Slide 1

ACTIVE CONTROL OF A GAS FLOW RATE IN AN ALTERNATING GRADIENT DIFFUSION CHAMBER USING LABVIEW by Max Trueblood & David LeBlanc ME240 Semester Project MS&T, Rolla, MO 65401 7 MAY 2010 FN: 10507 5071200 ME240 Project YES.pptx 1

Slide 2

OBJECTIVE: To actively control the outflow in the Alternating Gradient Diffusion Cloud Chamber (ALGR) based on the pressure drop across the sample metering tube inlet, so as to achieve stable operation, and thus improve data collection. 2

Slide 3

Figure 1. Green lines take dilution air to probe, while red lines take sample to instrumented trailer. Two one ton ingots of Pb hold probe securely. 3 3

Slide 4

Figure 2. Easing up into the contrail of the target plane to sample its particulates. 4

Slide 5

Figure 3. Sampling from a drones gas turbine engine at an engine rebuilding facility. Goal here was to try to burn up all C particles in extremely hot afterburner at right. 5

Slide 6

Figure 4. Dr Whitefield inspects engine at a hush house in Amsterdam. 6 Dr Phil Whitefield

Slide 7

7 Figure 5. Typical size distribution from jet engine. Conc (p/cc*nm) Particle Diameter, Xp (nm)

Slide 8

Figure 6. The condensation nucleus counter, CNC. The butanol vapor condenses onto each small particle forming a droplet which is ~ 1000 X larger than the original particle. The optics are then able to detect the individual droplets, allowing calculation of the particle concentration. 8 Soaked with 1-Butanol Laser DETECTOR

Slide 9

Since EFF(Xp) = Ccnc(Xp) / Ctru(Xp) The true concentration at diameter Xp is: Ctru(Xp) = [Ccnc(Xp) / EFF(Xp)] 9

Slide 10

10 Figure 7. Typical EFF vs. Xp for a CNC.

Slide 11

Figure 8. Overall schematic of the test setup. Ctru(Xp) Cvnv(Xp) 11 EFF(Xp) = Ccnc(Xp) / Calgr(Xp)

Slide 12

Figure 9. Schematic of the differential mobility analyzer (DMA). 12

Slide 13

Figure 10. Boltzmann charge distribution. 13

Slide 14

Figure 11. Alternating Gradient cloud chamber. Imperfect pumps will cause a variation of P that disturbs the dPsmt. Hold dPsmt very constant. Difficult! 14 Three pumps: AP1 Laser Ptle Counter loop AP2 Filtered air at top AP3 Excess air at bottom Eight flows: Q1 Excess at bottom Q2 Filtered at top Q3 LPC loop out Q4 LPC loop Q5 AP2 make up Q6 LPC loop in Q9 LPC annular in Qsmt sample metering tube Q1 Q9 ~ 1 to 4 L/m Qsmt ~ 0.010 L/m Qsmt = 3.55 * dPsmt 5.42 dPsmt ~ 1 inch H2O MFC1 MFC2

Slide 15

Figure 12. The condensation nucleus counter, CNC. The butanol vapor condenses onto each small particle forming a droplet which is ~ 1000 X larger than the original particle. The optics are then able to detect the individual droplets, allowing calculation of the particle concentration. 15 Soaked with 1-Butanol Laser DETECTOR

Slide 16

Figure 13. Schematic of LPC. 16

Slide 17

Figure 14. Overall schematic of the test setup. Ctru(Xp) Cvnv(Xp) 17 EFF(Xp) = Ccnc(Xp) / Calgr(Xp)

Slide 18

18 Figure 15. The DMA.

Slide 19

19 Figure 16. The CNC. This slide intentionally left blank. Originally it showed a commercial CNC. You can get on the web and find them. Look for Condensation Particle Counter or Condensation Nucleus Counter

Slide 20

20 Figure 17. The top of the ALGR.

Slide 21

21 Figure 18. The switch box that allows choosing what controls the MFCs.

Slide 22

Figure 19. The LPC setting at the bottom of the ALGR.

Slide 23

Figure 20. Alternating Gradient cloud chamber. Imperfect pumps will cause a variation of P that disturbs the dPsmt. Hold dPsmt very constant. Difficult.! 23 Three pumps: AP1 Laser Ptle Counter loop AP2 Filtered air at top AP3 Excess air at bottom Eight flows: Q1 Excess at bottom Q2 Filtered at top Q3 LPC loop out Q4 LPC loop Q5 AP2 make up Q6 LPC loop in Q9 LPC annular in Qsmt sample metering tube Q1 Q9 ~ 1 to 4 L/m Qsmt ~ 0.010 L/m Qsmt = 3.55 * dPsmt 5.42 dPsmt ~ 1 inch H2O MFC1 MFC2

Slide 24

Figure 21. 24

Slide 25

Figure 22. Front panel of LV progm, no feedback control. 25

Slide 26

Figure 23. Block diagram of program with no feedback control. 26

Slide 27

27 The previous method allows one to control Q1 (bottom outflow) a. Manually with the pot b. From labview program, but still manually. I would really like to keep dPsmt constant. Thus a feedback loop that controls Q1 based on comparing the actual dPsmt to a set point value is what I really desire.

Slide 28

Figure 24. LV progm w feedback. 28

Slide 29

Figure 25. LV program w feedback. Notice the formula node. 29

Slide 30

Figure 26. Sample data, no feedback control. 30

Slide 31

Figure 27. Q1 and dPsmt, no feedback control. Q1 was momentarily changed. 31

Slide 32

Figure 28. Computer controlled momentary change in Q1 and its effect on dPsmt, no feedback. 32

Slide 33

Figure 29. Momentary change in Q2 and its effect on dPsmt, no feed back. 33

Slide 34

Figure 30. Response for computer control with feed back loop in program. Here there were 3 separate changes in the desired dPsmt-sp. The effect on Q1 is shown. Note how the measured dPsmt does go to a new value and then remains constant. Good!

Slide 35

CONCLUSIONS 1. The output or signal of the MFCs has been successfully monitored by the labview program. 2. The MFCs have been successfully controlled a. manually with potentiometers. b. manually by the labview program. c. in an automated fashion with a closed loop feed back with the LV progm. 35

Slide 36

36 FURTHER WORK: 1. Have the LV program actually read the LPC, the dPsmt, etc, and calculate the C (p/cc) as given by the ALGR. 2. Have the LV program read the CNC and log the Ccnc. 3. Have the LV program compute the EFF = [Ccnc / Calgr ]. 4. MFC3 does not seem to provide a signal that I can monitor. Broken? I can control it, though, as proven by observing the rotameter in series with it. 5. Make use of all the logged data to find the sweet spot of operation of the ALGR where one gets reliable data. At this sweet spot, the Calgr would remain constant even though some of the flows wandered off their set points a small amount.

Slide 37

Acknowledgements: Thanks are due to Mr Mitch Cottrell and Mr Steven Achterberg for helpful suggestions. 37

Slide 38

QUESTIONS? 38

Slide 39

39