This invention relates to gas handling for gas analysis instrumentation.
A gas analyzer is an instrument designed to measure the concentration of one or more specific compounds in a gas sample. A typical application of such a gas analyzer is to use a single system to monitor the gas concentration at multiple locations. The key metric for this application is the measurement cycle time, which is defined as the time needed to obtain an accurate representation of the gas at each inlet point. This application is typically achieved by incorporating the gas analyzer into a multichannel sampling system. Perhaps the simplest implementation of a multichannel sampling system is a many-to-one valve manifold, where the gas analyzer is attached to the common output port, and sampling tubes are connected to the multiple inlet ports. Each of the sampling tubes is installed in different locations, often with different lengths of tubing. In the most common mode of operation, the valve manifold is controlled such that one and only of the input ports is pneumatically connected to the output port. In this way, the gas analyzer can sequentially analyze the gas at each of the input ports. Typically, the valve manifold is realized either via a tree of 3-way solenoid or pneumatically controlled valves, or via a rotary valve.
There are several disadvantages of this simple implementation:
1. When one location is being measured, the others are not. In other words, the temporal duty factor of measurement at a given location is given by 1/N, where N is the number of ports on the sampler.
2. When a port is not being measured, there is no flow in the tube. In such a stagnant sample, the concentration in the tube is dominated by adsorption and desorption effects on the surface of the tubing and potentially by diffusion through the tubing walls. When this port is sampled again, the concentration reported does not represent the input concentration for a significant amount of time, thus increasing the total measurement cycle time.
3. For most implementations of the valve manifold, during transitions when the valve manifold is changing state, there is a rapid and significant change in the impedance of the flow path, leading to pressure and flow transients that are often highly disruptive to the gas analyzer, leading to spurious results that must be ignored, and further extending the measurement cycle time.
4. Many gas analyzers are limited in the maximum gas flow that they can consume. This limited gas flow in turns limits the gas flow through the sampling manifold, which in turn increases the total measurement cycle time.
One may address disadvantage #2 by supplying an auxiliary pump to draw on all the sampling lines continuously, which continuously refreshes the sample in the tubing.
One approach to address disadvantage #1 would be to sample from multiple input ports simultaneously. The simplest and most generally desirable outcome would be that the concentration of the target compound as measured by the gas analyzer would be the simple arithmetic average of the input concentrations present on the active input ports. This average is achieved when the flow contribution from each input port to the total analyzer flow is equal. One might imagine that opening multiple ports simultaneously in standard sampling systems would deliver this condition. In practice, however, this condition is extremely difficult to achieve, as it requires an equivalent impedance to gas flow in each of the sampling ports. The simple act of having different length sampling lines, and/or any asymmetry in the valve manifold, will lead to unbalanced flows, which will then lead to an overemphasis of the high flow ports in the total, and an underemphasis of low flow ports.
It would therefore be desirable to design a multichannel sampling system that can measure a) each port independently or b) multiple ports simultaneously (with balanced flow), maintaining flow on all ports even when not active, and without flow or pressure transients that disrupt the gas analyzer, in a way that minimizes the measurement cycle time, even for low flow gas analyzers.
The main technical idea of this work is to ensure gas flow symmetry into a gas manifold that provides the output(s) to the gas analysis instrument(s). Such symmetry has two parts—equal gas flow properties from a set of reference points (one reference point for each input) to the manifold, and equal pressures at the reference points. Such equal pressures can be provided for unequal input flow rates by having a bypass valve for each input controlled so as to equalize the pressures.
The following technical analysis provides further details on this symmetry point. In a thermally stable environment, mass flow rate Q through a gas line of length L is proportional to pressure drop ΔP as follows
In a simple multichannel gas sampling system with a common mixing volume, one typically has equal pressure drops for each input, but unequal gas line lengths for each input. Therefore the resulting mass flows will be unequal. Furthermore, it may not be reasonable to make the conductance of the gas lines equal (e.g., they may be part of a customer installation that cannot be altered). The above equation holds where the pressure drop ΔP is small compared to the inlet pressure at the upstream end of the line. For larger pressures, a more complex relationship holds due to the compressibility of the gas, although the mass flow remains a monotonically increasing function of the pressure drop. For the purposes of this description, we will continue to use the linear approximation of small pressure drops, with the understanding that the expressions can be expanded to account for the compressibility of the gas. Finally, we note that the head pressure at the upstream end of different gas lines might also be different, and might also be variable, leading to additional flow variability from line to line and over time.
To solve this problem, we split off the sample paths of each channel prior to a common mixing volume (CV). The paths that face the CV are mechanically identical across all channels. The diverted bypass paths terminate at channel-dedicated proportional valves. Without the proportional valves, splitting the sample paths would merely lead to equal L and unequal ΔP from the split points to the CV. Thus equalizing the pressures at the split points is the primary task of the automatic system controller.
In some embodiments thermal stability across all inputs is not achievable and pressure and temperature need to be measured at each split point and in the CV to adequately compare the different mass flow rates that define the system. Mass flow rate has units of standard liters per minute (SLPM) which is a volumetric flowrate corrected to a standard temperature and pressure (STP). Multiplying a Q with units of SLPM by the density of the moving fluid at STP results in a value with units of mass per time. Above we have shown that mass flow rate Q can be related to pressure drop ΔP however, it should be made clear that pressure drop needs to be normalized to STP before interpreting the results as a mass flow rate. To properly relate Qs,x (mass flow to the CV for channel x) in terms of measured quantities (Pc=CV pressure, Tc=CV Temperature, Px=pressure at the input split point for channel x, Tx=temperature at the input split point for channel) we can use the following approximate relationship:
where the subscript ‘Ave’ represents the simple average of the physical conditions measured at ‘C’ and ‘x’. The ‘Ave’ values are the anchor points from where the STP correction for the system inputs are executed. From the above expressions we see that if one has the ability to control the values of Px while monitoring the value Pc then parity can be established across all Qs,x regardless of the upstream variances. In this work the actuator to be used to control Px is the channel dedicated bypass proportional valves. By varying the adjustments of these valves we can control the pressures at the splits, Px, and by association, the mass flow rates, Qs,x. This method achieves the goal of creating mass flow parity in varying multi-channel sampling systems.
Equal relative mass flow rate between two or more channels is what is required to achieve equal gas mixing. We note that to measure the absolute flow rate, a further step is needed, which is to characterize the conductance of the flow system—i.e., to determine the proportionality between flow and pressure in Eq. 2.
To better appreciate the present invention, it will be helpful to consider the functionality provided by various operating modes of the gas flow control system prior to describing how the gas flow system can be implemented in practice.
In this mode, the output of gas flow system 102 is a combined gas flow 108 including an equal mixture 112 of gas flows from a selected two or more of the system inputs. Here the equal mixture is schematically shown by equal length arrows in 112, despite the unequal input flows for the components of the mixture. This combined gas flow is provided to gas analysis instrumentation 130. For completeness, a pump 132 is shown that draws the combined gas flow through gas analysis instrumentation 130.
Here “an equal mixture of gas flows from a selected two or more of the system inputs in the combined gas flow” means that the combined gas flow has equal contributions O1, O2, O3 (O1=O2=O3) from the selected system inputs (e.g., inputs 1, 2, 3 of a 5 input system) even though flow rates at the corresponding inputs (I1, I2, I3) may not be equal (I1< >I2 and/or I2< >I3 etc.). Such inequality of the input flow rates most commonly comes from unequal sample input line lengths which usually cannot be made equal in practice. This work provides various ways to automatically compensate for unequal input flow rates.
A “combined gas flow” is one or more gas flows provided by the system as its output(s). If the combined gas flow is a single output, then that output is an equal mixture of the relevant inputs as described above. If the combined gas flow is multiple outputs (e.g., as in some examples below), then each constituent output is an equal mixture of the relevant inputs as described above. “gas analysis instrumentation” is one or more gas analysis instruments.
Accordingly, an embodiment of the invention includes a gas flow system as described above. More specifically, the gas flow system is an automatically controlled gas flow system configured to combine all or a portion of gas flows from one or more system inputs (e.g., 1, 2, . . . , N on
The first and second operating modes suffer from disadvantage #2 above, which can be expressed more generally as an undesirable dependence of input flow rates on the switching state of the automatically controlled gas flow system. E.g., flow rates at unselected inputs can be zero, leading to undesirable effects of stagnant gas lines as indicated above. On
Operating modes 3 and 4 address the issue of stagnant input gas lines for non-selected inputs, but disadvantages 3 and/or 4 can still be present. Accordingly, it is preferred for the automatically controlled gas flow system to provide an adjustable system gas flow rate in any of its operating modes without altering a combined gas flow rate provided to the gas analysis instrumentation.
Although consideration of all of the operating modes is helpful in appreciating the invention, it is not required for embodiments to have all operating modes. The only required operating mode is the first operating mode with an automatically provided equal mixture of two or more selected inputs at the output. Accordingly, embodiments of the invention can further include any combination of operating modes 2, 3, 4, and/or enhanced flow.
Gas flow system 102 also includes two or more proportional valves (214-1, 214-2, . . . ), each proportional valve configured to receive the second gas from the second Y-junction output of a corresponding gas flow Y-junction. Gas flow system 102 also includes a second gas manifold 204 configured to receive the second gas from outputs of all the proportional valves and a gas pump 216 configured to draw gas from the second gas manifold 204 and exhaust it from the apparatus. Finally, gas flow system 102 also includes a system controller 208 configured to measure at least pressures at the first gas manifold and at each of the gas flow Y-junctions, and configured to control at least all of the proportional valves. Here 218-1, 218-2, . . . are the pressure sensors for the Y-junctions, and 220 is the pressure sensor for the first gas manifold. Connections from system controller 208 to the components of the system are not shown on the figure. In some cases, e.g., as described above, it is preferred for system controller 208 to also be configured to measure temperatures at the first gas manifold and at each of the gas flow Y-junctions.
In practice it is often desired to provide inputs to multiple gas analysis instruments as shown in the example of
In preferred embodiments, gas flow paths between the Y-junctions (210-1, 210-2, . . . ) and the first gas manifold 202 have the same gas flow properties for all the Y-junctions. Here gas flow paths have “the same gas flow properties” if equal pressure drops from inputs to outputs of the gas flow paths provide equal gas flow rates through the gas flow paths for gas of the same composition and temperature. A “gas manifold” is any arrangement of gas flow chambers and/or gas flow lines having two or more inputs and/or two or more outputs.
With the apparatus of
With the apparatus of
The example of
With the apparatus of
With the apparatus of
The example of
With the apparatus of
With the apparatus of
The example of
With the apparatus of
With the apparatus of
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/691,222, filed on Nov. 21, 2019, and hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 16691222 | Nov 2019 | US |
Child | 18115534 | US |