Microsensor housing

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 6361206
  • Patent Number
    6,361,206
  • Date Filed
    Thursday, January 28, 1999
    25 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, March 26, 2002
    22 years ago
Abstract
A microsensor housing having a structure with at least one inlet at one end and a thermal property sensor at the other end. Situated between the inlet and the sensor is a convection shield. Sampled fluid is taken in the inlet from a channel carrying the fluid to be sampled. The convection flow lines of the fluid are barred by the convection shield. The fluid is diffused into a cavity between the shield and sensor. The sensor detects a thermal property of the diffused fluid. One preferred shield has holes about its perimeter with a solid center part of the shield covering at a distance the sensor. The channel carrying the fluid may have screens to reduce turbulence noise and to aid in fluid transport to and from the sensor housing.
Description




BACKGROUND




The invention relates to fluid sensors and particularly to microsensors. More particularly it pertains to housing for such sensors. Microsensors have one vexing packaging problem. Their space-saving and cost-saving smallness, in surface area and membrane thickness, make them vulnerable to occasional impacts with particles. The solid particles may destroy the gas-sensitive membrane of the sensor or change its heat transfer features with just a thin coat of sticky particles. The liquid ones may have the same effect as the small solids, if a residue stays after re-evaporation.




These problems continue to be of concern in relation to the development of microsensors of fluid vapor as needed for control or recovery operations of such vapors. The cause of the problem is the need to satisfy two competing goals which are to achieve a short response time (e.g., one to three seconds or less) and a service life of about ten years. Resolving the fundamental approach to sensing fluid properties is an important and essential step. But at least of equal importance is the design of a sensor housing or package, which will enable the sensor to perform its function rapidly, sensitively and reliably, even in harsh environments. The problem is that the filters and baffles one would provide to insure protection for long and reliable sensor service are the same that would increase response time to unacceptable levels. The present invention provides a solution and tradeoff between speed of response and sensor protection.




SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION




The present microsensor housing both protects small, one micrometer-thick sensing structures of thermal microsensors, and facilitates rapid and reliable operation in spite of exposure to forced convection, flow turbulence, dust, droplets and/or condensation.




In order to sense fluid (i.e., gas or liquid) thermophysical properties such as thermal conductivity, specific heat, or its derivatives of oxygen demand, heating value, compressibility factor or octane number, the sensor needs to be in contact with the fluid and be able to reliably sense small changes in the above properties. The sensitivity is provided by the design of the sensor as a chip, featuring low mass, large surface-to-volume ratio heating and sensing elements. Long and reliable service requires that the sensor be protected from interference due to settling dust or droplets, as well as from flow (laminar or turbulent). Protection against condensation means that the sensor is designed to recover its sensing performance within a specified short time after coming in contact with liquid condensates. Rapid response means that the sensor chip itself needs to respond quickly to changes in the fluid properties, as well as that the sensor housing needs to allow quick transport and replacement of “old” with “new” fluid sample elements, without noticeable thermal disturbance due to forced convection or turbulence.




For a fluid property sensor to meet a specified microsensor performance in terms of response time, insensitivity to flow, and service life, aspects of four parameter groups, which a designer can adjust to meet the desired sensor performance, include sensor chip design and performance, geometry of the convective transport section of the sensor housing, geometry of the convective barrier, and geometry of the diffusion transport section.




For the parameters of this tool kit, there are generic as well as quantitative guidelines for the design of microenvironmental protection of (thermophysical property) microsensors, to meet conflicting performance demands for “fast response”, “operability in high flows” and “long, reliable service” in harsh field environments. These were characterized by their average dust loads, occasional condensation, maximum flow velocities and flow turbulence, which had resulted in slow response time problems before, due to excessive protection. As a result of this invention, the specifying of performance (response time and service life), and the characterizing of environmental conditions, a microsensor housing for both property sensors and flow sensors has been developed which enables the packaged sensor to meet the desired performance and lifetime specifications.




The proposed approach is shown in

FIGS. 4



c


and


4




e


. The single-stage baffle is shaped to facilitate liquid runoff via the sides, if liquid should get near the sensor chip. It is machined with a set of concentric holes projecting an area around the chip and inhibiting direct splashes from the direction of the fitting to hit the chip. It provides chip protection while allowing diffusional access of fluid to the chip from all sides.




In summary, the disclosed housing for microsensors features a new environmental protection design based on a single-stage, concentric baffle with openings arranged around the protected sensor. It minimizes remaining dead spaces around the sensor (to reduce response time) by filling-in those spaces that are non-essential for fluid diffusion.




There are advantages of the invention relative to prior art screens and non-concentric baffles. It can be machined in one piece. Its baffle does not need assembly after machining. The concentric baffle holes are large enough to make the probability of clogging negligible. The response time is five to nine times smaller than that measured with a previous 2-stage, non-concentric baffle (having two offset and opposed D-shaped louvers of

FIG. 1



b


). The housing orientation relative to external flow direction does not affect the baffle's effectiveness. It is easy to machine, requires no assembly, and barely increases microsensor response time relative to not having a baffle at all.











BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWING





FIGS. 1



a


and


1




b


illustrate various aspects of microsensor housing configurations.





FIG. 1



c


illustrates a microsensor configuration of the prior art.





FIG. 2

is a graph of microbridge sensor output versus standard flow for three gases.





FIG. 3

is graph of microbridge heater power versus standard flow for three gases.





FIGS. 4



a


-


4




e


are views of microsensor housing designs and layout, and

FIG. 4



f


is an enlarged cross-sectional view of

FIG. 4



c.







FIG. 4



f


is a cross-sectional view of a baffle.





FIG. 4



g


is an expanded view of a ring-shaped insert.





FIGS. 5



a


-


5




c


are graphs of responses of the sensor with optimal baffle protection for various flow conditions.





FIGS. 6



a


-


6




c


show various response times of the sensor for three different gases.





FIG. 7

is a graph showing the sensitivity of sensor in terms of output to flow velocity for several protection barriers.





FIG. 8



a


and

FIG. 8



b


are a graph of droplet test results for the present housing barrier and microbridge sensor chip, and the setup for the condensation tests, respectively.





FIG. 9

reveals results of more droplet testing like that of

FIG. 8



a.







FIGS. 10



a


-


10




d


show various sensor microstructures.





FIG. 11



a


is a graph of a performance comparison between a standard and a ruggedized flow microsensor.





FIG. 11



b


is a graph of the response time constant of a ruggedized microbridge flow sensor.





FIG. 12

is a graph revealing the influence of membrane thickness on the response time of a ruggedized microbridge flow sensor.





FIGS. 13



a


and


13




b


show a bypass flow thermal property microsensor having honeycomb flow straighteners or “screens” in the main flow region.





FIG. 13



c


shows an expanded view of a honeycomb flow straightener.





FIG. 14



a


reveals a bypass flow thermal property microsensor having piezometric sampling.





FIGS. 14



b


and


14




c


show a flow channel cross-section of an alternate multiport piezometric sampling device.











DESCRIPTION OF THE EMBODIMENT




Solutions conceived and implemented to date, may either only provide partial protection and clog after a relatively short service life (screens,

FIG. 1



a


) provide good protection but require costly machining and assembly, and increase response time unacceptably (baffles), see

FIGS. 1



a


and


b.






Good sensor protection against dust, vapor mist/gum residue could be achieved with a double or triple screen; but this would increase response time well beyond the specified time. An insertable 2-stage baffle (in the shape of two offset Ds, see

FIG. 1



b


) was found to provide good protection against 1.6 mg droplets (which is not true for the screen) and even against a fine jet of droplets, but had a response time greater than fifteen seconds.




As shown in

FIG. 1



a


, the sensor housing or package


10


solves harsh environmental problems by providing a sensor


11


with a “microenvironmental” shield or baffle


12


, such that forced convection


13


can transport the fluid sample (with dust and droplets)


14


to shield


12


. Then diffusivity transports sample


14


between shield


12


and sensor


11


.

FIG. 1



a


shows the principle of housing indicating the protected location of the sensor


11


(its magnified cross section is shown in

FIG. 1



c


), a generic barrier (such as a screen) shield


12


for protection from convection flows, and transport of fluid sample elements


14


to sensor


11


into a diffusion area


22


.





FIG. 1



b


shows another barrier


15


for a sensor


11


, based on an angled path, which avoids a direct line-of-flight between an aerosol from the main flow stream


16


and sensor


11


, and an incidental ¼″ NPT fitting


17


to attach sensor


18


to the fluid stream to be monitored.




The rationale for housing


18


was derived from measurements, shown in

FIGS. 2 and 3

, which display microsensor flow data based on two methods of measurement, namely, differential and absolute flow sensing, using the same sensor, whereby the heater is controlled to operate at a constant temperature rise above ambient of about 100 degrees Celsius (C), unless indicated otherwise. In

FIG. 2



a


, the flow signal is derived from the difference in temperature between the two non-energized (Pt thin-film resistor) sensing elements flanking the central heating element, all of which are more or less influenced by forced convection. But

FIG. 3

shows that this influence is delayed for the heater, which consumes a steady power of about 5 mW within ±0.5% until flow has risen to about 160 L/h, which for the used Venturi nozzle of a 14 mm inside diameter (ID) is equivalent to 28 cm/s.

FIG. 3

shows that this heater power is proportional to thermal conductivity, as we compare the data for CH


4


, C


2


H


6


and N


2


, labeled M, E, and N in

FIGS. 2 and 3

. The plotted heater power, P, can be used to derive thermal conductivity, k, with a linear relationship between heater power and k.




Typical industrial gas streams range well above the above value of 28 centimeters per second (cm/s), so that some protection of sensor


11


as indicated in

FIGS. 1



a


-


1




c


is needed. Examples are: 1) 690 cm/s for 250 ft


3


/h of gas in a ¾″ ID pipe to a gas meter, Reynolds number (Re)=9,117; 2) 500 cm/s for 10 gal/min of air in a ½″ ID pipe, Re=4,387; 3) 2740 cm/s for 4 kg/min in a 2″ ID pipe, Re=96,585; and 4) 2716 cm/s for 200 L/min in a ½″ ID pipe, Re=23,551. Although these examples are for individual and unrelated applications, one can derive some generic conclusions and guidelines regarding flow turbulence. The indicated values of the Reynolds number (Re=d·v·ρ/η) fall into the turbulent flow regime of Re>2200, so that one can expect related interferences to show up during fluid property measurements, unless their effect is mitigated.




Response times, τ (63 percent), can be and were measured by recording the transient sensor signals during a switch from one gas to another and back (typically from N


2


to Ar or to CH


4


), while maintaining a flow of 240 Liters/hour (about 1 gallon/minute) in a pipe of 18 mm (0.71″) ID, corresponding to a linear speed of 26.2 cm/s, and with the sensor chip positioned a distance of 24 mm (0.94″) away from the pipe center, as in

FIG. 4



d


. As shown in

FIG. 5



a


, the 240 L/h or 4 L/min requirement was needed to obtain a conservative measure of the response time because under our conditions it was found to decrease somewhat inversely proportional to flow speed.

FIGS. 5



b


and


5




c


show the effects of flow rates of 600 and 1000 L/h, respectively. As expected from differences in diffusivity values for different gases,

FIGS. 6



a


,


6




b


and


6




c


show that gas composition also has an influence on the response time. The response times were observed to increase as the N


2


-to-gas switch was made with argon, propane and heptane, from 0.53, 0.94 and 3.5 seconds, respectively. And these increases approximately scale as the inverse of their mass diffusivities of 0.096, 0.039 and 0.016, respectively.




To develop a rapid way to estimate the diffusion part of the response time for the design of the housing represented by

FIG. 4



c


, one started with the classical one-dimensional diffusion equation for the effective distance of transport by diffusion, x


2


=2·D·t. But rather than pursuing a 3D integration approach for the three-dimensional case, an easy-to-apply diffusional viewing angle approach was developed. This consisted of factoring the ratio of areas of the open part (total area of holes) of the barrier diameter


190


to the cavity diameter


20


on the opposite end of the cavity toward sensor


11


. Together with the convective part of the response time being proportional to the flow velocity, one is able to confirm and predict the response times, τ, for the sensor test configurations


23


,


24


and


100


depicted in

FIGS. 4



a


,


4




b


and


4




c


, respectively.




The approach of the invention is shown in

FIGS. 4



c


and


4




e


. A single-stage baffle


25


is shaped to facilitate liquid runoff via sides


26


, if liquid should get near the sensor


11


. Second, it is machined with a set of concentric holes


21


projecting an area around sensor


11


and inhibiting direct splashes from the direction of the fitting to hit sensor


11


. Baffle


25


also provides chip protection while allowing diffusional access of fluid to sensor


11


from all sides. A ring-shaped insert


27


reduces the dead space around sensor


11


, which may be further cut by means of an epoxy-fill. Insert


27


, as shown in

FIGS. 4



c


,


4




e


and


4




g


in expanded view, has an outside diameter of about 0.170 inch, an inside diameter of about 0.130 inch. It has a thickness of about 0.045 inch at the outside diameter and a thickness of about 0.015 inch at the inside diameter. The change in thickness is a straight-line slope from the outside diameter to the inside diameter, with the sloped surface towards baffle


25


. An inlet


64


of fitting


17


has a diameter


65


that tapers down to a diameter


19


through the length of the inlet. Baffle


25


is at a distance


66


from the inlet entrance of diameter


65


. For certain favorable performance, a ratio of diameter


65


to distance


66


is close to or greater than one.




Referring now jointly to

FIGS. 1



a


and


4




c


, baffle


25


is a little curved or convex. It is the barrier of convection lines


13


of flow. Shield


12


, and/or baffle


25


hinders flow lines


13


of convection. After shield


12


or baffle


25


, in the space between the baffle and the sensor, diffusion of fluid


22


takes over the transport job. Baffle


25


, or shield


12


, as the case may be, keeps the convection of the fluid from sensor


11


. Brownian motion takes place between baffle


25


, shield


12


and sensor


11


. The droplet


39


test shown in

FIG. 8



b


applies to gas. A liquid


38


is the source of saturated vapor in volume


37


, which condenses to droplets


39


which are prevented from impinging sensor


11


by the solid area of baffle


25


. For supersonic flows, the hole or holes


21


of the baffle


25


would be very small. Baffle


25


center of solid material should mirror the sensor


11


configuration or area. Hole


21


length dampens convection. The length-to-diameter ratio of each hole


21


should not exceed one, that is, L/D≦1 or D/L≧1. Hole


21


walls create friction to inhibit convection. The projected volume under the hole


21


area, between the baffle and the sensor, should be about the same as the projected volume under the solid area of baffle


25


between the baffle and sensor. Holes


21


should be small enough to prevent passing of convection of the fluid, and the sum of the projected volumes from holes


21


to the sensor


11


side should be no smaller than the projected volume of the solid part of baffle


25


.




Thermal properties include thermal conductivity, specific heat, and thermal diffusivity. The distance between baffle


25


and the sensor


11


surface is kept greater than 100 microns, so as to prevent the quenching the thermal process to be measured. The aspect ratio of the diameter to length of each hole


21


should be close to one for good response time (D/L≧1). Structure


17


is coned at the input. The sensor


11


recess volume


22


is kept as small as possible to minimize diffusion times. The ratio of sensor


11


diameter


57


to the recess diameter


19


should be close to one but to allow for baffle openings. The area over or under the sensor itself should have no holes


21


or openings in the baffle


25


.




The response times of sensors with protection according to

FIGS. 4



a


and


4




b


are shown in

FIGS. 5



a


,


5




b


and


5




c


. Additional acceptance criteria are the sensitivity of the output signal to flow velocities outside of the ¼″ NPT fittings


17


, and the long term signal drift due to soiling.





FIG. 7

shows the results of sensitivity to flow for microsensor housings of

FIGS. 4



a


,


4




b


and


4




c


. At this time,

FIG. 4



c


represents our preferred embodiment, also from the point of view of ease of assembly, whereby the sensor housing and baffle are machined out of one piece. Electronics


28


(as shown, for example, in

FIG. 4



d


) can be fastened within an enclosure having a cover


29


of

FIG. 4



e


. For protection of electronics


28


against humidity, o-ring seals


30


are used on the chip holder.




In

FIG. 4



e


, barrier


25


has six holes


21


having a diameter of about 0.050 inch. The diameter of a circumference of a perimeter touching the outside edges of holes


21


is about 0.170 inch, and diameter


57


of a circumference of a perimeter touching the inside edges of holes


21


is about 0.070 inch. The spacing between adjacent holes


21


is about 0.010 inch. A thickness


75


of barrier


25


at its center is about 0.030 inch. The curvature of baffle


25


is outward towards sensor


11


. The entrance of inlet


64


has a diameter


65


of about 0.430 inch. A length


66


of inlet


64


from the entrance to the center of barrier


25


is about 0.510 inch. Diameter


19


of barrier


25


at the upper end of inlet


64


is about 0.190 inch. Distance


76


between chips


11


and the center of barrier


25


is about 0.030 inch. The diameter of sensor


11


is about the same as diameter


57


of the solid portion at the center of barrier


25


.




Sensitivities to flow and to flow turbulence were measured with the same setup mentioned above (18 mm ID pipe and sensor chip position at 24 mm from pipe


31


center), except that the flow was increased from 2 to 10,000 L/h (0.0333 to 167 L/min, or 0.22 to 1092 cm/s, with Re=2.7 to 13,600). In one modified setup, in which the gas supply from pressurized tanks and regulators was replaced with a shop vacuum pump, the effect of turbulence was striking. Without measurable pressure fluctuations (Δp≦0.3 cmWC), the random motion of turbulence enhanced the heat transfer at the site of the chip's sensor elements to the point of simulating the behavior of a fluid with higher than actual thermal conductivity. The magnitude of the resulting error under those conditions could be as large as the thermal conductivity change between Ar and N


2


, indicating that the provided sensor protection was insufficient. Even under mild flow conditions (Re<10,000),

FIG. 7

shows that the sensor housings shown in

FIGS. 4



a-c


, and


4




e


with convection barriers in the form of a wire screen


33


, louvers


32


and a baffle


25


, respectively, do differ significantly in their protection effectiveness.




Screen


33


, if its mesh is tight enough to protect against flow and turbulence, exhibited long response times (τ


63%


=20 (or 4) seconds for setup


34


indicated in

FIG. 4



d


) and clogged within a few months of operation as represented by curve A. Louvers


32


(

FIG. 4



b


and curves {right arrow over (B)} and in

FIG. 7

) provided better protection and did not clog, but had a still longer response time; but baffle


25


(

FIGS. 4



c


,


4




e


, and


4




f


) provided excellent protection, did not clog and exhibited response times of 0.34 and 3.5 seconds. Curves {right arrow over (B)} and represent the opposite flow directions during the tests. Curve C* in

FIG. 7

corresponds to a sensor housing


100


with a baffle constructed similarly to baffle


25


of

FIG. 4



f


, except that it had a set of holes corresponding to holes


21


about two times larger than those in

FIG. 4



e


, which made sensor housing


100


, with about a two times larger chip cavity


22


, still respond rapidly, but was too sensitive to flow


16


. All of the data shown in

FIG. 7

were measured under the setup


34


conditions, with reference to

FIG. 4



d


, where the flow rate was 4 L/min, the inside diameter of the tube was 18 mm and normal distance from the center of tube


31


to the sensor


11


was about 24 mm.




The effect of condensation and the recovery thereof was quantified with the help of a gas-tight enclosure


37


in which sensor


11


and its support structure


35


could be held above a liquid pool


38


of heptane, and stabilized at a temperature of 10-12 degrees C below that of the saturated vapor in equilibrium with the liquid. Setup


36


is shown in

FIG. 8



b


. However, such condensation tests took several hours, and at times days, to complete. A faster, and also more repeatable test, consisted of dropping 1.6 mg heptane droplets


39


and letting them fall through convection barrier


25


onto sensor


11


. This test version may represent a worst-case condensation scenario, i.e., when condensate in the form of a droplet


39


impinges on the sensitive surface of a sensor


11


.




As shown in curve


44


“bridge” of

FIG. 8



a


for test results with an “open” microbridge sensor structure


40


(see

FIG. 10



a


), each 1.6 mg droplet, deposited in intervals of 30 minutes, shifted the sensor output signal by an additional amount, which then does not return for several hours to the original value. Under a microscope, one could see that a small quantity of liquid had lodged itself under the microbridge, where capillary action kept it, in spite of the volatility of heptane (eventually it was removed with a still more volatile solvent, such as acetone).




In view of this insight, the droplet test was repeated with a closed micromembrane structure


41


(

FIG. 10



b


), and the results were plotted in curve


45


“membrane” of

FIG. 8



a


. As shown, the initial effect of the droplet is similar to that of curve


44


“bridge”, causing the signal to rise to indicate the presence of a higher thermal conductivity fluid. But within three minutes (see curve


45


“membrane” or a redrawn version of it on an expanded scale in FIG.


9


), the signal had largely returned back to the original level.




Four variations in sensor chip design were used, as presented in

FIGS. 10



a


,


10




b


,


10




c


and


10




d


. They all share the Pt thin-film resistive heater


46


and sensing elements


47


and the silicon nitride passivation


48


of these elements, but differ in the size, shape and support of this high surface-to-volume sensing structure.





FIG. 10



a


shows the standard, off-the-shelf microbridge sensor structure


40


, depicted in

FIG. 1



c


and manufactured since 1987.

FIG. 10



b


reveals a sealed, square micromembrane


51


of sensor structure


41


of about 750 μm (0.030″) on the side. Micromembrane


51


covers and seals open areas


49


shown in structure


40


to seal and prevent liquid or other substances from being lodged under the bridge supporting heater


46


and sensing elements


47


etched over open volume


50


.

FIG. 10



c


shows a similar version of sensor structure


41


, except that micromembrane


51


is circular and of 500 μm (0.020″) in diameter.

FIG. 10



d


reveals a polymer-filled volume


50


′ of structure


43


, which is like structure


40


, wherein the microbridge of heater


46


, sensing elements


47


and filled volume


50


′, has become part of a solid and robust structure.




The use of ruggedized microsensor


43


via an epoxy fill reduces the effect of dust and droplets


39


. The use of micromembrane


51


versus microbridge structure


40


eliminates the condensation problem (no recovery with the microbridge). The use of ruggedized structure


43


(

FIG. 10



d


) increases the range of the sensor to higher flows.





FIG. 13



a


shows honeycomb screens


59


,


60


and


63


used in a bypass flow microsensor for gases and liquids. End view


71


shows an example of a honeycomb design of the screens. In

FIG. 13



b


, the use of a special bypass


58


to baffle


25


of sensor


11


reduces particle collection on the sensor


11


surface in

FIG. 13



b


. Honeycomb screen


59


faces flow


16


to calm down turbulence. Honeycomb screen


60


then tends to force, by flow restriction and a tortuous path to the sensor inlet, a part of flow


16


with convection up through an offset bypass


61


up to baffle


25


having holes


21


. The reduced flow makes for a lower influence of turbulence. The tortuous path makes it difficult for heavier particles to flow into the volume about baffle


25


. Baffle


25


is the convection barrier, and diffusion of the fluid occurs in volume


22


. Fluid is forced down a bypass channel


62


into pipe


31


, and joins flow


16


through another honeycomb screen


63


. The driving force of the fluid into and out of bypass channels


61


and


62


, respectively, is provided by the pressure drop across screen


60


only.





FIG. 14



a


shows a configuration like that of

FIG. 13



b


except it has multiple port (i.e., piezometric) sampling devices


72


and


73


, which are channels around the main fluid conveyance mechanism or pipe


31


with a half of a dozen or more ports


74


from pipe


31


to the respective channel around the pipe. From device


72


, fluid goes to bypass channel


61


, to barrier


25


and returns back into pipe


31


via bypass channel


62


, to device


73


and ports


74


. Devices


72


and


73


reduce and average the effects of noise and the turbulent effects of flow


16


upon the convection of fluid into the volume about convection barrier


25


.

FIG. 14



b


shows a flow channel cross-section of a multiport piezometric sampling device


72


,


73


. Examples of two sizes of a honeycomb for screens


59


,


60


and


63


are illustrated in

FIGS. 14



b


and


14




c


. Flow velocity and pressure to the channels, among other things, determine the selection and sequence of screen sizes. In

FIGS. 13



a


,


13




b


and


14




a


, O-ring seals


30


are used to seal the connection of the thermal property sensor to fluid conveyance or pipe


31


.




Table 1 shows aspects of structures


40


,


41


,


42


and


43


. Among these stands out the tradeoff one makes to eliminate the interference by condensation and switching to a micromembrane


51


structure


41


,


42


or


43


. The second column in Table 1 lists the unamplified thermal conductivity (TC) sensor signals resulting from switching from N


2


to Ar, corresponding to a drop of 30.8% in TC. As shown, the TC mV signals are lower for the micromembrane


51


structures because only one side of their micromembrane


51


is exposed to the new sample gas, which amounts to an exact factor of two times, as verified with one membrane chip before and after sealing it to its substrate. The fact that micromembrane


51


diameter, thickness and the temperature coefficient of resistance of the Pt thin-film resistive heater


46


also influence these signals accounts for the listed values, which were measured.




The bottom row in Table 1 for structure


43


represents the results for a standard microbridge sensor except that its etched-out cavity


50


was refilled with epoxy. The rationale for doing this was the desire to sense high mass fluxes or velocity flows, as e.g., with liquids, whereas manufactured microbridge flow sensor structures


40


saturate at an air velocity near 30 m/s. It has been previously shown that the high limit of this range can be extended by either sensing the heater power as in classical hot-wire anemometry as shown in

FIG. 3

(with its consequences of shortened low-flow range and reduced stability), or by increasing the thermal conduction of the heater


46


. With the ruggedized structure


43


(Table 1), such an approach was checked out. The experimental flow sensor data, plotted as curve


52


in

FIG. 11



a


, show that by filling-in recess


50


of the microbridge chip with epoxy (triangle points), in structure


43


, the desired effect of extending the high limit of measurable gas flows to beyond 100 m/s (upper limit of our calibration rig at the time) is achieved. Curve


54


is similar data of structure


40


. And while a drop was expected in signal (two times for the bridge-to-membrane effect plus thermal conduction losses in the sensor itself), the measured four times drop came with the finding that for a given flow, the S/N ratio was not reduced but increased by about 10-20 percent. This is attributed to the increased time constant and associated reduction in sensitivity to turbulence, as indicated by the error bars


53


in

FIG. 11



a.






The draconian remedy of an epoxy fill did not negate the sensitivity benefits of a nimble, 1 μm-thick sensing structure


43


. In fact, performance data of structure


43


, plotted as curve


55



FIG. 11



b


, show that the measured response time of 8.7 ms is still faster than what many applications require.




To summarize, one might recommend sensor structure


40


for top sensitivity applications; sensor structure


42


for sensitive measurements under conditions of high dust load and probability of condensation; and sensor structure


43


for situations where high mass fluxes need to be sensed, regardless of dustload or condensation. Sensor structures


40


and


43


offer the additional feature of being inherently immune to overpressures.




Dust and particulates, if allowed to settle on the chip's sensing elements


47


, can alter the heat transfer characteristics, the sensitivities of elements


47


and thus the output signal of sensor


11


. There are at least two ways to reduce the probability of particle deposition on the sensing elements


47


surfaces. First one can increase the cross section of the flow channel at sensor


11


(with or without a bypass) to reduce the average particle mass flux at the chip level. Second, one can cleverly design the bypass geometry or the flow path to take advantage of the higher inertia of particles, such that the probability of having microbridge surface


51


in their path is reduced.




For example, for a specified “20-year” aerosol mass flux (in g/cm


2


) past sensor


11


, when sensor


11


is positioned as in present flow channel configuration, one might ask how much that aerosol flux would be reduced by placing sensor


11


in a bypass channel with only ten percent of the flow rate (cm


3


/s) and F=50% of the mass flux or flow velocity, beyond F, by virtue of clever design of the bypass geometry. A membrane structure


41


,


42


or


43


would therefore be preferable and offer less dust retention.




In order to meet a specified thermal conductivity sensor


11


performance in terms of response time, insensitivity to flow, and service life, a tool kit of parameter groups are selected or adjusted for the design of sensor


10


. They include sensor chip design and performance, and the geometries of the convective transport section, the convective barrier and the diffusion transport section of the sensor package or housing.




For the parameters of this tool kit, there are generic as well as quantitative guidelines for the design of microenvironmental protection of (thermophysical property) sensors


11


, to meet opposing performance demands for “fast response”, “operability in high flows” and “long, reliable service” in field environments. These were characterized by measurable dust loads, occasional condensation and flow turbulence, which had resulted in slow response before due to excessive protection.




By comparing the performance of microbridge structure


40


versus micromembrane sensor structures


41


,


42


and


43


, one is able to demonstrate rapid sensor recovery after condensation with a sealed micromembrane as in sensor structures


41


,


42


or


43


, but at the price of dropping the thermal conductivity sensitivity by a factor of about two times (the sealed side of micromembrane


51


is not exposed to the sample fluid), and increasing its sensitivity to changes in absolute pressure, as summarized in Table 1.




Sensor structure


43


has protection against interference by laminar or turbulent flow, changes in absolute pressure, particulates, condensation or even flooding, and protection against bulk-physical or -mechanical harm. The flow range is extended by over a factor of four times, while reducing sensitivity to turbulence and retaining sensor flow response times of under 10 ms.




The recommended approach to achieve fast and reliable property sensor operation is to combine convective macroscopic transport


13


of sample fluid


14


up to the sensor's shield


12


or baffle


25


, with diffusive transport inside shield


12


or baffle


25


to sensor


11


. The housing of

FIG. 4



c


represents this approach, which performed successfully in our tests. As part of this housing, sensor


11


is mounted facedown, and is protected from direct line of flight of aerosols from flowing fluid


14


to sensor


11


.




Ruggedization of sensitive and macroscopically fragile thermal sensing elements


47


may be achieved by filling in the thermal isolation recess


50


(air or vacuum pockets) with solid materials of low thermal conductivity (relative to that of the silicon of support


56


), such as suitable epoxies. Based on the results of tests, sensor structure


40


is recommended (

FIG. 10

or Table 1) for top sensitivity applications in relatively clean environments; sensor structure


42


for measurements under conditions of high dust load and probability of condensation; and sensor structure


43


for situations where high mass fluxes need to be sensed, regardless of dustload, condensation or overpressure.




Other embodiments of the invention, not disclosed here, do not minimize the spirit of the claimed invention.












TABLE 1











RELATIVE SENSITIVITIES OF THERMAL MICROSENSORS TO TC, p AND FLOW













Relative Sensitivities

















Th. Cond.Signal




±TC Noise




Abs.Press.




Flow Signal*




±Flow Noise*







Ar vs. N


2






N


2






2 vs. 1 bar N


2






N


2


at 7.6 m/s




N


2






















Sensor Chip Structure




mV




%




mV


rms






mV




%/bar




mV




S/N




mV


rms






cm/s























Commercial μbridge 40




−220




−30.8




0.04





0.16**




600




120




5




0.33






Large μmembrane 41




−105




−30.8




0.04





10.0






Small, strong μmembrane 42




−170




−30.8




0.04





5.0






Supported/filled μbridge 43




 −86




−30.8




0.04





0.16




150




130




1.2




0.30






Before filling




−351




−30.8




0.04





0.16











Reference conditions: N


2


at 15° C. and 1 atm (1.01325 bar); ΔT


htr


≈ 100° C. electronic response time, τ(63%) ˜0.2 seconds










*Heater temperature rise was set to 30° C., instead of 100° C.










**This value is caused by the pressure-dependence of thermal cond. of N


2


itself.












Claims
  • 1. A sensor and sensor housing assembly comprising:means for sensing at least one thermal property of a fluid, said means for sensing including a heating element and a sensing element arranged in a microbridge configuration; means for shielding, proximate to said means for sensing, for shielding said means for sensing from convection of the fluid that detrimentally affects an accuracy of the sensing the at least one thermal property of the fluid, said means for shielding including a plurality of concentrically spaced holes; and means for reducing velocity and conveying a portion of fluid to said means for shielding.
  • 2. The sensor and sensor housing assembly of claim 1, wherein:said means for shielding is situated more than 50 microns from said means for sensing.
  • 3. The sensor and sensor housing assembly of claim 2, wherein said means for sensing is supported on a surface on the sensor housing assembly, and said means for sensing comprises:a substrate situated on the surface supporting said microsensor means; a semiconductor piece formed on the substrate, the semiconductor piece including a recess; and a thermal sensing element proximate to the recess.
  • 4. The sensor and sensor housing assembly of claim 3, wherein the sensing element is situated in a membrane covering the recess.
  • 5. The sensor and sensor housing assembly of claim 4, wherein the recess contains a thermally isolating material.
  • 6. The sensor and sensor housing assembly of claim 5 wherein:said means for reducing velocity has a first end proximate to said shield means and a second end; the second end is an opening that has an area equivalent to a circle having a first diameter; the second end is at a first distance from said shield means; and a ratio of the first diameter to the first distance is close to or greater than one.
  • 7. The sensor and sensor housing assembly of claim 3, wherein the recess is filled with a substance having a low thermal conduction.
  • 8. The sensor and sensor housing assembly of claim 1, wherein said means for sensing is supported on a surface on the sensor housing assembly, and said means for sensing comprises:a substrate situated on the surface supporting said microsensor means; a semiconductor piece formed on the substrate; the semiconductor piece including a recess; and a thermal sensing element proximate to the recess.
  • 9. The sensor and sensor housing assembly of claim 8, wherein the recess is filled with a substance having a low thermal conduction.
  • 10. The sensor and sensor housing assembly of claim 1 wherein:said means for reducing velocity has a first end proximate to said shield means and a second end; the second end is an opening that has an area equivalent to a circle having a first diameter; the second end is at a first distance from said shield means; and a ratio of the first diameter to the first distance is close to or greater than one.
  • 11. The sensor and sensor housing assembly of claim 10, wherein the recess is filled with a substance having a low thermal conduction.
US Referenced Citations (21)
Number Name Date Kind
2496806 Moffatt Feb 1950 A
2928279 Schober Mar 1960 A
3675489 Garilli et al. Jul 1972 A
3720093 Gill Mar 1973 A
3881181 Khajezadeh Apr 1975 A
4488414 Jungkman et al. Dec 1984 A
4682503 Higashi et al. Jul 1987 A
5014552 Kamiunten et al. May 1991 A
5056362 Ang et al. Oct 1991 A
5081866 Ochiai et al. Jan 1992 A
5177696 Bonne Jan 1993 A
5220830 Bonne Jun 1993 A
5249462 Bonne Oct 1993 A
5279155 Johnson et al. Jan 1994 A
5303167 Bonne Apr 1994 A
5441638 Tillich Aug 1995 A
5452621 Aylesworth et al. Sep 1995 A
5505073 Gerblinger et al. Apr 1996 A
5653538 Phillips Aug 1997 A
6178811 Bonne et al. Jan 2001 B1
6184773 Bonne et al. Feb 2001 B1
Foreign Referenced Citations (5)
Number Date Country
319871 Jun 1989 EP
0882978 Dec 1998 EP
128318 Jul 1985 JP
9104067 Jul 1972 WO
25842 Nov 1994 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (3)
Entry
Stemme, G., “Micro fluid sensors and actuators”, Micro Machine and Human Science, 1995, MHS '95.,Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on, pp. 45-52, 1995.*
Evans et al., “Planar Laminar Mixer”, Micro Electro Mechanical Systems, MEMS 97, Proceedings, IEEE., Tenth Annual International Workshop on Mems, Jan. 26-30, 1997, pp. 96-101, 1997.*
Holm et al., “Stability and Common Mode Sensitivity of Piezoresistive Silicon Pressure Sensors made by Different Mounting Methods”, IEEE., pp. 978-981, 1991.