Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Banner Advert

Message Display

From: "Ken Sallot" <KEN@co*.ci*.uf*.ed*>
Organization: CIRCA, University of Florida
To: techdiver@terra.net, chris@ab*.co*
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 11:35:32 EST
Subject: Re: Gas Blending
> To: techdiver@terra.net
> From: chris@ab*.co* (Christopher M. Parrett)
> Subject: Re: Gas Blending
> 
> There is no doubt in my mind that we WILL run into limitations.
> What my goal is, is to allow the user to choose from an inventory of
> cylinders (we have about 100 now).
> This inventory has all of the data we need for the math.
> He then specifies, Dry fill or wet, if wet chilled or ambient.
> What the final fill pressure is.
> What the final Gas percentages are.
> 
> We then give him a fill sequence, by time and by pressure.
> Assuming he is able to follow it, we "Should" be able to get fairly close to
> what he wants.
> Perfect, probably not, close, probably so.
> And importantly, this type of math will accomodate high pressure fills to
> 300bar+, where PP blending really begins to fall apart.

Chris,

Aren't you forgetting something REALLY important? What about minute 
differences in tank volume. I realize it might seem trivial, however 
under extreme pressures these minute differences can add up. 

If I tumble my 104's, and they were tumbled three times before I got 
them, they'd be just a little bit bigger on the inside, and a little 
bit lighter due to loss of metal.

At a pressure of 2400psi (how many 104's still have that "+" on them, 
eh? And how many of us would ever do anything like overfill 104's?) 
that little difference caused by tumbling them four times could 
really add up to big numbers and throw the whole formula off. 

Maybe if we had a customizable entry for number of times a tank has 
been tumbled, then use an aggregate difference in internal volume 
based on the average volume difference after tumbling, and the 
weight differential of the tank after <x> amount of metal has 
been lost in the tumbling proccess, then we could plug that into the 
whole formula and resolve the entire problem to get an accurate 
fill? ;-)

Naw, I think I'll stick with partial pressure for my lowly EANx 
fills.

Ken
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Ken Sallot                   "High ppO2's can be hazardous to your health"
CIRCA                                 - Ronnie Bell
(904) 392-2007
kens@uf*.ed*
http://grove.ufl.edu/~ken
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]