Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Fluxgate”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

AMR Magnetic Sensors in Flux Expulsion Studies

Magnetic flux expulsion properties of the superconducting material such as bulk niobium, widely used for the radio-frequency cavity fabrication, substantially affect the performance characteristics of the cavities. The quality factor of the SRF resonators can be significantly compromised due to the presence of the trapped flux vortices causing additional RF energy losses in the material. Large number of experiments have been carried out by different research groups to establish the correlation of the flux trapping in niobium cavities with the presence of impurities in niobium as well as various surface treatment methods. Majority of these experiments utilize commercially available cryogenic fluxgate magnetic sensors to measure the field before and after the niobium transition to the superconducting state to quantify the amount of flux trapped. One disadvantage of the typically used fluxgates is the size of the sensing volume. As an example, the Barting-ton F and G type cryogenic fluxgates have a sensing core length of about 30mm, which is comparable to the curvature radius of the cavity walls and hence the magnetic field lines curvature radius after the expulsion. Thus, the measured field value needs to be corrected to account for the sensor effective averaging over the sensing volume. In case of the sharper geometries, for instance if the flux expulsion to be measured on the edge of the rectangular niobium flat sheet with a thickness of ~5mm, the use of the fluxgate would be impractical.

Netepenko, A.↗

Combined Mesonet and Tracker

Title: Combined Mesonet and Trackers (UNL Mobile Mesonets) Authors University of Nebraska PI: Adam Houston, UNL Professor (ahouston2@unl.edu) Mailing Address: 126 Bessey Hall P.O. Box 880340 Lincoln, NE 68588-0340 CoMeT Overview The University of Nebraska-Lincoln operates three Combined Mesonet and Tracker (CoMeTs). CoMeTs are Ford Explorers (model years 2015, 2017, and 2019) with forward-mounted suites of meteorological sensors and dual moonroofs, combining the capability of a mobile mesonet to collect near-surface observations with the capability of an unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) tracker vehicle, which enables an observer in the second row of seats to see the aircraft and maintain compliance with Federal Aviation Administration policies on UAS operation. The CoMeTs collect observations of slow temperature and humidity at ~2 m above ground level (AGL) using a Vaisala HMP155A, fast temperature at ~2 m AGL using a Campbell Scientific 109SS-L thermistor, pressure at ~2.5 m AGL using a Vaisala PTB210, wind speed and direction at ~3.25 m AGL using an R.M. Young 05103 propeller anemometer, and vehicle heading using a KVH Industries C-100 fluxgate compass (Barbieri et al. 2019). The HMP155A and 109SS-L thermistor are shielded and aspirated within a U-tube (Waugh and Frederickson 2010; Houston et al. 2016). This list of sensors is also included in the CoMeT data file metadata. Manufacturer specifications for these instruments are given in Table 1 of Hanft and Houston (2018). The reported measured quantities are summarized below.CoMeT-3 was funded through an equipment allocation included in the NSF TORUS award (AGS-1824649). Instrument Description The specific sensors included on each CoMeT are summarized in the table at the end of this section. In general each CoMeT collects observations of slow temperature and humidity at ~2 m above ground level (AGL) using a Vaisala HMP155, fast temperature at ~2 m AGL using a Campbell Scientific 109SS-L thermistor, pressure at ~2.5 m AGL using a Vaisala PTB210 barometer with a Gill pressure port, wind speed and direction at ~3.25 m AGL using an R.M. Young 05103 propeller anemometer, position using a Garmin 19x HVS receiver, and vehicle heading using a KVH Industries C-100 fluxgate compass. The HMP155 and 109SS are shielded and aspirated within a U-tube (Waugh and Frederickson 2010; Houston et al. 2016). Fast temperature and corrected RH measurements (using sensors housed within the U-tube) have a time constant of 10-12 s based on data collected across a temperature and RH shock during the CLOUD-MAP 2017 calibration/validation tests on June 26, 2017. Vehicle speed was < 10 kts for this test. CoMeT-1 CoMeT-2 CoMeT-3 Slow Temperature Slow RH Vaisala HMP155A-L20-PT Part #: 22280-7 Vaisala HMP155E Part #: E1AA11A0B1A1A0A Vaisala HMP155E Part #: E1AA11A0B1A1A0A Fast temperature Campbell Scientific 109SS-L20-PT Part #: 21448-3 Campbell Scientific 109SS-L12-PW Part #: 21448-109 Campbell Scientific 109SS-L12-PW Part #: 21448-150 Pressure Vaisala PTB-210 Part #: A1A1B Gill Pressure Port Part #: 61002 Vaisala PTB-210 Part #: A1A1B Gill Pressure Port Part #: 61002 Vaisala PTB-210 Part #: A1A1B Gill Pressure Port Part #: 61002 Wind RM Young 05103-L20-PT Part #: 18435-310 RM Young 05103-L20-PW Part #: 18435-244 RM Young 05103-L20-PW Part #: 18435-244 GPS Garmin GPS 19x HVS (NMEA 0183) Part #: 010-01010-00 Garmin GPS 19x HVS (NMEA 0183) Part #: 010-01010-00 Garmin GPS 19x HVS (NMEA 0183) Part #: 010-01010-00 Compass KVH C-100 Part #: 01-0177-15 KVH C-100 Part #: 01-0177-15 KVH C-100 Part #: 01-0177-15 Logger Campbell Scientific CR6-NA-XT-SW Part #: 28385-9 Campbell Scientific CR6-WIFI-XT-SW Part #: 28385-6 Campbell Scientific CR6-WIFI-XT-SW Part #: 28385-6 Data Collection and Real-Time Processing The reported measured quantities are summarized in the table below. Quantity Units Source Epoch time Seconds GPS Latitude and longitude Degrees GPS Altitude m GPS Pressure hPa PTB210 Temperature (fast) deg C 109SS-L Temperature (slow) deg C HMP155 RH (slow) % HMP155 Vehicle speed m/s GPS Vehicle heading deg C-100 and GPS In addition to the measured variables, several derived variables are calculated. Corrected/fast relative humidity (%) Relative humidity is adjusted to the fast temperature following Richardson et al. (1998) and Houston et al. (2016). Water vapor mixing ratio (g/kg) Dew point temperature (&deg;C) Potential temperature (Kelvin) Virtual potential temperature (Kelvin) Equivalent potential temperature (Kelvin) Regular intercomparisons between all three CoMeTs were performed during TORUS 2019. Comparisons were also conducted between CoMeT-1 and CoMeT-2 during LAPSE-RATE (2018) on 14 July. In these intercomparisons, the vehicles were parked adjacent to each other aligned perpendicular to (and facing into) the wind. To minimize engine heating effects, intercomparisons were only conducted when the wind speed was >10 kts. Data Format Original data files for each deployment are saved as text files and then converted to NetCDF. NetCDF versions have units that are CF compliant and may not match the original units in the txt files. The naming convention for the NetCDF files is as follows: UNL.CoMeT3.{deployment date YYYYMMDD}.{start time of observation collection in UTC HHMM}.L2.{post-processing codes}.cdf example: UNL.CoMeT3.20190627.1931.L2.g1.f1.cdf Post-processing codes are included to track modifications to the raw data. These codes are closely connected to error flags associated with each record. Each letter corresponds to a particular instrument: g: GPS p: Barometer tf: Fast temperature ts: Slow temperature rh: Relative humidity f: Compass w: Wind monitor a: All instruments Each number corresponds to a particular post-processing action described more below. Measured and derived variables are included in the following table. Variable Heading Standard Name Units time Time seconds since 00:00:00, 01-01-1970 Alt Altitude meters lat Latitude degrees north lon Longitude degrees east fast_temp Air Temperature kelvin slow_temp Air Temperature kelvin pressure Air Pressure pascals logger_RH Relative Humidity percent calc_corr_RH Relative Humidity percent wind_speed Wind Speed meters per second wind_dir Wind From Direction degrees vehicle_dir Vehicle Direction degrees dewpoint Dew Point Temperature kelvin mixing_ratio Humidity Mixing Ratio g/g theta Air Potential Temperature kelvin theta_v Virtual Potential Temperature kelvin theta_e Equivalent Potential Temperature Kelvin error_flag The error_flag variable is a string that matches the post-processing codes listed above. All instruments will have an associated code, but will have a &ldquo;0&rdquo; if the datum is unchanged from the initial processed value. Error Codes The following table summarizes the error codes for data collected before 2020: Error Code Relevant CoMeT Description g1 1,2,3 Exact correction. GPS position and time reprocessed from raw data g2 1 As far as we can tell this is an exact correction to an error in the GPS time. During the correct time periods the time suddenly went backwards ~250s and stayed at this offset for 750s when it corrected itself. The offset was applied to the &ldquo;time warp&rdquo; period. p1 2 Approximate correction. Hole in the pressure tube connecting the pressure port to the barometer. Resulted in erroneously low air pressure measurements when the vehicle was in motion. Derived variables recalculated (dew point temperature [e depends on qv and p], water vapor mixing ratio, potential temperature, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) a1 3 Exact correction. Missing data reprocessed from raw data a2 1 Bug fix to bias correction for ts1, ts2, and rh1: water vapor mixing ratio was off by a factor of 10 and virtual potential temperature was wrong because of this. f1 3 No correction, missing data. Fluxgate compass inoperable. Wind speed and direction calculated using GPS-derived vehicle heading instead. rh1 1 Approximate correction. Constant bias of +1.7% removed from relative humidity. Derived variables recalculated (corrected/fast relative humidity, dew point temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) ts1 1 Approximate correction. Constant bias of +0.6 K removed from slow temperature. Derived variables recalculated (corrected/fast relative humidity, dew point temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) ts2 1 Approximate correction. Constant bias of +1.0 K removed. Derived variables recalculated (corrected/fast relative humidity, dew point temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) References Bolton, D., 1980: The Computation of Equivalent Potential Temperature. Mon. Wea. Rev., 108, 1046&ndash;1053, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1980)108<1046:TCOEPT>2.0.CO;2. Hanft, W., and A. L. Houston, 2018: An Observational and Modeling Study of Mesoscale Air Masses with High Theta-E. Mon. Wea. Rev., 146, 2503&ndash;2524, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-17-0389.1.Wexler Houston, A. L., R. J. Laurence III, T. W. Nichols, S. Waugh, B. Argrow, and C. L. Ziegler, 2016: Intercomparison of unmanned aircraft-borne and mobile mesonet atmospheric sensors. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. 33, 1569-1582, doi: 10.1175/JTECH-D-15-0178.1. Lowe, P. R., 1977: An Approximating Polynomial for the Computation of Saturation Vapor Pressure. J. Applied Meteorology, 16, 100&ndash;103. Richardson, S. J., S. E. Frederickson, F. V. Brock, and J. A. Brotzge, 1998: Combination temperature and relative humidity probes: Avoiding large air temperature errors and associated relative humidity errors. Preprints, 10th Symp. On Meteorological Observations and Instrumentation, Phoenix, AZ, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 278&ndash;283. Waugh, S., and S. E. Frederickson, 2010: An improved aspirated temperature system for mobile meteorological observations, especially in severe weather. 25th Conf. on Severe Local Storms, Denver, CO, Amer. Meteor. Soc., P5.2. [Available online at https://ams.confex.com/ams/25SLS/techprogram/paper_176205.htm.]

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Precision current regulator for NMR electromagnets

When using electromagnets or non-persistent superconducting magnets, the field stability can be directly proportional to the current stability. We present in this report a simple design for a current regulator based upon a high-precision, dc-dc fluxgate transformer. The output current and NMR frequency are stabilized by about a factor of 50, over times of order one hour. The method can be applied to essentially any current supply.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

Calibration and Localization of Optically Pumped Magnetometers Using Electromagnetic Coils

In this paper, we propose a method to estimate the position, orientation, and gain of a magnetic field sensor using a set of (large) electromagnetic coils. We apply the method for calibrating an array of optically pumped magnetometers (OPMs) for magnetoencephalography (MEG). We first measure the magnetic fields of the coils at multiple known positions using a well-calibrated triaxial magnetometer, and model these discreetly sampled fields using vector spherical harmonics (VSH) functions. We then localize and calibrate an OPM by minimizing the sum of squared errors between the model signals and the OPM responses to the coil fields. We show that by using homogeneous and first-order gradient fields, the OPM sensor parameters (gain, position, and orientation) can be obtained from a set of linear equations with pseudo-inverses of two matrices. The currents that should be applied to the coils for approximating these low-order field components can be determined based on the VSH models. Computationally simple initial estimates of the OPM sensor parameters follow. As a first test of the method, we placed a fluxgate magnetometer at multiple positions and estimated the RMS position, orientation, and gain errors of the method to be 1.0 mm, 0.2°, and 0.8%, respectively. Lastly, we calibrated a 48-channel OPM array. The accuracy of the OPM calibration was tested by using the OPM array to localize magnetic dipoles in a phantom, which resulted in an average dipole position error of 3.3 mm. The results demonstrate the feasibility of using electromagnetic coils to calibrate and localize OPMs for MEG.

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗

Uncertainty analysis of steady-state measurements with a hot-filament type calorimetric emissometer

Calorimetric emissometers measure total hemispherical emissivity by measuring the heat transferred from a heated sample to its surroundings under a vacuum. The accuracy of emissometers standardized by the ASTM C835-06 are well understood. This work uses the Guide to the Evaluation of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM) for the propagation uncertainties for an ASTM compliant emissometer. The GUM method was able to develop a measurement model and expressions to determine the uncertainty for other emissometers of this type. Data on ‘as-received’ Hastelloy X was used to develop a detailed uncertainty analysis of the emissivity measurement. Data on ‘as-received’ SS 347 and sandblasted A387 Gr. 91 and previous data by the group on A508/A533B were used to determine uncertainty over the ranges 0.16 to 0.81. For all samples, relative uncertainties in emissivities varied from 0.77% to 2.5% when using a fluxgate magnetometer sensor (FMS) to measure the DC heating current. Data on Hastelloy X using a Hall-effect sensor for DC current and low alloy steel showed the DC current and voltage across the test section to be dominate sources of uncertainty. When these sources were reduced, the specimen temperature and the surface area of the test sections were main sources of uncertainty in the emissivity, especially at higher temperatures. As thermal expansion of the surface was considered in the calculations, correlation between specimen temperature and surface area was examined. It was found to be a small contribution to emissivity's uncertainty despite the differences in linear CTE and its uncertainty for the materials analyzed in this study. For low temperatures, the chamber temperature can be a significant source of uncertainty if not sufficiently cooled. The GUM was also briefly compared to uncertainty from the 2nd and 3rd expansions of the Taylor series. We found that the results were the same when rounding to two significant figures.

42 ENGINEERING↗

First Observation of Harmonics of Magnetosonic Waves in Martian Magnetosheath Region

Abstract The present study provides an evidence for the generation of harmonics of magnetosonic waves in the Martian magnetosheath region. The wave signatures are manifested in the magnetic field measurements recorded by the fluxgate magnetometer instrument onboard the Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution missioN (MAVEN) spacecraft in the dawn sector around 5–10 LT at an altitude of 4,000–6,000 kms. The wave that is observed continuously from 19.1 to 20.7 UT below the proton cyclotron frequency (f ci ≈ 46 mHz) is identified as fundamental mode of the magnetosonic wave. Whereas harmonics of the magnetosonic wave are observed during 19.7–20.3 UT at frequencies that are multiple off ci . The ambient solar wind proton density and plasma flow velocity are found to vary with a fundamental mode frequency of 46 mHz. It is noticed that the fundamental mode is mainly associated with the left‐hand (LH), and higher frequency harmonics are associated with the right‐hand (RH) circular polarizations. A clear difference in the polarization and ellipticity is noticed during the time of occurrence of harmonics. The magnetosonic wave harmonics are found to propagate in the quasi‐perpendicular directions to the ambient magnetic field. The results of linear theory and Particle‐In‐Cell simulation performed here are in agreement with the observations. The present study provides a conclusive evidence for the occurrence of harmonics of magnetosonic wave in the close vicinity of the magnetosheath region of the unmagnetized planet Mars.

Astronomy & Astrophysics↗

Evaluation of Anisotropic Magnetoresistive (AMR) Sensors for a Magnetic Field Scanning System for SRF Cavities

One of the significant causes of residual losses in superconducting radio-frequency (SRF) cavities is trapped magnetic flux. The flux trapping mechanism depends on many factors that include cool-down conditions, surface preparation techniques, and ambient magnetic field orientation. Suitable diagnostic tools are not yet available to quantitatively correlate such factors’ effect on the flux trapping mechanism. A magnetic field scanning system (MFSS) consisting of AMR sensors, fluxgate magnetometers, or Hall probes is recently commissioned to scan the local magnetic field of trapped vortices around 1.3 GHz single-cell SRF cavities. In this contribution, we will present results from sensitivity calibration and the first tests of AMR sensors in the MFSS.

Parajuli, I. P.↗

Simulation of the thermoelectric effect in a multi-metallic superconducting cavity

Superconducting radio-frequency accelerating cavities made with different material layers, such as copper, Nb or Nb₃Sn, are susceptible to thermoelectric effects due to differences in Seebeck coefficients between the metals. A temperature gradient across the surfaces can drive thermoelectric currents, which may impact the cavity performance. A layered Cu/Nb/Nb3Sn single-cell cavity was tested with cryocoolers in 2022. Three heaters were mounted on the cavity surface at different locations and three single-axis cryogenic fluxgate magnetometers were attached close to the cavity equator. A linear increase in the magnetic field was measured while increasing the heaters' power. The cavity setup was analyzed with COMSOL and the results showed a trend similar to that observed in the experiment. This contribution details the approach chosen for the simulation and some of the challenges encountered.

Accelerator Physics↗

Preliminary Results from Magnetic Field Scanning System for a Single-Cell Niobium Cavity

One of the building blocks of modern particle accelerators is superconducting radiofrequency (SRF) cavities. Niobium is the material of choice to build such cavities, which operate at liquid helium temperature (2 - 4 K) and have some of the highest quality factors found in Nature. There are several sources of residual losses, one of them is trapped magnetic flux, which limits the quality factor in SRF cavities. The flux trapping mechanism depends on different niobium surface preparations and cool-down conditions. Suitable diagnostic tools are not yet available to study the effects of such conditions on magnetic flux trapping. A magnetic field scanning system (MFSS) for SRF cavities using Hall probes and Fluxgate magnetometer has been designed, built, and is commissioned to measure the local magnetic field trapped in 1.3 GHz single-cell SRF cavities at 4 K. In this contribution, we will present the preliminary results from MFSS for a single cell niobium cavity.

Ciovati, G.↗