Comparison of Interpretation Methods of Thermocouple Psychrometer Readouts

被引:0
作者
Guz, Lukasz [1 ]
Majerek, Dariusz [2 ]
Sobczuk, Henryk [1 ]
Guz, Ewa [3 ]
Polednik, Bernard [1 ]
机构
[1] Lublin Univ Technol, Fac Environm Engn, Lublin, Poland
[2] Lublin Univ Technol, Fundamental Technol Fac, Lublin, Poland
[3] Med Univ Lublin, Fac Nursing & Hlth Sci, Lublin, Poland
来源
22ND INTERNATIONAL MEETING OF THERMOPHYSICS 2017 AND 4TH MEETING OF ENRE 2017 (THERMOPHYSICS 2017) | 2017年 / 1866卷
关键词
BUILDING-MATERIALS; PERFORMANCE;
D O I
10.1063/1.4994493
中图分类号
O414.1 [热力学];
学科分类号
摘要
Thermocouple psychrometers allow to determine the water potential, which can be easily recalculated into relative humidity of air in cavity of porous materials. The available typical measuring range of probe is very narrow. The lower limit of water potential measurements is about -200 kPa. On the other hand, the upper limit is approximately equal to -7000 kPa and depends on many factors. These paper presents a comparison of two interpretation methods of thermocouple microvolt output regarding: i) amplitude of voltage during wet-bulb temperature depression, ii) field under microvolt output curve. Previous results of experiments indicate that there is a robust correlation between water potential and field under microvolt output curve. In order to obtain correct results of water potential, each probe should be calibrated. The range of NaCl salt solutions with molality from 0.75M to 2.25M was used for calibration, which enable to obtain the osmotic potential from -3377 kPa to -10865 kPa. During measurements was applied 5mA heating current over a span 5 s and 5 mA cooling current aver a span 30s. The conducted study proves that using only different interpretation method based on field under microvolt output it is possible to achieve about 1000 kPa wider range of water potential. The average relative mean square error (RMSE) of this interpretation method is 1199 kPa while voltage amplitude based method yields average RMSE equaling 1378 kPa during calibration in temperature not stabilized conditions.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]  
Andraski B.J., 2002, Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 4 Physical Methods, VVolume 5, P609, DOI DOI 10.2136/SSSABOOKSER5.4.C22
[2]  
Brown R.W., CALIBRATION MODEL SC, P1
[3]   USING HANDHELD MOISTURE METERS ON LIMESTONE: FACTORS AFFECTING PERFORMANCE AND GUIDELINES FOR BEST PRACTICE [J].
Eklund, Julie A. ;
Zhang, Hong ;
Viles, Heather A. ;
Curteis, Tobit .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE, 2013, 7 (02) :207-224
[4]   Small resistive wood moisture sensors: a method for moisture content determination in wood structures [J].
Fredriksson, Maria ;
Wadso, Lars ;
Johansson, Peter .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF WOOD AND WOOD PRODUCTS, 2013, 71 (04) :515-524
[5]   Calibration of Thermocouple Psychrometers and Moisture Measurements in Porous Materials [J].
Guz, Lukasz ;
Sobczuk, Henryk ;
Polednik, Bernard ;
Guz, Ewa .
THERMOPHYSICS 2016: 21ST INTERNATIONAL MEETING, 2016, 1752
[6]   Moisture measurements in building materials with microwaves [J].
Kääriäinen, H ;
Rudolph, M ;
Schaurich, D ;
Tulla, K ;
Wiggenhauser, H .
NDT & E INTERNATIONAL, 2001, 34 (06) :389-394
[7]  
Kassem E., 2007, TRANSPORT RES REC, V1970, P45
[8]  
Kirkham MB, 2005, PRINCIPLES OF SOIL AND PLANT WATER RELATIONS, P241, DOI 10.1016/B978-012409751-3/50016-5
[10]  
RAWLINGS S. L., 1966, AGR METEOROL, V3, P293, DOI 10.1016/0002-1571(66)90013-6