ºÝºÝߣ

ºÝºÝߣShare a Scribd company logo
Environmentally Robust Carbon
Monoxide Sensor for Fire Detection
Dr. Neils R.S. Hansen
& Dr. Ann M. Harvey
Objective
¡° To develop a quality CO sensor made via a
robust automated manufacturing process.¡±
Portable Gas Detection
Flammable Gas Detection
Toxic Gas Detection (Semiconductor)
BRAND NAMES
Residential Gas Detection
Sensor Supplier
? UK¡¯s No
. 1 manufacturer & supplier of
residential carbon monoxide (CO) alarms, 1.5
M units sold since 1996.
UK
Headquarters,
Poole, England
? We manufacture both CO detectors &
sensors to pass BSI, UL & CSA standards
? Approximately two million cells sold
since 1996. Only CO cell used
presently for fire detection.
? World¡¯s largest gas detection company.
DESIGN STRATEGY
Critical analysis of existing products and processes
Improve performance to meet more stringent certification
approvals introduced since 1996
Design for automation
Failure Modes and Effects Analysis
Failure rate in field use is < 0.05 %
Process : poor sealing due to manual errors
Effects
? Zero CO sensitivity ( filter blockage )
? False alarms ( corrosion currents )
Complete customer satisfaction demands the effective elimination
of these failure modes from the ECO-Sure(TM)
cell design.
Design : electrolyte leakage in extreme R.H.
Analysis of CO Cells ( End-of-Life after ~ 5 yrs in field use )
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 1 2 3 4 5
CO Cell Lifetime (years in field use)
NormalisedSensitivity(%ofinitial)
Predicted Sensitivity Decay
Measured Decay of Old Product
Predicted Ecosure Decay
Performance Requirements
? Improved baseline stability
? Wider operational humidity range
High R.H. = no electrolyte leakage
Low R.H. = improved span stability
? Increased physical and chemical filtration capacity
? Reduced cost of work in progress
Design for Automation
Patented design has fewer components for automated manufacture
Efficient use of all components
? Charcoal cloth acts as a filter, an electrode support and also an efficient
gassing plenum
? Wick acts as both an electrolyte reservoir and compresses the electrode
stack
? Separator preferentially draws electrolyte from the wick and electrically
isolates electrodes
Materials have all been proven historically over five years
Previous Design
Pt Working Electrode
Plastic Housing
Impregnated Charcoal
Cloth Filter (2 layer)
Wick
Pt Counter Electrode
Push-fit Pins
Electrolyte
ECO-Sure(TM)
Design
Plastic Housing
Impregnated Charcoal
Cloth Filter (5 layer)
Pt Working Electrode
Wick
Pt Counter Electrode
Insert-moulded Pins
Separator
Electrolyte
Theoretical Electrolyte Volume vs Relative Humidity
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
Relative Humidity ( % at 20 o
C )
ElectrolyteVolume
(%ofcellfreevolume)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Concentration(moldm-3
)
ECO-Sure Electrolyte Volume
Electrolyte Concentration
maximum
capacity
Equilibrium humidity of
injected electrolyte
ECO-Sure(TM)
Cells During High Humidity Storage
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
0 5 10 15 20
Time ( weeks )
NormalisedSensitivity(%)
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
WeightChange(g)
ECO-Sure cell sensitivity
Mean ECO-Sure weight change
48 ECO-Sure(TM)
cells stored at 96% R.H and 20o
C
UL Test
Failure
ECO-Sure(TM)
Cells During Low Humidity Storage
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time ( weeks )
NormalisedSensitivity(%)
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0.0
MeanWeightChange(g)
ECO-Sure cell sensitivity
Mean ECO-Sure weight change
48 ECO-Sure(TM)
cells stored at 11% R.H and 50o
C
UL Test
Failure
More efficient use of electrode allows a
16 % reduction in the area of the cap hole
ECO-Sure(TM)
Cap Assembly
Old Design Cap Assembly
2 layer charcoal cloth
5 layer charcoal cloth
X-sections
Cross Sensitivity Comparison ( Old Design vs ECO-Sure(TM)
)
90
60
4
15
4
0.5 0.5
3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
800 ppm NO2 ( VdS ) 2000 ppm Ethanol
(EN50291)
50 ppm SO2 ( VdS ) 200 ppm IPA ( UL2034)
Gas Applied
Response(COppmequivalent)
Old design
ECO-Sure
PASS criteria is < 36 ppm CO equivalent
Improved Baseline Temperature Stability
? Effect : Positive Baseline Drift at elevated temperature
? Effect : Negative Baseline Drift at elevated temperatures
? Comparative Baseline Drift Performance
Old Design = + / - 8 ppm CO equivalent
(acceptable for residential CO monitoring)
ECO-Sure(TM)
< + / - 2 ppm CO equivalent
(required for fire detection applications)
Cause : As manufactured organic contamination de-sorbs from the filter.
Solution : Condition cells at elevated temperature prior to release
Cause : VOCs out-gassing from potting compound
Solution : Improved curing regime
Baseline Temperature Drift of ECO-Sure(TM)
Cells
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
N n s ¡° ? ? ?
Time ( hours )
Response(COppmequivalent)
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Temperature(Celsius)
Temperature
Mean Baseline Data
Maximum
Minimum
Baseline Temperature Shock of ECO-Sure(TM)
Cells
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
? h A ¨° ? ¡è } U . ?
Time ( hours )
BaselineDrift(COppm)
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Temperature(Celsius)
Mean Baseline Drift
Maximum Drift ( Mean + 2 x s.d. )
Minimum Drift ( Mean + 2 x s.d. )
Temperature
Baseline Temperature Shock of ECO-Sure(TM)
Cells
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
¡§ ? u  B ) ? ? ? ?
Time ( hours )
BaselineDrift(COppm)
Threshold Alarm Gas Concentration
ECO-Sure(TM)
Product Summary
Semi-automated production since March 2001
? Two stages of process FMEA fed into automated production line
? Yields are recorded for continual process improvement
ECO-Sure(TM)
cells have been approved in instruments tested to :
? BS, LPC, VdS & UL2034 (due April, 2002)
UL Component Recognition
? Advanced recognition scheme, monthly linearity test, maximum
concentration measurement and continuous 15 ppm CO exposure
? Provisional recognition granted (Feb 2002) achieved on first submission
Automated Manufacture
? Quality Improvements ( Components )
? Cleanliness
? Dimensional tolerance
? Placement
Quality Improvements ( Process )
Thermal welding of electrode followed by 100 % leak testing
Electric welding and continuity testing of every current collector
? Every critical operation has a minimum of one verification check
? SCADA system monitors and reports production status
Consistent high quality of manufacture
Pittcon 2002
Product Summary
Product currently supplied in volume to
multi-national fire and residential CO detector
manufacturers
Significant investment in automation to improve
manufacturing process and increase throughput
Significant improvement in cell performance to
significantly exceed all current standards

More Related Content

What's hot (8)

PPTX
Extracting Value from Mine Ores & Wastes using DC Arc Plasma Technology
Jessica Smith
?
PDF
Drop In Housings Cartridges catalog
Depuratori Acqua Osmosi Inversa Addolcitori Sinergroup
?
PDF
Drop In Housings Cartridges catalog
Depuratori Acqua Osmosi Inversa Addolcitori Sinergroup
?
PPT
My Profile
Pandian Chelliah
?
PPTX
Plastics to hydrogen
Recupera
?
PDF
Jmled Alliance
JULIANITA NG
?
PDF
Headspace Oxygen Analyzer for MAP
Labthink Instruments Co., Ltd
?
PDF
WG1_RizziM_Statistics_on_EP_treatment_of_cavities_in_series_production
Michela Rizzi
?
Extracting Value from Mine Ores & Wastes using DC Arc Plasma Technology
Jessica Smith
?
Drop In Housings Cartridges catalog
Depuratori Acqua Osmosi Inversa Addolcitori Sinergroup
?
Drop In Housings Cartridges catalog
Depuratori Acqua Osmosi Inversa Addolcitori Sinergroup
?
My Profile
Pandian Chelliah
?
Plastics to hydrogen
Recupera
?
Jmled Alliance
JULIANITA NG
?
Headspace Oxygen Analyzer for MAP
Labthink Instruments Co., Ltd
?
WG1_RizziM_Statistics_on_EP_treatment_of_cavities_in_series_production
Michela Rizzi
?

Viewers also liked (7)

PDF
7. MQ Ref - LL - Capstone
Michael Quan
?
PDF
The Carbon Monoxide Detector Placement Guide
CO Detector
?
PPTX
Cadeira Diretor Maldivas - azul j serrano
Ind¨²stria das Cadeiras
?
PPTX
Carbon monoxide
Chakri Cr
?
PDF
Report on Mapping of Carbon Monoxide using WSN
Arjun Aravind
?
PPTX
VVC AUTO 85.5 - Smog Technician - Level 1 - Lambda
Justin Gatewood
?
PPTX
VVC AUTO 85.5 - Smog Technician - Level 1 - Carbon monoxide
Justin Gatewood
?
7. MQ Ref - LL - Capstone
Michael Quan
?
The Carbon Monoxide Detector Placement Guide
CO Detector
?
Cadeira Diretor Maldivas - azul j serrano
Ind¨²stria das Cadeiras
?
Carbon monoxide
Chakri Cr
?
Report on Mapping of Carbon Monoxide using WSN
Arjun Aravind
?
VVC AUTO 85.5 - Smog Technician - Level 1 - Lambda
Justin Gatewood
?
VVC AUTO 85.5 - Smog Technician - Level 1 - Carbon monoxide
Justin Gatewood
?
Ad

Similar to Pittcon 2002 (6)

PPTX
Catalytic Bead Sensor Yield Improvement Presentation
Dr. Rupendra M. Anklekar
?
PDF
Ay31343348
IJERA Editor
?
PDF
Measuring Up to Chemical Compliance Challenges
Yokogawa1
?
PPTX
Vapor Combustor Improvement Project LinkedIn Presentation February 2016
Tim Krimmel, MEM
?
PDF
Research Inventy : International Journal of Engineering and Science
researchinventy
?
Catalytic Bead Sensor Yield Improvement Presentation
Dr. Rupendra M. Anklekar
?
Ay31343348
IJERA Editor
?
Measuring Up to Chemical Compliance Challenges
Yokogawa1
?
Vapor Combustor Improvement Project LinkedIn Presentation February 2016
Tim Krimmel, MEM
?
Research Inventy : International Journal of Engineering and Science
researchinventy
?
Ad

Pittcon 2002

  • 1. Environmentally Robust Carbon Monoxide Sensor for Fire Detection Dr. Neils R.S. Hansen & Dr. Ann M. Harvey Objective ¡° To develop a quality CO sensor made via a robust automated manufacturing process.¡±
  • 2. Portable Gas Detection Flammable Gas Detection Toxic Gas Detection (Semiconductor) BRAND NAMES Residential Gas Detection Sensor Supplier
  • 3. ? UK¡¯s No . 1 manufacturer & supplier of residential carbon monoxide (CO) alarms, 1.5 M units sold since 1996. UK Headquarters, Poole, England ? We manufacture both CO detectors & sensors to pass BSI, UL & CSA standards ? Approximately two million cells sold since 1996. Only CO cell used presently for fire detection. ? World¡¯s largest gas detection company.
  • 4. DESIGN STRATEGY Critical analysis of existing products and processes Improve performance to meet more stringent certification approvals introduced since 1996 Design for automation
  • 5. Failure Modes and Effects Analysis Failure rate in field use is < 0.05 % Process : poor sealing due to manual errors Effects ? Zero CO sensitivity ( filter blockage ) ? False alarms ( corrosion currents ) Complete customer satisfaction demands the effective elimination of these failure modes from the ECO-Sure(TM) cell design. Design : electrolyte leakage in extreme R.H.
  • 6. Analysis of CO Cells ( End-of-Life after ~ 5 yrs in field use ) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 1 2 3 4 5 CO Cell Lifetime (years in field use) NormalisedSensitivity(%ofinitial) Predicted Sensitivity Decay Measured Decay of Old Product Predicted Ecosure Decay
  • 7. Performance Requirements ? Improved baseline stability ? Wider operational humidity range High R.H. = no electrolyte leakage Low R.H. = improved span stability ? Increased physical and chemical filtration capacity ? Reduced cost of work in progress
  • 8. Design for Automation Patented design has fewer components for automated manufacture Efficient use of all components ? Charcoal cloth acts as a filter, an electrode support and also an efficient gassing plenum ? Wick acts as both an electrolyte reservoir and compresses the electrode stack ? Separator preferentially draws electrolyte from the wick and electrically isolates electrodes Materials have all been proven historically over five years
  • 9. Previous Design Pt Working Electrode Plastic Housing Impregnated Charcoal Cloth Filter (2 layer) Wick Pt Counter Electrode Push-fit Pins Electrolyte
  • 10. ECO-Sure(TM) Design Plastic Housing Impregnated Charcoal Cloth Filter (5 layer) Pt Working Electrode Wick Pt Counter Electrode Insert-moulded Pins Separator Electrolyte
  • 11. Theoretical Electrolyte Volume vs Relative Humidity 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Relative Humidity ( % at 20 o C ) ElectrolyteVolume (%ofcellfreevolume) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Concentration(moldm-3 ) ECO-Sure Electrolyte Volume Electrolyte Concentration maximum capacity Equilibrium humidity of injected electrolyte
  • 12. ECO-Sure(TM) Cells During High Humidity Storage 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 0 5 10 15 20 Time ( weeks ) NormalisedSensitivity(%) 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 WeightChange(g) ECO-Sure cell sensitivity Mean ECO-Sure weight change 48 ECO-Sure(TM) cells stored at 96% R.H and 20o C UL Test Failure
  • 13. ECO-Sure(TM) Cells During Low Humidity Storage 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 5 10 15 20 25 Time ( weeks ) NormalisedSensitivity(%) -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 MeanWeightChange(g) ECO-Sure cell sensitivity Mean ECO-Sure weight change 48 ECO-Sure(TM) cells stored at 11% R.H and 50o C UL Test Failure
  • 14. More efficient use of electrode allows a 16 % reduction in the area of the cap hole ECO-Sure(TM) Cap Assembly Old Design Cap Assembly 2 layer charcoal cloth 5 layer charcoal cloth X-sections
  • 15. Cross Sensitivity Comparison ( Old Design vs ECO-Sure(TM) ) 90 60 4 15 4 0.5 0.5 3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 800 ppm NO2 ( VdS ) 2000 ppm Ethanol (EN50291) 50 ppm SO2 ( VdS ) 200 ppm IPA ( UL2034) Gas Applied Response(COppmequivalent) Old design ECO-Sure PASS criteria is < 36 ppm CO equivalent
  • 16. Improved Baseline Temperature Stability ? Effect : Positive Baseline Drift at elevated temperature ? Effect : Negative Baseline Drift at elevated temperatures ? Comparative Baseline Drift Performance Old Design = + / - 8 ppm CO equivalent (acceptable for residential CO monitoring) ECO-Sure(TM) < + / - 2 ppm CO equivalent (required for fire detection applications) Cause : As manufactured organic contamination de-sorbs from the filter. Solution : Condition cells at elevated temperature prior to release Cause : VOCs out-gassing from potting compound Solution : Improved curing regime
  • 17. Baseline Temperature Drift of ECO-Sure(TM) Cells -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 N n s ¡° ? ? ? Time ( hours ) Response(COppmequivalent) -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Temperature(Celsius) Temperature Mean Baseline Data Maximum Minimum
  • 18. Baseline Temperature Shock of ECO-Sure(TM) Cells -2 -1 0 1 2 3 ? h A ¨° ? ¡è } U . ? Time ( hours ) BaselineDrift(COppm) -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Temperature(Celsius) Mean Baseline Drift Maximum Drift ( Mean + 2 x s.d. ) Minimum Drift ( Mean + 2 x s.d. ) Temperature
  • 19. Baseline Temperature Shock of ECO-Sure(TM) Cells 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 ¡§ ? u B ) ? ? ? ? Time ( hours ) BaselineDrift(COppm) Threshold Alarm Gas Concentration
  • 20. ECO-Sure(TM) Product Summary Semi-automated production since March 2001 ? Two stages of process FMEA fed into automated production line ? Yields are recorded for continual process improvement ECO-Sure(TM) cells have been approved in instruments tested to : ? BS, LPC, VdS & UL2034 (due April, 2002) UL Component Recognition ? Advanced recognition scheme, monthly linearity test, maximum concentration measurement and continuous 15 ppm CO exposure ? Provisional recognition granted (Feb 2002) achieved on first submission
  • 21. Automated Manufacture ? Quality Improvements ( Components ) ? Cleanliness ? Dimensional tolerance ? Placement Quality Improvements ( Process ) Thermal welding of electrode followed by 100 % leak testing Electric welding and continuity testing of every current collector ? Every critical operation has a minimum of one verification check ? SCADA system monitors and reports production status Consistent high quality of manufacture
  • 23. Product Summary Product currently supplied in volume to multi-national fire and residential CO detector manufacturers Significant investment in automation to improve manufacturing process and increase throughput Significant improvement in cell performance to significantly exceed all current standards