why not put a pressure sensor at the bottom of the tank?
If you have one at the top of the tank as well the difference + G-force
= head.
How well that's going to work with LOX and measuring a gnats wing of
difference in a 700PSI tank is left as an exercise for the reader.
On 15/09/15 17:04, George Herbert wrote:
Just had an idea. Package a thermal sensor (thermocouple, thermistor, etc) and
a small (say 1W) heater in a lightly insulated package. Immerse. It should
start warming up predictably and fast after the fluid level falls below it...
George William Herbert
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 14, 2015, at 9:50 PM, Derek Lyons <fairwater@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Ben Brockert <wikkit@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:No, it looks like a digital output (because the individual sensor
But I think my concept would put less heat into the tank and has digital
outputs, rather than analog.
states are binary) but it's actually discrete output. Nor can you
simply use the discretes directly as a digital word, because the
relationship between adjacent individual bits in a digital word is
exponential while the relationship between adjacent sensors in a
cylindrical tank is linear and proportional to the distance between
them. You *could* position the sensors so the linear and proportional
outputs equate to the exponential positions of your digital word...
but such an arrangement would be hopelessly coarse over most of the
burn. The conversion isn't necessarily of any great complexity, but
it is something you'll have to account for.
Nor does it escape the need for fine manufacturing and assembly
tolerances as the accuracy of your gauging system is (as it always is)
directly proportional to the accuracy of manufacturing and assembly.
D.