UNCOOLED IR DETECTOR TEMPERATURE CONTROL Performed by : Shimon Amir Yogev Ben-Simon Instructor :...
-
Upload
elwin-burns -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
0
Transcript of UNCOOLED IR DETECTOR TEMPERATURE CONTROL Performed by : Shimon Amir Yogev Ben-Simon Instructor :...
UNCOOLED IR DETECTORTEMPERATURE CONTROL
Performed by : Shimon Amir Yogev Ben-Simon
Instructor : Arie Nakhmani
1
TECHNION - ISRAEL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Department of Electrical Engineering Control And Robotics Laboratory
Control And Robotics Laboratory
Control And Robotics Laboratory 2
OUTLINE PRESENTATION
• PROBLEM• SYSTEM STRUCTURE• PROJECT GOALS & OPTIONAL SOLUTIONS• CHOSEN SOLUTION• RESULTS• FINDINGS • SUMMARY• CONCLUSIONS
Control And Robotics Laboratory 3
PROBLEM
• Detector “BIRD 384” is IR detector type uncooled .
• This kind of detector requires stable substrate temperature .
• The requirement for temperature deviation is +/- 10mK .
• During the characterization after manufacture the detectors pass series of tests ,which include settling to several set points. This procedure takes a lot of time , therefore we need to reduce the detector settling time.
• The initial tests showed that there is variance between the time response of the detectors .
Control And Robotics Laboratory 4
SYSTEM STRUCTURE
Detector Controller & Acquisition
Mechanical Stand
active element: TEC
active element: TEC
Measurement : RTD PT100
Measurement : RTD PT100
Microcontroller embedded on FPGA
Microcontroller embedded on FPGA
24 bitADC 24 bit ADC
20 bitDAC 20 bit DAC
linear power amplifier
linear power amplifier
Heat sinkHeat sink
Thermal Coupling Thermal Coupling
Uncooled IR Detector
Control And Robotics Laboratory 5
TEC
AluminaRTD
Thermoelectric Cooler (TEC)
Control And Robotics Laboratory 6
PT100 RTD Platinum RTDs ( Resistance Temperature Detectors ) are recognized as the most reliable standard available for temperature measurement . The PT100 RTD is described by the following generic equation , which makes a obvious nonlinear relationship between temperature and resistance:
Since the B and C coefficients are relatively small, the resistance changes almost linearly with the temperature.
7Control And Robotics Laboratory
2 3 0 0T 0
2 0 0T 0
00
3 0 1
7 0 2
12 0 4
R R [ 1+AT+BT +C(T-100)T ] ( 200 0 )
R R [ 1+AT+BT ] (0 850 )
: R 100 ( 0 )
3.9083 10
5.775 10
4.183 10
C T C
C T C
where at C
A C
B C
C C
T 0R R [ 1+AT]
Control And Robotics Laboratory 8
Mechanical Stand
Gap Filler For Thermal coupling
Electronic card & Detector
Control loopPT
-100
I=1m
A
G=30
ADC
REF
FPG
API
DR
EGU
LATO
R
DACTECShunt
TEC CURR. MEAS.
SUBSTRATE TEMP
PT-1
00
I=1m
A
G=30
ADC
OFF
SET,
GAI
NM
EAS.
Vsubstr.
Vcase
ADC_GAIN
ADC_OFF
Vref
Vref
Vref
Vref
Linear AMP Linear AMP
Diff. AMP
A/D
9Control And Robotics Laboratory
PROJECT GOALS & OPTIONAL SOLUTIONS
The project goals :
1. To reduce settling time .
2. To improve the robustness .
3. Identify the reasons for the variance between the settling time of detectors .
Optional solutions :
1. To improve the control algorithm .
2. To improve the physical parameters of the system/detector such as :
– Thermal impedance between detector package and the heat sink.
– Heat sink.
– “Inside of the package”, e.g. internal PT100 sensor location.
10Control And Robotics Laboratory
Control And Robotics Laboratory 11
CHOSEN SOLUTION
• System modeling .
• Algorithm : PID + switch mode - full power until getting to set-point area ,initializing the integral with a desired value , and then continue with closed loop to convention.
• PID tuning using software tool and manual adjustment.
• Mechanics : improve the thermal coupling to the heat sink.
System Modeling• The chosen model is second order system : one pole for the TEC and
another one for the temperature sensor.
• Even though we know that there is delay in thermal system , in our system the delay can be neglected.
• Initial system modeling using step response of the open loop system , and set the system parameters using software tool .
12Control And Robotics Laboratory
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 14000
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
T
empe
ratu
re [
oC
]
Time [ sec ]
Plant Simulink Model
13Control And Robotics Laboratory
td
k
b
a
Transfer Fcn 1
t1.s+1
k1(s)
Transfer Fcn
k2
t2.s+1Step
Scope 2
Scope 1
Scope
k1
Output Constraint
k2
FromWorkspace
simin
t2
t1
Abs
|u|
Modeling Results
The results for the second order estimation :
• DET 1(OK) :
• DET 2 (SLOW):
HIGH VARIANCE
26.15.165.3 21 KSECSEC
14Control And Robotics Laboratory
31.1234 21 KSECSEC
PID tuning using sisotool
Control And Robotics Laboratory 15
10-2
10-1
100
101
-180
-90
0
Frequency (rad/sec)
-100
-50
0
50Bode Editor for Closed Loop 1 (CL1)
10-3
10-2
10-1
100
101
-180
-135
-90
P.M.: 45.2 degFreq: 0.231 rad/sec
Frequency (rad/sec)
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
G.M.: InfFreq: InfStable loop
Open-Loop Bode Editor for Open Loop 1 (OL1)
-0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4Root Locus Editor for Open Loop 1 (OL1)
Step Response
Time (sec)
Ampl
itude
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 400
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
System: Closed Loop r to yI/O: r to yTime (sec): 7.17Amplitude: 0.922
System: Closed Loop r to yI/O: r to ySettling Time (sec): 29.4
RESULTS
16Control And Robotics Laboratory
The results of the PID tuning using sisotool :• P = 15• I = 0.008
and after manual adjustment :• P = 7• I = 0.02
SETTLING TIME RESULTS Measurements were taken from 8 detectors that tested in 3
configurations :
1. Original system - “Old”.
2. Improved controller and manually PID tuning – “New”
3. Improved controller , heat sink and thermal impedance - “New +Pad”
17Control And Robotics Laboratory
IMPROVEMENTS
OldNewNew + padNew vs OldNew vs OldNew + pad
vs OldNew + pad
vs Old
Avg time
[sec]Avg time
[sec]Avg time
[sec]improvement
[sec]improvement
]%[improvement
[sec]improvement
]%[
25 6082.56047.222.527.335.342.8
60 25 101.867.237.534.73464.363.2
25 3562.536.5352641.627.544
35 2576.348.734.227.736.242.255.2
25 1591.761.334.830.333.156.862
15 2576.735.336.241.353.940.552.8
25 573.75333.820.728.139.854.1
5 2564.232.233.73249.930.547.5
18Control And Robotics Laboratory
Comparison Between Detector #1 Results For The Jump 25 60
Det 1 “Old ”
1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950
58.5
59
59.5
60
60.5
61
61.5
62
62.5
63 Det 1 “New+Pad ”
1885 1890 1895 1900 1905 1910 1915 1920 1925 1930 1935
59.98
59.985
59.99
59.995
60
60.005
60.01
60.015
19
Det 1 “New ”
50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 13055
56
57
58
59
60
61
108 110 112 114 116 118 120
59.99
59.995
60
60.005
60.01
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
52
54
56
58
60
62
75 80 85 90 95 100 105
59.992
59.994
59.996
59.998
60
60.002
60.004
60.006
fig. 2 : zoom on the relevant area in fig. 1 fig. 4 : zoom on the relevant area in fig. 3 fig. 6 : zoom on the relevant area in fig. 5
fig. 1 : Det 1 “old” settling time to +/-10mK fig. 3 : Det 1 “New” settling time to +/-10mK fig. 5 : Det 1 “New+Pad” settling time to +/-10mK
0( 10 ) 35[sec]settlingt m K 0( 10 ) 55[sec]settlingt m K 0( 10 ) 80[sec]settlingt m K
MEASUREMENT QUALITY• Temperature sense readout circuits accuracy and quality is very
important.
• Testing the accuracy and noise of the temperature sense circuits was done by replacing the RTD with a regular resistor of 118.2 ohm [~ 46.5 deg’].
• Readout circuits noise is ~10mK pk-pk.
• Impact of readout circuits temperature drift is less then 20mK for 10 deg’ change of surroundings.
20Control And Robotics Laboratory90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130
46.61
46.615
46.62
46.625
46.63
~10mK
FINDINGS • There are two main kinds of temperature stability
problems:1. “Detector slow response”
2. “Detector can’t cool down”
• Slow response : the problem is mainly TEC-alumina and alumina-RTD contacts.
• Not cooling : the problem is mainly TEC-package contact.
21Control And Robotics Laboratory
Control And Robotics Laboratory 22
RTD ASSEMBLY
23Control And Robotics Laboratory
RTD SURFACEALUMINA-TECTEC - PACKAGE
GLUINGS
MECHANICS
• The current design includes a gap filler pad as thermal coupling to the heat sink .
• It has a thermal conductivity of 2 . and with 2mm thickness it’s thermal impedance is 1.3 .
• Compression achieved using material elasticity and socket friction .
• Possible improvement can be achieved by using a thermal pad with a better thermal impedance and a copper heat sink. – will require mechanical adjustments.
• Tested – 0.3 mm thermal pad with aluminum film to avoid pull-out (pad stick to the detector’s package) effect, thermal conductivity of 17 and thermal resistance of 0.06 , copper heat sink .
mK
W
2C in
W
mK
W
2C in
W
24Control And Robotics Laboratory
SUMMARY
Control And Robotics Laboratory 25
• Settling time improvement of 30%-40% has been achieved.
• Reasons for variance has been identified .
• Manufacturing process is being modified .
CONCLUSIONSPoints of view for future work :
• To build a better model , linear or non-linear ,and check the influence of adding derivative .
• To explore robust control methods .
• To explore adaptive control methods .
• Check the influence of adding derivative .
• Change the location of the temperature sensor.
• Thermal coupling improvement.
• Thermal mass reduction.
• Better heat sink.
Control And Robotics Laboratory 26