| Literature DB >> 28025536 |
Pengmin Pan1, Timothy McDonald2, John Fulton3, Brian Via4, John Hung5.
Abstract
An 8-electrode capacitance tomography (ECT) sensor was built and used to measure moisture content (MC) and mass flow of pine chip flows. The device was capable of directly measuring total water quantity in a sample but was sensitive to both dry matter and moisture, and therefore required a second measurement of mass flow to calculate MC. Two means of calculating the mass flow were used: the first being an impact sensor to measure total mass flow, and the second a volumetric approach based on measuring total area occupied by wood in images generated using the capacitance sensor's tomographic mode. Tests were made on 109 groups of wood chips ranging in moisture content from 14% to 120% (dry basis) and wet weight of 280 to 1100 g. Sixty groups were randomly selected as a calibration set, and the remaining were used for validation of the sensor's performance. For the combined capacitance/force transducer system, root mean square errors of prediction (RMSEP) for wet mass flow and moisture content were 13.42% and 16.61%, respectively. RMSEP using the combined volumetric mass flow/capacitance sensor for dry mass flow and moisture content were 22.89% and 24.16%, respectively. Either of the approaches was concluded to be feasible for prediction of moisture content in pine chip flows, but combining the impact and capacitance sensors was easier to implement. In situations where flows could not be impeded, however, the tomographic approach would likely be more useful.Entities:
Keywords: biomass; capacitance; electrical capacitance tomography; mass flow; moisture content
Year: 2016 PMID: 28025536 PMCID: PMC5298593 DOI: 10.3390/s17010020
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Distribution of sample numbers (a) by moisture content; and (b) by total (wet) weight.
Figure 2Images of the sensor chip feeding process used in a typical experiment, along with an accompanying image of permittivity distribution. Chips were moved on the conveyor belt and dropped into the sensor opening below the red fabric that was used to capture material falling short. (a) illustrated the situation when the sensor was empty; (b–d) were with increasing quantities of wood chips present in the enclosure. The colored images were interpolated from the estimated G matrix using the matplotlib.interpolate function with radial basis kernel.
Figure 3Linear regressions of the predicted total mass flow rate, M, using the impact mass flow estimation method (a) and dry matter flow rate, D, using the ECT method (b).
Summary of root mean square error for the two mass flow rate prediction methods.
| Method | Sample Set | Mean Sample Weight (g) | Absolute RMSE (g) | Relative RMSE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Impact | Calibration | 566.1 | 58.2 | 10.3 |
| Prediction | 530.5 | 71.2 | 13.4 | |
| ECT | Calibration | 346.3 | 62.5 | 18.1 |
| Prediction | 304.4 | 69.7 | 22.9 |
RMSE: root mean square error. ECT: electrical capacitance tomography.
Figure 4Linear regressions of the true and predicted sample moisture content based on wet mass flow rate (M) estimates from (a) the impact mass flow method and dry matter flow rate (D) estimated using (b) the ECT method.
Summary of root mean squared error for the two MC prediction methods.
| Method | Sample Set | Relative RMSE (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Impact | Calibration | 0.81 | 11.3 |
| Prediction | 0.71 | 11.9 | |
| ECT | Calibration | 0.71 | 19.1 |
| Prediction | 0.57 | 24.2 |
MC: moisture content. RMSE: root mean square error. ECT: electrical capacitance tomography.