In this post, you will learn how to change the transmission fluid (HT-1000) in Parker's HTG hydrostatic transmission in your mower. The HT-1000 Service Kit includes all the replacement parts needed for a smooth fluid change.
The transmission fluid in your mower should be changed at regular intervals to maintain the life of the mower. The HT-1000 transmission fluid only needs to be changed once every 1000 hours, as opposed to as early as 500 hours with other brands. Our Hydrostatic Transmission Fluid HT-1000™ is a synthetic transmission oil engineered to provide maximum durability and long life for heavy-duty hydrostatic drive systems.
Making oil changes simple and efficient
Our transmissions for off-road vehicles are designed to make oil changes very quick and simple, and the new service kit makes the process even easier by providing all the necessary oil change components. Contact your local dealer for more information!
Each transmission includes a low-speed, high torque motor (Torqmotor) integrated with a hydraulic pump to provide an all-in-one transmission package. the transmissions are ideal for zero-turn mowers, golf course maintenance equipment, and light-duty utility vehicles.
Each HTG service kit includes:
(2) gallons of HT-1000
(2) replacement filters
(2) plugs w/ washers
Watch how to change your transmission oil in this video:
How to Change Your HT-1000 Using a Parker Hydrostatic Transmission Service Kit step-by-step:
1) Remove Plug from the Transmission Bottom Cover
2) Remove Vent Plug from the Top of Transmission
3) Remove Filter from Transmission
4) After Oil is Drained, Insert New Filter
5) Install New Transmission Plugs
6) Lower the Mower
7) Raise the Seat
8) Remove Expansion Tank Cap
9) Add HT-1000 Fluid to Tank
10) Re-install Cap and the Vent Plug
11) Close the Seat
That's it! After completing these simple steps, you will have successfully changed your HT-1000 transmission fluid.
Our Pump & Motor Division (PMD) is a market leader in gear pump and low speed-high torque gerotor motors. PMD continues to blaze a trail by developing new technologies while maintaining a high level of service synonymous with Parker. Between the two divisions in North Carolina and Tennessee, the PMD team members have decades of industry experience to better serve you and your application.
Article contributed by CT Lefler, marketing product manager, Pump, and Motor Division.
Related, helpful content for you:
This article will teach you to how to change the transmission fluid (HT-1000) in the Parker HTE and HTJ hydrostatic transmissions on your mower. The HT-1000 Service Kit includes all the replacement parts needed for a smooth fluid change.
The transmission fluid in a mower should be changed at regular intervals to maintain the life of the mower. Parker’s HT-1000 only needs to be changed once every 1000 hours, as opposed to as early as 500 hours with other brands. Parker’s Hydrostatic Transmission Fluid HT-1000™ is a synthetic transmission oil engineered to provide maximum durability and long life for heavy-duty hydrostatic drive systems.
Meet the quick and simple oil change
Parker’s transmissions are designed to make oil changes very quick and simple, and the new Service Kit makes the process even easier by providing all the necessary oil change components. Contact your local dealer for more information.
Each transmission includes a low-speed, high torque motor (Torqmotor) integrated with a hydraulic pump to provide an all-in-one transmission package. The transmissions are ideal for zero-turn mowers, golf course maintenance equipment, and light-duty utility vehicles.
Each HTE/HTJ Service Kit includes:
Watch how to change your oil:
How to change your HT-1000 fluid using a Hydrostatic Transmission Service Kit - step by step:
1) Remove Filter Cap
2) Twist off Breather Cap / Dipstick
3) Remove Magnetic Plugs
4) Remove Filter Plug and Allow Oil to Drain
5) Install New Magnetic Plugs
6) Install New Filter
7) Re-install Filter Plug
8) Lower Mower and Raise Seat
9) Locate Tank and Insert Funnel
10) Add HT-1000 to Tank
11) Replace Breather Cap / Dipstick
12) Raise Mower and Place on Supports
13) Engage Wheels in Both Directions
That's it! After completing these simple steps, you will have successfully changed your HT-1000 transmission fluid.
Our Pump & Motor Division (PMD) is a market leader in gear pump and low speed-high torque gerotor motors. PMD continues to blaze a trail by developing new technologies while maintaining a high level of service synonymous with Parker. Between the two divisions in North Carolina and Tennessee, the PMD team members have decades of industry experience to better serve you and your application.
Article contributed by CT Lefler, marketing product manager, Pump, and Motor Division.
Related, helpful content for you:
Steve Holbert, a U.S. Marine Corps Veteran, was paralyzed in a 2010 motorcycle accident. Since then, his goal is to walk again and establish a new way of life. In March 2019, he received his Indego Personal exoskeleton and took 200,000 steps within the year. By July 2021, Steve had completed 500,000 steps or nearly 250 miles. What’s his secret? Harnessing the ambition and perseverance that made him a U.S. Marine.
What is your motivation to use your Indego exoskeleton?
The first motivation is to walk. Hopefully, the robot can help activate nerve pathways between my brain and legs. And if it doesn’t, there are the psychological and physical benefits.
What was the timeframe for achieving 500,000 steps?
It was March of 2019 that I got my personal Indego. I’ve pretty much averaged 200,000 steps per year, so about two and a half years to reach 500,000 steps.
Has your health improved?
My trunk control and posture have definitely improved. My bowel program always works better when I’m using the Indego regularly.
What is your general exercise routine?
I do a 40- to 45-minute session each time. Usually just non-stop walking, unless I stop to let the motors cool down a bit. In the heat of summer, I have to be careful with the temperatures.
How do you stay motivated?
I don’t know a good answer for that other than—I like it. Since I’ve used it for so long, I don’t really think about it being a robot as I’m walking. I don’t concentrate on making the robot function better; I try to make myself walk better, more efficiently. Standing for the national anthem along with all the other veterans in front of the president and vice president of our country is still one of the proudest moments of my life. (Read the Parker Indego blog post: Indego and the Commander in Chief: Steve Holbert's Story.)
Do you have any tips or tricks for using the Indego exoskeleton?
Since I’m a high-level injury, I have found that the tighter I strap on the unit, the better my body moves. My arm and shoulder movements can translate down into the robot to make it shift in the direction I intend to move. Also, when it’s tighter I can better feel where the robot is going.
How does the Indego exoskeleton benefit you?
I can break it down into two categories. Physical and mental. On the physical side, the first thing I noticed within just a few days of using it—my bowel program was better. I suppose it’s from standing up, walking and jostling around my insides; things just flow through my intestines much better, which makes my bowel program easier and more efficient.
Another physical aspect is putting weight on my leg bones. Hopefully it helps reduce the atrophy and even strengthens my bones. I don’t know if it affects my leg muscles, but I do know it strengthens my core and shoulder muscles. When I sit down in my wheelchair I am sort of hunched over in the sitting position, not activating my back muscles. The robot forces me to use my back muscles to keep me in a more upright, erect position. The straighter I stand up, the easier it is to make the robot function correctly. After several months of using the robot, my posture is better. And it’s plain old good exercise for my arms, shoulders, and core muscles.
As for the mental aspect, let me back up to when I was first injured. I did my initial rehab at TIRR (Texas Institute of Research and Rehabilitation) in Houston. In the main facility, along one of the hallways, they have big poster-size photographs of former patients; many of them are standing or walking. Every day when I would roll past those pictures, I would look at them and they would give me hope that someday I could stand up and walk again. A person needs hope!
Fast forward several years to when I first got to use the Indego. We did our exoskeleton training along the hallways in the spinal cord injury unit at the VA hospital in Houston.
One day as I was walking down the hallway, a friend rolled out of his room in his wheelchair. He saw me walking toward him in the robot. I remember the look in his eyes and his giant grin. It was the excitement and hope that one day he would walk again too. Although it’s with the help of a robot, It’s a huge mental boost.
Another mental perk is walking with my robot daily, doing laps around my driveway. Besides the benefit of just being outside and going for a walk, it’s the mental challenge of making my body function in concert with a machine. The more proficient I can make my body function, the more proficient the robot can operate. The combination makes both of us operate better. And that makes me feel good.
What’s your next Indego goal?
One million steps!
Salt is one of the most troublesome contaminants for gas turbine operators. In the offshore/coastal environment or indeed anywhere close to bodies of saltwater, corrosion of turbines can be swift and severe if airborne salts are not adequately understood and properly filtered. Salt removal is one of the areas that needs to be understood and defined.
The enormous amount of air a gas turbine consumes means even the smallest percentage of salt can have serious consequences. Over time, advanced filtration systems have moved from offering 95% salt removal efficiency to today, greater than 99.9%. This 5% difference seems small but is very significant in terms of the reliability and performance of the turbine.
Salt is perilous to gas turbines for two main reasons;
To rub further salt into the wounds, the hygroscopic/sticky nature (has an affinity for water and absorbs moisture from the surrounding air) of salt when in moisture-rich environments means it easily adheres to the compressor and turbine blades; increasing the rate at which contaminants build up on the surfaces and so more quickly impacting the aerodynamic performance of the turbine and its overall thermal efficiency. Below 40% relative humidity (RH), salt appears in dry form. Above 75% RH, it is in a liquid form. In between these states, salt exists in a particularly problematic, damaging wet and sticky form.A bit of history on measurement
How much salt is in the air was defined by the National Gas Turbine Establishment (NGTE) 30 knot aerosol standard back in the 1970s? Based on the amount of salt present in a series of air samples collected by the UK Royal Navy in the North Atlantic, this figure was set at 3.6 ppm (parts per million). Unfortunately, 3.6 ppm is very high and not a realistic appraisal of the true offshore environment. This was recognised by the NGTE at the time and was only ever meant to be an interim measure until more detailed test information became available. Less salt in the air is of course a good thing, however, it is also key that GT operators have a realistic view of how much salt is in the air in order that they may correctly specify filtration systems that limit the amount reaching the inside of the machine. This anomaly prompted Parker Hannifin, to carry out an ASME paper research project back in 2004, resulting in a new ppm figure for ambient air salt concentration and size distribution in the marine environment. This revised figure, now known as the McGuigan Marine Boundary Layer (MMBL), provides a conservative, realistic figure for the average salt levels in the lower marine boundary layer (MBL) throughout the world. Still a realistic measure today, it puts the salt level at 0.1067 ppm.
Each percentage point counts
The more contaminants that are allowed through to the turbine, the quicker its aerodynamic efficiency will reduce and the greater the risk of damage to the machine. Ultimately this reduction in performance will result in reduced power output, lower system availability and reliability, and higher maintenance costs.
Unlike contaminants that cause compressor fouling (and can be cleaned away by water washing), one of the major problems with salt corrosion is that its effects are often not perceived in turbine performance data until something actually breaks. Unscheduled maintenance can be significant but, in many mechanical drive applications, the cost of lost productivity can also be huge.
If a turbine consumes 350,000 kg of air per hour (typical 30MW GT) and there is 0.1607 ppm of salt by weight in the air to start with (1ppm(w) = 1mg/kg), this equates to an unfiltered gas turbine exposure of nearly 300 kg of salt per year for an 8000hr operating year!. This means each 0.1% improvement in filtration efficiency protects the turbine from an extra 0.3 kg of salt exposure per year.
Designing a filter for salt removal
Salt can exist in a solid, a liquid or a sticky in-between state. Changes in relative humidity affect the state of solidity of the salt. As a liquid salt droplet is transformed through drying to a solid particle, it will also contract to about 25% of its original size. To handle salt effectively, a filtration solution needs to allow for input concentration, aerosol size distribution and aerosol physical state; whether droplet, dry particle or any in-between/sticky state.
A filter system also needs to provide this protection without getting easily blocked itself. The right solution for a given application therefore also has to consider the impact of increased pressure drop from multiple filtration stages with the Gas Turbine salt protection needs and must be designed to handle and remove both salt phases in order to properly protect the turbine. Dust filters will capture solid dry salt particles. Liquid removal stages and hydrophobic filters prevent salt from attacking the turbine internals in liquid form.
One of the vital elements in handling salt corrosion in offshore and coastal environments is to effectively handle the moisture in the air. Filter media with high dry particulate efficiency ratings may not necessarily be effective at handling liquid droplets. Coalescers can manage free moisture and salt in liquid form (brine) by agglomerating droplets to make them larger and heavier so they will fall out of the airstream. Although traditionally associated with large maintenance overheads, coalescers are now available that will run for extended periods without sudden pressure spikes and in configurations that can be easily cleaned with a water or air hose.
Dry salt particles can be dealt with by high efficiency (HEPA/EPA) filters but care needs to be taken with media selection to ensure these filters are not quickly blocked by moisture or sticky salt particles. Tests in real-world applications have shown that thicker glass fibre media is less prone to blockage in such environments than ePTFE membranes, which are 10 times thinner. Glass fibre media with effective hydrophobic coatings have been shown to prevent virtually all liquid salt and/or sticky salt particles from entering the turbine.
How offshore installations are different
For an offshore oil and gas installation, a multi-stage filtration system is required to handle the various, harsh environmental challenges faced. As space offshore is at a premium, it often makes sense to install a more compact, high velocity filter system with a multi-stage Vane Coalescer Vane (VCV) salt removal system. Stage one is an inertial vane separator that removes bulk water including rain, sea spray and coarse aerosols. This is followed by a coalescer that coalesces fine salt aerosols into larger droplets (>20 µm). This stage also captures fine dust and dry salt. The final inertial vane separator stage stops and removes the re-entrained larger salt droplets.
A traditional M6 (EN779) VCV inlet filtration system is a popular choice for offshore turbines and offers excellent wet salt and bulk water removal capability. However, at high air velocities (as the units are designed to be compact) these systems are typically limited to an F7 (EN779) dry particulate removal efficiency rating. If the environment is considered dusty then this configuration can have a limited filter life, produce high operating pressure losses and have reduced effectiveness against dry salts. As well as a need to replace filters on a regular basis, maintenance of the drain system on these units is also critical to operation, so overheads can be higher than desired. These VCV systems are therefore typically employed when salt is the main concern rather than a combination of salt and high dust levels.
To address issues that result from a combination of high concentrations of salt as well as high concentrations of dust, the latest high-velocity filtration systems are designed with extra filtration stages that provide very high small particulate removal efficiency with hydrophobic properties; meaning they prevent liquid penetration while still capturing fine (< 3µm) dust and dry salt particles. These F8 (EN779) to H13 (EN1822) rated high-velocity filters can also be configured with deeper glass fibre filtration cells (24” deep) which means that although turbine inlet air velocity is high, the air velocity at the media is similar to low and medium velocity systems. This increases filtration efficiency and reduces pressure loss across the system. The thicker filter media has the added benefit of being less prone to blockage than thinner, high-efficiency alternatives.
Testing salt efficiency removal
Ultimately, whatever the ppm of salt in the air inlet, the more that is removed the better the turbine is protected from deteriorating performance and catastrophic failure. However, salt leaching rates are not covered in standard efficiency tests (EN779, ASHRAE 52.2, EN1822, JIS Z8122). The only real test of the effectiveness of an inlet filtration system is the performance of the turbine over time in the variety of environmental conditions it faces. To simulate the real world, Parker (CLARCOR) created a hydrophobic salt test protocol to help determine salt removal efficiency and in order to correctly and realistically evaluate new filter system designs when they are subject to variations in salt concentration, dust concentration and relative humidity. Specifically designed to test for phenomena such as salt leaching, the test takes the filter through a total of nine wet/dry cycles in a ten-day testing protocol.
The test requires that the filter(s) are clamped and installed as they would be on site. This ensures that the seal and clamping system are not weak points in the unit where liquid and contaminants can bypass the filtering media itself. Salt is first introduced into the test as an aerosol. Repeated tests are then completed (10 days’ worth) when the filter is loaded with dust. This adds back pressure to the system while the dust coats the fibres within the media as it gets captured, simulating real-world particulate build up. This combination of salt aerosol and loaded filter is very important to analyze as captured dust often acts as an alternative flow path for wet salt transfer downstream, in effect acting as a shortcut for wet salt transmittal downstream, bypassing the media!
Testing a filter system in this way provides comprehensive data about performance over time including the amount of water and salt that passes through the filter during various test stages and highlights any pressure loss increase that occurs. There are two widely used filter tests with accepted ratings used in the filtration industry – the EN779 standard and the EN1822 standard. The EN779 test standard has a set of criteria that a filter must meet to achieve a certain rating. Depending on the filter, a rating of G1-G4, M5-M6 or F7-F9 will be given. The higher the rating, the more effective (typically) the filter. The EN1822 standard is used to test higher efficiency filters, in the EPA/HEPA range, and produces a ratings scale of E10-E12, and H13-H17. When the multi-stage hydrophobic high-velocity system was tested against this salt test protocol, it showed salt removal efficiency to be improved by a factor of 10,000 compared with traditional M6 (EN779) units, giving an E11 (EN1822) efficiency rating with similar pressure loss to a standard M6 (EN779) efficiency system. Such units have also been proven to reduce the frequency of offline turbine water washes by up to a factor of 6 (from around four weeks to six months) without creating sudden pressure spikes.
No single filtration solution is right for all installations
Understanding the nature and impact of salt is a vital consideration in designing a filtration system for use in offshore or coastal environments. Systems need to be tested and evaluated for their performance in handling wet, dry and sticky salt to protect turbines from serious damage without sudden pressure spikes. If filters are selected solely on efficiency rating, operators may be left with systems that are difficult to maintain and, although higher rated, may not protect assets as well as lower efficiency solutions. With a careful assessment of conditions and selection of filter configuration, modern filtration solutions have been shown to virtually negate corrosion of turbine blades over 20,000 fired hours in real-world conditions.
About Parker Gas Turbine Filtration Division
Parker Hannifin supplies a full range of inlet systems and filters engineered to meet your operating goals, including:
We are the choice for advanced filtration for new units and replacement filters. Our inlet system designs include self-cleaning (pulse) and static inlet systems for all gas turbine OEMs. We supply a full range of filter types at all efficiency levels. The predictable and reliable performance of our air filters significantly reduces compressor contamination and the need for unplanned maintenance.
This article was contributed by Peter McGuigan, global LNG market manager, Parker Gas Turbine Filtration Division. It was originally published in Gas Turbine World, September 2017.
Other related and helpful articles on oil and gas applications:
Floating liquefied natural gas (FLNG) vessels are processing facilities that float above offshore gas fields. They treat and process natural gas using marine versions of the same technologies found on a land-based LNG plant -- only much more compact – floating LNGs are approximately 1/4 the size for the same LNG output. They offer operators the ability to process gas at or very close to the source field. The value of FLNGs is that they can tap into smaller and more remote fields. When a resource is exhausted, they can be unmoored and reconfigured for a new feed gas composition range and/or consumer non methane component specification and can be moved to another location to continue operations.
Offshore operation underscores the importance of maintaining the reliability of equipment on these vessels for extended periods. Operational shutdown of a key piece of equipment, such as a gas turbine (GT), can cost millions of dollars per day in lost production. Limited personnel and access to spare parts could mean further delays. Continue reading to learn more about the benefits and challenges of FNLGs as well as recommendations to ensure dependable GT operation.
The benefits of operating and processing gas offshore, at source, using a nonpermanent structure are clear.
Space is the biggest challenge facing FLNG engineers. LNG production requires a large amount of specialized equipment, including pretreatment systems, gas turbines, compressors, expanders, head exchangers, etc. Storage space for the LNG in its super cooled stage and natural gas liquids (NGLs) is also necessary. On top of that, all the systems and facilities needed for the ship and crew must be considered.
In contrast to land-based sites where designs may be considered as field proven, layout optimizations, design experiences, and engineering best practices with regards to implementing FLNG production are still relatively new and are evolving. To date, only a handful of FLNG production vessels have been commissioned - Petronas’ FLNG Satu and Dua, Golar’s Hilli Episeyo, Exmar’s Tango FLNG, and Shell’s Prelude. Projects currently under construction include Golar’s Gimi and ENl’s Coral South.
The importance of maintaining equipment
The refrigerant compressors hold the key to maximizing production. In most cases, refrigerant compressors are mechanically driven (rotated) by gas turbines. That said, the reliability of the GT becomes equally critical to production. Aeroderivative GTs are preferred as refrigerant compressor drivers over frame engines because they are smaller and lighter and have components that are quick and easy to interchange, making maintenance easier. They are also designed to offer high reliability, and can be quickly ramped up and down, allowing for any forced interruptions caused by adverse weather conditions to not have a prolonged effect on
Gas turbine air intake system
One key piece of GT equipment is the GT combustion air intake system. GTs take in huge amounts of air as part of their combustion process. Air that is left untreated contains several destructive contaminants, which can cause serious damage, erosion, corrosion, and fouling of the precision engineered GT internals. The harsh weather conditions found in offshore environments are particularly brutal on any piece of equipment, let alone one that needs to run continuously.
Gas turbine filtration requirements
Issues relating to the ingestion of ambient air particulate, salts and hydrocarbons account
for 60 - 80% of overall gas turbine losses. Controlling these contaminants with the right air intake filtration is a huge step in assuring reliable plant operations and maximizing LNG output for extended intervals.
Salt is particularly damaging to the GTs on FLNGs because there is such a large quantity of it churned up from the sea. While the filterhouse and internals are typically manufactured from 304 or 316 grade stainless steel, sodium from sea salt (NaCl), if allowed to get downstream of the filters, will combine with sulfur in the fuel to create sodium sulfate (Na2SO4). This chemical reacts with the base metal of the turbine blades in the high temperatures of the hot gas path, causing rapid corrosion and component failures. This is a common effect known as hot corrosion or sulfidation. Chlorine in the salt also acts as a pitting corrosion initiator in colder parts of the turbine, potentially leading to catastrophic damage.
Because of its hygroscopic nature, salt can be difficult to control. It readily absorbs water and can easily move from solid to liquid form with changes in ambient relative humidity.
Filtration recommendations to defend against salt contamination:
Sand and dust
Sand and dust can cause numerous issues for an installation in terms of both damage to machinery and degradation of turbine performance. Large dust particles greater than 2μm in size can cause erosion and affect turbine efficiency. If the erosion causes parts in the front end of the equipment to fail, contaminants may travel through and cause severe machine damage.
Finer dust can stick to parts of the machine and change the operating aerodynamics. This, in turn, reduces turbine efficiency, requires online and eventually offline water washing, reduces availability, and increases operational costs. Moisture in the inlet air stream can combine with dust to form mud which can block a filter.
Filtration best practices for sand and dust:
Turbine air inlet filtration system design considerations
There are several factors that should be considered in the design of an FLNG turbine air inlet system:
To ensure profitability, the reliability of the systems used to liquefy gas onboard an FLNG vessel is critical and, although GT filtration systems may seem like a smaller part of the overall puzzle, they are vital to ensuring ongoing smooth operations. GT air intake systems need to be designed for the real-world environment in which they will be used.
They must also be able to effectively and efficiently handle a diverse range of seasonally varying contaminants such as salt, dust, oily hydrocarbons, and moisture. For FLNG vessels, it is essential that these systems are physically compact and flexible enough to allow operators to easily change filter types depending on location. Designing GT air intake solutions for the offshore environment requires a thorough understanding of the very specific challenges such systems will face, but when undertaken correctly offers operators a rapid return on investment.
This post was contributed by Pete McGuigan, global LNG market manager, Parker Gas Turbine Filtration Division, Parker Hannifin Ltd, UK.
Related, helpful content for you
Pleasure craft owners and commercial ship staff rely on watermakers for their supply of purified water for drinking and process applications. Watermakers remove salt and contaminants from sea and brackish water. They offer a continuous supply and a cost-effective alternative to other sources of water.
Are you thinking about purchasing a Parker watermaker or do you have questions about how they are installed and maintained? To help, we've compiled a list of our most frequently asked questions.
Parker watermakers reduce the time, physical effort and concern related to assuring a continuous supply of fresh water on your vessel. Installation and maintenance are easy and require little time, leaving users more time for other activities while aboard. Parker products are backed by a dedicated, highly trained support team and over 350 sales and service dealers worldwide.
This article was contributed by Paul Kamel, product manager II, Parker Bioscience and Water Filtration.
Helpful, related articles
If semiconductor manufacturers had any question about the complexity of their industry ecosystem, COVID-19 eliminated that doubt.
Riding a wave of growing demand for semiconductors, buoyed in part by a 5.4% increase in 2020 sales attributed to stay-in-place home electronics orders and surprised by a boom in early 2021 automotive sales, the semiconductor industry found itself in the midst of production shortage.
While chipmaking capacity has kept pace with sales for the most part, consolidation of advanced manufacturing players has created scarcity in the market. The scarcity was enough for automotive manufacturers to halt production.
Things only worsened when the industry discovered a growing shortage of raw materials essential to component manufacturing. That shortage has spread to multiple sectors, leaving original equipment manufacturers to deal with pricing volatility, extended lead times and stock-outs in the near future.
The semiconductor industry is not alone
Many semiconductor and semiconductor tool companies lessen supply chain disruption with a dual-sourcing plan, a strategy that paid off during the pandemic.
But the semiconductor industry is hardly the only industry to deal with disruption. Nearly 94% of Fortune 1000 companies are dealing with supply chain disruptions due to the pandemic, according to a recent Accenture research study.
Supply chain disruption can extend delivery times and build product backlogs that can turn into customer concerns. Demand, disruption and innovation trickles down, as well. And nowhere is that clearer than in the ultrapure water industry.Demand for ultrapure water is growing
Ultrapure water consumption in the semiconductor industry is higher than any other industry, and technological advances in clean room and wafer manufacturing have created the need for even higher-grade ultrapure water.
While this is a boon for the ultrapure water industry – projections call for an $11 billion overall industry appraisal by 2026 – it is a bit of conundrum for manufacturers.
First, ultrapure water has become more expensive. Some estimates suggest that for every dollar’s worth of water purchased, it costs $20 to make it ultrapure and another $10 to properly manage wastewater disposal. Increased water usage can impact local communities and farms, and when water levels dip too low, there’s an environmental cost to wildlife habitats, as well.
There are other environmental concerns, as well. Most notably, the impact global fabs have on local watersheds and consumption. For example, the work of one Stanford University student shows that industry fab feedwater use was comparable to overall regional water use in China. That, along with long-term arid climate forecasts, could prolong – or excerabate – an already growing industry water shortage.
To mitigate both challenges, semiconductor manufacturing plants are exploring ways to reduce, reuse and recycle the ultrapure water they use during the high technology manufacturing process. But those efforts are just as challenging.
Water applications in microelectronics and chemical purity for semiconductor manufacturing
As chip technology advances, it becomes critical that the silicon wafer surface be as clean and clear of debris as possible to prevent damage and maximize yield.
This gets tricky on the nanometer level since there are more and more chances for contaminants to strike the wafer surface. Semiconductor innovation relies heavily on advanced materials research now to maintain the trend of achieving more computing power in smaller footprints. With an increase in chip yield per wafer, any defect could create a level of chip scrapping larger than years past, when fewer chips were housed on smaller wafers.
To eliminate the possibility, manufacturers must further reduce the level of contaminants in the water to avoid defects as small as 2 nm. In some instances, eliminating contamination associated with liquids has become more important than that from gases and cleanroom air.
Tackling the challenges of ultrapure water reclamation
A big challenge for semiconductor manufacturers is what to do with spent ultrapure water. Contaminated rinse water usually winds up in a manufacturer’s industrial waste treatment system and cannot be reused because of added contamination.
Overall, reclaiming spent ultrapure water for semiconductor fabrication is almost unheard of, though some methods to reclaim and deionize contaminated ultrapure water for semiconductor use are being tested. That hasn’t stopped some industries from recycling water for other purposes, including chemical aspirators, cooling towers and point-of-use abatement systems.
But the cost of acquiring ultrapure water combined with wastewater systems management is becoming a financial burden for many manufacturers and may encourage further study into effective reclamation and recycling technology.
In the meantime, an effective water management solution that handles the quality and quantity of supply water, treats wastewater discharge properly and secures industrial water for effective recycling is paramount for semiconductor companies, according to SK hynix.
Mitigating supply shortages
Supply chain disruptions also are impacting the rather straightforward creation of ultrapure water. How so?
During the purification process, or pretreatment, water is carried through a water filter, clearing it of most contaminants, and then deionized through either ion exchange or electrodeionization.
But polymer raw material shortages – especially polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), and monoethylene (MEG) – are causing factory shutdowns, price increases and production delays across multiple industries, according to Harvard Business Review. Almost universally, the filters critical to the purification of ultrapure water are built with these polymers, which means extended lead times both in component and semiconductor manufacturing.
This is where a dual-sourcing strategy like the one employed by Parker can pay dividends. Dual-sourcing, or multi-sourcing, is a risk-management strategy in which an organization uses two or more suppliers to acquire certain components, raw material, products and services.
For example, when a major diversified chip manufacturer’s original filter supplier unexpectedly extended lead times and couldn’t deliver those critical components within the promised time frame, Parker was able to supply those filters in less than half the lead time.Investigating fluid impurities
Semiconductor manufacturers also are combating wafer defects caused by process and fluid impurities. Often, filter leaching is the culprit – or what the defects are attributed to. The right vendor can help deduce the issue through expert technical assistance.
That was the case when one major chip manufacturer discovered a correlation between its wafer yield and the improved resolution of metals extractables measurement in their process water. The fluid transfer components, including Parker’s Clariflow filter line, could also be a source of added contamination that was not previously detected. To identify root cause, the manufacturer reached out to Parker, who then recommended a technical team further investigate to ensure the problem had been properly identified. Parker’s Technical Counsel provides field and lab service for customer application troubleshooting. They conduct fluid and filter analysis into the parts per trillion range.
After a thorough investigation, including a best-practices review with some of the customer’s peer manufacturers, the Parker team concluded the very nature of the filter’s construction materials, polypropylene and polyethersulfone membrane, tend to leach trace metals over time regardless of how the final filter product is manufactured or flushed.
Recognizing the material, rather than the construction, was the root cause, Parker encouraged the customer to consider its all-fluoropolymer filter product, Fluoroflow. Testing confirmed improved fluid purity and extended on-stream life. This, in turn, increased wafer yield through decreased defects, reduced equipment downtime, and more than $100,000 in annual filter spend.
Parker solutions for the semiconductor industry
Regardless of supply chain disruption and wastewater reclaimation efforts, the demand for ultrapure water in the semiconductor fabrication process will only grow. Through strategic dual-sourcing and unparalled industry expertise, Parker helps manufacturers meet demand with high-purity filtration solutions that enhance processes and meet ultrapure water needs.
Polypropylene filters, like the Parker Clariflow and Polyflow, are designed for general-purpose use in the filtration of high-purity liquids and aqueous chemicals. Our fluoropolymer product, Flouroflow, is designed for general-purpose use in the filtration of high-purity liquids and aqueous chemicals.
To learn more, download our white paper on semiconductor trends.
Article contributed by the Parker Filtration Team with our Bioscience Filtration Division.
Related and helpful content:
A lot has changed in the transportation industry since the introduction of fuel and its use in internal combustion engines in the late 19th century. As environmental concerns have driven more stringent emissions regulations over the years, today’s diesel fuel needs to be cleaner than ever to protect critical engine components. This has led to the wide use of water-fuel separation filtration technologies in engine designs. Fuel filter water separators are typically used to remove contaminants in the form of water droplets and solid particles from the fuel before it enters the engine.
In a fuel-water separator, the separated water falls to the lower bowl of the filter assembly — the water bowl — and is drained at regular intervals. If the water isn’t drained effectively, it can be re-entrained with the fuel causing significant damage to the engine and its performance.
In this blog, we outline a case study of simulation models used to construct design tools that contribute to creating a good first prototype design for water bowls and drainage in water-fuel filters for combustion engines.
A fine line between simple and complex
While this drainage mechanism in a fuel-water separator seems simple, the design is quite complex primarily due to three factors:
To best and most efficiently understand these factors, high-fidelity numerical simulations can be used. These simulations will lower the reliance on and requirement for experimental testing. They can be used to understand the physics of water drainage from inside a filter’s water bowl. Further, an analytical solution can be formulated to provide a design engineer with a very good first approximation of the most effective physical attributes that will assure proper water collection and drainage.
How it works
When water droplets are separated from fuel by a fuel-water separator, they coalesce and grow larger and heavier. Gravity causes the water droplets to settle and collect down as clean fuel is pulled in the opposite direction. The example shown below is our Fuel Filter / Water Separator – Racor GreenMAX™ Series.
The collected water is drained regularly to assure that it does not re-contaminate the cleaned fuel. If the water collected in the water bowl does not drain due to clogging or other malfunction, the separated water will re-contaminate the cleaned fuel and the performance of the fuel-water separator will dramatically diminish.
An increase in water content in the fuel supplied to the engine can:
An analytical solution – case study
Parker Hannifin specializes in fuel-water separator solutions for a variety of applications from marine to gasoline engines. Parker’s engineers found that given the varied geometries and materials used in their solutions, a simplistic physics-based tool to understand critical design features that prevent effective drainage of water from the water bowl is beneficial. The purpose of a study using this tool will provide initial design guidelines to a design- engineer even before a prototype is made for testing.
Computational fluid dynamic model (CFD)
From the base geometry of the water bowl, the internal fluid volume was extracted. Key geometric variables were refined, and the internal volume extraction was automated so that several different geometric variations could be simulated in the design space. The extracted internal volume was discretized for computational fluid dynamics (CFD) using unstructured polyhedral elements with finer resolutions where water curvature is of significance (for example, when geometry gaps are small). The cell aspect ratios and skewness factors were the key quality factors monitored to estimate meshing quality. Multiple levels of refinement were considered, and results were monitored.
The workflow used for the analysis is shown below.
A 3D transient, multiphase (volume-of-fluid) method was used to model the two-phase flow. To introduce water drops in the fuel domain, periodically, drops of specified volume were introduced into the water bowl. The estimate of water sizes came from experimental observations. The contact angle for water-fuel-surface interface was also specified from experimental measurements for all the different surfaces with which the water comes in contact.
In this application, the interface curvature was very critical, therefore a continuum surface stress (CSS) model was chosen to model the surface tension force.
The local pressure drop at key geometry points was monitored to indicate the event of water clogging the water bowl. The simulation was run for a pre-set time and the pressure and movement of water drops were observed to see if the clogging event was registered.
From the CFD analysis, key geometric features that result in clogging were identified. Analysis of these results paved the way to develop physics-based analytical expressions to predict obstruction of water in a water bowl design. Using the guideline of the analytical expression, experimental testing was performed on some known water bowl designs. The comparison between the analytical expression, CFD results and the experimental observation is shown below. The plot shows that the CFD observations of water buildup with respect to critical geometric gap as well as the experimental observations are within ± 5% of the analytical expression derived. This validates our physical understanding derived from the CFD analysis as well as the analytical expression simplified for this problem.
Equipped with this knowledge, Parker engineers created a simplistic design guide. This is highly valuable to a design engineer as it avoids time consuming CFD and/or experimental prototype analysis and provides a direct pathway to constructing a good first prototype. A sample design guide shown below provides a visual of the simplicity of use. The design engineer would input design parameters and the design guide would provide inputs on issues with geometric parameters.
Engine manufacturers rely heavily on creating prototypes and testing concepts to find appropriate design solutions. Engineers can use high-fidelity numerical simulations to provide quick guidelines and resolutions to water clogging issues they might face in their testing. Apart from that, since this tool provides design guidelines as well, the first prototype built with it is often more accurate than without it. This lowers testing requirements and prototype iterations by a significant number thus helping the engineer get to the final design faster and more effectively.
This post was contributed by Sucharitha Rajendran, advanced system design and modeling engineer, Parker Filtration Innovation Center.
Related, helpful content for you:
Industries operating in hazardous environments such as the oil and gas industry inherently depend on reliable products operating in critical settings, while requiring the need to maintain safety and strict compliance. Listening to the voice of the customer is crucial in the design of simple solutions to mitigate the trifecta related to the complexity of maintaining multiple part numbers, operating in multiple environments, all while maintaining multiple certifications. One such example comes from the team at Parker Hydraulic Valve Division. Over the years, the team’s design engineers have worked closely with these customers on the continual improvement of the product portfolio. The latest innovation is the new D1VW*ER (NFPA D03 / NG06 / CETOP 03) directional control valve. The team has focused on complexity reduction for its end-users while maintaining all the expected quality and performance Parker directional control valves have become known for.
Versatile and flexible design
With three horizontal positions and a vertical option for wiring installation per solenoid, electrical connections have become more adaptable. This modularity allows end-users to have more standardization by carrying fewer overall part number combinations. Additionally, usage of expensive explosion-proof fittings can be reduced. These adjustments can be made while still maintaining the tri-rated explosion-proof certifications.
Tri-rated hazardous location/explosion-proof certifications
The multi-ratings provide needed coverage and confidence in usage across the globe. These ratings include:
Based directly on customer feedback, temperature limits have been expanded to now carry an operating temperature range of 70 °C down to -54 °C.
The expanded versatility is another nod to global usage needs, particularly in extremely cold locations in the Oil & Gas industry.
End-users now have instant access to both critical information and certifications, when scanning the laser-etched QR code. No longer will there be wasted time and headaches trying to find various needed documentation. For example, all ATEX, CSA/UL, and IECEx certs are accessible and maintained current.
After further input from our customers and design engineering team, other attributes of the D1VW*ER include:
Although these valves can be used in countless hazardous environments, the design was heavily influenced by the needs of the Oil & Gas industry. Some targeted focuses are shown in figure 1 (below).
The D1VW*ER expands the offerings of Parker HVD hazardous rated valves, which also include:
To learn more about Parker's new line of directional control valves, watch this video:
Offshore Technology Conference 2021
See the D1VW*ER directional control valve live and talk with our engineering experts at OTC 2021, booth #2302.
This post was contributed by:
Mike Giammo, product sales manager, Parker Hydraulic Valve Division.
Mitch Eichler, business development manager, Parker Hydraulic Valve Division.
Related, helpful content for you
Attempts to regulate the air conditioning (AC) and commercial refrigeration markets for the benefit of the environment are nothing new. During the past 25+ years, various legislative actions have limited the use of various refrigerants that depleted ozone or emitted greenhouse gases, both of which have been shown to contribute to global warming potential (GWP).
The most recent actions, including the EPA’s Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program and the much more recent American Innovation and Manufacturing Act (AIM), are further driving growth of low-GWP refrigerants. While this is good news for the environment, these low-GWP refrigerants are not without their own challenges. They may increase energy consumption, introduce added safety risks and require significant equipment modifications.
A history of efforts to benefit the environment
Refrigeration systems contribute to the emission of greenhouse gases when a leak occurs of a high-GWP refrigerant. The two refrigerants most commonly used in the early days of refrigeration were ammonia and carbon dioxide (CO2). Both proved to be problematic for different reasons. Ammonia is toxic and carbon dioxide requires extremely high pressures to operate in a refrigeration cycle.
As a result, both refrigerants lost popularity when Freon 12 (dichloro-diflouro-methane) hit the market. Among other benefits, Freon is extremely stable, non-toxic, and operates at moderate pressures. Unfortunately, it was also shown to have a high ozone depletion potential (ODP), which is the primary reason is has since been banned from use globally.
Numerous other refrigerants have also been banned through SNAP, which was established under the Clean Air Act to identify and evaluate substitutes for ozone-depleting substances. The EPA has since published numerous rules about what is and is not acceptable under SNAP, creating tremendous confusion in the industry. The policies established under SNAP took on greater meaning due to the AIM Act, which went into effect in 2020. The AIM Act requires the EPA to implement a phase down of the production and consumption of hydrofluorocarbons (HFC refrigerants) to reach approximately 15% of their 2011-2013 average annual levels by 2036. HFCs are of particular concern since they are classified as potent greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change.
Pros and cons of preferred low-GWP alternatives carbon dioxide (CO2) and propane (R290)
Tighter environmental legislation is opening the door for increased demand for low-GWP refrigerants.
Two of the more popular options on the market today are CO2 and propane (R290). Both have a long history in refrigeration but have recently again emerged as front-runners due to their low environmental impact. CO2 is the more commonly used for many reasons, including:
A key challenge of using CO2, however, is that it operates at a far higher pressure than other natural and synthetic refrigerants. This increases the risk of leaks which, in turn, necessitates the use of more durable, costly components and piping to handle the greater pressure and added controls and other safety features, many of which increase energy consumption due to high ambient temperatures.
As a hydrocarbon, R290 provides several equally attractive benefits, including superior thermodynamic properties and greater heat capacity. These combined characteristics allow R290 to absorb more heat at an accelerated rate, resulting in higher device energy efficiency with faster temperature recovery and lower energy consumption.
More importantly from an environmental standpoint, R290 (like all hydrocarbons) has no ozone depleting properties and a low GWP of 3. It is also compatible with materials commonly used in the construction of refrigeration and air conditioning equipment, is readily available and relatively inexpensive. It can be stored and transported in steel cylinders similar to how other common refrigerants are handled.
A major concern about R290 is that it’s highly flammable. That’s why refrigerant charge limits are in place, as well as other special safety standards when using R290.
Overcoming the challenges of CO2
The higher operating pressure of CO2 creates a few design challenges. But most of these can be overcome, albeit at a higher cost. Key are material upgrades, such as thicker-walled piping or high-strength K65 copper alloys.
Parker manufactures an array of valves, seals and controllers that are specially rated for CO2 high-pressure refrigeration systems. This includes pressure-rated electric expansion valves, ball valves with integrated pressure relief, stepper motor-driven pressure regulating valves, pulse width modulation valves that manage refrigerant flow and pressure-regulating gas cooler/flash gas bypass valves.
Steel piping is also being used in some instances for high pressure CO2 and the addition of electronic controls which can monitor and record pressures, temperatures and additional parameters. This includes pressure-rated electric expansion valves, ball valves with integrated pressure relief, stepper motor-driven pressure regulating valves, pulse width modulation valves that manage refrigerant flow and pressure-regulating gas cooler/flash gas bypass valves. The use of remote monitoring systems is growing. Not only is remote monitoring a safer option, but it is also in response to the current shortage of trained HVAC technicians, allowing companies to monitor multiple systems and locations with fewer workers.
Overcoming the challenges of R290
With the high flammability of R290, refrigerator manufacturers need to make the necessary system design changes to align with applicable UL and ASHRAE standards that include charge limits, marking requirements and ventilation requirements. System charges of up to 150 grams are currently allowed for most R290 applications, though a few are even lower. Proposed and under-revision UL safety standards seek to raise this limit as high as 500 grams for open refrigeration appliances, and 300 grams for closed appliances. While some systems or applications would remain with more restrictive charges, these increases promise to open R290 to many more applications and enable new applications.
To address flammability concerns, Parker manufactures innovative filter driers and thermostatic expansion valves (TEVs) that are designed to minimize the amount of refrigeration system charge when using flammable refrigerants.that are designed to minimize the amount of refrigeration system charge when using flammable refrigerants.
In addition, some system manufacturers use a sealed design that seals off the spark inside by isolating the R290 from the electrical switch assembly. This type of design reduces the potential for explosion by stopping the gas from entering the electrical switch compartment.
Another option is to fit the leak detection and control systems such that, when activated, it will pump down the propane charge into a liquid receiver and then shut off the electrical supply. If the compressor is enclosed, a ventilation fan must be installed and activated by the leak detection system to remove any gas that might leak from the compressor into the enclosure.
Preparing for an uncertain future
Despite the ongoing changes and obstacles presented by various environmental regulations in the U.S. and abroad, the good news is that the necessary product and material innovations are already available to help engineers overcome the design challenges presented by low-GWP refrigerants, such as CO2 and R290.
This article was contributed by Parker Sporlan Division.
Additional helpful content:
The COVID pandemic impacted the way many industries do business, and the HVAC industry is no exception. Ongoing concerns regarding infection risk and indoor air quality have prompted an unprecedented demand for filters with a Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) value of 13, commonly known as MERV 13 filters, as well as those with even higher MERV ratings. As part of its COVID response, ASHRAE recommends increasing outside air within buildings as much as possible, as well as upgrading air filters to a minimum MERV 13 efficiency rating.
The rush to upgrade to high MERV filters, however, opens the door to a practical discussion about whether that is the best action in all cases. The reality is that using the wrong filter for the wrong application in the wrong place can substantially limit HVAC systems’ efficiency. The result is that air quality will suffer, and the system will consume more power than it should to function.
Is MERV 13 really the best choice for your HVAC system?
A MERV rating is determined by the filter’s particle-size removal efficiency. The higher the number, the higher the filter efficiency. Before considering ratings, however, it’s important to determine the purpose of the filter.
If the primary purpose is to keep heating and air conditioning systems clean and block contaminants from interfering with the operation of key components, you likely don’t need as high a MERV rating. If the primary objective is to protect breathing air quality, then a higher MERV rating might make sense.
An option worth considering in some applications is the use of a multi-filter system that includes final filters and pre-filters. A less expensive, lower MERV-rated filter, functioning as a pre-filter, can trap dirt and large particles before the air reaches the final filters downstream which then remove the small particles. Multi-filter systems can extend the life of the more expensive final filters, creating overall cost savings.
When choosing a filter, it’s also important to consider the conditioned space’s activities and the types and sizes of particles those activities generate. Contaminants of greatest concern need to be evaluated to determine the level of filtration efficiency required for that contaminant’s size (measured in micrometers/microns). Once a full list of contaminants of concern has been identified, you can use the ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 52.2-2017 to select the proper filter with the appropriate MERV.
Additional considerations when choosing a filter
Of course, particle-capture efficiency matters. But there are also other filter characteristics that should be considered when determining the best filter for a specific application. Cost is always a consideration and should include the purchase price, as well as service life and maintenance requirements. The filter’s resistance to airflow also is a key consideration, as it is proportional to the energy consumed by the filter. Energy expenditures can account for about 81% of an air filtration system’s annual operating costs, while its purchase price and maintenance can account for about 18.5%.
Other considerations include the design and materials used in filters. Some designs are easier to install, seal better, and don’t absorb moisture or shed. Pleated filters, which are commonly made with a blend of cotton and polyester or synthetic media, provide a larger filter-surface area than panel filters. Most pleated filters are MERV 6 to 13. Depending on the filter, capture efficiencies for particles in the 3 to 10-micron range can be 35% to 90%.
There are also extended-surface filters that are made with synthetic, fiberglass or cellulose/glass-fiber media. These include bag or pocket, rigid-cell, aluminum-separator and V-bank filters. Pocket filters provide an even greater filter surface area than pleated filters to provide maximum efficiency with the lowest pressure drop and longest life. They typically have MERV ratings of 11 to 15.
Other factors that can affect efficiency
Even a filter with the highest MERV rating can’t achieve high-quality air if some of the air is not going through the filter. Gaps around high-efficiency filters or filter housings can decrease filter performance. They occur when filter media are not sealed properly in the filter frame, when filters are not gasketed properly in filter racks, or when air-handler doors and duct systems are not sealed properly.
For a 1-mm gap, bypass flows can increase to 25% to 35% of the total airflow. The percentage increases based on the filter’s efficiency because air naturally flows through areas with the least resistance. Since higher efficiency filters have a greater resistance to airflow, bypass air has a larger effect. This, in turn, reduces the efficiency rating. For a 1-mm gap, for instance, a MERV 15 filter will perform only as well as a MERV 14 filter. A 10-mm gap, in contrast, causes a MERV 15 filter to perform as a MERV 8 filter. That’s why building operators and maintenance personnel should perform regular field inspections to ensure filter seals and gaskets are installed properly.
To combat gap problems, Parker created its QuadSEAL® HVAC filters with proprietary E-Pleat® media technology. The molded polyurethane frame incorporates a QuadSEAL integrated gasket on all four sides and can flex without damage. Since the media pack is 100% bonded into the foamed frame, bypass is eliminated as is the need for additional sealants or adhesives.
Challenges with MERV 13 filters (and what can be done)
If it were just a matter of choosing the filter that produced the best air quality, the decision would be simple. Everyone would install filters with the highest MERV ratings they could find. Unfortunately, it’s not quite so simple. The challenge facing engineers, building owners and maintenance personnel tasked with specifying and installing filters is that more efficient filters cause higher pressure drops because the smaller pores create more resistance to air flow.
Not only are higher efficiency filters less energy efficient (causing increased energy consumption by the fan), but your air handling unit simply may not have enough capacity to function with a high-efficiency filter. The reality is that most commercial HVAC systems today can only handle MERV 8 filter or MERV 9 filter types.
So, what are your options?
When COVID hit, suddenly industries that, for years, had functioned well with filters with MERV ratings of 8, 10 or 11, were scrambling for MERV 13, 14 and 16 filters. The reality, though, is that there are filter options even more efficient than MERV 16 filters.
High Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) and Ultra-Low Particulate Air (ULPA) filters are designed to trap the smallest airborne particles and contaminants. HEPA filters have a minimum efficiency of 99.97% at 0.3 microns, whereas ULPA filters have an efficiency rating of 99.999% at 0.12 microns or higher. This does not mean that ULPA filters are better than HEPA filters when taking air flow and other variables into account. In fact, HEPA filters cost less, have a lower resistance to air flow and offer a longer service life than ULPA filters.
Parker offers a complete line of HEPA and ULPA standalone and pre-filters for removing particles and contaminants with efficiencies up to 99.9995%. They also are designed to reduce energy consumption and operating costs.
So why doesn’t everyone simply switch to a HEPA or ULPA filter since they represent the gold standard in air quality? Because most commercial and industrial HVAC systems on the market today simply aren’t compatible with them. Since they are so efficient, HEPA and ULPA filters cause a higher pressure drop than filters with lower MERV ratings.
The best option today for using HEPA and ULPA filters is as part of stand-alone systems. Many school districts are looking at options for installing portable air filtration systems with HEPA filters in each classroom to augment their central air filtration systems. HEPA and ULPA filters are also frequently found in critical medical applications and cleanrooms.Newer innovations offer superior efficiency while overcoming problems with air flow
Parker’s approach to balancing the need for efficiency with minimum pressure drops has been the development of its LoadTECH® filter that utilize Parker’s proprietary E-pleat® technology. This patented design molds filtration media into a series of pre-formed channels that direct the air smoothly through the filter, allowing for even loading, minimum resistance and complete media utilization. The previously mentioned QuadSEAL® filters offer a similar benefit of improving efficiency without restricting air flow. The advanced media used in these filters also resists tearing, damage, moisture and microbial growth, leading to a long filter life and the need for fewer filter changeouts.
The decision to use a filter with a MERV 13 rating (or higher), in accordance with the latest guidance from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and ASHRAE, is complicated by the fact that most commercial HVAC systems cannot handle the highest efficiency-rated filters. While there are options for upgrades, redesigns that include a multi-filter system, and new technologies that balance efficiency and air flow, specifiers need to be careful that they choose the right filter after considering all the variables, including cost, maintenance requirements, operating efficiency and, of course, air quality.
This article was contributed by the Parker HVAC Filtration Division.
For decades, futurists have been dreaming of “flying cars” that are easier and nimbler to operate than a helicopter and accessible to everyone. Today, many aerospace technologies are coming together helping numerous companies develop small passenger electric aircraft as soon as 2023.
It’s no secret that Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) is going to be a hotly contested market with legacy aircraft builders, nimble startups, and original equipment manufacturer (OEM) systems providers clarifying their vision of the future. This new market aims to transport passengers and cargo at lower altitudes through urban, suburban, and regional landscapes. Aircraft that will meet these needs will utilize more- or all-electric technologies.
According to a 2020 Roland Berger study on Urban Air Mobility (UAM), a submarket of AAM, “the passenger UAM industry will generate revenues of almost $90 billion a year, with 160,000 commercial passenger drones plying the skies.” Further, Morgan Stanley Research projects that the UAM market could grow to $1.5 trillion by 2040.
Even the most conservative forecasts indicate the AAM market has huge potential as evidenced by the hundreds of vehicles in development.
In early 2021, Air One, the world’s first airport for electric aircraft, was launched in Coventry, England by Urban Air Port, a subsidiary of sustainable tech company small (Six Miles Across London Limited) in partnership with Hyundai Motor Company, Coventry City Council, and the UK government.
As technology evolves, infrastructure is built, and the regulatory/certification requirements established, AAM vehicles will take different forms:
More-electric aircraft (MEA), which have been in production for over a decade, utilize electric power for all non-propulsive systems. The trend toward more-electric aircraft has been driven by the desire for improvements in aircraft weight, fuel efficiency, emissions, life-cycle costs, maintainability, and reliability.
Technology advancements in the areas of electric motors, motor controllers and inverters, electromechanical actuators (EMAs), and thermal management equipment are providing the building blocks that enable development of systems for more-electric aircraft.
Parker Aerospace, via its dedicated AAM systems team, offers a broad range of products and systems expertise for present-day applications as well as future-state aircraft:
Certification: where concepts meet reality
The AAM market is dynamic and changing rapidly. New ideas for platforms, infrastructure, and the technologies that make this exciting segment possible are surfacing daily.
Amid this excitement, these aircraft must be certified for their intended purpose, as do the systems and components that enable the platforms to execute their missions. Regulatory agencies such as the FAA and EASA are presently establishing the parameters under which AAM vehicles can be approved to fly.
Platform builders need to know that their partners have the engineering muscle and experience to not only design an innovative solution that meets requirements, but to also produce a solution that can be certified. This is where an experienced aerospace technology partner is crucial.
Over decades, Parker Aerospace has built thousands of certifiable components and systems for commercial and military aircraft. All Parker equipment is conceived and engineered to offer redundancy, safety, and reliability with the certification process in mind. Contributing to Parker’s track record of certification success is its state-of-the-art simulation capabilities, advanced test equipment, and thorough knowledge of global regulatory requirements.
As the market continues to ascend, Parker Aerospace and its AAM team are actively innovating to help customers take full advantage of these new and fast-changing opportunities.
To learn more about how Parker Aerospace innovation is shaping the AAM market, email the team at email@example.com.
Making the world a better place is in our DNA
As a trusted partner, Parker's team members work alongside customers to enable technology breakthroughs that change the world for the better. We help our customers and distribution partners meet the newest standards for safety or emissions, reduce power usage, improve efficiency, and move faster to optimize resources. Parker's Purpose is at the core of everything we do. Watch the introduction video with Parker's CEO Tom Williams.
This blog was contributed by Chris Frazer key account manager and UAM/eVTOL/AAM business development lead of Parker Aerospace.
Since the introduction of aviation fuel monitor cartridges in aviation fueling, super absorbent polymers (SAP) have been the essential materials used in the final stage of airport ground fueling systems for the protection of on-board systems from water contamination. The material’s ability to absorb and chemically lock in water have its challenges―potential media migration downstream. In 2017, the aviation industry through the International Air Transport Association (IATA), Air Transport Association (ATA) and Joint Inspection Group (JIG) introduced interim procedures while SAP-free filtration was developed. Parker has introduced Water Barrier Filtration technology for interplane fuel filtration solutions.
Runway for change is fast approaching with the Phaseout of EI 1583 SAP filter monitors
The EI specification for filter monitors has been retracted and is no longer available or applicable to the industry, as of December 31st, 2020. Phaseout of the 1583 SAP monitor has been mandated by the industry regulators.
Parker's new drop-in solution for new and existing monitor vessels, the CDFX Water Barrier Filter, guarantees removal of water and dirt from fuel without requiring any additional sensing equipment, removing the water rather than simply detecting it. You can ensure that the clean dry fuel is delivered every time, avoiding costly downtime, potential flight delays, and/or removal of contaminated fuel from your aircraft.
All of Parker's products are fully certified, making switching easy and cost-effective.
There are several things to consider when deciding on various options available for SAP phaseout solutions.
What are your choices?
Questions to ask and factors to consider:
This means costly equipment design, installation, vehicle design limitations, meter capability, electronics, etc., resulting in expensive downtime
The Parker Velcon water barrier technology is approved to the EI 1588 test specifications. There are 22 tests that were similar to the 1583 specifications. However, we removed the tests associated with SAP testing. The rest of the 1588 requirements are part of the specifications:
Performance requirements for 1588 are as stringent as 1583, however, without the SAP media.Phase 1 testing
At Parker Velcon safety is our priority. In April of 2019, Parker Velcon successfully qualified the CDFX Water Barrier filter to the EI 1588 specification. Members of the Energy Institute witnesses were present at our Colorado facility.
Once qualified, we entered the EI robustness Phase One testing. This consisted of:
Test data shows that all 20 tests passed Phase One testing with no failures, achieving maximum effluent water of fewer than one parts per million. All the tests met the minimum pull force specification above 500 Newtons.Phase Two testing for field trials
Two locations were selected and testing was done at these airport tank farms. These tests were accelerated with more than 10 times the typical daily throughput. Upon completion, filters were sent back to our Velcon lab and a witness was present, through EI, to verify the water removal capabilities. Test runs from the two trial locations show vessel throughputs of over 3 million and 5 million gallons per vessel.
When breaking that down to throughput per element, it is approximately 180,000 or 310,000 gallons respectively. During the field trials, elements were returned to our Velcon lab for testing with an EI witness present. These tests included the 50 parts per million slug test and pull tests. Results were consistent with the EI qualification.
Filtration performance and filter integrity have exceeded expectations with no signs of degradation, disarming or reported issues with additives in the fuel.
Water Barrier filtration technology timeline
To summarize the developments of the CDFX Water Barrier filter technology, we review the timeline:
Here's a short video of the water barrier filter and operation. As you can clearly see, water in the fuel is repelled by the water barrier filter and droplets fall to the bottom of the vessel where eventually they must be removed at the low drain points.
Differences in technology application
Some product application differences with the water barrier filter include daily sumping that will be required and some education on the differential pressure effects.
Any water collected will need to be drained from the vessel drain point.
Parker CDFX elements are designed to replace SAP monitor elements and operation will be essentially the same. Since they do not absorb water, there are a few things to note:
Even if the entire vessel is filled with water, no water will pass through the filter. In any case, what is important to note is the differential pressures should not fall below the initial starting differential pressure when operating at rated flow.
There are three available technologies:
As you can see, only the 1588 water barrier technology offers removal for all three capabilities.
The CDFX Water Barrier filter is a true drop-in replacement, innovative at removing water and dirt while not allowing anything to pass through. It offers only clean dry fuel without the use of SAP media. Cost and resource-efficient, it fits deployed vessels in service, but without the needed cost of retrofitting or adding electronic sensors. All materials are compatible with fuels in the industry and simple product procedure changes are in place. Same diameter, same lengths, same flow rates all as with the two-inch monitor elements.
Ease of replacement
This is a short video demonstrating the ease of converting from the SAP monitor to the Parker Velcon water barrier filter.
General aviation fueling
Our water barrier filter technology was further developed for general aviation fueling applications.
The ACOX family of Water Barrier filters are ideal for slow throughput. From an operations perspective, there are minimal changes to your current operating procedures, no modifications to the filter vessel and filter change at a maximum of 22 PSID or three years of service life.
Drop-in solutions for existing houses will not require any retrofitting or additional electronic sensors. Again, no SAP material is used in the fabrication of the ACO X series of filter elements, and these elements are effective in fuel containing FSII which is anti-icing additive. These elements currently meet the effluent fuel and structural requirements of 1588. However, qualification to the EI-1588 standard is coming shortly for the ACOX family.
Electronic water sensor
Parker Velcon has also developed an electronic water sensor for detecting water and fuel. It meets the 1598 design criteria and it was developed to replace chemical water testing. It detects water from zero to 50 parts per million, utilizes a one-quarter-inch common standard port connection, will be certified to ATEX and IECE X, easily to install without any plumbing or electrical systems. And a control box is also available if desired.
The sensor works on a principle of light scatter. Laser light reflects off water and is detected by the photo detector. The more water droplets, the more intense the laser glows as shown in the illustration on the right. The design and testing for the sensor are complete. We expect to achieve ATEX IECE X certification shortly and are looking to qualify the sensor to the 1598 certification in midyear of 2021, making it available to the industry by later in the year in 2021.
Watch the full presentation by Robert Guglielmi, presented at Intrapol Aviation Conference
Article contributed by Robert Guglielmi, business development manager, Aerospace Filtration Division, Parker Hannifin
Related industry topics:
The performance of gas turbines (GT) for power generation has a fundamental influence on the bottom line. Lack of availability, reduced power output and maintenance overheads all link directly back to profitability. As the efficiency of GTs continues to increase, with models such as the GE H-class now pushing power plants above 60% net efficiencies, the cost for loss of performance gets higher. It doesn’t take a math whizz to see that the more power generated by a GT, the more power is lost if it underperforms or has to be shut down!
This new breed of efficient GTs aids the global push in the reduction of CO2 emissions to address climate change. They offer:
Consuming vast quantities of air, however, the quality of this air has a huge impact on GT performance, and the higher the GT efficiency, the greater the potential impact. This means the design of the filtration system has an even more crucial role to play in overall operational efficiency and reliability.
But what is so different about these high-efficiency GTs and why do they need different protection to older E-class or F-class models? They face all the same environmental perils as current GT installations – but their finely tuned performance is precision-engineered, packed with technology, latest advanced materials and finishes. This means they require more rigorous protection from the fouling, pitting and corrosion that finer particulates and contaminants in the inlet air flow cause to blades, stators and buckets.
You might consider just using finer filter media to catch the contaminants. Along this path, however, lies many troubles. Often the worst thing to do is to employ the finest, high-efficiency media as this easily blocks, can cause quick rises in differential pressure leading to unplanned GT “runback” or even shut down and increased maintenance overheads. On the business side of things, huge dollar losses from drops in power output are even more preeminent with pressure rises when operating these bigger, more efficient machines.
If you want to find out how you can ASSURE the performance of high efficiency GTs, the answer is multi-faceted. It requires deep understanding of real-world operating conditions and the demands of these impressive machines. And an understanding of what really matters inside the inlet house – and that can only come from experience.
The filtration system is only as good as its weakest part. Many different factors about filter design equate to assured performance, including:
At the end of the day, assuring the performance of H-class or equivalent GTs, requires a revolution in filtration design to provide maximum protection and reliable performance in the harshest installation environments.
Introducing clearcurrent® ASSURE
clearcurrent® ASSURE range of filters features an innovative design that helps to boost GT performance, reduce lifecycle costs, improve safety, increase availability and extend GT life. Features and benefits include
This article was originally published in the print and digital magazine 2-2021 Issue of Power Engineering International and again in the online version here: Why compromised filters mean compromised gas turbines.
This post was contributed by Tim Nicholas, market manager, PowerGen, Parker Gas Turbine Filtration Division.
Related and helpful content on Gas Turbine Filtration for Power Generation:
High performance QSFP-DD optical modules must use thermal interface materials to help dissipate heat efficiently and effectively to ensure the optimum operating performance, reliability and dependability of the high-speed transceiver.
The introduction of QSFP-DD, or Quad Small Form Factor Pluggable Double Density optical modules, have now doubled of the number of high-speed electrical interfaces that the module supports compared with a standard QSFP28 module.Greater density, greater heat
QSFP-DD modules are the newest standard in high speed pluggable connectors, as they are the smallest form factor 400 G/s transceivers, offering the highest bandwidth density while leveraging the backward compatibility to lower-speed QSFP pluggable modules and cables. Highly integrated and advanced PAM-4 DSP chips, externally modulated laser (EML) diodes, and GaAs laser diodes enable the 400 G/s performance, yet these ICs come with significant thermal issues.
Power loads of up to 25W require significant considerations for heat dissipation, including the application of thermal interface materials.
The goal of a system thermal design is to remove the heat from the module case to ensure that the internal components in the module stay within operating temperature ranges to ensure optimal performance and reliability.
High power thermal gels, such as Parker Chomerics THERM-A-GAP GEL 75, with 7.5 W/m-K thermal conductivity, as well as high performance single component thermal greases such as THERM-A-GAP GEL 8010 3 W/m-K, are typically robotically dispensed for high volume applications such as optical modules.
Robotically dispensing thermal interface material can dramatically reduce costs, save valuable time, and greatly improve the overall performance of the QSFP-DD module. Thermal gap filler pads can be die cut into exact shapes to help dissipate heat from any heat generating component. Thermal gap filler pads provide a soft and effective method of heat dissipation as well as helping to reduce vibration stress for shock dampening.
Need help deciding on a thermal interface material? Our recent blog Thermal Gels or Gap Filler Pads? Top 6 Things You Should Know can help!A TIM for every design; yes, even yours
Whatever your design is, be it a stacked card cage, or belly-to-belly, the thermal interface between the optical cable connector module and the heatsink attached to the outer case/cage is important to your design.
With speeds of 400 G/s being introduced now and 800 G/s on the near horizon, you must also consider the thermal heat dissipation needs of not only the module itself, but the interface connection on the PCB, as well as at the rack unit or cabinet level.
Cabinets featuring 40U to 46U racks require immense thermal heat dispersion featuring both active and passive cooling technologies. Higher data transfer speeds, low latency, and constant availability require more computing power, which in turn means higher power densities per rack.
No matter what your thermal interface material need, Parker Chomerics can help, download our Thermal Interface Materials for Electronics Cooling Guide now!
This blog post was contributed by Jarrod Cohen, marketing communications for Parker Chomerics
We receive many requests regarding seal retention but why is it so important? There are 3 main reasons: ease of component assembly, serviceability, and transit issues. For example, seal retention is important when you have complex groove paths where your groove wanders around bolts or ports. It is also valuable in improving operator ergonomics by reducing installation strain or fatigue in high volume applications. Additionally, seal retention improves serviceability by eliminating the need for liquid sealants which can be difficult to clean. Last but not least, seal retention resolves transit issues by ensuring seals are retained from workstation to workstation or if components are assembled in different locations.
Parker offers an array of Press-in-Place (PIP) Seals to accommodate these application challenges. Additionally, each particular profile provides performance properties to address issues like larger tolerance stock, low seal load, and complex groove paths to name just a few.
Parker’s Press-In-Place (PIP) seals are custom designed to fit into complex groove patterns without having to be stretched. These custom seals are designed to withstand a wide variety of environments, fluids, pressures and temperatures.
In comparable seal heights, a standard PIP groove is 60 percent narrower than traditional grooves. Seal retention is achieved by sidewall interference, requiring no adhesives. The PIP design also maintains high pressure differentials, provides lower seal load, optimizes material use and is easy to install.
Compared to dispensed Form-In-Place (FIP) seals, PIP seals have several advantages. For example, during maintenance, PIP seals can be easily and quickly changed out, where FIP removal often damages the groove. FIP seals also require a considerable investment in machines and fixtures while PIP seals deliver higher performance and robustness without expensive tooling or fixture costs.
Parker offers a variety of PIP standardized profile options. These include:
Other retention options include: Friction Fit Hollow O; Friction Fit Hollow Profile; PSA on Profile; Dart Profile in Custom Groove; Dart Profile in FF Groove; Hollow Profile Mechanically Fastened; PSA on Hollow D; and Hollow Profile Pressed into Metal Track.
A full summary of our PIP options with performance properties and our recommendations are provided in our Press-In-Place (PIP) Sealing webinar below. For help in determining the right solution for your application, please contact our O-Ring & Engineered Seals design team at OESmailbox@parker.com or 1-859-335-5101.
This blog was contributed by Samantha J. Sexton, marketing communications manager, Parker O-Ring & Engineered Seals Division.
Challenges abound for oil and gas companies during drilling and well completion operations. Drilling mud and frac fluids are some of the harshest and most destructive media to be sealed. It takes tough, rugged sealing components to last long run-time hours and continuously move high volumes of abrasive frac fluid that cause wear and tear on parts. And thermoplastic polyurethanes are raising the bar for performance expectations and proving out as preferred sealing materials.
Polyurethane has been an industry standard for dynamic sealing in hydraulic applications for more than 30 years. But polyurethane materials are not all formulated from the same hard- and soft-segment chemistry. The specific diisocyanate and chain extenders used in the synthesis of a polyurethane affect its physical and mechanical properties. When looking to achieve the best performance with mud and frac pumps, Parker’s Resilon® polyurethane is recommended. Our proprietary PPDI (p-phenylene diisocyanate) TPU formulation is specifically suited for injection molding of both large and small articles while retaining superior high-temperature performance.
The characteristics common to Resilon formulations make this PPDI class of material a leading choice for high pressure, dynamic sealing applications. These characteristics include exceptional:
Where to Use Resilon
Resilon polyurethane can be used with high effectiveness in many areas on mud and fracking pumps. The advantages are evident in each area.
Pony Rod Seals. Eliminate hydraulic fluid leakage and simplify installation by replacing standard two-piece seals with the single-piece design made from Resilon 4300. With its high contact force sealing lip design, coupled with compression-set resistant Resilon seal material, this patent-protected pony rod seal design retains lubricating oil in the power end, eliminating necessity of shut down to replenish lost hydraulic fluid. When maintenance and change over is called for, pony rod seal installation is much simpler. The integrated, single component oil seal/rod wiper can be secured via press fit so there’s no need for snap rings or retaining plates.
"Our sales team members receive inquiries from well completion operators who are frustrated when they are interrupted and have to shut down to replenish gallons of hydraulic fluid lost from leaking seals. These operators and their service technicians who are in the field doing the change-overs make it known they 'want the the tan colored pony rod seal,' referring to Parker's recognizable tan-colored Resilon 4300 formulation. Some operators are so pleased with the performance of the Parker pony rod seal they are demanding that the mud pump manufacturers install it as a condition to deploy their pumps on the job site."
Dana Severson, oil and gas market sales manager for Parker's Engineered Materials Group
Suction and Discharge Cover Seals. Our HGP Profile suction and discharge cover seals provide four times the reliable service life compared to traditional elastomer D-rings. Owing to its combination of unique geometry and Resilon 4300 polyurethane material, the HGP Profile resists wear due to the abrasive fluid proppant, high pressure and vibrating motion generated by high frequency pulsating pressurization. The tough, rugged material improves sealing reliability and minimizes degradation of fluid end mating hardware.
Fluid End Valve Seats. Valves take a beating from repeated cycling in highly abrasive drilling fluids and aggressive fracking fluids. But valves made with our unique geometry and Resilon polyurethane have shown to extend valve life by over 50 percent. Resilon valves reduce material failure caused by hysteresis and the optimized geometry increases service life and reliability of the valve seal. These can be formulated in both bonded and snap-in configurations.
Mud Pistons. Our design expertise in piston sealing applications has resulted in piston cups that outlast the competition, reducing costly downtime and eliminating leaks. Resilon polyurethane piston seals are long wearing and outperform traditional urethanes in hot water. Enhanced resilience/rebound characteristics allow the sealing lips of the mud piston to conform to the seal interface – maintaining consistent critical sealing lip contact under rapid cycling conditions, plus reduce frictional heating. In addition, Resilon formulations are compatible with oil and water-base drilling muds.
Well Service Packings. For positive displacement pumps, the materials used in our well service and vee-ring packings have exceptional compressive force resistance to manage side loading yet remain pliable enough for sealing. The material range includes Resilon polyurethanes to aramid fabric reinforced HNBR/FKM. Resilon is compatible with a wide range of hydraulic fracturing fluids.
Resilon® Material Formulations Help Overcome Oil & Gas Completion Challenges
With well conditions becoming increasingly challenging and taking a toll on equipment and expendables, you require sealing products that will enable you to achieve greater production efficiencies, improve performance and reduce down time. Whether you service frac pumps, run completion operations, or build frac pump equipment, Parker’s proprietary Resilon materials can improve your bottom line by:
This blog post was contributed to by Shannon Johnson, marketing communications for Parker Engineered Polymer Systems Division.
Thermal Capabilities & Polyurethane Seal Materials: What Do Temperature Ratings Mean?
Extend Downhole Drilling Time with Mud Motor Boot Sealing Technology
Innovative Dissolvable and Degradable Materials Optimize Oil and Gas Extraction
Today, lasers are used in a variety of industries including automotive, plastic, packaging, clothing, furniture, toys, label production, musical instruments, and medical. In order to be competitive, meet market expectations, and adhere to strict quality standards, businesses around the world are turning to industrial lasers to support their manufacturing processes.
The key to the success of implementing a laser system is not just having a laser, but ensuring it functions properly. In order to do this, it's very important that close attention is paid the to temperature of the water running through it. Variations in operating temperature will affect the laser's performance and increase downtime levels, resulting in costly maintenance and lost production.
These high-powered lasers generate a large amount of heat and must be dissipated to avoid overheating critical components. Regardless of whether it is a Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Neodymium, or Fiber laser, it will require a cooling system to remove excess heat. Water cooling is used for most industrial lasers because of its availability and high thermal capacity. It is necessary to maintain a high level of control over the temperature and cleanliness of the cooling water for three main reasons:
A reliable supply of cooling water is required to keep the laser functioning properly. If there are variations in operating temperature, the laser machine performance is negatively affected, resulting in costly, time-consuming downtime.
A flexible solution
Parker Hannifin has been serving the laser industry for years with a specialized range of industrial water chillers for precision cooling. Parker's Gas Separation and Filtration Division has recently expanded the product line and introduced a new chiller solution—the Hyperchill Plus. The Hyperchill Plus is designed for safe and reliable operation in the most varied working conditions, providing precise and accurate control of the process fluid temperature. The availability of a wide range of accessories and options makes Hyperchill Plus a flexible cooling solution.Features and benefits
A partner you can trust
We know each application in the industry is different, that is why our dynamic engineering team can design and optimize the chiller for your process, providing you the benefits of reliable laser performance. Trust Parker’s global service network and our years of industry experience for your water cooling needs.
For more information on the new Hyperchill Plus, view this interactive presentation and download the brochure.
This post was contributed by the Gas Generation Technology Team - Parker Industrial Gas Filtration and Generation Division.
The future of air travel is evolving beyond fossil fuels with hybrid electric and all-electric aircraft leading the way. The growing need for low emissions and carbon neutrality has created a new focus on more electric aircraft (MEA), as aircraft original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) look to satisfy the growing needs of travelers while achieving the environmental goals being mandated around the world.
Power for all systems on conventional aircraft today is derived primarily from jet engines, fueled, of course, by fossil fuels. Engine gearbox-driven generators provide power for standard electrical equipment like avionics, lighting, and general cabin power. High-pressure engine bleed air is used to drive pneumatic systems such as cabin pressurization, anti-icing, and air conditioning. The engine gear box also drives hydraulic pumps for flight controls, landing gear, braking systems and door actuation as well as mechanical systems such as oil and fuel pumps. Parker Aerospace has a deep pedigree stretching back decades with sub-systems and components in conventional engines.
The evolution to MEA changes the way these systems are implemented. Whether it’s a more electric aircraft with jet engines, a hybrid electric, or a fully electric aircraft, mechanically-driven pumps for hydraulics, pneumatics, oil, and fuel will be replaced with fully electric pumps and actuators for everything including flight surface controls, environmental systems, and braking.
Initially, gas-powered engines will still drive the electric generators for these systems. Ultimately, gas turbine engines may be replaced entirely with fully electric motors and batteries. This migration will start small, with commuter transports and urban air mobility platforms first reaching the market.
Migration from hydraulic and pneumatic energy to electric energy requires improved power-handling capability and efficiency. System voltages for MEA will climb from 28VDC and 115VAC to upwards of 1,000VDC. This power will be delivered by a complex combination of generators and batteries and requires a highly advanced and flexible electrical distribution system capable of managing system needs.
Along with the increase in demand and capacity, the potential for significant damage during short or overload conditions must be recognized. For example, a 270V Li-Ion battery can deliver more than 2,000 amps into a short in a matter of microseconds. The typical electrical interfaces on today’s aircraft consist of mechanical relays and contactors, which are not fast enough to prevent fault propagation, and may even fuse during a fault event. This drives a need for an effective solution for high voltage, high-power buses with enhanced capability.
To answer that call, Parker Aerospace’s Fluid Systems Division has been developing a modular solid-state power controller (SSPC) for use as a standalone unit that is an electronic replacement for a relay or contactor. As part of a larger electrical distribution system, multiple SSPCs can be configured into a solid-state electrical distribution unit (SSEDU). Think of an SSPC as an individual circuit breaker whereas the SSEDU would be the entire circuit breaker box containing multiple breakers. An SSEDU can be configured with two or more SSPCs, with each SSPC being an individually controlled channel.
Utilizing advanced silicon carbide technology, Parker’s SSPC design is a modular architecture that yields the potential to accommodate multiple platform applications without costly redesigns and qualifications. Some features include:
An individual SSPC can be programmed and coordinated with other SSPCs to provide staggered power on/off configurations when used in a multi-channel configuration. Power sequencing, source and load isolation, power routing, and bi-directional flow for battery charge/discharge, can all be configured in the same SSEDU. Voltage, current, temperature and other performance and fault data is available for each SSPC.
The Parker Aerospace modular SSPC design provides benefits beyond the technical specifications. The initial concept was to provide the protection and control in a format that would allow scalability and flexibility in an electrical distribution system implementation. Taking advantage of the common SSPC design allows for:
Parker has completed testing of a first-generation, eight-channel SSEDU, with each channel configured for 270VDC and handling loads from 20 amps to 150 amps. The capability demonstrated included programmed and manual switch control, bolted short fault mitigation, startup and operational overcurrent protection, thermal efficiency with continuous loads, and bi-directional power flow on individual channels.
Current development on the second-generation SSPC will culminate with a two-channel unit in a more compact, thermally efficient, and lighter unit. This fully capable demonstrator will provide an example of how the Parker Aerospace SSPC and SSEDU can be utilized for multiple applications and configurations requiring the control, protection, and flexibility required to satisfy the needs of the new generation of more electric aircraft.
This blog was contributed by electronics engineering manager Andrew Walsh from the Fluid Systems Division of Parker Aerospace.
Due to the processes involved, many industries such as oil and gas, chemical and petrol-chemical, energy or pharmaceutical industries may encounter flammable substances (gas, vapour, mist, liquid, dust, small fibres) and could involve an explosive atmosphere. Where dynamic performance or compact dimensions are required, servo motor technology provides the best solution. Parker has developed specific ATEX Permanent Magnet AC (PMAC) motors where compact dimensions and dynamic response with torque, speed or positioning control are required. These 10-pole servomotors are up to five times more compact than comparable asynchronous motors.
Parker’s EX series is also ideal for applications that include: filling machines in the packaging sector, oil and gas valve actuators, automotive paint shop robots and feed mills in the food sector.What is an explosive environment?
An explosive atmosphere is a mixture of air and flammable substances such as gas, vapour or dust under atmospheric conditions that can explode, where for an explosion to occur, three circumstances must be fulfilled: the presence of fuel, oxygen and a source of ignition. Ignition sources, such as flames, electric arcs and sparks, ultrasound, chemicals or electromagnetic radiation have the potential to cause an explosion in certain circumstances.
Parker EX servomotors, characterized by excellent motion quality, great acceleration/deceleration capabilities and high torque output over a wide speed range, are specifically designed to follow the European ATEX regulation for explosive atmospheres, based on the following European directives:
1- 1999/92/EC: Under the end-user responsibility, 1- 1999/92/EC regulates worker safety and explosive zone classification. EX servomotors are designed and certified to be safe under normal operating conditions both in a place where an explosive atmosphere is likely to occur only occasionally (between 10 to 1000h/y) as well as in a place where it can occur for a very short period (>10/y) (see left-hand side of the chart below).
Standards and certifications
2- 2014/34/EU: Under the supplier's responsibility, 2- 2014/34/EU regulates the device's design compliance for operation in explosive environments. EX servomotors are designed to guarantee safety with a high level of protection, giving single fault tolerance. (see right-hand side of the chart below).
EX servomotors are ATEX compliant for operation in surface industries (Equipment Group II) and in accordance with given levels of flammability for substances present in the atmosphere, such as propane (IIA), ethylene (IIB), Hydrogen & Acetylene (IIC) regarding gas reference and combustible flying (IIA), non-conductive dust (IIB) and conductive dust (IIC) regarding dust reference. While the temperature classification is T4 (135°C).
In 2016, Parker extended the EX servo motor compliance to the IECEx standard as well as to the regional Kosha certification for the Korean market. More recently, EX servo motors have been CCC certified to guarantee compliance with Chinese legislation, where CCC certification is mandatory for explosion proof products (Ex products). Apart from the specific nameplate, CCC motors have the same construction as IECEx motors. They are intended for use in the same areas (gas or dust) and have the same degree of safety.
As an option, Parker offers a version of the EX series that is certified UL for the North American market in accordance with the UL674 standard. Importantly, Parker’s extensive portfolio of ATEX-rated motors, gearheads and actuators ensures the right combination of application-compatible products can be selected every time. Various winding variants and numerous options are available to offer maximum flexibility.
The precision helical gearing design of the GXA gearbox series associated with the powerful Parker ATEX servomotors range offers smooth and quiet operation for the most demanding high-performance applications. Finally, our well-known ETH electro cylinder range for explosive atmospheres are certified for use in explosive gas atmospheres (device group II, category 2G)
Want to know more about our motor series and international standards? View the slideshare presentation.