Need some help on air pressure through a manifold and optimal leak/pressure rate

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on optimizing air pressure through a custom manifold for an aquarium pump system. The user seeks to determine the ideal orifice size for two air rails to maintain maximum pressure during the 7-second off phase of the pump cycle. The total volume of the manifold and tubing is calculated to be 2.9828 cubic inches, with specific pump performance metrics provided. Despite the request for assistance, the user expresses frustration at the lack of responses and indicates a willingness to experiment with different orifice sizes. The conversation highlights the challenge of achieving consistent pressure management in small-scale pneumatic systems.
pityocamptes
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
I have a small pump system for an aquarium, and have decided to build a small manifold. The total volume of the manifold and the tubing is 2.9828 cu inches. Here is my pump specs:

Inflation time < 8s (from 0-200 mmHg in a 100cc tank)
Air flow > 70mL/min
Max pressure > 360mmHg
Leakage max 36mmHg/15sec from 300mmHg at 70cc tank
Pump time - 7sec on / 7sec off


From the pump is a 3/16" x 12" tube (volume = .3311 cubic inches) which attaches to a small cylindrical manifold (1"x3" - volume = 2.3571 cubic inches) that has two air rails (each air rail (1/4" x 3" -volume = .2946 cubic inches). Total volume should be 2.9828 cubic inches.

I was hoping to see if someone could figure out how big of an orifice I would need on each rail for maximum pressure, within the 7 seconds on, 7 seconds off (basically optimal orifice pressure and size where manifold drops stays at a constant positive pressure at the end of the 7 second off phase wherein the 7 seconds on phase starts to pump and build pressure. Any help on this would be appreciated. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Anyone? Bump...
 
No one? Thats odd. I guess than, I will just have to experiment with different orifice sizes to get the best result, was trying to avoid this and wanted to see if a mathematical solution existed for this problem.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top