Temperature/Pressure conversion for NH3

  • Thread starter Thread starter rcguy111
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on developing a conversion equation for temperature to pressure and its inverse for an NH3 refrigeration system. The original temperature to pressure equation was identified as a cubic function, but the user struggled with deriving the inverse, resulting in significant deviations when tested. After refining the equation and increasing precision, a new formula was created that reduced the maximum deviation to 2.5 degrees. The conversation highlights the complexities of cubic equations and suggests interpolation as an alternative method for finding the inverse relationship. Ultimately, the user successfully improved their formula for converting pressure to temperature.
rcguy111
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I am working on a conversion equation to put into the PLC that is running our refrigeration system. I have found the equation to convert temp to pressure, but i am struggling on finding the inverse of this equation. Any advice on a formula or method would be greatly appreciated.
y = .000044x3 + 0.0065x2 + 0.730x + 15.7
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I am put a chart into excel but the new equation for pressure to temperature is not working correctly when I plug the original points back into it. It has a deviation of 150 degrees at the high end of the scale. Am I correct in assuming that the inverse of temp to pressure equation would give me the pressure to temp equation?
 
How did you find the inverse equation? Your temperature to pressure formula is a general cubic equation, and while it's possible to find x in terms of y via the cubic equation, it would be too long and tedious; moreover, you have to deal with the possibility that sometimes there may be more than one temperature for each pressure value (at least given by your equation). If your given formula was interpolated in the first place, you may as well just interpolate again in the reverse.
 
Yeah that is why I have tried it in excel in the same fashion I achieved the original equation. I was having difficulty with it and the deviation of the new equation was massive. so i tried multiple little additions to the equation. I found that my scientific notation was not precise enough so I increased my decimal places and developed an equation that has a max deviation of 2.5 degrees. It was a user problem. Thank you for the help. This will go from pressure to temperature...

y = -6.68E-08x4 + 4.60E-05x3 - 1.19E-02x2 + 1.70E+00x - 2.51E+01
 
If you don't mind sharing your formula "y = -6.68E-08x4 + 4.60E-05x3 - 1.19E-02x2 + 1.70E+00x - 2.51E+01" what units are the variables y and x ?.

y is pressure in ?
x is temperature in ?

Kind Regards
 
See what the max deviation is on this

x= -49.242424242424235 - 0.516472181892512/(5.090996*10^-7 + 5.2272*10^-8*y + 5.2272*10^-8*sqrt(326.78516758494044 + 19.478864401591675*y + y^2))^(1/3) + 6012.882772606816*(5.090996*10^-7 + 5.2272*10^-8*y + 5.2272*10^-8*sqrt(326.78516758494044 + 19.478864401591675*y + y^2))^(1/3)
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top