If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Altimeters and air pressure variation
At sea level, the change in atmospheric pressure with altitude is
close to 1"Hg/1000'. Logically, this would mean that the air pressure would drop to zero somewhere not much above 30000'. It doesn't, because as the density drops the variation with altitude also changes. Which brings to mind the question, how does an altimeter deal with this? As far as I know, it's just a simple aneroid barometer with a bunch of linkages and gears to turn its expansion into pointer movement. My altimeter is marked "accurate to 20000' ". Is this why? Do altimeters for higher altitudes have some kind of clever mechanism to deal with the non-linearity of pressure at higher altitudes. I asked my acro instructor (10K+ hrs, airforce instructor pilot, ex U2 pilot so should know a thing or two about high altitudes). He explained the non-linearity of pressure to me but was stumped on how this translates to the altimeter mechanism. Anyone know? John |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"jharper aaatttt cisco dddooottt com" "jharper aaatttt cisco dddooottt com" wrote in message news:1105391055.635118@sj-nntpcache-3... .... Do altimeters for higher altitudes have some kind of clever mechanism to deal with the non-linearity of pressure at higher altitudes. I am not an expert in the mechanics of barometer/altimeter construction, but I do not see that it has to be particularly clever. Typically, the metal "can" (which expands and contracts with air pressure) is preloaded with a steel-spring against the air pressure. Isn't the force produced by a steel-spring typically non-linear throughout its expansion... so could not the spring-steel parameters be chosen such that the non-linearity matches air pressure non-linearity closely? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"jharper aaatttt cisco dddooottt com" "jharper aaatttt cisco dddooottt com" wrote in message news:1105391055.635118@sj-nntpcache-3... At sea level, the change in atmospheric pressure with altitude is close to 1"Hg/1000'. Logically, this would mean that the air pressure would drop to zero somewhere not much above 30000'. It doesn't, because as the density drops the variation with altitude also changes. Which brings to mind the question, how does an altimeter deal with this? As far as I know, it's just a simple aneroid barometer with a bunch of linkages and gears to turn its expansion into pointer movement. My altimeter is marked "accurate to 20000' ". Is this why? Do altimeters for higher altitudes have some kind of clever mechanism to deal with the non-linearity of pressure at higher altitudes. I asked my acro instructor (10K+ hrs, airforce instructor pilot, ex U2 pilot so should know a thing or two about high altitudes). He explained the non-linearity of pressure to me but was stumped on how this translates to the altimeter mechanism. Anyone know? The following is a WAG but that could be the reason that in the Flight Levels, above 18k feet everyone sets thier altimeter to 29.90. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Gig Giacona" wrote in message ... "jharper aaatttt cisco dddooottt com" "jharper aaatttt cisco dddooottt com" wrote in message news:1105391055.635118@sj-nntpcache-3... Anyone know? The following is a WAG but that could be the reason that in the Flight Levels, above 18k feet everyone sets thier altimeter to 29.90. Hopefully, 29.92. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Icebound" wrote in message ... "Gig Giacona" wrote in message ... "jharper aaatttt cisco dddooottt com" "jharper aaatttt cisco dddooottt com" wrote in message news:1105391055.635118@sj-nntpcache-3... Anyone know? The following is a WAG but that could be the reason that in the Flight Levels, above 18k feet everyone sets thier altimeter to 29.90. Hopefully, 29.92. That still wouldn't help since the pressure change for a 1000ft change in altitude at 18k would be smaller than at sea level. It would have to have some non-linear spring compensation as a function of absolute pressure. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
It would have to have
some non-linear spring compensation as a function of absolute pressure. It could also be a non-linear gear compensation, such as using non-circular gears. Lotsaways it =could= be done, but I don't know how it =is= done. Jose -- Money: What you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
I couldn't be done easily with a spring. Springs are very linear except in
very special cases. I think it's done with leaver arms that change effective length with displacement. Rod "Sriram Narayan" wrote in message news:1105397045.6c0b9af7d0985bd99dd3e30aa7ae44ee@t eranews... "Icebound" wrote in message ... "Gig Giacona" wrote in message ... "jharper aaatttt cisco dddooottt com" "jharper aaatttt cisco dddooottt com" wrote in message news:1105391055.635118@sj-nntpcache-3... Anyone know? The following is a WAG but that could be the reason that in the Flight Levels, above 18k feet everyone sets thier altimeter to 29.90. Hopefully, 29.92. That still wouldn't help since the pressure change for a 1000ft change in altitude at 18k would be smaller than at sea level. It would have to have some non-linear spring compensation as a function of absolute pressure. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Sriram Narayan wrote:
That still wouldn't help since the pressure change for a 1000ft change in altitude at 18k would be smaller than at sea level. It would have to have some non-linear spring compensation as a function of absolute pressure. Yes but the non-linearity is very weak. I coded up the formula for the US standard atmosphere (described below) and plotted it. See http://www.burningserver.net/rosinsk...atmosphere.jpg Perhaps the non-linearity is so weak that altimeters neglect it? I don't know. The formula for US standard atmosphere can be derived from the ideal gas approximation (p = rho*R*T) and the hydrostatic approximation (dp/dz = -rho*g). The final equation is: z = T0/gamma * (1 - (p/p0)**(R*gamma/g))) where R=287, T0 = 288K, p0 = 1013.25 mb = 29.92 in, gamma = 6.5 deg/km, g = 9.8. The formula assumes that temperature decreases linearly with altitude, an assumption which becomes invalid above the tropopause. The equation and its derivation can be found in Wallace & Hobbs, "Atmospheric Science", pg. 60-61. Jim Rosinski |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"jim rosinski" wrote in message oups.com... Sriram Narayan wrote: That still wouldn't help since the pressure change for a 1000ft change in altitude at 18k would be smaller than at sea level. It would have to have some non-linear spring compensation as a function of absolute pressure. Yes but the non-linearity is very weak. I coded up the formula for the US standard atmosphere (described below) and plotted it. See http://www.burningserver.net/rosinsk...atmosphere.jpg Perhaps the non-linearity is so weak that altimeters neglect it? I don't know. The formula for US standard atmosphere can be derived from the ideal gas approximation (p = rho*R*T) and the hydrostatic approximation (dp/dz = -rho*g). The final equation is: z = T0/gamma * (1 - (p/p0)**(R*gamma/g))) where R=287, T0 = 288K, p0 = 1013.25 mb = 29.92 in, gamma = 6.5 deg/km, g = 9.8. The formula assumes that temperature decreases linearly with altitude, an assumption which becomes invalid above the tropopause. The equation and its derivation can be found in Wallace & Hobbs, "Atmospheric Science", pg. 60-61. Jim Rosinski It doesn't look that linear to me. I found a website with a similar graph and it appears that at sea level and at 10000ft the slope of the curve is at least 2x different. Your curve is quite a bit more linear (maybe 20% increase in slope at 10k). There must some sort of mechanical compensation involved otherwise altimeters would be off quite a bit even at 10k (even with your curve). Isn't it something like 75ft accuracy requirement for altimeters? http://www.atmosphere.mpg.de/enid/16h.html |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"jim rosinski" wrote in message oups.com... Sriram Narayan wrote: That still wouldn't help since the pressure change for a 1000ft change in altitude at 18k would be smaller than at sea level. It would have to have some non-linear spring compensation as a function of absolute pressure. Yes but the non-linearity is very weak. I coded up the formula for the US standard atmosphere (described below) and plotted it. See http://www.burningserver.net/rosinsk...atmosphere.jpg Perhaps the non-linearity is so weak that altimeters neglect it? I don't know. The formula for US standard atmosphere can be derived from the ideal gas approximation (p = rho*R*T) and the hydrostatic approximation (dp/dz = -rho*g). The final equation is: z = T0/gamma * (1 - (p/p0)**(R*gamma/g))) where R=287, T0 = 288K, p0 = 1013.25 mb = 29.92 in, gamma = 6.5 deg/km, g = 9.8. The formula assumes that temperature decreases linearly with altitude, an assumption which becomes invalid above the tropopause. The equation and its derivation can be found in Wallace & Hobbs, "Atmospheric Science", pg. 60-61. Jim Rosinski It doesn't look that linear to me. I found a website with a similar graph and it appears that at sea level and at 10000ft the slope of the curve is at least 2x different. Your curve is quite a bit more linear (maybe 20% increase in slope at 10k). There must some sort of mechanical compensation involved otherwise altimeters would be off quite a bit even at 10k (even with your curve). Isn't it something like 75ft accuracy requirement for altimeters? http://www.atmosphere.mpg.de/enid/16h.html |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|