当前位置：文档之家 › Design of planar stell frames using Teaching Learning Based Optimization

Design of planar stell frames using Teaching Learning Based Optimization

  • 格式：pdf
  • 大小：583.33 KB
  • 文档页数：8

Design of planar steel frames using Teaching–Learning Based OptimizationVedat Tog˘an ⇑Karadeniz Technical University,Department of Civil Engineering,61080Trabzon,Turkeya r t i c l e i n f o Article history:Received 20July 2011Revised 24August 2011Accepted 25August 2011Available online 4November 2011Keywords:Structural design Optimization framesTeaching–Learning Based Optimizationa b s t r a c tThis paper presents a design procedure employing a Teaching–Learning Based Optimization (TLBO)tech-nique for discrete optimization of planar steel frames.TLBO is a nature-inspired search method that hasbeen developed recently.It simulates the social interaction between the teacher and the learners in a class,which is summarized as teaching–learning process.The design algorithm aims to obtain minimum weight frames subjected to strength and displacement requirements imposed by the American Institute for Steel Construction (AISC)Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD).Designs are obtained selecting appropriate W-shaped sections from a standard set of steel sections specified by the AISC.Several frame examples from the literature are examined to verify the suitability of the design procedure and to dem-onstrate the effectiveness and robustness of the TLBO creating of an optimal design for frame structures.The results of the TLBO are compared to those of the genetic algorithm (GA),the ant colony optimization (ACO),the harmony search (HS)and the improved ant colony optimization (IACO)and they shows that TLBO is a powerful search and applicable optimization method for the problem of engineering design applications.Ó2011Elsevier Ltd.All rights reserved.1.IntroductionOptimization can be defined as finding solution of problems where it is necessary to maximize or minimize a real function within a domain which contains the acceptable values of variables while some restrictions are to be satisfied.There might be the large amount of set of variables in the domain that maximizes or mini-mizes the real function while satisfying the described restrictions.They are called as the acceptable solutions and the solution which is the best among them that satisfy constrains are obtained as the optimum solution of the problem.Analogously the definition given above,the aim of the optimum structural design methods is to minimize the size of the structural elements considering their load carrying capacity in order to re-duce the total cost by reducing the material necessary for construc-tion.The methods taking discrete design variables and seeking for the global optimum under the constraints that change depending on type of the problems have drawn a lot of attention among the researchers and the engineers in practice.Among the optimization methods developed and used in the structural optimization,the recent novel and innovative stochastic search techniques emerged use nature as a source of inspiration to establish a numerical search algorithm for solving complex engi-neering problems and they do not suffer the discrepancies of math-ematical programming based optimum design methods [1].The basic idea behind these techniques is to simulate the natural phe-nomena such as survival of the fittest,the cooling process of mol-ten metals through annealing,the social interaction of ant colonies,swarm intelligence,the musical performance process,the process of food foraging of honey bees,etc.into a numerical algorithm [2–7].These methods are very suitable and effective in finding the solution of discrete structural optimization problems [8–20].On the other hand,the emergence of new computational tech-niques that are based on the simulation of paradigms found in nat-ure has still continued due to its ability of solving different optimization problems.Rao et al.[21]developed a new optimization method,the so-called Teaching–Learning Based Optimization (TLBO),as an inno-vative optimization algorithm inspiring the natural phenomena,which mimics teaching–learning process in a class between the teacher and the students (learners)and they applied the TLBO for solving the mechanical design optimization problems taken from the literature.In their model,the ‘‘Teaching Phase’’produces a ran-dom ordered state of points called learners within the search space.Then a point is considered as the teacher,who is highly learned person and shares his or her knowledge with the learners,and others learn significant group information from the teacher.However,during the ‘‘Learning Phase’’the learners learn by inter-action between each other.After a number of sequential Teaching–Learning cycles,where the teacher convey knowledge among the learners and those level increases toward his or her own level,the distribution of the randomness within the search space be-comes smaller and smaller about to point considering as teacher.0141-0296/$-see front matter Ó2011Elsevier Ltd.All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.08.035Tel.:+904623772671;fax:+904623772606.E-mail address:togan@.trIt means knowledge level of the whole class shows smoothness and the algorithm converges to a solution.This paper presents a design procedure employing a Teaching–Learning Based Optimization(TLBO)technique for discrete optimization of planar steel frames.The total weight of the frame structures subjected to constraints in the form of strength and displacement requirements imposed by the American Institute for Steel Construction(AISC)Load and Resistance Factor Design(LRFD)[22]is considered as the objective function.Several frame examples from the literature are examined to verify the suit-ability of the design procedure and to demonstrate the effective-ness and robustness of the TLBO creating of an optimal design for frame structures.2.Formulation of the optimum design problemThe design of steel frames requires the selection of steel sec-tions for its columns and beams from a standard steel section ta-bles such that the frame obeys the serviceability and strength requirements specified by the code of practice while the economy is observed in the overall or material cost of the frame[1].This turns out to be discrete optimum design problem which has the following mathematical form:find X¼½A1;A2;...;A ngminimize WðXÞ¼X ngi¼1A iX mnj¼1qiL isubjected to c rk60k¼1;...;ncc dr60r¼1;...;ns16A i6ms i¼1;...;ngð1Þwhere X is the design variables vector taken as the cross-section area of the each member group;ng is the total numbers of groups in the frame;W(X)is the weight of the frame;mn is the total num-ber of members in group i;q j and L j are density and length of mem-ber j,respectively;A i is cross-sectional area of member group i.Theinequalities c rk 60and c dr60represents the strength and displace-ment requirements imposed by the AISC-LRFD specification[22];ns and nc are the number of stories and the number of beam columns, respectively.Since A i is selected W-shaped sections from a standard set of steel sections given by the AISC-LRFD specification[22]ms shows the total number of W-shaped sections considered in the de-sign for group i.The strength constraints,c rk60,for members subjected to axial force and bending are expressed according to AISC-LRFD[22]as follows:c r k ¼P unþ8M uxb nxþM uyb nyÀ1if P unP0:2P u2/P nþM ux/b M nxþM uy/b M nyÀ1if P u/P n<0:28><>:ð2Þin which P u is the required axial strength(compression or tension); P n is the nominal axial strength(compression or tension);M ux and M uy are the requiredflexural strengths about the major and the minor axes,respectively;M nx is the nominalflexural strength about the major axis;M ny is the nominalflexural strength about the minor axis(for two-dimensional frames,M uy=0);/is the resistance factor shown as/c and/t for compression(equal to0.85)and tension (equal to0.90),respectively;/b is theflexural resistance factor, which is equal to0.90.The displacement constraints,c dr60,representing the inter-storey drift of the multi-storey frame are stated in the following equation:c d r ¼dÃd ruÀ1where düðd rÀd rÀ1Þð3Þin Eq.(3)d r and d rÀ1are lateral deflection of two adjacent storey le-vel;d ru is the allowable lateral displacement(equal to h r/300,whereh r is the storey height).The constrained optimization problem defined through Eqs.(1)–(3)is converted to the unconstrained one via penalty functionbased on the measurement of constraints violation.The uncon-strained objective function f(X)is then written as:fðXÞ¼WðXÞð1þCÞeð4Þwhere C is the value of total constraints violation and e is the posi-tive penalty exponent.The total constraints violation C is a functionof the summation of the stress and deflection constraints definedas:C¼X nck¼1c rþX nsr¼1c dð5Þwhere c r¼maxðc rk;0Þand c d¼maxðc dr;0Þ.The value of the penalty function exponent,given in Eq.(4),istaken as2[23].3.Teaching–Learning Based OptimizationThe TLBO mimics the teaching–learning process in a class be-tween the teacher and the learners(students).Teacher desires toreach best harmony on the out put of learners in a class,whichcan be obtained through their grades considered as the output.Output is evaluated by means of exam taken by the teacher.Sincethe teacher is generally considered as a highly learned person whoshares his or her knowledge with the learners,the quality of a tea-cher affects the outcome of the learners.It is obvious that a goodteacher trains learners such that they can have better results interms of their marks or grades[21].The TLBO will be explained in the following,similar to the workby Rao et al.[21].Fig.1shows the distribution of grades obtainedby the students taught by two distinct teachers into two differentclasses.A normal distribution is assumed for the obtained gradesafter taking an exam by the teachers.It is clearly seen from Fig.1that the teacher who teaches thestudents in the class2is better than the teacher in the class1sincethe mean of the grades,M2,obtained by the students in the class2represents better results than M1.Therefore it can be stated that agood teacher produces a better mean for the results of the stu-dents.Students also learn from interaction between themselves,which also helps in their results.However,in practice a teachercan only move the mean of a class up to some extent dependingon the capability of the class.This follows a random processdepending on many factors[21].Consequently,since a teacher,who is the most experienced per-son on a subject in the society,influences the student’s behavior toattain some pre-determined goal it is expected that the teacher226V.Tog˘an/Engineering Structures34(2012)225–232increases the knowledge level of the whole class depending on his or her skill.The teacher,therefore,will put maximum effort into teaching his or her students,but students will gain knowledge according to the quality of teaching delivered by a teacher and the quality of students present in the class[21].In addition,the students can also gain knowledge by discussing,communicating, discovering and interacting with the world defined by the teacher.An analogy between the teaching–learning process and the optimum design of steel frames can be established in the following way:a class and a student in that class represent the population and the candidate solution.Each subject taught to the students represent the design variable(steel section no)and the combina-tion of it denotes the design variables(steel sections)of objective function.The candidate solution composes of design variables and is qualified according to itsfitness.The solution having bestfit-ness in the population is determined as the teacher.The entire pro-cess is continued until reaching the termination criteria as well as other nature-inspired methods.4.Optimum design using TLBOBased on the above teaching–learning process,a mathematical model of a novel optimization technique called Teaching–Learning-Based Optimization(TLBO)was developed by Rao et al.[21].It consists of two phases:a Teaching Phase,where candidate solutions are randomly distributed over the search space and the best solution is determined among those then it shares the infor-mation with others;and a Learning Phase,where the solutions put effort into passing the own information through the interaction to each other.The optimum design algorithm using TLBO in the current work is explained with stepwise manner as follows.4.1.Initialize the parameters to control TLBOThe number of students(population size)and stopping criteria (maximum number of iteration)are designated in this step,only.4.2.Initialize a classAs stated above,class represents the population,which com-poses of students.The class isfilled with randomly generated stu-dents(solutions)according to the population size,np,and number of design variables,nd.class¼pop¼x11x12 (x1)ndÀ1x1ndx21x22 (x2)ndÀ1x2nd...............x npÀ11x npÀ12...x npÀ1ndÀ1x npÀ1ndx np1x np2...x npndÀ1x npnd266666664377777775!!!!!fðX1ÞfðX2Þ...fðX npÀ1ÞfðX npÞð6Þwhere each row represents a candidate steel design(a student)in the population(class),f(X1,2,...,npÀ1,np)is the corresponding uncon-strained objective function value,and pop symbolizes the population.4.3.Teaching PhaseThe steel design having minimum unconstrained objective function value in the population is found and it is mimicked as tea-cher(X teacher=X min f(X)).Since the teacher will put effort to move the mean of the population,X mean,for the particular design variable towards X teacher,an update formula for the solution X i is applied as: X new;i¼X iþrðX teacherÀT F X meanÞð7Þwhere X new,i and X i are the new and existing solution of i,r is a ran-dom number varying[0,1],T F is a teaching factor being either1or2 [21],and X mean is the mean of the solutions calculated with column-wise manner,Eq.(8).X mean¼m popX npj¼1x j1!!m popX npj¼1x j2!!...m popX npj¼1x jndÀ1!!"ÂpopX npj¼1x jnd!!#ð8Þwhere m(.)is the mean of an data set.At this stage of the TLBO algo-rithm,a controlling procedure is performed for X new,i as having ap-plied Eq.(7),any design variable,x new;i1;x new;i2;...;x new;indÀ1;x new;ind,in X new,i might be less than x L or bigger than x U due to addition and subtrac-tion.If any design variable of X new,i is less than x L or bigger than x U it is taken into account as x L or x U,respectively.In here,x L and x U show the lower and upper boundaries for the design variables.Since the solution of discrete structural optimization problems is explored, x L is equal to1while x U=maximum steel section number considered in the design.If the new solution,X new,i is better than the current solution,X i, the new solution is replaced with the current solution otherwise X i is preserved.In other words,if f(X new,i)<f(X i)X i=X new,i;if f(X new,i)P f(X i)X i=X i.4.4.Learning PhaseAs explained above,students can also increase their knowledge by means of interaction between each other according to teaching–learning process.So,a solution is randomly interacted to learn something new with other solutions in the population.A solution will learn new information if the other solutions have more knowl-edge than him or her[21].The modification formula representing the learning phase is applied to learn new information between the solution i and j in the population can be expressed as:X new;i¼X iþrðX iÀX jÞif fðX iÞ<fðX jÞX new;i¼X iþrðX jÀX iÞif fðX iÞ>fðX jÞð9Þin which X j is the any solution to be different from X i.Then applying of Eq.(9),the solution gained new information,X new,i,is checked so as to ensure that the any design variable in X new,i is bigger than x U and less than x L due to addition and subtraction in Eq.(9).If any de-sign variable of X new,i is less than x L or bigger than x U it is taken into account as x L or x U,respectively,as well as in the teaching phase.If the solution gained new information with help of Eq.(9)pro-duces better unconstrained objective function value than X i change X i to X new,i,otherwise preserve X i.4.5.TerminationAt the end of the learning phase,a cycle(iteration)is completed for the TLBO and the steps in Sections4.3and4.4are continued un-til reaching a termination criterion.In the present work,a termina-tion criterion is adopted for TLBO.The algorithm is terminated when a predetermined maximum iteration number is reached.5.Design examplesThe optimal designs of planar steel two-bay three-story,one-bay ten-story and three-bay twenty four-story frames,respec-tively,are evaluated by using the TLBO to verify the suitability of the design procedure and to demonstrate the effectiveness and robustness of its.Since they are already optimized by the research-er using different algorithms,i.e.the genetic algorithm(GA)[24], the ant colony optimization(ACO)[23],the harmony search(HS)V.Tog˘an/Engineering Structures34(2012)225–232227[25]and the improved ant colony optimization (IACO)[26],the re-sults of the TLBO are compared to those of GA,ACO,HS,and IACO.Numerical results presented in the study show the best solu-tions obtained among the thirty independent runs performed.The adjustable parameter,T F ,defined in the TLBO algorithm is ta-ken 2as indicated in Rao et al.[21].An approximation formula,K x ¼ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi1:6G A G B þ4ðG A þG B Þþ7:5G A þG B þ7:5q ,proposed by Dumonteil [27]is used to calculate the member effective length factors depending on the relative stiffness of a member at its two ends,G A ,G B .Designs of examples are obtained selecting appropri-ate W-shaped sections from the AISC-LRFD specification [22].5.1.Two-bay three-story frame designGeometrical properties and load case of two-bay three-storyframe consisting of 15members planar frame is illustrated in Fig.2.All members were assumed to be constructed from a mate-rial with the Young modulus,E ,is 29,000ksi and a yield stress,f y ,is 36ksi.The objective of the problem is to minimize the weight of the structure and the constraints (excluding displacements)areimposed on member stresses in accordance with the AISC-LRFD specification [22].Members of the frame are collected into two groups,which con-sist of six beams and nine columns.In the design,the beams arechosen from a list with 267-W shaped sections while the columns are limited to W10sections resulting in 18-W shapes.The effective length factors,K x ,of the members are calculated from the approx-imate equation proposed by Dumonteil [27].For each column,the out-of-plane effective length factor K y is considered as 1.0.The out-of-plane effective length factor for each beam member is specified as one-sixth of the span length.Table 1summarizes the best designs developed by Pezeshket al.[24]using GA,Camp et al.[23]using ACO,Deg˘ertekin [25]using HS,and by the TLBO algorithm explained in this study.The best design developed by the TLBO algorithm,a frame weighting 17,789lb,is presented in the last column of Table 1.The design produced by the TLBO is approximately 5.4%and 3.0%less than the design of GA,ACO and HS,respectively.The reported minimum number of truss analyses in the given references is 1800[24]and 1853[25]to converge to a solution.However,TLBO algo-rithm develops the presented result at 40generations with a pop-ulation size 20resulting in 1600frame analyses.Typical design history for the best optimum design and average frame weight of 30designs for the two-bay three-story frame is illustrated inFig.3.Moreover,interaction ratio of members at the best solution is also shown in Fig.4.It is surprising that the TLBO algorithm yields the result pre-sented in Table 1at 12th iteration (see Fig.3)resulting in 480frame analyses.Although the design obtained at 12th iteration is the best solution reached at the end of the TLBO process,the aver-age weight of the population at 12th iteration is 22,226.813lb,with a standard deviation of 2688.93lb.In other words,the explo-ration of design space is still continued by TLBO algorithm and the best harmony in the population is not satisfied before after 30th iteration.The average of final generation is 17,795.60lb,with a standard deviation of 28.58lb.It can be stated from Fig.4that interaction ratio of member 2and 14is within 98%and 95%of maximum interaction ratio at the best solution,respectively.It is worthy to state that the result obtained in this study using TLBO is the minimum among the ones obtained previously and the TLBO algorithm exhibits more computational efficiency over GA,ACO,and HS from point of view of frame analyses.Table 1Designs for two-bay,three-story frame.Element groupMemberAISC W-shapes GA Pezeshk et al.[24]ACO Camp et al.[23]HS Deg ˘ertekin [25]TLBO (This study)1(beam)10–15W24Â62W24Â62W21Â62W24Â622(column)1–9W10Â60W10Â60W10Â54W10Â49Weight (lb)18,79218,79218,29217,789228V.Tog˘an /Engineering Structures 34(2012)225–2325.2.One-bay ten-story frame designOne-bay ten-story frame shown in Fig.5is designed using TLBO as second example.The frame consists of 30members and they are organized into 9groups due to fabrication conditions.The corre-sponding member groups,the dimension of the frame and the loading are shown in the figure.The material has a modulus of elasticity E =29,000ksi and a yield stress of f y =36ksi.The design is obeyed the AISC-LRFD specification [22]and a displacement constraints considered as inter-story drift <storey height/300.All 267-W sections is used the groups organized for beam members,while the column element groups is chosen from W14and W12sections.The effective length factors,K x ,of the members are calcu-lated from the approximate equation proposed by Dumonteil [27]when the out-of-plane effective length factor K y is considered as 1.0.The out-of-plane effective length factor for each beam member is specified as one-fifth of the span length.The best frame design that weighs 61,813lb developed by the TLBO and the other algorithms are presented in Table 2.The best TLBO design results is 5.1%less than the design of GA [24]andTable 2Designs for one-bay,ten-story frame.Element group No.AISC W-shapes GA Pezeshk et al.[24]ACO Camp et al.[23]HS Deg ˘ertekin [25]IACO Kaveh and T.[26]TLBO (This study)1(column 1–2S)W14Â233W14Â233W14Â211W14Â233W14Â2332(column 3–4S)W14Â176W14Â176W14Â176W14Â176W14Â1763(column 5–6S)W14Â159W14Â145W14Â145W14Â145W14Â1454(column 7–8S)W14ÂÂ99W14Â99W14Â90W14Â90W14Â995(column 9–10S)W12Â79W12Â65W14Â61W12Â65W12Â656(beam 1–3S)W33Â118W30Â108W33Â118W33Â118W30Â1087(beam 4–6S)W30Â90W30Â90W30Â99W30Â90W30Â908(beam 7–9S)W27Â84W27Â84W24Â76W24Â76W27Â849(beam 10S)W24Â55W21Â44W18Â46W14Â30W21Â44Weight (lb)65,13662,61061,86461,82061,813Note:S =Story;Kaveh and T.[26]=Kaveh and Talatahari [26].V.Tog˘an /Engineering Structures 34(2012)225–2322291.3%less than the design of ACO[23].The TLBO algorithm produces roughly identical design to the design reported by HS[25]and IACO[26].TLBO algorithm uses100generations with a population size20resulting in4000frame analyses to converge to a solution. The required frame analyses to converge to a solution for the TLBO algorithm is more than3000,3690,and2500analyses required by GA[24],HS[25],and IACO[26]except the8300analyses required by ACO[23].Fig.6shows the design history for the best optimum design and average frame weight of30designs for the one-bay ten-story frame.Since both the inter-story drift displacement of some stories and the interaction ratio of several members are within95%of maximum interaction ratio as illustrated in Fig.7and Fig.8,respec-tively,not only inter-story drift constraints but also stress con-straints are dominant at the optimum design.5.3.Three-bay24-story frame designFig.9shows configuration of three-bay24-story frame consist-ing of168members and its node,element numbering patterns and the loading.The loads are W=5761.85lb,w1=300lb/ft,w2= 436lb/ft,w3=474lb/ft and w4=408lb/ft.The members of planar frame are divided into20groups after linking in order to impose the fabrication condition on the construction of the168member frame.The outer columns and inner columns in every three story are grouped together.The beams offirst and third bay on allfloors are considered to be the same whereas the roof beams are grouped to be two different groups,resulting in four beam groups as shown in thefigure.Each of the four beam element groups were chosen from all of the267W-sections,whereas the16column member groups were selected from only W14sections.The material properties are a modulus of elasticity of E=29,732ksi and a yield stress of f y=33.4ksi.The frame is de-signed following the AISC-LRFD specification[22]and uses an in-ter-story drift displacement constraint(inter-story drift<storey height/300).The effective length factors,K x,of the members are calculated from the approximate equation proposed by Dumonteil [27]and the out-of-plane effective length factor K y is considered as 1.0.All columns and beams are considered unbraced along their lengths.Table3lists the designs developed by the TLBO algorithm and the others.The lightest TLBO design results in a frame that weighs 203,008lb,which is7.9%,5.5%and6.6%lighter than the one ob-tained using ACO[23],HS[25]and IACO[26],respectively.TheTLBO algorithm requires approximately12,000frame analysis in order to yield the best optimum design(150generations with a 40population size).Although the required analyses number for the frame is more than3500analyses required by IACO[26],TLBO230V.Tog˘an/Engineering Structures34(2012)225–232enables to reach the best optimum design with less frame analyses when compared to15,500and13,924analyses required by ACO [23]and HS[25].Therefore,it can be expressed that TLBO algo-rithm exhibits more robustness and efficiency over not only ACO [23]and HS[25]but also IACO[26]from the point of view of the best optimum design.Design history of number of cycle(iteration)for the best and average optimum design of steel frame with TLBO is shown in Fig.10.Fig.11shows the inter-story drift for each story of the frame designs whereas the interaction ratio for the three-bay24-story frame design obtained by TLBO is shown in Fig.12.Since the inter-story drift constraint is within95%of the upper limit of most stories as shown in Fig.11at the best optimum when the maximum value of the stress ratio is81%as shown in Fig.12,it should be indicated that inter-story drift constraint is dominant in the optimum design.6.Observations and conclusionsA novel optimization method,TLBO,based on concepts pro-posed by Rao et al.[21],is applied to discrete forms of structural optimization to design low-weight planar steel frames.Through a series of benchmark-type frame optimization problems,the TLBO algorithm demonstrates that it can routinely minimize the overallTable3Designs for three-bay,24-story frame.Element group No.AISC W-shapesACO Camp et al.[23]HS Deg˘ertekin[25]IACO Kaveh and Talatahari[26]TLBO(This study)1(beam1–23S,bay1,3)W30Â90W30Â90W30Â99W30Â90 2(beam24S,bay1,3)W8Â18W10Â22W16Â26W8Â18 3(beam1–23S,bay2)W24Â55W18Â40W18Â35W24Â62 4(beam24S,bay2)W8Â21W12Â16W14Â22W6Â9 5(column1–3S,E)W14Â145W14Â176W14Â145W14Â132 6(column4–6S,E)W14Â132W14Â176W14Â132W14Â120 7(column7–9S,E)W14Â132W14Â132W14Â120W14Â99 8(column10–12S,E)W14Â132W14Â109W14Â109W14Â82 9(column13–15S,E)W14Â68W14Â82W14Â48W14Â74 10(column16–18S,E)W14Â53W14Â74W14Â48W14Â53 11(column19–21S,E)W14Â43W14Â34W14Â34W14Â34 12(column22–24S,E)W14Â43W14Â22W14Â30W14Â22 13(column1–3S,I)W14Â145W14Â145W14Â159W14Â109 14(column4–6S,I)W14Â145W14Â132W14Â120W14Â99 15(column7–9S,I)W14Â120W14Â109W14Â109W14Â99 16(column10–12S,I)W14Â90W14Â82W14Â99W14Â90 17(column13–15S,I)W14Â90W14Â61W14Â82W14Â68 18(column16–18S,I)W14Â61W14Â48W14Â53W14Â53 19(column19–21S,I)W14Â30W14Â30W14Â38W14Â34 20(column22–24S,I)W14Â26W14Â22W14Â26W14Â22 Weight(lb)220,465214,860217,464203,008Note:S=Story;E=Exterior column;I=Interior column.V.Tog˘an/Engineering Structures34(2012)225–232231。

合集下载

Designing a Capsule Catalyst and Its Application for Direct Synthesis of Middle Isoparaffins

Designing a Capsule Catalyst and Its Application for Direct Synthesis of Middle Isoparaffins

Designing a Capsule Catalyst and Its Application forDirect Synthesis of Middle IsoparaffinsJingjiang He,†Yoshiharu Yoneyama,†Bolian Xu,‡Norikazu Nishiyama,§andNoritatsu Tsubaki*,†Department of Applied Chemistry,School of Engineering,Toyama University,Gofuku 3190,Toyama 930-8555,Japan,Department of Chemistry,Nanjing University,Nanjing 210093,China,and Division of Chemical Engineering,Graduate School of Engineering Science,OsakaUniversity,Osaka 560-8531,JapanReceived November 12,2004.In Final Form:January 12,2005A catalyst in the form of a capsule catalyst was prepared by coating HZSM5membrane on a preshaped Co/SiO 2catalyst pellet.The capsule catalyst with HZSM5membrane exhibited excellent selectivity for light hydrocarbon synthesis,especially for isoparaffin synthesis from syngas (CO +H 2).Long-chain hydrocarbon formation was totally suppressed by the zeolite membrane.The modification of membrane and core catalyst significantly improved the catalytic properties of these new kinds of capsule catalysts.IntroductionThe Fischer -Tropsch synthesis (FTS)reaction,CO +H 2)hydrocarbons +H 2O,was found by Fischer and Tropsch in 1925.1It can produce liquid fuels such as gasoline and diesel oil from coal or natural gas.As more and more natural gas resources are found in the world presently,the FTS process becomes more promising.2Furthermore,as the technique of producing syngas (CO +H 2)from biomass is being developed,synthetic liquid fuel can be obtained from biomass via FTS.3The FTS products are almost normal hydrocarbons,either olefins or paraffins,and the product selectivity follows the ASF distribution.The advantages of FTS hydrocarbons are their high n -paraffin content,high cetane number as diesel fuel,and sulfur-free,aroma-free,nitrogen-free properties,especially on cobalt-based catalysts.4-7The production of hydrocarbons rich in isoparaffins,alkylates,has gained much attention because of its high octane numbers if used as synthetic gasoline.Several groups have tried to make isoparaffins by utilizing FTS catalyst,which is metal dispersed on acidic zeolite or other acidic supports.8But these catalysts performed with very low conversion due to a rather low reduction degree.We have recently reported that when a mechanical mixture of zeolite and normal FTS catalyst,Co/SiO 2,was used in a single-or dual-step FTS reaction,the formation of short-chain isoparaffins was enhanced while the formation of longer hydrocarbons was suppressed.9Zeolite is a special material with unique pores and channels.The varied molecular diffusion rate in these pores and the shape selectivity,as well as acidic properties,make it widely used.Many studies on preparing zeolite membrane and its application for separation have already been reported.10On the other hand,zeolite is also a good hydrocracking/hydroisomerization catalyst due to its acidic properties.11In the present work,zeolite membrane was tailor-made coated on the FTS catalyst pellet,Co/SiO 2,and we call it a capsule catalyst.In the reaction,feed gas,CO +H 2,diffused through zeolite membrane and arrived at the FTS catalyst.Then the hydrocarbons formed there and desorbed.When the hydrocarbons diffused into the zeolite membrane,all of them,in the form of normal hydrocarbons,could enter zeolite channels and must be cracked and isomerized by acidic sites inside zeolite channels.A schematic image is shown in Figure 1.For long-chain hydrocarbons,their low diffusion rate in zeolite membrane makes them stay in the membrane layer longer,having a higher possibility of isomerization and cracking reaction inside the membrane.Furthermore,compared to conventional membrane reactors,the catalyst designed above has larger membrane area per unit reactor volume.This kind of capsule catalyst is of great advantage in practical application,because membranes with large area and without pinholes or cracks are very difficult to*To whom correspondence should be addressed.E-mail:tsubaki@eng.toyama-u.ac.jp.†Toyama University.‡Nanjing University.§Osaka University.(1)Olive,H.G.;Olive,S.The Chemistry of the Catalyzed Hydrogena-tion of Carbon Monoxide ;Springer-Verlag:Tokyo,1984;p 144.(2)Wegrzyn,J.E.;Mahajan,D.;Gurevich,M.Catal.Today 1999,50,97.(3)Chum,H.L.R.;Overend,P.Fuel Process.Technol.2001,71,187.(4)Iglesia,E.;Soled,S.L.;Fiato,R.A.J.Catal .1992,137,212.(5)Johnson,B.G.;Bartholomew,C.H.;Goodman,D.W.J.Catal .1991,128,231.(6)Schanke,D.;Vada,S.;Blekkan,E.A.;Hilman,A.M.;Hoff,A.;Holmen,A.J.Catal .1995,156,85.(7)Van Der Laan,G.P.;Beenackers,A.Catal.Rev.Sci.Eng.1999,41,255.(8)Chen,Y.W.;H.T.Tang;Goodwin,J.G.,Jr.J.Catal .1983,83,415.Nijs,H.H.;Jacobs,P.A.J.Catal .1980,66,401.Jacobs,P.A.Catalysis by Zeolites ;Imelik,B.,Naccache,C.,Vedrine,J.C.,Eds.;Elsevier:Amsterdam,1980;p 293.(9)Li,X.;Asami,K.;Luo,M.;Michiki,K.;Tsubaki,N.;Fujimoto,K.Catal.Today 2003,84,59.(10)de Vos,R.M.;Verweij,H.Science 1998,279,1710.Nishiyama,N.;Miyamoto,M.;Egashira,Y.;Ueyama,mun.2001,18,i,Z.;Bonlla,G.;Diaz,I.;Nery,J.G.;Sujaoti,K.;Amat,M.A.;Kokkoli,E.;Terasaki,O.;Thompson,R.W.;Tsapatsis,M.D.;Vlachos,G.Science 2003,300,456.(11)Feller,A.;Guzman,A.;Zuazo,I.;Lercher,J.A.J.Catal.2004,224,80.Figure 1.A schematic image of the capsule catalyst role in the FTS reaction.1699Langmuir 2005,21,1699-170210.1021/la047217h CCC:$30.25©2005American Chemical SocietyPublished on Web 02/01/2005prepare in most cases.12This new kind of capsule catalyst is expected to have wide applications,if the combination of core catalyst and membrane catalyst is varied according to the target reaction.Experimental SectionThe conventional FTS catalyst was prepared by incipient-wetness impregnation of an aqueous solution of Co(NO 3)2‚6H 2O and two kinds of silica support (Cariact Q-10,Fuji Silysia Co.;specific surface area,323m 2‚g -1;pore volume,1.03mL ‚g -1;pore diameter,10nm)whose pellet size was 0.85-1.7and 0.38-0.50mm,respectively.The catalyst precursors were dried in air at 393K for 12h and then calcined in air from room temperature to 673K with a ramping rate of 2K ‚min -1and kept at 673K for 2h.After calcination,the catalysts were cooled to room temperature in nitrogen.In zeolite membrane synthesis,distilled water and ethanol (Wako Pure Chemical Industries Ltd.,99.5%)were used for solutions.The templet was TPAOH (tetrapropylammonium hydroxide solution,Wako Pure Chemical Industries Ltd).Al and Si sources were Al(NO 3)3‚9H 2O (99.5%)and TEOS (tetraethyl ortho silicate;Wako Pure Chemical Industries Ltd.),respectively.TEOS/TPAOH/H 2O/EtOH/Al(NO 3)3)1:0.25:60:4:0.025.First,TEOS,10%TPAOH water solution,ethanol,and water were added in a 100mL Teflon tank.Then Al(NO 3)3‚9H 2O was added to the mixture solution carefully and stirred at 333K for 2h until the lucid sol was formed.Continuously,the normal FTS catalyst was added in the sol,and the capped tank was put in hydrothermal synthesis equipment (DRM-420DA,Hiro Co.,Japan),heated to 453K,and run at 10rpm with various duration times for crystallization.In this process,the zeolite membrane was coated on the surface of FTS catalyst pellets.Then,the coated catalyst was separated from the synthesis solution and dried at 393K for 12h,followed by calcination at 773K for 5h where the temperature rising rate was 1K/min from 393to 773K.Thus,a capsule catalyst was obtained.The pure zeolite wassynthesized by the same method without adding the Co/SiO 2catalyst,as a blank experiment.The morphology and surface component analysis of the Co/SiO 2catalyst and the prepared capsule catalysts were investi-gated with a scanning electron microscope equipped with an EDX attachment (JEOL JSM-6360LV,15-20kV,1.0nA).The catalyst was precoated with Pt before characterization.The FTS reaction was conducted under pressurized conditions,1.0MPa,533K,by using a flow-type fixed reactor.Before reaction,the catalyst was reduced in flowing hydrogen at 80mL/min at 673K for 10h and at last cooled to 353K in nitrogen.The catalyst amount was 0.5g on the Co/SiO 2base,and the H 2/CO ratio of the feed gas was 2.During the reaction,effluent gas released from the reactor was analyzed by on-line gas chromatography using an active charcoal column equipped with a thermal conductivity detector (TCD).The hydrocarbons were also ana-lyzed on-line using a capillary column (J&W Scientific GS-Alumina,30m)equipped with a hydrogen flame ionization detector (FID).A trap with concentrated sulfuric acid was attached to the system for adsorbing the olefins.The olefin hydrocarbons were calculated from difference of FID peaks after the olefins were absorbed by the concentrated sulfuric acid.Results and DiscussionThe morphology of the Co/SiO 2FTS catalyst and the obtained capsule catalysts is shown in Figure 2.The image of a capsule catalyst in Figure 2B suggested that the HZSM5crystal formed on the surface of the Co/SiO 2catalyst pellet,while no crystals were observed on the Co/SiO 2pellet surface as in Figure 2A.The EDS plane analysis results confirmed the formation of zeolite mem-brane on the Co/SiO 2pellet because there was Al X-ray signal on the capsule catalysts but not on the Co/SiO 2catalyst as shown in Figure 2C,D.Furthermore,no cobalt was detected on the capsule catalyst,indicating the zeolite membrane was perfect.Figure 3shows a cross-sectional view of the prepared capsule catalyst pellet.The zeolite membrane can be clearly distinguished from the cobalt(12)Nishiyama,N.;Ichioka,K.;Park,D.H.;Egashira,Y.;Ueyama,K.;Gora,L.;Zhu,W.;Kapteijn,F.;Moulijn,J.A.Ind.Eng.Chem.Res.2004,43,1211.Figure 2.External surface of the Co/SiO 2pellet and the capsule catalyst pellet and the EDS analysis result:(A)Co/SiO 2;(B)2-Co/SiO 2-zeolite;(C)Co/SiO 2;(D)2-Co/SiO 2-zeolite.1700Langmuir,Vol.21,No.5,2005Letterscatalyst supported on silica because of the quite different morphology.The thickness of the zeolite of the membrane was measured as about 10µm.The intensity of Si K R and Al K R X-ray signals from an EDX line scan is also shown in Figure 3.The intensity of Al K R X-rays increased dra-matically at the zeolite membrane layer,while at the cen-ter of the catalyst,the Al K R X-ray intensity was near to zero.The Si signal intensity changed according to its con-tent in the Co/SiO 2FTS catalyst and HZSM5.The SiO 2/Al 2O 3ratio of the membrane of the capsule catalyst was 48.The catalytic properties of the catalysts were studied with a high-pressure flow-type fixed bed reactor.Co/SiO 2catalyst only and its mechanical mixture with zeolite (20wt %)were operated in the same conditions as a comparison.All the capsule catalysts gave similar CO conversion,which was slightly lower than mixture catalyst or normal FTS catalyst Co/SiO 2,probably because the zeolite membrane slowed the diffusion rate of CO and H 2as shown in Table 1.Also,methane selectivities increased when the membrane was coated and increased when the zeolite coating amount increased.The low diffusion efficiency of CO and H 2led to a high H 2/CO ratio in the interior part of the catalyst pellet,which might increase methane selectivity,13because H 2diffuses more quickly than CO,especially inside small pores or channels.The CO 2in FTS reaction is mainly from WGS (water gas shift)reaction,and its selectivity hardly changed.The hydrocarbon distributions of conventional FT catalyst Co/SiO 2and the mixture catalyst (Co/SiO 2+zeolite)are compared in Figure 4A,B.The mixture catalyst gives a narrower distribution than the Co/SiO 2catalyst,because the waxy product migrating from the conventional FTS catalyst to the surface of zeolite catalysts was subject to secondary isomerization and hydrocracking,forming lighter hydrocarbons containing isoparaffins.The se-quential isomerization and hydrocracking reaction on zeolite reduced the selectivity of long-chain paraffins and remarkably enhanced the selectivity of light isoparaffins.Different from the random behavior in the mechanical mixture catalyst,all products,in the form of straight chains,from Co/SiO 2core FTS catalyst must enter zeolite channels and diffuse through the zeolite membrane in capsule catalysts,which ensures that all waxy products receive secondary reactions inside zeolite membrane.The hydrocarbon diffusion rate in zeolite membranedependsFigure 3.A cross-sectional image of one capsule catalyst (2-Co/SiO 2-zeolite)and the intensity of Si K R and Al K R X-ray signals from the EDX line scan indicated in theimage.Figure 4.FT synthesis product distribution on (A)Co/SiO 2,(B)Co/SiO 2+zeolite-MX,(C)2-Co/SiO 2-zeolite,and (D)1-Co/SiO 2-zeolite-S catalyst;H 2/CO )2;1.0MPa;W/F )10g ‚h/mol based on Co/SiO 2;533K.Table 1.FT Reaction Properties of Capsule Catalysts asampleCO conversion (%)CH 4selectivity (%)CO 2selectivity (%)isoparaffin/n -paraffinzeolite coating amount (%)Co/SiO 298.415.710.60Co/SiO 2-zeolite-MX b 93.616.98.00.4920.0mixed 1-Co/SiO 2-zeolite c 83.622.79.950.3711.52-Co/SiO 2-zeolite 85.531.310.20.7317.27-Co/SiO 2-zeolite 86.137.47.0 1.8824.31-Co/SiO 2-zeolite-S d 91.524.310.4 1.2129.12-Co/SiO 2-zeolite e80.129.96.50.5117.2aReaction conditions:533K,1.0MPa,W/F )10g ‚h ‚mol -1,H 2/CO )2.b MX in the name of sample means the physical mixture of Co/SiO 2catalyst and zeolite whose zeolite additive is 20%.c Numbers in sample names represent crystallization time in days in zeolite synthesis.d S in the sample name means the catalyst was prepared from small Co/SiO 2pellets (0.38-0.50mm),while the others were prepared from large pellets (0.85-1.7mm).e W/F )5g ‚h ‚mol -1and other reaction conditions were the same.Letters Langmuir,Vol.21,No.5,20051701on chain length.Consequently,long-chain compounds stayed in the zeolite membrane longer,which caused all the long-chain hydrocarbons to crack and isomerize.All capsule catalysts gave a very sharp hydrocarbon distribu-tion that ended at C9-C10,while there were still some C13-C20hydrocarbons in the products of the mechanical mixture catalyst.Figure4C,D shows the hydrocarbon distribution for two typical capsule catalysts.It is sug-gested that the covering membrane had an excellent selectivity for short-chain hydrocarbons,inhibiting the long-chain hydrocarbon completely.In addition,the capsule catalyst produced much isoparaffins and olefins. The yield of isoparaffin depended on the zeolite membrane content,which is also listed in Table1.With the increase of zeolite membrane content,the ratio of isoparaffin to n-paraffin(>C3)increased.With a similar zeolite content, the capsule catalyst(2-Co/SiO2-zeolite)produced rather more isoparaffins than the mixture catalyst.These findings indicate that zeolite membrane had higher secondary reaction efficiency than the mechanically mixed zeolite because the capsule catalyst avoided the random occurrence of the secondary reactions of FTS hydrocarbons in the mechanical mixture catalyst.Also compared with the2-Co/SiO2-zeolite catalyst in Table1,when contact time W/F changed from10to5 g‚h‚mol-1,CO conversion decreased slightly due to the faster flow rate.Methane selectivity decreased and the ratio of isoparaffin to normal paraffin became lower,indicating the residence time of normal paraffins from the core FTS catalyst,inside zeolite membrane,was too short to receive enough isomerization and hydrocracking, for this consecutive reaction regime.CO2selectivity was down because the amount of water formed was reduced, related to the decreased CO conversion.Moreover,the capsule catalyst prepared from small FTS silica support pellets which crystallized in24h(1-Co/ SiO2-zeolite-S)showed a higher isoparaffin/n-paraffin ratio than the catalyst prepared from large silica pellets in48 h crystallization(2-Co/SiO2-zeolite)but a lower methane selectivity.It was implied that the pellet size of the core catalyst had a strong effect on the capsule catalyst properties.Modifying the membrane catalyst and the core catalyst or optimizing the reaction conditions might enhance the catalytic activity and selectivity of capsule catalysts.Further studies are needed soon. Furthermore,the typical chemical process can be represented asBuilding catalyst Cat1as a membrane on the surface of catalyst Cat2pellets can be applied to prepare a lot of capsule catalysts.This process can realize the combination of these two sequential reactions coupled with the in situ reaction-separation effect.These new kinds of capsule catalysts can be applied to many fields of chemical processes.LA047217H(13)Madon,R.J.;Iglesia,E.J.Catal.1994,149,428.A98Cat1B98Cat2C1702Langmuir,Vol.21,No.5,2005Letters。

Christie One 杠架系统用户指南说明书

Christie One 杠架系统用户指南说明书

Assembling the Christie One rigging frameWith the Christie One rigging frame, the projector can be secured to trusses or structures built for the purpose of positioning the projector.With the frame:•Up to three projectors can be stacked in landscape orientation.• A single projector can be positioned in portrait mode but no stacking is permitted.Christie ships the frame separately from the projector.Affected productsThe Christie One rigging frame is designed for use with the following projectors.•HS Series projectors (D13HD-HS, D13WU-HS, D13HD2-HS, D13WU2-HS, D16HD-HS, D16WU-HS, D20HD-HS, D20WU-HS, DWU1612-HS, DWU2022-HS)•H Series (D12HD-H and D12WU-H)•Q Series (DWU951-Q, DHD951-Q, DWX951-Q, DXG1051-Q, DWU851-Q, DHD851-Q, DWX851-Q)•GS Series (DHD635-GS, DWU635-GS, DHD635-GS China, DWU635-GS China, DHD630-GS, DWU630-GS, DHD630-GS China Black, DWU630-GS China, DHD630-GS Black, DWU630 GSBlack, DHD1075-GS, DWU1075-GS, DHD1075-GS China, DWU1075-GS China, DWU6322-GS, DWU7062-GS, DWU1082-GS, DHD850-GS, DWU850-GS, DHD700-GS, DWU700-GS)Required componentsThe following components are required.Christie One rigging frame (P/N: 140-113106-03 or higher)Safety warnings and guidelinesRead all safety and warning guidelines before starting this procedure.Danger! If not avoided, the following results in death or serious injury.•Do not stack the device unless specified in this manual.•The supporting structure must safely support the combined load of the product, all attached hardware, and components following all local safety standards and regulations.•Use all mounting points, including the safety point, when installing the product overhead.Warning! If not avoided, the following could result in death or serious injury.•Only use this frame with the specified products.•Safety straps must be used when stacking two or more rigging frames.•Always install safety straps when the frame and projector are installed overhead.•Do not stack empty frames.•Projectors must be installed in frames before stacking.Notice. If not avoided, the following could result in property damage.•Use appropriate packaging when shipping the product installed in the frame.•The 0.84-1.02:1 short zoom lens (P/N: 140-114107-XX) when used with an HS Series projector can have limited lens movement (see below) due to the size of the lens barrel and interface withthe stacking frame. Do not perform a lens calibration with this lens when inside the stackingframe.Limitations:Pitch:+1.8/-2.55 degreesRoll:+/-1.6 degreesYaw:+/-1.5 degreesTools requiredThe following tools are required for installing the rigging frame.• 3 mm hex key (Christie One rigging frame)• 4 mm hex key (Christie One rigging frame)• 5 mm hex key (Q Series, GS Series)• 6 mm hex key (H Series, HS Series)Optional tools•Adjustment tool provided with the Christie One rigging framePhysical specificationsLearn the weight and physical dimensions of the Christie One rigging frame.•Weight: 40.37 kg (89 lbs)•Dimensions: 790 mm x 790 mm x 483 mmSecuring the projector to the stacking frame Secure the projector to the stacking frame before stacking additional projectors.Danger! If not avoided, the following results in death or serious injury.•TIP HAZARD! Stacked frames must be secured together using all locking pins.•Use all mounting points, including the safety point, when installing the product overhead.Warning! If not avoided, the following could result in death or serious injury.• A minimum of four people or appropriately rated lift equipment is required to safely lift, install, or move the product.•The supporting structure must safely support the combined load of the product, all attached hardware, and components following all local safety standards and regulations.1.Turn off the projector.Allow the cooling fans to stop before proceeding with step 2.2.Disconnect the projector from AC power.3.Remove lens from projector, if installed.4.Verify the base plate of the frame is in a flat position and is level.5.Adjust the feet of the projector.•For HS Series, Q Series, and GS Series, adjust the feet of the projector so there is no extension.•For H Series, extend the projector feet out 4 mm before placing in the frame.The projector must sit flat on the base plate.6.Place the four spacers provided with the frame over the four appropriate mounting holes ontop of the base/mounting plate.•For HS Series, place the four spacer provided with the frame over the four HS Series mounting holes on top of the base plate.•For GS Series 630/635, DWU6322-GS, and DWU7062-GS only, place the four spacers provided with the frame over the four orange GS Series mounting holes on top of themounting plate.Ensure the holes on the base plate and spacers are aligned.7.Lift the projector onto the base plate through the top opening of the frame.Ensure the lens mount faces the front of the frame, as indicated below.8.Secure the projector to the base plate using four hex socket head screws and washersprovided with frame.•For H Series and HS series projectors, use M8 x 1.25 x 40 mm bolts and washers and secure with a 6 mm hex key.The M8 bolts must be tightened to a torque of 38 Nm.•For GS Series 630/635 GS Series, DWU6322-GS, and DWU7062-GS projectors, use M6 x1.0 x 35 mm bolts and washers.The M6 bolts must be tightened to a torque of 16 Nm.•For GS Series 1075, GS Series 850/700, DWU1082-GS, and DWU8902-GS projectors, use M6 x 1.0 x40 bolts and washers.The M6 bolts must be tightened to a torque of 16 Nm.•For Q Series projectors, use M6 x 1.0 x 16 mm bolts and washers and secure with a 5 mm hex key.The M6 bolts must be tightened to a torque of 16 Nm.The Q Series, GS Series 850/700, GS Series 1075, DWU1082-GS, and DWU8902-GShardware includes optional adhesive washers than can be used between the framemounting plate and the projector to help align the projector for installation.Refer to the image below for the mounting points on the base plate for each projector series.•Purple—H and HS series screws M8 x 1.25 x 40 mm bolts and washers•Green—Q series screws M6 x 1.0 x 16 mm bolts and 3 mm thick adhesive washers•Orange—GS Series 630-GS/635, DWU6322-GS, and DWU7062-GS screws M6 x 1.0 x 35 mm and washers for M6•Red—GS Series 1075, GS Series 850-GS/700 Series, DWU8902-GS, and DWU1082-GS screws M6 x 1.0 x 40 mm and 3 mm thick adhesive washers for M6Stacking multiple framed projectorsUp to three framed projectors can be stacked in landscape orientation only, and then rigged in an upright or inverted position. Stacking in portrait orientation is not permitted.Danger! If not avoided, the following results in death or serious injury.•TIP HAZARD! Stacked frames must be secured together using all locking pins.•Do not stack the device unless specified in this manual.Warning! If not avoided, the following could result in death or serious injury.• A minimum of four people or appropriately rated lift equipment is required to safely lift, install, or move the product.•The supporting structure must safely support the combined load of the product, all attached hardware, and components following all local safety standards and regulations.•Do not stack empty frames.•Projectors must be installed in frames before stacking.1.Remove the locking pins from each stacking leg.2.With one person positioned on each side of the framed projector, lift the assembly and place itonto the bottom frame.Stacking in portrait orientation is not permitted3.Verify the four stacking legs of the upper assembly are securely seated on the bottom frame.4.Insert a locking pin through each of the stacking legs to lock the frames together.The steel ball on the end of the pin keeps the pin from releasing inadvertently.5.Install safety straps (not included) between the frames.Safety straps must be adequately rates for the total load.6.Aligning stacked projectorsStacked projectors must be correctly aligned to one another to achieve an optimally displayed image.1.Hoist and secure a stack of projectors before aligning.2.Loosen the locking screws on each adjustment knob.3.Before adjusting the roll, loosen the four screws on the base plate; otherwise, the adjustmentknob can break during adjustment.4.Adjust pitch, roll, or yaw, manually or with the optional adjustment tool provided with theframe, until the image geometry is optimized.a)To adjust the roll of the display clockwise, rotate the adjustment pin clockwise and vice-versa.b)To adjust the pitch of the projector, loosen the two locking rings on the top and bottom ofthe adjustment screw. To tilt the image down, turn the adjustment screw to the right. Totilt the image up, turn the adjustment screw in the opposing direction.If having trouble adjusting the adjustment screw, use a 4 mm hex key and place it in oneof the holes on the adjustment screw, then turn in required direction. Once the image isproperly adjusted, tighten the two locking rings.c)To adjust the yaw of the projector, loosen the four adjustment knobs with a 6 mm hex keyand make adjustments. Once properly adjusted, re-tighten the four adjustment knobs.A Roll—Rotates the image clockwise or counter-clockwise.B Pitch—Moves the image up and down.C Yaw—Moves the image to the left or right.5.For pitch and yaw, ensure the gap between the pin and the plate is more than 0.5 mm.The pin limits the adjustment within the useful range.6.To lock adjustments, tighten the setscrews with a 3 mm hex key on each adjustment knob.。

FRT Overview from Design’s Perspective

FRT Overview from Design’s Perspective


7
Common Test Equipment
> Common test equipment includes the following:
• • • • • • • • • 4432B ESG Signal Generator (capable of CDMA waveforms) 8665A CW Signal Generator E4440A PSA Spectrum Analyzer Qty 2 E4419B Power Meters Qty 2 8482 High Power Sensors 8481D Low Power Sensor 34401A Multimeter Various Power Supplies (2M70 FRTs are older than MFRM-3 Ready FRT) VXI Chassis Including:
8
RF Switching Overview
> The figure below shows the RF components in the FRT and how the functional blocks are connected > The application specific portion of the FRT is shown in the blue box
• Both common and application specific hardware are required for testing applications • Manufacturing designs fixtures for the application specific component • Design requires a solution before fixtures are ready and therefore a temporary set-up is typically designed for this purpose • Manufacturing has a different list of requirements than design – durability, repeatability, and cycle times are more of a driving force for the fixture solution
浩特威缄飞航天技术有限公司产品说明书：模型90071脚本翼端、反向光、位置灯组装

浩特威缄飞航天技术有限公司产品说明书：模型90071脚本翼端、反向光、位置灯组装

A v i a t i o nPhone: (860) 526-9504Internet: Sales/Service e-mail: info@©2016 Whelen Aerospace Technologies Form No.14A20A (082619)WARNING: This product can expose you to chemicals including Lead which is known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm. For more information go to www.P65Warnings.ca.g ov.Installation Guide:Model 90071Wingtip StrobeAnti-collision/Position Light Assembly18AWG TEFLON1.79110°70°1.08.151.66RED(+14or +28VDC)BLACK(-)GROUND POS 1 - RED(ANODE)POS 2 - BLACK(CATHODE)POS 3 - WHITE(TRIGGER)TAIL LIGHT WIRES (BLUE)NO POLARITYLEAD LENGTH 6.00"±1.00"2.461.835.631.35DIA..501.00.881.75.140 DIA.(3) MOUNTING HOLES FOR #6-32 SCREWSSpecifications:Position Lights -Current Draw ................ 2.0 Amps @ 28 Volts D.C.Weight ........................... 0.8 lbs.Length ........................... 5.6”Width ............................. 1.7”Height ............................ 2.4”INSTALLATION...The A600 Series must be properly mounted to comply with FAR Part 91.205(c-2) & (c-3). The light assembly must be mounted so that the light distribution pattern is not obstructed by any parts of the aircraft. A limited amount of obstruction is permitted (Ref. FAR Part 23.1401 for anti-collision lights, and FAR 23.1387 for position lights).The baseplate must be mounted parallel to the vertical and horizontal centerlines of the aircraft to project the patterns properly.MOUNTING...1.If necessary, fabricate the mounting pattern using dimensions found in fig. 1.2.Make the necessary wiring connections using 18 gage wire for the position lights, and Whelen 16 gage 3/c cable for the strobe lights. All connections must use FAA approved techniques.3.Remove the two (6-32 x .312) retainer mounting screws,retainer and lens.4.Attach the base assembly to the wingtip using (3) #6-32countersunk screws (unit may be sealed around periphery with RTV or equivalent).5.Re-attach the lens and retainer.WIRING...1.The strobe connector should plug into the Whelen interconnecting cable, or a Whelen strobe power supply.Observe the following strobe color coding:PIN 1 - RED (Anode)PIN 2 - BLACK (Cathode)PIN 3 - WHITE (Trigger)Caution:When pins 1 & 2 or pins 2 & 3 are reversed, the system will appear to operate normally, however this condition will cause premature flash tube failure.2.Connect the forward position light wires as follows:RED - (+) 28 volts BLACK - (-) Ground3.The tail position light has no polarity, as noted by both wires being BLUE. Connect one BLUE wire to +28 volts. Connect the other BLUE wire to ground (see fig. 2).Fig. 1Fig. 2NOTE:LENS/RETAINER ASSEMBLY (A612-D) P/N 02-0350071-35 CONSISTS OF AN RF COATED LENS ELECTRICALLY BONDED TO THE ALUMINUM RETAINER. THE BOND MAY EXHIBIT GAPS OR SEPARATION. THIS IS ACCEPTABLE. THIS RF BOND IS NOT A SEAL.。