Sciencemadness Discussion Board » Special topics » Technochemistry » Why is there no electronic optical pyrometer ? Select A Forum Fundamentals   » Chemistry in General   » Organic Chemistry   » Reagents and Apparatus Acquisition   » Beginnings   » Responsible Practices   » Miscellaneous   » The Wiki Special topics   » Technochemistry   » Energetic Materials   » Biochemistry   » Radiochemistry   » Computational Models and Techniques   » Prepublication Non-chemistry   » Forum Matters   » Legal and Societal Issues

Author: Subject: Why is there no electronic optical pyrometer ?
metalresearcher
International Hazard

Posts: 697
Registered: 7-9-2010
Member Is Offline

Mood: Reactive

Why is there no electronic optical pyrometer ?

An optical pyrometer is a device with an incandescent filament observed by the user against the background incandescense color. The voltage can be regulated until the filament becomes invisible and then it has the correct temperature.

Such a device can also be used through a window of a transparent medium, like glass or quartz, e.g. a furnace peephole.

But the very convenient infrared pyrometers don't work that way, they measure the temperature of the glass in between. That is why I cannot measure temperature through the peephole of my Kanthal furnace or the window of my wood stove.

Why is there no device with a small camera in it which senses the color of the target object and compares it to the known RGB values of color temperatures ? Obviously, when the color deviates too much (e.g. green or magenta) it cannot measure.
Just a color comparison, so when such a hypothetical device is pointed at a tomato (where it is not meant to be used for) would show about 700 C as a tomato color is very close to the color temperature of about 700 C, despite being not the actual temperature.

unionised
International Hazard

Posts: 4950
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: UK
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

" a hypothetical device is pointed at a tomato ...would show about 700 C a... despite being not the actual temperature.".

I suspect that, until you get things very hot, the RGB values would be all R and not much G or B which would make it difficult.

You could, of course, build an optical pyrometer.
If you know the current and voltage of the heated filament then you can calculate the resistance.
If you compare that to the resistance when it's cold, you can find the temperature.
Twospoons
International Hazard

Posts: 1201
Registered: 26-7-2004
Location: Middle Earth
Member Is Offline

Mood: A trace of hope...

If you make the window of your furnace peephole from silicon then your optical pyrometer should work just fine.

If you wanted to work off color then the best bet would be a spectrometer, with some software to find the best matching blackbody radiation profile.

[Edited on 3-1-2021 by Twospoons]

Helicopter: "helico" -> spiral, "pter" -> with wings
densest
National Hazard

Posts: 359
Registered: 1-10-2005
Location: in the lehr
Member Is Offline

Mood: slowly warming to strain point

Inexpensive optical detectors are not evenly sensitive over their designated colors. Black body emission is mostly IR and red below (IIRC) 800C or so.

There are optical pyrometers which compare the intensity of visible red against near IR or deep red vs. lighter red. They're not inexpensive.
One system I've seen uses a single detector viewing through an opaque wheel with multiple windows in the wheel containing different filters.
The filters would have to be carefully matched against the expected temperature range.
Someone could probably build something like that for you.
Calibration is left as an exercise for the user.
macckone
International Hazard

Posts: 2145
Registered: 1-3-2013
Location: Over a mile high
Member Is Offline

Mood: Electrical

Try searching non-contact infrared thermometer.
There are inexpensive versions.
Less than US$20 for temperatures between room temp and 150C. Above that the price goes up. The get one that goes up to 2000C cost about US$70.
metalresearcher
International Hazard

Posts: 697
Registered: 7-9-2010
Member Is Offline

Mood: Reactive

 Quote: Originally posted by macckone Try searching non-contact infrared thermometer. There are inexpensive versions. Less than US$20 for temperatures between room temp and 150C. Above that the price goes up. The get one that goes up to 2000C cost about US$70.

Well, this is exactly what I have and works flawlessly until 1500 C and is OK for most cases, *as long as* I don't measure through glass.
And using a similar device for measuring through glass, that is what I am looking for.

Twospoons: Probably you mean silica (quartz) as silicon is opaque.
[s]But where can I obtain small (i.e. 30x30mm is OK) quartz windows ?[/s]
EDIT: Found oon ebay.

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_dlg=1&_jgr=1&LH_Pre...

But do these sheets really transfer IR so the pyrometer reading is not affected, unlike ordinary glass ?

[Edited on 2021-1-4 by metalresearcher]
Metacelsus
International Hazard

Posts: 2508
Registered: 26-12-2012
Location: Boston, MA
Member Is Offline

Mood: Double, double, toil and trouble

 Quote: Originally posted by metalresearcher Twospoons: Probably you mean silica (quartz) as silicon is opaque.

Actually silicon is transparent in the IR, so it could work.

As below, so above.
unionised
International Hazard

Posts: 4950
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: UK
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

Given that silica absorbs quite a lot of IR and silicon is transparent to a lot of IR, I suspect that twospoons meant what he said.

Fairly obviously, a silicon window won't transmit IR that would be detected by a silicon photodiode type detector but it should be OK at longer wavelengths.
You can buy silicon windows- for example
https://www.thorlabs.com/newgrouppage9.cfm?objectgroup_id=39...

but a thermocouple thermometer might be cheaper, at least for most of the range. .
macckone
International Hazard

Posts: 2145
Registered: 1-3-2013
Location: Over a mile high
Member Is Offline

Mood: Electrical

A B-type thermocouple will withstand temperatures that will melt fused silica.

Fused silica has a higher melting point than silicon.

In very high temperature ranges a calibrated optical photometer is used for one or two wavelengths.
These are very specialized and they are usually for a single process, like melting iron or bronze.
Different materials give off different spectra in the higher ranges due to quantum effects.
Infrared can be problematic as well but it is less so.

There are number of companies that sell these but they are not general purpose.
They basically say 'process has reached required temperature', not what the temperature is.
They are also not cheap.
Somone was working on an app for android that would measure visible light and determine temperture but I don't think the project got off the ground.
Twospoons
International Hazard

Posts: 1201
Registered: 26-7-2004
Location: Middle Earth
Member Is Offline

Mood: A trace of hope...

I absolutely meant silicon, not silica. Theres a reason silicon is used as a optical material for CO2 lasers - it becomes transparent for wavelengths >1.1um. ZnSe is also used, and has a slightly higher melting point.
The pyrometers have sensors meant to pick up the longer IR wavelengths >5um.

I agree with the comment about using a thermocouple - its much simpler and more reliable. Type B goes to 1700C, R to 1480C, S to 1600C. All based on alloys of platinum and Rhodium, and therefore somewhat pricey.

[Edited on 4-1-2021 by Twospoons]

Helicopter: "helico" -> spiral, "pter" -> with wings
metalresearcher
International Hazard

Posts: 697
Registered: 7-9-2010
Member Is Offline

Mood: Reactive

 Quote: Originally posted by Twospoons I absolutely meant silicon, not silica. Theres a reason silicon is used as a optical material for CO2 lasers - it becomes transparent for wavelengths >1.1um. ZnSe is also used, and has a slightly higher melting point. The pyrometers have sensors meant to pick up the longer IR wavelengths >5um. I agree with the comment about using a thermocouple - its much simpler and more reliable. Type B goes to 1700C, R to 1480C, S to 1600C. All based on alloys of platinum and Rhodium, and therefore somewhat pricey.

Well, I have temperature measurement, I have a few type S thermocouples with alumina sheathings and work excellently in my propane furnace for melting cast iron up till 1550 C and also in my Kanthal furnace up till 1200 C. I prefer S rather than K as the latter can only withstand > 1000 C for short periods.
And I use the infrared pyrometer when I have direct access (i.e. without a window) to the target.

I just quickly tested a silicon wafer (which I have) and pointed the pyrometer first directly to a hotplate which showed 300 C and through the wafer to the same hotplate and it was 180 C, so this worked partially.

But I think I should give up the idea of getting an infrared window for the pyrometer. The high temperature measuring devices I have are already great.
Twospoons
International Hazard

Posts: 1201
Registered: 26-7-2004
Location: Middle Earth
Member Is Offline

Mood: A trace of hope...

Out of curiosity, was it a doped wafer you tried? Doping might degrade transmission in the mid IR.
If you're not sure, test for electrical conductivity - pure silicon is a poor conductor.

[Edited on 5-1-2021 by Twospoons]

Helicopter: "helico" -> spiral, "pter" -> with wings

 Sciencemadness Discussion Board » Special topics » Technochemistry » Why is there no electronic optical pyrometer ? Select A Forum Fundamentals   » Chemistry in General   » Organic Chemistry   » Reagents and Apparatus Acquisition   » Beginnings   » Responsible Practices   » Miscellaneous   » The Wiki Special topics   » Technochemistry   » Energetic Materials   » Biochemistry   » Radiochemistry   » Computational Models and Techniques   » Prepublication Non-chemistry   » Forum Matters   » Legal and Societal Issues