Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

Design and development of DAS for

measurement of low level and low
frequency electric fields

Under guidance of
KVVSS Murthy By
Sc- ‘G’ Pavan sandeep v v
08MSS014
1/15
1/18
 Agenda:
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

 Aim of the project and block diagram

 Introduction
- types of fields
- how corrosion related to fields
- field generation
- their importance
 Prediction
- modeling techniques
- parameters involved
- software prediction
 Measurement at lab
 Comparison

2/15
2/18
 Aim of the project:
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

To measure the low level and low frequency

electric fields that are generated under water due to the
cathodic protection systems onboard.

Overview of project with block diagram:

Signal t to the
Pre
filtering A/D micro
from amplifier
conversion controller
computer stage
Electrode
pair

3/15
3/18
 Types of Fields
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

Underwater Corrosion
Related Signatures

Static Field Alternating Field

UEP CRM ELFE

(Underwater (Corrosion Related
Electric Potential) Magnetic)

1 mHz to 5 Hz 5 Hz to 4 KHz

4/15
4/18
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

5/15
5/18
Corrosion
 Static Field Generation
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

The emitted electric fields

ICCP System
are of great importance as
they may be used to
detectaand characterize a
ship or sub-marine.

The field thus produced

are Static Fields.

6/15
6/18
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

Ground mine
Moored mine
(SE, ELFE)
7/15 (SE,ELFE)
7/18
 Prediction
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

Importance:

In order to protect the ships against the mines it is

necessary to reduce the signature below certain level
which a mine can detect. To reduce the signature, first
we should know the signature of our own ship. So
Prediction is necessary.

8/15
8/18
 Modeling Techniques
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

Various modeling techniques are being

used for Signature prediction. They are

• Empirical
• Data Models
• Numerical methods
– Finite Difference Method
– Boundary Element Method
– Finite Element method
9/15
9/18
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

The Electric Signatures of a Ship

depends on the following parameters:

 Full vessel geometry of the wetted surfaces.

 The material electrochemical properties.
 Sacrificial anode corrosion protection systems
 ICCP systems
 The depth of vessel
 The sea depth and seabed profile.
 The electrical conductivities of seawater and sea bed.
 Shaft rotation

10/15
10/18
 PREDICTION SOFTWARE- TUB MODEL
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

 It is a software used for predicting the potential

values that are to be obtained in the conducting
medium.

 The dimensions of the tub are taken and modeled by

using this software.

 To calculate the potential ,we have given different

inputs like material properties, conductivity and the
point at which the potential to be calculated.

 Then input current is given to electrode, to calculate

11/15
the potential at which, point is given as input.
11/18
 Tub after patching
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

source

conductors
15.5 cms

Electrodes
30

Tub
cm
s

s
20.5 cm
12/15
12/18
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

13/15
13/18
Tub with meshing:
 Meshing details:
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

 Total no. of nodes= 3225

 Total no. of nodes for tub = 3200
 Total no. of nodes for electrodes= 10
 Total no. of nodes for conductor = 10
 Total no. of nodes for source = 5

14/15
14/18
 Material properities:
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

 Specific resistivity of copper - 17.2 nΩmt

 Conductivity of copper - 5.800E+07siemens/mt
 Std. potential of copper - 0.34v
 Specific resistivity of chromium - .129m Ωmt
 Conductivity of chromium -7.9*10^6 siemens/mt
 Std. potential of chromium - -0.74v

15/15
15/18
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

16/15
16/18
Material properities
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

17/15
17/18
Values obtained in software:
 Measurement at lab:
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

 Tub model setup is established in lab, as simulated in

software.
 Tub is filled with simulated water whose conductivity is
equal to the sea water that is 4siemens/ mts.
 The procedure of the experiment is as below:
- Current is passed through the electrodes to
the sea water and flow of electrons will happen which
acts as electrolysis process.
- The field generated by this process is sensed
by the sensor and the sensed field is given as the input
to the amplifier
- Amplifier amplifies the received signal and its
output is given to the Nano voltmeter
18/15
18/18
 Instrumentation amplifier – AD620
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

 The amplifier used is the instrumentation amplifier

with the model no AD620.

 AD620 has excellent DC performance:

- 50µV max input offset voltage
- 100dB min common mode rejection
ratio(G=10)

 LOW NOISE :
9 nV/√Hz, @ 1 kHz, Input Voltage Noise
0.28 mV p-p Noise (0.1 Hz to 10 Hz)
19/15
19/18
 Applications of instrumentation amplifier :
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

 Weigh Scales

 ECG and Medical Instrumentation

 Transducer Interface

 Data Acquisition Systems

 Industrial Process Controls

20/15
 Battery Powered and Portable Equipment
20/18
 Tub model in lab with electrodes and sensors
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

21/15
21/18
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

22/15
22/18
Bread board connections with op-amp
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

23/15
23/18
Total circuit connection of op-amp
 Measured values-between current & voltage
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

Current applied (mA) Voltage obtained(V)

10 0.085
20 0.098
30 0.110
40 0.1211
50 0.131
60 0.140
70 0.150
80 0.159
90 0.168
100 0.176
200 0.279
300 0.480
400 0.582
24/15
24/18
500 0.678
 Comparision:
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

 Simulated and measured values are compared and

mismatch between the values are observed.

 Hence, tub model is rechecked for debugs and

predicted the following reasons as some causes:

- taking the electrodes as point sources in

prediction.

- conductivity of simulated salt water in lab

model.

25/15
25/18
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

 In prediction software, again the tub is modeled by

taking the electrodes as patching parts.

 Conductivity of the salt water simulated in lab model

is measured by using the sensor named CTD SENSOR
which measures the conductivity, temperature and
depth .

 By using this sensor, it was found that the

conductivity of the salt water simulated is
5.4 Siemens/mt instead 4 Siemens/mt.

26/15
26/18
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

27/15
27/18
source
Current

electrodes
CTD sensor
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

 Again tub simulated by taking the conductivity of 5.4

Siemens/mt in the software.

 The predicted values are again compared with

measured values and observed that they are not
equal.

 Then assumed that if the distance between the

electrodes increased then there might be a change
in the values of the potentials obtained

28/15
28/18
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

 New tub is modeled and simulated by using the

software and the tub model is as below:

29/15
29/18 Tub before patching Tub after meshing
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

 Modeled tub is simulated in lab and are compared

as below:
Prediction Model
Current
source Measurement set-up
Electrodes

60 cm
50 cm

30/15 90cm
30/18
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

 salt is added as per calculation to reach the

conductivity of sea in terms of half, 3/4th and then
completely to reach the conductivity of the sea.

 Then current is passed through the electrodes and

potentials are generated in the water and these are
sensed by the sensor placed in water

31/15
31/18
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

 The output of the sensor is given to the

preamplifier and then preamplifier output is
given to the scope.

 Then potentials are measured and are

tabulated as below.

32/15
32/18
 For 4.77 siemens/mt conductivity:
Out put voltages :
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

I/p current (mA) P-P RMS

0.1 280 57.36
0.15 352 82.03
0.2 400 108
0.3 540 156
0.4 700 204.9
0.5 860 251.4
0.6 1020 314.6
0.7 1160 357.6
0.8 1280 404.1
0.9 1400 458.5
1 1560 507.6
1.1 1700 558.4
1.2 1860 607.2
1.3 2000 668.8
1.4 2140 703
1.5 2280 756.3
1.6 2400 813.6
1.7 2560 866.9
33/15 1.8 2720 913.2
33/18
1.9 2840 960.8
 For 3.64 Siemens/mt conductivity
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

out put voltage

I/p current (mA) P-P RMS
0.1 280 67.2
0.15 320 100.1
0.2 460 132.4
0.3 680 193
0.4 860 262.5
0.5 1020 299.5
0.6 1220 398.6
0.7 1380 458.2
0.8 1580 529.8
0.9 1760 580.6
1 1980 658.6
1.1 2140 717.4
1.2 2320 791.9
1.3 2520 835.2
1.4 2720 923.3
1.5 2880 971.1
1.6 3040 1045
1.7 3240 1108
1.8 3440 1181
34/15
34/18 1.9 3640 1234
2 3800 3800
 For 2.863 Siemens/mt conductivity
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

O/P voltages:
I/p current (mA) P-P RMS
0.1 460 102.6
0.15 640 150
0.2 712 194.3
0.3 940 282.9
0.4 1260 384.6
0.5 1540 477.4
0.6 1820 589.7
0.7 2100 685.8
0.8 2320 767
0.9 2640 864.8
1 2920 974.2
1.1 3200 1081
1.2 3400 1182
1.3 3680 1215
1.4 4000 1308
1.5 4240 1447
1.6 4560 1536
1.7 4800 1632
35/15
35/18 1.8 5040 1773
1.9 10640 2232
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

 predicted values are calculated in two different

methods, they are 1) Average of all values
2) RMS value of all values
obtained

 These measured values are compared with

predicted values and are tabulated as below

36/15
36/18
 For conductivity 4.77 Siemens/ mts
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

I/P current(mA) pred value avg pred value RMS measured P-P measured RMS
0.1 6.17455E-05 0.002753777 0.140332588 0.028748133
0.15 5.93618E-05 0.002752846 0.176418111 0.041112436
0.2 6.38985E-05 0.002751887 0.200475126 0.054128284
0.3 6.47443E-05 0.002750011 0.27064142 0.078185299
0.4 6.32449E-05 0.002748113 0.350831471 0.102693383
0.5 6.48212E-05 0.002746218 0.431021521 0.125998617
0.6 6.64744E-05 0.002744324 0.511211571 0.157673687
0.7 6.69358E-05 0.002742456 0.581377866 0.179224763
0.8 6.79354E-05 0.002740537 0.641520403 0.202529996
0.9 6.80123E-05 0.002738664 0.701662941 0.229794613
1 7.00115E-05 0.002736751 0.781852992 0.254402935
1.1 7.05882E-05 0.002734881 0.852019286 0.279863276
1.2 7.01653E-05 0.002732989 0.932209336 0.304321241
1.3 7.12803E-05 0.002731103 1.00237563 0.335194411
1.4 7.02422E-05 0.00272729 1.072541924 0.352335034
1.5 7.1857E-05 0.002727336 1.142708218 0.379048345
1.6 7.35486E-05 0.0027254 1.202850756 0.407766406
1.7 7.2895E-05 0.002723523 1.283040807 0.434479717
1.8 7.3664E-05 0.002721633 1.363230857 0.457684713
37/15
37/18
1.9 7.52787E-05 0.002719748 1.423373395 0.481541253
2 7.56248E-05 0.002717845 1.523610958 0.514218698
 For conductivity 3.64 Siemens/ mts
Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

current(mA) predicted RMS predicted avg measured P-P measured RMS

0.1 0.002803149 2.14148E-05 0.140332 0.033679
0.15 0.002802209 2.11073E-05 0.16038 0.050168
0.2 0.002801227 2.24529E-05 0.230546 0.066357
0.3 0.0027993 1.93387E-05 0.340807 0.096729
0.4 0.002797326 1.9877E-05 0.431021 0.131561
0.5 0.002795401 1.80315E-05 0.511211 0.150105
0.6 0.002793476 1.78393E-05 0.611449 0.199773
0.7 0.002791542 1.96078E-05 0.691631 0.229644
0.8 0.002789605 1.77624E-05 0.791876 0.265529
0.9 0.002787668 1.63014E-05 0.88209 0.290989
1 0.002785743 1.59938E-05 0.992351 0.330082
1.1 0.002783803 1.71473E-05 1.072541 0.359552
1.2 0.002781873 1.49558E-05 1.162755 0.39689
1.3 0.002759775 3.86774E-05 1.162755 0.418512
1.4 0.002757842 3.4679E-05 1.262993 0.462746
1.5 0.002755926 3.6486E-05 1.36323 0.486703
1.6 0.002754 3.39485E-05 1.44342 0.523741
1.7 0.002752089 3.46405E-05 1.623848 0.555316
38/15
38/18 1.8 0.0027502 3.39485E-05 1.724086 0.591902
1.9 0.002748251 3.49481E-05 1.824323 0.618465
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag
For 2.863 Siemens/mts
current(ma) pred.avg. diff(mV) pred RMS value(mV) measured values(P-P) measured value(RMS)
0.1 2.14148E-05 0.002803149 0.230546 0.051421
0.15 2.11073E-05 0.002802209 0.32076 0.075178
0.2 2.24529E-05 0.002801227 0.356847 0.09738
0.3 1.93387E-05 0.0027993 0.471116 0.141786
0.4 1.9877E-05 0.002797326 0.631496 0.192756
0.5 1.80315E-05 0.002795401 0.771829 0.239267
0.6 1.78393E-05 0.002793476 0.912162 0.29555
0.7 1.96078E-05 0.002791542 1.052494 0.343714
0.8 1.77624E-05 0.002789605 1.162755 0.384411
0.9 1.63014E-05 0.002787668 1.323135 0.442294
1 1.59938E-05 0.002785743 1.463468 0.498245
1.1 1.71473E-05 0.002783803 1.603801 0.552867
1.2 1.49558E-05 0.002781873 1.724086 0.592403
1.3 1.47251E-05 0.002779938 1.844371 0.608943
1.4 1.45329E-05 0.00103347 2.004751 0.655553
1.5 1.38793E-05 0.002776075 2.125036 0.725218
1.6 1.27643E-05 0.00277416 2.285416 0.769824
39/15
39/18 1.7 1.59938E-05 0.002772166 2.405701 0.817938
1.8 1.25721E-05 0.002770229 2.525986 0.888605
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

 Again predicted values are compared with measure

values and obtained no relation between them.

 Again rechecked the model for debugs and assuming

that units of the system are also one of the causes
for the prediction.

 Now, I m again doing the model in software by

taking the correct units for prediction.

40/15
40/18
 Naval Science & Technological Laboratory, Vizag

41/15
41/18
THANK YOU