Abstract
This invention relates to compositions of matter formulated to work in conjunction with CO.sub.2 gas for identifying the exact leak site location of small and large leaks in sealed systems. The leak finding compositions of matter foam, or are in the form of a foam, when applied to the one or more external surfaces of a system, that is closed and pressurized with CO.sub.2, where a leak site location is suspected. This foam then changes color from a first color to a second color over the exact leak site.
Claims
1. A method of detecting a CO.sub.2 gas leak from a leak site in a sealed system which system is pressurized to a pressure in excess of the pressure surrounding the sealed system (herein pressurized CO.sub.2), the sealed system having one or more external surfaces, the method including a composition of matter formulated to identify the location of leak sites in sealed systems by reacting with the pressurized CO.sub.2 escaping from such leak sites, the composition of matter having the following properties: it foams or is in the form of a foam when applied to one or more external surfaces of a sealed system (herein foam); it adheres to the one or more external surfaces; and it includes water and an indicator which, in the presence of CO.sub.2 escaping from the leak site and reacting with the water, visually changes the color of the foam over the leak site to identify the location of the leak site; the method including the steps of: covering at least a portion of the one or more external surfaces with the composition of matter; reacting the pressurized CO.sub.2 escaping from the leak site directly with the water, thereby changing the pH of the water over the leak site and the color of both the indicator and the foam over the leak site; and examining the foam after it has been applied to locate the leak site by the presence of the visibly perceivable color change in the foam over the leak site.
2. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein, as applied to the one or more external surfaces, the foam has a first color, and wherein the step of reacting the pressurized CO.sub.2 with the water changes the color of the foam over the leak site to a second color.
3. The method as set forth in claim 2, wherein the indicator is a colorimetric pH indicator selected from the group including bromothymol blue, neutral red, cresol red, phenol red, azolitmin and naptholphthalein.
4. The method as set forth in claim 3, wherein the colorimetric pH indicator is phenol red, and wherein the reaction of the pressurized CO.sub.2 with the water changes the color of the foam over the leak site from a pink color to a yellow color.
5. The method as set forth in claim 1, further including the use of a detector capable of detecting the presence of pressurized CO.sub.2 after it has passed through the leak site, further including the step of scanning with the detector at least some of the one or more external surfaces of the sealed system for the presence of the pressurized CO.sub.2 escaping from the leak site in the sealed system to identify the base location of the leak site, and wherein the step of covering at least a portion of the one or more external surfaces with the foam includes covering the area including the base location identified by the detector.
6. The method as set forth in claim 1, further including the use of a source of pressurized CO.sub.2 external to the sealed system, and wherein the method further includes the step of injecting the pressurized CO.sub.2 from the external source into the sealed system to a pressure in excess of the pressure surrounding the sealed system.
7. The method as set forth in claim 6, further including the use of a detector capable of detecting the presence of the pressurized CO.sub.2 after it has passed through the leak site, further including the step of scanning with the detector at least some of the one or more external surfaces of the sealed system for the presence of the CO.sub.2 escaping from the leak site in the sealed system to identify the base location of the leak site, and wherein the step of covering at least a portion of the one or more external surfaces includes covering the area including the base location identified by the detector.
Description
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
(1) FIG. 1 is a block diagram of the leak detection system with the CO.sub.2 detector;
(2) FIG. 2 is a block diagram of the leak detection system illustrating the application of the foam to the leak area and the change in color from pinkish to yellow in the presence of CO.sub.2 escaping from a leak;
(3) FIGS. 3A-F is a series of line drawings illustrating a plastic bottle (having a 0.015 diameter leak) pressurized with CO.sub.2, the application of the foam of the present invention, the change in color (from pink to yellow in the presence of CO.sub.2), and the formation of a bubble (FIG. 3F);
(4) FIG. 4 is an illustration of the CO.sub.2 leak detector;
(5) FIG. 5 is an illustration of the CO.sub.2 sensor probe;
(6) FIGS. 6A-C is an illustration of the electronics incorporated in the CO.sub.2 leak detector of FIG. 4;
(7) FIG. 7 is an illustration of the CO.sub.2 leak finding solution preferred applicator;
(8) FIGS. 8A-X is a series of drawings illustrating the differences in the ability to detect leaks with the present invention and with smoke generated by a Snap-on Smart Smoke Machine EELD500;
(9) FIGS. 9A-N is a series of drawings illustrating the use of commercial automotive gas analyzer to try to detect the presence of CO.sub.2 leaking from various size holes ranging from 0.001 inches in diameter up to 0.030 inches in diameter;
(10) FIG. 10 is a drawing illustrating the use of the leak detector of the present invention identifying the location of a leak site 0.005 in diameter;
(11) FIG. 11 is a chart of the preferred leak finding solution; and
(12) FIG. 12 is a chart of the composition of an alternate leak finding solution.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
(13) FIGS. 1-2 illustrate the leak detection system of the present invention, including the application of the foam. In FIG. 1 the CO.sub.2 pressurized bottle 1 is connected to a conventional pressure regulator 3 through hose 2. In operation, the service person will adjust pressure regulator 3 to the correct pressure for the system being tested. Hose 4 connects to sealed system 5. Thus, the pressure regulator 3 feeds CO.sub.2 from bottle 1 into sealed system 5 through hose 4. If one or more leaks are present in sealed system 5 then CO.sub.2 will escape out of the leak site(s) into the surrounding area. As illustrated, sealed system 5 has a leak at leak site 8 which leaks CO.sub.2 into the surrounding area.
(14) After pressurizing system 5, a service person looking for leakage then moves CO.sub.2 detector 7 with sensor 6 round the sealed system 5. Where CO.sub.2 is leaking out of sealed system 5, sensor 6 detects the presence of this gas in the surrounding area. Detector 7 reads the sensor's voltage change that breaks a set threshold, and the visual alert lamp and audio alert are turned on. These alerts let the service personal know that a leak is present in the general area where the gas is sensed. As discussed below, the service person can then adjust the sensitivity in order to further isolate the area of the leakage.
(15) With reference to FIG. 2, the service person now having identified the base area where the CO.sub.2 leakage is occurring takes leak finding solution applicator 9 and sprays the area with the leak finding solution (not shown) which forms foam 10. Foam 10 produces bubble(s) and undergoes a color change from pinkish to yellow at leak site 8 due to the presence of escaping CO.sub.2. The foregoing is dramatically illustrated in FIGS. 3A-F, a time sequence of drawings, where the sealed system 5 takes the form of a plastic bottle 15 having a cap 16 and, approximately, a 0.015 inch diameter pin-hole leak (circled in black in FIG. 3A). The bottle is pressurized with CO.sub.2 from a tank (not shown) via the line 4A. When leak finding solution comes into contact with the exterior of the plastic bottle 15 a pink foam 10 is formed. See FIG. 3B. As is evident from FIGS. 3C-E, as the CO.sub.2 escapes from the pin-hole leak the color of the foam 10 over the leak site starts to change from pink to yellow 14 as such CO.sub.2 reacts with the water base in the foam turning it acidic. Further chemistry details are set forth in the Summary of the Invention, above. As is evident from carefully examining FIG. 3F, bubbles 18 are also forming. However, as previously discussed, under certain conditions bubbles may not form but the color change takes place. Either way, the service person now has identified the exact location of the leak.
(16) It would also be apparent that, under certain circumstances, the service person would not need to first locate the general area of a leak with the CO.sub.2 leak detector. Rather he could fill the sealed system with the correct CO.sub.2 pressure for such system and then spray the leak finding solution at critical points (or over the entire surface) of the system. The leak site can now be clearly identified by either the color change, the presence of bubbles, or the combination of color change and presence of bubbles the manifestation thereof depending on the leak size. For example, in a house under construction where the plumbing has just been installed and is leaking (this would be determined by a vacuum test where vacuum decay would indicate a leak is present somewhere in the pipes), the joints that were soldiered together are most likely where the leak is located. (The copper tubing is most likely not the source of any leak.) The system would be pressurized to the correct pressure with CO.sub.2 and each joint would then be sprayed with the leak finding solution. In this way the more expensive electronic leak detector would not be used; however the location of the leak site would still be found.
(17) FIG. 4 illustrates the CO.sub.2 leak detector 7, including leak detector housing 32 and CO.sub.2 sensor 6 located at end of flexible connector 34 in sensor holder 35. For testing for leakage from the fuel containment system of an automobile, connection hose 34 is on the order of 14 inches long. Depending on the application, shorter of longer lengths would be appropriate. Regardless of the length, the use of a flexible connector 34 allows sensor 6 to be moved into small, remote areas. As is also evident from FIG. 4, detector 7 includes audio alert 36, visual alert 37, off/on switch 39, low battery lamp 40, head lights 41A and B, and probe ready lights 42A (red) and 42B (green). As discussed in greater detail below, the service person can change the sensitivity of the CO.sub.2 detector 7 by rotating the sensitivity knob 38.
(18) As is evident from FIG. 5, CO.sub.2 sensor 6 includes sensing element 44 that produces a voltage change when it comes in contact with CO.sub.2. More specifically, sensing element 44 operates on the bases of a Electromotive Force (EMF) resulting from the electrode reaction (shown below) according to the Nerst Equation (shown directly below):
EMF=Ec?(R?T)/(2F)ln(P(CO.sub.2)). P(CO.sub.2)CO.sub.2 - - - partial Pressure Ecconstant Volume RGas Constant volume TAbsolute Temperature (K); FFaraday constant
Though other sensing elements can be used, preferably sensor element 44 is a Nerst Cell in that an electrochemical reaction takes place on the cell changing the voltage output from the sensor. When the sensor is exposed to CO.sub.2 the following electrode reaction occurs:
2Li++CO.sub.2+?O.sub.2+2e?=Li.sub.2CO.sub.3;Cathodic reaction:
2Na++?O.sub.2+2e?=Na.sub.2O; andAnodic reaction:
Li.sub.2CO.sub.3+2Na+=Na.sub.2O+2Li++CO.sub.2.Over all chemical reaction:
In order for the sensor element to operate it must be heated slightly above ambient temperature. This is accomplished with heating element 45. Connection pins 46A, 46B, 46C, and 46D connect sensor element 44 and sensor heating element 45 to CO.sub.2 detection circuit 50. Screen 47 protects sensing and heating elements.
(19) FIGS. 6A-C illustrate the leak detector circuit 50. Battery 53 supplies power to switch 39 such that when switch 39 is in its closed position battery voltage (in the order of 9 volts) is supplied to regulator 52. In turn, voltage regulator 52 regulates voltage at 6 volts for the various circuits within leak detector circuit 50. When switch 39 is first turned on battery voltage is supplied to timer circuit 51. Comparator circuit 55 uses the voltage from timer 51 to turn driver 57 on or off. So long as timer circuit 51 has not reached its preset voltage (approximately 3.79 volts) threshold driver 57 is off, in which case leak detection lamp 37 and alarm 36 do not have a ground circuit and so will remain off. However, the circuit for lamp 42A is on during timer circuit 51 warm up. Once timer circuit 51 has crossed its preset voltage threshold driver 57 is turned on, thus: completing the ground circuits for leak detection lamp 37 and alarm 36; turning off lamp 42A; and turning on lamp 42B. Regulator 52 also supplies 6 volts to heater 45 with in sensor 6 to heat CO.sub.2 sensor 44 (illustrated as 44A and B in FIG. 6C). As discussed above, CO.sub.2 sensor 6 sends a voltage output based on sensed CO.sub.2 concentration on sensor 44. This sensed CO.sub.2 concentration is converted into a voltage output change that is read by amplifier 59, pin 3. Pins 1 and 2 are connected together setting this as a buffer circuit. Amplifier 59 amplifies the CO.sub.2 sensor voltage to audio alarm 36 out of pin 14. As CO.sub.2 sensor voltage is amplified by amplifier 59 to audio alarm 36, voltage is increased whereby the audio output becomes louder. Comparator 55 receives buffered CO.sub.2 voltage from amplifier 59, pin 1, and compares it to the threshold voltage set by 10k pot 61, of divider (or sensitivity) circuit 69, connected to sensitivity knob 38. Via knob 38 and pot 61, voltage divider circuit 69 sets the voltage to amplifier 59 via pin 5, which voltage is amplified at pin 7. Divider circuit 69 also sets the voltage at comparator 55, pin 11, which is used to turn on leak detector lamp 37. In operation, when the voltage threshold set by sensitivity circuit 61 is crossed leak detected lamp 37 is turned on by driver 63. Comparator 55 also receives the battery voltage signal from battery 53 and compares this voltage to determine if battery voltage is below a preset threshold. If this voltage threshold is crossed driver 65 is turned on, thus turning on low battery lamp 40.
(20) In operation, when a service person turns on detector 7 with on/off switch 39 head lights 41A and 41B are turned on by battery voltage through resistor R20 so the leak sight under inspection will be illuminated. As discussed above in reference to FIG. 5, sensor 6 has a heating element 45 to heat sensor element 44. The ready light 42A is illuminated red until sensor element 44 is hot enough to operate correctly. During this warm up the alert circuits for both alarm 36 and lamp 37, are not grounded. Once CO.sub.2 sensor element 44 is at operating temperature the alert circuits are grounded, ready light 42A (red) is turned off and ready light 42B (green) is illuminated. At this time the service personal can now use detector 7 to isolate leakage from the sealed system.
(21) In operation, once CO.sub.2 sensor element 44 comes into contact with CO.sub.2 the voltage across element 44 drops and a signal is sent to detector circuit 50, particularly amplifier 59, pin 3. More specifically, detector circuit 50 monitors the voltage from sensor element 44 with amplifier 59 pin 3, then buffers and amplifies the sensor element voltage. This buffered voltage is sent to comparator circuit 55 where it is compared to the voltage value from voltage divider circuit 69. When the threshold voltage of comparator 55 is crossed, comparator 55, via pin 13, turns on driver 63 which activates the alert circuit and lamp 37. The circuit (including amplifier 59, pin 14) for alarm 36 is turned on and amplified by amplifier 59. The sensitivity circuit 69 changes the voltage that goes to amplifier 59 pin 5 which, in turn, changes the volume of audio alert 36. Audio alert 36 is proportional to the account of CO.sub.2 sensed (i.e., the more CO.sub.2 sensed the louder the alert). The CO.sub.2 detection circuit is set to turn on the alerts when the set threshold voltage is crossed, which threshold voltage can be adjusted by the operator to adjust the sensitivity of detector 7. This sensitivity allows the point that the alerts are turn on to be changed depending on the amount of CO.sub.2 that is detected. This is done by a dial 38, mounted on the detector housing 32, which changes the resistance of the 10 k potentiometer 61 in sensitivity or divider circuit 69.
(22) The preferred form of applicator 9 for delivering the leak finding solution, illustrated in FIG. 7, is an aerosol can 71 that is pressurized with propellant and releases the leak finding solution out of nozzle 72. The preferred propellant is nitrogen. In the case of phenol red, the nitrogen assures that the indicator stays above a pH of 8.2 with extended storage. This allows the indicator (including indicators other than phenol red) to be maintained at a pH that maintains its sensing ability when exposed to the amount of CO.sub.2 exiting from the leak site.
(23) The leak finding solution is made up from mostly water, to which is added, the surfactants and indictor. The surfactants that are added to the water may be anionic, cationic, and or nonionic and may include quaternary ammonium salts such as Hexadecyltrimethyl ammonium bromide (HTABr), polyethers such as Triton X-114, emulsifiers such as Polysorbate-80 (PS-80) and other amphiphilic molecules such as sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS). Chemicals that are added to the water may be, modifiers such as polyvinylpyrrolidone, poly(ethylene oxide), xanthum gum, guar gum, and glycerin, and electrolytes such as sodium chloride. The preferred indicator, phenol red, is added to the solution to provide the indicator that changes the leak finding solution pinkish in color. The preferred mixture is deionized water, Hexadecyltimethly ammonium bromide HTABr, polysorbate-80, sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), sodium hydroxide and phenol red, as indicated in FIG. 11. The numbers are rounded to the nearest hundredth. Note also that the 0.1M sodium hydroxide could be tabulated as sodium hydroxide and water, but should probably be added as a dilute solution as indicated here. It has been found that the foam formed from this composition readily adheres or sticks to the various types of surfaces (e.g., metal, plastic) that are likely to be tested for leaks.
(24) FIG. 12 shows an alternative composition of matter that is in a container and shaken by hand. When shaken the mechanical energy of the solution hitting the inside of the container is transferred to the solution allowing the surfactants and chemicals to form a foam, which is used as a carrier for the phenol red. This foam is then removed from the container (e.g., with an instrument such as a spoon) and applied to the leak site area, or it could be directly applied by dumping the container out on the leak site. The phenol red contained in the solution changes the color of the foam to pink (fuchsia); if a leak is present the foam will change from pink to yellow at the leak site as previously discussed. As with the previously described composition, the foam produced by this formula readily adheres or sticks to the site being tested for leaks.
(25) The use and variation of surfactants in the above described solutions allows the surface tension to be modified so the gas escaping from the leak site will normally produce bubbles. With different blends of the chemical(s) and surfactant(s) that make up the leak finding solution nozzle 52 will need to be changed in order to produce the correct foam. There is a number of different style nozzles that can be used on an aerosol can. These different nozzles will need to be matched to the properties of the leak finding solution, so as the solution can work properly, both to make foam and bubbles. With the addition of the preferred pH indicator, phenol red, the foam will become a carrier for the indicator. This carrier or foam will now be colored pink, which will allow the foam, when applied to the sealed system, to react with the CO.sub.2 from the leak site changing the carrier or foam color to yellow. If no leakage is present there will be no change to the foam color. As previously discussed, this solution finds leaks in two methods: the first method is to produce bubble(s) around the leak site; and the second method is for the foam to be one color (pink in the case of phenol red) and to change in another contrasting color (yellow in the case of phenol red) around the leak site. This color change from red-pink (fuchsia or pinkish) to yellow results in a great contrast between these colors making it quit easy to identify the exact location of the leak site. Either method will clearly identify the exact location of the leak site.
(26) It would also be possible to make the solution in the pH 6.8 range, turning it yellow in color. The gas, or a carrier in the gas, would then be based toward a pH of 8.2. This would make the leak solution (yellow in color) turn red-pink at the leak site when exposed to CO.sub.2. Additionally, many different indicators could be used such as bromothymol blue, neutral red, cresol red, azolitmin, naptholphthalein, etc. When using such other indicators one would need to adjust the pH of the surfactant solution to work in the range of the chosen indicator.
(27) The preferred gas, carbon dioxide (CO.sub.2), can change the pH of water as it dissolves slightly in water to form a weak acid called carbonic acid, H.sub.2CO.sub.3, according to the following reaction:
CO.sub.2+H.sub.2O-->H.sub.2CO.sub.3
Then the carbonic acid reacts slightly and reversibly in water to form a hydronium cation, H.sub.3O+, and the bicarbonate ion, HCO.sub.3.sup.?, according to the following reaction:
H.sub.2CO.sub.3+H.sub.2O-->HCO.sub.3.sup.?+H.sub.3.sup.+
This is why water, which normally has a neutral pH of 7, when exposed to air changes its pH to an acidic base of 5.5.
(28) Other gases, but not limited to ammonia or sulfur dioxide, could be used to bring about a color change. These substances could be put in pressurized air or an inert gas, wherein such air or inert gas acts as a carrier, to pressurize a sealed system. Sulfur dioxide as seen below will make a weak acid that will change the pH of an indicator, thus changing its color. If you dissolve sulfur dioxide into water it forms sulfurous acid, which is weak diprotic acid.
(pKa1=1.81)SO.sub.2+H.sub.2O.fwdarw.H.sub.2SO.sub.3?.fwdarw.HSO.sub.3?+H+
It would be apparent that those skilled in the art could readily choose a gas phase molecule that when in contact with water will alter the water's pH (either acidic or alkali) and determine its appropriate concentration in combination with a suitable colorimetric pH indicator.
(29) The following, with reference to FIGS. 8A-X, is a comparison between the use of smoke from a smoke machine (i.e., a Snap-on Smart Smoke Machine EELD500) with the present invention, which demonstrates that the smoke machine has very limited ability. For each and every comparison: (1) the leak site location is known prior to the test; (2) the lighting to see smoke is optimized; (3) there is no air movement in the testing area; (4) the smoke generating machine is set at 12.5 inches of water column, which is the factory setting; and (5) the CO.sub.2 pressure is set at 14.0 inches of water column. Further, and again for every test, the sealed system being tested for a leak is first filled with smoke from the Snap-on smoke machine, sealed, and then pressurized with CO.sub.2. These are not real world conditions, but are optimized to determine the maximum capabilities (in terms of smallest hole size) for the smoke machine. The leak detector of the present invention is only shown in conjunction with finding the very smallest of leaks at 0.001 and 0.002 in diameter (FIGS. 8A-C and FIGS. 8D-F, respectively). It should be understood that if detector 7 can find these very small leak sites, larger leaks are no problem and, therefore, not illustrated in reference to the tests illustrated in FIGS. 8G-X.
(30) FIGS. 8A-C illustrate the use of a fitting 103 with 0.001 orifice from O'Keefe Controls Co. coupled to a test block 104 which, in turn, is connected to the Snap-on smoke machine (not shown) via tubing 106. As in all the tests, the tubing and fitting with the orifice was first pressurized with the smoke machine (i.e., 12.5 inches water column), then sealed and examined for the presence of escaping smoke, and then pressurized with CO.sub.2 (i.e., 14.0 inches water column). The leak detector was then used to find the location to apply the leak finding pink foam. As is evident from FIG. 8A, no smoke was observed exiting from the 0.001 orifice. However, the presence of CO.sub.2 in the vicinity of such orifice was detected with detector 7. See FIG. 8B. After the gas was detected, the orifice was covered with pink foam 10 according to the present invention, which turned yellow 14 over the orifice (the leak site). FIG. 8C.
(31) FIGS. 8D-F illustrate the use of a fitting 107 with 0.002 orifice from O'Keefe Controls Co. coupled to a test block 104 which, in turn, is connected to the Snap-on smoke machine (not shown) via tubing 106. Again the tubing and fitting with the orifice was first pressurized with the smoke machine (i.e., 12.5 inches water column), then sealed and examined for the presence of escaping smoke, and then pressurized with CO.sub.2 (i.e., 14.0 inches water column). The leak detector 7 was then used to find the location to apply the leak finding pink foam. As is evident from FIG. 8D, no smoke was observed exiting from the 0.002 orifice. However, the presence of CO.sub.2 in the vicinity of such orifice was detected with detector 7. FIG. 8E. After the gas was detected, the orifice was covered with pink foam 10 according to the present invention, which turned yellow 14 over the orifice (the leak site). FIG. 8F.
(32) FIGS. 8G & H illustrate the use of the leak finding composition of matter (in this case the foam) where the leak is a hole approximately 0.005 in diameter in a plastic bottle 110. See FIG. 8G where the hole is circled for identification. The bottle 110 was first pressurized with smoke (i.e., 12.5 inches water column), then sealed and tested with smoke (i.e., examined to see if any smoke was escaping through the hole). Then the bottle 110 was pressurized with CO.sub.2 (i.e., 14.0 inches water column) and leak finding pink foam 10 was applied to the hole and the immediately surrounding area. As is evident from FIG. 8G, no smoke was observed exiting from the 0.005 orifice. Since the location of the hole is known, the leak detector of the present invention was not utilized. When the orifice was covered with pink foam 10 according to the present invention, it turned yellow 14 over the orifice (the leak site). FIG. 8H.
(33) FIGS. 8I & J illustrate the use of the leak finding composition of matter (in this case the foam) where the leak is a hole approximately 0.010 in diameter in a plastic bottle 110A. See FIG. 8I where the hole is circled for identification. The bottle 110A was first pressurized with smoke (i.e., 12.5 inches water column), then sealed and examined for the presence of escaping smoke. Then the bottle 110A was pressurized with CO.sub.2 (i.e., 14.0 inches water column) and the leak finding pink foam applied. As is evident from FIG. 8I, no smoke was observed exiting from the 0.010 orifice. Since the location of the hole is known, the leak detector of the present invention was not utilized. When the orifice was covered with pink foam 10 according to the present invention, it turned yellow 14 over the orifice (the leak site). FIG. 8J.
(34) FIGS. 8K & L illustrate the use of the leak finding composition of matter (in this case the foam) where the leak is a hole approximately 0.015 in diameter in a plastic bottle 110B. See FIG. 8K where the hole is circled for identification. The bottle 110B was first pressurized with smoke (i.e., 12.5 inches water column), then sealed and examined for the presence of escaping smoke. Then the bottle 110B was pressurized with CO.sub.2 (i.e., 14.0 inches water column) and the leak finding pink foam applied. With optimal lighting and no air movement in the test area, a very very little amount of smoke was observed exiting from the 0.015 orifice as indicated by reference 112. Since the location of the hole is known, the leak detector of the present invention was not utilized. When the orifice was covered with pink foam 10 according to the present invention, it turned yellow 14 over the orifice (the leak site). FIG. 8L.
(35) FIGS. 8M & N illustrate the use of the leak finding composition of matter (in this case the foam) where the leak is a hole approximately 0.020 in diameter in a plastic bottle 110C. See FIG. 8M where the hole is circled for identification. The bottle 110C was first pressurized with smoke (i.e., 12.5 inches water column), then sealed and examined for the presence of escaping smoke. Then pressurized with CO.sub.2 (i.e., 14.0 inches water column) and the leak finding pink foam was applied. With optimal lighting and no air movement in the test area, a very little amount of smoke was observed exiting from the 0.020 orifice as indicated by reference 113. Since the location of the hole is known, the leak detector of the present invention was not utilized. When the orifice was covered with pink foam 10 according to the present invention, it turned yellow 14 over the orifice (the leak site). FIG. 8N.
(36) FIGS. 8O & P illustrate the use of the leak finding composition of matter (in this case the foam) where the leak is a hole approximately 0.025 in diameter in a plastic bottle 110D. See FIG. 8O where the hole is circled for identification. The bottle 110D was first pressurized with smoke (i.e., 12.5 inches water column), then sealed and tested for the presence of escaping smoke. Then the bottle 110D was pressurized with CO.sub.2 (i.e., 14.0 inches water column). With optimal lighting and no air movement in the test area, a little amount of smoke was observed exiting from the 0.025 orifice as indicated by reference 114. Since the location of the hole is known, the leak detector of the present invention was not utilized. When the orifice was covered with pink foam 10 according to the present invention, it turned yellow 14 over the orifice (the leak site). FIG. 8P.
(37) FIGS. 8Q & R illustrate the use of the leak finding composition of matter (in this case the foam) where the leak is a hole approximately 0.030 in diameter in a plastic bottle 110E. See FIG. 8Q where the hole is circled for identification. The bottle 110E was first pressurized with smoke (i.e., 12.5 inches water column), then sealed and examined for the presence of escaping smoke. Then the bottle 110E pressurized with CO.sub.2 (i.e., 14.0 inches water column) and the leak finding solution applied. From careful observation and with optimal lighting and no air movement in the test area, smoke was observed exiting from the 0.030 orifice as indicated by reference 115. Since the location of the hole is known, the leak detector of the present invention was not utilized. When the orifice was covered with pink foam 10 according to the present invention, it turned yellow 14 over the orifice (the leak site). FIG. 8R.
(38) FIGS. 8S & T illustrate the use of the leak finding composition of matter (in this case the foam) where the leak is a hole approximately 0.040 in diameter in a plastic bottle 110F. See FIG. 8S where the hole is circled for identification. The bottle 110F was first pressurized with smoke (i.e., 12.5 inches water column), then sealed and examined for the presence of escaping smoke. Then the bottle 110F was pressurized with CO.sub.2 (i.e., 14.0 inches water column) and, as in the previous tests, the leak finding pink foam 10 applied to the leak and the immediately surrounding area. From careful observation and with optimal lighting and no air movement in the test area, it can be seen that smoke was observed exiting from the 0.040 orifice as indicated by reference 116. Again, since the location of the hole is known, the leak detector of the present invention was not utilized. When the orifice was covered with pink foam 10 according to the present invention, it turned yellow 14 over the orifice (the leak site). FIG. 8T.
(39) FIGS. 8U & V illustrate the use of the leak finding composition of matter (in this case the foam) where the leak is a hole approximately 0.070 in diameter in a plastic bottle 110G. See FIG. 8U where the hole is circled for identification. The bottle 110G was first pressurized with smoke (i.e., 12.5 inches water column), then sealed and examined for the presence of escaping smoke. Then the bottle 110G was pressurized with CO.sub.2 (i.e., 14.0 inches water column) and the leak finding pink foam applied to the leak area. From observation and with optimal lighting and no air movement in the test area, it can be seen that smoke was observed exiting from the 0.070 orifice as indicated by reference 117. Since the location of the hole is known, the leak detector of the present invention was not utilized. When the orifice was covered with pink foam 10 according to the present invention, it turned yellow 14 over the orifice (the leak site). FIG. 8V.
(40) FIGS. 8W & X illustrate the use of the leak finding composition of matter (in this case the foam) where the leak is a hole approximately 0.090 in diameter in a plastic bottle 110H. See FIG. 8W where the hole is circled for identification. The bottle 110H was first pressurized with smoke (i.e., 12.5 inches water column), then sealed and examined for the presence of escaping smoke. Then the bottle 110H was pressurized with CO.sub.2 (i.e., 14.0 inches water column) and the leak finding pink foam applied. From observation and with optimal lighting and no air movement in the test area, it can be seen that smoke was observed exiting from the 0.090 orifice as can be seen with reference 118. Since the location of the hole is known, the leak detector of the present invention was not utilized. When the orifice was covered with pink foam 10 according to the present invention, it turned yellow 14 over the orifice (the leak site). FIG. 8X.
(41) The above described testing was not done on orifices smaller than 0.001 in diameter. However, as the CO.sub.2 molecule is very small, and will escape from a hole less than 0.001, detection of leaks smaller than 0.001 is possible.
(42) When attempting to use a gas analyzer (either a typical one or the ATS Emission5 Gas Analyzer discussed below) for leak detection several limitations are apparent. First, as previously pointed out, the instrument itself usually sits on a table or on a cart, at some distance from the probe which is at the end of a 20 ft. hose. Second, the gas analyzer has a digital read out on the front panel that essentially requires the technician to be physically close to the instrument in order to view the analysis of sample gas that the gas analyzer has pumped into the sample tubes for testing. This is not a problem when the probe is inserted into a tail pipe and held in place by a clip or bracket. However, for trying to test a vehicle's fuel containment and handing systems for leaks a technician will be holding the probe and inspecting such places as the top of the fuel tank. Thus, it will be very hard for the technician to be watching the front display panel of the gas analyzer and, at the same time, watching where the probe is currently located. Accordingly, in order to try to find the leak(s), it will take two technicians, one to move and watch the gas analyzer probe and the second to watch the gas analyzer display panel. Third, when a gas sample is tested and CO.sub.2 or HC is detected, the gas analyzer display will move up as the sample is analyzed and then back down once the sample is pumped out of the sample tubes. This process from the time the gas traces are detected to the time they are cleared takes about 8 seconds. Fourth is the time it takes to pump the sample gas from the test site into the sample tubes. This time delay, between 8 to 20 seconds depending on the brand of gas analyzer and the length of hose, creates a problem in locating the location of the leak site (assuming that the analyzer could actually detect the presence of gas escaping from the containment system). Depending on how fast the sample probe is moving across the leak site, the probe will have moved a significant distance from the leak site by the time the gas analyzer display shows the gas sample. Thus, the location of the leak site will be missed.
(43) In addition to the foregoing, fifth and arguably the most important, the amount of dilution from the air surrounding the leak site that the gas analyzer will pump into the sample tubes is so great compared to the trace gas (e.g., the CO.sub.2 that has been used to pressurize the system) escaping from a leak site that the gas analyzer cannot find small leak sizes even when the leak site is known in advance. Again, the gas analyzer probe is just a vacuum nozzle. This is not a problem when inserted in the tail pipe of a running engine where the ambient air is excluded by the pressure of the exhaust gas stream within the exhaust pipe. However, in attempting to use such a system for leak detection, which is an open air environment, the probe is sucking in considerably more ambient air than any gas it is trying to detect and, thus, significantly diluting any sample collected. While the automotive gas analyzer can read small gas samples; the very small amount of gas escaping from a small leak site, with the dilution factor, makes it very hard or impossible to detect small leaks.
(44) This fifth limitation is demonstrated with reference to FIGS. 9A-N. In each case the size of the leak site (i.e., from 0.001 to 0.030 in diameter) and location are known. Further, except in reference to FIGS. 9A and 9B, a closed plastic bottle (having a leak site) pressurized with CO.sub.2 represents the sealed (or closed), but leaking system. In all of the tests an ATS Emission5 Gas Analyzer 121 in proper calibration was used. It was on for a minimum of 15 minutes and was fully warmed up. Carbon dioxide (CO.sub.2) pressure was regulated to 0.5 psi and allowed to fill each container completely before testing was carried out and no other substance (e.g., gasoline) was in the container. In the tests illustrated in FIGS. 9A-9H the gas analyzer probe 122 was held stationary for greater than 30 seconds directly above the leak site. Obviously this is not real world testing, but was designed to give the gas analyzer the best possible chance to detect the presence of CO.sub.2 from the leak site. In FIGS. 9I-9N the gas analyzer probe was moving at less than 1 inch per second, which is very slow and not a real world condition, and the time after crossing the leak site was extended approximately 30 seconds to account for the maximum latency of any gas analyzer. The highest concentration value over this 30 second period is shown on the digital readout 124. Again this is not real world testing but allows the gas analyzer the best possible chance to detect the leak site.
(45) FIG. 9A shows an ATS 5 gas analyzer (EMS 1000) 121 testing for a CO.sub.2 leak from a fitting 103 having a 0.001 orifice from O'Keefe Controls Co. coupled to a test block 104. The other end of the test block is coupled to the source of CO.sub.2 (not shown). The gas analyzer probe 122 was held stationary directly above the leak site for 30 seconds, and as can be seen on the display panel 124, 0.00% CO.sub.2 was registered.
(46) FIG. 9B shows the ATS 5 gas analyzer (EMS 1000) 121 testing for a CO.sub.2 leak from a fitting 107 having a 0.002 orifice from O'Keefe Controls Co., again coupled to test block 104 as described above. The gas analyzer probe 122 was held stationary directly above the leak site for 30 seconds, and as can be seen on the display panel 124, 0.00% CO.sub.2 was registered.
(47) FIG. 9C shows the ATS 5 gas analyzer (EMS 1000) 121 testing for a leak in a plastic bottle 125 pressurized with CO.sub.2 to 0.5 psi with an approximate 0.005 diameter orifice hole. Again, the gas analyzer probe 122 was held stationary directly above the leak site for 30 seconds, and as can be seen on the display panel 124, 0.00% CO.sub.2 is registered.
(48) FIG. 9D shows the ATS 5 gas analyzer (EMS 1000) 121 testing for a leak in a plastic bottle 125A pressurized with CO.sub.2 to 0.5 psi with an approximate 0.010 diameter orifice hole. The gas analyzer probe 122 was held stationary directly above the leak site for 30 seconds, and as can be seen on the display panel 124, 0.00% CO.sub.2 is registered.
(49) FIG. 9E shows the ATS 5 gas analyzer (EMS 1000) 121 testing for a leak in a plastic bottle 125B pressurized with CO.sub.2 to 0.5 psi with an approximate 0.015 diameter orifice hole. The gas analyzer probe 122 was held stationary directly above the leak site for 30 seconds, and as can be seen on the display panel 124, 0.12% CO.sub.2 is registered.
(50) FIG. 9F shows the ATS 5 gas analyzer (EMS 1000) 121 testing for a leak in a plastic bottle 125C pressurized with CO.sub.2 to 0.5 psi with an approximate 0.020 diameter orifice hole. The gas analyzer probe 122 was held stationary directly above the leak site for 30 seconds, and as can be seen on the display panel 124, 0.81% CO.sub.2 is registered.
(51) FIG. 9G shows the ATS 5 gas analyzer (EMS 1000) 121 testing for a leak in a plastic bottle 125D pressurized with CO.sub.2 to 0.5 psi with an approximate 0.025 diameter orifice hole. The gas analyzer probe 122 was held stationary directly above the leak site for 30 seconds, and as can be seen on the display panel 124, 2.49% CO.sub.2 is registered.
(52) FIG. 9H shows the ATS 5 gas analyzer (EMS 1000) 121 testing for a leak in a plastic bottle 125E pressurized with CO.sub.2 to 0.5 psi with an approximate 0.030 diameter orifice hole. The gas analyzer probe 122 was held stationary directly above the leak site for 30 seconds, and as can be seen on the display panel 124, 2.84% CO.sub.2 is registered.
(53) FIG. 9I shows the ATS 5 gas analyzer (EMS 1000) 121 testing a for leak in a plastic bottle 125 pressurized with CO.sub.2 to 0.5 psi with an approximate 0.005 diameter orifice hole. The gas analyzer probe 122 is moving, as indicated by arrow 127, slower than 1 inch per second across the leak site, and as can be seen on the display panel 124, 0.00% CO.sub.2 is registered. The speed and distance in this test, as well as those discussed in reference to FIGS. 9J-N, was determined by the tape measure and a stop watch (not shown).
(54) FIG. 9J shows the ATS 5 gas analyzer (EMS 1000) 121 testing for a leak in a plastic bottle 125A pressurized with CO.sub.2 to 0.5 psi with an approximate 0.010 diameter orifice hole. The gas analyzer probe 122 is moving slower than 1 inch per second across the leak site, and as can be seen on the display panel 124, 0.00% CO.sub.2 is registered.
(55) FIG. 9K shows the ATS 5 gas analyzer (EMS 1000) 121 testing for a leak in a plastic bottle 125B pressurized with CO.sub.2 to 0.5 psi with an approximate 0.015 diameter orifice hole. The gas analyzer probe 122 is moving slower than 1 inch per second across the leak site, and as can be seen on the display panel 124, 0.00% CO.sub.2 is registered.
(56) FIG. 9L shows the ATS 5 gas analyzer (EMS 1000) 121 testing for a leak in a plastic bottle 125C pressurized with CO.sub.2 to 0.5 psi with an approximate 0.020 diameter orifice hole. The gas analyzer probe 122 is moving slower than 1 inch per second across the leak site, and as can be seen on the display panel 124, 0.11% CO.sub.2 is registered.
(57) FIG. 9M shows the ATS 5 gas analyzer (EMS 1000) 121 testing for a leak in a plastic bottle 125D pressurized with CO.sub.2 to 0.5 psi with an approximate 0.025 diameter orifice hole. The gas analyzer probe 122 is moving slower than 1 inch per second across the leak site, and as can be seen on the display panel 124, 0.10% CO.sub.2 is registered.
(58) FIG. 9N shows the ATS 5 gas analyzer (EMS 1000) 121 testing for a leak in a plastic bottle 125E pressurized with CO.sub.2 to 0.5 psi with an approximate 0.030 diameter orifice hole. The gas analyzer probe 121 is moving slower than 1 inch per second across the leak site, and as can be seen on the display panel 124, 0.27% CO.sub.2 is registered.
(59) In contrast with the tests illustrated and described in reference to FIGS. 9I-N, FIG. 10 shows the use of detector 7 of the present invention (with sensor 6 at the end of the flexible connector 34) testing for a leak in a plastic bottle 125 pressurized with CO.sub.2 to 0.5 psi with an approximate 0.005 diameter orifice hole. Detector 7 is clearly identified by the words PROBE READY (and associated lights), LEAK DETECTED (and the associated light) 37, LOW BATTERY (and the associated light), and SENSITIVITY (and the associated knob). Further, to simulate real world testing conditions, detector 7 (sensor 6) was moving faster than 4 inches per second across the leak site, and as can be seen by alert lamp 37, the leak site is identified. Further, detector 7 identified the location of the leak site in less than 1 second after crossing over the hole. It should be understood that if detector 7 can find these very small leak sites when moving very fast, larger leaks are no problem and, therefore, not illustrated in reference to the hole sizes tested in FIG. 9J-9N.
(60) As is evident from the discussion of the testing illustrated in FIGS. 8A-X, smoke machines (such as disclosed in Pieroni) are not effective in identifying leaks smaller than a hole 0.020 in diameter. Gas analyzers are also ineffective, as is evident from the testing described in reference to FIGS. 9I-N. These limitations present an additional problem in testing to determine whether or not there actually is a leak in those systems where control or monitoring equipment associated with such systems indicates that a leak (at an unspecified location or locations) is present. In the case of motor vehicles, the fuel containment and handeling system of such vehicles is monitored by the Engine Control Module (or ECM), which ECM will set what is known as a Diagnostic Trouble Code (or DTC) if there actually is a leak, or, for instance, one or more sensors is defective or providing a false reading. When a Diagnostic Trouble Code (DTC) is set for leakage the technician assumes there actually is a leak. To validate the DTC the method that the technician uses will be very important. If this method cannot clearly determine that a leak is present or not present within the fuel containment and handling system, then a false DTC cannot be ruled out. One example would be if the fuel gauge is misreading. The ECM checks the enabling criteria to make sure that the test results will be accurate. If the fuel tank is full, there is not enough vapor space in the fuel tank to accurately run the EVAP leak test so the test sequence is suspended. However, if the fuel level gauge misreads the fuel level the test will be allowed to run when the test should have been suspended. This will happen when the fuel tank is full, but the fuel gauge reads that the fuel level in the fuel tank is only % filled. In this situation the ECU calculates the vapor space within the fuel tank at % being that of vapor space. This, in turn, can set a false leak DTC, instead of flagging a misreading fuel gauge. The present invention (e.g., detector 7) can clearly and quickly determine if a leak is present or not within the fuel containment and handling system and, therefore, can determine if the DTC is a false DTC or not. If no leak is found, the false DTC is flagged and the technician can focus on the cause(s) of such false DTC.
(61) Whereas the drawings and accompanying description have shown and described the preferred embodiments of the present invention, it should be apparent to those skilled in the art that various changes may be made in the forms and uses of the inventions without affecting the scope thereof. For instance, testing to determine whether or not there is a leak could also be applied to systems other than fuel containment and handling systems, such as air conditioning systems and plumbing systems.
