THERMAL MASS FLOW CONTROLLER SCALING RELATIONS

Chiun Wang, Ph.D.

CareFusion, Inc.
22745 Savi Ranch Pkwy
Yorba Linda, CA 92887
(714) 922-7595
ccwang_2000@yahoo.com

Abstract - Thermal mass flow controllers precisely control the timely delivery of a great variety
of gases during the MEMS and semiconductor manufacturing processes. Many of these gases
cannot be used for the calibration and the tuning of the controllers because they are corrosive
and can easily contaminate the ultra-clean high-vacuum processes. Although a non-reactive
surrogate gas such as nitrogen may be used for the calibration or tuning, the controllers are
eventually required to be accurate for the actual process gases themselves. To deal with these
mutually conflicting requirements, scaling relations that guarantee the accuracy for the process
gases become extremely important for the fabrication of high-accuracy mass flow controllers.
The three main components of the MFC, i.e. the thermal mass flow sensor, the laminar flow
element, and the flow control valve, are each governed by a different set of thermal fluid dynamic
relations, some of which are significantly nonlinear, making the scaling of especially multi-gas
thermal mass flow controllers both interesting and challenging. In this paper the theoretical
relations governing different components of the thermal mass flow controllers are reviewed.
Examples are then given to show how accurate scaling laws may be developed for each MFC
component to guide the design of the thermal mass flow controllers, and to optimize their
calibration and tuning processes.

INTRODUCTION

Thermal mass flow controllers (MFCs) play an important role in the fabrication of various micro-
electromechanical (MEMS) and semiconductor devices. They precisely administer the timely delivery of
hundreds of process gases utilized during the various stages of doping, etching, cleaning, and chemical
vapor deposition, all of which occurring in the ultra-clean environment. Modern MFCs must meet high
accuracy requirements sometimes exceeding 1% of reading over the entire (1% to 100% of full-scale)
range of operation.

It is not feasible for mass flow controller manufacturers to calibrate the MFCs directly with the process
gases. For gases that are corrosive, corrosion will contaminate the MFC during calibration and render it
unacceptable for the ultra-clean semi-conductor processes. Even when the process gases are non-
corrosive, since the MFCs are nonlinear devices and the nonlinearity varies with both the gas and the
range of the controllers, calibrating a multi-gas MFC by using the exotic process gases is a formidably
expensive operation.

The intriguing question is then without direct calibration how can one achieve the required process-gas
accuracy? Historically the industrys approach was to assume that the MFCs are linear, and to calibrate
the MFCs with an appropriate inert surrogate gas, such as nitrogen, at flow rates equal to the process-
gas flow-rate multiplied by a certain 'gas conversion factor' or 'gas correction factor'. This method often
leads to miserable inaccuracy because the MFC output is a significantly nonlinear function of the flow
rate. While the accuracy requirements at the dawn of the semi-conductor industry could be a few
percent of the full-scale flow rate, the accuracy requirements for modern semi-conductor processes is
typically better than 1% of the flow reading. Using a constant conversion factor for scaling simply would
not deliver the high accuracy that is required for most modern MFC applications.

To deal with these issues, at first sight it might seem that one could build a batch of identical MFCs, and
test and calibrate each and all of them with both the process gas and the inert calibration gas to establish
their mutual conversion functional relationship, with the hope that these relations remain invariant and can
therefore guarantee the process-gas accuracy of the production MFCs. Unfortunately due to the small
dimensions of some of the MFC components and the unforgiving manufacturing tolerances involved, no
two MFCs may be considered identical or 'close enough' to share the same performance characteristics.

It is also not practical to develop physical models that can be adapted to variations in the device
dimensions. Bear in mind that certain tolerance of the devices, such as the thickness of the insulation
layer over the resistance heating wires, or the thermal contact resistance between the heating wire and
the sensor tube, or the radius of curvature at the corner of the entrance to the tubular laminar flow
elements, cannot even be quantified with or without taking the components completely apart. Thus the
cost-effective calibration of high performance multi-gas MFCs has been a great technical challenge.

The three main components of the MFC, i.e. the thermal mass flow sensor, the laminar flow element,
and the flow control valve with the control electronics, as shown in Fig. 1, are each governed by a
different set of thermal fluid dynamic relations. In this paper the governing equations for the different
components of the thermal mass flow controllers are reviewed. Examples are then given to show how
similarity analysis may be used to derive accurate scaling laws. These scaling laws are useful for the
design of thermal mass flow controllers and the optimization of their calibration and tuning processes.






Fig. 1 Thermal mass flow controller, cross-sectional view.

THERMAL MASS FLOW SENSOR

The typical thermal mass flow sensor consists of a stainless steel sensor tube with its two ends welded
to the sensing port of the MFC, as shown in Fig. 2. Two temperature-sensitive resistance elements are
wound over the sensor tube as shown in Fig. 3, and are electrically connected in series to form one
branch of a Wheatstone bridge. An electric current flowing through the two resistance elements raises
the wire temperature to approximately ~100 C
o
above the ambient. The two resistance elements also
function as the differential temperature sensor. When there is no fluid flow, the electric current heats up
the sensor tube symmetrically and there is no differential voltage output. When there is flow, the fluid
cools down the upstream resistance element more than the downstream element. The difference in
temperature between the two resistance elements is indicative of the mass flow rate.

Strictly speaking the convective heat transfer in the thermal mass flow sensor involves the conjugated
heat transfer problem. Fortunately the sensors are made of thin-walled stainless steel tubing so that the
thermal conductivity of the tube wall does not significantly diffuse the temperature gradient introduced by
the flow. In fact the tube walls are often so thin, with the tube length to the wall thickness ratio exceeding
several hundred, that the temperature over any axial cross section of the metal tube is essentially uniform
under the steady-state conditions. For continuum flows the fluid adjacent to the tube inside wall is also at
the same temperature as the wall. This tremendously simplifies the mathematical problem because now
we only need to deal with the temperature distribution in the fluid.

Similarity Analysis

Assume the radial component of velocity v to be identically zero in the sensor tube and the laminar flow
has a fully-developed velocity profile, as shown in Fig. 3. For gases with constant thermal conductivity k,
constant density and constant specific heat c
p
, the energy equation for convective heat transfer in the
cylindrical coordinates reads:

x
T
k
c u
x
T
r
T
r
r r
p
c
c
=
c
c
+
|
|
.
|

\
|
c
c
c
c

2
2
1
(1)
where T stands for the gas temperature, r is the radial- and x the axial- coordinate along the length of
the tube. Eq. (1) may be written in dimensionless form [1] as:

2 2
2 2 2
1 1

2 (Re Pr)
D
u
r r r x x
u u u u
+
+ + + + +
c c c c
+ =
c c c c
(2)
where
0
0
0
( )
, / ,
( )
/
, / ,
Re Pr
Re ; Pr ; , Re Pr .
W
W
D
p p
D D
T T
u u V
T T
x r
x r r r
c V D c
V D
and
k k
u

+
+ +

= =

= =
= = =

In the above, r
0
is the radius and D is the inside diameter of the tube. T
0
is the temperature of the
ambient. T
W
is the tube inside wall temperature and is a constant for the constant-temperature


Fig. 2 Thermal mass flow sensor.

Fig. 3 Steady-state convective heat transfer in the sensor tube.



sensor under consideration. V is the reference flow velocity. V may be identified with the maximum
in the sectional velocity profile. The heat conduction of the fluid in the axial direction is retained in the
above formulation. Eq.(2) tells us that the thermal conduction in the axial direction is important when
Pr Re
D
is small, occurring at low flow-rates in the thermal mass flow sensor.
For a sensor with two adjacent heating coils each with length L, Eq. (2) applies over the region:
( )
Pr Re
2
~ 0
D
D
L
x

=
+
(3)
Eqs.(2) and (3) suggest that the temperature distribution in the fluid is governed by the two non-
dimensional parameters: Pr Re
D
and L/D. For a constant-temperature sensor, the sensor output is
determined by the amount of heat generated by the electric current to offset the effect of the gas flow
so as to keep the resistors at the constant temperature. For a constant-temperature thermal mass-
flow sensor with two resistance elements symmetrically located on the tube, the output voltage S is
proportional to the difference between the heat input to the upstream and to the downstream element.
The heat loss through the tube-ends as well as the heat loss to the ambient through the thermal
insulation are both omitted from the consideration on the ground that, since the coil windings are
maintained at constant temperature, these heat losses do not vary with the gas flow and therefore do
not affect the sensor differential output.
With the temperature distribution in the fluid written as:
)
`

=
+ +
D
L
r x
D
; Pr Re ; ; (4)
, the heat-flux from the heating coil to the fluid per unit length of the tube wall is

1
0 0
) ( 2 2
0
=
+
=
+
|
|
.
|

\
|
c
c
=
|
|
.
|

\
|
c
c
=
r
W
r r
r
T T k
r
T
k r
dx
dq u
t t (5)
Using Eqs.(3)-(5) the following expression for the sensor output is obtained:
( )

|
|
.
|

\
|

|
|
.
|

\
|
=
) )

+ +
+
=
+
+
=
+
Pr Re
1
Pr Re
2
Pr Re
1
0
1 1
0

Pr) (Re S
D
D
L
D
D
L
D
D
L
dx
dr
d
dx
dr
d
T T G kD
r r
D W
t (6)
where G is the electronic amplifier gain. The quantity in the curly bracket is a function of the two non-
dimensional parameters Pr Re
D
and L/D only. Except for the gas thermal conductivity k, the
quantities G, D, L/D , and (T
w
T
0
) are all fixed sensor design constants. For sensors of a given
design, clearly Eq. (6) suggests that the quantity S/k is a function of Pr Re
D
, i.e., the Pclet number
of the flow.
Scaling Relation
Without explicitly solving the partial differential equation, we thus arrived at the following scaling
relation for the constant-temperature sensor:
{ }
)
`

=
k
c D V
W W
p
D

Pr Re
k
S
(7)
where W represents the integral on the right-hand-side of Eq.(6). The similarity theory and sensor
model was verified by data from the constant-temperature sensors with 0.0135 inches tube ID and
0.5 inches-long heated section [2]. Fig. 4 shows the sensor electric output signal plotted against the
flow-rate for several process gases with widely varying nonlinear characteristics. Fig. 5 shows the
same data plotted by using the non-dimensional quantities given in Eq. (7), i.e. S/k ~ Re
L
Pr. In these
data, gas property constants [3] at an average temperature of 85 C were used for calculating the
dimensionless parameters. As shown in Fig. 5, the S/k ~ Re
L
Pr curves from the 9 gases tested all
collapsed into a narrow band, suggesting that the similarity theory works quite well.
Examination of the data from multiple sensor samples suggests that the residual error in Fig. 5
may be further reduced by adjusting the gas specific heat c
p
with a multiplier e
c
and the thermal
conductivity k by a multiplier e
k
. It turns out even with all the manufacturing tolerances involved, the
values of the correction constants e
c
and e
k
do not vary significantly among sensors of the same
design. This suggests the constants e
c
and e
k
are not arbitrary fudge factors but are associated with
either the approximations inherent in the model or the uncertainty in the gas property data. The
optimal values of e
c
and e
k
were chosen by comparing against the live-gas test data.
The thermal mass-flow sensor similarity model has since been extensively verified against data
obtained from a great number of process gases. In Fig. 6 the sensor output for over 30 different
process gases are plotted along with the calibration gas argon, for which the gas properties are
assumed to be exact (with e
c
and e
k
both equal to 1.0). The gas property correction constants e
c
and
e
k
for all of the gases tested are listed in Table 1. The fact that these constants all fall pretty close to
1.0 suggests that the gas property corrections are moderate and the similarity theory is largely sound.
Of particular interest in Fig. 6 are the data for xenon (Xe) recently obtained from the pressure rate-of-
rise measurement. Xenon is known to be one of the gases exhibiting the worst nonlinearity in the
thermal mass flow sensor output. The xenon data in Fig. 6 also comply with the similarity scaling
relationship, providing further proof for the validity of the theory and the model in Eq. (7).
Explicit mathematical solutions for the thermal mass flow sensor may also be obtained from Eqs. (2-6)
with the appropriate boundary conditions. For instance the solution the author obtained for the constant-
temperature sensor satisfactorily predicts all the important features of the sensor nonlinear characteristics
including the gas-to-gas scaling relationship presented above. Although these solutions enlighten the
sensor design process, they do not exactly predict the output curves for any particular sensor, potentially
due to the manufacturing tolerance issues mentioned earlier. The similarity scaling relation in Eq. (7),
however, remains valid for any constant-temperature sensor that was tested. This makes it possible for
the thermal mass flow controller manufacturers to build sensors that are accurate for the process gas
even if they are calibrated only by using an inert gas.





Fig. 4 Raw sensor data.
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
S
e
n
s
o
r

O
u
t
p
u
t
Actual Gas Flow (sccm)
Ar
CF4
SF6
CO2
CH4
CHF3
He
N2





Fig. 5 Sensor data plotted by using the similarity variables.






Fig. 6 Sensor data plotted by using the similarity variables after gas property correction.

0
20
40
60
80
100
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
(
S
e
n
s
o
r

O
u
t
p
u
t
)

/

k
Re Pr
Ar
CF4
SF6
CO2
CH4
CHF3
He
N2
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
(
S
e
n
s
o
r

O
u
t
)
/
(
k
*
E
k

)





u = Re Pr *Ec
Sensor Output in Similarity Variables
N2
He
Ar
CF4
SF6
CO2
CH4
CHF3
HBr
Cl2
NH3
CH3F
C2H4
BCl3
SiCl4
C2F6
C4F8
CH2F2
C4F6
Xe
Table 1 Values of the e
c
and e
k
constants

Gas e
c
e
k

N2 0.99 0.95
He 1.00 1.00
Ar 1.00 1.00
CH4 1.00 1.00
CO2 1.00 1.00
CF4 1.00 0.93
CHF3 0.98 1.02
SF6 1.00 0.93
HBr 0.98 1.03
Cl2 0.99 1.15
NH3 0.98 1.0
CH3F 0.96 0.96
C2H4 0.97 0.98
BCl3 0.98 1.04
SiCl4 0.97 1.11
C2F6 0.98 1.00
C4F8 0.97 1.00
CH2F2 0.99 1.00
C4F6 1.15 1.00
Xe 0.98 1.07


LAMINAR FLOW ELEMENTS

Laminar flow elements are frequently used in flow meters either as the flow-sensing element or as the
flow-splitting device. When used as the flow-sensing element, the laminar flow element generates the
pressure drop to deduce the flow rate. When used as a flow-splitting device, the laminar flow element
divides the flow between the sensor flow path and the bypass flow paths. In both cases the pressure
drop characteristics directly impacts the accuracy of the flow meter.

The pressure drop in the fully-developed laminar flow in round tubes is well-known and is governed by
Hagen-Poiseuilles relation. Unfortunately no laminar flow element delivers purely fully-developed flow.
In fact any laminar flow element must have an entrance, where the boundary layer grows and the loss of
the dynamic pressure in the potential core contributes significantly to the pressure drop. The entrance
effect makes the pressure-flow characteristics for most laminar flow elements significantly nonlinear, with
the nonlinearity depending on both the inlet geometry and the gas viscosity. The viscosity effect may be
characterized by the Reynolds number Re
D
=uD/. The larger the Reynolds number, the more nonlinear
the pressure drop characteristics.

The bluntness of the lip at the tube entrance affects the nonlinearity associated with the loss of the total
pressure, with the exact shape of the lip determined by the manufacturing tolerance. Consider laminar
flow elements composed of bundles of round tubes for example. As a result of the electro-chemical
polishing process the corner radius at the tube entrance is non-uniform and may range anywhere from
0.0005" to 0.001. For tubes with 0.020 ID and 0.005 thick wall the corresponding corner to radius ratio
can easily vary between 5% and 10%, enough to make a significant difference in the flow pattern and the
pressure drop characteristics, as illustrated in Fig. 7. As a matter of fact the exact geometry of many
practical laminar flow elements cannot even be accurately quantified except by dissection. Without
knowing the exact geometry, any attempt to describe the pressure flow characteristics explicitly by using
a closed-form formula is futile.

Similarity Analysis

To conduct a formal similarity analysis for the laminar flow in a tube with entrance effect one begins
with the Navier-Stokes equations in cylindrical coordinates. After going through the standard procedures
of simplification and non-dimensionalization, the following results are obtained:


( )
1
0

u
r v
x r r
+
+ +
+ +
c c
+ =
c c
(8)
1

u u d p u
u u r
x d x r r r r
+ + +
+ + +
+ + + +
| |
c c c c
+ = +
|
c c c c
\ .
(9)
where

0
0
; ;
r u vr
r u v
r V

+ + +
= = =

and
0
2
2
1
x 4 4
Re

D
x x x
VD D D Vr
p
p
V

= = =
'
=

Eq. (8) and (9) suggest the solution for pressure distribution in the form
( )
x p f = , with which the
pressure drop
'
L
p at x = L becomes
2
1
Re
L
D
p L
f
D V
' | |
=
|
\ .
(10)

It is interesting to approach the same problem also from dimensional analysis. There are totally six (6)
physical quantities governing the problem of laminar flow in a tube with the entrance effects: the tube
inside diameter D, the length L, the fluid viscosity , the fluid density , the mean flow speed U, and the
overall pressure drop Ap. Buckinghams -theorem dictates that there are three (6-3) dimensionless
parameters governing the problem. While these parameters may be chosen as D/L, Re
D
, and u
2
/Ap,
Langharr's work [5] suggests u
2
/Ap to be a function of Re
D
(D/L), as given in Eq. (10).

In the above analysis we deliberately omitted the variation in the entrance geometry as a controlling
parameter. This is permitted only based on the assumption that the similarity relationship to be obtained
will only be applied to devices of exactly the same entrance geometry. Since in practice due to the
manufacturing tolerance issue the exact geometry cannot be guaranteed, the above assumption means
that the similarity relation must be applied to nothing but exactly the same device. Although this may
sound restrictive, using the similarity relationship to scale the calibration data from the calibration gas to
the process gas for individual MFC is exactly what we intend to achieve. Besides, since for accuracy
reasons one must individually calibrate each nonlinear laminar flow element anyway, why not explore the
similarity relation and take full advantage of the calibration data?

Scaling Relation

Extensive tests and measurements were carried out to verify the similarity relation by using a variety of
gases over a wide range of Reynolds numbers. In these tests each laminar flow element was calibrated
and then scaled as a unique device with the intent that any distinctive features in the flow characteristics
due to part tolerance are completely preserved. In order to avoid the denominator on both sides of the
Eq.(10) to vanish simultaneously at no flow, to correlate the experimental data, the similarity relation is
written in the following alternative form:

2
Re

~
D
V
f
P
D
L
| |
|
A
\ .
. (11)

Fig. 8 shows the test data collected from 9 different gases using a laminar flow element consisting of
138 round tubes each 1.5" long, with 0.030"ID and 0.004" thick wall. The tubes were electro-chemically
polished and packed in hexagonal patterns inside a housing with a hexagonal cutout. Typical tolerances
were 0.0005 for the wall thickness and 0.001 for the ID, respectively. The corner radius at the tube
inlet was not controlled and it falls somewhere between 10% and 30% of the wall thickness. As shown in
Fig. 8, there was very little random error at either the low or the high flow-rates for any of the gases
studied, suggesting that the similarity principle holds quite well.

To account for the temperature difference between the gas flowing through the sensor and through the
laminar flow element, a gas specific bias-function [4] was introduced to further reduce the systematic error
in the model. With these the similarity principle was checked out satisfactorily among the data collected
from different gases using any single laminar flow element. The similarity plots spread out somewhat
more pervasively, however, when data from different laminar flow elements (albeit of the same design)
are cross-compared, even after the bias functions are introduced. This seems to justify our speculation
that device-to-device part variation impairs the similarity relationship. The flow rate data reported above
were obtained by using the DryCal moving-piston provers made by BIOS International Corporation.










Fig.7 Effect of inlet geometry on the laminar boundary layer near the entrance of a tube.








Fig. 8 Pressure drop in a laminar flow element with 138 x 0.030 inches ID tubes that are 1.5 inches
long.


VALVE TUNING CONDITIONS

The flow control valve together with the valve-drive electronic circuit regulates the flow by way of a
feed-back control loop. The required valve stroke depends on both the flow rate and the supply pressure
available to the process gas of interest. Of course the dynamic performance of the solenoid valve, for
example its current-displacement characteristics, also depends on the actuator's electro-mechanical
design such as the size of the coil, the magnetic path, and the stiffness of the return spring.

When the MFCs are being built in the factory, the valve is typically tested by using an inert gas. After
the valve dynamics is optimized by using an inert tune gas at a certain pressure, at the same drive
current it behaves differently when flowing the process gas that may have a different molecular weight,
different thermal physical properties, and different supply pressure. Besides, the mass flow controllers
normally operate under the choked conditions with its downstream exposed to the semi-conductor
process vacuum. The MFC manufacturers, however, sometimes cut corners by tuning the MFC with the
exhaust exposed to not the vacuum but the ambient atmospheric pressure, where the valve may or may
not be choked depending on the supply pressure of the tune gas. All of these complicate the valve tuning
process. Especially when the engineering solution must deal with hundreds of semi-conductor process
gases, how to effectively choose the proper tuning gas and the tuning pressure is a question of practical
importance.

Although the valve normally works under the choked conditions with the gas acting like a compressible
fluid in the semiconductor vacuum processes, there is usually so much reserve in the valve stroke that
incompressible flow relations may often be used as a rough estimate for calculating the stroke. For
simplicity, we will assume incompressible flow here just to illustrate how the valve tuning conditions may
be determined. When more accurate calculations are needed compressible flow relations must be used
with some extra effort.

0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.20
0 5 10 15
U
2
/
2
A
P
Re D/L
Ar
N2
CO2
CHF3
CF4
SF6
In order to tune a valve for ideal dynamic performance, the valve must be operated under the right
valve opening and the right differential pressure. The equation for valve sizing is well known and needs
no mentioning here. The method for scaling and choosing the proper tuning conditions will be discussed
below. Consider the valve at an effective opening area A. Neglecting the compressibility effect, the flow
rate is related to the pressure difference by

( )
2
2
2
1 1
2 2
uA
p u
A

A = (12)
, where is the gas density and u is the gas velocity at the valve throat. Since we will only be dealing
with pressures ratios in the following discussion, a valve orifice discharge coefficient of 1.0 is used here
without loss of generality. The effect of Reynolds number on the discharge coefficient is also neglected.
With the quantity uA equated to the mass flow rate m, and after introducing the perfect gas law, Eq.(12)
becomes:

( ) 2

MP
m p A
RT
= A
(13)
where M represents the molecular weight and

Rthe universal gas constant. Taking the ratio of the mass
flow rate between the surrogates (subscript s) tune gas and the process gas, for the same valve opening
area A we obtain:

s s s s
m p P M
m p P M
A
=
A
(14)
With the mass flow rate expressed in moles per minute m nM = and n directly proportional to the
volumetric flow rate Q, Eq.(14) becomes

s s s s
s
Q n p P M
Q n p P M
A
= =
A
(15)
Assume the MFC output voltage e to be linearly related to the mass flow rate by a constant 'conversion
factor' C
F
, i.e.,
F
Q n C e . Finally the MFC output for the surrogate gas is related to that for the
process gas by:

,
s s s F
s F s
e p P M C
e p P M C
A
=
A
(16)
In the above, we have neglected the nonlinearity of both the sensor and the laminar flow elements to
simplify the formulation as much as possible so that it does not obscure the main objective.

Normally the MFC manufacturers tune the valve for the optimum transient response at a few selected
set-points, for examples at 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% of the sensor full-scale output. These set-points
correspond to the same percentages of sensor full-scale output voltage e for the process gas and for the
surrogate tune gas, respectively, i.e.

,
1
s s s F
s F s
p P e M C
p P M C e
A
= =
A
(17)
Eq. (17) provides a method for choosing the correct tune gas and pressure for any process gas at any
pressure of interest.

To give an example, provided that the MFC is built for a certain process gas where the discharge
pressure is 1 atm. Assume that the MFC is tuned with ambient discharge so that 14.7 P p psia = A +
and 14.7
s s
P p psia = A + . Eq. (17) may now be written as

2
,
2
( 14.7 )
( 14.7 )
s F s
s s
F
M C
p p psia
p p psia
M C
A A +
=
A A +
(18)
For a chosen tune gas, the factor on the right hand side of Eq. (18) is a constant. Represent this
constant by , we have

2
14.7 ( 14.7) 0
s s
p p p p A + A O A A + = (19)
, for which the only meaningful solution is:

( )
2
0.5* 14.7 4 ( 14.7) 14.7
s
p p p A = + O A A +
(20)
This example illustrates how the tune pressure may be calculated for any process gas at any vapor
pressure with any given tune gas. Valve tuning conditions are important because many process gases
are associated with low vapor pressure or high molecular weight that the valve will perform poorly if the
wrong tune gas or the wrong tune pressure is used.

CONCLUSIONS

Scaling relations that ensure the accuracy for the actual process gases are important for the fabrication
of high-performance mass flow controllers. The three main components of the MFC, i.e. the thermal
mass flow sensor, the laminar flow element, and the flow control valve, are each governed by a different
set of thermal fluid dynamic relations, some of which are significantly nonlinear, making the scaling of
especially multi-gas thermal mass flow controllers challenging. In this paper the governing equations for
the three MFC components were reviewed, and the scaling relations were presented.

In retrospect, it is rather unfortunate that the word scaling sometimes leaves people a false sense of
vagueness and imprecision. While some scaling laws may be approximate when the physical processes
are modeled with approximate theories, those derived rigorously from precise theories using similarity
analysis can be highly accurate. Proper understanding of the underlying physical process is critical for
developing the accurate scaling laws. Proper application of the scaling laws is critical for the calibration
of the multi-gas mass flow controllers.

References

[1] Wang, C. "A Similarity theory for Thermal Mass Flow Sensor and Its Gas Conversion Factors",
Measurement Science Conference, Jan. 25, 2007, Long Beach, CA.

[2] Wang, C. Thermal Mass Flow Sensor Similarity Theory Comparison with Experiment,
Measurement Science Conference, Mar. 13, 2008, Anaheim, CA.

[3] "Le Gas Encyclopedia" L'air Liquide, 1976.

[4] Wang, C. Calibration of Nonlinear Laminar Flow Elements for Multigas Applications,
Measurement Science Conference, 2009 Pasadena, CA.

[5] Langharr, H.L. Steady Flow in the Transition Length of a Straight Tube, J. Applied Mechanics, Vol.
9, No. 2, A55-58, 1942.

[6] Kays, W. M., and Crawford, M. Convective Heat and Mass Transfer, 2
nd
ed. 1980, and 3rd ed.
1993, McGraw-Hill.



(Published in: Measurement Science Conference, Anaheim, CA. March 2012)