748
Views
11
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Dual dynamic airflow protection for the removal of fused silica micron particles in the final optics assembly

, , , , &
Pages 342-352 | Received 23 Aug 2019, Accepted 20 Nov 2019, Published online: 23 Dec 2019

Figures & data

Figure 1. Overall schematic layout of dual dynamic protection for the FOA as shown in neutral plane.

Figure 1. Overall schematic layout of dual dynamic protection for the FOA as shown in neutral plane.

Figure 2. Longitudinal obstruction experimental setup: (a) overall settings; (b) sample areas setting.

Figure 2. Longitudinal obstruction experimental setup: (a) overall settings; (b) sample areas setting.

Figure 3. CCD images of 5-μm diameter particles at market area after applying Image Binarization methods. (a)–(d), respectively, present natural sedimentation from position 1–4, while adding extra (e) laminar flow, (f) laminar flow and air knife at position 4 are also exhibited.

Figure 3. CCD images of 5-μm diameter particles at market area after applying Image Binarization methods. (a)–(d), respectively, present natural sedimentation from position 1–4, while adding extra (e) laminar flow, (f) laminar flow and air knife at position 4 are also exhibited.

Figure 4. Simulation arrangement in the neutral plane.

Figure 4. Simulation arrangement in the neutral plane.

Figure 5. Experimental setup depicting the placement of each component including bellows, collection boards, 45 degree-bracket, and air knives. Four in-line positions from the C1 surface at 100, 200, 300, and 400 mm, respectively.

Figure 5. Experimental setup depicting the placement of each component including bellows, collection boards, 45 degree-bracket, and air knives. Four in-line positions from the C1 surface at 100, 200, 300, and 400 mm, respectively.

Figure 6. Absolute proportion of 0.5–5 μm particles from position 1–4 in natural sedimentation.

Figure 6. Absolute proportion of 0.5–5 μm particles from position 1–4 in natural sedimentation.

Figure 7. Relative percentage after applying windy methods at preset positions. (a)–(c) represented modification of particles in diameter 0.5, 1, 5 μm, respectively.

Figure 7. Relative percentage after applying windy methods at preset positions. (a)–(c) represented modification of particles in diameter 0.5, 1, 5 μm, respectively.

Figure 8. Simulation results of velocity field during recovery process of laminar and air knife flow at various times. (a)–(d) indicating time at 0.32, 0.35, 0.47, and 0.73 s, respectively.

Figure 8. Simulation results of velocity field during recovery process of laminar and air knife flow at various times. (a)–(d) indicating time at 0.32, 0.35, 0.47, and 0.73 s, respectively.

Table 1. The statistic ratio (average) of particles on the three collection boards released at various positions.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.