4.3 Article

3He/4He dilution refrigerator with high cooling capacity and direct pulse tube pre-cooling

期刊

CRYOGENICS
卷 48, 期 11-12, 页码 511-514

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cryogenics.2008.07.004

关键词

Dilution; Pulse tube; Heat exchangers

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the article, a He-3/He-4 dilution refrigerator (DR) is described which is pre-cooled by a commercial two-stage pulse tube refrigerator (PTR); cryo-liquids are not necessary with this type of milli-kelvin refrigerator. The simple design of the condensation stage of this so-called dry DR is novel and explained in detail. In most dry DRs the circulating He-3 gas is cooled by a two-stage PTR to a temperature of about 4 K. In the next cooling step, the He-3 flow is cooled and partially liquefied in a Joule-Thomson circuit, before it is run to the dilution refrigeration unit. The counterflow heat exchanger of the Joule-Thomson circuit is cooled by the cold He-3 gas pumped from the still of the DR. In the DR described here, the heat exchanger of the Joule-Thomson stage was omitted entirely; in the present design, the He-3 gas is cooled by the PTR in three different heat exchangers, with the first one mounted on the first stage of the PTR, the second one on the regenerator of the second stage, and the third one on the cold end of the second stage. The heat load caused by the 3 He flow is mostly absorbed by the first two heat exchangers. Thus the He-3 flow presents only a small heat load to the second stage of the PTR, which therefore operates close to its base temperature of 2.5 K at all times. A pre-cooling temperature of 2.5 K of the He-3 flow is sufficiently low to run a DR without further pre-cooling. The simplified condensation system allows for a shorter, compacter and more economical design of the DR. Additionally, the pumping speed of the turbo pump is no longer obstructed by the counterflow heat exchanger of the joule Thomson stage as in our earlier DR design. (c) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据