Guide to CSIRO Pt.6/12

When project is started in CSIRO it is always shrouded in "we need to understand the underlying science" in the process. In wool combing it was; can we understand the "fibre physics behind the process" ( as one must do - it is a scientific process ). It is not something that can be patentable or produce IP but it is science for publishing. The CSIRO in Division of wool Technology took between 10-14 years to publish a new theoretical model on fibre performance as they did not have the skills to understand the math behind the Kirby's model or appreciate the numerical skills behind Sokolov solution (& proof) . Lead Picture shows myself as I was in 1991, Kirby just lost for words ( not approving ) and "Ken" being disrespectful. 

Theory and Practice behind Combing of Wool.

This is a picture of a fibre Beard showing the alignment and angle of Individual fibers. This is a cross section of a tuft ( length distribution -ends lined up ) prepared in an Al-meter. It is an important method of measuring the fibre distribution before and after combing,a way of getting hard numbers to evaluate modification to the comb. Comb sample preparation requires huge amount of consistent technical skill.

 Here we see a standard Al-meter preparation based on a pin bed - or gill bed preparation. Prepared sample is then fed into a capacitance meter that measures the fibre length distribution. And since the worsted comb is essentially a filter for short fibre length it is of interest to understand the fiber distribution before and after combing. It was method of comparing our numerical method to actual results.

On the left is prepared beard for capacitive measurement and on the right is capacitive measurement glass plates ready to measure fibre length distribution. This procedure and machine were product of 1970's technology and remains unchanged even today. This is typical output.

Note the date on that print out, I spent many weeks studying how to convert this data into a meaningful input to a model of combing. Here are critical equations that govern the capacitive Al-meter.

This was a starting point of the theoretical aspect of the Combing project. Combing is a filter for length - short fibre is rejected. There is small selection region in which probability of selection is 1 and within space of one of the bins above (5-12mm) it drops to zero. 

The last equation predicts the ideal beard distribution prior to circular combing. At that point two theories evolved and then diverged. Theory 1 Belin and Verhagen (1966) and Theory 2 Kirby and Sokolov (1992) ( mostly Kirby's work, my contribution was numerical method and test of theoretical distribution for which there was a classical solution I will discuss it in detail later in this publication ). One is based on a selection function and other is based on tuft shape derived from mechanical motion of comb components. 

Figure 1. This is a Probability distribution of fibre length described by a function p(l) -green ( also known as pdf) converted into a continuous function. Cumulative function cdf. in form of (1-cdf(l)) starting at 1. I have also shown the combed p(l) after short fibre was removed with filter length being set at 24mm - any fibre shorted then 24mm-f ( f=feed distance ) was removed. This was an exercise in precision of numerical analysis, as in 1990 I did not have great mathematical packages or graphical interface - that had to be written from base code in C++ and Pascal.

Figure 2. This is a Theoretical square fibre distribution, p(l) - Green. There were 3 combing ( removal of short fibre -%noil). What needs to be noted in this theoretical distribution one can see fibre rejection of 100% at (n-f), n - noil or fibre length rejection set and f - feed forward of new wool. One can see that between n and (n-f) there is a chance that the fibre will survive combing. Noil or waste product of combing is very low and competes with numerical error. However this software has no rounding errors. 

One must realize that combing and re-combing is dealing with very small differences. See figure 2. In selection function theory one is dealing with an interval between (n) and (n-f) over an entire fibre distribution length. This gets more complex with multiple level of integration as one moves from Belin theory to Kirby theory - all designed to test even the most modern mathematical computer tools such as; Matlab, Simulink, Maple sim and Mathematica. Keep in mind that this software was written in early 1990's and it took CSIRO 14 years to duplicate the result. 

Figure 3. This is a triangular probability function p(l) green developed to test numerical stability and precision of the computation. Cdf(l) is so close that one can not differentiate the two curves. Combed p(l) shows a curve between (n-f) and n. In an earlier work by Belin this region was assumed to be linear section function s(l). My numerical engine was used in Dr.Kirby's and my paper to derive various properties ( ratio of moving to stationary fibres, insertion point , hooks ect..). It has taken CSIRO 14 years to fully appreciate this and publish only small portion of Dr.Kirby's and my work. 

Figure 4. This is an input end for data entry for theoretical work last update was 1 Dec 1993. This was new in Sokolov 1990 software capable of creating models from Belin 1966 to Kirby's 1990 work. Great feature was ability to enter theoretical distributions with Haar type step functions. 

Figure 5. Here we can see the ratio of moving to total fibres as a function of the front comb entry point. Also with zero residual error. Calculations were made on Figure 3. distribution p(l). This type of calculation is susceptible to cumulative error due to large number of integrals over fibre length; distribution and position. ( based on Dr.Kiby's theory -no rounding errors for Sokolov numerical method)

Figure 6. Shows the Maximum ratio of moving fibres relative to the entry point for a triangular distribution. This work was required to be able to judge any changes to the comb mechanism and textile fibre properties. Once again this was a self contained numerical method with residual error of zero. It used to take 15 minutes on 1990 computer now it only takes less than 5 sec running a "VM Windows 2000" capable of running old programs under an "OS Win10".

Mechanical aspects of Sokolov cam system and advantages over NSC.

Looking back at the mechanism of the comb covered in previous publications ( and particularly the apron mechanism involved in fibre acquisition ), here is just a reminder of that only a small potion of cam cycle interacts with the wool.

Figure 7. shows the fibre interaction region ( magenta highlighted region 1-2rad), on the left is the NSC Sclumberger comb and on the right is the Sokolov50 cam one of many cams developed at CSIRO and following BVH directive not to change the fibre interaction. One must note that there is interaction with other mechanisms going on as fibre is passed on to the apron where its being assembled into a combed sliver the aim was to develop a unidirectional feed thus far failed to be delivered by CSIRO or NSC Sclumburger but owned by Sokolov.

Figure 8. shows the Velocity fibre interaction region, on the left is the NSC80 Sclumberger comb and on the right is the Sokolov50 ( to recap this is only 50mm There was also Sokolov22;  22mm retraction while retaining same textile processing properties properties ) . The "red line" in the background indicates the Fourier fit to the derivative and points indicate raw data differentiated with no filtering. This demonstrates 50% improvement in mechanical design over NSC Sclumberger  Comb as designed in Geelong. It was not about "cutting the cam down to size and developing a suitable profile".

Figure 9. shows the Acceleration fibre interaction region (1-2 rad), on the left is the NSC Sclumberger comb and on the right is the Sokolov50. One can see even with a minimum of Mechanical Engineering that Sokolov-Geelong made cams are superior.

In 1992 through whatever means NSC Schlumberger found out that I have modified the cams and that they are working. Perhaps by numerous visits by the management of CSIRO and for a lack of discussion have described some of our efforts but not all the details ( perhaps our visitors were not able to fully appropriate the technology ). There were at least 5 people that visited NSC Schlumberger in that time frame - I can not pin point the source, But as result of my efforts Schlumberger produced NSC60 single cam. It was their early attempt to show that we had nothing and destroy our confidence. They didn't know the full story or "story" was not conveyed to them properly by visitors from CSIRO. I was not that high in the CSIRO "management food chain" so I had no particular insight in what they were "giving away" out of shear ignorance of the potential of my work. What was also interesting NSC Schlumberger sent a message to CSIRO;" If CSIRO has something it might be appropriate to share and N.S.C. Schlumberger would tell us if it is possible". I don't think a working class person like myself would have fell for such an offer but I think CSIRO management did. 

Figure 10.  NSC60 Sclumberger comb and on the right is the Sokolov50 cam. This was Sclumbergers attempt to shorten the stroke. Look at the NSC60 "bump" after the fibre interaction was completed it has a significant problems in higher derivatives of motion such occur at high speed - it was simply design to confuse CSIRO management which had no idea of the technology ( or appropriate technical discipline background ) and no confidence in us. See figure 11 and 12 to compare velocity and acceleration of NSC60 cam v Sokolov50. 

Figure 11. shows the Velocity fibre interaction region, on the left is the NSC60 Schlumberger comb and on the right is the Sokolov. Also Note that our Velocity profile is almost 50% improvement over redesigned NSC cam 1991. CSIRO management got "fooled" by the NSC Schlumberger as far as management was concerned we don't need a combing project Schlumberger after resisting stated that they can "shorten the stroke". The Schlumberger's initial objection to shortening the stroke was the complexity of the comb. This was not the only technology that was lost. Also Schlumberger found out that my name was Sokolov and confused my identity with a famous aircraft designer from Czech Republic - something I had to clear up when I eventually went to France in 1996 ( they were worried in 1991-2). 

 Figure 12. shows the acceleration fibre interaction region, on the left is the NSC60 Schlumberger comb and on the right is the Sokolov50. It is important to note the scale on the y-axis, clearly indicating a superior design. 

 Figure 13. shows the acceleration profile of NSC80 left and compromised NSC60 (right) profile used to fool CSIRO management. One can see that the original NSC80 cam was well design. NSC60 "bump" (Fig.11) to reduce the stroke resulted in 20% more inefficient cam. But desired result was achieved CSIRO management was compromised because they were acting outside their area of expertise. Simply having a PhD is Physics ( crystal x-ray diffraction as BVH has ) does not make you an expert in "everything" just because one becomes a Group leader in CSIRO. Dare I say, Schlumberger pulled the wool over the eyes of CSIRO. I think expectation of BVH was that after showing Schlumberger that we were doing mechanical engineering - the Schlumberger was going to make parts for CSIRO - very naive approach. 

 Figure 14. shows digitizing ( c1990 one of the first builds assoiated with my new project ) table covers briefly in my early section "Young Users Guide to CSIRO". Item 1 is the precision calibrator for the sensors. The table is temperature stable and readings are repeatable. The technical detail of this equipment will be covered in another post. For now this was a first digitizer built on CSIRO - Division of Wool Site to revers engineer the cams a critical part of operation of the NSC comb ( digitizing - now a big thing combined with 3D printing, that was my work c1990, before management discovered magic words; disruptive and digital tech.. ). Items 1-9 are instruments suitable for calibrating and revers engineering most parts of the comb. for example item 4 is a Nipper jaw spring calibrated load cell and spring assembly. Table rotated in both directions at 1 rpm. Software readers and verifies the shape after 5 revolutions, which is enough to form a statistical opinion of the shape. 

Here is a reminder on how the apron mechanism cams fit into the structure of creating a sliver from individual tufts assembled on the retraction apron.

 Figure 15. This is a detail of actions contributing to the motion of the apron and the assembly of the tuft and eventually the comb sliver. What is important here is to note the relationship to the fibre . The red indicates the motion mechanism of the cam and 1-2 rad affected part of the cycle. Green indicates mech. to spread of the tuft. Blue indicates the motion mech. forward to produce the overlapping feature and weakness in the combed sliver. Of significant interest is the ratchet mech. located in the withdrawing rollers with only facilities withdrawing rollers acting during a part of the cycle.

CRD50 HS 2Cam system is Sokolov50 cam system.

From Figure 15 we can see how the fibre and comb apron mechanism interacts. One notes that cam acts only on fibre for approx 1-2 rad of a single revolution. In that time the withdrawing rollers act to acquire the leading part of the beard and spreads it on the apron as a tuft. reversal action using a ratchet mechanism. During the next circular combing phase the ratchet acts to revers the tuft and facilitate overlap it was said "like the tiles on the roof". At the exit point the tuft is rolled to produce a combed sliver. That sliver is weak due to its regularity ( joint is always in the same spot ). There is more to this but essentially it is a base explanation. 

The apron Mechanism was chosen as a starting point was the largest and most inertia prone elements of the comb. For that there is a solution and it does not include using lighter materials that could help but a simplification to the entire mechanism by providing a unidirectional motion - the next step in comb radical "evolution". The Sokolov Cams are only the start, I was convinced in 1995 that CSIRO in combination with NSC Schlumberger would take that next step, but I think I over estimated their ability. 

The next publication will deal with Belin simulation and then Kirby and then Sokolov -Kirby mechanism-theory prediction. 

Discussion;

This section covers CSIRO pure science of understanding the fibre behaviour during the combing process. The work was derived from Mr. R.Belin and Dr.Kirby's work ( and my own efforts in a numerical model and proof). Dr.Kirby produced an advanced theory in 1990 of fibre behaviour over Belin's theory in 1966. My contribution to all that work was a stable numerical method modeling ( &proof ) both theories and having a residual error of zero on a given set of fibre distribution. It took Ken and CSIRO more then 10-14 years to publish our work. This simply came about since BVH dismissed our work by saying: " it is a circular argument and it will never work". BVH dismissal was out of hand and was supported by "Ken" in sentence; "yes, whatever B*** said" ( it was a BVH style of management by decree) . Dr.Kirby was dismayed as we had a new calculation method that relates the production of combed wool to the mechanics of the comb. It took 14 years for our work to be published and only happened as CSIRO had a vacation student advanced in computer numerical methods confirming what we had as being a fact. Dr.Kirby and I did all our work in less the 3 years - but never received a formal apology from "our betters" of recognition with a "CSIRO medal" for work that benefited processing of Australian wool clip.( Few others from Division of Wool Technology got that recognition - some for being photogenic and just doing their job - lord of the castle in his chiefdom favours the "good servants" )

In this and next few publication I will cover an explanation Dr.Kirby's theory, numerical method (our work 1990) and that of Mr.Belin's work published in 1966. 

I will also endeavor to explain how the Kirby model links to mechanism. There will be a few things to look forward to in next few publications.

I have  upgraded the software into Simulink and Matlab. I will explain my earlier attempts to use a Simulink like program, but of course I run into computational wall in 1998. There was not enough ram or CPU speed to do such a model ( I had income from university session work and I also had a motorcycle accident - in short; no money to buy new equipment and university contract ended abruptly there is always a PhD student eager to take up a position). It has similar to my earlier days of 3D CAD , it all had to be done in sections as I could not afford the RAM or space. In 2015 there is no such problem.

See my "Young Users Guide to CSIRO" Parts 1-12, simply like 

Ravels Boléro

 , starts softly and building up. Hope you now see your group leader in a different light. 

Ida Rubinstein, the inspiration behind Boléro. Portrait by Valentin Serov.( from wikipedia )

In this publication "Young Users Guide to CSIRO pt6" only the work between 1990-1994 will be discussed - think where Dr.Kirby and I would been if we were treated and taken seriously by the CSIRO management. The same Jet-setting management of CSIRO going to the "gab fests" in Europe and disclosing our fundamental research. Note Jet-setting to France, UK ( just to visit relatives ) and Germany was(is) the perk of the job. I wanted to be into that, but then I was just another low life drone, a cannon fodder, "Eastern European" in my CSIRO badge they created a term of endearment.....

Original badge that was issued by CSIRO, that was not a spelling error of my name, that was a "joke", everyone had a good laugh. I also included my 2003 Institute if Engineers and photo I added. One needs to know that I do not get pushed around by a CSIRO no matter how self important they think they are. I will not be bullied by management...and their cushy "life as they know it" .

I was having good time at CSIRO working conditions like working over an effluent pit, asbestos lab and finally realization that my achievements were not going to be recognized ( bit slow it took me 8 years to learn that AND I was told by Allen White - "get out while you can" I didn't listen. Well do I give up - NO ( not in my nature _ I love a good entrepreneurial experience even if the prize is only victory over odds, this part CSIRO fails to understand even today "its not about money for individuals like myself - however money helps the project. Less money more challenge.  And CSIRO was a challenge I didn't walk away from) , I simply have the solution to half the cost of wool processing worldwide. Will they listen - and will they act to the benefit of the wool grower?

Here is a reminder of last CSIRO effort that failed to yield results as they got rid of two people that were delivering the results. It is no wonder that CSIRO can not keep or even recognize original technology - the simpler the better.

Here is also a picture of 2015 combing technology as produced by N.S.C.Schlumberger using partial technology developed in Geelong.

Opportunity for CSIRO, CRD P/L and Australian Wool Grower is still there. Business model from ABARE is still valid. With a radical technology of CSIRO lab22 3D staff and metal printing we could produce original technology - its waiting to be picked up and carried by IP and by us. Other's have had the opportunity only Dr.Kirby and I keep the dream alive - let us conclude our technology.

Technology beneficial to Australia awaits its construction at bargain cost unchanged since 1990's as it has no glamour but heaps of technology.

Thank you for reading my post. 

Refrences: Consider Reading my other posts..

>>>>>>>>Topics that are Bold are related

23 Oct 28, 2015 Young users Guide to CSIRO (part 5)

23 Sep 28, 2015 Young users Guide to CSIRO (part 4)

22 Sep 27, 2015 Young users Guide to CSIRO ( part 3 )

21 Sep 10, 2015 Young users Guide to CSIRO ( part 2 )

20 Sep 10, 2015 Young users Guide to CSIRO ( part 1 )

19 Jul 5, 2015 Mining Fan modal analysis

18 Jun 29, 2015 Mining Fan Failure and analysis

17 Jun 22, 2015 Cam linkage motion analysis - Front comb

16 Jun 10, 2015 Flash Furnace model, method & Gauss solution

15 May 30, 2015 Rod Mill failure analysis

14 May 17, 2015 Art of 3D CNC/CAD/3DP

13 May 4, 2015 WiFi & RF noise

12 Apr 26, 2015 Flash Furnace - Sensors

11 Apr 11, 2015 Mechatronic project and automation (Part 2)

10 Jan 4, 2015 Furnace - Venturi scrubber improvment

9 Dec 20, 2015 Mechatronic project and automation (Part 1)

8 Dec 12, 2014 FIFO to work - my best commute.

7 Dec 8, 2014 Be Green - LCD monitors recycled

6 Nov 28, 2014 Navigate 6DOF CAD in 3D printing

5 Nov 25, 2014 Worsted Combing - Rise of Computing (part 1)

4 Nov 2, 2014 Mechanical Computer - prime numbers

3 Oct 30, 2014 Wavelets v Heisenberg uncertainty (part 1)

2 Jul 14, 2014 UAV CH47 remote control with Saitek X52Pro.

1 Jun 26, 2014 HPC-MPI Super Computing Cluster