Difference between revisions of "Team:UMaryland/Design"
Line 68: | Line 68: | ||
min-width: 1000px; | min-width: 1000px; | ||
text-align: center; | text-align: center; | ||
+ | margin:auto; | ||
+ | } | ||
+ | #contentbox1{ | ||
+ | width: 80%; | ||
+ | max-width: 1900px; | ||
+ | min-width: 1000px; | ||
+ | text-align: right; | ||
margin:auto; | margin:auto; | ||
} | } | ||
Line 256: | Line 263: | ||
<p> We have had one successful amplification with our machine however we understand that repeatability is a vital component of all lab work and currently we are attempting to make our device repeatable. From our early days of testing we found that peltier units were not powerful enough to enable PCR tube to reach 95 degrees. <strike>Although conventional PCR machines use these units frequently they are often specialized and tailored made to perform PCR. With this tailoring comes a high price tag that does not suit the DIY market, and so we found a solution in the form of a hairdryer. </strike><b>On the other hand, t</b>he fan and heating element of a <b>cheap </b>hairdryer provide a control scheme that enables for <b>rapid</b> cycling of temperature<strike> rapidly and accurately and they are relatively inexpensive</strike>. We have found that developing a housing for the PCR tubes and enabling even heat distribution is challenging. We often have found that our temperature sensor and the pcr reaction tube are not at the same temperature and degree of difference is a delta of over 10 degrees celsius<b>It is therefore NOT accurate, as described in previous sentences</b>. We are currently working of milling a block of aluminum with better and more consistent heat transfer properties, and modeling the heat transfer within the can. Our ambition is that this will enable better control of temperature within the device. | <p> We have had one successful amplification with our machine however we understand that repeatability is a vital component of all lab work and currently we are attempting to make our device repeatable. From our early days of testing we found that peltier units were not powerful enough to enable PCR tube to reach 95 degrees. <strike>Although conventional PCR machines use these units frequently they are often specialized and tailored made to perform PCR. With this tailoring comes a high price tag that does not suit the DIY market, and so we found a solution in the form of a hairdryer. </strike><b>On the other hand, t</b>he fan and heating element of a <b>cheap </b>hairdryer provide a control scheme that enables for <b>rapid</b> cycling of temperature<strike> rapidly and accurately and they are relatively inexpensive</strike>. We have found that developing a housing for the PCR tubes and enabling even heat distribution is challenging. We often have found that our temperature sensor and the pcr reaction tube are not at the same temperature and degree of difference is a delta of over 10 degrees celsius<b>It is therefore NOT accurate, as described in previous sentences</b>. We are currently working of milling a block of aluminum with better and more consistent heat transfer properties, and modeling the heat transfer within the can. Our ambition is that this will enable better control of temperature within the device. | ||
<br></br> | <br></br> | ||
+ | <div id='layer2'> | ||
+ | <div id='contentbox1'> | ||
+ | <h1><b>CODE </b></h1> | ||
<pre> | <pre> | ||
<font color="#000000">#include</font> <font color="#434f54"><</font><font color="#000000">PID_v1</font><font color="#434f54">.</font><font color="#000000">h</font><font color="#434f54">></font> | <font color="#000000">#include</font> <font color="#434f54"><</font><font color="#000000">PID_v1</font><font color="#434f54">.</font><font color="#000000">h</font><font color="#434f54">></font> |
Revision as of 21:54, 18 September 2015