Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 27, 2026

Experimental Methodology for Estimation of Local Heat Fluxes and Burning Rates in Steady Laminar Boundary Layer Diffusion Flames
Published on: June 1, 2016
Understanding and Controlling the Sources of Variability in pMDI Plume Temperature Measurements
Riccardo Brini1, Leah-Jane Hopkins1, Diego Copelli2
1Chiesi Ltd, Units T1-T3, Bath Road industrial Estate, Bath Road, Chippenham, SN14 0AB.
Abstract:
Thermocouple-based measurements of pMDI plume temperature are used as in‑vitro descriptors relevant to patient-perceived cooling and device development; however, reproducibility can be compromised by uncontrolled ambient conditions. This study investigated major sources of variability in minimum plume temperature (Tmin) measurements by enclosing a custom plume temperature tester within an environmental chamber (ClimateZone). Plume temperatures were recorded using four centreline Type‑K thermocouples positioned at 25, 50, 75 and 100mm downstream of the actuator under a fixed sampling flow (28.3L/min). Three pMDIs (two commercial products and an HFA‑134a/ethanol placebo) were tested across a staged temperature-humidity matrix, with three replicates of six actuations per condition. A regression model quantified contributions of product, ambient temperature, RH and probe distance. Ambient temperature and probe distance were the dominant drivers of variation in Tmin, with RH exerting a secondary effect. At 25mm, increasing ambient temperature from 19°C to 40°C increased Tmin from ∼2°C to ∼15°C at 25%RH and from ∼3°C to ∼24°C at 70%RH. Increasing distance shifted Tmin upward, consistent with progressive mixing and thermal recovery. Under uncontrolled laboratory conditions, inter‑day variability exceeded intra‑day variability by ∼2-3 × at 25mm (IQR 1.518°C vs 0.488-0.716°C), motivating explicit environmental control. These findings demonstrate that plume temperature is a configuration‑dependent metrology endpoint that is confounded by ambient conditions; therefore, defined and reported environmental control is required for robust inter‑day and comparative plume temperature assessment. Model-based extrapolation to 37°C/100%RH is provided as hypothesis‑generating context and should not be interpreted as validated physiological prediction.
More Related Videos
09:18Laser-heating and Radiance Spectrometry for the Study of Nuclear Materials in Conditions Simulating a Nuclear Power Plant Accident
Published on: December 14, 2017
10:22Split Point Analysis and Uncertainty Quantification of Thermal-Optical Organic/Elemental Carbon Measurements
Published on: September 7, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Flame Photometry: Overview
Pipe Flowrate Measurement
The orifice meter is a simple,...
Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision
Temperature Measurement Sites
Oral: When assessing oral temperature, the thermometer tip should be placed under the tongue in the posterior sublingual pocket. It offers accurate readings and can be...
Pipe Flowrate Measurement: Problem Solving
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...