Accuracy of Detectors (Overall)

User avatar
MoMoney$$$;)0)
Member
Member
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2019 6:38 pm
Division: C
State: OH
Pronouns: He/Him/His
Has thanked: 41 times
Been thanked: 16 times

Accuracy of Detectors (Overall)

Post by MoMoney$$$;)0) »

So I was wondering how exact you guys are getting your detector to be since mine is still around ± 0.5 Degrees and sometimes more accurate, but how exact have you guys gotten you detector to get to place. Thanks!
Division C - Northeast Ohio
Gravity Vehicle
Machines
Detector Building
Circuit Lab
Protein Modeling


2019-2020 Medal Count: 5 :cry:
"Don't be upset by the results you didn't get from the work you didn't do'
Memberships: Builder Cult
lifeof3.141592
Member
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:07 am
Division: C
State: IL
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Accuracy of Detectors (Overall)

Post by lifeof3.141592 »

MoMoney$$$;)0) wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:58 pm So I was wondering how exact you guys are getting your detector to be since mine is still around ± 0.5 Degrees and sometimes more accurate, but how exact have you guys gotten you detector to get to place. Thanks!
in total or 0.5 degrees per test for a total of 2?
User avatar
MoMoney$$$;)0)
Member
Member
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2019 6:38 pm
Division: C
State: OH
Pronouns: He/Him/His
Has thanked: 41 times
Been thanked: 16 times

Re: Accuracy of Detectors (Overall)

Post by MoMoney$$$;)0) »

lifeof3.141592 wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2020 8:21 am
MoMoney$$$;)0) wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:58 pm So I was wondering how exact you guys are getting your detector to be since mine is still around ± 0.5 Degrees and sometimes more accurate, but how exact have you guys gotten you detector to get to place. Thanks!
in total or 0.5 degrees per test for a total of 2?
Either one is fine, and Thanks for the reply!
Division C - Northeast Ohio
Gravity Vehicle
Machines
Detector Building
Circuit Lab
Protein Modeling


2019-2020 Medal Count: 5 :cry:
"Don't be upset by the results you didn't get from the work you didn't do'
Memberships: Builder Cult
User avatar
zandaddy
Member
Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2019 9:34 am
Division: C
State: WI
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Accuracy of Detectors (Overall)

Post by zandaddy »

I'm assuming you mean plus or minus 0.5 per test. And as for accuracy, all you can do is test. Finding what factors cause inconsistencies in results helped me immensely.

Code: Select all

sudo rm -rf /
LIPX3
Member
Member
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 8:41 am
Division: C
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Accuracy of Detectors (Overall)

Post by LIPX3 »

The biggest suggestion I can give you is to improve your entire set up. More data isn't the solution - if your setup is inherently inaccurate, more data won't do anything. Try to reduce electrical noise as much as possible.
jinhusong
Member
Member
Posts: 170
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 3:34 pm
Division: C
State: CA
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Accuracy of Detectors (Overall)

Post by jinhusong »

Depend on what sensor you use.

For TMP36, You should not use its linear formula, come up with your own high level polynomial (or LUT).
More important, its output noice extremely depends on the source. Better use standalone battery pack (like 2AA or 3AA). Still, read like 1000 time and take average. With all these, you may still not be able to get 0.1C resolution, but it should be way better than 0.5C.

For thermistor, normal setup of 10K resistor and 10K thermistor with 1000 average reading should easily get you 0.2C with Arduino UNO, it should get you 0.1C with Arduino DUE.

Student here cuts Steinhart formula into 4 sections with 5 datapoint, got 0.0, 0.0, 0.2, 0.1C.
3 dataPoint direct got like 0.1, 0.2, 0.1, 0.2C.

Hope these help.
These users thanked the author jinhusong for the post:
karmanyaahm (Mon Apr 27, 2020 9:06 pm)
User avatar
MTV<=>Operator
Member
Member
Posts: 142
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:41 pm
Division: Grad
State: NY
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Accuracy of Detectors (Overall)

Post by MTV<=>Operator »

jinhusong wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2020 3:44 pm Depend on what sensor you use.

For TMP36, You should not use its linear formula, come up with your own high level polynomial (or LUT).
More important, its output noice extremely depends on the source. Better use standalone battery pack (like 2AA or 3AA). Still, read like 1000 time and take average. With all these, you may still not be able to get 0.1C resolution, but it should be way better than 0.5C.

For thermistor, normal setup of 10K resistor and 10K thermistor with 1000 average reading should easily get you 0.2C with Arduino UNO, it should get you 0.1C with Arduino DUE.

Student here cuts Steinhart formula into 4 sections with 5 datapoint, got 0.0, 0.0, 0.2, 0.1C.
3 dataPoint direct got like 0.1, 0.2, 0.1, 0.2C.

Hope these help.
When you say normal setup, what type of equation are you using? Also how exactly do you cut the formula into 4 sections?
THHS '21 Builder Cult Member
2017-2018
2018-2019
2019-2020: GV (9 YUSO, 5 NYC), Detector (8 YUSO, 7 NYC), WS (10 NYC), PPP
2020-2021 Events/ Yosemite/HUSO/River Hill/ NYC South Regional
Vehicle Design / 1/--/--/--
WICI / 3/--/--/--
Circuits /--/ 3/ 5/ 1
Machines /--/ 4/ 2/ 2
Detector /--/--/ 2/--
User avatar
MoMoney$$$;)0)
Member
Member
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2019 6:38 pm
Division: C
State: OH
Pronouns: He/Him/His
Has thanked: 41 times
Been thanked: 16 times

Re: Accuracy of Detectors (Overall)

Post by MoMoney$$$;)0) »

MTV<=>Operator wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:56 pm
jinhusong wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2020 3:44 pm Depend on what sensor you use.

For TMP36, You should not use its linear formula, come up with your own high level polynomial (or LUT).
More important, its output noice extremely depends on the source. Better use standalone battery pack (like 2AA or 3AA). Still, read like 1000 time and take average. With all these, you may still not be able to get 0.1C resolution, but it should be way better than 0.5C.

For thermistor, normal setup of 10K resistor and 10K thermistor with 1000 average reading should easily get you 0.2C with Arduino UNO, it should get you 0.1C with Arduino DUE.

Student here cuts Steinhart formula into 4 sections with 5 datapoint, got 0.0, 0.0, 0.2, 0.1C.
3 dataPoint direct got like 0.1, 0.2, 0.1, 0.2C.

Hope these help.
When you say normal setup, what type of equation are you using? Also how exactly do you cut the formula into 4 sections?
It's quite easily actually once you know what you're doing, and if you're acquainted with the language you're working with. I'm pretty sure he's talking about using the Stienhart-Hart equation given with a thermistor, and then changing it with some testing.
Division C - Northeast Ohio
Gravity Vehicle
Machines
Detector Building
Circuit Lab
Protein Modeling


2019-2020 Medal Count: 5 :cry:
"Don't be upset by the results you didn't get from the work you didn't do'
Memberships: Builder Cult
User avatar
MTV<=>Operator
Member
Member
Posts: 142
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:41 pm
Division: Grad
State: NY
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Accuracy of Detectors (Overall)

Post by MTV<=>Operator »

MoMoney$$$;)0) wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:13 pm
MTV<=>Operator wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:56 pm
jinhusong wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2020 3:44 pm Depend on what sensor you use.

For TMP36, You should not use its linear formula, come up with your own high level polynomial (or LUT).
More important, its output noice extremely depends on the source. Better use standalone battery pack (like 2AA or 3AA). Still, read like 1000 time and take average. With all these, you may still not be able to get 0.1C resolution, but it should be way better than 0.5C.

For thermistor, normal setup of 10K resistor and 10K thermistor with 1000 average reading should easily get you 0.2C with Arduino UNO, it should get you 0.1C with Arduino DUE.

Student here cuts Steinhart formula into 4 sections with 5 datapoint, got 0.0, 0.0, 0.2, 0.1C.
3 dataPoint direct got like 0.1, 0.2, 0.1, 0.2C.

Hope these help.
When you say normal setup, what type of equation are you using? Also how exactly do you cut the formula into 4 sections?
It's quite easily actually once you know what you're doing, and if you're acquainted with the language you're working with. I'm pretty sure he's talking about using the Stienhart-Hart equation given with a thermistor, and then changing it with some testing.
Changing it as in adding a constant? I don't see how one could find new coefficients in the 20 minutes of allotted calibration time.
THHS '21 Builder Cult Member
2017-2018
2018-2019
2019-2020: GV (9 YUSO, 5 NYC), Detector (8 YUSO, 7 NYC), WS (10 NYC), PPP
2020-2021 Events/ Yosemite/HUSO/River Hill/ NYC South Regional
Vehicle Design / 1/--/--/--
WICI / 3/--/--/--
Circuits /--/ 3/ 5/ 1
Machines /--/ 4/ 2/ 2
Detector /--/--/ 2/--
User avatar
MoMoney$$$;)0)
Member
Member
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2019 6:38 pm
Division: C
State: OH
Pronouns: He/Him/His
Has thanked: 41 times
Been thanked: 16 times

Re: Accuracy of Detectors (Overall)

Post by MoMoney$$$;)0) »

MTV<=>Operator wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 5:45 pm
MoMoney$$$;)0) wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:13 pm
MTV<=>Operator wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:56 pm

When you say normal setup, what type of equation are you using? Also how exactly do you cut the formula into 4 sections?
It's quite easily actually once you know what you're doing, and if you're acquainted with the language you're working with. I'm pretty sure he's talking about using the Stienhart-Hart equation given with a thermistor, and then changing it with some testing.
Changing it as in adding a constant? I don't see how one could find new coefficients in the 20 minutes of allotted calibration time.
More than doable with the right tools. This can be like quickly using a good graphing calculator to take points with corresponding voltage and temperature. Then finding a line of best fit. Personally I've done it in a time crunch, with a little under 20 minutes. Definitely can happen.
Division C - Northeast Ohio
Gravity Vehicle
Machines
Detector Building
Circuit Lab
Protein Modeling


2019-2020 Medal Count: 5 :cry:
"Don't be upset by the results you didn't get from the work you didn't do'
Memberships: Builder Cult

Return to “Detector Building C”