[Firecracker Analyser] [week 0] Sensor Research

RE: [Firecracker Analyser] [week 0] Sensor Research

mcb1 — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 07:00:55 GMT

Don't let the whole application overwhelm you.

While keeping with the design, try to break it into chunks and not rely on one piece of hardware making another work.

You have a number of sensors, and each measures its own gas, so each is a standalone and will give some results.

Sure the whole spectrum will give a better picture, but so would a lot of other things ... all pointing to its bad.

Is it possible to have two sensors, one filtered and one not to show the difference.? (maybe cost ???)

Don't worry about workshops and lots of tools.

I saw a very nice plasma cutter and a 3D printer used very effectively, but it didn't mean it couldn't be done in other ways.

Mark

RE: [Firecracker Analyser] [week 0] Sensor Research

michaelwylie — Wed, 29 Oct 2014 21:52:01 GMT

Also, don't get ruffled about it. I treat these challenges as a learning experience. I'll give you an example. In the Forget Me Not, which you totally rocked ... love the robot, I ordered a solenoid to move a switch. It showed up and I never used one before. It took me a while to figure out why it wasn't working and then I realized it needed a spring ...

RE: [Firecracker Analyser] [week 0] Sensor Research

michaelwylie — Wed, 29 Oct 2014 21:41:44 GMT

I have a question to help me understand your project better.

1. The way I am reading your application is that you are building this unit to mount in a location (your home) that measures the effects on the breathable air as opposed to measuring the values directly at a fireworks/firecracker show? I.e. you are trying to measure the effects the shows have on air pollution in total, not the local effect of the show.

RE: [Firecracker Analyser] [week 0] Sensor Research

ipv1 — Wed, 29 Oct 2014 20:42:19 GMT

Michael sir, thanks for the input. I'll be sure to keep the power requirement in mind. I understand the limitations of the mq series but the me series is just expensive. My attempt will be to use these detectors and with multiple units cross verify results and generate approximate ppm values. Does that sound doable?

Dab sir, thanks for the input as well. I might try that since now I am also looking at IR based sensors.. DIY?

RE: [Firecracker Analyser] [week 0] Sensor Research

DAB — Wed, 29 Oct 2014 19:07:40 GMT

You might want to consider setting up a big funnel attached to a flexible hose with a small fan at the sensor end.

You would be able to pull in a larger volume air sample and concentrate the material detection process.

While it would skew your results slightly, you can always recalculate your PPM data over the volume sampled/second rate.

DAB

RE: [Firecracker Analyser] [week 0] Sensor Research

michaelwylie — Wed, 29 Oct 2014 18:25:24 GMT

I almost forgot, don't forget to check the cross-sensitivity of other gases to the sensors you find. For example, you have a Hydrogen Sulfide sensor which responds to NH4 and CO. Also, keep in mind your power requirements because some of those semiconductor ones are power hungry, since they use heater elements. The MQ1xx sensors are about 900 mW each.

RE: [Firecracker Analyser] [week 0] Sensor Research

michaelwylie — Wed, 29 Oct 2014 18:08:44 GMT

A lot of these sensors will be good for building a detector, that is to alarm when a certain threshold is reached, since drift is always a problem in those semiconductor sensors. Note in the technical data where they say Applications, and all the applications are detectors. Detectors aren't the same as a meter that gives accurate PPM levels. But, with the budget the way it is, you'll just have to go with what you can do. I wouldn't worry about it, you're hitting the same problems every competitor will hit. There are no cheap, accurate sensors for this type of stuff unless you want to calibrate every time you turn on the meter. The reason you have trouble finding the particulate matter sensor is because they're usually custom solutions. Keep digging.