Timeline for Why are there sensors that encode their readings as serial sequence of PWMs?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 5, 2019 at 13:41 | vote | accept | Marcus Müller | ||
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:32 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://electronics.stackexchange.com/ with https://electronics.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Nov 30, 2016 at 15:07 | history | edited | Marcus Müller | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 2142 characters in body
|
| Nov 30, 2016 at 14:21 | history | edited | Marcus Müller | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 181 characters in body
|
| Nov 30, 2016 at 13:12 | comment | added | user98663 | @MarcusMüller, might also be worth a footnote mentioning that these simple PWM encodings also have the benefit of having a constant and equal number of rising and falling edges, something that RS-232 does not have. This is favourable in some applications (noise / crosstalk management in high speed systems, and for 1-wire as you said which needs this for the vampire current source). | |
| Nov 30, 2016 at 13:04 | comment | added | curious_cat | Ha. Sorry! These follow up questions seemed too trivial for full standalone questions & it felt bad form to edit a question that you had posted! :) | |
| Nov 30, 2016 at 13:02 | comment | added | Marcus Müller | @curious_cat added this to q/a above. Please don't ask this many questions in comments – better go and ask a full question! | |
| Nov 30, 2016 at 13:02 | comment | added | curious_cat | Off topic, but I wonder what application finds use of a "cheap" yet "high-resolution" sensor, like in the original question. I mean sure it's cheap to provide 10^14 possible values but what's the smallest value-jump over which one would actually find the output of this sensor repeatable or accurate. i.e. Could the application actually trust the difference of two sensor outputs that differed 100 psi / 10^14 pressure units (encoded) as anywhere close to significant? PS. Your answer is excellent I'm just going off on a tangent questioning excessive resolution. | |
| Nov 30, 2016 at 13:02 | history | edited | Marcus Müller | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 8 characters in body
|
| Nov 30, 2016 at 12:55 | history | edited | Marcus Müller | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1587 characters in body
|
| Nov 30, 2016 at 12:45 | comment | added | curious_cat | So I wonder, in applications where rapid change is crucial, say airplane control, avionics etc. what sort of protocols have become the convention? Do they use 4 to 20 mA or PWM or dedicated buses? | |
| Nov 30, 2016 at 12:44 | comment | added | curious_cat | Is it also about the rapidity of change? i.e. In most process control applications the time constants of the underlying process are pretty slow. e.g. In (say) controlling a distillation column you may very well have an old school DCS system that polls the temperature sensor only a few times per sec. Is 4 to 20 mA more suited for this sort of change but couldn't cope up with a signal that's changing rapidly (say) thousands of times a sec? | |
| Nov 30, 2016 at 12:37 | history | answered | Marcus Müller | CC BY-SA 3.0 |