Subject:
|
Re: pyroelectric sensor
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Sat, 20 Nov 1999 02:12:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1135 times
|
| |
|
|
OneTimeCRX <lego-robotics@crynwr.com> wrote in message
news:3835D9F8.8E24F0BB@orion.ramapo.edu...
> Maybe it can run without an analog interface, and maybe it can run
> without a voltage regulator, but I don't know because I haven't tried it
> nor do I have the electronics background to know any better. Maybe
> somebody else can say from the specs?
> http://www.acroname.com/robotics/parts/R1-442-3.html
Hey why mess with success. When you've got over $40 invested in a sensor
what's a few cents for an opamp and voltage regulator. I wouldn't touch
anything.
> I am probably wrong here, but I think that a voltage regulator is needed
> because the output on the sensor is (at most) equal to the input voltage
> (V+). So even if the sensor can take an input of 7 volts that the rcx
> feeds it, it's not supposed to output 7 volts too because the rcx only
> wants a max of 5 volts.
Your are correct that 5V is the limit of the analog to digital conversion.
(5V=0 while 1.6V=100 for LIGHT mode) The RCX doesn't care if the voltage
goes above 5V. Keeping it to 5V shouldn't hurt anything. I like that you
didn't regulate the voltage to the opamp. It should be as high as possible.
I've seen passive IR motion sensors for outdoor lights in stores for less
than $15. I wonder why they want $40 for this thing?
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: pyroelectric sensor
|
| (...) Maybe it can run without an analog interface, and maybe it can run without a voltage regulator, but I don't know because I haven't tried it nor do I have the electronics background to know any better. Maybe somebody else can say from the (...) (25 years ago, 19-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
7 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
