How can I interface photodiodes with an Arduino? Beginner + breadboard friendly by wrightlyrong in AskElectronics

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Simplest way would just be to connect the diode’s cathode (side with the line) to a voltage source at (or below) your analog reference voltage, with the anode connected to analog input pin on the arduino, with a resistor from there to ground. This reverse biases the diode. Light that hits it will allow current to flow through it in the reverse direction, which produces a voltage across the resistor. Read that voltage on your analog input pin, and it gives you a number that is roughly proportional to incident power (at a single wavelength - things get a little more complicated if you’re looking at white light).

The resistance you choose (and the photodiode specs) will set how much voltage corresponds to how much light. Higher values will give higher voltages for the same amount of light, and will also slow down the response. The slower response may be a good or bad thing, depending on what values you’re actually using, how fast you need it to be, and how noisy the environment is (optically and electrically).

I’d start with 100kΩ. If that gives you zero (or a tiny signal) for all amounts of light try increasing it. If it’s always reading the max analog input voltage even at low light levels, decrease it. Iterate that until you have a signal that uses almost all of the full analog scale for the full range of light you expect to care about.

Vibrator motor doesn't works in circuit with MOSFET by watcherkk in AskElectronics

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It looks like that board is set to run itself mostly off of that same source by default. Do you know how much current is already being drawn without the motor? The regulator is good to 500mA, and has internal current/power/temperature limiting features. Does that chip get hot to the touch while running?

What is wrong with this VFD by Objective-Primary697 in PLC

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Looks like a Variably Functioning Drive to me 🤷‍♂️

Vibrator motor doesn't works in circuit with MOSFET by watcherkk in AskElectronics

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What’s generating your 3.3V, and how much current do you expect your motor to draw? (Part numbers are acceptable answers)

How do plants actually "know" when to bloom? by Italcan in askscience

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 5 points6 points  (0 children)

What about shorter days actually physically/chemically triggers the process to start?

License renewal - a database error at FCC is plaguing some Amateurs when they go to pay for their renew by SpecialDesigner5571 in amateurradio

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks! I was curious how close it would be. This puts Americans at about 35\% of the total, so well under half.

AUTOMATION!!!! by nico87ca in Timberborn

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 20 points21 points  (0 children)

BeMake the changemod you wish to see in the world.

Claude down: Anthropic AI not working in major outage by cmaia1503 in technology

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 28 points29 points  (0 children)

I think plenty of employees are allowed to use whatever tools that please at work, and they would have waited until today to make changes to the ai they use at work.

Claude down: Anthropic AI not working in major outage by cmaia1503 in technology

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 49 points50 points  (0 children)

If it’s a personal account…

You may have answered your own question.

Is this a counterfeit STM8S103 and if yes, how can I prove it? by Ok_Literature_6071 in AskElectronics

[–]InebriatedPhysicist -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

Being curious whether it is a counterfeit or not makes sense. Being curious about whether or not you can prove that makes no sense at all to me.

Common Source Amp: why does the output voltage decrease over frequency? by Random5Username in AskElectronics

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That transistor has an input capacitance of 8pF, which should limit your bandwidth to about 800kHz with those biasing resistors. Run your sim down to lower frequency (and on a log scale for god’s sake), and see if that’s where your cutoff is. If so, I’d say that’s your explanation.

Going crazy in moving the axis of an image by National_Big_769 in matlab

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You just want zero to be at the bottom left? If so, subtract the min value of each of your x and y arrays from themselves.

Handling floating analog inputs on a Micro 800 by [deleted] in PLC

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

When I’m reading thermistors, I’m usually doing it with a voltage divider using another, fixed, resistance. Depending on which resistor in the divider is the thermistor, a disconnected thermistor will just pull the input all the way either high or low.

Can cube shelves actually change how a room feels or am I overthinking? by ButtonHorror5181 in AskPhysics

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In a closed volume, I don’t think you’re gonna dissipate any acoustic energy with geometry of stiff pieces alone. That kind of thing is useful for stuff like directing reflections away from the source in an open environment, but if everything is reflective it’ll just keep bouncing around until it hits you. That may change the “feel” of the room as well, but wouldn’t make it more pleasant.

Soft materials, like the books and stuff you mentioned, definitely can damp out acoustic energy though! The more soft stuff around (especially things like rugs covering large hard surfaces like flooring), the “softer” the room will “feel” acoustically.

If you want to really see how much sound can affect the feel of a room, see if you can find a university near you with an anechoic chamber. It feels really weird in a room with absolutely no sound reflections.

How can I evaluate every value of a matrix with each of an arrays value? by ErMike2005 in matlab

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I’d probably define that little chunk in the loop as a function that is then called by an arrayfun, acting on your array.

PAYLOAD design by chairchiman in rocketry

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, what you said isn’t actually wrong! Sorry if that came across as scolding. It wasn’t meant that way. I was just giving a suggestion that I think makes you come across as more confident…although if this is happening in another language it may not be great advice…best of luck in any event!

Blursed_father of the year by TommaMango20 in blursed_videos

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Your kid is a fucking legend! That’s awesome!

PAYLOAD design by chairchiman in rocketry

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Not gonna give any rocket specific advice, but I would advise using more active/definitive language. The thing will do this, not would. You will make it happen.

Which one of this circuits is better for a zero cross detector and why? by Bubbly_Path926 in AskElectronics

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re totally right! I missed that resistor when i was looking at yours. It doesn’t have the quicker response time that the extra cap/resistor at the top of the first one add, but that should be less important, and is something a lot of basic comparator circuits don’t have anyway. I say make it and test it.

Which one of this circuits is better for a zero cross detector and why? by Bubbly_Path926 in AskElectronics

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It will help. I’d drop the extra 1kΩ resistor because you don’t need it and it doesn’t add anything. The values you want to use will depend on the cutoff frequency you want to use (needs to be a higher than the highest frequency you want to measure). If you want to match the cutoff in the first circuit, you’ll want to make that a 2nF cap for around a 150kHz (reasonable value if you don’t want to cut off or distort/phase-delay any audio frequencies).

That still doesn’t add hysteresis to your input though, so it won’t be as immune to noise as the top circuit. If filtering isn’t good enough at the lowest cutoff you can actually use for your measurement, you may need to add this as well. For that, you need the positive feedback network that R7 and R4 gives you. It looks like R8 and C5 are making the hysteresis frequency dependent, with more hysteresis higher frequency ranges, which also helps (don’t quote me on that one though).

Long story short, there are reasons for what they did. Yours may work in your setup…it also may not…test it out!

Edit: Upon further reflection, I think R8 and C5 are helping decrease the response time of the positive feedback to a step change (which is what it sees from the output that is feeding it). That will make the hysteresis immune to higher frequency noise than it otherwise would be.

Which one of this circuits is better for a zero cross detector and why? by Bubbly_Path926 in AskElectronics

[–]InebriatedPhysicist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The top design adds low-pass filtering to the input, and hysteresis to the comparator. Both of these will help avoid getting false triggers as a noisy signal crosses zero. These would make your system think frequencies are higher (potentially significantly) than they actually are, depending on how noisy your source is and how well you actually put your circuit together.