I have three Honeywell HSC series sensors, +/- 40 mBar differential (about +/- 16 in. H2O). I put them on my manometer test stand and modified my software a little bit to match the Honeywell I2C protocol. This is what the HSC sensor looks like in the test rig:
I produced the following results, which are also in our Git folder:
HSCDRRN040MD2A3 (11) [Honeywell Sensor]
-14.963 inH2O => -14.947 inH2O, min= -0.031 %fs, max= +0.046 %fs, err= +0.050 %fs
-14.963 inH2O => -14.950 inH2O, min= -0.038 %fs, max= +0.053 %fs, err= +0.042 %fs
-9.976 inH2O => -9.953 inH2O, min= -0.038 %fs, max= +0.061 %fs, err= +0.069 %fs
-4.988 inH2O => -4.984 inH2O, min= -0.046 %fs, max= +0.061 %fs, err= +0.011 %fs
+0.000 inH2O => -0.034 inH2O, min= -0.038 %fs, max= +0.061 %fs, err= -0.107 %fs
+4.988 inH2O => +4.891 inH2O, min= -0.038 %fs, max= +0.038 %fs, err= -0.301 %fs
+9.976 inH2O => +9.872 inH2O, min= -0.031 %fs, max= +0.061 %fs, err= -0.320 %fs
+14.963 inH2O => +14.834 inH2O, min= -0.038 %fs, max= +0.038 %fs, err= -0.401 %fs
+14.963 inH2O => +14.827 inH2O, min= -0.038 %fs, max= +0.038 %fs, err= -0.424 %fs
HSCDRRN040MD2A3 (12) [Honeywell Sensor]
-14.965 inH2O => -14.955 inH2O, min= -0.053 %fs, max= +0.061 %fs, err= +0.032 %fs
-9.977 inH2O => -10.056 inH2O, min= -0.046 %fs, max= +0.046 %fs, err= -0.248 %fs
-4.988 inH2O => -5.038 inH2O, min= -0.038 %fs, max= +0.053 %fs, err= -0.155 %fs
+0.000 inH2O => -0.027 inH2O, min= -0.046 %fs, max= +0.053 %fs, err= -0.084 %fs
+4.988 inH2O => +4.945 inH2O, min= -0.038 %fs, max= +0.046 %fs, err= -0.135 %fs
+9.977 inH2O => +9.941 inH2O, min= -0.046 %fs, max= +0.053 %fs, err= -0.110 %fs
+14.965 inH2O => +14.886 inH2O, min= -0.046 %fs, max= +0.046 %fs, err= -0.246 %fs
HSCDRRN040MD2A3 (12) [Honeywell Sensor]
-14.968 inH2O => -14.920 inH2O, min= -0.053 %fs, max= +0.061 %fs, err= +0.150 %fs
-14.968 inH2O => -14.940 inH2O, min= -0.031 %fs, max= +0.061 %fs, err= +0.089 %fs
-9.979 inH2O => -10.029 inH2O, min= -0.046 %fs, max= +0.053 %fs, err= -0.157 %fs
-4.989 inH2O => -4.982 inH2O, min= -0.069 %fs, max= +0.061 %fs, err= +0.024 %fs
+0.000 inH2O => -0.029 inH2O, min= -0.031 %fs, max= +0.046 %fs, err= -0.092 %fs
+4.989 inH2O => +4.984 inH2O, min= -0.023 %fs, max= +0.046 %fs, err= -0.017 %fs
+9.979 inH2O => +9.895 inH2O, min= -0.031 %fs, max= +0.046 %fs, err= -0.263 %fs
+14.968 inH2O => +14.849 inH2O, min= -0.069 %fs, max= +0.046 %fs, err= -0.371 %fs
+14.968 inH2O => +14.842 inH2O, min= -0.237 %fs, max= +0.084 %fs, err= -0.394 %fs
I produced the following results, which are also in our Git folder:
HSCDRRN040MD2A3 (11) [Honeywell Sensor]
-14.963 inH2O => -14.947 inH2O, min= -0.031 %fs, max= +0.046 %fs, err= +0.050 %fs
-14.963 inH2O => -14.950 inH2O, min= -0.038 %fs, max= +0.053 %fs, err= +0.042 %fs
-9.976 inH2O => -9.953 inH2O, min= -0.038 %fs, max= +0.061 %fs, err= +0.069 %fs
-4.988 inH2O => -4.984 inH2O, min= -0.046 %fs, max= +0.061 %fs, err= +0.011 %fs
+0.000 inH2O => -0.034 inH2O, min= -0.038 %fs, max= +0.061 %fs, err= -0.107 %fs
+4.988 inH2O => +4.891 inH2O, min= -0.038 %fs, max= +0.038 %fs, err= -0.301 %fs
+9.976 inH2O => +9.872 inH2O, min= -0.031 %fs, max= +0.061 %fs, err= -0.320 %fs
+14.963 inH2O => +14.834 inH2O, min= -0.038 %fs, max= +0.038 %fs, err= -0.401 %fs
+14.963 inH2O => +14.827 inH2O, min= -0.038 %fs, max= +0.038 %fs, err= -0.424 %fs
HSCDRRN040MD2A3 (12) [Honeywell Sensor]
-14.965 inH2O => -14.955 inH2O, min= -0.053 %fs, max= +0.061 %fs, err= +0.032 %fs
-9.977 inH2O => -10.056 inH2O, min= -0.046 %fs, max= +0.046 %fs, err= -0.248 %fs
-4.988 inH2O => -5.038 inH2O, min= -0.038 %fs, max= +0.053 %fs, err= -0.155 %fs
+0.000 inH2O => -0.027 inH2O, min= -0.046 %fs, max= +0.053 %fs, err= -0.084 %fs
+4.988 inH2O => +4.945 inH2O, min= -0.038 %fs, max= +0.046 %fs, err= -0.135 %fs
+9.977 inH2O => +9.941 inH2O, min= -0.046 %fs, max= +0.053 %fs, err= -0.110 %fs
+14.965 inH2O => +14.886 inH2O, min= -0.046 %fs, max= +0.046 %fs, err= -0.246 %fs
HSCDRRN040MD2A3 (12) [Honeywell Sensor]
-14.968 inH2O => -14.920 inH2O, min= -0.053 %fs, max= +0.061 %fs, err= +0.150 %fs
-14.968 inH2O => -14.940 inH2O, min= -0.031 %fs, max= +0.061 %fs, err= +0.089 %fs
-9.979 inH2O => -10.029 inH2O, min= -0.046 %fs, max= +0.053 %fs, err= -0.157 %fs
-4.989 inH2O => -4.982 inH2O, min= -0.069 %fs, max= +0.061 %fs, err= +0.024 %fs
+0.000 inH2O => -0.029 inH2O, min= -0.031 %fs, max= +0.046 %fs, err= -0.092 %fs
+4.989 inH2O => +4.984 inH2O, min= -0.023 %fs, max= +0.046 %fs, err= -0.017 %fs
+9.979 inH2O => +9.895 inH2O, min= -0.031 %fs, max= +0.046 %fs, err= -0.263 %fs
+14.968 inH2O => +14.849 inH2O, min= -0.069 %fs, max= +0.046 %fs, err= -0.371 %fs
+14.968 inH2O => +14.842 inH2O, min= -0.237 %fs, max= +0.084 %fs, err= -0.394 %fs
The errors are within half of the +/- 1% accuracy guaranteed by the manufacturer.
The manufacturer claims +/- 0.25% error from the Best Fit Straight Line, which I presume would require a per-sensor calibration. I'm not planning to calibrate each sensor so I won't be taking advantage of that spec.
In general, I see far greater consistency than the All Sensors products. However, this is a small sample size and I have not yet subjected these sensors to our operational environment. I will build up a probe with these sensors and start using it as soon as possible, and thereby better characterize their performance in the field.
No comments :
Post a Comment