The response curve of the photsensor is distinctly non-linear. That's how you can get an accuracy greater than the physical size of the light tube. The cut out circuit looks for a threshold, not just "stop as soon as I see ANY light". If it did that, then indeed the best you could achieve would be the width of the tube, but if the circuit discriminates more, it's not just the tube diameter, but where within the tube diameter the sensor is. A peak detector comes to mind but then it has to see at least one drop from absolute peak before it could tell it has passed the peak point. But even that would be very consistent. Accuracy would be based on the tolerances of the electronic components and the response curve of the detector. You can see in the chart how steeply the response drops off as you move off the 0 angle. And that is just for that one specific part. Check data sheets, choose wisely.
At least as far as the circuit commanding the motor to stop - there's still the mechnical tolerances in the drive train.
The decidely non-scientific answer is - it works, we know because of empirical proof. No reason to believe Mel is not telling the truth that his works, but there are also commercial systems that clearly work. I may be way off with the idea that they might use peak detection, but I think that's one way it COULD work.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
RR_MelThe accuracy is less than 1/64” from either direction every time.
i'm not doubting this, but i don't exactly understand how using small 3mm (1/8") components can be this accurate.
the beam from an LED emitter must spread and a phototransistor must be sensitive to a beam at a slight angle. The angular displacement chart below indicates that a phototransistor sensititvity is still 90% at 5 degree angle. I assume similar for an LED viewed at an angle
seems that the aperature to both the LED and phototransistor need to be restricted.
why is the accuracy using the 1/16" tubes < 1/16"?
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
when calibrating to a zero position, there's no need to stop the motor. Calibration can occur whenever the bridge passes across the calibration point during normal operation, should there be any slippage.
This isn't what Mel did. But his motor turns at 1/2 rpm (~0.5"/sec for 130' bridge).
Gearing and load on the bridge may provide sufficient friction to stop a DC motor quickly.
That's another key element - the shorting of the motor when power is cut. Otherwise there may be considerable drift. At least if a motor with encoder or other drive like that is used. A stepper, if you stop stepping, will just stop.
I had a great loco to demonstrate that efffect - the Bowser Baldwin switchers with their Cannon can motors. On DC< if the power was just disconnected from full throttle, they would travel quite a distance on jus thte tiny flywheel momentum, and the motor BEMF would keep the headlight LED lit. Short the track and it woudl stop like you threw a chain around it. Some varying resistance and you could control how fast it stopped. The only thing I've ever seen coast futher are old Lionels with spur gear drive and no worms.
RR_MelIR sensors centered under each end of the bridge with a 1/16” ID x ⅜” long piece of Styrene tubing in front of the sensor.
i think the tubing is a good idea. what made you think of it?
if the tubing were mounted at a slight angle, it could restrict the effective opening to much less than 1/16"
Seems to work precise enough to Lenz, who makes the electronics in the Walthers turntables. A narrow aperature, coupled with fast enough peak detection, should be plenty accurate.
I'm wondering if approaching the cal point from both sides, adn then taking an average would better compensate for any slop in the drive mechanism. If you only go from one side, all the accumulated error will be against one side of each gear in the drive, if gears are used. The fewer the better, I think. If you cal from one side, then when the table is turned the opposite direction the bridge position would lag the motor count by whatever the total abount of slop in the gears is. Fewer gears, less slop, less need to cal both directions. Or maybe instead of gears, a cogged belt drive - if not a direct drive. That would be for more accurate, or at least easier to set up and be accurate, than a multiple gear train.
an indexed turntable system using either a geared stepper or dc motor with encoder needs a reference point on the turntable that indentifies position zero. I believe this can be an opening in the turntable wall with a phototransistor that detects a light from an LED on the turntable bridge.
i've been wondering how precise that can/needs to be to be accurate to some fraction of the width of a rail.
i'm wondering if the opening in the wall needs to be a thin slot. is a slot also needed between the led on the bridge.
while the semiconductor junction sensitive to light on the phototransistor must be pretty narrow, i wonder if that and a thin slot are enough to detect the LED at a very precise and repeatable position.
do they always do such calibration by approaching from a specific direction?