How does it compare to piezoelectric sensors (classic approach)?

Document created by analog-archivist Employee on Feb 23, 2016
Version 1Show Document
  • View in full screen mode

How does it compare to piezoelectric sensors (classic approach)?


While classic piezo devices are much lower in noise (>100x) and wider in
bandwidth, they are much more difficult to use, have a much higher “total
system” cost and require more specialized knowledge to integrate into modern
production equipment. In these types of comparisons, we are often working with
engineers who are tasked with upgrading a very old system or with implementing
vibration sensing on platforms that have never used these techniques before. 
So, customers will rarely be able to offer “requirements” that are directly
related to their machinery.  When they do have specifications, it is most often
a comparison to another sensing approach, like piezo systems.  In this case,
our goal is to broaden their mind and make them aware that “lowest noise” is
not going to be the best selection guide, unless they have direct knowledge of
their machinery’s vibration profile.

“While you are refining your specifications, why don’t you bolt an
ADIS16228/PCBZ and EVAL-ADIS to one of your machines and try it out?  You will
get spectral vibration data very quickly and might find that the noise
performance is good enough, which could save you a significant amount of money
in your system roll-out. You could start by seeing if the noise performance
support sufficient resolution for simple states in your machine like off, idle,
half-speed and full speed. If you have older machines, which have some
operational issues, that might give you even better insights.  Even if you
don’t use the ADIS16228, this could be a useful tool for cross-checking your
long-term solution.”