I want to monitor the condition of a rolling bearing. For this I want to use a mems acceleration sensor. In a first research I came across the ADXL1001. according to the data sheet it is suitable for accelerations of up to +/- 100g and has a sensitivity of about 20mV/g. the rolling bearing causes amplitudes of +/- 1g.
my questions are now:is the adxl1001 suitable for my application?if not, which one would you recommend?
Thank you for your question. Sorry for the delayed response.
Although the ADXL1001's application include condition monitoring, considering the amplitudes given off by the rolling bearing (+…
I absolutely agree with your perspective, g-range, BW and spectral noise density altogether need to be considered when choosing the component.
Hope it helps.
Although the ADXL1001's application include condition monitoring, considering the amplitudes given off by the rolling bearing (+/- 1g), it would be better to use ADXL354 (https://www.analog.com/en/products/adxl354.html) . This accelerometer is also suited for condition monitoring and has less noise density than ADXL1001. Moreover, it has a higher sensitivity (400 mV/g vs 20 mV/g) than ADXL1001's sensitivity.
Hope this answers your question.
Thank you for your response to this forum. You are correct, in that the ADXL354 has slightly lower noise than the ADXL100x models offer, which can be influential, when monitoring low-frequency vibration/motion. The ADXL354 offers another advantage, in that it provides three axes of sensing, in one package.
Having said that, noise (resolution) is not the only selection criteria that matters for the Condition-based Monitoring (CbM) applications. Measurement range and frequency response (bandwidth) are often important metrics to consider, as well. As you know, we have a team that is focusing on building content for the CbM space, but for the interim, this article might be interesting to consider, with respect to understanding the trade space, for CbM applications.
Please keep one thing in mind: this article was written, before the introduction of the ADXL100x product family. I suspect that our CbM team is working on writing even better articles, which will include the ADXL100x products, within this trade space.
For future reference, the online selection tables provide a nice tool for quick comparison of key specs. In this case, I customized the selection table, for the purpose of comparing five selection criteria, for the ADXL35x and ADXL100x products: number of axes, bandwidth, measurement range, noise density, interface type and package:
If you would like to check this out, copy and paste the following text, into the URL address line, in a web browser:
Mahdi.Sadeghi Would agree with this perspective, in that we need to consider, measurement range, bandwidth (frequency response) and noise, when making recommendations for products in emerging CbM applications?
I hope that this helps!