Hey Everyone, Has anyone ever tried to use the ultrasonic ping sensors underwater? I know that the sensor reading would obviously be a lot different because sound traveling faster through water and because of the extra layer of whatever material is used to make it waterproof. Although it would be nice to be able to get an actual distance to the object, I'm mainly concerned with just knowing that I'm 6" to 12" away from the object. What I'm trying to do is automate the depth that the ROV travels at so that it stays just slightly above the bottom of the lake floor. I'm open to any other ideas anyone has as well.
T 502.476.9878
C 502.939.1756
pmccar...@humana.com<mailto:pmccar...@humana.com>
From: lvl1@googlegroups.com [mailto:lvl1@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jon Clark
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 2:54 PM
To: lvl1@googlegroups.com
Subject: {LVL1} Using an ultrasonic sensor underwater? or other ways to detect close objects
Hey Everyone,
Has anyone ever tried to use the ultrasonic ping sensors underwater? I know that the sensor reading would obviously be a lot different because sound traveling faster through water and because of the extra layer of whatever material is used to make it waterproof. Although it would be nice to be able to get an actual distance to the object, I'm mainly concerned with just knowing that I'm 6" to 12" away from the object. What I'm trying to do is automate the depth that the ROV travels at so that it stays just slightly above the bottom of the lake floor. I'm open to any other ideas anyone has as well.
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed
and may contain CONFIDENTIAL material. If you receive this material/information in error,
please contact the sender and delete or destroy the material/information.
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Jon Clark <jdc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Everyone,
> Has anyone ever tried to use the ultrasonic ping sensors underwater? I
> know that the sensor reading would obviously be a lot different because
> sound traveling faster through water and because of the extra layer of
> whatever material is used to make it waterproof. Although it would be nice
> to be able to get an actual distance to the object, I'm mainly concerned
> with just knowing that I'm 6" to 12" away from the object. What I'm trying
> to do is automate the depth that the ROV travels at so that it stays just
> slightly above the bottom of the lake floor. I'm open to any other ideas
> anyone has as well.
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Jon Clark <jdc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Everyone,
> Has anyone ever tried to use the ultrasonic ping sensors underwater? I
> know that the sensor reading would obviously be a lot different because
> sound traveling faster through water and because of the extra layer of
> whatever material is used to make it waterproof. Although it would be nice
> to be able to get an actual distance to the object, I'm mainly concerned
> with just knowing that I'm 6" to 12" away from the object. What I'm trying
> to do is automate the depth that the ROV travels at so that it stays just
> slightly above the bottom of the lake floor. I'm open to any other ideas
> anyone has as well.
For most purposes... Yes SONAR is the way to go. The problem is the price and complexity of using SONAR. The SONAR system I just purchased last week for the ROV cost a little over $8,000! (and that came only second to the next level up which cost $30,000!) For the ROV SONAR we are using a forward scanning sonar which is great for navigating but now I just want to be able to add something a lot less costly that will let me know when I'm getting close to the floor.
On Monday, May 7, 2012 2:54:23 PM UTC-4, Jon Clark wrote:
> Hey Everyone, > Has anyone ever tried to use the ultrasonic ping sensors underwater? I > know that the sensor reading would obviously be a lot different because > sound traveling faster through water and because of the extra layer of > whatever material is used to make it waterproof. Although it would be nice > to be able to get an actual distance to the object, I'm mainly concerned > with just knowing that I'm 6" to 12" away from the object. What I'm trying > to do is automate the depth that the ROV travels at so that it stays just > slightly above the bottom of the lake floor. I'm open to any other ideas > anyone has as well.
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Jon Clark <jdc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For most purposes... Yes SONAR is the way to go. The problem is the price
> and complexity of using SONAR. The SONAR system I just purchased last week
> for the ROV cost a little over $8,000! (and that came only second to the
> next level up which cost $30,000!) For the ROV SONAR we are using a
> forward scanning sonar which is great for navigating but now I just want to
> be able to add something a lot less costly that will let me know when I'm
> getting close to the floor.
> On Monday, May 7, 2012 2:54:23 PM UTC-4, Jon Clark wrote:
>> Hey Everyone,
>> Has anyone ever tried to use the ultrasonic ping sensors underwater? I
>> know that the sensor reading would obviously be a lot different because
>> sound traveling faster through water and because of the extra layer of
>> whatever material is used to make it waterproof. Although it would be nice
>> to be able to get an actual distance to the object, I'm mainly concerned
>> with just knowing that I'm 6" to 12" away from the object. What I'm trying
>> to do is automate the depth that the ROV travels at so that it stays just
>> slightly above the bottom of the lake floor. I'm open to any other ideas
>> anyone has as well.
The problem with anything mechanical is the fact that the ROV has to physically touch the floor which is the reason from trying to do it with some type of ultrasonic or sonar. When anything touches the floor of the lake, sea, etc, it causes a major amount of dirt/silt to be thrown up in the cameras view. You can go from cyrstal clear picture to dirt storm by just barely touching the floor.
On Monday, May 7, 2012 2:54:23 PM UTC-4, Jon Clark wrote:
> Hey Everyone, > Has anyone ever tried to use the ultrasonic ping sensors underwater? I > know that the sensor reading would obviously be a lot different because > sound traveling faster through water and because of the extra layer of > whatever material is used to make it waterproof. Although it would be nice > to be able to get an actual distance to the object, I'm mainly concerned > with just knowing that I'm 6" to 12" away from the object. What I'm trying > to do is automate the depth that the ROV travels at so that it stays just > slightly above the bottom of the lake floor. I'm open to any other ideas > anyone has as well.
As far as I understand it an ultrasonic sensor is basically "sonar in the
air" -- why not build a simple sonar? Doesn't need to do scanning and
terain mapping; jut return a distance value, right?
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Jon Clark <jdc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The problem with anything mechanical is the fact that the ROV has to
> physically touch the floor which is the reason from trying to do it with
> some type of ultrasonic or sonar. When anything touches the floor of the
> lake, sea, etc, it causes a major amount of dirt/silt to be thrown up in
> the cameras view. You can go from cyrstal clear picture to dirt storm by
> just barely touching the floor.
> On Monday, May 7, 2012 2:54:23 PM UTC-4, Jon Clark wrote:
>> Hey Everyone,
>> Has anyone ever tried to use the ultrasonic ping sensors underwater? I
>> know that the sensor reading would obviously be a lot different because
>> sound traveling faster through water and because of the extra layer of
>> whatever material is used to make it waterproof. Although it would be nice
>> to be able to get an actual distance to the object, I'm mainly concerned
>> with just knowing that I'm 6" to 12" away from the object. What I'm trying
>> to do is automate the depth that the ROV travels at so that it stays just
>> slightly above the bottom of the lake floor. I'm open to any other ideas
>> anyone has as well.
What you are doing is basic echo sounding... I have seen small devices that look like a flashlight... put it in the water, press the button, get depth.
I think they can be found in marine catalogs
Much more common is the "fish finder"... which looks for 2 "return signals" showing a soft bottom (fish) and a hard bottom (seabed)
In your case, if thick, it's return "silt layer" and "Hard bottom" :)
PS, IIRC, you don't need to actually touch the bottom, your impellers are downward facing, right? So anywhere close and you'll stir up a mess :)
Hey, you get a place to practice?
I have a small pond (small turtles)
And a bigger lake (Bigger Turtles) you could practice in.... (I Need to get permission if you are interested in the big lake...)
Patrick McCarthy
T 502.476.9878
C 502.939.1756
pmccar...@humana.com<mailto:pmccar...@humana.com>
From: lvl1@googlegroups.com [mailto:lvl1@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Ben Hibben
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 3:43 PM
To: lvl1@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: {LVL1} Re: Using an ultrasonic sensor underwater? or other ways to detect close objects
As far as I understand it an ultrasonic sensor is basically "sonar in the air" -- why not build a simple sonar? Doesn't need to do scanning and terain mapping; jut return a distance value, right?
Blenster
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Jon Clark <jdc...@gmail.com<mailto:jdc...@gmail.com>> wrote:
The problem with anything mechanical is the fact that the ROV has to physically touch the floor which is the reason from trying to do it with some type of ultrasonic or sonar. When anything touches the floor of the lake, sea, etc, it causes a major amount of dirt/silt to be thrown up in the cameras view. You can go from cyrstal clear picture to dirt storm by just barely touching the floor.
On Monday, May 7, 2012 2:54:23 PM UTC-4, Jon Clark wrote:
Hey Everyone,
Has anyone ever tried to use the ultrasonic ping sensors underwater? I know that the sensor reading would obviously be a lot different because sound traveling faster through water and because of the extra layer of whatever material is used to make it waterproof. Although it would be nice to be able to get an actual distance to the object, I'm mainly concerned with just knowing that I'm 6" to 12" away from the object. What I'm trying to do is automate the depth that the ROV travels at so that it stays just slightly above the bottom of the lake floor. I'm open to any other ideas anyone has as well.
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed
and may contain CONFIDENTIAL material. If you receive this material/information in error,
please contact the sender and delete or destroy the material/information.
> The problem with anything mechanical is the fact that the ROV has to
> physically touch the floor which is the reason from trying to do it with
> some type of ultrasonic or sonar. When anything touches the floor of the
> lake, sea, etc, it causes a major amount of dirt/silt to be thrown up in
> the cameras view. You can go from cyrstal clear picture to dirt storm by
> just barely touching the floor.
> On Monday, May 7, 2012 2:54:23 PM UTC-4, Jon Clark wrote:
>> Hey Everyone,
>> Has anyone ever tried to use the ultrasonic ping sensors underwater? I
>> know that the sensor reading would obviously be a lot different because
>> sound traveling faster through water and because of the extra layer of
>> whatever material is used to make it waterproof. Although it would be nice
>> to be able to get an actual distance to the object, I'm mainly concerned
>> with just knowing that I'm 6" to 12" away from the object. What I'm trying
>> to do is automate the depth that the ROV travels at so that it stays just
>> slightly above the bottom of the lake floor. I'm open to any other ideas
>> anyone has as well.
you need some underwater transducers, you can hack them off of fish finders
or buy them seperatly, they work exactly the same as a regular ultrasonic
ping sensor does but just have different math for being in the water.
adafruit forum suggested this when I searched for underwater transducers
but depth transducer appears to give better results
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Brian Wagner <br...@tegrasys.com> wrote:
> Sounds, in water, travel 25 times faster than air. It would be an
> interesting experiment to see how it works.
> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Jon Clark <jdc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hey Everyone,
>> Has anyone ever tried to use the ultrasonic ping sensors underwater? I
>> know that the sensor reading would obviously be a lot different because
>> sound traveling faster through water and because of the extra layer of
>> whatever material is used to make it waterproof. Although it would be nice
>> to be able to get an actual distance to the object, I'm mainly concerned
>> with just knowing that I'm 6" to 12" away from the object. What I'm trying
>> to do is automate the depth that the ROV travels at so that it stays just
>> slightly above the bottom of the lake floor. I'm open to any other ideas
>> anyone has as well.
Just tonight I cut the old sonar sensor that was on the bottom of my boat, it is from before I owned the boat I do not have the readout part but you can have it if you want.
Or go to Bass Pro Shop you can get a deapth sounder for $100.00 .
Bill S
Sent from my iPhone
On May 7, 2012, at 3:42 PM, Ben Hibben <the.blens...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As far as I understand it an ultrasonic sensor is basically "sonar in the air" -- why not build a simple sonar? Doesn't need to do scanning and terain mapping; jut return a distance value, right?
> Blenster
> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Jon Clark <jdc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The problem with anything mechanical is the fact that the ROV has to physically touch the floor which is the reason from trying to do it with some type of ultrasonic or sonar. When anything touches the floor of the lake, sea, etc, it causes a major amount of dirt/silt to be thrown up in the cameras view. You can go from cyrstal clear picture to dirt storm by just barely touching the floor.
> On Monday, May 7, 2012 2:54:23 PM UTC-4, Jon Clark wrote:
> Hey Everyone,
> Has anyone ever tried to use the ultrasonic ping sensors underwater? I know that the sensor reading would obviously be a lot different because sound traveling faster through water and because of the extra layer of whatever material is used to make it waterproof. Although it would be nice to be able to get an actual distance to the object, I'm mainly concerned with just knowing that I'm 6" to 12" away from the object. What I'm trying to do is automate the depth that the ROV travels at so that it stays just slightly above the bottom of the lake floor. I'm open to any other ideas anyone has as well.
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Lockadoc <locka...@aol.com> wrote:
> Just tonight I cut the old sonar sensor that was on the bottom of my boat,
> it is from before I owned the boat I do not have the readout part but you
> can have it if you want.
> Or go to Bass Pro Shop you can get a deapth sounder for $100.00 .
> Bill S
> Sent from my iPhone
> On May 7, 2012, at 3:42 PM, Ben Hibben <the.blens...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As far as I understand it an ultrasonic sensor is basically "sonar in the
> air" -- why not build a simple sonar? Doesn't need to do scanning and
> terain mapping; jut return a distance value, right?
> Blenster
> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Jon Clark <jdc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The problem with anything mechanical is the fact that the ROV has to
>> physically touch the floor which is the reason from trying to do it with
>> some type of ultrasonic or sonar. When anything touches the floor of the
>> lake, sea, etc, it causes a major amount of dirt/silt to be thrown up in
>> the cameras view. You can go from cyrstal clear picture to dirt storm by
>> just barely touching the floor.
>> On Monday, May 7, 2012 2:54:23 PM UTC-4, Jon Clark wrote:
>>> Hey Everyone,
>>> Has anyone ever tried to use the ultrasonic ping sensors underwater? I
>>> know that the sensor reading would obviously be a lot different because
>>> sound traveling faster through water and because of the extra layer of
>>> whatever material is used to make it waterproof. Although it would be nice
>>> to be able to get an actual distance to the object, I'm mainly concerned
>>> with just knowing that I'm 6" to 12" away from the object. What I'm trying
>>> to do is automate the depth that the ROV travels at so that it stays just
>>> slightly above the bottom of the lake floor. I'm open to any other ideas
>>> anyone has as well.
Hey Bill,
I def wouldn't mind making use of the one you stripped off your boat if
you'r not going to use it anymore. Might make the boss happier having
something to test with before we go out and buy a bunch too.
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 7:49 AM, Brian Wagner <br...@tegrasys.com> wrote:
> discussions like this are why LVL1 is so AWESOME!
> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Lockadoc <locka...@aol.com> wrote:
>> Just tonight I cut the old sonar sensor that was on the bottom of my
>> boat, it is from before I owned the boat I do not have the readout part but
>> you can have it if you want.
>> Or go to Bass Pro Shop you can get a deapth sounder for $100.00 .
>> Bill S
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> On May 7, 2012, at 3:42 PM, Ben Hibben <the.blens...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> As far as I understand it an ultrasonic sensor is basically "sonar in the
>> air" -- why not build a simple sonar? Doesn't need to do scanning and
>> terain mapping; jut return a distance value, right?
>> Blenster
>> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Jon Clark <jdc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The problem with anything mechanical is the fact that the ROV has to
>>> physically touch the floor which is the reason from trying to do it with
>>> some type of ultrasonic or sonar. When anything touches the floor of the
>>> lake, sea, etc, it causes a major amount of dirt/silt to be thrown up in
>>> the cameras view. You can go from cyrstal clear picture to dirt storm by
>>> just barely touching the floor.
>>> On Monday, May 7, 2012 2:54:23 PM UTC-4, Jon Clark wrote:
>>>> Hey Everyone,
>>>> Has anyone ever tried to use the ultrasonic ping sensors underwater? I
>>>> know that the sensor reading would obviously be a lot different because
>>>> sound traveling faster through water and because of the extra layer of
>>>> whatever material is used to make it waterproof. Although it would be nice
>>>> to be able to get an actual distance to the object, I'm mainly concerned
>>>> with just knowing that I'm 6" to 12" away from the object. What I'm trying
>>>> to do is automate the depth that the ROV travels at so that it stays just
>>>> slightly above the bottom of the lake floor. I'm open to any other ideas
>>>> anyone has as well.
> Hey Bill,
> I def wouldn't mind making use of the one you stripped off your boat if you'r not going to use it anymore. Might make the boss happier having something to test with before we go out and buy a bunch too.
> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 7:49 AM, Brian Wagner <br...@tegrasys.com> wrote:
> discussions like this are why LVL1 is so AWESOME!
> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Lockadoc <locka...@aol.com> wrote:
> Just tonight I cut the old sonar sensor that was on the bottom of my boat, it is from before I owned the boat I do not have the readout part but you can have it if you want.
> Or go to Bass Pro Shop you can get a deapth sounder for $100.00 .
> Bill S
> Sent from my iPhone
> On May 7, 2012, at 3:42 PM, Ben Hibben <the.blens...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> As far as I understand it an ultrasonic sensor is basically "sonar in the air" -- why not build a simple sonar? Doesn't need to do scanning and terain mapping; jut return a distance value, right?
>> Blenster
>> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Jon Clark <jdc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The problem with anything mechanical is the fact that the ROV has to physically touch the floor which is the reason from trying to do it with some type of ultrasonic or sonar. When anything touches the floor of the lake, sea, etc, it causes a major amount of dirt/silt to be thrown up in the cameras view. You can go from cyrstal clear picture to dirt storm by just barely touching the floor.
>> On Monday, May 7, 2012 2:54:23 PM UTC-4, Jon Clark wrote:
>> Hey Everyone,
>> Has anyone ever tried to use the ultrasonic ping sensors underwater? I know that the sensor reading would obviously be a lot different because sound traveling faster through water and because of the extra layer of whatever material is used to make it waterproof. Although it would be nice to be able to get an actual distance to the object, I'm mainly concerned with just knowing that I'm 6" to 12" away from the object. What I'm trying to do is automate the depth that the ROV travels at so that it stays just slightly above the bottom of the lake floor. I'm open to any other ideas anyone has as well.
