Laser vs Ultrasonic - TOF10120 vs. HC-SR04

[@davidgapp1457]

I've spent time with the TOF10120. You can change several parameters inside the device by transmitting (on the serial interface) a message with the format 'sR-xxxx#' where R is the number of the register in the range 0 to 8 inclusive, and xxxx is a numeric, decimal value (which varies in size depending on the register to which you are writing). Conversely you can read any register by sending 'rR#' where R is the number of the register. So to read register 3 you send 'r3#' across the serial interface. Deviation (register 1) allows you to change a scaling value. Changing this value you can calibrate the device at a given range. So, for instance, I can set an object exactly 200mm from the sensor and modified the deviation until the reported distance is 200mm or thereabouts. As an example, I send the command 's1-02#' on the serial port which reduces the deviation by 2mm. Reading back the register (by sending 'r1#') you will notice the 's1-02#' command is a decrement of 2 - you are NOT setting an absolute value! So conversely, if you send the command 's1+02#' you will see the value of the register increments upwards by 2. The ONLY time this command sets an absolute value is when you send 's1-0#'. The maximum range for the register value appears to be -100 to 99. For my device I found the best value for register 1 was D=-17mm. I'm not sure why it's return in millimeters. I suspect this implies there is an ideal calibration distance. One thing for sure, you can massively improve the accuracy of your device by playing with this value! There are other useful things you can set including filtering, on or off (I suspect this is kalman filtering) which is register 3. You can also set the measurement periodicity over serial which is set, by default to 100ms. This is set via register 2. You can also tell the device to stop continuous transmission of readings (the passive mode) using register 5. This is set by sending 's5-1#' for passive or 's5-0' to return to continuous streaming. If you DO set for passive reads, you can either read across i2c or by reading register 6 ('r6#'). Note this will ONLY return the distance when the device is in passive mode. Finally there is another value, register 8, which is the calibration command. To be honest I haven't played with this register (yet) but I suspect that using a combination of register 1 and register 8 you can actually get decent accuracy out of this device. Next up we have the i2c interface (which I prefer to use as the serial connection is a 1 to 1 interface) If you read 2 bytes from device 82 (aka top seven bits of address 0xA4), register 0, you will always get the range (in mm). That applies to both active and passive modes on the serial interface. However you can also read and write the other registers! This is where things get strange. I've spent time mapping i2c byte addresses to their equivalent registers. Here's what I've come up with so far: i2c byte address 0 corresponds to distance (2 bytes). byte address 6 is the deviation (2 bytes) and corresponds to r1. The serial send interval (default 100ms) is found at byte address 10. The maximum distance measurement (max value 2000) is found at byte address 12. The active/passive flag for serial measurement transmission is found at byte address 9 (1 byte). The distance measurement is found at byte address 4 (2 bytes). The 8 bit device address is found at byte address 14 (2 bytes) or byte address 15 (1 byte). The filtering on/off flag is at byte address 8 (1 byte). I hope this helps. If you spot any errors or have additional information, please rely to this comment and I'll either make corrections or confirm your observations!

[@lebronjames2864]

so actually you can get good readings below 100mm? How low?

[@davidgapp1457]

@@lebronjames2864 I am out of country until July 7th. I will take a good look at readings below 100mm when I return to my lab and update here.

[@AwestrikeFearofGods]

@@lebronjames2864 I haven’t used one yet, but it probably depends on your definition of accuracy. Assuming it functions by measuring round-trip delay of a brief laser pulse, I see no reason why it couldn’t measure distances as short as 1 mm. At these ranges, constant error would have more effect than proportional error, so I imagine it might read 3mm instead of 1mm. This would be “only off by 2mm”, while also being “200% off”.

[@davidbernfeld2609]

Great info thanks!!! Is it possible to change the i2c address to use several of them?

[@aboverobotics]

Thank you. 2 years passed. Do you still continue to use this laser sensor? Any additional info on it? Going to use it in a small RC car.

[@preetamsingh147]

Thank you so much for the amount of hard work you did in this single video, just to make everybody understand things pretty easily. Hats off Man!

[@happysprollie]

Would be interesting to know how they cope with reflective surfaces (eg, gloss paint) and angled surfaces. In my experiences, few distance sensors cope well in either case, but I'm intrigued to know what the limits might be.

[@bulldogc8710]

According to the article you are using "331.4 + (0.606 * temp) + (0.0124 * hum)" to calculate the speed of sound. Could you give a quick explanation where you found these numbers? I did find the .6*temp+331 in some other reference but have been unable to track down the humidity calculation.

[@EsotericArctos]

This was an interesting comparison. I am wondering if the sensors may have been picking up your supporting timbers that you used at each set point. Are they even needed with the way this is designed? Might be better to replace the timber supports with just lines to align each measurement point and see how it goes with that. It was an interesting comparison. I had high hopes for the TOF laser sensor. Apart from the speed of the readings, the two sensors were quite similar in accuracy, given you couldn't go further than 50cm with the ultrasonic one.

[@johnhaythorpe206]

Could the failure of the HC-SR04, have anything to do with the fact that it looks to be mounted pointing upwards and that the reflected waves are missing the receiver. I note the TOF10120 line of sight was parallel to the test platform, but it appears as though the HC-SR04 is inclined upwards by 10 to 15 degrees.

[@MathiasBacher]

I agree, I think that's the reason

[@lloydrmc]

Disagree. I don't think the Time of Flight sensor "failed"

[@spassantechnik]

The problem with the HC-SR04 is that you often have "outliers" in the measurements and have to recognise and filter them out yourself. There are also big problems when the measurement falls on a surface that is positioned at an oblique angle to the sensor. I had hoped to find out in this video whether the laser sensor performs better. But unfortunately not.

[@user-vn7ce5ig1z]

This will be useful for picking the appropriate sensor for projects. Thanks. 👍 Maybe in a future video, you can compare PIR and microwave motion detectors. 🤔

[@argcargv]

It would be useful to test measuring distance to an angled surface. I have found that the ultrasonic sensors don't sense objects when at an oblique angle, but in robot applications you may need to sense a wall that you are not pointing at right angles. It seems like optical sensors are better in this regard.

[@qozia1370]

I 3d printed some shades and managed to reduce the detection angle of hcsr04!

[@AmbachtAle]

Could the distance be off for the long because of your mounting brackets, the right angle at the leading edge might be the problem. Put in a triangular leading edge taller than the square rear spacer or remove the rear entirely.

[@DerrickBommarito]

This is likely it. It's sound. It's not super directional and it will read any echo that comes back.

[@EcoHamletsUK]

I thought I might be able to use the TOF10120 for an application where I'd previously tried an HC-SR04, but was disappointed its apparent lack of accuracy. Then I found the VL53L0X laser board, and wondered if you'd tried that. It's supposed to work up to 2m, so seems to serve a similar function to both these devices, and it's cheaper than the TOF10120. Has anyone tried comparing them?

[@newburypi]

I haven't verified this, but it seems that many sensors will find "edges" and report their distance. The white pieces, you used to hold the target, could be causing that effect.

[@rholt2]

I concur with this. basically, it's what you were saying about the field widening. i'm surprised you didn't try placing a piece of board or paper to cover the unused brackets between the sensor and the target.

[@demiurgiac]

Consider this a 'heads up' to anyone getting their TOF10120 working for the first me. I found that the compile fails because of a reference to "fdevopen". ('fdefopen not declared in this scope'). I am not a seasoned Arduino coder and I really didn't know what to do to fix it. In researching it I couldn't 't even figure out just what it was supposed to do. Anyway, just for grins, I just deleted it and any references to it and what-a-ya-know... the sketch works just fine without it.

[@RobertoColi]

Very good and useful video. I am working with the HC-SR04 sensor and I realized that I should imagine A WIDE CONE exiting from it. In your case, to have a real idea of the cone, stating to your measures, you had to put a long ruler bar starting from the centre of the sensor and hit around the 50cm lower bar on the table (the max distance of meaningful detection) and see the real angle. Another thing that you could do, was to raise the sensor to increase the distance from the table and avoid the sound cone to hit the table and bounce back.

[@elvirredzepovic6898]

The test starts at 21.18, up to then this guy is TAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLKKKKKKIIIIIIIIIG. A lot !

[@phrankus2009]

The accuracy of the sonic receptor might benefit from a shroud, such as a short toilet tissue tube or other exclusion/rejection barrier, which would limit the angle of echo-return waves.

[@24crypto]

Nice vid. Quick question. Does anybody know if the Tof10120 can detect water surface levels? Mounted pointing down at the water surface. Thanks for any comments / followups.

[@cdfairchild]

I've tried that and it didn't seem to work well (i.e., the measurements were way off). The light just passes through the water until it hits the bottom of the container if it's in range. If you're trying to measure the level in a smaller body (e.g., a few feet), I'd use eTape liquid level sensors.

[@24crypto]

@@cdfairchild Thanks for the feedback. I am going to test independently with multiple ToF sensors as well as the ultra sonic HC-SR04 and will report back as to my findings especially since the sensors are soooo cheap. However, I thought a lot more about it and I think I am going to be using load cells. Knowing approximate densities as the fluids relate to water and knowing that 1 mL = 1 gram for water and being able to measure to the 1 gram increment on the load cells I should be able to make these measurements with a high degree of confidence. I will report back early part of February as to my findings. Thx for your feedback

[@Felipe-53]

Thank you so much for sharing! Helped me a lot decide wich would be appropriate for my project! Huge thanks!

[@charlesaol]

Thanks for this. Confirms the problem I've been having with my TOF sensor. This, unfortunately, makes it much less practical for my project. I'll have to do what I can with the HC-SR04

[@newburypi]

Just had another thought. I wonder if those edges were the cause of error of the TOF sensor. Might want to rerun the tests with the white guides removed.

[@AwestrikeFearofGods]

I knew I'd find this comment. The readings were suspiciously close to 50 cm.

[@gerardvirgona5541]

I've tested a M5stack tof vl53lox it's accurate to about 150cm after that it's readings start getting erratic.

[@christophemalvasio5569]

next calculate distance with images of 2 cameras ;)

[@tonyfremont]

I suspect the ultrasonic sensor was responding to the reflection received from the sticks on the board. That ultrasonic sensor has a small pic on it and you're at the mercy of the embedded firmware. I can assure you that it received the reflection from the further distance, it just ignored it. I did a pic project in the early 2000s using some transducers obtained from a surplus electronics store. I was able to receive reflections from over 8' away reliably. It does have a broad cone of sensitivity, but that can be handled with a literal waveguide to narrow it considerably. I was driving the sending transducer solely by connecting it to two output pins and toggling one low and the other high simultaneously, with a slight delay then reversing the drive, effectively putting 10v peak to peak on the sender, for 6 cycles spaced to generate a 40kHz signal. Using a single opamp on the receiving transducer, it could easily measure to the far wall in the room I was using. Using an oscilloscope I could see other reflections arriving early. I suspect the sensor you are using is picking the first one above a hard set threshold, without regard to any stronger ones received later. Outside of convenience and cost, these mass produced sensor modules are just not that good. I don't believe they have any ability to measure relative strength of the reflections, just a simple comparator aided by a gradual increase in sensitivity (by lowering the threshold) as time elapsed after there transmission, eventually giving up after a preset limit. They're fine for what people use them for, simple to use, but fairly crude technology wise. They're built to a price point, and it shows.I haven't dug through the Arduino library code, but I'm confident that the pulse widths measurements are equally as crude, influenced by random inaccuracies caused by interrupt handling routines. I would think that by using the capture feature of the atmega chip, consistency would greatly improve. I have no experience with the TOF module.

[@scottwood1143]

Great presentation. I like the consistent camera angle/view and more meaningful transitions. Bravo!

[@padmalayarawal3091]

Also please compare it with VL53L0X sensor too.😊

[@rbrtck]

Have you tried the US-100 ultrasonic distance sensor? In my limited experience, it seems to be both faster and more accurate than the HC-SR04, and compensates for temperature on its own in serial UART mode.

[@i_critique_your_vanity7216]

Local electronics store? Which stores can I buy arduino components from that are local in North America?

[@sargetester99]

Can it see through glass?

[@cdfairchild]

Great video DroneBot! Can either of these be used behind a sheet of protective glass/plastic? Or will the sound/light reflect off a see-through surface? I'm trying to find devices that can be placed at multiple levels inside a canister of dry goods (e.g., dog food), and am thinking I'll need to separate the sensor from the stored material by a sheet of glass or plexiglass.

[@JerryEricsson]

Glad to see that, I have a half dozen of the old sound sensors that I got once when I thought about robots but never went forward. Now I don't have the funds to buy the laser anyhow. Thanks for the entertainment and knowledge!

[@OsoPolarClone]

Can a tube be added to the transmitting ultrasonic transmitter in order to restrict the wide spread of the sound transmission and thus improve accuracy?

[@rholt2]

This would be a worthy test!

[@MrRfaass]

No, but if can tune it to the frequency, think cantenna

[@faisletoismeme]

The white supports glued at the bottom of your board probably returns some echo !!!.

[@winstonsmith478]

It would be nice to see a tabular result comparison.

[@RelentlessHomesteading]

More data of course is alway nice - I wondered about the angular spread of the ultrasonic sensor. ...There seemed no excuse for the poor laser performance. BTW -- Saw your icon and immediately thought of Tin Hat Ranch who used that as their logo - sure wish he was back on KZbin, he was very creative.

[@devluz]

Could you please test this with a wall that is at an angle of 30 - 60 degrees to the sensors? I built a little robot based on the HC-SR04 and being unable to detect walls at an angle is the biggest problem. If it moves towards a wall at an angle higher than 45 degrees it won't see anything and drive right in :/ So if the laser sensor is better in that it would be a good replacement! Edit: Here is an example kzbin.info/www/bejne/fl6vgKGwo9qmobc (This was my first robot btw. Thanks a lot for your videos I wouldn't have gotten so far without them :) )

[@TRfromTO]

Anybody else having trouble with the sample sketch for the TOF10120? My Arduino IDE compiles it OK but it makes many "orange text" comments like " ...C:\Users\Terry HPLT\Documents\Arduino\libraries\Wire\src/Wire.h:61:13: note: candidate 2: uint8_t TwoWire::requestFrom(uint8_t, uint8_t) uint8_t requestFrom(uint8_t, uint8_t); ^~~~~~~~~~~ " Already spent too many hours on it. I could just ignore it but I suspect it will bite me sooner or later. Solution? Anybody?

[@nameerlatef2079]

I like all of your videos. I just have one question. Why do all the videos measure distance for you or for others? They do not approach small or precise distances, i.e. from zero to five centimetres. Are there such sensors? Please explain. Thank you.

[@dipakkhatawkar4230]

Sir can you please make a tutorial on control of continuous servo motor clockwise-stop-countercw control with joystick on Arduino mega board. It will be really helpful for the learners. Im trying but not getting done. Kindly help sir. 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@777fiddlekrazy]

*******I need to create or even purchase a Sensor that would detect an object / human / animal crossing a path within a 13 foot distance and shutdown and brake drive motors!! ANY IDEAS AND DATA ACCURACY OF SUCH?******

[@baala2739]

Hi Sir, Good Day, am frm India, Can you pls make DIY Multi output mode (Centimeter, Inches, Feet, Millimeter) Distance sensor using generic Arduino with 16X2 LCD or 16X4 LCD

[@TheRelativy]

Well, I get it, the sensor is fast. How fast? 10hz? 50hz? 100hz? 1kHz? What about the extreme cases? When board is right in front of the sensor? How the signal look then? What happend if board is right outside the sensor range? What will happen when the board will be at angle to the sensor? There is no problem detecting big static object. Half an hour video about nothing... I am looking for a replacement for GP2Y0A60SZLF, but i guess I need to buy every modern LiDAR / ToF sensor and test it myself...

[@mdsayemsaif4130]

Hello, Is anybody here who can suggest me the small sensor same like IR sensor? Which can work same as the IR sensor module but it should be smaller in size. Please help me.

[@abuwaleed1191]

Sir Your way of teaching is very perfect with very good details. thanks you for sharing.

[@colepdx187]

Very interesting workshop today. Thanks Bill. It seems like these sensors are barely useful for anything more than proximity sensing. The laser module looks pretty much like what you see on automatic plumbing fixtures in public restrooms.

[@banban8481]

In my University we create many robots using these sensors. From automatic book transporter to a self driving car.

[@BigTimeCharley1956]

I wonder if the stray hc-sr04 reflection at 50+cm is the vertical face of the quarter round making the slot at 50cm (I have not read the comments yet; maybe someone else already suggested this)?

[@thewuff66]

I would assume that the different reflectivity between foam and wood wall causes the different reading as it would change the amplitude of the reverse signal. Nice measurement though!

[@ndgoh67]

It would be perfect if an infrared sensor can be added to the test... thanks for the incredible effort to make these videos. Thank you. Btw, I have doubts the ultrasonic sonic spec max distance sensing is 400cm...

[@sayeedm71]

Hi will it work in underwater to measure distance I am working on a school project building submarine with distance measurement TOF10120

[@ecsyntric]

would have nice to also show performance with the obstructions at an angle in real world cases objects are rarely perfectly perpendicular to the incidence plane

[@TomasSobutas]

To be honest a bad test. Why? because both have weird "seeing" angles, one is quite wide (SR04), the other is a conic shape. Another thing to consider is the speed of both. Another one is how both see different surfaces.... There are so many things to consider.....

[@venkatyalamati3285]

Thank you so much for the video sir.. plz make a video on HC-12 433 SI4463 Wireless Serial Module

[@qozia1370]

For me ultra sonic sensors are horrible, they interfere a lot with each other, and when the robot is moving they become utterly useless, maybe my ultrasonic sensors are too cheap!

[@MortenKielskov]

at 25.53 you are saying somthing there tricker my Google Home it will play somthing but she dont onderstand whai "i say" :D

[@tridibeshsen6492]

I tried to use your code with tof10120 but in serial monitor value is showing only 0mm, can anyone help where is the problem,

[@caiofreitas3750]

Recently started into the microcontrollers world and I learn a lot on your channel. Thanks for the uploads. Hugs from Brazil.

[@WorldHRN]

I'd prefer watching tutorial video from old men to young men :) Thanks for the tutorial

[@robertomarcosholway5147]

Interesting. I was expecting a very accurate laser sensor. Users will have to implement software compensation to be able to use it.

[@jeremiahayres103]

Do you have a recommendation for a sensor that can be used to scan a 3d object. I need to be able to have accurate measurements to 0.1mm preverbally 0.05mm.

[@bob-ny6kn]

If range were a mile, the LASER will dominate. At short distances, the speed of light is harder to measure than sound.

[@ttac2011]

Is it possible to change The I2c adres ?? I mean the phisical adres 0x52 (82)

[@hariseldon2577]

'Lasers, everything is better with lasers!'...maybe not...

[@mohammedk.h.f3016]

Please, What is the maximum distance can HC-SR04 measure in the open area???

[@tonyhill8300]

all this is well and good if you know where the "0" point is on the sensor. also the ultrasonic sensor apears to have a higher resolution.but lets be honest niether is of any practical use.

[@originallytari5038]

Great content and testing. Yet, I believe that detection at an angle should be included in the tests.

[@luisfernandolebrando7677]

sir could you orivide a functioning code aside from a given library,thnx,,

[@laurenth7187]

ALso the laser will not be reflected by water i think. If you want to check the level of a recipient.

[@cpsanjana]

Library for both are same else for TOF which library should be included

[@electronic7979]

Helpful video 👍

[@ed-jf3xh]

Your sensors sre too close to the work surface. In the case of the HC-SR04, you're probable getting reflections from your support strips.

[@MrWATCHthisWAY]

ed - bingo you nailed it. I ran the same test and used only back stops against my board and receive full range will my tests. I am surprised he never caught this reflection but I thought the laser would have not had such erroneous readings?? I still running tests

[@ed-jf3xh]

@@MrWATCHthisWAY My guess would be the fault of the diode itself and not having a very tight focus. Then again, could be the manufacturing process.

[@MrWATCHthisWAY]

ed your probably correct in the manufacturing tolerance doesn’t meet the design spec. I’ll check out the cut sheet and try and see if they give a value to the area field to see if this test meets its operation requirement. Should have check that first.

[@ed-jf3xh]

@@MrWATCHthisWAY I'd be interested in hearing your results. Thanks.

[@MrWATCHthisWAY]

ed the spec sheet was useless and I sent an email to the design engineers and now waiting for feedback on the design. I also mentioned the test that had been performed with a like to the video and ask for their feedback on these results. Why and what may have caused these results but I AA’s m going to guess that they will blame manufacturing but I am going to bet that they didn’t provide any limits for quality control or there was no sampling going on in the manufacturing.

[@gunterpietzsch3995]

Great stuff. I'm more than impressed of the quality of your videos. Have you ever thought about using the LIDAR stuff together with the jetson nano? Which tool are you using to create your beautiful animations? This might be something useful for my class room presentations.

[@randallblake1213]

I don't know if he is using it, but Fritzing is somewhat similar for the circuit presentation.

[@conget]

Could it be the power socket in front of the table? It is about at 52 cm mark if you can see

[@jadonjung]

you actually got the two schematics swapped :D

[@CT-qx8nl]

Guy sounds like he's spitting all over the place when he says his "sh"s

[@d74g0n]

I have been pondering which sensor to go with; but the i2c factor for this project of mine made the choice for me. Thank you universal coincidences.

[@madhukeshnp]

Can the laser sensor read the water level with reflection?

[@soldierp1101]

Nice great chanel and video ,helpful. what do you think which sensor is better for drones with flight controller pixhawk 4 than (anti collision)? tof10120 or sr04? and I want to use 4 times for all sides (Back ،front ،left right) is that? if so can you send me a link or any info pdf or so? I would also pay for it it is important to me! Plz answer my question! Danke schön 👍🏽

[@reyes09071962]

Man you are repetitive. Just say laser or sonic.

[@3D_Printing]

0.001 measurement, any chance?

[@jozeflodeweyckx4009]

Moving the HC-SR04 upwards will show targets at 75cm and 100cm.Now false reflection on wood plank are the cause.

[@lloydrmc]

Is it surprising that a "Time of Flight" sensor is only effective at close range? If it's designed to tell how long your quad copter or whatever has been in the air, do you really want it to potentially confuse trees and structures with the ground? Think of a macro lens on a camera: you can focus it very close to the subject, and not farther away. Remember that the Time of Flight sensor is an optical device with a very narrow field of view, which indicates it's designed to focus at a short distance. Remember that the ultrasonic sensor had the exact opposite problem: at longer distances, the target wasn't wide enough for the ultrasound signal to be bounced back.

[@frenchcreekvalley]

A small point, but the HC SRo4 seemed to be pointing upward a bit on the test rig. Could be that it is shooting over the top of the board at the longer distance?

[@dogrsbr]

the TOF10120 sensor detects water?

[@peterwooldridge7285]

Thanks Bill, yet again another great presentation

[@jrgalyen]

Are you measuring water level? Laser might measure depth of the container while ultrasonic would measure water level. Both might be needed.

[@farshadbagheri]

Hello. Thank you very much for another great video. Could you please let me know what application you use for the wiring schematic, where you show connections between the board and sensors?

[@queenidog1]

What happens at the extreme, ie the 400 cm distance quoted for the SR04? I have the SR04 and an SR08 with supposedly double the distance, but can't get more than 6 feet in my shop. According to tech support it's because the sensor is seeing the floor or the ceiling, something I dispute because I have an 8 foot ceiling and my sensor is right on the edge of my desk, 32" off the floor. They work great at short distances but the divergence could be an issue. I'd like to see some experiments with cone reflectors and push the limits to the extreme. As a result of my own tests and these issues I decided to go with microwave (radar) and also laser (bouncing off a mirror and back) for vehicle detection on a busy highway.

[@Magicman8508]

I own a HC-SR04 too and as far as i know those devices are rated up to 7 meters. At 26:13 the reading didn't even change if you go to 100mm. I would suggest trying another lib and check the calculations that are done with the temperature and humitiy sensor. Maybe there is some sort of mathematical maximum hidden in it. Another possibility could be that it catches the white place holder.

[@hanspijpers2100]

I suspect the ultrasound sensor is picking up the white colored holders on the base board, if you had the sensor twice as high from the base, the sensor would miss the obstacles on the base board. it is a quit narrow vertical angle from the transducers. To me that is the most likely cause of the max measurement Kind regards Hans

[@qzorn4440]

very nice dimension sensor video...👍 do you have a video on line-scan cameras or document line-scan 8.5" wide sensors? would opencv work with these sensors? thanks...:)

[@prasannashevare2073]

Hi, I was wondering how does this sensor compare to VL53L0x? Does it work in sunlight unlike ST's VL53L0x?

[@donaldtodd2352]

A possible very useful application for the TOF10120 is in pressure tanks tipple used for spray painting. It is difficult to tell how close to empty the tank is. This sensor would seem ideal if it can tolerate air pressures around 100 PSI. Is there any information about pressure or can someone reasonable guess what might happen?

[@muhammadharisjamal9779]

You have placed brackets to hold the board. That's the thing ultrasonic sensor is detecting. And not showing over 50cm

[@Hephaistos51413]

It is possible to improve the HC-SR04 by decreasing it's measuring angle. To do this one can simply roll up some card stock into a tube and slip it over the transceiver/receiver cylinders. Longer card stock tubes result in a higher directionality of the measurement.

[@NewAgeDIY]

Great demonstration. I wonder if the LASER was designed for close range work? Due to the fact that it's very small it could be mounted inside a device and the LASER could be used to adjust a electrical / mechanical component. For example elevator door. Measuring the distance to close the door, slowing it down or speeding it up.

[@jorgeferreira6727]

One thing we must take into account is that no sensor has a real linear response. Usually the manufacturer datasheet has a table or graphical representation of the readings versus the real values. That info should be included in the software, usually in the form of a lookup table, to compensate for the natural non linearity of the sensor. And, yes, a LASER based sensor will always out perform a ultra sound one, but not by $10.

[@albertsjoberg1200]

You need to lift the sensor higher off the surface. The error appears to be exactly the distance to the quarter round behind the 500 mm Mark. Alternatively, put down a black or charcoal felt as acoustic damper. The Ultra-sonics are easily good to 200 cm

[@mandog2142]

Hey there Dronebot, Would the orientation of the sensor change the results, for instance orientating the device 90 degrees from tested pin placement? Or tilting the sensors slightly off the perpendicular axis (up, down)? Also I'm curious if you covered the rungs on your test bed from sensor to target might improve the results. I've played around with the HC-SR04 and looking to use it in a home application. Thanks for producing these informative videos!

[@bjornwegener3233]

Hey guys, what sensor would you use to measure the depth of a hole (5.5cm diameter). I don't get reliable readings because of the measurement angles these 2 sensors have.

[@schorschy96]

Hey guys, i am looking for a way to messure the flightpath of a small object, to catch it with a robot. Ultrasonic would be great, but the field of view is to limitet. Do you guys know which sensor i could use or is it possible to build a cheap ultrasonic sensor with one output and varios inputs?

[@youssefahourri3245]

Hey, I got DHT11 sensor should I just define DHTType to 11 instead of 22 or I have to use another adequate library??