I G Force Calculation Optimisation with camera, equations & accelerometer (drop testing)

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter ao01
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
Drop testing on devices using an accelerometer has revealed inconsistencies in G-force readings, particularly at higher altitudes where expected values decrease unexpectedly. The average peak acceleration recorded is 441 G, but variations occur, raising questions about the accuracy of the accelerometer and the methodology used for calculations. Suggestions include integrating acceleration over time to compare with expected velocity changes, as well as ensuring the accelerometer's temporal resolution is adequate for capturing short peaks. The testing setup may also introduce friction or binding issues affecting results, and there is a need for multiple trials at each height to assess consistency. Developing a simulation could help refine calculations, and sharing test setup images may provide further insights.
ao01
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
G Force Calculation Optimisation with camera&equations&accelerometer
Hello, we do drop testing on devices and we have an accelerometer. Our accelerometer does not always give accurate G values, that is, as the altitude increases, the G force should increase, but there are moments when it decreases. We also place impact labels on the box we throw away, but they cannot always verify this situation.

I'm trying to get more accurate results on the computer with the help of a camera. Peak accelerations average 441 in all tests (427-528). I tried to find a better result by dividing these by the collision time, and indeed I got slightly better results, but I'm never sure.

Apart from this verification, I also want to reach this result by making calculations. I don't know how the G-Force value is calculated, it is calculated differently in many sources. Maybe I'm wrong because I examined the calculations according to the impact label table.

To give an example, we carry out the tests by raising the height by 10 centimeters:

385G in 30cm
40 542G
50 550G
60 552G
70 524??
80 425??

We reach the values and the impact label of the device turns red at 80 cm, but the G value is lower than other heights.

I also want to develop a simulation. With which application can I find an easier and faster result while developing this simulation? I'm waiting for your help.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF.

Can you upload some pictures of your test setup and sample preparation? (Use the "Attach files" link at the lower left of the Edit window.) It looks like you have some extra friction or binding in the higher drop tests...
 
Last edited:
ao01 said:
I tried to find a better result by dividing these by the collision time,
You should rather intergrate the acceleration over time, and compare that to the expected velocity change.

ao01 said:
To give an example, we carry out the tests by raising the height by 10 centimeters:
Did you drop it from each height several times? What is the spread of values you get for a fixed height?

What is the temporal resolution of your accelerometer and data recording? Are you sure it can even capture short time peaks properly?
 
  • Like
Likes SammyS, Lnewqban and berkeman
berkeman said:
Welcome to PF.

Can you upload some pictures of your test setup and sample preparation? (Use the "Attach files" link at the lower left of the Edit window.) It looks like you have some extra friction or binding in the higher drop tests...
I'm sorry, I'm on leave for a while, but the system is like this. I am using pcc program with determine the speed and acceleration. If it might be useful to you, I can share the velocity and acceleration txt documents, but I don't think you can understand them alone.

1722252339286.png
1722237839007.png


A.T. said:
You should rather intergrate the acceleration over time, and compare that to the expected velocity change.


Did you drop it from each height several times? What is the spread of values you get for a fixed height?

What is the temporal resolution of your accelerometer and data recording? Are you sure it can even capture short time peaks properly?
We could only do it once because we did not have enough impact labels.
 
ao01 said:
We could only do it once because we did not have enough impact labels.
I'm asking about your accelerometer values. How consistent are they for the same drop height?
 
For fun I was trying to use energy considerations to determine the depth to which a solid object will sink in a fluid to reach equilibrium. The first approach that I tried was just to consider the change in potential energy of the block and the fluid as the block is lowered some unknown distance d into the fluid similar to what is shown in the answer to this post. Upon taking the limit as the vessel's cross sectional area approaches infinity I have an extra factor of 2 in the equilibrium...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?