Interpretation of Linear Variable Differential Transformer (LVDT) voltage output

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the use of a Linear Variable Differential Transformer (LVDT) for measuring distance, specifically addressing unexpected non-linear voltage output despite expectations of linearity. The user observed that the output voltage plotted against height resulted in a polynomial curve, with discrepancies noted between actual height measurements and LVDT output, particularly at the extremes of the measurement range. Participants suggest that the user can rely on the fitted curve for their project, as the accuracy of 2.5% is deemed acceptable given the power supply voltage variation. Calibration of the LVDT is considered unnecessary since the user has already validated the sensitivity through gauge block measurements. The consensus leans towards utilizing the derived curve for practical applications.
ca2n
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Good day to all Physics Forums members,

I am currently undertaking a project which involves the use of a Linear Variable Differential Transformer (LVDT) to measure the distance an object makes between two points. My setup is as follows:

  1. LVDT Type: Solartron DC50 with sensitivity of 6.158 mV/V/mm at 10 VDC
  2. Power supply to LVDT: 12.12 VDC (const. and cannot be varied)
  3. Voltage output from LVDT fed to dataTaker data acquisition system

In an attempt at verifying the calibrated sensitivity of the LVDT, I performed a number of height measurements using gauge blocks. I took 6 equally-spaced height intervals between the maximums of the LVDT range and plotted the LVDT voltage output vs. height. Here is what I encountered:

  1. The curve plotted was NOT linear as I anticipated it to be. As a matter of fact, the curve fit a polynomial equation of degree five with R2 = 1
  2. When comparing the LVDT output voltage with the LVDT calibrated sensitivity values, discrepancies occured, e.g. a 20 mm difference between two gauge block heights returned a 20.5 mm difference calculated from the voltage output of the LVDT. The discrepancies grew as the ends of the LVDT were approached.

My questions are:

  1. Could the fitted curve be beneficial for my use seeing as I've determined the end-to-end output values of the LVDT, OR,
  2. Should I, instead, just get the LVDT calibrated and use the obtained sensitivity value.

To be frank, I would highly prefer Option 1, if it is in fact a justifiable solution.

Any help is much appreciated. Thanks. :smile:
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
From your quoted numbers, the accuracy is 2.5% of reading. Considering that your supply voltage is over 20% high, that isn't bad at all. If 2.5% is within your needed accuracy, use it as is.

I see no reason to "...get the LVDT calibrated...", you just did when you measured the gauge blocks. Use those numbers if you need the accuracy.

Cheers,
Tom
 
Thread 'I thought it was only Amazon that sold unsafe junk'
I grabbed an under cabinet LED light today at a big box store. Nothing special. 18 inches in length and made to plug several lights together. Here is a pic of the power cord: The drawing on the box led me to believe that it would accept a standard IEC cord which surprised me. But it's a variation of it. I didn't try it, but I would assume you could plug a standard IEC cord into this and have a double male cord AKA suicide cord. And to boot, it's likely going to reverse the hot and...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K