<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More ideas of a dubious nature&#8230;</title>
	<link>http://britishengineeringsystems.com/2008/09/07/more-ideas-of-a-dubious-nature/</link>
	<description>Blog of an Engineer (amongst other things)</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 20 May 2012 10:20:27 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: P</title>
		<link>http://britishengineeringsystems.com/2008/09/07/more-ideas-of-a-dubious-nature/#comment-1260</link>
		<author>P</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Sep 2008 12:01:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://britishengineeringsystems.com/2008/09/07/more-ideas-of-a-dubious-nature/#comment-1260</guid>
		<description>I think I saw this video when you first published it and thought that they could do with a bit of tuning. The idea is sound, however I think the implementation of the was not as good as it could be. What would be interesting would be to find out what they used as the compression volume, the diameter and length of pipe they used, the pressure sensor they used and the pressure difference they saw. from this pic ( http://www.flickr.com/photos/metaphorge/1495885933/sizes/l/in/set-72157602302921425/ ) it looks like it was about a 1/4" tube about 4' long which will have a comparable volume to the change in volume of the thing being squeezed and that will meen that the system will be low resolution and will saturate quickly (in this case that means the thing has been squished flat) which would explain the pump bulb and pressure gage there as to stop saturation the thing would need to be pressurised. This is why I thought it would need to be filled with a liquid, so that the change in volume is reduced and the sensor will have a larger range and not saturate. The probe I bought off the shelf has a bulk piece inside it thus reducing the total gas volume of the system and has a 2mm id pipe about 4" long so the force exerted on it acts almost entirely on the gas in the probe so both resolution and no saturation (assuming the user is not too strong) are assured. With suitable sensor it should generate a good output. the sort of sensor I am looking at is this http://uk.farnell.com/731687 They are nice and cheep and easy to use.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think I saw this video when you first published it and thought that they could do with a bit of tuning. The idea is sound, however I think the implementation of the was not as good as it could be. What would be interesting would be to find out what they used as the compression volume, the diameter and length of pipe they used, the pressure sensor they used and the pressure difference they saw. from this pic ( <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/metaphorge/1495885933/sizes/l/in/set-72157602302921425/" rel="nofollow">http://www.flickr.com/photos/metaphorge/1495885933/sizes/l/in/set-72157602302921425/</a> ) it looks like it was about a 1/4&#8243; tube about 4&#8242; long which will have a comparable volume to the change in volume of the thing being squeezed and that will meen that the system will be low resolution and will saturate quickly (in this case that means the thing has been squished flat) which would explain the pump bulb and pressure gage there as to stop saturation the thing would need to be pressurised. This is why I thought it would need to be filled with a liquid, so that the change in volume is reduced and the sensor will have a larger range and not saturate. The probe I bought off the shelf has a bulk piece inside it thus reducing the total gas volume of the system and has a 2mm id pipe about 4&#8243; long so the force exerted on it acts almost entirely on the gas in the probe so both resolution and no saturation (assuming the user is not too strong) are assured. With suitable sensor it should generate a good output. the sort of sensor I am looking at is this <a href="http://uk.farnell.com/731687" rel="nofollow">http://uk.farnell.com/731687</a> They are nice and cheep and easy to use.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: qDot</title>
		<link>http://britishengineeringsystems.com/2008/09/07/more-ideas-of-a-dubious-nature/#comment-1257</link>
		<author>qDot</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Sep 2008 04:24:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://britishengineeringsystems.com/2008/09/07/more-ideas-of-a-dubious-nature/#comment-1257</guid>
		<description>So, I've talked to a couple of people who've built something similar to this. For instance, the Electric Orifice Orchestra at Arse Elektronika last year (Warning: Painful video, but it at least shows that it... "worked") - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tFCXXlcUng

I can try and dig out the plans or at least put you in contact if you'd like, just throw me an email.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So, I&#8217;ve talked to a couple of people who&#8217;ve built something similar to this. For instance, the Electric Orifice Orchestra at Arse Elektronika last year (Warning: Painful video, but it at least shows that it&#8230; &#8220;worked&#8221;) - <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tFCXXlcUng" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tFCXXlcUng</a></p>
<p>I can try and dig out the plans or at least put you in contact if you&#8217;d like, just throw me an email.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

