Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.electronics.design > #459992

Re: Microphone risk factors

Show all headers | View raw

On 5/12/2017 8:02 AM, Michael Kellett wrote:
>> What I'm looking for are guidelines that might be common to all
>> such "transducers" with *specific* refinements that would
>> apply to different technologies.  Most of the information I've
>> found specifies those refinements in terms of cost or
>> *signal* characteristics (use this for lots of dynamic range
>> in signal; use that for a flat response; etc.)
>
> There are so many different factors that affect reliability that it's
> not possible to help without more information.
>
> For example:
> Many of the tiny mics (including most MEMS devices)  have very small
> holes for the sound to get in - they are very susceptable to dirt. A
> nice big traditional moving coil microphone with a 1.5" diameter is not
> much upset by mouse crap sized particles but may  have other issues.
>
> The MEMs mics are likely to be the most realible in terms of random
> failures in benign conditions (because of the very automated and
> controlled manufacturing process.)
>
> So if you tell us what you want to do with it it may be possible to
> help.

You're looking at it the wrong way.  I want to know what can
possibly be done WITH a microphone as a cheap transducer to
decide how I can apply them.

You'd like me to say "I want to deform a piece of metal; how
can I do that?"

Ans:
- wack it with a hammer
- bend it with some pliers
- swage it in a hydraulic press
- heat it to its melting point and drape it over a form
- selectively add/remove material to affect the net deformation

I, instead, am saying, "Hammers are cheap.  What sorts of things can
I do with them?  And, what are the things that will cause a hammer
to fail or be contraindicated in a particular application."
Ans:
    "You could use it to deform a piece of metal..."
    "You could use it as a paperweight..."
    "You could use it to drive a nail..."
    "You could use it as a tourniquet..."

[Ask yourself what uses you can devise for a microphone (or any
other transducer of your choosing).  If you can't come up with
a dozen (or score), you're not trying!]

As I mentioned previously, a friend uses them in qualifying new
engines -- "listen" for characteristic sounds of valve/lifter/rocker
noises instead of pulling the valve covers off after every N hours
of simulated wear.

Another firm has a device that uses a microphone to determine the
structural integrity of telephone poles.

Putting a microphone on a hot engine block exposes it to a different set
of stresses than holding it against a telephone pole.

Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Microphone risk factors Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-10 21:27 -0700
  Re: Microphone risk factors Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 21:39 -0700
  Re: Microphone risk factors jrwalliker@gmail.com - 2017-05-11 07:01 -0700
    Re: Microphone risk factors Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-11 11:06 -0700
      Re: Microphone risk factors piglet <erichpwagner@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-12 09:02 +0100
      Re: Microphone risk factors "Michael Kellett" <nospam@invalid.com> - 2017-05-12 16:02 +0100
        Re: Microphone risk factors Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-12 09:37 -0700
          Re: Microphone risk factors "Michael Kellett" <nospam@invalid.com> - 2017-05-12 18:08 +0100
            Re: Microphone risk factors Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-12 11:02 -0700
              Re: Microphone risk factors Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 17:44 -0700
              Re: Microphone risk factors Terry Newton <nbill@bellsouth.net> - 2017-05-13 17:19 +0000
                Re: Microphone risk factors Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-13 11:57 -0700
                Re: Microphone risk factors Jan Panteltje <pNa0nStpealmtje@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-13 19:12 +0000
                Re: Microphone risk factors Jan Panteltje <pNa0nStpealmtje@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-14 08:40 +0000
                Re: Microphone risk factors Jan Panteltje <pNa0nStpealmtje@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-14 09:17 +0000
                Re: Microphone risk factors Jan Panteltje <pNa0nStpealmtje@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-14 10:49 +0000
                Re: Microphone risk factors Terry Newton <nbill@bellsouth.net> - 2017-05-13 19:26 +0000
                Re: Microphone risk factors (OT -- long) Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-13 13:37 -0700
            Re: Microphone risk factors "dcaster@krl.org" <dcaster@krl.org> - 2017-05-13 11:06 -0700
              Re: Microphone risk factors Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-13 12:11 -0700
              Re: Microphone risk factors krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-13 20:36 -0400

csiph-web