User:Sarah Labianca/Notebook/Smyth Lab/2012/02/10

From OpenWetWare
< User:Sarah Labianca‎ | Notebook‎ | Smyth Lab‎ | 2012‎ | 02
Revision as of 10:49, 15 February 2012 by Andy Maloney (talk | contribs) (Comments)
Jump to: navigation, search
Owwnotebook icon.png <html><img src="/images/9/94/Report.png" border="0" /></html> Main project page
<html><img src="/images/c/c3/Resultset_previous.png" border="0" /></html>Previous entry<html>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</html>Next entry<html><img src="/images/5/5c/Resultset_next.png" border="0" /></html>

Issues with calibrating the force pendulum

Chatillon TCD-200
The force gauge we were going to use to measure the impulses of the force pendulum was the Chatillon TCD-200. However we ran into some issues with the machine. The machine is designed for stretching and compression tests, and the software is no exception. When powered on, the TCD-200 moves the force gauge either up or down, depending on the type of test one is conducting. We decided to remove the force gauge from its mount on the test stand to prevent movement and run the software to take continuous measurements.

The software and force gauge did not take measurements well-- we are unsure of its accuracy. It seemed to max out well before its designated limit. We would raise the pendulum arm and release it to impact with the sensor. However, the force gauge would often move backwards from the force of the impact. We could not completely secure the force gauge and prevent it from moving. When recording the impacts, the graphs produced by the software showed strange data. Sometimes the peaks of force were in the negatives, and sometimes in the positive. There was no consistency, the data was unusable. Because of this, we decided to build our own force gauge to calibrate the pendulum.


Andy Maloney 13:49, 15 February 2012 (EST): If you saved any of the strange looking data, I would recommend that you post it. That way there is more context to what you describe above.