I'm playing around with LED pulse counting on a Wiznet ethernet based board and finding it both very stable and more accurate compared to CT clamps on my home and office installs.
The big downside is power consumption - I had a CT unit working wirelessly (using a Jeenode but much like a Nanode RF/ Emon TX) on batteries using a simple 'wake up, measure, send, sleep for a minute' sketch and it lasted for months.
With the pulse count, for now I'm leaving the power on between (interrupt derived) pulses to get accurate time - in a sense im pulse timing not pulse counting.
Anyone developed beyond this point? I considered taking a fairly long time period and counting pulses, and accepted the rror between (say) 11.1 pules and 11.9 pulses. Any thoughts or experiences?
Pulse count EmonTX running on batteries
Submitted by Guest on Wed, 22/02/2012 - 13:19I'm playing around with LED pulse counting on a Wiznet ethernet based board and finding it both very stable and more accurate compared to CT clamps on my home and office installs.
The big downside is power consumption - I had a CT unit working wirelessly (using a Jeenode but much like a Nanode RF/ Emon TX) on batteries using a simple 'wake up, measure, send, sleep for a minute' sketch and it lasted for months.
With the pulse count, for now I'm leaving the power on between (interrupt derived) pulses to get accurate time - in a sense im pulse timing not pulse counting.
Anyone developed beyond this point? I considered taking a fairly long time period and counting pulses, and accepted the rror between (say) 11.1 pules and 11.9 pulses. Any thoughts or experiences?