X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.98.4 at av01.lsn.net Message-ID: <54F9CC6C.7070903@ecosensory.com> Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 09:49:00 -0600 From: John Griessen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] [OT] Temperature sensor and control recommendation References: <201503051621 DOT t25GL09H018380 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com On 03/06/2015 08:55 AM, Evan Foss wrote: > Why is everyone assuming this should be done digitally? 0.3 deg C is close to the tolerances of thermocouples you can buy, and the temperature dependencies of the control circuit are in that range also. With so much needing calibration to get rid of offsets and drifts, programmable seems the way to get whole-system accuracy. Precision is easy to get with digitizers and sigma delta tech, which leaves accuracy of the whole system, and it's difficult and time consuming to iterate the design of an analog machine exposed to fluctuating ambient outside the oven, and sensor drift as it gets broken in with use over weeks.