Those both sound like good answers, the 316 stainless ought to corrode less, and the corrosion will be proportional to the current - so a reduction in that will reduce the galvanic corrosion.
You can still get galvanic corrosion with dissimilar metals, might be good to make the other part of this thing stainless, too (if you can). Stainless can still corrode, and this salt water + electric current combination is tough on the surface. Your best bet may be to plate the probe with palladium.
Combating Conductivity sensor electrolytic corrosion
-
16th April 2012 05:05 PM #1Mosaic
Combating Conductivity sensor electrolytic corrosion
Hi all:
I am using a PIC with weak pull up on a galvanized iron wire probe into a mild salt solution act as a level sensor. The other probe is at circuit ground.
When the PIC WPU pin is pulled down by conduction to ground the level is detected.
After 3 weeks the WPU probe corrodes.
I am considering the following steps and I'd like any input from the forum members:
1) Upgrade to 316 s/s probes.
2) Dynamically enable the WPU and sample for level once per second or so at a tiny duty cycle...running at instruction speeds: perhaps a millisecond sample. Then either float the probe pin or output a digital zero until the next sample.
What do u think, thanks.
-
16th April 2012 05:45 PM #2duffy
0Please respond to items in forum, not in private messages.
-
16th April 2012 06:15 PM #3jpanhalt
You might also want to consider titanium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanium). It is becoming quite common.
John0
-
16th April 2012 11:42 PM Thread Starter #4Mosaic
BTW from a PIC16f886, what is the actual voltage on a pin outputing a digital LOW? 5 VDC supply.
Also, there appears to be no "ADC style" delay required for the WPU. Does this mean I can enable the WPU and then sample the input pin right after and obtain a correct reading?0Last edited by Mosaic; 17th April 2012 at 12:47 AM.
-
17th April 2012 03:53 AM #5Pommie
I'm not clear on how you are reading the pin, are you using the ADC? If so then, although the WPUs act instantly, the ADC capacitor needs time to charge. As the WPUs are typically 20k this would require quite a long acquisition time.
One other thing to consider is using two pins alternatively so you even the corrosion on the electrodes. Output ground on one and read the other. Note that the WPUs are automatically turned off for any pin set to output.
Edit, digital low is a maximum of 0.6V - no load - see table 17.5 of data sheet.
Mike.0Last edited by Pommie; 17th April 2012 at 03:55 AM.
-
17th April 2012 07:20 AM #6Diver300
Most conductive sensors use AC for that reason. You could put a capacitor in series with the probe to prevent the DC that leads to corrosion. You will need a more complicated detector to work with the capacitor but it should not be too difficult.
-
18th April 2012 12:39 AM Thread Starter #7Mosaic
No ADC ...simply depends on conductivity to pull a digital low on the input pin.
Originally Posted by Pommie
I am using a direct ground connection so oscillating the current requires a board rebuild.
B4 I do a board rebuild I am going with the 1/1000 duty cycle and upgrade to 308 s/s probes from pieces of TIG welding rod. Basically activate the WPU to sample and then deactivate until the next sample @ a 1sec sample period0
-
19th April 2012 03:03 PM Thread Starter #8Mosaic
I am interested in optimizing the sensitivity of the sensor bu using adc. I note the pdf data sheet on the 16f882/6 shows a huge adc sampling time of 4.67mS, I feel they mean 4.67uS. Section 9.3 ,pg 107. Can anyone advise?
0
-
20th April 2012 03:50 AM #9be80be
Sorry it is 4.67mS
To calculate the minimum acquisition
time, Equation 9-1 may be used. This equation
assumes that 1/2 LSb error is used (1024 steps for the
ADC). The 1/2 LSb error is the maximum error allowed
for the ADC to meet its specified resolution
-
20th April 2012 01:38 PM #10duffy
Mosaic - you are correct, it is really 4.67μS. Page 13 on the Errata sheet here, with the corrected units in the equation -
http://www.electro-tech-online.com/c.../04/80302F.pdf
Parroting back the error on the spec sheet isn't helping. If you had actually looked at the equation, you would have noticed that first they had Tc in μS, and then put it in mS in the final equation - an obvious mistake that requires no math to discover. Also, 4.67ms would be an ABSURDLY long acquisition time. Originally Posted by be80be
+1Last edited by duffy; 20th April 2012 at 06:10 PM.
Please respond to items in forum, not in private messages.
| Tags |
| Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Conductivity Sensor | AlphaRugal79 | General Electronics Chat | 1 | 20th February 2007, 11:46 PM |
| Current and Conductivity | ElectroMaster | Electronic Theory | 1 | 2nd February 2007, 12:50 PM |
| Inductive Conductivity Sensor | cdr | General Electronics Chat | 8 | 23rd June 2004, 01:29 PM |
| Building a vibration sensor | mmilbury | Electronic Projects Design/Ideas/Reviews | 3 | 24th October 2003, 12:34 PM |
| Audio for a motion sensor | Poncho | Electronic Projects Design/Ideas/Reviews | 3 | 14th December 2002, 04:11 PM |