🚀 go-pugleaf

"S. Young" <shy9@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3B79F766.294@earthlink.net...
> Robert Miller wrote:
> >
> >
> > Basically my idea is for a device that will detect the tornado, but
since it
> > can only
> > detect one as close as the back yard it is next to useless for the home
that
> > has
> > the detector.  So it broadcasts a signal to every other device within
range.
> > I
> > believe I can get the production costs down to about $40.00 each maybe
less.
> > One detector in a city is useless.  So if I could seed a city with 1,000
> > detectors,
> > still rather sparse.  Every device purchased would increase the
> > effectiveness of
> > the network.
> >
> Althought not an electronics engineer, it sounds like you have each
> device inputting data from 999 OTHER devices and processing that data.
> I question if that data processing can be done for less than $100 per
> device.
>
> What type of RF would be involved, and how many people would be alarmed
> at that much RF in their neighborhood.
>
> But a more basic question is what type of data do you expect each of
> these 1000 devices to gather, and how often (more data means more
> processing).  Although there may be some common "signal" that could be
> detected (by some sort of device), such a signal has NOT YET BEEN
> DESCRIBED. I may be wrong, but I can't recall any computer program that
> is able to model tornadogensis. Even pressure drops occur without
> tornadogensis.

Micro-processors have dropped in price,  as well as digital signal
processors and
even communications chipsets.

Building a foolproof sensor is not practical,  anything can be fooled given
the right
circumstances.  Is a smoke detector foolproof? yet how many lives are saved
every
day by smoke detectors.  There are simple ways to increase the accuracy of
the
detector in given design constraints.

Robert Miller