🚀 go-pugleaf

David Lesher wrote:
> 
> "Antony N. Lord" <antony_lordX@hotmail.com> writes:
> 
> >>   Actually, the LM35 and variants are more accurate than most commercial
> >> thermometers; one has to shell out a fairly good chunk of change to get
> >> a calibrated thermometer as good as or better than these ICs.
> >>   No calculations, lines of best fit, or any other trash like that.
> 
> >I suppose that is true - but surely there has to be calculations /
> >adjustments made due to voltage loss etc. in the cable run between the
> >sensor and the interface.
> 
> >More importantly - any clue as to bringing the maximum output voltage
> >(at the upper measuring temperature point) closer to the 4095mV level.
> 
> >It seems pointless not to be using the "full scale" of the input board.
> 
> I'm snowed in/out {in at a friend's, out of BWI..} but thinking out
> loud... the LM35 spec sheet had a suggestion of a ?200 ohm resistor
> at the device, getting you a current loop scheme.  Could you then
> use a 2K resistor across the DVM input; getting you 0.1v/C?
> 
> The depressed zero is harder; ISTM there are schemes on the sheet
> with split supplies.
>         Or
> Are you wed to the LM35? I seem to recall similar sensors that 0K,
> not 0C based, getting you 2730mv at 0C.
> 
> --
> A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
> & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
> Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
> is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

  I, for one, would like to know about the zero Kelvin referenced
devices.