Products > Thermal Imaging

Guide PC210 Review

<< < (5/15) > >>

You got a PM. Send me please a email with the files...
I am affraid when you upload images here the EXIF-data could be damaged. I will post them in the group as images and as ZIP so that everone can download the originals and test them in some analysis tools.

When you say "measurement errors" do you mean an error message? or just inaccuracies in the measurements.

The temperature here in the UK is now below 0 so I am interested to test.. Can you let me know a specific test i can do?


1st we found out that setting the reflected temp. did not affect anything. So it seems the software just do not factor in RAT.
You can test to measure something with a known emisivity value after the camera was 5 - 10 min. in the cold.

So just go outside for a few minutes and let the camera cool down before taking the images.

I think I have found a bug in the firmware...

The PC210 do not factor the reflected temperature in the temp. calculation! No matter if I set the RAT to -20 or +550°C I get the same temp. reading...  :-//

I have attached my images so that you can test it yourself!

Reflected temperature has a far greater effect when the target is reflective and so reflecting the environs temperature towards the camera. Try your test with a target that is lower Emissivity and the cameras Emissivity setting appropriate for it. Anything below an Emissivity of 0.5 becomes a challenging scenario for accurate temperature measurement if Emissivity enhancers are not employed. As you will know, the Reflected Temperature setting on a thermal camera is used to compensate for the thermal energy that is being reflected off of a low Emissivity targets surface in order to remove the reflected energy element from the targets temperature calculation. If the reflected temperature setting has no effect on a low Emissivity, highly reflective target, then that is indeed proof that the cameras measurement system is not using that variable in its compensation calculations. In your tests I see that you are using an Emissivity of 0.8. That is not a target Emissivity that would normally concern me greatly with regard to reflected thermal energy. It could be that the firmware only uses the ambient reflected temperature in calculations involving much lower Emissivity settings. I am surprised that your test showed little difference in the measurements with such wild ambient reflected temperature values though.



[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod