Multifunction DAQ

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Twisted pair to BNC noise issue

Solved!
Go to solution

Hi,

 

I am in the process of compiling a sensor system for an offshore asset using accelerometers. The differential voltage signal is transferred in a twisted pair cabled and is connected to data acquisition (NI-9239) via BNC. In my testing it seems that a lot of noise is introduced in the connector between the cable and the data acquisition equipment. Do you have any recommendations on how to connect a twisted pair cable to a NI-9239 via BNC? Or commonly used connectors from twisted pair to BNC?

0 Kudos
Message 1 of 9
(3,676 Views)

The accelerometers already have signal condinioners? (IEPE with 10 to 20 mA is a common long cable field application, however the 9239 has no IEPE support... and the usual 2-4mA IEPE supply can work but sometimes the extra low impedance help 😉 )

Output impedance?

How long is your twisted pair?

Can you  try a lower the input impedance (1k-10k) ?

 

Greetings from Germany
Henrik

LV since v3.1

“ground” is a convenient fantasy

'˙˙˙˙uıɐƃɐ lɐıp puɐ °06 ǝuoɥd ɹnoʎ uɹnʇ ǝsɐǝld 'ʎɹɐuıƃɐɯı sı pǝlɐıp ǝʌɐɥ noʎ ɹǝqɯnu ǝɥʇ'


0 Kudos
Message 2 of 9
(3,651 Views)

Thanks for the response Henrik.

 

I see that my original post could use a bit more information.

 

I have nine accelerometers where the only difference is the cabling. For four of them I use the following cable:

 

1786.PNG

 

For the rest I use the following pigtail in combination a terminal to BNC adaptor:

 

1592.PNG

With this setup I get the following RMS-values at idle:

rms.png

 

It is pretty evident that something goes wrong for sensor 5-9. As the cables are from the same manufacturer I assume that it is the connector that is to blame. I have also tried splicing the pigtail to a BNC cable, but I am not able to achieve better results using that setup.

0 Kudos
Message 3 of 9
(3,642 Views)

What are the types and sensitivities (cal-data) of your sensors?

The RMS voltage noise is about 3.5 times higher,  a 8315A2D0 4000mV/g to 8330B... 1200mV/g matches 3.3 times the sensitivity 😉

How does it look like if you compare scaled RMS values?

(assuming all sensors see about the same input :D)

 

Greetings from Germany
Henrik

LV since v3.1

“ground” is a convenient fantasy

'˙˙˙˙uıɐƃɐ lɐıp puɐ °06 ǝuoɥd ɹnoʎ uɹnʇ ǝsɐǝld 'ʎɹɐuıƃɐɯı sı pǝlɐıp ǝʌɐɥ noʎ ɹǝqɯnu ǝɥʇ'


0 Kudos
Message 4 of 9
(3,637 Views)

All sensors are 8316A2D0D0TA00:

 

https://www.kistler.com/?type=669&fid=78520&model=document

 

The sensitivity is very close to 4000 mV/g.

0 Kudos
Message 5 of 9
(3,629 Views)

Have you checked (pin to pin) both cable connections to be equal? 

You want pin 1 & 2 to for +- power and 4&3 for +-signal..

The 1786D cable seems to be wrong according to this doc:

https://www.kistler.com/?type=669&fid=79055&callee=frontend

 

Greetings from Germany
Henrik

LV since v3.1

“ground” is a convenient fantasy

'˙˙˙˙uıɐƃɐ lɐıp puɐ °06 ǝuoɥd ɹnoʎ uɹnʇ ǝsɐǝld 'ʎɹɐuıƃɐɯı sı pǝlɐıp ǝʌɐɥ noʎ ɹǝqɯnu ǝɥʇ'


0 Kudos
Message 6 of 9
(3,625 Views)

It seems that I have used a wrong picture of the cable. The correct name is 1786C10 and it looks like this:

 

1786.PNG

0 Kudos
Message 7 of 9
(3,620 Views)
Solution
Accepted by John_Doe_

And how is it wired?

 IF the power -  and signal - are swaped the sensor migth still work (due to protection diodes) but you get only half the amplitude... 

Just check the connections to be pin to pin equal and correct 😉

 

Greetings from Germany
Henrik

LV since v3.1

“ground” is a convenient fantasy

'˙˙˙˙uıɐƃɐ lɐıp puɐ °06 ǝuoɥd ɹnoʎ uɹnʇ ǝsɐǝld 'ʎɹɐuıƃɐɯı sı pǝlɐıp ǝʌɐɥ noʎ ɹǝqɯnu ǝɥʇ'


Message 8 of 9
(3,617 Views)

I have just checked the cable and I am quite surprised. The "good" cable is single ended and not for differential voltage as it should be.

 

I am very grateful for your help Henrik. Thanks!

0 Kudos
Message 9 of 9
(3,608 Views)