-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Enable pre-heat for PMSx003 sensors #35
Conversation
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ | |||
|
|||
ALIASES = ("PMS1003", "G1", "PMS5003", "G5", "PMS7003", "G7", "PMSA003", "G10") | |||
|
|||
PREHEAT = 10 # 10 seconds |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Since this observation is only for PMSA003, would it make more sense to create a pmsa003.py
module to keep the change isolated to that sensor?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It might be mentioned only on the PMSA003
, but it seems to me that this should affect all Plantower sensors that support sleep
/wake
commands.
The PMSA003 sensor takes approximately 10 seconds to warm up, with InconsistentObservation and WrongMessageFormat exceptions raised for earlier samples. From experimentation, 10 seconds is almost exactly the warm up time, but the datasheet actually recommends 30s [^1]: Stable data should be got at least 30 seconds after the sensor wakeup from the sleep mode because of the fan’s performance. However, it makes sense to set this number based on what happens in practice; we can always increase if others observe worse behaviour. [^1]: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0176/3274/files/PMSA003_datasheet.pdf?v=1619703
eb7154d
to
a00176d
Compare
Hi @avaldebe, just one last PR from me. It's fairly optional from my perspective, but I thought you'd be interested in the behaviour of this sensor, at least. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for this and your previous PRs, and thanks for your patience dealing with my pickiness.
This is a viable replacement for PMSx003 sensors since [^1]. It makes sense to embed warm up knowledge in the PyPMS repository, rather than pushing the warm up time decision forward. [^1]: avaldebe/PyPMS#35
Thanks Alvaro 🙂 |
This is a viable replacement for PMSx003 sensors since [^1]. It makes sense to embed warm up knowledge in the PyPMS repository, rather than pushing the warm up time decision forward. [^1]: avaldebe/PyPMS#35
This is a viable replacement for PMSx003 sensors since [^1]. It makes sense to embed warm up knowledge in the PyPMS repository, rather than pushing this one bit of implementation to consumers. [^1]: avaldebe/PyPMS#35
This is a viable replacement for PMSx003 sensors since [^1]. It makes sense to embed warm up knowledge in the PyPMS repository, rather than pushing this one bit of implementation to consumers. [^1]: avaldebe/PyPMS#35
just came fro holidays, will deal with this today/tomorrow |
The PMSA003 sensor takes approximately 10 seconds to warm up, with
InconsistentObservation and WrongMessageFormat exceptions raised
for earlier samples. From experimentation, 10 seconds is almost exactly
the warm up time, but the datasheet actually recommends 30s 1:
However, it makes sense to set this number based on what happens in
practice; we can always increase if others observe worse behaviour.
Footnotes
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0176/3274/files/PMSA003_datasheet.pdf?v=1619703 ↩