HSRW EOLab Students Wiki

User Tools

Site Tools

Trace: • mba • grafana • finca • comparision • panel
amc2021:groupl:report:start

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

amc2021:groupl:report:start [2021/09/06 19:49] – [6. Discussion and Conclusion] leen001amc2021:groupl:report:start [2023/01/05 14:38] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
Line 254: Line 254:
  
 **Limitations to the experiment:** **Limitations to the experiment:**
 +
 1. The sensor LM393 was not as sensitive to sounds as expected. An example is seen in location 2, albeit being the busiest street, the LM393 could only detect loud sounds like a truck's engine or a cruiser bike starting. A better sensor can be used in place of this to make a more accurate reading. 1. The sensor LM393 was not as sensitive to sounds as expected. An example is seen in location 2, albeit being the busiest street, the LM393 could only detect loud sounds like a truck's engine or a cruiser bike starting. A better sensor can be used in place of this to make a more accurate reading.
 +
 2. CO<sub>2</sub> readings taken were justified given the location of the three places, where there were more green patches, a higher concentration of CO<sub>2</sub> was detected. The measurement was taken after sunset in location 1; therefore, reduced photosynthesis processes contributed to those higher CO<sub>2</sub> concentration levels.  2. CO<sub>2</sub> readings taken were justified given the location of the three places, where there were more green patches, a higher concentration of CO<sub>2</sub> was detected. The measurement was taken after sunset in location 1; therefore, reduced photosynthesis processes contributed to those higher CO<sub>2</sub> concentration levels. 
 Nevertheless, to better assess the pollution levels, a different sensor could have been used to detect a more prominent pollutant, e.g., Carbon Monoxide or Nitrogen Dioxide. When this was tried with the MQ-135 sensor, the values received were strangely off the charts, making them unreliable. Nevertheless, to better assess the pollution levels, a different sensor could have been used to detect a more prominent pollutant, e.g., Carbon Monoxide or Nitrogen Dioxide. When this was tried with the MQ-135 sensor, the values received were strangely off the charts, making them unreliable.
 +
 3. The MQ-135 needed to heat up for over 24 hours to get a stable value. Due to the time limitations of testing in three different locations, the time to heat up was not achieved. So only a few hours of heating up could possibly cause the sensor to get odd values. 3. The MQ-135 needed to heat up for over 24 hours to get a stable value. Due to the time limitations of testing in three different locations, the time to heat up was not achieved. So only a few hours of heating up could possibly cause the sensor to get odd values.
 +
 4. Test results should have been taken simultaneously to overcome the limitation of difference in temperature and humidity conditions. 4. Test results should have been taken simultaneously to overcome the limitation of difference in temperature and humidity conditions.
  
  
-4. Test results should have been taken at the same time, in order to overcome the limitation of difference in temperature and humidity conditions. 
  
 ===== 7. References ===== ===== 7. References =====
amc2021/groupl/report/start.1630950575.txt.gz · Last modified: 2023/01/05 14:38 (external edit)