Imaging (sensors)

Hello,My name is Joran, and I'm a student in Belgium. My school tasked me with a project that involves the use of the VL53L5CX sensor.Aside a few other guidelines, I have to follow this rule: no use of high-level programming languages (e.g. Python) or no use of the Arduino IDE, only assembly languages and C.As I already had another subject that used a XC888 processor from Infineon, I thought it would be easier to use this one again in this project, especially because I already knew the instruction set architecture.At the start I was unaware of the flash memory needed for the ultra-light driver for the sensor. I find myself with the hurdle of solving this problem: how can I still use the XC888 to do this project even though it contains 32 kbytes of flash memory. I am aware of other processors with more flash memory but I want to avoid the learning curve for this new processor and its instruction set.I have seen that the biggest portion of this ULD is the firmware that has to be 'uploade

Read reg 0x4f the data is 0x00,means No threshold events reported.and read reg 0x4d the high 4bit data is 0x0F,means Ranging Algo Overflow.But I don't know why this happens,and how to solve it.Could anyone please help me?​Thanks!

Hello.Isn't the period of interrupt not in timing budget?When tested indoors, the period of the interrupt is the timing budget.However, when testing outdoors, the interrupt cycle is irregular.If you look at UM2133 - Rev 6 page 11, what is reported when a target is not detected.If it is not detected, it should be reported as not detected, but no interrupt is generated.

Dear Sir, ​We will develop system with VL53L1X. Now we are going to port the driver for our Thread RTOS. There are several sample version at candidates such as STSW-IMG007, STSW-IMG009 , STSW-IMG013 and STSW-IMG032. Could you give me some advice for selecting the sample code? which one is better for our case?best regardsDai Sai

Hi!. We are developing a distance measurement solution and are planning to use the VL6180v1 and/or VL53L4CD Time of Flight sensors. Due to our application conditions we need to identify the position of a very specific spot surrounded by a lot of metal and other reflective surfaces, so that we need to use a reflective adhesive tape and maybe a lens to reduce the Field of View of the sensor. Has anyone used any of those two elements? Any recommendations on the subject? Thank you

I've been trying to design a custom board for a VL53L5CX ToF Sensor similar to a VL53L5CX-SATEL or the ones made by SparkFun and Pololu. I didn't want to use the GPIO Pins or I2C reset to simplify my project.I tried this design. However, I cannot receive sensor data. When I checked the SCL and SDA Pins using an oscilloscope I observed a constant voltage around 3.6 Volts. What did I do wrong?

I am started to work with the sensor, and when I tried to calibrate based on the documentations I fond that I when i use the SetTimingRange function (as shown ind the high accuracy example ).I tried to error check with the GetTimingRange function and I always got back the same result(14). It looks like the SetTimingRange function does not have any effect on the sensor.

Hi, I am new to VL53L3Cx sensor.I am trying to understand how to use the VL53L3CX_SimpleRanging example, to detect multiple targets.I am able to detect a single target with a good amount of certainty. But when i try to get distance measurement for 2 or more targets within the Fov (field of view) (until 4 targets per zone available according to the example code), i encounter a problem with it-it is sometimes identifying and sometimes don't. How can verify multi target detection?Thanks,Tzahi

I am considering using the above sensor to detect if a car is in a parking space in a garage. I would plan to mount the sensor ~6' above the floor on the wall at the end of the space. It would be pointing down in a 45˚ angle, which means the center of the FOV would be ~6' horizontally from the wall. Will this angle of viewing the floor be a problem? Obviously, when a vehicle is in the space, the measured distance would be much less. That's the fundamental concept of this detection method.

Where to locate missing header files for VL53L0X API?Hi allI am currently trying to integrate the VL53L0X sensor to a STM32L053 discovery board using CubeMX and Cube IDE, but I haven't had the best of luck...I am inexperienced regarding the integration of sensors and I2C.I have downloaded the API and API user manual. I have read the datasheet for the VL53L0X which only seems to provide me with two addresses for reading and writing (0x52 and 0x53). The datasheet seem to rely on the API library provided by ST, making it hard (or impossible for a newbie such as myself) to integrate otherwise.Now my issue is: after downloading the API and including all c-files and header-files provided under the API folder (core and platform) I am unable to build the project and get an error message that the windows.h, Windows.h and SERIAL_COMMS.h files do not exist.I do not understand why windows.h is needed, but it seems to complicate issues when I try to remove the #include. The SERIAL_COMMS.h soun

I am wondering how to extend the FOV of the 8x8 tof sensor. I think on mounting two or three VL53L5CX in a horizontal array. However, since all sensors operate at 940nm, I should place them far enough to avoid that the reflection on one is detected by other. Is that correct? If so, is there any parameter (like modulation) I could use to just place them together and expand the FOV, and consequently the zones?Thanks

Hi,I have read the tutorial and document about VL53L5CX. It says that the distance of targets and the range sigma are extracted from histogram by assuming a normal distribution (the distance and range sigma are the mean and standard variance of the distribution, respectively). However, i find the returned range sigma is always much lower than the actual ones. For example, the returned sigma rarely exceed 5 cm, but the actual sigma may be 2-5 times, which means that it is usually larger than 10 cm, and can even reach 20-30 cm.I test this by seting up a device suit which align L5 and a high-resolution depth sensor (RealSense D435 which have a depth resolution of 640x480). What is the reason behind this? Are there some post-processing algorithms, if yes, could you brifely describe how they work, so maybe i could recover the real standard variance which is important in my research.Many thanks,Yijin.

We need to understand the best topology / positioning when considering some different situations, for example:1) passage with of 0.8m with ceiling height of 2,60m2) passage width 1,5m, ceiling height of 2,60m3) passage width of 3m with ceiling height of 2,60m4) passage width of 6m with ceiling height of 3,5mThanskMauricio

..

I am checking signal status also for Big obstacle it showing Distance up to 2.1 meter(210Cm) and status is 0, and for small obstacle showing distance up to 1.2 meter(120 cm) and status is zero, it is not useful in outdoor environment , and it Hangs after some time continuously giving same result if obstacle present or not present, we are following delay as per directed by datasheet for start ranging and stop ranging

I'm implementing the VL53L5CX ultralight driver on an ATSAM4L. The sensor responds correctly when requesting Device ID and Rev. The init function runs without errors (status = 0) through the loading of firmware and restarting the sensor's MCU. But one of the next steps in the init function is getting the offset NVM data. It writes VL53L5CX_GET_NVM_CMD without error (status is still = 0). Then it polls the sensor, and at that point it returns status = 66.I have a Total Phase I2C protocol analyzer on it during the entire init process. It reports no errors during any of the transactions. Any ideas? This step is the first WrMulti() call where the register address is not 0 (it's 0x2fd8). So that is a possibility. But the I2C analyzer shows 0x2fd8 being correctly passed to the sensor. So I'm running out of ideas. All help or suggestions appreciated!

How can one adapt the WrMulti() and RdMulti() I2C functions for MCUs that have an I2C length limit? This is an oft-asked question.

I can see from the datasheets (VL53L4CD for example) that the emitter and sensor volume is represented as two cones that start at the sensor face and grow bigger as the distance from the sensor increases.If I am measuring the distance to a target that is visible through a "tube", can the sensor figure out that the walls of the tube are not the target and ignore them, or do I need to ensure that the tube diameter is larger (+ some margin) than the diameter of the sensing element's "cone" as shown in the datasheet?

I'm a little frustrated that there isn't a "Here's ST's Time of Flight sensor offering and which sensors have which features" kind of page. The sensor datasheets themselves also do not give any real comparison data to other (pin compatible) parts.From what I have gathered:vl53l0x - 25o FOV, base model in ranging sensors. Single zone, single targetvl53l1  - 27o FOV, multi-zone (adjustable FoV)vl53l1x - same but with more zones?vl53l1cb - no ideavl53l2 - not a productvl53l3cx - 25o FOV, multi target, faster (1MHz) I2Cvl53l4cd - 18o FOV, short range (1mm - 1300mm), fast (100Hz), 1MHz I2Cvl53l4cx - histogram based (?), long range (0-6000mm), 18o, multi targetLooks like the L5 isn't footprint-compatible:vl53l5cx - 63o FOV, multizone, mutli-targetvl53l5cp - cx + person detect?vl53l8ca - 2nd gen, wide FOV like L5, pin compatible with L5?Then there's the VL6180, which is not footprint compatible and I think is older, based on an earlier ToF design, and the VL6180x which add

Hi,I am trying to find a low power solution for close range (down to 1mm) proximity detection at 1Hz frequency. It seems VL53L4CD can do the job pretty good but I didn't find power consumption details of low power mode in the datasheet.I also found there is a Ultra Low Power driver for VL53L3CX which only consumes ~50uA@1Hz but it doesn't support close-range. Can VL53L4CD achieve something similar wrt power consumption?Thanks!

I see from the datasheet that the indoor measurement accuracy at 1-100mm is +/-7mm. I’d like to use the sensor to measure the deflection of a piece of stainless steel, which is used as part of an actuator to hold an object still for measurement. Basically this bent piece of metal is going to be moved using a lead screw on a stepper motor until it makes contact with an object. The metal will deflect as squishes against the object, and I’m interested in trying to see the moment of deflection and gauging “how much�? deflection has occurred as a way to gauge how much force this metal is applying to the object.The nominal distance from the sensor to the steel is ~5mm, and I would be trying to detect about 1-2mm of deflection at most. Now this is (very much) inside the measurement accuracy of +/-7mm so I know I can’t “trust�? the absolute distance reported, but the exact deflection amount isn’t important, just the fact that it’s deflecting. I don’t see a “repeatability�? specification i

..

The datasheet shows VL53L0X has 25 degrees of FOV. However each VL53L0X shows slightly different FOV.For example, one VL53L0X seems to be 24 degrees, another VL53L0X seems to be 26 degrees.What is the FOV range of VL53L0X?If possible, I hope to maximize the FOV of VL53L0X. Let me know how to maximize the FOV of VL53L0X by Software.

Hello.I am using the VL53L1.It's fine for indoor lighting.However, in sunlight, the measurable distance becomes shorter.Is there any way to test it similar to this sunlight?Could you please tell me how to test it in relation to sunlight?​thank you.

I have used VL53L0X without using VL53L0X_SetReferenceSpads() and VL53L0X_GetReferenceSpads(). The VL53L0X are working well without using them. I found out that some VL53L0Xs have narrower FOV than others and that VL53L0X_SetReferenceSpads() and VL53L0X_GetReferenceSpads() are not implemented in my code.Of course, the code has been used for all VL53L0X.I thought VL53L0X_SetReferenceSpads() and VL53L0X_GetReferenceSpads() seemed to effect the FOV.After I implemented them, the FOV of some VL53L0Xs was changed slightly.I tested the reflective sheet at the same boundary of FOV. If they are implemented, the distance(RangeMilliMeter) becomes about 20 mm shorter than before and the EffectiveSpadRtnCount decreases to about 48,000 less about 2,000 than before about 50,000.Why are these happening?