• State
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 1 reply
  • Subscribers 16 subscribers
  • Views 500 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Similar topics

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

TIDM-RF430-TEMPSENSE & TIDA-00721

Chanho No
Intellectual 790 points
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TIDA-00721, TIDM-RF430-TEMPSENSE, RF430FRL152H, MSP430G2403, RF430CL330H, LMT70, ADS1113

Hello,

I am looking for NFC Termperature sensing patch(Battery-Less) solution for Humand body.

There are TIDM-RF430-TEMPSENSE and TIDA-00721 solution.

I found 'Generally the SD14 using a thermistor can achieve about 0.2C-0.5C accuracy in the 20-45C range'  on the bleow e2e link,

http://e2e.ti.com/support/wireless_connectivity/nfc_rfid/f/667/t/433414 

I want to achive  temperature accruacy of under the ±0.2°C for human skin Temperature measurement.

TIDM-RF430-TEMPSENSE is used only RF430FRL152H and termistor.

But, TIDA-00721 is used RF430CL330H, ADS1113(16bit), MSP430G2403 and LMT70.

I know that RF430FRL152H include MSP430 and ADC(SD14).

So, I want to know can we use RF430FRL152H and LMT70 instead of thermistor?

If we use RF430FRL152H and LMT70, can we achive temperature accruacy of under the ±0.2°C?

if possilble, please let me guide how to do.

Thanks.

  • 0
    TI__Guru*** 128195 points
    Hello Chanho,

    I am not sure if it can reach that accuracy, but first let me inform you of something to consider in general.

    Even if the RF430FRL152H could manage that level of accuracy, it may not be a good fit for your application. To get high precision on the SD14, you will need a lot of time. For maximum accuracy you are looking at 2 seconds minimum using the Moving Average Filter. You may need up to 4 or 8 seconds to really achieve the less than 0.2C accuracy if that's even possible. That would be a long delay to hold an NFC reader to the temperature patch in a Batteryless application as you would need to provide an RF field the entire duration.

    I would say if you want to go with a batteryless solution, the TIDA-00721 method is more realistic.

    Did you have any concerns with the TIDA-00721 that made you want to use the FRL instead? Does knowing the length of time needed for high accuracy sample change your assessment - would that even work for you, or does that rule out the FRL regardless of if it could actually hit that accuracy?