Tweet
Allright, are you ready for a scientific wonder!
I have developed a way to transmit video under water without using radiowaves. It is based on ultrasonic transducers, a hydrophone and a laptop for calculations.
The project is only in its infant stage, but I am getting on with it. Maybe it will be finished in about a year. At the moment the system will ahve a resolution of 176x144 (Q-CIF) and use 9-bit colors (512 different colors) and a 2 pictures per sec. I now it sounds pretty ugly, especially the 2 pictures per sec, but then here is the bonuses about the system :
Bonus:
- Its 100% legal, uses now radiowaves only highfrequence sound
- It will have a range far above what can be achieved with radio transmitters.
- the transmitter can be small
- the transmitter will run 6 volt, maybe 9 volt.
- Maybe I can implement the transmitter to send some data about speed, depth, batterylevel etc. too
Negatives:
- Low picture rate and low resolution
- Might have problems in waters with smooth and hard shore (Like swimmingpools) as a result of strong echoes.
- Pretty expensive maybe around 200-300 dollar (if you don't have a laptop then you need that too)
- You might need a laptop with a pretty good graphics card (To do the math)
- The receiver and laptop must do a lot of math to create the actual picture, thereby using your laptop battery very fast
- Range dramaticly reduced when above water.
- The project is long from finished and I might discover some problems I can't solve at the moment.
- It will take at least a year before I have a working version.
At the moment I am working on how to create the computer interface with microcontrolers. I have found a suitable camera and some possible ultrasonic transducer.
Now what I would like to know from you fellow sub builders is:
Would I have a market for this nifty wireless camera?
Andreas DK
I have developed a way to transmit video under water without using radiowaves. It is based on ultrasonic transducers, a hydrophone and a laptop for calculations.
The project is only in its infant stage, but I am getting on with it. Maybe it will be finished in about a year. At the moment the system will ahve a resolution of 176x144 (Q-CIF) and use 9-bit colors (512 different colors) and a 2 pictures per sec. I now it sounds pretty ugly, especially the 2 pictures per sec, but then here is the bonuses about the system :
Bonus:
- Its 100% legal, uses now radiowaves only highfrequence sound
- It will have a range far above what can be achieved with radio transmitters.
- the transmitter can be small
- the transmitter will run 6 volt, maybe 9 volt.
- Maybe I can implement the transmitter to send some data about speed, depth, batterylevel etc. too
Negatives:
- Low picture rate and low resolution
- Might have problems in waters with smooth and hard shore (Like swimmingpools) as a result of strong echoes.
- Pretty expensive maybe around 200-300 dollar (if you don't have a laptop then you need that too)
- You might need a laptop with a pretty good graphics card (To do the math)
- The receiver and laptop must do a lot of math to create the actual picture, thereby using your laptop battery very fast
- Range dramaticly reduced when above water.
- The project is long from finished and I might discover some problems I can't solve at the moment.
- It will take at least a year before I have a working version.
At the moment I am working on how to create the computer interface with microcontrolers. I have found a suitable camera and some possible ultrasonic transducer.
Now what I would like to know from you fellow sub builders is:
Would I have a market for this nifty wireless camera?
Andreas DK
Tweet
Comment