×
RadLog
Compare cpm counter out with cpm radlog in
2 years 3 months ago #6197
by yVega
Compare cpm counter out with cpm radlog in was created by yVega
I am also comparing the CPMs measured by Geiger counter and those counted by RadLog.
I connected RadLog with audio microphone jack input
I think it's normale differecies at the same time, but macro differencies on an average in the same day it's a bit suspicious, correct?
in the same day on the one hand there are 89 cpm on the software there are over 120 cpm..
where am i wrong?
what did I forget to set in the software?
I connected RadLog with audio microphone jack input
I think it's normale differecies at the same time, but macro differencies on an average in the same day it's a bit suspicious, correct?
in the same day on the one hand there are 89 cpm on the software there are over 120 cpm..
where am i wrong?
what did I forget to set in the software?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
2 years 3 months ago - 2 years 3 months ago #6198
by yVega
Replied by yVega on topic Compare cpm counter out with cpm radlog in
the spikes are even more suspicious
here is an example:
here is an example:
Last edit: 2 years 3 months ago by yVega.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
2 years 2 months ago #6201
by yVega
Replied by yVega on topic Compare cpm counter out with cpm radlog in
I had taken the signal from the piezoelectric capsule. I didn't realize the signal was so dirty and jagged.
I have now updated the peak recognition configurations in the "Audio" section of RadLog. So, now the software is counting the pulses more like the geiger counter source. In the meantime I will try to fix the signal upstream.
I have now updated the peak recognition configurations in the "Audio" section of RadLog. So, now the software is counting the pulses more like the geiger counter source. In the meantime I will try to fix the signal upstream.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Moderators: Gamma-Man
Time to create page: 0.206 seconds