Sensor Tech (Sonic, Infrared, or Microwave)?

[Scipio]

I have been looking into rear obsticle detection technology since I purchased my AV a year ago. An entire car can hide behind my AV and I would not be able to see it. So far camera technology looks the best but is very expensive. Looking into the alternatives the detection equiptment costs much less but it seems you get what you pay for with false positives.

I can't help but wonder about the practicality of the technology

Sonic - would include products that use soundwave detection...I like the looks of this one http://www.parking-aid.com/. It has a wireless LCD dispay to give you some kind of visual feedback as to distance and relative position of the obsticle and costs about a hundred buck.
How reliable is sonic technology...anyone have experience with this type of system?

Infrared - ATN Auto Park 2000 looks like its infrared. It seems to me that the seonsor is looking for the reflection from the IR lights. I imagine you have to be careful about the placement of the sensor (ie...you want to keep it low to be able hit potential childrens toys placed directley on your AV's 6). I am just guessing that this is the least reliable.

Microwave - I found this British site with this product available http://www.sempal.co.uk/acatalog/spal_parking_distance_sensors.html I can see some real potential for an ariel designed detection sensor. It boast 180 degree detection capability which I don't think anyone needs or even wants but I am sure you can manipulate that area by antena placement. I am wondering if anyone has experience with microwave technology in this application? Seems it would be like Sonar technology.

Please feel free to share your experiences and knowlege!

 

[irontrain]

For back-up assist Snake eyes is the best way to go. The owner is a member here (you'll save $$) and you'll find lots of install help. Run a search on snake eyes for more info.

 

[ShapeShifter]

Microwave - I found this British site with this product available http://www.sempal.co.uk/acatalog/spal_parking_distance_sensors.html I can see some real potential for an ariel designed detection sensor. It boast 180 degree detection capability which I don't think anyone needs or even wants but I am sure you can manipulate that area by antena placement. I am wondering if anyone has experience with microwave technology in this application? Seems it would be like Sonar technology.

The Rosta system is a microwave system, and it apparently works very well. However, one of the drawbacks with the microwave systems is that it works off of a doppler shift: either the vehicle or the obstacle needs to be moving. If both are stationary, there is no detection. This is probably not as big an issue as it sounds, as one is generally interested in what is back there when the vehicle is backing up (hence moving) but still something good to know.

I have not heard anything about the infrared systems. The ultasonic systems seem to work well when the sensors are clean and not obstructed by dirt or snow/ice. Also, the sonic sensors must be visible to work. The microwave sensors don't have to be kept clean, can be mounted behind a plastic bumper (so they are invisible) but require movement.

I think the overall best solution is a camera, albeit a pricy one. The other systems can work, but you have to decide what features are most important (display, audio alerts, apperance, operation.) Sonic systems seem to be most popular, and factory systems tend to be sonic. That may be because of performance and quality reasons, or it may just be because it is less expensive.

It's good to ask advice, but in the end, you will have to decide according to the criteria that are important to you.

-- SS

 

[Scipio]

The ultasonic systems seem to work well when the sensors are clean and not obstructed by dirt or snow/ice. Also, the sonic sensors must be visible to work.
-- SS

Thats weird. I would think that "sonic" systems could be dirty and still work. At least they could be dirtier then a camera and work.

Out of all the systems I have to agree I like the camera one simply because visual feedback makes a difference and keeps you from getting false positives. For example there is an obsticle in my driveway...(a bush) that would give me a positive everytime. This would lead to me pretty much ignoring the system in the worst possible place to ignore it.

The sonic system with the display might be pretty good for combating this.

With camera systems though I am thinking its a combination of camera quality and mounting location.

Anyone know what the viewing angle and LUX are for the snake eyes camera?

 

[ShapeShifter]

The ultasonic systems seem to work well when the sensors are clean and not obstructed by dirt or snow/ice. Also, the sonic sensors must be visible to work.
-- SS

Thats weird. I would think that "sonic" systems could be dirty and still work. At least they could be dirtier then a camera and work.

Yes, if it is just dusty or filmy type dirt, that shouldn't be a problem like it would be for a camera. I don't think they have to be spotless, but if they are caked with mud, or covered with ice, that would "muffle" the sound and cause problems. Similarly, you can't paint the actual transducer portion, nor hide it behind a plastic bumper like you can with a microwave system.

-- SS

 

[Forbin]

Lol after spending 6 hours putting my PA system in....I see this wireless system go up for sale...

/sigh this would've saved me some time...owells