cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

VL53L3CX performance improvements question about AN5561

TYomo
Associate II

I checked the Application note "AN5561", VL53L3CX maximum ranging performance improvements. I had a question about "1.3 Maximum ranging distance".

The performance of Medium distance mode seems to be better than the one of Long distance mode. I thought these tables were exchanged .

Is it correct the spec of Table 1? The distance of Medium distance mode is longer than the one of Long distance mode?

Thanks at advance

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions
John E KVAM
ST Employee

STSW-IMG016 - is the GUI for the GUI for X-NUCLEO-53L3A2

It's the one you want.

I've heard that it's been updated, but have not proved it for myself.

  • john

If this or any post solves your issue, please mark them as 'Accept as Solution' It really helps. And if you notice anything wrong do not hesitate to 'Report Inappropriate Content'. Someone will review it.

View solution in original post

5 REPLIES 5
John E KVAM
ST Employee

I'm so happy that AN5561 was finally published. Thank you for finding it.

Choosing the distance mode allows us to set the interval between the tiny pulses of light.

Long distance mode means the flashes are farther apart to give the light time to travel.

But spacing the pulses farther apart means there are fewer of them in an given number of milliseconds. And more pulses means better data.

So the best ranging performance would be the nearest mode you can get away with and still accomplish your task.

If you have trouble, the easy solution is to change the timing budget and give the sensor more time.

But with the maint6 release the rules of the game changed.

With more advanced processing we were able to increase the distances, and all of a sudden having more pulses was more important than the spacing.

So, as odd as it seems, 'Medium' does work better than 'long'.


If this or any post solves your issue, please mark them as 'Accept as Solution' It really helps. And if you notice anything wrong do not hesitate to 'Report Inappropriate Content'. Someone will review it.
TYomo
Associate II

Thanks for your replying.

I could understand the mechanism.

Now I'm evaluating the performance of VL53L1X, but I was wondering whether VL53L3CX was better in my case or not...

Do you have a plan to release GUI like VL53L1X?

Kindest Regards

John E KVAM
ST Employee

STSW-IMG016 - is the GUI for the GUI for X-NUCLEO-53L3A2

It's the one you want.

I've heard that it's been updated, but have not proved it for myself.

  • john

If this or any post solves your issue, please mark them as 'Accept as Solution' It really helps. And if you notice anything wrong do not hesitate to 'Report Inappropriate Content'. Someone will review it.

Thanks!

Yes, that's what I want.

Kindest ​Regards

TYomo
Associate II

I had another question;

Recently, I got the sample of VL53L3CX and evaluated the spec with GUI​(STSW-IMG016).

According to the AN5561, VL53L3CX seems to have the 3 modes, "Short", "Medium" and "Long".

However, I couldn't find the mode option on the GUI.

Then I checked the datasheet of VL53L3CX, the 3 modes were not defined.

Is it wrong that AN5561 shows the distance mode?

Thanks in advance