Wireless Sensor Validation Lab

Wireless accelerometers are attractive because they reduce cabling, installation time, and route complexity. But before a wireless sensor can be sold into reliability programs, it needs evidence: amplitude accuracy, phase behavior, bandwidth, noise floor, latency, and fault-detection performance.

The cleanest validation method is to compare the wireless device against a wired reference sensor and a stable DAQ chain under the same vibration input.

A calibration or comparison step should come first. Mount the wireless unit and a reference accelerometer on the same vibration input, then sweep the usable frequency range. Record amplitude deviation, phase deviation, repeatability, and any frequency bands where the wireless signal rolls off or becomes noisy.

This creates a device record before the sensor is placed on a machinery fault rig. Without this step, it is difficult to separate a sensor limitation from a real fault signature.

Once the sensor is characterized, the TMFSS can provide repeatable fault signatures. Run healthy baseline, unbalance, misalignment, bearing defects, looseness, and other controlled conditions while capturing a wired reference signal in parallel.

The wireless stream becomes the test signal. The wired PhonoVibe stream becomes the reference. Together they form labelled signal pairs that can be used for firmware validation, edge analytics, cloud model training, and customer demonstrations.

A strong report includes test setup, sensor location, mounting method, sampling settings, frequency response comparison, phase comparison, repeatability, fault class results, and example time and frequency plots. It should also state where the wireless sensor performs well and where engineering limits remain.

That honesty is useful. Customers do not only need a perfect-looking graph; they need to know the operating envelope where the sensor can be trusted.