Because he wants to automatically move the target following a hit.Perhaps the OP can explain if/why he wants to avoid visual methods like everyone else uses.
I can't recommend trying to develop a new method without knowing exactly what's "wrong" with the standard method. Read the title of his post, and explain to me why the "best way" is not the current state of the art already in use.
Can you elaborate on the simple visual method?Regardless of what it is used to activate, the issue is still, what is the best method to detect a bullet passing through a paper target. So far there are two suggested methods, sonic and visual.
The visual method is tried and true, and is relatively simple.
Only way I can imagine is a computer analyzing an image captured with a camera.. Nothing simple about it..Can you elaborate on the simple visual method?
OKCan you elaborate on the simple visual method?
Knock detectors are common in cars these days. Piezoelectric accelerometers.It used a piezo device as a detector.
But the target is a plane. The photo transistor and light source form a line. There is an infinite number of lines on the plane, one of which is between the photo transistor and light source. What guarantee is there that the bullet will pass between the two, sufficiently close, to trigger a hit?The sensor is a photo transistor.
…
The bullet causes the light to decrease as it passes between the photo transistor and the light source. …
The photo transistor has an aperture width of about 45 degrees. Look at the photo below. Sunlight illuminates the defuser panels at the top of the photo. Notice the slot openings on the top of the lower housing. This is where the photo transistors look up at the defuser panels. They detect the variation of the light when a bullet passes through the segment. One transistor watches a 45 degree segment. If you wanted to watch a larger area you probably would need more than one sensor.But the target is a plane. The photo transistor and light source form a line. There is an infinite number of lines on the plane, .........
muzzle blast from a .22 at 25 yards? not very much. the op sisnt specify the calibre of bullet. I have an old 1884 springfield trapdoor rifle that I can hear the bullet hit the backstop at 100 yards away. a littloe more muzzle blast too. there are many, especially military weapons , that are louder.If it wasn't winter I would preform a test, just happen to have a shooting range in my back yard. I still think sound is the answer, I would build the box I described above and hook a scope to the speaker. Chart a 22 hit from muzzle blast at 25 yards to target hit and see what signals I end up with. I'm guessing we would see a pretty large spike when the target is hit.