Skip to content

Module's Selected Major Components

Module's Selected Major Components

The following sections detail the selected major components of my camera sensor subsystem. These work in unison in order to fullfill the project requirements for this subsystem.

Power Management (Pending further research)

WIP

Camera Sensor Subsystem Components

Camera Modules

  1. OV2640 2MP Camera

* $7/each
* [link to product](https://www.arducam.com/arducam-ov2640-camera-module-2mp-mini-ccm-compact-camera-modules-compatible-with-arduino_m0031esp32-esp8266-development-board-with-dvp-24-pin-interface_.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com)<br>


| Pros                                      | Cons                                                             |
| ----------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------- |
| Has redily available support and ESP32 libraries      | Lowest resolution of the threee options              |
| Easy to find from reputable vendors                   | Challenging to find separate from esp32 dev kits     |
| Very affordable                                       | Fish eye distortion to image                         |
| Lower resolution means lower bandwith requirements 1600x1200   |                                             |
| Available as a standalone module                      |

  1. OV5640 5MP Camera

    Pros Cons
    Has redily available support and ESP32 libraries Slighly higher bandwith requirements
    Easy to find from reputable vendors More difficult to configure than OV2640
    More expensive More expensive
    Higher resolution lens 2592x1944

  2. IMX219 8MP Camera

    Pros Cons
    Larger size Requires Raspberry Pi as a bridge between camera and ESP32
    Interchangeable lenses Most complex solution
    Readily Available Most expensive
    Highest resolution lens 3280x2464 May cause image distortion due to wide angle lens

Rationale: As a rover camera image quality is important, though lowering bandwith requirements would be more desired. Option 1 would be the choice to go with for this reason since it is also more simpler to configure due to many existing projects already using this camera. However, option 2 is a solid choice as an alternative since both the OV2640 and the OV5640 use the same connectors, the same pin out, and power requirements.

Antenna

  1. FXP74 4dBi Antenna

    Pros Cons
    Works with 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi 50% efficient, placement is important
    Good peak gain at 4 dBi Single 2.4 GHz band
    Compact Not directional
    Flexible placement
    Bluetooth compatible

  2. FXP72 3dBi Antenna

    Pros Cons
    Higher efficiency 67% Physically larger
    Bigger antenna may be less affected by placement if away from metal Lower peak gain at 3 3.06 dBi
    Readily Available at approved vendors More expensive
    Very easy to adapt with FXP74
    Bluetooth compatible

  3. Molex 2069940100 3.6dBi Antenna

    Pros Cons
    Low cost Installation placemeent sensitive
    Good peak gain of 3.6 dBi Medium size
    Dual band compatible 2.4 & 5 GHz Very low efficiency due to design type
    Bluetooth compatible

Justification
The usable wireless range of the camera subsystem is determined by the system link budget, which includes transmitter power, antenna gain, propagation loss, receiver sensitivity, and system losses. While the ESP32-S3 provides a fixed Wi-Fi transmit power, the use of an external antenna improves effective range by increasing antenna efficiency and allowing optimal placement away from noise sources. Environmental factors such as distance, obstructions, and multipath fading, significantly affect range at 2.4 GHz. Operating the camera in a low-resolution streaming mode reduces required data rate and improves receiver sensitivity, further extending usable range. This design approach supports a reliable near 30 m operating distance while remaining compliant with regulatory limits.

Rationale: Ideally if size is not a problem all 3 options would work, they all share the same U.FL cable connector, and have around the same gain. Any should be good alterntives in case availability becomes a problem. For cost option 3 would be the best, but since we are trying to pass through video content (QVGA/ VGA) it would be best to go with options 1 or 2. At this point it becomes a matter of which one works with our available space in the rover, so option one would be the safer choice if space is a concern.

Resources Used
More on antenna types and applications here