if you do multiple readings you can increase the decimals. (averaging ~16 readings gives you one extra decimal resolution)
Another option is to check if there is a physics process that responds to temperature that you can measure indirectly.
I am thinking of expansion of some metal, and measure the expansion precisely.
Or you could measure a gas in a closed room and measure the pressure differences..
Don't know if that would be fast enough...
muppy:
I need more or less 10 reading per minute.
Ok, i can accept to average over 16 measurements.
You need to check the return time of the DS18B20. I believe it is normally used for one reading per second which implies about four averaged readings per minute. If you really need to take that path, a PT 100 is probably a better bet.
This makes no sense. A sensor that reports a temperature like 78.95 degrees when it is really 78.5 is useless. The accuracy has to be close to the resolution in order for the data to be useful.
This makes no sense. A sensor that reports a temperature like 78.95 degrees when it is really 78.5 is useless. The accuracy has to be close to the resolution in order for the data to be useful.
Not if you care about relative measurements. Even though the overall accuracy is only .5 deg, the relative measurements between steps will be much more accurate and may be entirely useful depending upon the application.