Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

http://jbperf.com/io_extender/index.html
http://jbperf.com/io_extender/tinyIOx.html for the TinyIOx

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby masterx81 » Wed Nov 20, 2013 12:07 pm

How they store the 10 bit values in the table, not in 2 bytes? I've never opened the ms3 source codes, i do coding, but that it's too much for me :p
Just for curiosity, why a 2 bit increment over 10 bit (20% more) increase the size of the tables by 400%?
How much memory takes the actual 24 adc values saved in the iox? I suppose they are stored in 2 bytes per adc, so 48 bytes, doubling them to 96 and storing the 10 bit version in another set will be a problem?

For sure the best solution is convert the ms3 code to handle 12bit values...

Thanks for your patience :)
masterx81
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:03 am

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby jbelanger » Wed Nov 20, 2013 12:17 pm

The problem is not the storing of the ADC values themselves because they are already stored on 2 bytes. The problem is the space needed for the calibration tables for the non-linear sensors (the ones you calibrate in the TS calibration menu). The calibration tables in the MS3 have one calibrated value for each of the 1024 possible values for a 10-bit ADC value (0-1023). If you go to a 12-bit ADC value (0-4095), you need 4096 calibration values.

And storing 10 and 12-bit ADC values on the IOx does not make much sense even if it is only 48 bytes.

Jean
Image
jbelanger
 
Posts: 3633
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 12:24 pm
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby masterx81 » Wed Nov 20, 2013 12:39 pm

Thanks for the explanation :)

Yes, i'm agree with you, storing the adc values 2 times is a waste, but if there is no way to support 12 bit in ms3, it's a little price to pay for an increased precision of the iox...
Let's see what James and Ken say on the ms forums :)
masterx81
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:03 am

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby masterx81 » Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:17 am

Ok, James said that ms3 will not support 12bit values...
Any 48 spare bytes to use on the iox? :)
Who can benefit of this is who use the iox log functions (log on the iox sd with high accuracy while still can send data to the ms3), and who use the iox 'standalone' functions (pwm, generic outputs, etc)...
masterx81
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:03 am

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby jbelanger » Fri Nov 22, 2013 11:53 am

I will have a look at doing this because I do agree that it would be nice to be able to use the higher precision and still be able to send the data to the MS3 (and MS2). And there is plenty of memory left.

So the datalog on the IOX would have the higher precision data and the MS3 would still use the same table offset to get the 10-bit data. The user would be able to select between the 10-bit and 12-bit data for the IOx functions (I don't know why someone would choose to use 10-bit data but that data would be available anyway).

Jean
Image
jbelanger
 
Posts: 3633
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 12:24 pm
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby masterx81 » Fri Nov 22, 2013 12:09 pm

Really thanks Jean :D
masterx81
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:03 am

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby Sanec » Mon Nov 25, 2013 9:11 pm

Ask to make a choice in the second axis PWM table as selecting the load axis? Not only RPM.
Sanec
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 8:36 pm

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby jbelanger » Mon Nov 25, 2013 9:14 pm

Sanec wrote:Ask to make a choice in the second axis PWM table as selecting the load axis?

I'm sorry but I don't understand the question. Can you formulate it another way?

Jean
Image
jbelanger
 
Posts: 3633
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 12:24 pm
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby Sanec » Mon Nov 25, 2013 9:23 pm

There is a choice of load. You can select an option. Can I do the same for the second axis of the table. Not limited to rpm and load.
For example, select one axis table as ad0 and the second axis as ad1. This would give more freedom of action.
Sanec
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 8:36 pm

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby jbelanger » Mon Nov 25, 2013 9:31 pm

I have thought of this and I agree that it would increase the flexibility but that would increase the complexity of the computations. I will have to check to see how significant the increase would be. However, I don't think it will be available in the near future.

For now you can either have a 3-D table (8x8) with a choice of loads vs RPM or a 2-D table (16 entries) with a choice of loads.

Jean
Image
jbelanger
 
Posts: 3633
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 12:24 pm
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby Sanec » Mon Nov 25, 2013 9:49 pm

Still very lacking as a sensor input settings. Curve to adjust 4x4 enough. This is especially true for industrial sensors linearity may not be the values ​​do not start from zero.I picked up a formula to the pressure sensor fuel for three hours. Rewriting the ini file and adjusting.
Sanec
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 8:36 pm

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby jbelanger » Mon Nov 25, 2013 10:07 pm

There is no sensor calibration done in the IOx and that will never be added either because that would be too much processing load for the CPU. So any calibration issue is either and MS3 or a TunerStudio issue.

You can use non-linear calibration in TunerStudio by using a calibration table that has 1024 entries. Or if you use 12-bit ADCs then you can use a 4096-entry table. That should give you all the precision you need.

And I don't understand where that 4x4 comes from and what you're doing with it.

Jean
Image
jbelanger
 
Posts: 3633
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 12:24 pm
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby Sanec » Mon Nov 25, 2013 10:14 pm

I wont more sdandalone options. No problem with use ms3+ioex.
Sanec
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 8:36 pm

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby jbelanger » Mon Nov 25, 2013 10:17 pm

Then the issue with calibration is that it is too difficult to do in TunerStudio. If you have problems or questions on that aspect, please start a new thread. It would be a good idea to have such a thread with different examples of how to add things to a custom.ini to calibrate different sensors.

Jean
Image
jbelanger
 
Posts: 3633
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 12:24 pm
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby masterx81 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:27 pm

I've seen that the new tinyiox fw has already the new features of adc and pwm accuracy... When it's planned to backport them in iox? As i have my ecu still removed from the car, and will be nice to do all the new 12bit calibrations by now :)
In any case the 0.1.1 seem rock solid.
masterx81
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:03 am

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby jbelanger » Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:35 pm

It should be done next week.

Jean
Image
jbelanger
 
Posts: 3633
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 12:24 pm
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby masterx81 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:37 pm

:)
masterx81
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:03 am

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby Jazz30-06 » Mon Dec 14, 2015 7:31 pm

For some reason I can't get all of the tabs to show up.

TS issue.PNG
TS issue.PNG (220.1 KiB) Viewed 12776 times


I don't have it connected to anything, but shouldn't I still be able to set everything up?
Jazz30-06
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2015 7:26 pm

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby jbelanger » Tue Dec 15, 2015 12:31 am

Did you use the ini file linked in the first post? It looks like you use an old ini file.

Jean
Image
jbelanger
 
Posts: 3633
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 12:24 pm
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Release 0.1.1 (long post and picture heavy)

Postby Jazz30-06 » Tue Dec 15, 2015 3:53 pm

Figured it out... somehow the main control device was selected as CAN 5 when the ECU is CAN 0
Jazz30-06
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2015 7:26 pm

Previous

Return to I/O Extender

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron