Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 103.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • GTS-t VSPEC

    20904

  • Nizmo

    13582

  • SHUTO-BOY

    6636

  • skyzerr33

    5353

Cos every sane person is either

at the pub

at the club

in bed

with friends

in bed with friends

hell, even in bed with there wife

any where but on this goddamn forum talking to desperates like you:D :lol: :lol:

Cheers

Ken

* Hmmm what does that make me *

OOPS , I double posted.

No , theres a knocking at the door....

AAARGGHHH it's Joe the whore police... nooooo , I didn't mean to do it... I'm sorry ... please don't beat me, please don't:(

Hehehehe:lol:

Cheers

Ken

Other road users do think your asleep at the wheel:lol:

I'd be really scared if Joe knocked on the door, you'd want to make sure you have plenty of public liability insurance, he'd probably trip on the door step and break his leg:lol:

See'ya:burnout:

Nah , I'm lying, he wouldn't have got up the paved driveway without going bum up:shake: :rolleyes::D

Whaat, you seen me drive then. Damn i gotta get those windows tinted darker on the van.

Scares people when they look over to see your head resting on the wheel going down the freeway :lol:

Cheers

Ken

Reflective tint, they can't see you sleeping and you don't get disturbed by the light, a win-win situation:lol:

I'm sursprised Joe's lived this long, he's accident prone. Maybe we could all chip in some money and buy him a plastic bubble to live in:lol:

See'ya:burnout:

Yep , I gotta couple of Glad bags i could put together. Will give him priolly a coupla days of air unless he falls out of it, punctures it, rolls it down a hill , sets fire to it or any innumerable other things we prolly haven't even thought of.:lol:

Cheers

Ken

Knowing Joes luck some piece of the Challenger space shuttle will burst through the atmosphere and destroy the bubble. It might be kinder just to kill him now, rather than let him suffer with accidents the rest of his life:lol:

See'ya:burnout:

Joe's taking all this in his stride, when he doesn't fall over an hurt himself:lol:

Imagine falling out of a parked car, I would just die from embarassment. Joe's dad was cool, helping to fix Hick's intercooler, we have yet to send Hicks the bill, he won't be happy when he finds out that I charge $160/hr for my time.

See'ya:burnout:

hey

leave nandos out of it lol

that is just a lil on the side stuff

i am really a hardcore jap tuner from Garage Sushi

one time on Mechanic camp we put together a engine backwards and drove it , it was so cool yeah

and then there was this one time i even drove with no exhaust

whoa

i am really tired lol

can ya tell?

adrian

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...