Virtual Dyno - Standalone Software
Dec 20, 2010, 11:42 AM
#691
.
Dec 20, 2010, 11:43 AM
#692
I know all about smoothing charts and graphs and this and that, and you sir, are 100% correct. I really just liked looking at the high numbers on this one. sue me lol this chart is so jagged though, even at 20 smoothing it's still bumpy. I normally just set the smoothing to 3 like everyone else.
If its only that bumpy on 1 smoothing, you should only need 3-5 to make it smooth, not 20.
Dec 20, 2010, 02:45 PM
#695
Evolved Member
the graphs are smoother if the time stamp period is longer, 150-250ms gives a good result. Superfast logging does not help here.
Brad, can we have an option to change the AFR and Boost lables on the graph?
I dont mean the log column names, but the names as they appear on the lower graph. I often include load and spark for example, which the app graphs nicely, just the label is incorrect.
Brad, can we have an option to change the AFR and Boost lables on the graph?
I dont mean the log column names, but the names as they appear on the lower graph. I often include load and spark for example, which the app graphs nicely, just the label is incorrect.
Dec 20, 2010, 03:02 PM
#696
the graphs are smoother if the time stamp period is longer, 150-250ms gives a good result. Superfast logging does not help here.
Brad, can we have an option to change the AFR and Boost lables on the graph?
I dont mean the log column names, but the names as they appear on the lower graph. I often include load and spark for example, which the app graphs nicely, just the label is incorrect.
Brad, can we have an option to change the AFR and Boost lables on the graph?
I dont mean the log column names, but the names as they appear on the lower graph. I often include load and spark for example, which the app graphs nicely, just the label is incorrect.
He just needs to smooth his graph more.
Dec 20, 2010, 08:34 PM
#698
Im contemplating how to add graphing of any column ... if I do that then Ill include the label of that in the chart. Im just trying to find the time and motivation while on break to work on this 
Trying to get divorced at the same time ... which is eatting into my christmas break :P
Trying to get divorced at the same time ... which is eatting into my christmas break :P
Dec 21, 2010, 12:19 AM
#699
i'm not saying anything confusing....all I said is that on THAT particular log, I adjusted the smoothing on every setting 1 through 20, and none of them produced a truly smooth graph. that particular log just shows up extremely jagged. because of that, I just decided to use the one with the highest numbers for fun.
Dec 21, 2010, 12:39 AM
#700
i'm not saying anything confusing....all I said is that on THAT particular log, I adjusted the smoothing on every setting 1 through 20, and none of them produced a truly smooth graph. that particular log just shows up extremely jagged. because of that, I just decided to use the one with the highest numbers for fun.
I help brad develop this program and I dont find what your saying to be true. With the graph only that wavy @ 1 smoothing, it should be totally fine on 3-5, but you are saying its not even good at 20. That just doesnt make sense to me and I have plotted 100s and 100s of plots with VD.
How bout you just post up that run, with the smoothing on 10 and let us see it?
Dec 21, 2010, 02:52 AM
#701
I didnt say you said anything confusing.
I help brad develop this program and I dont find what your saying to be true. With the graph only that wavy @ 1 smoothing, it should be totally fine on 3-5, but you are saying its not even good at 20. That just doesnt make sense to me and I have plotted 100s and 100s of plots with VD.
How bout you just post up that run, with the smoothing on 10 and let us see it?
I help brad develop this program and I dont find what your saying to be true. With the graph only that wavy @ 1 smoothing, it should be totally fine on 3-5, but you are saying its not even good at 20. That just doesnt make sense to me and I have plotted 100s and 100s of plots with VD.
How bout you just post up that run, with the smoothing on 10 and let us see it?
Dec 21, 2010, 07:32 AM
#702
I wonder if the RPM logging changed in Evoscan 2.8? Because there are some issues with RPM being delayed in being written to the log causing jagged graphs. I dont know how to even explain this to hamish so it could get fixed. RPM if selected needs to be the first value recorded so its as close to the timestamp as possible. I wish all logging took place like this so it made it easier on graphing and it also would smooth out the random massive spikes in some logs.
Dec 21, 2010, 10:44 AM
#703
I'll do it when I get home. I don't think the issue is with the program. what program are you using to make the logs? when i was using EVOscan 2.7, all my logs were smooth on 1. as you can see from the first log I posted, I didn't smooth it at all. every one I've done with EVOscan 2.8 though, and plugged into VD, it's come out jagged as hell
What Im trying to say is even if some logs from you car are good @ 1 smoothing, other logs from the same car may need more smoothing.
Dec 21, 2010, 12:20 PM
#704
I use Evoscan 2.7. And I have to use anywhere from 1-10, usually. On most cars, most are smooth with only 1-5 smoothing, but sometime i have to bump it up to 5-10, even on cars that only needed 1-5 on some plots.
What Im trying to say is even if some logs from you car are good @ 1 smoothing, other logs from the same car may need more smoothing.
What Im trying to say is even if some logs from you car are good @ 1 smoothing, other logs from the same car may need more smoothing.
Dec 21, 2010, 01:02 PM
#705
This sounds just from the brief reading Ive done to be an issue with Evoscan ... if we could pinpoint what it is from the data then maybe we could approach hamish about it and see what he could do. Im sure he would love to know if there is a bug or glitch. Thats how programs get better. Pinpointing the issue though is the trouble.