|
Combined G Anomaly?
I just returned from an event at VIR. While comparing data from the event between two different drivers in similar cars with similar setups (but one is on slicks and the other is on R compounds) I saw a curious pattern while looking at combined G. One driver's data shows these jagged traces. Do any of you have any thoughts as to what might explain this?
FYI this is through Turn 1 at VIR. https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlis...8dc579bac1.png Combined G through Turn 1 at VIR |
GPS accelerometers vs actual?
|
Smoothing setting?
|
Both.
|
Originally Posted by Matt Romanowski
(Post 15772246)
GPS accelerometers vs actual?
Originally Posted by Der ABT
(Post 15772359)
Smoothing setting?
|
Originally Posted by Beantown Kman
(Post 15772703)
They both appear to be using the same CombG math channel that uses GPS Lat and Lon Accel. How do you choose the "actual" accelerometers? Is one preferred over the other?
Hard to say, Looks to me like GPS derived, versus accelerometer derived. But you say they're both the same. Where do I find this? https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlis...75395cfd24.jpg |
Thanks Peter!
|
Beat me to it. Thanks peter
|
Originally Posted by ProCoach
(Post 15773849)
See attached pic. Click on the channel properties by clicking on the channel, then filtering
|
Here's how to check the match channels themselves A and B are where to click so you can check. Look at C to find what channels were used and D to see if there is a filter on the math channel.
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlis...abede384d1.jpg |
I checked the Combined G math channels for both cars/tests. They are identical with respect to all of their settings and formulas.
The formula for the math channels used is: sqrt(GPS_LatAcc^2+GPS_LonAcc^2) Any other thoughts or suggestions? |
Originally Posted by Beantown Kman
(Post 15781332)
I checked the Combined G math channels for both cars/tests. They are identical with respect to all of their settings and formulas.
The formula for the math channels used is: sqrt(GPS_LatAcc^2+GPS_LonAcc^2) Any other thoughts or suggestions? Should be sqrt((GPS_LatAcc^2)+(GPS_LonAcc^2)) |
Originally Posted by Beantown Kman
(Post 15781332)
I checked the Combined G math channels for both cars/tests. They are identical with respect to all of their settings and formulas.
The formula for the math channels used is: sqrt(GPS_LatAcc^2+GPS_LonAcc^2) Any other thoughts or suggestions?
Originally Posted by ProCoach
(Post 15781336)
That formula is incorrect. Your syntax is not right.
Should be sqrt((GPS_LatAcc^2)+(GPS_LonAcc^2)) |
[QUOTE=Matt Romanowski;15781406]What are the two loggers? Is the GPS set at the same logging rate?
The logger with the smoother traces is a AiM MXL2. The logger with the more jagged line is a SoloDL. I do not know how to check the "logging rate" of the two devices. Am I reading too much into this?? When comparing CombinedG one stood out to me as being so irregular that it made me question what caused it to look like that. Is it possible the logger itself is not mounted firmly enough in the car? |
[QUOTE=Beantown Kman;15782113]
Originally Posted by Matt Romanowski
(Post 15781406)
What are the two loggers? Is the GPS set at the same logging rate?
The logger with the smoother traces is a AiM MXL2. The logger with the more jagged line is a SoloDL. I do not know how to check the "logging rate" of the two devices. Am I reading too much into this?? When comparing CombinedG one stood out to me as being so irregular that it made me question what caused it to look like that. Is it possible the logger itself is not mounted firmly enough in the car? The smooth one is using more of the available grip all the time. That is really what you want to know. It could be mounting. I would look at the whole lap and other test sessions to see if it was a problem before I went about trying to fix it. |
| All times are GMT -3. The time now is 12:03 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands