Posts: 3,288 Threads: 129 Likes Received: 2,740 in 1,644 posts Likes Given: 2,969 Joined: Apr 2017 Reputation: 65 So on my first flight of The Leaf, the OSD reports that I used only 330mah on a flight...I KNOW this is wrong. After charging the pack I found that I added 472mah back into the pack. I flew several more pack with similar results.
I have watched the videos, but I really am pretty bad at math...
472-330=142 which is roughly 43% difference in reading.
The base value in BF for the Current Sensor Scaling is 400. I calculate 43% of 440 as 172. When I subtract 172 from 400, I arrive at 228. So setting an offset for the Current Meter of 43% from 400 leaves me with new scaling value of 228...
What am I messing up? It cannot be that simple...nothing mathematically driven is in my universe.
I will be using the values of averages for my actual calculations...but for the sake of simplicity I stuck with the single first flight value for the question. SoCal Kaity :D
OMG, no one told me it would be this much fun! Addicted :) ![[-]](https://intofpv.com/images/collapse.png) • Posts: 12,098 Threads: 125 Likes Received: 3,739 in 2,836 posts Likes Given: 99 Joined: Feb 2017 Reputation: 388 20-Jan-2020, 02:53 AM (This post was last modified: 20-Jan-2020, 02:54 AM by voodoo614.) You don't want to mess with the offset. Just the scale value. new_scale = old_scale x (OSD_mAh_consumed / mAh_charged) New_scale = 400 x (330/472) New_scale = 400 x 0.70 New_scale = 279 You will want to run the next pack and readjust the scale again. You will need to do this a few time. Don't use averages. https://oscarliang.com/current-sensor-calibration/ Posts: 3,288 Threads: 129 Likes Received: 2,740 in 1,644 posts Likes Given: 2,969 Joined: Apr 2017 Reputation: 65 Thank you! That makes sense to me...mostly. I really am craptastic at math! SoCal Kaity :D
OMG, no one told me it would be this much fun! Addicted :) • Posts: 12,098 Threads: 125 Likes Received: 3,739 in 2,836 posts Likes Given: 99 Joined: Feb 2017 Reputation: 388 Algebra can really be confusing. ![[Image: Elhpq2Cl.png]](https://i.imgur.com/Elhpq2Cl.png) Posts: 3,288 Threads: 129 Likes Received: 2,740 in 1,644 posts Likes Given: 2,969 Joined: Apr 2017 Reputation: 65 One
1+2=3*2=6/6=1 SoCal Kaity :D
OMG, no one told me it would be this much fun! Addicted :) Posts: 3,288 Threads: 129 Likes Received: 2,740 in 1,644 posts Likes Given: 2,969 Joined: Apr 2017 Reputation: 65 I can work through it ok if the formula is simple and expressed. I have trouble creating a formula in my head (that works anyway). I get lost very quickly when transiting through the steps to solving any equation over about 4 steps.
Not sure that makes sense. SoCal Kaity :D
OMG, no one told me it would be this much fun! Addicted :) • Posts: 12,098 Threads: 125 Likes Received: 3,739 in 2,836 posts Likes Given: 99 Joined: Feb 2017 Reputation: 388 (20-Jan-2020, 05:40 AM)kaitylynn Wrote: One
1+2=3*2=6/6=1 Sorry, answer is 9 • Posts: 3,288 Threads: 129 Likes Received: 2,740 in 1,644 posts Likes Given: 2,969 Joined: Apr 2017 Reputation: 65 (20-Jan-2020, 06:31 AM)voodoo614 Wrote: Sorry, answer is 9 LOL...seriously??? SoCal Kaity :D
OMG, no one told me it would be this much fun! Addicted :) • Posts: 12,098 Threads: 125 Likes Received: 3,739 in 2,836 posts Likes Given: 99 Joined: Feb 2017 Reputation: 388 20-Jan-2020, 06:49 AM (This post was last modified: 20-Jan-2020, 06:49 AM by voodoo614.)  , yes seriously. It is 9. • Posts: 2,416 Threads: 51 Likes Received: 1,861 in 1,175 posts Likes Given: 3,315 Joined: Mar 2016 Reputation: 74 (20-Jan-2020, 06:34 AM)kaitylynn Wrote: LOL...seriously??? Kaity, don't fret - your answer is historically correct!  • Posts: 3,288 Threads: 129 Likes Received: 2,740 in 1,644 posts Likes Given: 2,969 Joined: Apr 2017 Reputation: 65 (20-Jan-2020, 10:19 AM)sloscotty Wrote: Kaity, don't fret - your answer is historically correct! Somehow I actually feel better knowing that! I am part of history!!!  SoCal Kaity :D
OMG, no one told me it would be this much fun! Addicted :) • Posts: 12,098 Threads: 125 Likes Received: 3,739 in 2,836 posts Likes Given: 99 Joined: Feb 2017 Reputation: 388 More importantly, did you calibrate the current sensor. • Posts: 3,288 Threads: 129 Likes Received: 2,740 in 1,644 posts Likes Given: 2,969 Joined: Apr 2017 Reputation: 65 In progress, but 275 seems to be a close number! SoCal Kaity :D
OMG, no one told me it would be this much fun! Addicted :) • Posts: 3,288 Threads: 129 Likes Received: 2,740 in 1,644 posts Likes Given: 2,969 Joined: Apr 2017 Reputation: 65 Telemetry reads a draw of 417. Charged the pack with 462...WAY closer. New_scale = 279 x (417/462) New_scale = 279 x .9 New_scale = 251 Trying the scale at 251 SoCal Kaity :D
OMG, no one told me it would be this much fun! Addicted :) • Posts: 12,098 Threads: 125 Likes Received: 3,739 in 2,836 posts Likes Given: 99 Joined: Feb 2017 Reputation: 388 (20-Jan-2020, 07:25 PM)kaitylynn Wrote: Telemetry reads a draw of 417. Charged the pack with 462...WAY closer.
New_scale = 279 x (417/462)
New_scale = 279 x .9
New_scale = 251
Trying the scale at 251 The math is spot on. • |
