Quote:
Originally Posted by scalbert
Now, with the newer logic, it is essential calculating an error correction, or near calibration (can’t be full as at least two discrete points are needed) is occurring with the PROcede. Shiv can correct me where I am wrong, but the new logic looks at the perceived error by the DME, via the CANBus interface, and creates a corrective multiplier to fix much of the potential error. This is where the difference comes into play.
|
Correct. we basically compare the DME boost signal the DME is reading and compare it what the Procede thinks it is putting out. The error is the difference. We keep track of this difference via a running average computation and apply it as a real-time offset. Which is why we know our "model" of DME boost is the same as the actual DME boost.
And thanks for taking the time to explain all that calibration info. There is a lot of slop in there and would surprise a lot of people who never bothered (or couldn't) measure themselves. It certainly surprised us when we discovered this issue ourselves.
Shiv