"Noisy" tpsDOT

This is a forum for discussing the development and testing of alpha MS2/Extra code. Documentation
(Runs on MS2 and Microsquirt)

Moderators: muythaibxr, jsmcortina

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby gslender » Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:15 pm

I've updated a mod I released to include TPS oversampling such that it averages the results of many samples (~400) obtained inbetween the previous 50ms sample period. This has resulted in a significantly less noisy TPS signal, and to a degree, removed the need for any other type of TPS filtering.

The firmware in this post includes Rob's original tpsDOT moving anchor method and the new TPS averaging sampling.
viewtopic.php?f=91&t=44289

You should be able to try either method, and/or both and see how you get on. I'm currently using both and feel it provides the best outcome.

G
Mazda MX5 + MS3 Pro
User avatar
gslender
Super MS/Extra'er
 
Posts: 1047
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2011 5:29 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby piledriver » Tue Mar 13, 2012 5:28 am

Does this include the MAP sampling improvements from 330b as well?
Always doing things the hard way, MS2 sequential w/ v1.01 mainboard, LS2 coils. 80 mile/day commuter status.
piledriver
Super MS/Extra'er
 
Posts: 1045
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:24 am

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby gslender » Tue Mar 13, 2012 5:48 am

Sure does! 8)

G
Mazda MX5 + MS3 Pro
User avatar
gslender
Super MS/Extra'er
 
Posts: 1047
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2011 5:29 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby 1031 » Tue Mar 13, 2012 11:15 am

Hello. I would point this out again. Have you looked where that noise is coming from?? I had noise on tps line and source for that noise was Mega it self (V3.0 board). Somehow noise levels raised after polyfuse (Vref goes throught it) and that was easy to notice just by lookin signals/voltages with oscilloscope. My solution was just replace that polyfuse wiht normal fuse. No more erratic noise after that mod and also AE works much more nicely now.
1031
MS/Extra Newbie
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 4:39 am

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby jsmcortina » Tue Mar 13, 2012 2:09 pm

1031 wrote:I had noise on tps line and source for that noise was Mega it self (V3.0 board). Somehow noise levels raised after polyfuse (Vref goes throught it) and that was easy to notice just by lookin signals/voltages with oscilloscope. My solution was just replace that polyfuse wiht normal fuse. No more erratic noise after that mod and also AE works much more nicely now.

Very interesting - thanks for sharing.

James
I can supply, repair or upgrade Megasquirts in UK.

My Success story: viewtopic.php?f=104&t=34277
MSEXTRA documentation at: http://www.msextra.com/doc/index.html
jsmcortina
Site Admin
 
Posts: 27108
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 1:34 am
Location: Birmingham, UK

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby 1031 » Wed Mar 14, 2012 6:53 am

Thats easy to test, if you know that your wiring etc.. are ok, just bypass(jumpwire) that polyfyse temporally and see if there is change in accell enricment wizard "page" In my case there was noticeably difference.
1031
MS/Extra Newbie
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 4:39 am

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby Peter Florance » Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:16 am

1031 wrote:Thats easy to test, if you know that your wiring etc.. are ok, just bypass(jumpwire) that polyfyse temporally and see if there is change in accell enricment wizard "page" In my case there was noticeably difference.

I wonder if bypassing with capacitor would help?
Peter Florance
PF Tuning
81 BMW Euro 528i ESP Car
60-2 Wheel LS2 Coils, Low Z Inj
Check your grounds: http://www.msextra.com/doc/general/grounding.html
User avatar
Peter Florance
Super MS/Extra'er
 
Posts: 3345
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 8:40 pm
Location: Virginia Beach, VA

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby Philip Lochner » Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:53 am

Noting that removal of the polyfuses are claimed to help I thought I would have a look for myself having just completed an MS2/V3 intended for yet another Rover V8. Please note, this was all done with MS on the bench with Jimstim - ie not even in a real car.

Bottom line
: Removal of F2 did not seem to help much but removal of F1 and F2 did seem to help quite a bit - but the greater TPS, the more TPSdot noise there is even though absolutely no change is logged in TPS The amount of noise on TPSdot seems directly correlated to the value of TPS, ie, if TPS = 0 there is no TPSdot noise, at 1% TPS, TPSDot noise commences, at 50% there is a lot more noise and at 100% its hectic. (BTW, it seems that MAP and BARO is also more stable as previously both of them would be moving about quite actively on the bench)

The attached logs show what I mean. In the first two cases I'm using the double pole filter proposed earlier in this thread (which makes TPS lag way too much) In the last log I have the original TPS circuit but with both F1 and F2 removed.
Kind regards
Philip
My Project Cars: http://www.jaguardiy.net
Philip Lochner
Super MS/Extra'er
 
Posts: 908
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:18 am
Location: Centurion, South Africa

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby Philip Lochner » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:06 am

Pictures paints a thousand words
Kind regards
Philip
My Project Cars: http://www.jaguardiy.net
Philip Lochner
Super MS/Extra'er
 
Posts: 908
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:18 am
Location: Centurion, South Africa

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby Philip Lochner » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:57 am

Now things are getting spooky...

With the promising results on the newly built MS/V3, I hauled out the MS/V3 in my own car with the idea of bypassing its F1 and F2 as well.

Did so and no TPSdot noise, none, nada, ziltch, not even at 100% TPS, no noise whatsoever.

Both now have the same standard TPS input circuit, both running 2.1.0.d. The main difference is that the one (noisy one) is built for 60-2 VR tach input and direct coil control whereas the other (the quiet one) for Hall input / EDIS-8.

So what now?...

EDIT: Have found that if I turn RPM to 0 on the noisy MS2(the one that is build for 60-2 VR input), the TPSdot noise goes away...
Kind regards
Philip
My Project Cars: http://www.jaguardiy.net
Philip Lochner
Super MS/Extra'er
 
Posts: 908
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:18 am
Location: Centurion, South Africa

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby 1031 » Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:41 am

Just to point obvious thing out. If bypassing that polyfuse gives good results. Then replace whit same amp rated normal fuse. Idea of using polyfuses is good,if you have "oops" moment and you made shortcircuit ,polyfuse opens and after that it resets and conduct again. Problem whit those polyfuses is that those are not really 0 ohm as normal fuses are. Thats why those can make some series resistance in circuits under load... So amount of noise depends how much current is drawn after that polyfuse and what kind is current draw ie. Pulsed signals etc..
1031
MS/Extra Newbie
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 4:39 am

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby Philip Lochner » Thu Mar 15, 2012 10:23 am

Thanks 1031, noted.

So my blond brain got to thinking.... and I hauled out my picoscope to have a look-see. I looked at both sides of R9 (blue and red trace) and the signals are pretty much the same except for the slower rise times on the side with C9.

The attached PDF contains pictures:
VR 60-2 input TPS=0%
VR 60-2 input TPS=50%
VR 60-2 input TPS=100%
Hall input TPS=100%

So now, is this noise coming from MS2 or from Jimstim?
Kind regards
Philip
My Project Cars: http://www.jaguardiy.net
Philip Lochner
Super MS/Extra'er
 
Posts: 908
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:18 am
Location: Centurion, South Africa

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby elaw » Thu Mar 15, 2012 10:40 am

Where did you have the scope grounded?

Also, can you try putting the scope on Vref? The fact that the noise increases with increasing TPS suggests that the noise may actually be on Vref.

I will also say that ~14 millivolts of noise (it looks to me like about -6 to +8 on the scope traces) on a 5-volt signal is not all that much - only 2 or 3 counts on a 10-bit A-to-D. I think it's not the amplitude but the fast-changing nature of the noise waveform that's creating the high TPSdot values.
Eric Law
1990 Audi 80 Quattro with AAN turbo engine: happily running on MS3+MS3X
1997 Saab 9000 Aero: self-tweaked stock engine management (and stock engine)
1986 Audi 4000 Quattro: R.I.P.

Be alert! America needs more lerts.
User avatar
elaw
Super MS/Extra'er
 
Posts: 2377
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 6:20 am
Location: Wilmington, MA

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby Philip Lochner » Thu Mar 15, 2012 11:18 am

Hi Eric

A Picture of my test setup. I'm using the earth pin of Q7 as the reference.

The attached pdf has two pages:
1) The green trace is Vref with a 50Khz low pass filter applied
2) The green trace is Vref with no filtering applied

The reason I believe that noise is NOT on Vref is that those traces appear to be correlated to the VR_in signal. Let me see what I can get.
Kind regards
Philip
My Project Cars: http://www.jaguardiy.net
Philip Lochner
Super MS/Extra'er
 
Posts: 908
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:18 am
Location: Centurion, South Africa

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby elaw » Thu Mar 15, 2012 11:34 am

Wow, that's pretty weird.

I'd suggest 'scoping two things. First, pin 32 on the processor - that's the ground for the A-to-D. If you see noise there, it probably means you don't have a good ground reference ("good" meaning equivalent to what the A-to-D is seeing) and you might see if you can move your ground to a point more closely connected to the A-to-D, like the ground side of C5, C7, C9, or C2.

Then if possible 'scope the 3 pins of the TPS pot on the stim. If the ground pin is noisy, it may be an internal problem with the stim or a grounding issue between the stim and the megasquirt. If the +5 pin is noisy but looks different from Vref, or the middle pin signal looks different from the TPS input on the megasquirt, again there might be a problem in the stim or a bad connection between it and the megasquirt.
Eric Law
1990 Audi 80 Quattro with AAN turbo engine: happily running on MS3+MS3X
1997 Saab 9000 Aero: self-tweaked stock engine management (and stock engine)
1986 Audi 4000 Quattro: R.I.P.

Be alert! America needs more lerts.
User avatar
elaw
Super MS/Extra'er
 
Posts: 2377
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 6:20 am
Location: Wilmington, MA

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby Philip Lochner » Thu Mar 15, 2012 11:39 am

Now I have a lot of work!! I'll get to it tomorrow - late here now.
Kind regards
Philip
My Project Cars: http://www.jaguardiy.net
Philip Lochner
Super MS/Extra'er
 
Posts: 908
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:18 am
Location: Centurion, South Africa

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby 1031 » Thu Mar 15, 2012 12:12 pm

If i recall correct.. Noise was at vref line. All sensors got supply from there,and are "after" that polyfuse. So anything that is on that line can be culprit to that noise. I dont remember if that vref is also connected to prosessor itself, but noise thar i scoped (whit analog o-scope) looked much like digital noise.. I think also that polyfuse's series resistance can rise over time. At our rally car that noise came out of bushes and we nearly had to pull out of stage because afr went so rich (accel enricment startet to trigger..) but we were able to continue, about 8 sparkplugs was consumed :D
1031
MS/Extra Newbie
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 4:39 am

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby DaveC » Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:02 pm

The HW work in this page of posts is fantastic and I don't want to distract from that at all, but...

I just read this entire thread in one sitting and I'm SURE there's plenty of details that I missed or maybe even forgot already! :lol: Anyway, I have a question: how is tpsDOT calculated? Is it just a 2 point calculation: (tps - tpsLast) / timestep? If so, I have gotten better results using multipoint calculations. The methods prposed by Pavel Holoborodko have worked well for me, though they are all central difference methods which requires having data several samples into the future; fine if you're working with previously sampled data, less fine in real time. Though, if the sample rate is high enough....

Please, just don't tell me that guys are using a 2 point finite difference approximation for the derivative.
DaveC
MS/Extra Newbie
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2011 8:08 am

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby DaveC » Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:15 pm

Another look through Pavel's web site turned up this paper on calculating 'one sided' derivatives using only past data. It would take some experimentation to see if the delay incurred by heavily filtering tps before calculating tpsDOT might be a wash for calculating tpsDOT of a few samples back (with a higher order method) from lightly filtered tps. In any case, some of Pavel's methods pretty efficient computationally, i.e. denominators that are a power of 2, so division reduces to a bit shift.
DaveC
MS/Extra Newbie
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2011 8:08 am

Re: "Noisy" tpsDOT

Postby robs » Tue Mar 20, 2012 4:32 pm

gslender wrote:I've updated a mod I released to include TPS oversampling such that it averages the results of many samples (~400) obtained inbetween the previous 50ms sample period. This has resulted in a significantly less noisy TPS signal, and to a degree, removed the need for any other type of TPS filtering.

The firmware in this post includes Rob's original tpsDOT moving anchor method and the new TPS averaging sampling.
viewtopic.php?f=91&t=44289

You should be able to try either method, and/or both and see how you get on. I'm currently using both and feel it provides the best outcome.


Been out of circulation for a bit: Colorado ski trip. Good fun, and no broken bones this time.

Glad to hear that the moving anchor code is in there. The best way to work out whether it's actually any good is for people to try it in a range of engines.

On the increased sampling, a couple of points.

  • Don't let the flag name confuse you, the existing sampling interval is 10ms not 50 (a comment in isr_rtc.s explains why, though I think it would be reasonable to rename the flag).
  • Isn't 400 samples overkill? It should reduce the jitter by a factor of 20 or so, but there's an appreciable cost. Considering how relatively unimportant the TPS value is in the MS2/Extra model, it doesn't seem worth it. Taking 4 or 8 samples in a quick burst near the 10ms interval would seem reasonable. It would also give a more accurate estimate of where a moving throttle actually was.
Have fun,

Rob.
robs
Experienced MS/Extra'er
 
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 4:26 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

PreviousNext

Return to MS2/Extra Development

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest