4.0 Public Beta Issues

Things to come.
PTODD
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 8:13 pm
Bot?: No

Re: 4.0 Public Beta Issues

Post by PTODD »

Can anyone explain the PID tuning utility? I can access it while running a process (i.e. Heat to Strike) where the HLT element is on and I'm recirculating water through the HLT. I select the "tuning" box and I see the data logging below, but I'm not sure if it's auto tuning while running the state in the process??

Thanks for any insight into how this works,

PTODD
brahn
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:01 am
Bot?: No

Re: 4.0 Public Beta Issues

Post by brahn »

It is not auto-tuning anything. It is showing you the parameters used and the values calculated from them. If you know what you're doing (I don't!) you can use those values to tune the parameters and see the changes reflected live in the calculated values.
User avatar
oakbarn
Posts: 846
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 2:28 pm
Bot?: No
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: 4.0 Public Beta Issues

Post by oakbarn »

Are we going to get Temp Averaging back? I use it in two places where I have two probes measuring in 3.7.1 at different spots.
brahn
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:01 am
Bot?: No

Re: 4.0 Public Beta Issues

Post by brahn »

As I posted in another thread, we're giving this beta some time for people to use it on their systems and get feedback. Once some time has passed we will evaluate the feedback and see what should make it into the final release of 4.0.

I do have some concerns about implementing the temp averaging specifically. I've gone through the forums and read up on the history of this feature and it seems it was implemented without much research as a potential solution to a problem that the consensus says doesn't exist. The concern with adding it is that it's something that on the surface seems like a good idea, but really just means the BCS is using a bogus temperature to make decisions on what outputs to trigger. It doesn't really matter to me if you want to do this, but it could cause confusion and support issues which is why I'm hesitant to add the feature.

It would not be terribly complicated to add this feature, so if there is sufficient demand we will add it to 4.0 prior to final release. We're already aware that you want it, but we can't add every feature that a small number of people want because we're limited in development/maintenance/support time and space on the device.
PTODD
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 8:13 pm
Bot?: No

Re: 4.0 Public Beta Issues

Post by PTODD »

Would you consider adding the "AND" condition to the EXIT conditions so the process must meet two or more requirements before exiting?

Thanks,

PTODD
MrNatural
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2013 1:46 pm
Bot?: No

Re: 4.0 Public Beta Issues

Post by MrNatural »

PTODD wrote:Would you consider adding the "AND" condition to the EXIT conditions so the process must meet two or more requirements before exiting?

Thanks,

PTODD
Total rookie here, but isn't this what Ladder Logic provides? Haven't got around to goofing with it yet.
Still in the trial & error & error & error phase with processes and states.
brahn
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:01 am
Bot?: No

Re: 4.0 Public Beta Issues

Post by brahn »

PTODD wrote:Would you consider adding the "AND" condition to the EXIT conditions so the process must meet two or more requirements before exiting?

Thanks,

PTODD
This is something we could consider for post-4.0, but is very unlikely for 4.0. Could you provide a use case where this would be valuable?
MrNatural wrote:Total rookie here, but isn't this what Ladder Logic provides? Haven't got around to goofing with it yet.
Still in the trial & error & error & error phase with processes and states.
Ladder Logic does allow you to create AND/OR conditions based on certain inputs, but does not provide exactly what an AND option in the exit conditions would provide.
JonW
Site Admin
Posts: 1726
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 7:51 am
Bot?: No
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Contact:

Re: 4.0 Public Beta Issues

Post by JonW »

brahn wrote:Ladder Logic does allow you to create AND/OR conditions based on certain inputs, but does not provide exactly what an AND option in the exit conditions would provide.
This is related to something I was talking about with DHempy the other night. If we could use registers as exit conditions, it would do what PTODD is asking as well as give us the ability for a process/state to trigger another process/state. As it is, we can only trigger the start or end of another process, but with registers as exit conditions, we could enable a finer level of inter-process communication. e.g. Process1 changes states and asserts a register which in turn triggers Process2 to change states also. In PTODD's case, the AND conditions would be in ladder logic and the register would be the state exit condition.
BrianC
Posts: 28
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:45 pm
Bot?: No
Contact:

Re: 4.0 Public Beta Issues

Post by BrianC »

brahn wrote:Could you provide a use case where this would be valuable?
Actually, I have wondered about this before. I have a temp probe and a float switch in my boil kettle. It would be nice to have the temp be at boiling AND the float switch activated before it kicks off the boil timer. The way it works for me right now (well, if I ever get around to brewing again), is my boil process kicks off when the temp probe hits boiling. This usually works fine as most times it takes me longer to reach boiling than it does for the float switch to get tripped, but every once in a while I'll hit boiling before the volume reaches the float switch.
bcrawfo2
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2014 2:34 pm
Bot?: No

Re: 4.0 Public Beta Issues

Post by bcrawfo2 »

Duty cycle off by a decimal place.

I'm running the beta and couldn't get my boil under control. I usually run at about 45% and it was boiling like mad.
I've reduced it to 4 or 5 and it's now operating as I expect.
Weird. Anyone else?
I've set the duty cycle in both Safari and Chrome.
Post Reply