I work as a software developer and I'm currently working on a redesign of the ADC-16 GUI for a client.
The application is an underwater robot that uses equations to convert Pico's read data into actual real values such as depth and heading etc.
We've run the sample VB6 project and the results are nothing like what the 'actual' Pico software gives when we put the numbers through the equations Pico uses. Thinking that it was the conversion of the read data to a mV reading I repeated it by taking just read value and still when run through the equations we get completely different values.
Could someone please explain how I obtain the values Pico reads before applying the conversion equations using VB6? It seems that the value the sample project reads is totally different.
I need to find out a little more about what you are doing exactly. You say you put equations and you are using VB6. So are you using our software or are you writing your own software? What do these equations do, what are you trying to measure and how are you measuring it? The more information you can provide, the easier it will be to help you.
I've attached a screenshot from an Excel Spreadsheet that should hopefully get my point across more clearly (though the program itself is being coded in VB6).
On the left are the Channels (Eight is unused), the column titled ADC-16-32Bit(2) is the value the sample VB6 project returns. The column titled Pico Display is the values that the PicoLog Recorder shows at the same time*. Resolution is self explanatory** and the Pico Equation is the Scaling Equation copied and pasted from PicoLog Recorder.
The problem I have is that when I take the ADC-16-32Bit(2) Data and run it through the scaling equations I get a completely different value to what the PicoLog display shows. Any ideas on getting the two to 'match up'?
Hope that makes it clearer,
Cheers,
Michael
* - The VB6 project and the PicoLog recorder were actually run one after the other but nothing was done that would cause a significant change in the read data.
** - One slight difference between the VB6 program and the PicoLog Recorder was that in the VB6 one all channels were set to 16bit resolution whereas in the Recorder only Channel 2 (Heading) was set to 16 Bit resolution.
Channel 1 doesn't have a scaling equation only 2 through 7 and as you can see from the table the VB6 project was reading just over 7mV while the Pico program was reading 2138mV.....
It still doesn't make the values match up. I'll try to explain it again....
I've compiled the sample program (SP) and run it and noticed that the values that it reports are different to what the PicoLog recorder produces.
So where the sample program will say Ch1 is 45mV if I then close down it down and open PicoLog Recorder it will say that the same Ch1 is something different like 2894mV even though nothing has changed - certainly nothing that would cause such a wide change in the readings.
Right now I'm concentrating purely on Ch1 as that's purely a mV reading so you can forget about the scaling equations I mentioned earlier.
What I would suggest is to download the latest version of our software and see if this makes a difference, we are currently on 5_16_2. Let me know how you get on.