On 11 December, 2017 - Davide DB wrote: > On 11 December 2017 at 15:59, Anton Lundin <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 11 December, 2017 - Davide DB wrote: > > > >> On 11 December 2017 at 10:16, Anton Lundin <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> I calibrate my two Petrels ALWAYS when I assemble my unit as part of > >> >> my checklist and ALWAYS the same day I dive and. No calibration No > >> >> party. > >> >> I made other dives and all of them show the same error. Shearwater > >> >> desktop tell me that everything is ok (like my Petrel underwater) > >> >> while Subsurface reports pO2 over 1.6. > >> >> Thank you for the detailed explanation. > >> >> Where do we go from here? > >> > > >> > Is this a divecan unit or something? > >> > > >> > I'm just guessing that it might affect how/where the cal factors are > >> > stored. > >> > > >> > > >> > //Anton > >> > >> Yes, divecan unit. > > > > There we go. Thats probably why its the factory default cal factors that > > are stored in the header, and not the real ones. It might be that the DC > > doesn't even have them, and its only the sensor board which know them > > for real. > > > > > > My suggestion then is to not show individual sensor ppo2's, if the cal > > factor is 2100, and just emit the average ppo2 then. > > > > At least that one is accurate. > > > > > > The best would be if we had a interface which let us both expose the > > average ppo2 and the raw mV values. > > > > > > //Anton > > Hi Anton, > > The strange thing is that also the other dataset from my dive friends > came from divecan units (JJ). > IIRC those dataset haven't this problem.
When I read the thread again, from the snippets Jef posted all those have cal factors of 2100, so I'm guessing those ppo2-values are inaccurate to. Jef: could you verify this against the average ppo2 in those mem dumps? //Anton -- Anton Lundin +46702-161604 _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list [email protected] http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
