Joined Jul 2006
11K Posts | 291+
Texas
Yamaha new electronics
- Thread starter hawkdriver
- Start date
-
- Tags
- electronics yamaha
Joined Apr 2011
900 Posts | 4+
somewhere else
Joined Oct 2007
4K Posts | 744+
Tuscany, Italy
Joined Sep 2007
2K Posts | 60+
here
For gods sake this quote also backs me !!!!!
Whats wrong with you guys! You are argueing with me and throwing evidence at me that supports my case!
I ask you of your quote ............
do they use Gyros alone
to ascertain their position on traack!!
That was what the argument was,!
Understand that and you will likely see that YOU are agreeing with me
FFS
Michael,
You are missing a point, I am not pro GPS, I am anti-Gyros operating alone ........ with no reference checks. Whatever those reference checks ....... eg. be they visual ( line of sight such as past space travel required ), transmitted signals, triangulation, etc. etc.
If you are falsifying/misinterpreting my argument, then you have little ability to declare me "wrong".
It has been my experience that Gyro devices have an intrinsic flaw for such a task.
Even you Yamaka have said the exact sameand then you go on to tell me you are taking an opposing view ........ fruity!
Hmm, shouting (using large font) makes your argument so much better
If you bother to follow my link that I gave a few days ago to the convo back in 2010 you will see that whilst the original argument was with Babel & gyros alone, your argument with me was not. And that argument went on for several posts, so don't try to claim we have ever been in agreement on this subject.
In the post I linked earlier, where you replied to my opening argument regarding needing more than just gyros, you insisted that the extra sensors would not resolve drift :
Post linked belowAnd yet ....... with all that supposed technology .... it is not done in motogp .... why Yamaka?
How big is the equipment needed for a complete system?
What is the operating range of the equipment?
You don't feel that the rapid direction changes experienced in MGP aren't somewhat excessive for such a system?
I put it to you it is far from feasible for motogp. If you feel otherwise surey you would be out there selling such a system
I'll believe it when it happens Yama
http://www.powerslid...post&pid=227083
This makes it clear that, whilst originally you may have been arguing that gyros alone couldn't be used to map a track, you neatly segued into arguing with me that it couldn't be done no matter how many extra sensors were added because no-one was doing it. Now they are doing it, you have conveniently forgotten this part and even try to pretend that we are on the same page.
And, despite your claims now that
this is what you said in 2010
Post linked below :Well in the abscence of information on your " Gyro Mapping system" or even the existence of one, all I can assume is that since you all think its such a great system, it'll be out there for me to see in real life soon. In the meantime ........ I shall believe the explanations on problems with gyros, till I see otherwise
http://www.powerslid...post&pid=227380
Not quite the same are they?
Joined Sep 2007
2K Posts | 60+
here
Actually I do understand, I just like to call BS when I see it and I have a laugh doing just that.
Joined Aug 2007
11K Posts | 3K+
Pomona NY
Actually I do understand, I just like to call BS when I see it and I have a laugh doing just that.I also enjoy BM's participation, but wish he'd lose the arrogance of thinking he's the only engineer on the forum and understand that each of us has our own area of expertise. I have never ridden a bike off-road and understand that BM's knowledge in this area is therefore significantly greater than mine. I just wish he'd appreciate that the same is true on other subjects. In the meantime I'll hopefully educate some and have a laugh at the same time. What the forum is all about IMHO
What??? Me!??? Admit fallibility? Mai non Monsieur!
Attachments
Joined Jun 2007
10K Posts | 1K+
Norah Head
No argument with a proper reference check Yamaka, you know I've said that ......... you are just being pedantic.
1 Whole lap resetting, but what means you have not said ATM, I don't think is possible for the accuracies needed. Even that article you quoted earlier speaks of triangulation of external signals with use of the gyros as a "fill in" in the corners.
I agree a regular reference check would be a feasible system, but not gyros alone.
1 Whole lap resetting, but what means you have not said ATM, I don't think is possible for the accuracies needed. Even that article you quoted earlier speaks of triangulation of external signals with use of the gyros as a "fill in" in the corners.
I agree a regular reference check would be a feasible system, but not gyros alone.
Joined Aug 2008
6K Posts | 748+
Thailand
From the man who wears his pedantic nature like a prick for a nose!
Attachments
Joined May 2008
3K Posts | 79+
Southern Aridzona - Hell's doorstep.
F.F.S., Barry.
The only 'sensor' you'd need is a button the rider could press every few laps as he's zipping down the straight. This would re-zero all gyros and nicely correct for Earth rate, sensor or electronic drift, continental drift, sunspots, rider flatulence, and any other nefarious influences.
Or just let the raw output drift. With a bit of programming, the computer could figure out when it's on the straight and calculate a corrective offset for each channel.
Big whoop.
Joined Sep 2007
2K Posts | 60+
here
I have quoted posts of yours from 2010 in this thread where you said that it couldn't be done with gyros regardless of what sensors one teamed them with. If you have finally understood that gyro drift can be corrected, great.
The article I quoted refers to triangulation of signals as one method and gyros plus accelerometer ("my" solution) as another. Regarding the accuracies required using gyros, see the following: (FYI, I have cut-and-pasted wholesale from several of my posts during my arguments with you in 2010.)
You can reliably use it to work out which part of the track as I explained before - together with an electronic odometer which is reset every time the bike crosses the finish line, it will provide you with sufficiently accurate information to determine which corner you are in. If it is accurate enough to fly an aircraft on, attitude-wise, then the attitude it senses it definitely accurate enough to use lean angle to the extent of working out whether the bike is entering corner 1, 2 etc. This is all that GPS is used for - we are in corner X, use engine map Y. I don't really know what is confusing about this part.
For example, take the first 3 corners of Mugello. On entry to the long hairpin of San Donato the inertial pack will be registering a lean angle of X degrees to the right for a period of Y seconds. The system knows as soon as the tip in begins that this is corner 1. Also the tip in point can be predicted to some extent based on distance travelled as sensed by the odo. On exit the bike will be approximately upright for a period then begin to tip into Luco. Here the lean angle will be to the left and so the system knows this is corner 2. Transitioning through upright then tipping to the right on entry to Poggio Secco. Etc. Software would be needed to convert the attitude data to engine map selection with the aid of a table detailing the corners, distance between them, together with the lean angle direction and extents for the particular track. It wouldn't be hard for a real-time embedded system.
As I keep repeating, the accuracy of solid state laser gyros plus associated software are sufficient to fly aircraft on. If the roll gyro was detecting even a small roll to the left of 0.1deg/sec, for example, and this was fed to the display then the display would show the aircraft inverted within 30 minutes despite it flying straight and level. Obviously, if the pilot were to "correct" for the erroneous roll rate then the display would show zero roll, but within 30 minutes the aircraft would be inverted. This does not happen, so you can be assured that the accuracy of the attitude information available from a gyro/accelerometer/tilt inertial sensor pack and associated software is more than sufficient to give positioning accuracy at the very least as good as that available using GPS. All that is required to convert the attitude data to engine map selection is an electronic odometer and a look-up table detailing the corners, distance between them, together with the lean angle direction and extents for the particular track.
BTW, most consumer GPS units claim an accuracy of about +/-10m, but the actual accuracy depends on how long the occupation time required to achieve the claimed accuracy actually is. Systems that tout high accuracy are only able to achieve this after a stationary occupation of at least several minutes, which is obviously no use for bikes.
Joined Jun 2007
10K Posts | 1K+
Norah Head
Do it then Yamaka.
Attitude reading and use, is very different to "mapping a whole track. Do it, without references, or show me someone who does
Attitude reading and use, is very different to "mapping a whole track. Do it, without references, or show me someone who does
Joined Jun 2007
10K Posts | 1K+
Norah Head
Do it then Yamaka.
Attitude reading and use, is very different to "mapping a whole track. Do it, without references, or show me someone who does
Attitude reading and use, is very different to "mapping a whole track. Do it, without references, or show me someone who does
Joined Jun 2007
10K Posts | 1K+
Norah Head
No, I don't believe this is good enough. Thats why they talk of referencing .... they know the problems ...... obviously they have encountered them of they would be just doing the simple system you describe.
No there's a lot more to it than that Geo
Joined Sep 2007
2K Posts | 60+
here
Do it then Yamaka.
Attitude reading and use, is very different to "mapping a whole track. Do it, without references, or show me someone who does
Oh, FFS, we are back where we were in 2010. With a reference beacon available at the start finish straight, why would you not use it as it simplifies the software and hence makes it cheaper. The same reason teams were using full on GPS before it was banned. You can even buy a COTS product for $1K which includes a reference beacon & uses gyros & an accelerometer - see http://www.moto1store.com/p-2132129-mychron-3-gold-auto-8mb-4-ch.aspx
I could do it without the reference beacon, but currently no-one would pay me for it and why should they. And I'm majorly allergic to the concept of working for free
I'll post this again one more time and please note how old the article is and that these problems have been solved. These are interviews with the actual engineers who program the bikes and pioneer the electronics in GP. This is from 2008, and in 2007 they were denying what they were able to do. Yamaha have also now admitted they can do what was being asked during the this interview. GPS isn't good unless you can access a bunch of satellites and I doubt the US has any interest in giving motorcycle racing the ability to pick up any more satellites than any other non govt entity.
http://www.eetimes.com/design/automotive-design/4005855/Under-the-Hood-MotoGP-electronics-is-where-the-rubber-meets-the-road?pageNumber=0
http://www.eetimes.com/design/automotive-design/4005855/Under-the-Hood-MotoGP-electronics-is-where-the-rubber-meets-the-road?pageNumber=0
There are three more articles about GP on that site and there is one more on another EE site that is rather damaging to all forms of racing if you ask me, or if you are a fan of the racer as opposed to the technology. The riders are no longer in charge of the engine during the most difficult parts of racing, braking, down shifting, and corner entry. There is a hint of it in that article but they don't really go into it. We all know the braking zones are much smaller and it's thanks to the electronics, the engineers don't want to leave it up to the riders and they know those types of riders are hard to come by. They have all admitted that a control ecu would be a deal breaker and even a few riders said they would leave if it came to that, the magic isn't in the TC we all think of (throttle control during acceleration) but in corner entry.
Again, yamaka had the best answer for this imo when we first discussed it. Ban ride by wire throttles, ban track position aware software/engine mapping.
I guess the latter has been present for a while in crude form; back in the day they used different engines for different circuits, but this still left the riding decisions to the rider within the lap.
