aheit
commented
2 years ago Hello Rasmus,
thanks for the report and sorry for the late response.
Let me try to understand what is going wrong:
- We are looking at the data on channel 11 to which BBC.dbc is assigned
- During BLF decoding, cantomat matches DAQ1_TESTER_T to some message and translates the contained signals incorrectly. This can be seen in the matdump output.
- CANape and other tools match DAQ1_TESTER_E to the same message and translate the signal values correctly. This can be seen in the CANape screenshot
Let me try to ask some questions first.
- You wrote “Issue I want to pinpoint here is that cantomat output says DAQ1_TESTER_E instead of the expected DAQ1_TESTER_T”. This seems to contradict the mat output which says “Ch11_DAQ1_TESTER_T_DAQ1_data”. Is there a mistake in the description?
- What is the difference between DAQ1_TESTER_R and DAQ1_TESTER_T in the dbc file? Do they have different CAN ids? Can you tell me their numerical ids?
- Debugging the issue might be difficult without the actual files. Would you be able to provide reduced files with just the relevant data for root causing?
Thanks,
Andreas
Von: RasMH @.> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 4. November 2021 11:23 An: aheit/cantools @.> Cc: Subscribed @.***> Betreff: [aheit/cantools] Cantomat, result differ from canalyzer (Issue #12)
Hello I am converting a blf-file to mat with the help of three dbc-files. By comparing the output to a Canalyzer trace, I see that some message and signal names in the mat output does not match the ones shown in Canalyzer. To better judge which one is incorrect, I have also used the python cantools utitilty and it shows the same exact ouput as Canalyzer.
Here is the command I use to convert: cantomat -b2 -d BBA.dbc -b3 -d BBB.dbc -b11 -d BBC.dbc -B cantraffic.blf -pbm --verbose -t1 -m out.mat Here is the relevant output with cantomat:
Name: Ch11_DAQ1_TESTER_T_DAQ1_data Rank: 2 Dimensions: 33739 x 2 Class Type: Double Precision Array Data Type: IEEE 754 double-precision { 0.000326 3.84469e+09 0.001586 13 0.002894 3.35544e+09 0.005309 2.5574e+09
In Canalyzer I have this: https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/12778717/140295913-5ec0eb7b-524f-4fae-8574-4f99a3b5ce29.png
Issue I want to pinpoint here is that cantomat output says DAQ1_TESTER_E instead of the expected DAQ1_TESTER_T. Signal values differ as well. Timestamps match as you see (and there are no other signals with the same timestamp). This is not the only frame that is different. I have tried, bu not been able to find a pattern, I get the wrong name on different channels and on both extended and short ids.
I may not be able to share the blf or dbc files, but I would be glad to assist in figuring out what the issue may be. kind regards, Rasmus
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/aheit/cantools/issues/12 , or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABBD72MH7XXH6UX5U3QPKNTUKJNGPANCNFSM5HLCOLRA . https://github.com/notifications/beacon/ABBD72KBZWAWG3YAE3QZFGTUKJNGPA5CNFSM5HLCOLRKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4PSC63BA.gif
RasmusH-DS
Hello I am converting a blf-file to mat with the help of three dbc-files. By comparing the output to a Canalyzer trace, I see that some message and signal names in the mat output does not match the ones shown in Canalyzer. To better judge which one is incorrect, I have also used the python cantools utitilty and it shows the same exact output as Canalyzer.
Here is the command I use to convert: cantomat -b2 -d BBA.dbc -b3 -d BBB.dbc -b11 -d BBC.dbc -B cantraffic.blf -pbm --verbose -t1 -m out.mat Here is the relevant output with cantomat:
Name: Ch11_DAQ1_TESTER_T_DAQ1_data Rank: 2 Dimensions: 33739 x 2 Class Type: Double Precision Array Data Type: IEEE 754 double-precision { 0.000326 3.84469e+09 0.001586 13 0.002894 3.35544e+09 0.005309 2.5574e+09
In Canalyzer I have this:
Issue I want to pinpoint here is that cantomat output says DAQ1_TESTER_T instead of the expected DAQ1_TESTER_E. Signal values differ as well. Timestamps match as you see (and there are no other signals with the same timestamp). This is not the only frame that is different. I see a mismatch on about 40 frames compared to cantools. I have tried, but not been able to find a pattern, I get the wrong name on different channels and on both extended and short ids.
I may not be able to share the blf or dbc files, but I would be glad to assist in figuring out what the issue may be.
Cantomat version is 0.31. I compiled it on Ubuntu 20.04 under windows subsystem for linux (WSL). kind regards, Rasmus