Closed JustinLangridge closed 7 years ago
Providing two new properties in the Configurable Device
class:
Cal Equation
- user can use this to apply a calibration to the primary measurement of the device (RH for the Vaisala's, pressure for the PPTs, volumetric flow for the Alicats, etc). The input will go in the configuration file as [ID].CalEquation
and can be applied to any object classified as a Device. This value will be picked off in the method Configurable Device::Configure Device
which heretofore has been purely abstract.Config Section
- this allows us to utilize the Cal Equation
in a more general method by providing direct access to the configuration section in the INI file.The equation that is put in for the Cal Equation
is a polynomial that looks like
[ID].CalEquation = Cn*x^n+Cn-1*x^(n-1)+...+C1*x+C0
where x
is the original value and Cn
is the nth coefficient. This value is optional in the INI file and the default is 1*x.
Added for MFCs, PPTs and Vaisalas. Tested specifically for Vaisala's.
Is this calibration just for display purposes ? I think data recorded should be as close to raw data as possible.
No. It is not just for display purposes. Generally calibrations are generally something done rarely and therefore we just apply them across the board. The raw data is always there - the user performing the analysis simply has to invert the calibration (generally trivial for polynomial fits). That being said, I understand the desire to include the raw data. To this end, I have two potential fixes (neither of which I will include in this phase as they are beyond the scope of work - but you are always welcome to change them):
Personally, I think that the second is more elegant - this is what we generally do for calibrations of measurements such as flow, T and RH. But, either one is workable (the first probably requires the most work).
Seems the second is probably the better option.
From: Matt Richardson [mailto:notifications@github.com] Sent: 30 November 2016 05:41 To: msr-consulting/exscalabar_server Cc: Tiddeman, Dave; Comment Subject: Re: [msr-consulting/exscalabar_server] Vaisala cal coefficients (#161)
No. It is not just for display purposes. Generally calibrations are generally something done rarely and therefore we just apply them across the board. The raw data is always there - the user performing the analysis simply has to invert the calibration (generally trivial for polynomial fits). That being said, I understand the desire to include the raw data. To this end, I have two potential fixes (neither of which I will include in this phase as they are beyond the scope of work - but you are always welcome to change them):
Personally, I think that the second is more elegant - this is what we generally do for calibrations of measurements such as flow, T and RH. But, either one is workable (the first probably requires the most work).
— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/msr-consulting/exscalabar_server/issues/161#issuecomment-263788217, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALmnR5tBb3MoZ6rxwkdEwwnwEtLOJYXMks5rDQxOgaJpZM4K5sEv.
If it is quick I might be able to get it in. I think it would be good to always have the most recent copy of the INI anyway just in case something happens.
Can we add calibration coefficients for the vaisalas to the .ini file? These will be coefficients based on a straight line fit of the true RH to the RH measured by the device.
While this is a nicety for most of the probes and can be applied in post-processing, it is important for the two vaisalas used to control the RH as we want to control to a calibrated RH value.