View Single Post
Old 09-06-2008, 07:04 PM   #8 (permalink)
ac7ss
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Olympia, wa
Posts: 65

Red Beast - '82 V45 Sabre Vetter Fairing
90 day: 39.38 mpg (US)

Da Truck - '92 B2600I
90 day: 25.66 mpg (US)

The Wife's bike - '82 CM450E Red
90 day: 57.22 mpg (US)

Yellow Submarine - '04 Neon SXT
90 day: 28.71 mpg (US)

Blue Magoo - '93 Metro
90 day: 44.57 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Averaging the 2 non-anomalous readings is bad, it introduces instability to the equation. With 3 readings we are counting on only one being bad, if 2 are bad, it will return the bad average anyway.

The plan that I had proposed would return the least anomalous of the last 2 readings.

If we need a larger sample to average, it would take a bit more code and variable space and we would merely make a average of 10 (Slower 'instant' readings at low speed) or running average of the last 10 (Instant update, lagging by 5 values). IMO, this would bypass the entire 'instant' reading idea. both also introduce errors at low speeds.
__________________

  Reply With Quote