Offline
Newbie
Karma: 0
Posts: 11
|
 |
« on: November 12, 2012, 08:47:52 pm » |
I'm currently working on a flow meter, which measures in GPH. I'm trying to set it up so it displays the current gph usage and two resettable total gallon used counters. The sketch counts the number of pulses from the sensor every second or so. I then take the flow measurement( which is pulses * gals per pulse) and add it to totalgallonsA. TotalgallonsA += flowgal; // both are float
The problem I'm having is totalgallonsA instead of increasing always goes back to zero? I can post the complete code if needed, I have it on my other computer I'm very new to programming, and don't know where to begin?? Matt
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Global Moderator
Melbourne, Australia
Offline
Shannon Member
Karma: 219
Posts: 13896
Lua rocks!
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: November 12, 2012, 08:52:19 pm » |
Can you print both variables before and after the add please? (Serial.print).
Possibly one or the other is NaN (not a number).
Preferably post all your code inside code tags.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
UK
Offline
Tesla Member
Karma: 89
Posts: 6400
-
|
 |
« Reply #2 on: November 12, 2012, 09:54:53 pm » |
Floating point doesn't seem like a good bet for that sort of thing - you're going to be getting unpredictable rounding errors that could get quite large. Better IMO to define the resolution you're going to measure at (tenths of gallons, hundredths, thousandths etc) and store your counters as fixed point integer numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Left Coast, CA (USA)
Offline
Brattain Member
Karma: 279
Posts: 15320
Measurement changes behavior
|
 |
« Reply #3 on: November 12, 2012, 10:08:04 pm » |
I agree. A flow meter that generating pulses per unit of material flowed is best dealt with using integer math. it's rather straight forward counting of pulses in a fixed time interval and of course updating the total flow value, I see no advantages to using floating point math and several disadvantages.
Lefty
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Netherlands
Offline
Tesla Member
Karma: 90
Posts: 9429
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, however in practice there are many...
|
 |
« Reply #4 on: November 13, 2012, 12:56:59 pm » |
probably you need to define the total counter as a global variable.
to be sure please post your code.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Offline
God Member
Karma: 9
Posts: 778
|
 |
« Reply #5 on: November 13, 2012, 03:33:28 pm » |
This should work: TotalgallonsA = TotalgallonsA + flowgal; // both are float
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Global Moderator
UK
Offline
Brattain Member
Karma: 138
Posts: 19067
I don't think you connected the grounds, Dave.
|
 |
« Reply #6 on: November 13, 2012, 04:06:03 pm » |
TotalgallonsA = TotalgallonsA + flowgal; And how is that different to the code the IP posted?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Pete, it's a fool looks for logic in the chambers of the human heart.
|
|
|
|
Poole, Dorset, UK
Offline
God Member
Karma: 8
Posts: 672
|
 |
« Reply #7 on: November 13, 2012, 07:01:39 pm » |
Can't tell unless you post your whole code.
Mark
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Offline
Newbie
Karma: 0
Posts: 11
|
 |
« Reply #8 on: November 13, 2012, 08:35:04 pm » |
Here is my code so far. Im pretty new to the language, any help would be great Matt #include <LiquidCrystal.h> // initialize the library with the numbers of the interface pins LiquidCrystal lcd(12,11,10,9,8,7);
byte sensorInterrupt = 0; // 0 = pin 2; 1 = pin 3 byte sensorPin = 2;
// The hall-effect flow sensor outputs aproximatly one pulse per .00038L
volatile byte pulseCount;
float flowRate; unsigned int flowGallons; float totalGallonsA; unsigned int totalGallonsB; int pulseCounttot; unsigned long oldTime;
void setup() { Serial.begin(9600); lcd.begin(16, 2); lcd.setCursor(0, 0); lcd.print("BRADSHAW "); lcd.setCursor(0, 1); lcd.print("INDUSTRIES ");
delay(3000); lcd.clear();
pinMode(sensorPin, INPUT); digitalWrite(sensorPin, HIGH);
pulseCount = 0; flowRate = 0.0; flowGallons = 0; totalGallonsA = 0; totalGallonsB = 0; oldTime = 0; pulseCounttot = 0; // The Hall-effect sensor is connected to pin 2 which uses interrupt 0. // Configured to trigger on a FALLING state change (transition from HIGH // state to LOW state) attachInterrupt(sensorInterrupt, pulseCounter, FALLING); }
/** * Main program loop */ void loop() {
if((millis() - oldTime) >= 1000) // Only process counters once per second { // Disable the interrupt while calculating flow rate and sending the value to // the host detachInterrupt(sensorInterrupt);
// Because this loop may not complete in exactly 1 second intervals we calculate // the number of milliseconds that have passed since the last execution and use // that to scale the output. unsigned long time = millis() - oldTime; float time_in_sec = time / 1000; float impuls = pulseCount * time_in_sec; //scale pulse number
float flowG = impuls * .00010; // amount of gals float GPH = flowG * 120 ; // convert to gph
totalGallonsA =+ flowG ;
oldTime = millis(); {
} lcd.setCursor(0,0); lcd.print(GPH); lcd.setCursor(6,0); lcd.print("GPH"); // Print the integer part of the variable lcd.setCursor(0,1); lcd.print(totalGallonsA,4);
// Reset the pulse counter so we can start incrementing again pulseCount = 0;
// Enable the interrupt again now that we've finished sending output attachInterrupt(sensorInterrupt, pulseCounter, FALLING); } }
/** * Invoked by interrupt0 once per rotation of the hall-effect sensor. Interrupt * handlers should be kept as small as possible so they return quickly. */ void pulseCounter() { // Increment the pulse counter pulseCount++; }
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Global Moderator
Melbourne, Australia
Offline
Shannon Member
Karma: 219
Posts: 13896
Lua rocks!
|
 |
« Reply #9 on: November 13, 2012, 09:03:21 pm » |
That isn't the same as: totalGallonsA += flowG ;
Your version merely sets totalGallonsA to the value in flowG. It doesn't add.
// Disable the interrupt while calculating flow rate and sending the value to // the host detachInterrupt(sensorInterrupt);
Better is: noInterrupts();
// Enable the interrupt again now that we've finished sending output attachInterrupt(sensorInterrupt, pulseCounter, FALLING); Better is: interrupts ();
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Austin, TX
Offline
Faraday Member
Karma: 41
Posts: 5176
CMiYC
|
 |
« Reply #10 on: November 15, 2012, 07:59:57 pm » |
Why is it better to disable all of the interrupts instead of just the one?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
North Queensland, Australia
Offline
Edison Member
Karma: 31
Posts: 1194
|
 |
« Reply #11 on: November 15, 2012, 08:11:33 pm » |
Disabling global interrupts is a single bit manipulation, attach/detach interrupt are not as efficient. The operation could be done before detachInterrupt even returns.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Global Moderator
Melbourne, Australia
Offline
Shannon Member
Karma: 219
Posts: 13896
Lua rocks!
|
 |
« Reply #12 on: November 15, 2012, 09:16:39 pm » |
I agree, but if you wanted finer tuning you could disable that particular interrupt, eg. EIMSK &= ~_BV (INT0); That is also a single-bit operation. And turn it on later with: EIMSK |= _BV (INT0); In this case I don't think having interrupts off for a moment will be a big deal.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|