Hi there,
thank you Sembazuru for pointing that out. I guess that means I should have set "MEDIAN_MAX_SIZE" to somewhat around 200 and then define a RunningMedian samples = RunningMedian(50); Well, as I learned yesterday the RunningMedian takes more processing time as it needs to sort the array. As I´m taking my measurements each 50ms I guess that would not be an option - especially not with a large array size (which seem absolutley logical now to limit the array size). I´m now using the RunningAverage-library as I found my optimum array size for my setup via the tests I did. So everything is fine now. But I still wonder if the array size can be made user configurable during runtime.
@ivanseidel: Thank you for pointing me to your library. But I allready implemented the RunningAverage-library by Rob Tillaart and only needed some fine tuning (and understanding on whats going on behind the scenes). The last results I got were suficiently constant. I just needed to adjust the array size to get the timing right (because a large array size means smoother data but more timeleg on steep gradients ).
Best regards,
Jan