Waveform Library Reform

Ask any questions about using PicoScope Automotive software here.

Waveform Library Reform

Postby Mark Dalton » Tue Jun 20, 2017 3:13 pm

I'm curious as to how many people use the Waveform Library and how useful you found it. I was looking for a Waveform the other week and found 10 times as much stuff that was of no use, as stuff I found that was of any use. What do people think if you could only upload to the Library if...
+ You could only Upload Good Waveforms. (Someone else's Bad waveform doesn't mean that your suspect waveform is good.)
+ You can only upload if all the details are complete. ( I want to be confident that I'm comparing apples with apples.)
+ You could submit a request to have a Waveform removed from the Library. (If you make a mistake entering information then the waveform is stuck there.)

The Library is a fantastic tool, but it will lose it's value if good information becomes swamped by users uploading waveforms arbitrarily.
User avatar
Mark Dalton
TwoWaves
TwoWaves
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 11:35 pm
Location: Melbourne

Re: Waveform Library Reform

Postby liviu2004 » Tue Jun 20, 2017 5:04 pm

You can remove own uploaded waveforms.
liviu2004
TwoWaves
TwoWaves
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 10:23 am
Location: Netherlands

Re: Waveform Library Reform

Postby Alan » Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:09 pm

Hi Mark,

Thanks for the suggestions. There are certainly a lot of waveforms in the database but the different search options should make it easy to get to the relevant one(s).

What waveform were you looking for and what ones got in the way.

We do enforce that a number of fields are filled in for a waveform to be updated but not all - for example the ABS sensor on a vehicle will usually not vary with different engine sizes.

Bad waveforms can be as useful (IMHO) as good ones if you have the same fault.

As for which waveforms get used the most - CAM VS Crank is usually the top but ABS, injector and ignition are popular.

Happy to listen to any suggestions on how to keep improving the database - of course one of the best ways is if everyone makes an effort to upload as well as just make use of it.

Regards
Alan
Alan
Pico Staff Member
Pico Staff Member
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 10:02 am

Re: Waveform Library Reform

Postby steevegt » Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:10 am

Hi,

To your questions I mostly have the same opinion as Alan.

As a suggestion to improve the waveform library database, in my opinion, a feature that allows the community to add some info on the waveform, could help in multiple ways and solve some issues.

Should be possible to all users, to add some info on any waveform, like saying that the Cam vs Crank for engine A, also applies for engine B and C. Or the opposite, saying the waveform does not apply to engine D or E.
The users could also add a Like or Dislike flag, if the waveform is referenced as good, and they think that it isn't. Also if the capture was done with a lot of noise, or with very low sample rate, or simply if the waveform does not bring any useful information...

A way to reference waveforms could also help the search. It should be possible to add a link in the waveform library, referencing a know good to this know bad, or the opposite. It may also be useful to link together captures of the same car made in the same context. Etc.

I know that it is challenging to open this door to the community, but I believe that with little supervision the database could become much more rich than it is today with the same exact number of waveforms.

Thanks
steevegt
TwoWaves
TwoWaves
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 12:05 am

Re: Waveform Library Reform

Postby Mark Dalton » Wed Jun 21, 2017 11:52 am

I like the idea of being able to up or down vote a Waveform, it's an efficient way to give feedback.
User avatar
Mark Dalton
TwoWaves
TwoWaves
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 11:35 pm
Location: Melbourne

Re: Waveform Library Reform

Postby Mark Dalton » Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:18 pm

Alan wrote:Hi Mark,

Thanks for the suggestions. There are certainly a lot of waveforms in the database but the different search options should make it easy to get to the relevant one(s).

What waveform were you looking for and what ones got in the way.

We do enforce that a number of fields are filled in for a waveform to be updated but not all - for example the ABS sensor on a vehicle will usually not vary with different engine sizes.

Bad waveforms can be as useful (IMHO) as good ones if you have the same fault.

As for which waveforms get used the most - CAM VS Crank is usually the top but ABS, injector and ignition are popular.

Happy to listen to any suggestions on how to keep improving the database - of course one of the best ways is if everyone makes an effort to upload as well as just make use of it.

Regards
Alan


Hi Alan,
+ One of my thoughts about the fields was that some of them could be dropped. If you enforced an Engine Option Code that should mean you are comparing like for like straight away. It's possible that a Engine Option or Transmission Option can be used by a manufacturer over multiple models, but I've never seen the same option code used for physically different engines i.e. a petrol and a diesel.
+ How do you know you've got the same fault as someone else? Unless the waveform specifically tells what's wrong with it and it's specific symptom, you could end up chasing the wrong thing.
User avatar
Mark Dalton
TwoWaves
TwoWaves
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 11:35 pm
Location: Melbourne

Re: Waveform Library Reform

Postby PicoPhil » Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:00 pm

Hi
All these point s are taken on board and we hope users will use the notes sections to add as much information on the test as possible.Yes it is hard to remember test conditions and link perhaps wiring information to the test but it can be done and works.
If you have ever looked at our case studies, you will see we add notes and to help files for user after capture of waveform.
Thank you for your input on this subject and please keep adding waveform s to the library.
Philip :D
PicoPhil
Pico Staff Member
Pico Staff Member
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 1:38 pm

Re: Waveform Library Reform

Postby PicoPhil » Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:07 pm

Hi
If anyone enters the wrong information by mistake this can be changed by a member of Pico staff. Please contact us via the forum page. We do look at the waveform s on a weekly bases.
thanks
Philip
PicoPhil
Pico Staff Member
Pico Staff Member
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 1:38 pm

Re: Waveform Library Reform

Postby steevegt » Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:35 pm

PicoPhil wrote:All these point s are taken on board and we hope users will use the notes sections to add as much information on the test as possible.Yes it is hard to remember test conditions and link perhaps wiring information to the test but it can be done and works.
If you have ever looked at our case studies, you will see we add notes and to help files for user after capture of waveform.
Thank you for your input on this subject and please keep adding waveform s to the library.
Philip :D


Hi,

Based on your answer, I guess that I maybe didn't express myself very well before.
Is it possible, for me, to add notes on a waveform uploaded by someone else? That was my original thought on the subject.
I can add valuable info on a waveform, even if I'm not the creator...

Thanks
steevegt
TwoWaves
TwoWaves
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 12:05 am

Re: Waveform Library Reform

Postby liviu2004 » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:55 pm

On my uploaded forms, I would mind if someone starts putting notes. Be aware of the bad intentions and I'm not gonna check each day to see what else has been messed with.
Fine if you want to make like comments list for the waveform, but don't touch my forms please. Good or bad ones.
liviu2004
TwoWaves
TwoWaves
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 10:23 am
Location: Netherlands

Next

Return to PicoScope 6 Automotive software

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests