I am wanting to graph engine rpm from a crank sensor either hall effect or inductive. The reason for this is to develop a test to ID which cylinder is misfiring. I have tried a math channel using freq(A)number of teeth*60 and this is what I got with a pressure transducer in cylinder 1, but it still does show cylinders 1 not contributing
I have used a maths channel 60/32*freq(A-2.5) for the digital crank signal on channel A.
I have then applied this maths channel and increased the scaling by a factor of 3 to reveal the drop in RPM for the cylinder containing the WPS (Cylinder 1)
Just read a similar reply on iatn. When doing these calculations you have to allow for missing teeth. So on a 58 tooth crank it will actually be 60-2. So using your formula it becomes 60/60*freq(A-2.5) = 1*freq(A-2.5) = freq(A-2.5).
Make sense?
This should be 60/34*freq(A-2.5) (if I have counted correctly).
You have most certainly counted correctly as I have not allowed for the missing teeth.
I think I didn't. . My apologies. 2X 2 missing teeth. So 36 teeth. Which is a nicer number 10* each
Cheers
FF
I'd reitterate what FF says here - you need to use 36 as the number of teeth per engine revolution for this example, not 34 or 32. Fundamental to what FF is saying is that when you make a maths channel calculation for speed from a tooth frequency, you must use the tooth count as if there are no missing teeth, e.g. in this case add the 4 missing teeth to the counted 32 for a revolution. Then just reject the data at the missing teeth (drop-outs) in the speed calculation.
Am I missing something in the start of the thread here - all four cylinders DO look as if they are contributing equally, not the statement that No.1 is NOT contributing equally?
Thanks Steve. I did read this article again and got some more info regarding math channels and understand some things better now.
I also did some tests and found no difference between these two options. However i believe crossing point in middle may give better results in some situations.
Also I must say that these new math channel functions are just great and make things much simpler.
Most of these are still not undestandable for me so I hope there will be some "real life" examples shown in the future. Or maybe I just have not noticed?