Like I said in the earlier post, we act like we have better accuracy than we
do.
Now I need to go back to designing my special front bumper extendo
mechanism.
-- Rick Brown
BP Corvette
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-autox@autox.team.net [mailto:owner-autox@autox.team.net]On
Behalf Of GPSoftware
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 8:38 PM
To: autox@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Wireless autocross timing equipment?
Wow, I certainly have been getting plenty of feedback on this subject! What
if the price was $200?!!
I'm getting more like 1.4 inches traveled in .002 seconds at 40 MPH. I
derived it in this roundabout way:
40 MPH * 5280 Ft = 211200 ft/hr
211200 ft/hr / 3600 = 58.67 ft/sec
58.67 ft/sec * .002 = .1173 ft
.1173 ft * 12 = 1.4 in
I'm pretty sure this would be undetectable to the human eye, and certainly
worthy of a "tie". The big reason I think .001 is silly is because
environmental factors such as temperature, cloud cover, and wind contribute
significantly more error than this. If we were Autocrossing in an
environmental chamber and could somehow all run simultaneously it might be
something to worry about.
Gary
> On Tuesday, June 11, 2002, at 12:08 AM, GPSoftware wrote:
> > I'm prototyping a dual trigger wireless system that should easily
> > retail for
> > under $1000. It's already obvious that timing accuracy won't be in the
> > .001
> > second range. Frankly, I've never understood why the SCCA requires this
> > resolution, and my experience has been that there are many clubs that
> > don't
> > adhere to that rule and would rather have a system that is easy to use
> > and
> > affordable.
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|