Shearwater upload problems

[Willem Ferguson]

On 05/02/2018 15:44, Jef Driesen wrote:
>> This might be due to the parser by some reason parsing it as petrel
>> data. The petrel sample size is twice the sample size of the predator.
>>
>> Are you sure you did pick "predator" ?
>
> The predator doesn't support the newer petrel protocol. So I assume 
> Willem did indeed select "Predator", otherwise the download would have 
> failed.
>
> But you are pointing in the right direction. The subsurface branch 
> introduced a bug with commit 8ea8cebb4e6c3d86b9ceb2291caa077dabd2a3f7. 
> There, the "petrel" parameter was removed and replaced with the model 
> number. But the purpose of that parameter is to indicate whether the 
> data came from the petrel or the predator backend. And because the 
> model number appears to be stored incorrect in Willem's data (zero 
> instead of 2), the data gets indeed parsed using the petrel format.
>
> There is something strange with this data. The model number is zero, 
> while it's supposed to be 2 for the Predator. The number of sensors is 
> 1, but none of the three sensors has its calibrated bit set, and all 
> three calibration values are also zero.
>
> Does the rest of the data looks good, or are there other errors as well?
>
> Jef
>
I definitely did pick the Predator option, both in the Linux OS 
Bluetooth setup and within Subsurface. The O2 sensor on the computer was 
calibrated using oxygen in the way specified in the user manual and it 
performed very well. I have no idea how this relates to the calibration 
bit and calibration value.

The temperature data are ok. There are issues with the deco ceiling 
calculated in Subsurface, but since deco is time-bound and we have an 
erroneous time scale, it remains to be seen if the deco effects are 
genuine or an artifact of the time scale problem.

Kind regards,

willem





-- 
This message and attachments are subject to a disclaimer.
Please refer to 
http://upnet.up.ac.za/services/it/documentation/docs/004167.pdf for full 
details.