Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Gain max. SRF08? #6451

Closed
radioelf opened this issue Jan 23, 2017 · 8 comments
Closed

Gain max. SRF08? #6451

radioelf opened this issue Jan 23, 2017 · 8 comments
Assignees
@PeterKietzmann
Labels
Area: drivers Area: Device drivers Community: Hack'n'ACK candidate This PR is a candidate for review and discussion during one of RIOT's monthly Hack'n'ACK parties Impact: minor The PR is small in size and might only require a quick look of a knowledgeable reviewer Type: bug The issue reports a bug / The PR fixes a bug (including spelling errors)

Comments

@radioelf
Copy link

radioelf commented Jan 23, 2017 •
edited
Loading

Hi.
Is this correct? RIOT/drivers/include/srf08.h line 65 "#define SRF08_MAX_GAIN 0x25"
In the documentation https://www.robot-electronics.co.uk/htm/srf08tech.html it indicated 0x31 (1025)
@PeterKietzmann
Copy link
Member

Where did you see 0x35 on the provided site? What I found there was
31 0x1F Set Maximum Analogue Gain to 1025 which still differs from your description. When writing this file I used this document as reference which states 0x25. However, looking at the "Analogue Gain" table I think the mapping might be wrong. Is there anyone with more experience about that device?

@PeterKietzmann PeterKietzmann self-assigned this Jan 23, 2017
@PeterKietzmann PeterKietzmann added Area: drivers Area: Device drivers Discussion: RFC The issue/PR is used as a discussion starting point about the item of the issue/PR Type: bug The issue reports a bug / The PR fixes a bug (including spelling errors) Impact: minor The PR is small in size and might only require a quick look of a knowledgeable reviewer and removed Discussion: RFC The issue/PR is used as a discussion starting point about the item of the issue/PR labels Jan 23, 2017
@radioelf
Copy link
Author

radioelf commented Jan 23, 2017 •
edited
Loading

HI, It was a mistake, is 0x31....

@PeterKietzmann
Copy link
Member

No. In the link you sent it is 0d31 equals 0x1f. The link I sent did not translate the decimal to the hex values correctly. Thus I assume your documentation is correct. Do you want to provide a fix for the header file :-)?

@PeterKietzmann PeterKietzmann added this to the Release 2017.04 milestone Jan 24, 2017
@radioelf
Copy link
Author

No, better ensure the correct documentation

@PeterKietzmann
Copy link
Member

@radioelf do you have new insights which data sheet is the correct one? Otherwise I assume the issue still persists, right?

@radioelf
Copy link
Author

Hi Peter, Safely NO, yes the issue still persists.

@PeterKietzmann PeterKietzmann added the Community: Hack'n'ACK candidate This PR is a candidate for review and discussion during one of RIOT's monthly Hack'n'ACK parties label Nov 6, 2017
@PeterKietzmann PeterKietzmann mentioned this issue Nov 7, 2017
Merged
@kYc0o
Copy link
Contributor

kYc0o commented Nov 27, 2017

#7956 was merged, can we consider this as solved?

@PeterKietzmann
Copy link
Member

Whoops, thought I already closed this issue. Yes, I see it as solved now.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@PeterKietzmann PeterKietzmann

Labels
Area: drivers Area: Device drivers Community: Hack'n'ACK candidate This PR is a candidate for review and discussion during one of RIOT's monthly Hack'n'ACK parties Impact: minor The PR is small in size and might only require a quick look of a knowledgeable reviewer Type: bug The issue reports a bug / The PR fixes a bug (including spelling errors)
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@aabadie @kYc0o @radioelf @PeterKietzmann