Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[TWG_TECH8]

Dear customers,

Sorry for your wait and appreicated your support on our product.
The firmware is expected to release last weekend, but we found a problem and try to fix it.
The firmware improves:
- Add HR% in custom page
- Add HR% Alert
- Add a arrorw at 1/3 display in Track back mode
- Fix cumulative lap distance error
- In mile system, the height unit keep using "ft", not change to "mile"
- Add pace 1K in custom page

Please contact me if you have interest,

Have a nice weekend,

Geoffrey 

note: over 64 laps in one training and slope need some days to implement, will release once finished.

[Hubert]

Hi Geoffrey,

after waiting so long, this are really good news ! 

Thank you to you and your team for your efforts !

Of course I'm interested in the new version, so please send
it to my email adress. Thank you very much !

Bytheway: Do you really want to call it version X ??

Regards, Hubert

[maran]

Hi Geoffrey,

Pleas send me the new firmware. I will try it in this weekend. I really looking forward to the better HR-tracking.
Email: marcus.annacarin@home.se

/Marcus

[Roger C]

Hi all !

I have completed one short running ( 5 km ) with the new Beta firmware installed, and found out that "pace 1K" function needs to be improved.

First of all this function starts to work after around 1.1 km, and after that its not updating as freqvent/often as it should ( not at all like avg/pace ), and with wrong value.
One time it jumped from 4.31 to 4.56 in a few secound and then it stayed there for long even when i ran faster.

So something is wrong there.

% function works great, but i had to change my age to get the right maxpulse value ( i dont have 220 - age like the watch gives us ), like longjog has described in another tread.

thats all for now, over and out.

Have a nice/sunny weekend !

Roger C

[chagongo]

Hi all

Like Roger said, seems that there is something wrong with the 1k Pace, I think that the values starts showing after you ran 1k because the watch needs that data to start the calculations but in my test the 1k pace was always higher than the pace showing at the end of the lap, in general where over 10 to 15 seconds and in some place it where like 30 seconds higher.

The fix for the cumulative error worked great for me, I get 5 laps of exactly 1km in sportstrack and 3 laps of 1.01km. Great job here.

The %HR can't be tested because I have a older heart rate belt with the problems of hi bpm values, I'll purchase a new belt at the US globalsat site, I hope that it works correctly and I can use the full features of our watch.

Geoffrey and all the team, tank you for still doing improvements to the software, and keep the good things coming.

Regards
Ricardo
Monterrey, México.

[snow_freak]

Hi Geoffrey,
the new FW sound great! I'm interested in testing the new one, please send it to my email address.
Many thanks in advance.

[TWG_TECH8]

Hi Geoffrey,
the new FW sound great! I'm interested in testing the new one, please send it to my email address.
Many thanks in advance.

Hi Snow_Freak

Done it, please check your email box.

Sincerely,

Geoffrey

[TWG_TECH8]

Hi Geoffrey,

after waiting so long, this are really good news ! 

Thank you to you and your team for your efforts !

Of course I'm interested in the new version, so please send
it to my email adress. Thank you very much !

Bytheway: Do you really want to call it version X ??

Regards, Hubert

Hi Hubert,

Done it.
I call it "X" just personal interest. 
X is extreme~

Geoffrey 

[ultrapetita]

I tested the new FW during a marathon yesterday. The results were not that good:

1) 1kpace: like reported earlier here, useless - seems that the pace is a bad guess of the real pace, lap pace worked much better and was reliable. I can not understand why 1kpace showed completely wrong level results.

2) Cumulative error: 1k laps, first 15km very well in place, but after that the cumulative error appeared and the result at 42km already 130m cumulative error.

[Longjog @ GS-Sport-Servicecenter]

2) Cumulative error: 1k laps, first 15km very well in place, but after that the cumulative error appeared and the result at 42km already 130m cumulative error.

Hi Ultrapedia,

look at your single recorded lap-distances. They are sometimes more and sometimes less than 1000m.
If the algorythm would work fine, summation of the single distances to 1000 m would be 0 m. But in reality the 1000 + values are bigger than the 1000 - values. The result is a positive abberation from x.000m
I have done two runs with the firmware x 17,7 km, the "error" was + 40m (pace of 5:30min/km), 26 km, the "error" was +130 m (pace of 6:15min/km). On the first look the "error" seems to be always positive but to be sure much more recordings are needed.

Maybe this is a way to solve the problem:
distance over all = d
lap-distance = ld
number of laps = n

A full lap should be triggered always when d > ld * (n+1)
With every full lap n is getting one more.
 
The disadvantage of this solution is, if you take a manual lap the new lap should count from this point the next lapdistance but if a lap always is triggered from the beginning of the recording, the next lap would come to early.

So it would be better to optimize the new algorithm. I donīt know how the auto-lap is triggered at the moment. In the old firmware the lap was always full, when the lap distance was reached. The reason for the positive error in the past firmware-versions was, the distance canīt be measured meter by meter. If after 998 m came 1006 m for example, the full lap was triggered at 1006 m. As result the more than 1000 meters were accumulated to more and more absolute "errors".
With the new firmware x lap-distances with less than 1000 m are possible. It looks like the new algorythm regards the "step-size" betwen two values. Maybe the step-size depends on the speed. This means, the (positive) cummulative error would be bigger the faster you run (more distance in the same time), if the step-size is a fix value. To trigger a full lap means, to trigger at a distance calculated by lapdistance - "step-size". In this case the positive and negative errors will accululate to 0. But you (globalsat) have to determine the right step-size which depends on the speed. At the moment it seems the step-size is to small. Please check your algorythm of calculation of "step-size", if this description is the way in the new firmware.

Regards

Longjog

You have to

[ultrapetita]

I just checked the laps from the sunday's marathon and it is quite clear that there is ~0.3% cumulative error present with 5min/km pace (4s recording interval, 1km laps). For every 10km's distance the lap was shifted by 30m (10km ->10.03km, 20km->20.06km, 30km->30.09km, and 40km->40.12km).

Thus, I would need to specify the lap as .997km in order to get 1k laps without cumulative error, but according to my experience,  GH-615 does not take the 3rd decimal into account...

[TWG_TECH8]

Hi all !

I have completed one short running ( 5 km ) with the new Beta firmware installed, and found out that "pace 1K" function needs to be improved.

First of all this function starts to work after around 1.1 km, and after that its not updating as freqvent/often as it should ( not at all like avg/pace ), and with wrong value.
One time it jumped from 4.31 to 4.56 in a few secound and then it stayed there for long even when i ran faster.

So something is wrong there.

% function works great, but i had to change my age to get the right maxpulse value ( i dont have 220 - age like the watch gives us ), like longjog has described in another tread.

thats all for now, over and out.

Have a nice/sunny weekend !

Roger C

Hi Mr.Tester,

About the Pace1K alogrithm, we update the information as the below when the interval of distance be:

0-1000m --> P(1)
100-1100m --> P(2)
200-1200m --> P(3)
...
n*100m-(10+n)*100m ->P(n)

Because it is difficult to calculate by every meter regarding GPS accuracy and CPU power.
Please advise if any good ideas.

Regards

Geoffrey 

[TWG_TECH8]

2) Cumulative error: 1k laps, first 15km very well in place, but after that the cumulative error appeared and the result at 42km already 130m cumulative error.

Hi Ultrapedia,

look at your single recorded lap-distances. They are sometimes more and sometimes less than 1000m.
If the algorythm would work fine, summation of the single distances to 1000 m would be 0 m. But in reality the 1000 + values are bigger than the 1000 - values. The result is a positive abberation from x.000m
I have done two runs with the firmware x 17,7 km, the "error" was + 40m (pace of 5:30min/km), 26 km, the "error" was +130 m (pace of 6:15min/km). On the first look the "error" seems to be always positive but to be sure much more recordings are needed.

Maybe this is a way to solve the problem:
distance over all = d
lap-distance = ld
number of laps = n

A full lap should be triggered always when d > ld * (n+1)
With every full lap n is getting one more.
 
The disadvantage of this solution is, if you take a manual lap the new lap should count from this point the next lapdistance but if a lap always is triggered from the beginning of the recording, the next lap would come to early.

So it would be better to optimize the new algorithm. I donīt know how the auto-lap is triggered at the moment. In the old firmware the lap was always full, when the lap distance was reached. The reason for the positive error in the past firmware-versions was, the distance canīt be measured meter by meter. If after 998 m came 1006 m for example, the full lap was triggered at 1006 m. As result the more than 1000 meters were accumulated to more and more absolute "errors".
With the new firmware x lap-distances with less than 1000 m are possible. It looks like the new algorythm regards the "step-size" betwen two values. Maybe the step-size depends on the speed. This means, the (positive) cummulative error would be bigger the faster you run (more distance in the same time), if the step-size is a fix value. To trigger a full lap means, to trigger at a distance calculated by lapdistance - "step-size". In this case the positive and negative errors will accululate to 0. But you (globalsat) have to determine the right step-size which depends on the speed. At the moment it seems the step-size is to small. Please check your algorythm of calculation of "step-size", if this description is the way in the new firmware.

Regards

Longjog

You have to

Hi Longjog,

Yes, we adjust the trigger by "step-size", the variation of trggier value would be: (ex. the lap is set to 1000m)

No of Lap   Trigger (1km)    Lap dist
----------   ---------------   -----------
0               1000m             1006m 
1               994m               999m
2               1001m             1004m             
3               992m               997m
4               1003m             1005m 
5               995m               1001m

So the total cumulative error is : 6-1+4-3+5+1=12m
Because GPS accuracy is +/-15m, the lap dist will always larger a little bit than trigger.

Please post your training file like the above format or send me the training ile, so that I can easier to find out the reason.

Have a nice day,

Geoffrey

[snow_freak]

Hello,
today i wanted to upgrade to the new FW. When i tried the firmware upgrade tool provided with the last beta FW, it says 'Wrong Firmware file!'. What software to use?
Thanks for help in advance.

[Longjog @ GS-Sport-Servicecenter]

Hi Geoffrey,

today I have done a Conconitest while I have had my GH625 with 200m auto-lap function.
Here are the results:
Lap# Trigger (200m) Lap dist  cumm error
01         200m            209m      +9m
02         191m            200m      +9m
03         200m            201m     +10m --> SET Trigger Value to 200-10 =190!
04         199m            210m     +20m --> this lap distance would be little about 190m then
05         190m            194m     +14m
06         206m            205m     +19m
07         195m            198m     +17m
08         202m            205m     +22m
09         195m            202m     +24m
10         198m            198m     +22m
11         202m            206m     +28m
12         194m            199m     +27m
13         201m            207m     +34m
14         193m            197m     +31m
15         203m            213m     +44m
16         187m            190m     +34m
17         210m            207m     +41m
18         193m            227m     +68m
19         173m            179m     +47m

I think the problem could be solved by the shown idea above but here I have the recording of an other training form yesterday also:

10k training-run with 1km auto-lap:

Lap# Trigger (1000m) Lap dist  cumm error
01        1000m          1014m   +14m
02         986m            986m       0m
03        1014m          1000m   this lap distance would be higher because the trigger would be 1000 m, but be compensated by next lap
04        1000m          1008m
05          992m          1008m
06          992m            996m
07         1004m          1012m
08           988m           998m
09         1002m          1007m
10           993m           995m

What is with the Pace1k. How looks the algorythm there?
Maybe I have an idea .

But now I have to go to bed

Sincerely
Longjog