DAQ Revisited

[JHarshbarger]

I'm looking into stand-alone data acquisition systems and I haven't seen any recent discussions on the subject. I'm just looking for some input about what you guys think about the systems. By stand-alone systems I mean systems that you don't need a buy a certain ECU to use (ie. AEM, MOTEC).

Here's a few I'm considering and some of their features:
- Race-Technology DL1 - 2-axis accelerometer, GPS tracking, 7 analog inputs, 4 frequency inputs, Compact Flash recording, $965
- AIM MXL PRO - 1-axis accelerometer, 12 analog inputs, 4 speed inputs, USB interface, dash display, connects with ECU, $2299
- AIM EVO 3 Pro - 1-axis accelerometer, 12 analog inputs, 4 speed inputs, connects with ECU, don't know price
-Advantage Motorsports Ultimate 30 - 2-axis accelerometer, 4 analog inputs (upgradeable to 12), 5 frequency inputs, USB interface, $1195

If any of your teams have used these systems or any other systems that you prefer, please give some input.

[JHarshbarger]

I'm looking into stand-alone data acquisition systems and I haven't seen any recent discussions on the subject. I'm just looking for some input about what you guys think about the systems. By stand-alone systems I mean systems that you don't need a buy a certain ECU to use (ie. AEM, MOTEC).

Here's a few I'm considering and some of their features:
- Race-Technology DL1 - 2-axis accelerometer, GPS tracking, 7 analog inputs, 4 frequency inputs, Compact Flash recording, $965
- AIM MXL PRO - 1-axis accelerometer, 12 analog inputs, 4 speed inputs, USB interface, dash display, connects with ECU, $2299
- AIM EVO 3 Pro - 1-axis accelerometer, 12 analog inputs, 4 speed inputs, connects with ECU, don't know price
-Advantage Motorsports Ultimate 30 - 2-axis accelerometer, 4 analog inputs (upgradeable to 12), 5 frequency inputs, USB interface, $1195

If any of your teams have used these systems or any other systems that you prefer, please give some input.

[formula_wally]

evo 3 pro will be the new hot ticket, est fsae price of 1100 US.

After a long chat with one of the cost judges, the idea of not buying or using logger that is a combination dash is useless. Cost judges do not care if you choose not to cost something like an MXL pro 05, and then run it in race trim and endurance. He also went as far to say that I could show up with the dash logger installed on the car to cost event, even if it wasnt in the report and you intended on running dynamics with it.

There were a few teams running ADL2's in race trim, and had them hidden/covered in cost.

[Jersey Tom]

You don't need to buy any ECU to use a MoTeC SDL or ADL.

Being able to log the data is one thing, being able to analyze it is another. I love MoTeC's i2 software. Very powerful, though to get the most from it Pro Logging is where its at.

I've never used any of the above, or Pi. The real question is what do you intend on doing with it? What kind of data are you interested in, how many channels do you need, etc?

What I'm really curious about is the teams running wireless telemetry (Graz, UWA..) - do you really benefit from it?

[RStory]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jersey Tom:
Being able to log the data is one thing, being able to analyze it is another. I love MoTeC's i2 software. Very powerful, though to get the most from it Pro Logging is where its at.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i2 Pro is very good, the best analysis software I've used so far. i2 Standard is kind of frustrating, don't know how much of that is just being used to Pro.

I've found that in the AIM software you can export files in Motec .CSV format. Then if you go to Motec's site, go to the old software downloads and get the old Interpreter software, it comes packaged with a program called Convert or something like that... you can use that to convert the .csv file from AIM into the Motec .ld format, and you can open it in i2 Standard.

So far I haven't had any trouble opening AIM files in i2 Standard that way, except that it doesn't split up the laps properly... which might not be an issue depending on what sort of testing you are doing.

[Bryan Hagenauer]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by formula_wally:
Cost judges do not care if you choose not to cost something like an MXL pro 05, and then run it in race trim and endurance. He also went as far to say that I could show up with the dash logger installed on the car to cost event, even if it wasnt in the report and you intended on running dynamics with it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I sure hope the judges care about following the rules. Lucky for us:

4.3.7.4 Data Acquisition, Video and Radio Systems

"Stand-alone"� data acquisition, video and radio systems, and their associated sensors, need not be included in the Cost Report. A "standalone"� system is one that can be removed from the vehicle without affecting the vehicle's ability to perform. Teams that claim to be using a "stand-alone"� system may be required to remove the system to substantiate their claim.

[Tommo]

tom,

the primary benefit of wireless telemetry is live diagnostics, the engineer can see when somethings not right and pull the driver in before damage occurs (testing) or instruct alternative driving techniques, rather than hope the driver sees that warning light

it also increases testing efficiency significantly

cheers

[Brian S]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
What I'm really curious about is the teams running wireless telemetry (Graz, UWA..) - do you really benefit from it? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We use a wireless link for tuning. Because we don't have a dyno all of our tuning is from driving. We have a wideband 02 sensor wired into one of the analog inputs on our ECU and then the ECU is connected to the radio on the car. The other radio has a USB port of it and came with drivers so the computer sees it as a serial port. this allows us to be modifying the fuel table while the car is driving rather than having to drive for a while, stop, look at the data, and make changes. Now that we have tried it we will never have a car without it again.

[Tim.Wright]

We run a DL1 and so far are pretty happy with it. But to make it a useful solution some extra costs may have to be incurred.

The unit uses screw terminal connectors which quickly become a mess as there is only one 5v(ref) and ground, so lots of splicing etc. I made a breakout box for our unit which solved that problem but cost a few extra dollars.

Factor in purchasing a compact flash card reader and a card if you don't have one (generally not included in the price), and a usb to serial converter unless your laptop etc has a serial port. By now the price would be at least approaching the Advantage Motorsports Ultimate 30 unit you listed.

I belive it now comes with 8 analogue channels (0-12v). Our model only has 7 (mix of 0-5v and 0-12v).

The software has some really cool functions but can be a bit counter intuitive to use at times. Shock speed histograms can be generated but are quite cluttered. Other than that we haven't really stretched the limits of the software.

The GPS functionality is really useful as you don't need a lap beacon to define laps, just drag a line over your gps plot.

Finally anywhere the software falls short you can export to .csv (up to 64k data points I think) or matlab (It you upgrade to the pro version of the software).

If you don't already have an external dual axis accelerometer to plug into it, then the one included in the DL1 will open up mountains of information about your car. I use maths channels on lat and long G forces all the time to imply things like accel and braking torques, g-g plots etc.

I haven't used any other loggers or their software, but if cost is a major factor then I reckon the DL1 will probably give you best bang for your buck.

Tim Wright
Suspension & Vehicle Dynamics
Curtin Motorsport, Western Australia

[JHarshbarger]

Brian,

You make a very good point with the wireless DAQ, but since we have an engine dyno, I think the wireless might be a little less useful to us.

I was originally under the impression that DAQ that was on the car at the Cost Event needed to be costed. Now I'm considering the MXL Pro a little more. However, if you are using the dash in the competition, I would think that you would need to cost the data logger, the dash, and any sensors that could display something on the dash. The car will run the same without it, but the driver will be slightly impaired. If the rules say "the vehicle's ability to perform" and the cost judges say it's OK, then that's that. Good to know!

The reason I want DAQ for our cars is because I feel like our car is at the point where we can not tune effectively anymore. I have never used a DAQ system before, so I'll need to read some books, take some classes, or spend a lot of time at the computer. In the past, we have not had the money or time to devote to a DAQ system. I hope that with a DAQ system we will be able to fine tune the performance of our cars and also give our drivers some driving advice as to how they can improve according to the data. It might take some time to effectively use a DAQ system, but at this point I think it will be a good investment to our club.

I'll have to look into those other systems you guys mentioned. That interesting that you can view the AIM data on the MoTeC software. Is the software for the AIM systems that bad that people are looking for other software for it, or do you just prefer the MoTeC software that much more? From what I've read, Race Studio for AIM systems looks pretty good, but, again, I've never used a DAQ system before.

[Tim.Wright]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JHarshbarger:

...However, if you are using the dash in the competition, I would think that you would need to cost the data logger, the dash, and any sensors that could display something on the dash. The car will run the same without it, but the driver will be slightly impaired. If the rules say "the vehicle's ability to perform" and the cost judges say it's OK, then that's that. Good to know!
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Joel,

You are on the right track, but according to the FSAE definition of a standalone DAS, it must (among other things) have no display OR control function. See following document by Michael Royce:

http://www.sae-a.com.au/fsae/downloads/fsaesdas.pdf

Therefore, if your DAS runs your dash, it MUST be costed.

In my opinion, while running a permanently wired DAS on your vehicle may negatively impact your cost event, but could have positive effects on your design and presentation scores if you justify it correctly. (just like any other system on the car!)

Tim Wright
Suspension & Vehicle Dynamics
Curtin Motorsport, Western Australia

[JHarshbarger]

Tim,

Thanks for your input. That does make more sense.

So, about the whole "if it isn't displayed on the dash, it doesn't need to be costed" part of that rules change clarification, would I be able to cost an AIM MXL Pro as an MXL Strada if the only functions I am using for the dash display are the functions that are available on the Strada? Would save $1300 on the cost report!

I don't think having the DAQ premanently wired on your will have much on an impact on the design or presentation events. First of all, the presentation event doesn't involve the physical car at all. Also, the design judges aren't going to think anything of a DAQ system unless you have good data to justify it. Even in that case, having the DAQ system on your car isn't what will get you the design points, it's the data that you received from the system that you have used to improve the car. Look at it this way: if an average racer was looking to buy a performance car, I would think that knowing that the designers used extensive tuning through data acquisition with data to back it up would outweigh a car that simply came with data acquistition. Then again, tuning doesn't end at the factory. The driver needs to see how HE/SHE is performing and also needs to make adjustments to different tracks. In that sense, DAQ would be good to have on a production car and the design judges would note that. If it has a dash display, it would be that much better.

OK, I've succesfully argued both sides. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I guess it comes down to how much of an impact it's going to make on the cost report and how much it will improve the design. I can see this being an ongoing discussion/argument on our team.

[Jevon]

If anyone is looking for an inexpensive DAQ unit then check out the following company:

http://www.dataq.com/

They have a unit that measures 8 channels and is only $50. It needs to be tethered to a laptop to work. Standalone units seem to start at $500. They don't offer all the frills the high end units do but if just want to log accelerometer data, etc. you can be set up for less than a hundred bucks.

Jevon

[Tim.Wright]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JHarshbarger:
...would I be able to cost an AIM MXL Pro as an MXL Strada if the only functions I am using for the dash display are the functions that are available on the Strada? Would save $1300 on the cost report! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not familiar with those systems. If they are the same physical hardware with a software 'unlock' for the Pro setup then I think it should be ok. I think this may be similar to what the teams running MoTeC gear do with the pro logging option, ie they purchase the pro logging option, but only cost the ECU itself. Can anyone confirm this?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JHarshbarger:
OK, I've succesfully argued both sides. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I guess it comes down to how much of an impact it's going to make on the cost report and how much it will improve the design. I can see this being an ongoing discussion/argument on our team. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, you justified it the way I did! If I was buying one of these cars, a factory installed DAS would be an attractive option. Push that in the presentation event! (just tell the judges it was Tim's idea...)

Tim Wright
Suspension & Vehicle Dynamics
Curtin Motorsport, Western Australia

[JHarshbarger]

Well, from what I can tell, the Pro version of the MXL is a different unit. The Pro mainly has more inputs and sensors - basically an upgrade from the base version. I'll have to look into how different the units are from each other and if it would be justifiable to say that the base unit is the only operable system at competition.

[Jersey Tom]

We electrical taped a piece of black plastic over our SDL display at the last minute before cost event. Might have even been when we were sitting in the bay waiting for the judges to come over.

They didn't ask a thing about it! It was clearly there and plugged into the wiring harness and all.

Questions we got were like..

"How would you make that brake light?"
"Whats the difference between a 5- and 6-point harness?"

[formula_wally]

I know what the rules say about costing a logger with display. It was really frustrating to hear from the cost judges mouth that we could put our MXL 05 back on and run it in the dynamic events.

Going through it cost 2 years in a row, it seems they are more concerned about the process you choose to include in the assembly of the car, rather than the parts direcetly.

I would go on to bet that no one would get caught for costing cheap dampers and the cheapest ECU, and more terrible parts that are not actually on the car to bring the price down to sub 10,000. I spent a bulk of time this year doing our cost report, and if they are not going to cross check the major component on the car to what they actualy bring to the cost event, then next year our car is going to cost sub 8,000 with emphasis on describing the manufacturing process better.

[Kevin Hayward]

Making DAQs easy to use within the rules was probably the best rule change in recent times. A DAQ system definitely enhances learning.

I want to put another vote forward for Motec. When looking at software i2 Pro is in the same league as Pi Toolbox, in some ways even better (i2 standard is almost a waste of time though). Software is definitely something you don't want to make too many compromises with. Needs to be easy to use and the time from download to analysed results very short. If not, you will not use it as much as you should.

The cost of a DAQ, unlike so many other components, is easily spread over a number of cars, so going for ultra cheap doesn't make a lot of sense. It is also the sort of thing that can be sold to potential sponsors.

Kev

[BStoney]

Another vote for Motec and i2 Pro is where money should be spent... The standard version is just not worth using...

I agree with Kevin, and we have been down that road before, so don't skimp on DAQ...a good system is worth the investment as well as the necessary sensors and high quality, shielded wiring...

[js10coastr]

Hey Kev, good to see you back on here.

My two cents: If you've got the money, get a MoTeC system. And if you don't have the money, go and ask for money.

I've been able to work with Stack, AIM, DL1, Pi clubman, and MoTeC systems. I can't really put into words how overjoyed I am when I get to work with a MoTeC pro logging system with proper sensors.

The AIM hardware is a pretty good price, but the software is a pain to use. All of the worksheets and variables get changed around when you don't want them to. The DL1 pretty close to AIM in most aspects.

Stack pretty much has the middle ground covered. The software is pretty good, up there with i2 standard I'd say. But I always feel a bit "handcuffed" in what I can do with the system.

The better question to ask is "what am I going to do with the data?" and then go and pick a system. If you want to verify your acceleration simulations/pull off some coefficients of drag and do some driver training a lower price system would prob work. But if you want to start looking a bit deeper into vehicle dynamics you'll quickly want to step up to a better system.

[mtg]

I've used AIM, D2 and Motec and would advise getting something that is RELIABLE. When I was at UMR, we'd spend most of the time trying to get the damn AIM system to work (including sending it back to Italy for months). At OptimumG I used Motec and D2, both of which were reliable. I'll throw in another Motec vote, with pro logging and i2, it's the shit.

The Motec is a lot more than just a racecar daq system- it's really a general engineering daq system that rarely has problems. All you need is a sensor that operates with one of the few volt ranges of the ADL(2) and you can log it and calibrate it, whatever it is. That's really sweet for expandability. I used that at OptimumG as the logging system for the tire testing machine I made as an example.

So, don't get sucked into buying a cheap unreliable daq system because you can't afford something better. Just keep saving cash until you can get something that's actually going to help you. On that note, Motec does offer a discount to FSAE teams as far as I know.

[BStoney]

After just going through purchasing an ADL2 system this past year, if you don't buy an ECU from Motec (in the US anyways), they won't give you a discount on the DAQ systems.

We got ours through Hoerr Racing Products (www.hrpworld.com (http://www.hrpworld.com)) and they give a decent discount to FSAE as well and work out a pretty nice package that has the ADL2 with 30 channels, pro-logging, and i2 all enabled. Once we got into it, we found that having the additional channels (upgrade to 50 which gives you 20 analog voltage inputs + the 8temp inputs, 4 wheel speeds, etc etc) is very useful and you can log damn near everything you want that way.

Also, with regard to lap timing, if you have one of the blue UltraLap systems (~400 USD) already, you can send it back to them in California and they will solder in two wires from the display unit for a nominal fee and you can use this digital signal for the beacon input on the Motec, thus avoiding the 1200+ USD fee for the Motec timing beacon/receiver. (Or, you can figure out what pins you need to grab and go from their on your own...)

[js10coastr]

...one other thing to note is that it really helps to get a system that has free software, and the ability to share the data. A few systems really tie you down with security stuff. It makes sense if you're working with a professional team and don't want the data to fall into other people's hands, but for FSAE you'll want to be able to share the data with everyone on the team and also pass it down to the coming years.

I do have to plug VeracityRacingData up in norcal. David and Ellen Ferguson were extremely helpful in terms of helping us choose a system troubleshoot it and also in helping my career.

[gergo]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RStory:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jersey Tom:
Being able to log the data is one thing, being able to analyze it is another. I love MoTeC's i2 software. Very powerful, though to get the most from it Pro Logging is where its at.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i2 Pro is very good, the best analysis software I've used so far. i2 Standard is kind of frustrating, don't know how much of that is just being used to Pro.

I've found that in the AIM software you can export files in Motec .CSV format. Then if you go to Motec's site, go to the old software downloads and get the old Interpreter software, it comes packaged with a program called Convert or something like that... you can use that to convert the .csv file from AIM into the Motec .ld format, and you can open it in i2 Standard.

So far I haven't had any trouble opening AIM files in i2 Standard that way, except that it doesn't split up the laps properly... which might not be an issue depending on what sort of testing you are doing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi!
I'd like to convert *.csv file to *.ld. I've downloaded the motec interpreter software, and I've found the MoTeC_Converter.exe in the interpreter directory but it doesn't work. I try to run it, but it doesnt do anything. No window, no message...
Can anybody help me?

[Nitesh]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brian S:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
What I'm really curious about is the teams running wireless telemetry (Graz, UWA..) - do you really benefit from it? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We use a wireless link for tuning. Because we don't have a dyno all of our tuning is from driving. We have a wideband 02 sensor wired into one of the analog inputs on our ECU and then the ECU is connected to the radio on the car. The other radio has a USB port of it and came with drivers so the computer sees it as a serial port. this allows us to be modifying the fuel table while the car is driving rather than having to drive for a while, stop, look at the data, and make changes. Now that we have tried it we will never have a car without it again. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Brian, Could you let me know what radio system you are using for the telemetry. we also have no access to a dyno and have been wanting to do a similr setup but haven't been able to find such a thing probably because we don't know what and where exactly to look for.. Any help would be appreciated.