Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Commuting Bicycle commuting is easier than you think, before you know it, you'll be hooked. Learn the tips, hints, equipment, safety requirements for safely riding your bike to work.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-03-17, 08:40 AM   #1
simonplatt
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
cycle computer reads 3 decimal points

whilst watching the distance the last figure is unreadable. i want to set it to 1 decimal point.
simonplatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-17, 08:42 AM   #2
motorthings
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 523
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
you might want to search online for the manual pdf for the computer you have, to see if it tells how to change the decimal places. if it's not in the manual, contact the manufacturer.
motorthings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-17, 11:50 AM   #3
acidfast7
http://www.538.nl
 
acidfast7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: England / CPH
Bikes: 2010 Cube Acid
Posts: 6,512
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
That's some Teutonic precision right there

What brand is it?
acidfast7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-17, 10:39 AM   #4
Moe Zhoost
Half way there
 
Moe Zhoost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Durham, NC
Bikes: 72 Raleigh Super Course (daily commuter), 1973 Raleigh Sports, 1974 Raleigh Competition, 1976 Nishiki Professional, 1977 Nishiki International, 1983 Colnago Super, 90s Bianchi Eros (conversion to 650B in progress), 2010 ICE Trike
Posts: 1,111
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by acidfast7 View Post
That's some Teutonic precision right there

What brand is it?
Precision does not mean accuracy. You can't really calibrate a cyclometer to be that accurate.
Moe Zhoost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-17, 10:57 AM   #5
acidfast7
http://www.538.nl
 
acidfast7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: England / CPH
Bikes: 2010 Cube Acid
Posts: 6,512
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moe Zhoost View Post
Precision does not mean accuracy. You can't really calibrate a cyclometer to be that accurate.
Why not?

Anyways ... I was just tooling home with the TAGES KM function on and with only two digits after the decimal point (km) the final digit was moving quite rapidly. So, I must assume that the OP is correct and that the final digit would be totally worthless.
acidfast7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-17, 01:32 PM   #6
wphamilton
Senior Member
 
wphamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Posts: 12,076
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1245 Post(s)
use black vinyl tape over the unnecessary 2 digits. Or pre-set the distance to something over 1,000 miles and the extra digits go away.
wphamilton is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-17, 07:26 AM   #7
locolobo13 
Senior Member
 
locolobo13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Phx, AZ
Bikes: Trek Mtn Bike
Posts: 1,344
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Ignore the last digit while riding. If you record the mileages round them.

Alternatively there are plenty of bicycle computers that show only one decimal place. Buy one of those.
locolobo13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-17, 07:44 AM   #8
ItsJustMe
Seņior Member
 
ItsJustMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Michigan
Bikes: Windsor Fens, Giant Seek 0 (2014, Alfine 8 + discs)
Posts: 13,743
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 413 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by acidfast7 View Post
Why not? (can't calibrate that accurate)
Unless they have some unusual sensor on the wheel, it only gets one pulse per revolution. One revolution on a 700c wheel is about 2100mm or about 7 feet. 3 digits means that last digit is measuring a distance of 5280/1000 = 5.3 feet.

You're measuring 5 foot distances with a 7 foot stick. It's going to be jittery at best. on subsequent revolutions it'll go 7,14,21,28,35, 42,49,56 feet, which will translate to:

0.001, 0.002, 0.003,0.005,0.006, 0.007,0.009, etc

You have a cumulative error that's a significant percentage of the indicated value, so either that last digit is unneeded (which is probably the case, in which case why show it) or it's inaccurate (usually off by a large part of its indicated value) in which case why show it)
__________________
Work: the 8 hours that separates bike rides.
ItsJustMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-17, 09:01 AM   #9
acidfast7
http://www.538.nl
 
acidfast7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: England / CPH
Bikes: 2010 Cube Acid
Posts: 6,512
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsJustMe View Post
Unless they have some unusual sensor on the wheel, it only gets one pulse per revolution. One revolution on a 700c wheel is about 2100mm or about 7 feet. 3 digits means that last digit is measuring a distance of 5280/1000 = 5.3 feet.

You're measuring 5 foot distances with a 7 foot stick. It's going to be jittery at best. on subsequent revolutions it'll go 7,14,21,28,35, 42,49,56 feet, which will translate to:

0.001, 0.002, 0.003,0.005,0.006, 0.007,0.009, etc

You have a cumulative error that's a significant percentage of the indicated value, so either that last digit is unneeded (which is probably the case, in which case why show it) or it's inaccurate (usually off by a large part of its indicated value) in which case why show it)
My bike computer requires the total mm of the circumference the wheel + tyre. As ISO chart is included is the user is lazy but one can also use a piece of string, which I did and I think it came out to 2096mm. When I change tyres, I recalibrate. I also compared the tyre that I got about 4000km out of an measured a 2mm difference in circumference (2 / 2096 = 0.95%), which I'm OK with.

http://202.215.251.86/data/resources...e_chart_v2.pdf

So I don't really understand this whole measuring a 7-foot length with a 5-foot stick, as the computer will also keep track of fractional units as well.
acidfast7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-17, 10:29 AM   #10
ItsJustMe
Seņior Member
 
ItsJustMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Michigan
Bikes: Windsor Fens, Giant Seek 0 (2014, Alfine 8 + discs)
Posts: 13,743
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 413 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by acidfast7 View Post
So I don't really understand this whole measuring a 7-foot length with a 5-foot stick, as the computer will also keep track of fractional units as well.
It's not that you can't calibrate the computer to be accurate overall. it's that the display is showing a precision that far outstrips the granularity of the measurement.

To take it to an extreme - Let's say you have the same display, showing 1/1000th of a mile, and it only clicks every 800 feet. Clearly the last few digits are completely useless, because they're basically never right.

Having a display to the 1/1000th mile is IMPLYING a precision that simply is not there. In the actual example, you see that it misses the 0.004 mile marker. Because it is trying to display a precision that is not supported by its measurement method, it displays 0.003 past the point where it SHOULD be saying 0.004 and never shows it, skipping straight to 0.005

It's displaying pointless precision in other words. There's simply no point to having it there. You can't ever really know if that last digit is correct or not, so there's no point in showing it.
__________________
Work: the 8 hours that separates bike rides.
ItsJustMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-17, 11:14 AM   #11
GamblerGORD53
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Elevation 666m Edmonton Canada
Bikes: 2013 Custom SA5w / Rohloff Tourster
Posts: 1,122
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 446 Post(s)
You can have my ill bought never used stupid one decimal Bontrager speedo. OK for cars, but for bikes?? Completely useless and impossible to calibrate. You can barely see 1/10 mile down the road. 2 decimals is perfect.
GamblerGORD53 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-17, 02:39 PM   #12
acidfast7
http://www.538.nl
 
acidfast7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: England / CPH
Bikes: 2010 Cube Acid
Posts: 6,512
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsJustMe View Post
It's not that you can't calibrate the computer to be accurate overall. it's that the display is showing a precision that far outstrips the granularity of the measurement.

To take it to an extreme - Let's say you have the same display, showing 1/1000th of a mile, and it only clicks every 800 feet. Clearly the last few digits are completely useless, because they're basically never right.

Having a display to the 1/1000th mile is IMPLYING a precision that simply is not there. In the actual example, you see that it misses the 0.004 mile marker. Because it is trying to display a precision that is not supported by its measurement method, it displays 0.003 past the point where it SHOULD be saying 0.004 and never shows it, skipping straight to 0.005

It's displaying pointless precision in other words. There's simply no point to having it there. You can't ever really know if that last digit is correct or not, so there's no point in showing it.
Thanks- Now I see what you are saying.
acidfast7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-17, 03:10 PM   #13
locolobo13 
Senior Member
 
locolobo13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Phx, AZ
Bikes: Trek Mtn Bike
Posts: 1,344
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Another question about that. How many times does the magnet have to pass the sensor before the computer registers 1 revolution? It seems like mine is 2 or maybe 3 times. That is going to effect the accuracy as well. I suppose the 2nd time would be the most accurate.
locolobo13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-17, 07:16 PM   #14
GAJett
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Bikes: 1973 Raleigh Competition, 2010 Rivendell A. Homer Hilsen, 2010's Bike Friday Pocket Companion
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Wanting high accuracy and precision? String won't cut it 😀. Doesn't account for weight on the tire which reduces the radius, hence the diameter. Best to do a "roll-out test", where you weight the tire with the expected mass, then measure the distance of one or more revolutions.
But you still haven't accounted for varying weights or tire pressures! Those will also impact your accuracy and precision to some (probably trivial) degree.
Specific discussions of precision were addressed above. AT BEST, with a single sensor (magnet), your precision is +/- 1/2 the diameter and is theoretically CUMULATIVE (+ one time, - the next and random, so it can't be calculated)!
If you wish to increase your precision you will need to add more sensors. Two sensors, you're at 1/4 the diameter. What the heck! Put a sensor on each spoke, you're now at 1/64th the diameter for a 36-spoke wheel😱. (But at what increase in rotating mass?)
Yes, I know, reductio ad absurdum. Two digits is more than enough for me. But that's just me. YMMV. Just ride. /<snark>
Cheers!

Last edited by GAJett; 07-12-17 at 07:23 PM. Reason: corrections
GAJett is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:46 PM.


 
  • Ask a Question
    get answers from real people!
Click to start entering your question.
I HAVE A QUESTION