SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > Silent Hunter 3 - 4 - 5 > Silent Hunter III
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-12-07, 02:23 AM   #1
Dantenoc
Captain
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Ensenada, B.C., Mexico
Posts: 504
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

excellent, will give it a try
Dantenoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-07, 10:44 AM   #2
Keelbuster
Ace of the Deep
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: BA 72
Posts: 1,092
Downloads: 43
Uploads: 0
Default

OMG YES. I've always wanted to do this!

Quick question: in the rpm chart it says that rpm values are _almost_ always rounded down, with the exception of high values like 27.9 -> 28. I don't really know what it's referring to, but I wonder: why not round fairly on all numbers? Was this done to better fit the data you collected?
__________________
Keelbuster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-07, 11:35 AM   #3
raduz
Engineer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Slovakia
Posts: 205
Downloads: 3
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keelbuster
OMG YES. I've always wanted to do this!

Quick question: in the rpm chart it says that rpm values are _almost_ always rounded down, with the exception of high values like 27.9 -> 28. I don't really know what it's referring to, but I wonder: why not round fairly on all numbers? Was this done to better fit the data you collected?
Each turn count has always been measured for 60 seconds. Often, the number of revs per minute did not represent the whole number: there was a certain amount of complete revs + part of the last one.

Example: I was measuring the turn count for one minute. Let's say at 00:58, the RPM was 27, that means 27 complete revolutions. Two seconds before one minute has passed, 28th rev started. At 01:00 this 28th rev was still not complete. It was completed at 01:02. Now how was I supposed to record this situation? I had to round the RPM either down, either up, because it was something between 27 and 28. (this is just an example, the numbers are imagined).

If there was 27.5 revs in 60 seconds, I recorded 27. The only case when I rounded up was when it was like 27.9, that means ALMOST 28 complete revs. I hope you understand what I mean
raduz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-07, 01:28 PM   #4
Keelbuster
Ace of the Deep
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: BA 72
Posts: 1,092
Downloads: 43
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by raduz
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keelbuster
OMG YES. I've always wanted to do this!

Quick question: in the rpm chart it says that rpm values are _almost_ always rounded down, with the exception of high values like 27.9 -> 28. I don't really know what it's referring to, but I wonder: why not round fairly on all numbers? Was this done to better fit the data you collected?
Each turn count has always been measured for 60 seconds. Often, the number of revs per minute did not represent the whole number: there was a certain amount of complete revs + part of the last one.

Example: I was measuring the turn count for one minute. Let's say at 00:58, the RPM was 27, that means 27 complete revolutions. Two seconds before one minute has passed, 28th rev started. At 01:00 this 28th rev was still not complete. It was completed at 01:02. Now how was I supposed to record this situation? I had to round the RPM either down, either up, because it was something between 27 and 28. (this is just an example, the numbers are imagined).

If there was 27.5 revs in 60 seconds, I recorded 27. The only case when I rounded up was when it was like 27.9, that means ALMOST 28 complete revs. I hope you understand what I mean
Gotcha - precision on the estimate of the rev-count was low, and prevented fair rounding, so you tended to round down unless it was obviously very close to the next number?

Kb

P.S. Sorry to be a measuring stickler!
__________________
Keelbuster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-07, 02:12 PM   #5
raduz
Engineer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Slovakia
Posts: 205
Downloads: 3
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keelbuster
Gotcha - precision on the estimate of the rev-count was low, and prevented fair rounding, so you tended to round down unless it was obviously very close to the next number?

Kb

P.S. Sorry to be a measuring stickler!
Exactly! No need to be sorry. My English is sometimes not clear enough.
raduz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-07, 04:31 AM   #6
Canovaro
Ace of the Deep
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,062
Downloads: 34
Uploads: 0
Default

Thank you so much for the hard work, I have been searching for a new hydro table for GWX!

Canovaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-07, 04:49 AM   #7
raduz
Engineer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Slovakia
Posts: 205
Downloads: 3
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canovaro
Thank you so much for the hard work, I have been searching for a new hydro table for GWX!

you are welcome
raduz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.