J
-
Categories
-
Platforms
-
Content
J
Jim Adney
You've said that you just want a timer that will run over a period of
six hours with 1/60 sec accuracy.
You've said that all you want is a simple clock display that reads out
seconds.
You've said that it needs to just start at an arbitrary start time and
count from there.
None of these goals is particularly hard, but to get that accuracy
you'll need to buy some sort of commercial clock with a time display
and mate it to a frequency source (which in this industry is also
commonly called a "clock", further confusing this question) that is
more accurate than such timers usually come with. Or, if you have real
money to spend you can buy something with a real frequency standard
(clock) inside which could be purchased with a digital clock display.
The price for something like this could be anything from $2500 to
$40,000. This whole range is much more accurate than you've asked for,
but it seems unlikely that anyone makes something that meets just your
minimum accuracy requirement.
The problem that I see is that you've not asked for any kind of
electronic input or output for the timer, which makes most of us
wonder how you expect to be able to use 1/60 sec accuracy while just
doing this by eye.
If you're planning to use electronic start and stop signals, then you
can get much better accuracy than 1/60 sec.
So this leaves us confused about what it is that you really want/need.
It's not that people here are trying to be difficult; it's that they
are trying to be helpful, but the specs of your request, taken as a
whole, just don't seem to make sense.
So if you explained a little more, without giving away any of your
secrets, then you will probably get the answer you're after.
-
R
Richard H.
http://www.google.com/search?q=1/100+second+timer
#2 on the list...
http://www.meylan.com/1_100sec.html
12 models with 1/100 displays and up to 100 hours. Whether they're
really 99.99992%+ accurate is for you to determine.
Now, these were very easy to find. They meet your limited "simple"
specs. Seiko is a name brand in sports timing, and the printer model
has it all.
I'll politely assume that surely you searched Google first, found these,
and determined they were inadequate by merely looking at them. So, what
makes these unsuitable?
Richard
Richard said:
Well, you have already hinted at it your self.
What are the odds that a stand alone stopwatch will be anything close
to 1/60th of a second of the correct time at the 6 hour mark?
And we all know that 1/100th of a second on a hand held stopwatch is
nothing but a marketing gimic.
Darren Harris
Staten Island, New York.
Richard said:
Well, you have already hinted at it your self.
What are the odds that a stand alone stopwatch will be anything close
to 1/60th of a second of the correct time at the 6 hour mark?
And we all know that 1/100th of a second on a hand held stopwatch is
nothing but a marketing gimic.
Darren Harris
Staten Island, New York.
Richard said:
Well, you have already hinted at it yourself.
What are the odds that a stand alone stopwatch will be anything close
to 1/60th of a second of the correct time at the 6 hour mark?
And we all know that 1/100th of a second on a hand held stopwatch is
nothing but a marketing gimic.
Darren Harris
Staten Island, New York.
Jim said:
So it seems.
Let me repost something I wrote earlier in this thread:
"It is way too complicated to go into the details as far as why I need
this, but basically this will involve conducting experiments/tests on
the accuracy of human timing, and also the confirmation of certain
conclusions drawn from studying the code contained within the hardware
I'll be testing against."
"1/60th of a second is important because it is specific to that
hardware
and how it functions. It uses registers that change every 1/60th of a
second to make certain occurances "random". If one could react with an
accuracy of 1/60th of a second, then these occurances would follow a
predictable pattern. But of course that kind of timing is not humanly
possible with any kind of consistency."
Again, this involves "human timing".
I covered everything pertinent in my posts, and have no idea what else
I can say(that doesn't throw everyone further into a state of
cconfusion).
There are no "secrets".
This is actually much simpler than the original project which involves
more than just a timer, but the ability to record the time of each of
four (joystick)input activations/deactivations, which could number over
300 over the course of between 2 and 3 minutes. And then play them back
the same way.(Thereby replicating my moves with that 1/60th of a second
accuracy). But since I am having such difficulty with this, the
original needs are definitely out of the question anytime soon.
I thought that there might be an affordable timer that would somehow
keep it's accuracy by via 60Hertz AC. But I guess not.
Darren Harris
Staten Island, New York.
B
biltu
Ian said:
In sci.electronics.repair Jim Adney said:
As said before, the power company has something almost up to that
standard, but that idea was probably also rejected in earlier
discussion here?
I
Ian Stirling
In sci.electronics.design [email protected]2.com wrote:
Google
GPS stopwatch
Job done.
Well, you have already hinted at it yourself.
What are the odds that a stand alone stopwatch will be anything close
to 1/60th of a second of the correct time at the 6 hour mark?
And we all know that 1/100th of a second on a hand held stopwatch is
nothing but a marketing gimic.
GPS stopwatch
Job done.
R
Rich Grise
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 10:06:02 -0700, Searcher7 wrote:
[and seems to have snipped all attribution]
We are "unfamiliar with the project" because you haven't _told_ us
anything about the project. You've made some obscure reference to
video games;
What do you need to time?
What are you trying to accomplish?
Yeah, the question was simple. "I need to time an interval to an
accuracy of 1/60 second, over a span of possibly 6 hours."
People who have many years' experience have informed you of almost
a half-dozen ways to accomplish this, but apparently they're
unsatisfactory.
And newbies wonder why us crusty old farts get annoyed at newbies.
Get to the f---ing point, rather than bitching about the suggestions
that have been offered based on nothing more than the above, with
a dollop of mind reading thrown in. In Other Words, What Are You
Trying To Accomplish?
Thanks,
Rich
[and seems to have snipped all attribution]
We are "unfamiliar with the project" because you haven't _told_ us
anything about the project. You've made some obscure reference to
video games;
What do you need to time?
What are you trying to accomplish?
Yeah, the question was simple. "I need to time an interval to an
accuracy of 1/60 second, over a span of possibly 6 hours."
People who have many years' experience have informed you of almost
a half-dozen ways to accomplish this, but apparently they're
unsatisfactory.
And newbies wonder why us crusty old farts get annoyed at newbies.
Get to the f---ing point, rather than bitching about the suggestions
that have been offered based on nothing more than the above, with
a dollop of mind reading thrown in. In Other Words, What Are You
Trying To Accomplish?
Thanks,
Rich
R
Rich Grise
Me Too!
;-)
Rich
BTW, the email is richardgrise at yahoo dot com, but elide ard.
;-)
Rich
BTW, the email is richardgrise at yahoo dot com, but elide ard.
R
Rich Grise
Well, Jesus Aitch! Why didn't you just say so? There's probably a
dozen people here who could design a joystick tracker with millisecond
accuracy, and record switch closures to microsecond tolerances. I'd
lighten up a bit on looking for a coincidence detector, which is not
going to happen unless you can physically hack the game you're trying
to hack.
If you're looking at reaction time stuff, then you'll have to find
a biology or anatomy group, although I'd still venture to guess that
most people who are conversant with this level of electronics
probably know something about nerve impulse propagation and
electromyelographic interfaces. Heck, a year or so ago, I was being
tested for neuropathy, and they taped some electrodes that look
very much like EKG or EEG electrodes to my legs, and the nurse (or
lady doctor - we didn't get into that) took a hand-held that looked
so much like a stun gun that when I said, "Stun Gun???" she said,
"That's what everybody says." They stunned me, and they took
readings of my neural response. Diagnosis: Alcoholic Neuropathy.
Oh, well.
You might also look into the source code for "MAME" - Multiple
Arcade Machine Emulator. I play Mr. Do! and Bubble Bobble regularly,
and am considering something much like your project, to see how the
software uses joystick/button actions to modify its own algorithm!
Good Luck!
Rich
In said:
I think for you to measure an event with an accuracy of 1/60th of a
second, you need to take measurements at least 120 times a second (well
known theorem, I forgot the name).
O
OBones
That would be Shannon.
K
Keith Williams
No, that would by Nyquist. Shannon limits the data rate, based on
bandwidth and S/N ratio.
R
Richard Henry
Nyquist.
P
Peter Duck
In message <[email protected]>
As has been mentioned repeatedly in this thread, the short-term accuracy
of power-system frequencies is several (many?) orders of magnitude worse
than your stated requirement (they 'run slow' at times of high demand,
but are carefully made to 'catch up' at other times so that domestic
clocks, etc., don't develop cumulative gross errors).
Your confidence that the videogame's(!) registers 'will have undergone
1,296,000 increments over the course of 6 hours' is certain to be
similarly misplaced, though if crystal-controlled perhaps only to the
extent of a few hundred increments.
This, basically, is IMO why no-one can see the point of your
accuracy-requirement - you seem to believe that you need it to 'keep in
step' with a process that is proceeding at rate only approximately-known
but from which you can't derive any synchronising-information.
As has been mentioned repeatedly in this thread, the short-term accuracy
of power-system frequencies is several (many?) orders of magnitude worse
than your stated requirement (they 'run slow' at times of high demand,
but are carefully made to 'catch up' at other times so that domestic
clocks, etc., don't develop cumulative gross errors).
Your confidence that the videogame's(!) registers 'will have undergone
1,296,000 increments over the course of 6 hours' is certain to be
similarly misplaced, though if crystal-controlled perhaps only to the
extent of a few hundred increments.
This, basically, is IMO why no-one can see the point of your
accuracy-requirement - you seem to believe that you need it to 'keep in
step' with a process that is proceeding at rate only approximately-known
but from which you can't derive any synchronising-information.
Q
quietguy
I suggested that your approach (precision rather than accuracy) might be a
better way to go, but the guy rejects this idea, but I agree it is a better shot
David
better way to go, but the guy rejects this idea, but I agree it is a better shot
David
Rich said:
As I mentioned, I can't hack into the gameboard. This has to be a
separate device. And this project is on the back burner anyway, since
it is more complex than just the timer I am seeking for now.
MAME is not an option, because the original hardware must be used.
The original project involved a "Automatic Pattern Generator". People
develop patterns to clear the mazes in the game Pac-man. I wanted to
have a computer develop patterns through trial and error, but that
would entail hacking into the game board.
So I came up with the idea to at the press of a button have my joystick
movements recorded and then have the option of playing the sequence
back through the joystick inputs.(It's a lot more complex than this,
but those are the basics).
I've had to put these ideas on the back burner and concentrate on
something else that requires the timer I posted about.
Darren Harris
Staten Island, New York.
Similar threads
