******
Lloyd I'm using the
LM-1, Evoscan and
Tactrix cable combination but do not have this problem. The WB02 data would be coming in separately to Evoscan through a serial connection from the
LM-1 to a usb adapter connected to the laptop and that might be the problem...maybe some adapters aren't as good or maybe the laptop itself is the problem?
I have one other customer having the same problem and he's using the
LC-1, we tried mitsulogger instead of evoscan and had the same problem so maybe it's something specific to the
LC-1 if that's what Jason has, I thought he had a
LM-1 but maybe I'm wrong.
My logs don't miss a single cell but I do have a fast new laptop.
Just throwing out some ideas.
******
I've looked at the logs and it looks like a simple issue of the data streams coming in at different sample rates
Could be the serial to USB converter, could be a matter of USB 1.0 vs USB 2.0 (speeds are different) or it could be a set up problem with the software.
Three points come to mind
1: I don't see a problem in the skipped cells regarding datalogging, i.e. I don't see that it causes any problem. You can still chart and graph the data and it's only small slices missing where the RPM data is obviously being sampled at faster rates than the AFR data. Where you have data in both columns, they're in sync. Where you have data in the RPM column but the AFR is blank, you simly have no AFR data for that slice of time and can either ignore those rows charting only the rows where you have both columns or force Excel to just fill the cells with the average of the cell before and the cell after. Either way provides accurate charting with the AFR & RPM data synchronized and the slice of time is so small that there's not any doubt regarding the value of that missing cell as it's definitely going to be somewhere between the cell before and the cell afterwards.
2: I'd still like to see a data log taken using
Logworks since that's the software designed specifically for the
Innovate data stream.
3: I'd like to see the data run directly into a real serial port or through one of the usb to serial converters tested and approved for use with the MTS datastream. I believe the
Prolific converters will do or you could get the actual usb to serial converter that
Innovate Motorsports recommends,
Innovate p/n 3733
Bottom line is I don't see any indication of a bad
LC-1. I see two data streams coming from two different sources which have different sampling rates. We can either focus on speeding up the sample rate of the
LC-1, slowing the sample rate of the OBD connection, averaging the
LC-1 sample rate to 'virtualize' the data, or ignore the gaps altogether as there is really no question what the values are for the missing cells.