Wicked Air Sportz: Turbo Rev

[Miscue]

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz


There is not constant pressure on the balls.

I will be back tomorrow to check the responses. If people would like to know how this works, and have an open mind, with an open discussion, that would be great.

Once the discussion is complete, there will be nothing left to "prove" to anyone, and the nay-sayers will probably feel a little silly.

It's only natural to have nay-sayers. You've provided nothing to help anyone understand the why's and how's. Skepticism is only natural and you have not provided any information so that anyone can be 'correct' in their ideas on this board, w/o blindly following your claims. We don't like to blindly follow things. We want to know WHY.

Why until tomorrow? I thought you made this thing? Should be on top of your head.

Make us believe... please. So that we can have an understanding of the truth.

[Miscue]

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz


Not a chance... I am going to do something even better. I am going to hold your hand, and walk you through the technology, make you answer the questions, and let you build one yourself.

BTW, I was not foolish enough to not lock the PIC chip.

Fine then. What algorithms did you use? Pseudocode is fine. BTW, I can't build it from scratch w/o your code. And besides... A 10 year old could slap it together on a bread board w/o assistance. Your habitual inability to produce data/information is disheartening.

[Cristobal]

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz


There is not constant pressure on the balls.

I will be back tomorrow to check the responses. If people would like to know how this works, and have an open mind, with an open discussion, that would be great.

Let's get this straight from the get-go then:

What is the definition of an "open mind" and "open discussion"?

In my view this suggests that parties participating will, without bias or prejudice, consider any information presented on its relative merits. Open discussion further implies there are no opinions which are automatically discounted, that no data should be excluded that has a bearing on the matter under discussion, and that no party should be intentionally miss-represent data or evade direct questioning. Finally, each participant should be treated with courtesy and respect even by those of dissenting opinions.

Edit: Wow, this thread is moving fast

[Butterfingers]

WAS,

Before you comment, If you could answer these questions to the best of your ability...

Out of all the other manufactrers out there why do you think we pick on you?

Why do you think all of your products have come into doubt as you claim?

Do you think it may have somthing to do with your marketing tactics? Perhaps your attitude towards potential customers?

If you can answer and understand the responses to these questions I will guarantee you will have a revalation.

After we find out what you think, perhaps we can reply with our answers.

[Restola]

OMG HE STILL HASN'T REALLY SAID ANYTHING

On the thread on the mainboard he says come here, you come here and he says NOTHING!

I swear to never buy ANYTHING from someone this evasive and annoying.

[Miscue]

An interesting article...

http://www.lysator.liu.se/amiga/al/g...od_or_bad.HTML

[WickedAirSportz]

Out of all the other manufactrers out there why do you think we pick on you?

It is because my claims are beyond the normal scope of what people have been programmed to believe as the limits of a device. Simple as that.

Why do you think all of your products have come into doubt as you claim?

Because I do not produce common place products. I seek to produce products that exceed the boundries of what is considered the maximum level. It is by no accident that these products are doubted. I want to make things that will make people feel that way... and when they get them in their hands, and the reviews are done, I was right. The money and the fame in the industries I have been involved in are truly meaningless to me. It's that look on the doubters face when they realize they were wrong that keeps me going.

Do you think it may have somthing to do with your marketing tactics? Perhaps your attitude towards potential customers?

My marketting tactics are the simple truth. Mix that with the product specifications, and you're bound to have a mass of nay-sayers.

I love my potential customers. We have implemented a lot of changes based on customer requests. This is a REAL big thing with me, and one of the main reasons why there is a communications port on the Equalizer. I want to be able to have multiple languages (a suggestion made by a customer), ability to have a custom boot up message (yet another suggestion). When you sit in the technology pit, you don't always see what would be good for your products, and our customer feedback has been incredibly valuable.

[Butterfingers]

Here are my honest answers,

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz


It is because my claims are beyond the normal scope of what people have been programmed to believe as the limits of a device. Simple as that.

Sorry to say it isnt as simple as that...

I honestly know very little about microelectronics. However your answer is not the case. Your answer to this question, at least in my mind is false. The simple fact is that you come off as a person who blows alot of smoke and that puts alot of us on the defensive. We have NO problem accepting the extraordianry. Its just the way you present it that makes us cynical. The fact that you tend to avoid questions just makes it worse. It makes people think you have somthing to hide.

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz



Because I do not produce common place products. I seek to produce products that exceed the boundries of what is considered the maximum level. It is by no accident that these products are doubted. I want to make things that will make people feel that way... and when they get them in their hands, and the reviews are done, I was right. The money and the fame in the industries I have been involved in are truly meaningless to me. It's that look on the doubters face when they realize they were wrong that keeps me going.

Actually, no. Your products are good yes... But the reason your products spark controversey is beause independently derived results differ than your stated results. 30 fps dropoff at 14 bps PUHLEZE. It would be lucky if it showed 2 fps dropoff with the stock board at that ROF. At best we can call this claim highly exaggerated. We are not attacking your technology we are attacking your claims. So far you have not proven ANY of our concerns wrong. I think you will be hard pressed to prove that the stock board is in fact the reason for dropoff. Considering cledford's methods were far superior to yours. The fact that you avoid and sidestep the aquestions does not help either. The fact that you change claims to fit your situation does not help.

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz


My marketting tactics are the simple truth. Mix that with the product specifications, and you're bound to have a mass of nay-sayers.

I love my potential customers. We have implemented a lot of changes based on customer requests. This is a REAL big thing with me, and one of the main reasons why there is a communications port on the Equalizer. I want to be able to have multiple languages (a suggestion made by a customer), ability to have a custom boot up message (yet another suggestion). When you sit in the technology pit, you don't always see what would be good for your products, and our customer feedback has been incredibly valuable.

So you dont think calling a PIC controller a state of the art microprosessor isnt exaggerating a LITTLE. How about the confirmed LIES about 30 fps of dropoff that never existed? And the confirmed LIE about how 14 bps isnt 14 bps when waveform analysis actually confirmed it was 14 bps on the dot?

We will continue to laugh harder than you ever will until you address the concers presented.

Sereously,

If you honestly beleive your answers are the "Real" reasons. You either don't understand us or you are just on a self imposed self rightous high of arrogance and ignorance.

I encourage other members to reply to these same questions honestly and accurately so WAS can see and perhaps learn the million dollar question of why...

Let me tell you a story of me...

Being a whiz kid isnt all that it is cracked up to be. Isolation from activities outside of the acedemic realm often leaves us devoid to the feelings and intentions of others. I admit to being ignorant when I was younger most notably up to my first 2 years of highschool. In 8th grade I was invited to a national science convention in brookhaven national labs and took honorable mention for my work on plant biology, I was always on the top of my class. I *thought* I was smarter than anybody else. The last 2 years of highschool my life changed. I had joined the football team. At first I thought my colleauges were just the stereotypical jocks. I always thought I was right and that they didnt understand me. The truth is I just didnt listen...

Take that as you will...

[WickedAirSportz]

But the reason your products spark controversey is beause independently derived results differ than your stated results.

One person, one gun, one set of results.

Good grief. This is a million dollar a month marker that is being sold here. Do you honestly believe that NO testing was done here, and these numbers came out of thin air? Top that off with the fact these numbers were derrived from an independant source that I would like to believe to be a bit more accurate than Cledford's numbers (no offense Cledford).

[manike]

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
It is because my claims are beyond the normal scope of what people have been programmed to believe as the limits of a device. Simple as that.

I was going to say "don't be so arrogant" but I am not sure that's possible with you. The reason that a lot of us do not believe you or your claims, is because we also have skills and abilities in these areas and have the ability to think for ourselves.

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
One person, one gun, one set of results.

Which from your original claims of how you were making the equaliser is also how you were conducting your tests. And which sparked a lot of complaints in case the dropoff issues you claimed to see were just from your gun as an isolated case.

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
Good grief. This is a million dollar a month marker that is being sold here. Do you honestly believe that NO testing was done here, and these numbers came out of thin air?

That's exactly what I believe. Especially since you change the numbers as people debunk your claims. I think you made something which offered an improvement and then made up numbers and hype to push it. I don't believe your numbers because there is NO PROOF whatsoever of those numbers and despite your promises to provide it you still haven't. It's vapourware.

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
Top that off with the fact these numbers were derrived from an independant source that I would like to believe to be a bit more accurate than Cledford's numbers (no offense Cledford).

You had the numbers derived from an independent source? hhmm, first you claimed you did the testing, then you tried to bluff me that AGD did the testing and now you are claiming 'an independent source'? Who is that source is it Bob Long? I'm going to ask him next time I talk to him about how he tested the guns

And then you attack Cledford's numbers claiming someone elses' to be more accurate? how can you do that without knowing how Cledford achieved his results?

Let me leave you with the definition of hype (no it's not WAS's marketing' )

hype1 Pronunciation Key (hp) Slang n.

Exaggerated or extravagant claims made especially in advertising or promotional material: “It is pure hype, a gigantic PR job” (Saturday Review).

Something deliberately misleading; a deception: “ [He] says that there isn't any energy crisis at all, that it's all a hype, to maintain outrageous profits for the oil companies” (Joel Oppenheimer).

tr.v. hyped, hyp·ing, hypes
To publicize or promote, especially by extravagant, inflated, or misleading claims: hyped the new book by sending its author on a promotional tour.

I will believe your claims on the turbo rev and equaliser when you provide proof. Once again you have typed a lot, said nothing, and prooved only that you like to be evasive. It appears from research on the net, that you were like this in other industries that you were involved in.

Instead of being evasive why not just post some proof. Until then those of us that also know what we/you are talking about will continue to show those you try and hype why they need to be careful about your products.

manike

[WickedAirSportz]

The reason that a lot of us do not believe you or your claims, is because we also have skills and abilities in these areas and have the ability to think for ourselves.

Huh? How much sense does that make? That's like saying I don't believe that time travel is possible because I have the skills to think its not.

Which from your original claims of how you were making the equaliser is also how you were conducting your tests. And which sparked a lot of complaints in case the dropoff issues you claimed to see were just from your gun as an isolated case.

What I posted was a small sample of what testing was conducted. It would be foolish to believe that only one gun was tested during the entire development period. It would be foolish to think only a dozen were tested too.

I will likely never be forthcoming with information in a competitive environment. That is not practical business sense. Give enough information to prove your point (even if there are those who don't believe it), but not enough to allow others to compete against you...

That's exactly what I believe. Especially since you change the numbers as people debunk your claims. I think you made something which offered an improvement and then made up numbers and hype to push it. I don't believe your numbers because there is NO PROOF whatsoever of those numbers and despite your promises to provide it you still haven't. It's vapourware.

Yep, you got me. I made the whole thing up. There isn't even a board... it just a piece of paper that my 4 year old colored.

I don't change anything, I merely provide a little more information. I believe I have provided ample proof. I sleep fine at night.

You had the numbers derived from an independent source? hhmm, first you claimed you did the testing, then you tried to bluff me that AGD did the testing and now you are claiming 'an independent source'? Who is that source is it Bob Long? I'm going to ask him next time I talk to him about how he tested the guns

I did do the testing... so did a LOT of others. If you think I am actually going to provide you (or anyone else) with all of the information during a product's development, you have another thing coming. Smoke and mirrors - no lies, just not telling everything. This is normal in the computer industry. Please do speak with Bob. He may not tell you anymore than I will, but he may tell you everything. That is of course up to him. The project is done at this point, but there will still be secrets kept about the board so that other manufacturers do not copy key elements from it.

And then you attack Cledford's numbers claiming someone elses' to be more accurate? how can you do that without knowing how Cledford achieved his results?

Cledford told me how he obtained his results in a PM. There are lots of little details like this that you are not aware of until now.


I guess my confusion is once I do provide you the holy grail of proof that you are so desperately seeking, then what?

[manike]

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
Huh? How much sense does that make? That's like saying I don't believe that time travel is possible because I have the skills to think its not.

LMAO, you really are an obstinant and arrogant person. You imply you are right because the only person who can understand what you are saying is yourself? What a joke.

What we are discussing is NOT ROCKET SCIENCE, it's pretty simple physics and mathematics (well maybe that is rocket science in your terms and the hype you use, but it's easy enough for most to understand given a little coaching through the principles).

I'm happy enough in my understanding of these fields that I can call your hype and claims for the absolute rubbish that they are. In return you have nothing but hot air. I have no need to try and baffle the 'audience' with long words and terms in the hope they will not understand me and take what I say for granted as true, like you do. In fact although I could act that way I go out of my way to do the opposite and make it that people can understand me and the theories and physics involved. You have no plausible theory, you have no evidence, you site 'competition' as the reason you do not provide it? and you expect people who do have evidence to the contrary to believe you?

I'm waiting for you to claim cold fusion in a test tube next.

Practical business sense is to be able to back up what you claim. You can not, and it appears you have quite a history of claiming things you can not back up.

When cornered you argue over semantics and act more like your 4yr old child than someone who actually has the ability to prove their claims.

You said you would provide video's of your claims, and we are still waiting for them. Have been for a long time, and I only expect to get more hot air out of you rather than the video's to back up your claims.

What happens when you come up with proof? You will get an apology from me for outrightly calling you a liar, and will be held aloft as achieveing something outside the realms of reality. Wow, you should be falling over yourself to come up with the proof! I think you are an outright liar about how the Turbo Rev works. I do not believe your theory is even remotely plausible, and you either know that and are selling hype to make money or you are crazy enough to actually believe the ridiculous hypothesis you have made.

At the moment, your refusal to provide proof, and your arrogance that we will not understand it if you did, just makes you come across as a snake oil salesman.

The king is naked and we can all see that.

manike

[manike]

Hey WAS. Here is an easy claim for you to prove for us to show you aren't full of BS. You said...

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
You just can't argue with the fact that a gun set to shoot at 18bps (in full auto) empties the hopper in a just a few seconds, without breaks, chops, or misses. This is what we are seeing with the TurboRev upgraded hopper.

I won't argue with that if you show it Put a turbo rev on your intimidator and empty it at 18bps in a few seconds.

I believe that was also claimed for any gun, so please also turn the ACE off and show it how it can do it without chops

How's that for an easy start for you? Shouldn't be too difficult for you to do should it?

manike

[WickedAirSportz]

I'll do you better than that... this test was conducted by a respected author for APG (Paul "Doc" Koch), using his Tippman Model 98 with an experimental e-bolt.

[manike]

I don't see anything yet...

A video please, not just an article with 'words'

manike

[314159]

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
Some of the posts here are dead on the money about how it works, and others are so far off in left field.

would thoes be my posts?

and a reply to everyone that is saying that the picmicro microcontrollers are not state of the art. microcontrollers are reducing circuits to themselves, and input and output components, no external ram/rom/bus logic, they reduce the area and thus the cost of a pcb, making electronics cheaper.

they are powerfull because of their limits. their reduced instruction set allows them to have their instructions and data on the same word of memory. they process the instruction and data in the same processor cycle (except for instructions that write to the program counter). they do not have to wait to retrive information from a disk.

for everyone that is calling them a $4 dollar chip, i can get them for 1.58 in quanity of 1. (if you wish to buy them at $4 a chip, contact me about being your distributor ) http://www.digikey.com/scripts/us/dk...575&Row=241037

i would urge a mod to do some weeding and clean up this thread a little. some people are litterly holding down the wickedairsportz guy while the other one works the gut.

i have heard of a bug that will allow you to dump the code of a pic with the protection bit set. note: you do risk ruining the pic in the process of dooing this. i read this a while ago, so if it has been fixed, or if my memory no longer serves me correctly... it involves raising vcc line of the picmicro to around +14v instead of +5v while reading the pic.

[Butterfingers]

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
I'll do you better than that... this test was conducted by a respected author for APG (Paul "Doc" Koch), using his Tippman Model 98 with an experimental e-bolt.

Oh yeah... that should be really easy to verify dosent webby write for APG too... err...

[314159]

this might pertain to other pics than the 16c84, you run a good chance of DESTROYING the pic you are trying to read. one of the followup posters to this got 3 fizzles before 1 good read.

> 1. I use the PIC16 programmer from Farnell Components (part no. 459-471).
>
> 2. The standard programming software supplied is ASLPIC from Application
> Solutions Ltd.
>
> 3. Install the 16C84 into a turned pin socket with pin 14 (VDD)
> cut off. Attach a flying lead to the stub of pin 14 and
> connect this to a power supply (0V to +14V) sharing a common
> ground with the programmer.
>
> 4. Run ASLPIC.
> Insert the PIC+socket into the ZIF on the programmer board and switch
> VDD to 5V.
> From the menu set the CP configuration fuse to OFF.
> Now set VDD to VPP-0.5V (approx 13.5 volts).
> Program the configuration fuses. (Reply on screen saying
> error invalid?? Ignore this error and set VDD back to 5V.)
> Switch VDD supply off at the power supply.
> Switch off programmer supply.
> Wait 10 to 20 secs.
> Switch on programmer supply.
> Switch the VDD supply to 5V.
> Read PIC.
>
> What may be confusing to people is the error message displayed
> when programming the configuration fuses, and next not waiting for
> the charge on the cells to fall back to 5 volts after setting the
> fuses. This is why I say switch off for 10 to 20 secs, but don't
> forget to reset the VDD supply to 5 volts first.

[WickedAirSportz]

This bug was found only the first 16C84 PICs, and was immediately corrected by Microchip. In fact, because of this bug, extra security measures were added to make sure something like this would never happen ever again.

By the way, YOU basically have the entire TurboRev logic figured out. 512 bytes (words if you like that phrase better) of code space is plenty of space to handle the algorithm. It was a challenge to get that along with the LED control, battery voltage comparison, push button switch debounce, and a few other misc control routines.

There are no interrupts in the 12C508/509 PICs. You have to simulate one by using the timer.

The TurboRev II will use the latest state of the art PIC micro. How lastest? Well, it gets released this month. It is the same package size (8 pin SOIC), has interrupts, EEPROM, 1K of code space, 3 times the RAM, an A/D converter, and is flashable. Not bad for a part that is $1.12 each.

Some people question that a motor's speed and torque can be controlled via a PIC micro. You will find numerous motor speed control circuits using the 12C50x family parts on the internet. This is where I got the example source code for handling the duty cycle and frequency output to the motor driver.

Since there is an eye, you can "clock" the amount of time between balls passing by the eye. By varying the motor speed, you can easily determine if the current speed is working good or bad, and increasing or decreasing the speed can be compared against a speed that is known to be the fastest feeding. Taking this to another level, you can deliberately stutter the rotation of the paddles with the feeding to determine if you can in fact "smack" the stack of balls to improve the feeding, all by adjusting the torque as well as motor speed. You can easily build patterns that work, and stick with them. When paint stops flowing, the table pointers are cleared and the process starts over. Due to the limited RAM and lack of EEPROM in the 12C508A part, there is no way to permanently store what has been learned for further comparison. With the new PIC part, that will be possible so that the feeding algorithm will function even quicker.

[314159]

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
This bug was found only the first 16C84 PICs, and was immediately corrected by Microchip. In fact, because of this bug, extra security measures were added to make sure something like this would never happen ever again.

heh, oh well. life goes on i suppose.

[Miscue]

Question: Why does a revy need to be able to learn? Does it play chess too?

[WickedAirSportz]

Do you want the hopper to feed fast? If so, you need to determine the optimal speed/torque for the motor (at the very least).

A very simplified form of hopper AI can be viewed like this:

The time between balls is clocked in, and an average over a period of time is recorded. Now, increasing and decreasing the motor speed is going to affect that average. So, the software can determine what the best possible speed is to allow the balls to flow the quickest.

This method alone works great, but it can not deliberately accelerate the stack of balls, although this does happen on occassion as you see a spike in the timing chart.


Miscue, you and others asked for an explanation (proof) of how the TurboRev technology works. I am providing that to you. If you intend to make smart *** remarks, then I won't waste my time.

[manike]

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
This method alone works great, but it can not deliberately accelerate the stack of balls, although this does happen on occassion as you see a spike in the timing chart.

Exactly! It works great as an agitating system, which I have said all along, but there is no way with such a paddle system you will be able to synchronise the falling of the paintballs into an empty breech in order to reliably feed faster than any other agitating system.

The chance of a paddle hitting a ball is just too randomn, and the chance of that ball falling into the feed tube at the right time within a few ms, is unreal.

And each ball would have to fall down an empty feed tube to make a difference or be exactly timed to work in conjunction with when the bolt moves (not possible when it's a random paddle rotation and collision with paintball). Since the hopper is not linked to the gun's firing, nor does it know how far away the eye is from the breech it's just a pipe dream to think that your hypothesis on how it works is even plausible.

It's a great agitating hopper, it's not a force feed system and it can not run a gun set at 18bps.

We are still waiting for a video of it running a gun at 18bps full auto reliably... Still waiting for any proof whatsoever on the claims of feed rates you make for it, other than 'word' of mouth Which just doesn't cut it.

manike

[marley618]

This is a little off topic but:I've heard people say you use a Halo B when you are giving a demo of your Timmy Board. Why don't you use a turbo rev instead? It should feed fast enough, right?

[WickedAirSportz]

... there is no way with such a paddle system you will be able to synchronise the falling of the paintballs into an empty breech in order to reliably feed faster than any other agitating system

Wrong!

How can YOU be so bold as to say this? Have you done months worth of research on this technology to determine if it is possible or not... I didn't think so.

This IS entirely possible, and this IS how the TurboRev works. Like it or not... Nothing else is faster in the agitated hopper arena.

Let's break this down into steps: Are saying that it is absolutely impossible to cause the motor to oscillate with the falling of the balls? (a simple yes or no question)

[WickedAirSportz]

Originally posted by marley618
This is a little off topic but:I've heard people say you use a Halo B when you are giving a demo of your Timmy Board. Why don't you use a turbo rev instead? It should feed fast enough, right?

The TurboRev won't feed the 22+ bps that we need for the demos.

[manike]

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
Wrong!

How can YOU be so bold as to say this? Have you done months worth of research on this technology to determine if it is possible or not... I didn't think so.

I haven't done months of research no... I've done about 8 years of it... That's how long I have been testing and looking at paintball loader systems. I have conducted tests like you say and I have looked at the synchronisation of feeding balls out of a loader to how the bolt cycles. I've done this with guns without ACE and guns with ACE.

via the randomn knocking of balls down a tube I've never achieved over 16bps and certainly not 18bps. By actively feeding them down at specific times with intervals to allow the bolt to cycle in relation to the bolt and firing of the gun I was able to increase the feed rates, but not reliably. And this is with a release system that purposely dropped a ball to be in time with the open breech. Not a randomn paddle rotation as you use.

That's one of the reasons I still think you are full of crap. I'm still waiting to see any theory of yours that isn't absolute codswallop.

Just show us some proof. Where is a video of a Turbo Rev on a gun shooting 18bps? that's all we want to see!

It is not possible. I watched a Turbo rev in a clear hopper and all it does is reliably keep the feed tube full. It has no synchronisation to the opening of the breech or the gun firing. It's obvious from just watching it keep the feed tube full that it can't synchronise the randomn smacking and dropping of paintballs into the breech.

It's easy to make the motor oscillate with the falling of the balls. It's impossible with such a paddle to ensure it knocks a ball down when required.

manike

[hitech]

It looks like Miscue had this figured out from the start.

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
The TurboRev II will use the latest state of the art PIC micro... Not bad for a part that is $1.12 each.

Originally posted by Miscue
Now, I'm looking at this picture of the TurboRev Board. I see some capacitors, a diode, a switch, some other stuff, and a PIC 12C508A microcontroller. I'm still looking for the "latest state-of-the-art microprocessor with artificial intelligence software," that's supposed to be on there.

A $1.12 "computer" that is capable of artificial intelligence software. I never would have believed...

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
512 bytes (words if you like that phrase better) of code space is plenty of space to handle the algorithm. It was a challenge to get that along with the LED control, battery voltage comparison, push button switch debounce, and a few other misc control routines.

Originally posted by Miscue
The 12C508A has 33 single word instructions, 512 words of program memory and 25 bytes of data RAM. Out of these 33 instructions, the ability to multiply or divide numbers is not present.

It was a challenge to get the simple routines in there, but not the AI code. I wonder why we haven't seen any "robots" using this "computer"? AI software would be great for "robots". And BTW, a byte is 8 bits, period.

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
You can easily build patterns that work, and stick with them. When paint stops flowing, the table pointers are cleared and the process starts over. Due to the limited RAM and lack of EEPROM in the 12C508A part, there is no way to permanently store what has been learned for further comparison.

Originally posted by Miscue
All they have is a SINGLE trial in which they mention average feed rates. Seems to me that they produced numbers AFTER the board was made, and did NOTHING before it was made.

Since it can't store anything permanently, and it clears the tables after paint stops flowing the best it can do is adjust to a single string of shots. Artificial intelligence software? Really?

[manike]

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
Nothing else is faster in the agitated hopper arena.

Agitated? exactly. To get it to feed at the rates you claim it would have to be force feed

BTW I have found that the re-load kit works better than the turbo rev.

manike

[hitech]

Jeez, I gotta learn to type faster...