Using clone ELM327 Bluetooth OBDII adapter with Leaf

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
garygid said:
Do you intend to combine the FS and SS (System Status) versions
into one, perhaps by just defining 4 "new" screens?
Click to expand...
It is hard enough to maintain the two sets of screens I have now. Adding a third I would need to keep in sync with the other is not likely. There are portrait and landscape version of the main screen set so that really means I would have 2 x 2 +1 =5 screens to manage.

I will probably come up with a different way of doing it but it might mean starting all over again. But I don't like having to compile two versions either.
 
Oh, so apparently the Show-SS "flag" is a module-global compile-time
"constant", and Settings is a different module, so it can show the SS
even in the FS vbersion?

Thanks for considering it.
 
Each "Activity" has its own set of Attributes one of which is a FullScreen setting. The Settings menu activity has #FullScreen set to False which is why the notification bar is visible at the top. The Main activity was set to True but now I compile two versions one with it set true and other with it set false.
 
I miss the larger text size. I.can understand it if you need the room for more data, but it is definitely harder to read during the day.
 
I had a chance to play with the app on 2 Leafs today - my 2011 with ~28K mi and 2012 loaner from dealer with ~5K mi.

I think capacity is a bit overstated in the app at least for 2012 leafs... :(
The capacity on Loaner displayed as 101.98%...

Another thing I noticed is that temperature and/or maybe charge affects the reading as well... at least on my 2011 leaf.
On loaner I see the same values when I took it, after I drove on highway, quick charged it, left it sitting for few hours, capacity always was showing at 101.98%.

For my Leaf, I noticed that it fluctuates quite a bit, usually just by fraction of %, but yesterday battery temp went over 80deg for the first time since I started using the app, and I was really surprised to see the capacity number at almost 98%...
After sitting for the night the reading returned to 95%.

So... seems like getting capacity reading is not an exact science for leaf...
 
You have to adjust the Ah value. I had to, because my 2013 was saying 105%...

UkrainianKozak said:
I had a chance to play with the app on 2 Leafs today - my 2011 with ~28K mi and 2012 loaner from dealer with ~5K mi.

I think capacity is a bit overstated in the app at least for 2012 leafs... :(
The capacity on Loaner displayed as 101.98%...

Another thing I noticed is that temperature and/or maybe charge affects the reading as well... at least on my 2011 leaf.
On loaner I see the same values when I took it, after I drove on highway, quick charged it, left it sitting for few hours, capacity always was showing at 101.98%.

For my Leaf, I noticed that it fluctuates quite a bit, usually just by fraction of %, but yesterday battery temp went over 80deg for the first time since I started using the app, and I was really surprised to see the capacity number at almost 98%...
After sitting for the night the reading returned to 95%.

So... seems like getting capacity reading is not an exact science for leaf...
Click to expand...
 
Turbo3 said:
How about a sample Landscape version?

http://imageshack.us/a/img818/2429/201305192233.png" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Click to expand...
Well, that's the same image I posted :lol: So here's my MSPaint'd mock-up of that. Not on the same computer that made the original, but I figure all that needs to be done is moving some UI elements around...

Untitled.png

Oh, and also, leaving Bluetooth on isn't a battery drain. It's idle and powered down most of the time (when "on"), unless something is connected. I've left mine "on" almost all the time from the day I got an Android phone, and having it on or off never affected the battery life... just makes it less convenient to connect devices and use Bluetooth itself, in my opinion ;)
 
Ingineer said:
Tip: You can implement graphical representation for variables without needing to use a big pretty icon. A simple bar will do. Numbers do not cut it for many variables, they really need a linear analog representation. If done well, you can implement both a bar and a number, as well as adding "graduation" marks to the bar so the units are apparent at a glance. If dual display is desired, you can implement the number off to the side, in the middle, or "through" by inversion or transparency.

You can also double a bar's resolution by having it start from the opposite side of the screen when the value goes negative, etc. I first did this back in the 1980's on an old 8 bit computer I was using to monitor some processes, it really works well. It's perfect for displaying bi-directional data, such as kW or Amps.

-Phil
Click to expand...
This is exactly what I had in mind. I suck at creating things from a blank slate, so I used Google Images creatively to represent what I had in my mind onto the screen. How exactly to implement it is up for debate, but I put together the clearest interpretation of what was in my head when I first came up with the idea. Adding tick markers to the battery indicator matching the 12 bars of the Leaf's existing battery gauge would be a perfect visual cue that would seriously improve accuracy.

I think we can improve by just adding a small graphical indicator there for the battery, something with tick-marks that make up the 12 battery segments (I think that would be 11 tick marks, right?), and mesh that data with the capacity-bars data to fully emulate a detailed LEAF battery gauge on screen. Now with up to about 300 or more points of precision instead of just 12!

I also agree about the bar entering from the opposite end to reflect "negative" and double resolution. Instead of having a bar start in middle of the screen and extend one way or another, it'd start at either end and enter from one side if positive (e.g. accelerating), or the other side if negative (e.g. regenerating). Perfect for an "amps" display that I'd love to see as well, but probably a ways off since the interface is already so busy processing battery voltage info ;)
 
However, I'd almost think a landscape mode could "stack" some of that data instead, leaving the battery graphic to stretch the whole width of the display and provide even further accuracy/resolution between the 12 (or more, now) tick marks. MSPaint is too limiting there, and I'd have to back off to traditional box art and stick figures for the graphics ;) I'm sure everyone gets the idea. Some info is better interpreted graphically for some of us that see data in that form better than others. :)
 
It seems that many are confusing tank fullness (basically SOC or dashboard Bars)
with a Fuel Gauge. Yes, they would basically be the same IF the tank remained
the same "size" (capacity), but it does not. After 2 years, my car's tank appears
to be down only about 10%, but heading into the warm-summer "dip" in
capacity. A full charge still gives about 95% SOC, but the fuel on board is down
about 10% from what the new-car capacity would hold, about 89 %GIDs instead
of the original 100 %GIDs that I got 2 years ago.

So, for driving, SOC is not very helpful. %GIDs (or synthetic 'GIDs perhaps, if done well,
or kWh if we use a meaningful conversion constant) are fuel-related measures.
Remember, your car uses fuel to drive, not tank fullness.

So, showing SOC in small text (or Bars) for reference might be Ok just to satisfy
the curiosity of some, but if you have SOC and FUEL available, you will quickly
switch to using the Fuel gauge, and totally ignore any SOC-based gauge.

The suggestions above are talking about (and showing) SOC and Bars as if
they are meaningful measures. As your car's tank shrinhs, you will come
to understand that Tank Fullness is not as helpful as it could be. What good
are higher resolution Bars, if they are 10%, 20%, or 40% wrong? :eek:

Nissan could have displayed a Fuel Gauge, but they decided to hide
the car's capacity loss, and show Tank Fullness (Bars) instead.

Yes, SOC could be corrected with the current capacity (if we knew that accurately),
and that is basically how the synthetic 'GIDs estimate is derived.
 
garygid said:
It seems that many are confusing tank fullness (basically SOC or dashboard Bars)
with a Fuel Gauge. Yes, they would basically be the same IF the tank remained
the same "size" (capacity), but it does not. After 2 years, my car's tank appears
to be down only about 10%, but heading into the warm-summer "dip" in
capacity. A full charge still gives about 95% SOC, but the fuel on board is down
about 10% from what the new-car capacity would hold, about 89 %GIDs instead
of the original 100 %GIDs that I got 2 years ago.

So, for driving, SOC is not very helpful. %GIDs (or synthetic 'GIDs perhaps, if done well,
or kWh if we use a meaningful conversion constant) are fuel-related measures.
Remember, your car uses fuel to drive, not tank fullness.

So, showing SOC in small text (or Bars) for reference might be Ok just to satisfy
the curiosity of some, but if you have SOC and FUEL available, you will quickly
switch to using the Fuel gauge, and totally ignore any SOC-based gauge.

The suggestions above are talking about (and showing) SOC and Bars as if
they are meaningful measures. As your car's tank shrinhs, you will come
to understand that Tank Fullness is not as helpful as it could be. What good
are higher resolution Bars, if they are 10%, 20%, or 40% wrong? :eek:

Nissan could have displayed a Fuel Gauge, but they decided to hide
the car's capacity loss, and show Tank Fullness (Bars) instead.

Yes, SOC could be corrected with the current capacity (if we knew that accurately),
and that is basically how the synthetic 'GIDs estimate is derived.
Click to expand...

+1! Well said Gary!
 
Adjust it to what? I know what it is right now, I don't know what the value was 2 years ago for my car (I don't care about loaner value :) )

sorphin said:
You have to adjust the Ah value. I had to, because my 2013 was saying 105%...

UkrainianKozak said:
I had a chance to play with the app on 2 Leafs today - my 2011 with ~28K mi and 2012 loaner from dealer with ~5K mi.

I think capacity is a bit overstated in the app at least for 2012 leafs... :(
The capacity on Loaner displayed as 101.98%...

Another thing I noticed is that temperature and/or maybe charge affects the reading as well... at least on my 2011 leaf.
On loaner I see the same values when I took it, after I drove on highway, quick charged it, left it sitting for few hours, capacity always was showing at 101.98%.

For my Leaf, I noticed that it fluctuates quite a bit, usually just by fraction of %, but yesterday battery temp went over 80deg for the first time since I started using the app, and I was really surprised to see the capacity number at almost 98%...
After sitting for the night the reading returned to 95%.

So... seems like getting capacity reading is not an exact science for leaf...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
garygid said:
It seems that many are confusing tank fullness (basically SOC or dashboard Bars)
with a Fuel Gauge. Yes, they would basically be the same IF the tank remained
the same "size" (capacity), but it does not. After 2 years, my car's tank appears
to be down only about 10%, but heading into the warm-summer "dip" in
capacity. A full charge still gives about 95% SOC, but the fuel on board is down
about 10% from what the new-car capacity would hold, about 89 %GIDs instead
of the original 100 %GIDs that I got 2 years ago.

So, for driving, SOC is not very helpful. %GIDs (or synthetic 'GIDs perhaps, if done well,
or kWh if we use a meaningful conversion constant) are fuel-related measures.
Remember, your car uses fuel to drive, not tank fullness.
Click to expand...
I understand why you feel that way, but I see no reason to use those darned 'Gids (No offense, 'Gary). If it were the real Gid number, I'd understand why we're displaying it, but I see no reason for the simulated number. I'd much rather use the kWh number, which is in units that make sense, that I can do arithmetic with when considering charge times and m/kWh rates. And I still want the SOC% in graphical form. It's useful to know I've used half of what I started with even if what I started with isn't what it would have been two years ago.
 
davewill said:
I understand why you feel that way, but I see no reason to use those darned 'Gids (No offense, 'Gary). If it were the real Gid number, I'd understand why we're displaying it, but I see no reason for the simulated number. I'd much rather use the kWh number, which is in units that make sense, that I can do arithmetic with when considering charge times and m/kWh rates. And I still want the SOC% in graphical form. It's useful to know I've used half of what I started with even if what I started with isn't what it would have been two years ago.
Click to expand...
GID% (or 'GID% if you can't have the real thing) is the most intuitive way to glance at the gauge to determine if you can make it home, and if you can make it home next year. kWhr you have to divide by 21 to figure out the fraction of real charge you have left.
 
nogajim said:
GID% (or 'GID% if you can't have the real thing) is the most intuitive way to glance at the gauge to determine if you can make it home, and if you can make it home next year. kWhr you have to divide by 21 to figure out the fraction of real charge you have left.
Click to expand...
Different strokes. If you want a percent of a fictional "original" tank, you don't need Gids for that. Just set a kWh target for 100% in the settings and display a %kWh gauge based on it. I honestly think that you guys who have other meters have just gotten used to Gids. To me, they are just confusing and annoying. The only reason I would ever bother with them is if they were the real number from the car and I had no better choice, like you guys did for a long time.
 
davewill said:
...I see no reason to use those darned 'Gids (No offense, 'Gary). If it were the real Gid number, I'd understand why we're displaying it, but I see no reason for the simulated number.
Click to expand...
Personally, I want the 'GIDs displayed to use the formula / equation that cliff posted earlier which appears to match actual GIDs +-2 compared to the current value which diverges drastically especially towards low SOC.

It shouldn't take too many data points from different cars to figure out how the 0.31 or -15 should be adjusted based on the CAP value.

On my car with about 58.6 Ah capacity, it appears that using 0.3075 and -15 gets very close to +-1 actual GIDs at 95%, 80% and LBW. I think that we could leave -15 as fixed for now, and calculate the capacity adjustment as Ah / 65 * 0.3075 with while capping the value at 0.3075, so the formula would look like this:

GID = SOC% * 10 * (Ah / 65 * 0.3075) - 15

Example using data from my car (LBW goes on just below 24% and VLBW goes on just below 14%):

80% charge: 80 * 10 * 58.6 / 65 * 0.3075 - 15 = 207 GID
LBW: 23.9 * 10 * 58.6 / 65 * 0.3075 - 15 = 51 GID
VLBW: 13.9 * 10 * 58.6 / 65 * 0.3075 - 15 = 24 GID

This is very close to what I'd expect in terms of real GIDs and certainly close enough to be very usable - would be very interesting to see how these numbers look on other cars.

cliff said:
It appears to me that when calculating gids from soc that the offset between
the 2 may not be used. I found from extrapolation for me that when soc = 0,
gids = -15.
I recorded data on 4-24-2013 for soc, and gids, with my home brew hardware.
Here is a plot of the data:

The red is about 6600 data points, and green is a
linear fit to the data, using gids = soc * .31 - 15.
While the .31 will change with battery age, I do not know if
the -15 gids will change, or is fixed.
Still as a first guess, using this offset might improve simulated gids calculation.
Click to expand...
 
nogajim said:
davewill said:
I understand why you feel that way, but I see no reason to use those darned 'Gids (No offense, 'Gary). If it were the real Gid number, I'd understand why we're displaying it, but I see no reason for the simulated number. I'd much rather use the kWh number, which is in units that make sense, that I can do arithmetic with when considering charge times and m/kWh rates. And I still want the SOC% in graphical form. It's useful to know I've used half of what I started with even if what I started with isn't what it would have been two years ago.
Click to expand...
GID% (or 'GID% if you can't have the real thing) is the most intuitive way to glance at the gauge to determine if you can make it home, and if you can make it home next year. kWhr you have to divide by 21 to figure out the fraction of real charge you have left.
Click to expand...
GID% is really useful you are on a often repeated drive and already know that "21% will get me from A to B". (*21% representing a percentage of new capacity*)

For me, that's not what I'm doing when REALLY need to know if I can make it home. Then, I'm on a route that I rarely drive, or sometimes have never driven before. The map will tell me how far I have to go. The dash will tell me how many miles I'm getting per kWh. The only thing I still need to figure out if I can make it is how many kWh's I have left.

If that math says that I can't make it - barely, then what? It is simple to take miles remaining and divide by kWh's remaining to get a target mpk that will get me home. To do this, I have to convert GID's to kWh's. I have to convert SOC to kWh's. Or I even have to convert GID% to kWh's.

If you use GID%, how can you possibly calculate what efficiency you have to achieve to get home, over an unknown route, without going to kWh's?
 
Late to the party-

The OGs (original Gids) are a real number from the car which seems to be 80Whs in and ~75Whs out. Some like to use actual Gids, some like Gid%. I use a rough estimate of 5% Gids equals one kWh to determine remaining range.

So far this app only reads the Car-CAN but can ask for some information from the EV-CAN through the Car-CAN. The numbers are then adjusted to determine simulated Gids because they can only be read directly from the EV-CAN. They are not yet as accurate as real Gids. As we get more experience with them, we will learn to rely on these numbers as well.


davewill said:
nogajim said:
GID% (or 'GID% if you can't have the real thing) is the most intuitive way to glance at the gauge to determine if you can make it home, and if you can make it home next year. kWhr you have to divide by 21 to figure out the fraction of real charge you have left.
Click to expand...
Different strokes. If you want a percent of a fictional "original" tank, you don't need Gids for that. Just set a kWh target for 100% in the settings and display a %kWh gauge based on it. I honestly think that you guys who have other meters have just gotten used to Gids. To me, they are just confusing and annoying. The only reason I would ever bother with them is if they were the real number from the car and I had no better choice, like you guys did for a long time.
Click to expand...
 
drees said:
davewill said:
...I see no reason to use those darned 'Gids (No offense, 'Gary). If it were the real Gid number, I'd understand why we're displaying it, but I see no reason for the simulated number.
Click to expand...
batteryproblemmnl


Personally, I want the 'GIDs displayed to use the formula / equation that cliff posted earlier which appears to match actual GIDs +-2 compared to the current value which diverges drastically especially towards low SOC.
Click to expand...
+1

The old formula is based on a number of assumptions, and it has not been very accurate in the field. I think it's time to make an adjustment and continue from there. The formula Dave mentioned above will work, but yield Gid counts above 281 for new cars. If we wanted to fix that, Ah values would need to be capped at 65. Alternatively, we could use the Ah defined as CAP in preferences instead of fixed 65 Ah.
 

Similar threads

B
[W.I.P] Happy Leaf - ELM327 intuitive Nissan Leaf interface for Android Tablets
Replies
13
Views
17K
bmartin
B

Latest posts

Back
Top