Penri wrote: ↑26/04/2022, 21:56I'm not sure I understand the full picture behind the Night Control Code and what it's implications would be as the system currently stands, I certainly could see value as and when we have the Stage and Hanham Butts all available for storage.
Penri,
I think the main value would be to get as little water as possible in the main river system to reduce the scope for leaks. Presumably, since the river and bog garden contains far more water than the Sump it would help to reduce water losses owing to overflows and adding more potential storage in the Stage and Lady Hanham butts would only help in this because this strategy cannot work if the Wendy Butts are already full.
In fact, night mode could actually be designated 'backup mode' and could be made to kick in if the Sump ever got over full, whether at night or during the day.
If the sump is over fully, our existing logic of pump to the wendy butts and then pump from there somewhere else (once we've got the pump infrastructure done that is) should be okay, I think. Am I missing something?
I think from a maintenance and getting the timing correct point of view, that design is probably far easier to implement correctly, as well as simpler on the hardware level. Seems like a good plan to me.
Penri found that the Sump was empty this morning while the Butts were full. I logged in over VPN and confirmed the Butts level, but the Sump was returning 500 to 600 mm. The actual values returned by the A/D were of the order:
Something was clearly wrong; the Vmeas[0] reading should have been nearer 3.15 V, so Penri removed the probe to his workshop. He initially confirmed the fault, but after disassembly the fault cleared. He is currently soak testing the probe in his workshop.
On initial test, with no magnet applied Vmeas[0] measured around 2V while the other channels measured 3.1V or so, clearly an issue.
The probe was disassembled, it was noted that Vmeas[0] now measured around 3.1V, the same as the other channels. A visual inspection followed by a test of each Hall effect switch was carried out, all appeared well and each switch performed as expected. The bare probe was subjected to some shaking when live, without any ill effects being observed.
The probe has been re-assembled, given another shaking and left on soak test, thus far it is working as it should.
Hmm, this is interesting. It'd be good to know what it is that's causing the problem, assuming this is the issue that's plagued us since the start with this design. Maybe just water ingress / damp due to condensation?
The electronic, inside the tube, looked pristine, no sign of damp, no corrosion evident.
Can't explain why the issue went away on disassembly, if it had been a hard (ie permanent) fault then the issue would probably have been down to one of the Hall effect switches, of which there are 40 in each probe, but each individual switch checked out ok when tested.