VAMO V2: the Problem with the Effectiveness of the Device

[cckk]

MikeE3,

Thank you for the words: “your attention to detail is amazing”. Some less polite ECF member could say instead to me: “you’re .... retentive person” or simply: “you’re ....”.

As for using VAMO in No. 1 with volts versus No. 2 with watts I was inspired by sailense which replied to my question concerning the battery draining by VAMO here:

This is most likely due to the booster used in the Vamo and the additional power needed for the circuitry.

So my idea was the following:

So – according to my speculations – VAMO V2 in the mode No. 1 (AVG) with the preset voltage doesn’t have to count the voltage (because it’s preset) so it doesn’t perform all those stupid actions which it does in mode No. 2 (RMS) to count the voltage and which – as a side effect – worsen the battery and doesn’t allow to vape the entire 3 ml tank.

I called above RMS mode and the wattage setting “stupid actions” because they don’t work as they should in VAMO V2. When properly implemented RMS and wattage setting is “great thing”. Unfortunately it isn’t the case of VAMO V2.

As for your “a” and “b” questions I can’t reply them without testing that. Taking into consideration that “[my] attention to detail is amazing” it’s very probable than tomorrow I’ll perform those tests and publish the results here.

 

[sailense]

I've been away from the thread for a bit, but looks like @awsum140 answered the question about the pulse frequency. I saw it in the same Phil Busardo video that he posted.

Regarding your results, I find it very interesting that you found a linear drop on the avg setting versus rms, and I don't think I've seen this anywhere else. Your conclusion leads me to believe that the calculation of the rms draws a significant amount of power.

For avg calculation, you're looking at basic addition and division, which can be done with integer math. For rms, you'll need to take a square root, which requires floating point operations. My guess is that the floating point calculations require more power overhead on the chipset and that would cause more draw for the rms versus the avg.

 

[cckk]

sailense,

Very coherent explanation of the battery draining in AVG and RMS modes. I suppose you just answered the questions by MikeE3 from post #40. To be sure I should test that.

I just started the next phase of the tests and now I’m vaping the entire 3 ml tank using No. 1 mode (AVG) and preset wattage 6.0 W – the same as before. I vaped so far ¼ of the tank but it seems that it’ll be possible to finish the tank using the same battery without draining it too much. That would be the result compatible with your assumptions.

Thank you very much for moving me one or two steps ahead towards the explanation how VAMO works indeed.

 

[cckk]

Side note: I think that it’s completely superfluous to count the voltages on the fly for the devices such as VAMO V2. The range of the preset wattages is predefined (3.0–15.0 W). The lowest acceptable resistance is predefined (1.3 Ω). The highest useable resistance is easy to establish. So instead of count the voltage each time to match the working resistance and the preset wattage it would be enough to store in the device memory a table including all possible values assuming some grain, for example 0.1 Ω, 0.1 W, and 0.1 V. Seeking the table is much simpler than counting the averages and using the floating point calculations so it doesn’t require a lot of the power.

My question to the Chinese MODs’ developers: Is it so hard to think for a while?

 

[cckk]

sailense, MikeE3,

The last batch of the tests is here: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...all-about-wire-temp-read-15.html#post10326131. Sorry for the inconvenience.