ndb

I had this doubt initially as well. I'll try to explain what I think it's happening under the hood, but that's just my interpretation so @James please correct me if I'm wrong: 1) Replay in Watts: your taste is in charge: whatever you feel is a "good puff" (let's call it the "master" puff) gets memorized in terms of resistance-over-time and reproduced. If you have very bad taste buds and don't feel a hit is dry, you'll burn cotton when replaying your puff 2) Replay in TC: TC is in charge: your puff will follow the rules of TC, and so if you set a proper temperature, even if your taste is crap, since the "master" puff was temperature controlled, you will never exceed that temperature while replaying. The example of the bad taste buds not feeling dry hits is admittedly a bit extreme, but here's a more realistic reason I'd think about for using replay with TC: You might be exceeding "temperature considered safe" even if by taste you don't perceive any hint of dry hit. I won't enter into the merit of it, but if it's true that the emission of nasty chemicals could exponentially grow after coil temperature exceeds X deegrees, and at this X degrees you don't feel any dry hit and your cotton doesn't burn, then recording the "master" puff in watts only won't protect you from the potential danger. You might be enjoying thousands of replayed puffs at X + 50 degrees, without feeling anything wrong. If you record your "master" puff with TC, and set your temperature below X, you should be guaranteed that no matter what your taste says, you won't risk producing nasty chemicals in any of the replayed puffs. Hope I could explain what I have in mind, but please remember again this is just my interpretation...

Got it! I think I know what to do then, thanks.

So, I happily upgraded my 75C to new firmware with the Replay, and downloaded a couple of themes that support it. But by analyzing them I couldn't understand how would I add myself support for Replay in my old themes... I can only see a condition "temperature sensing coil OR can reply" applied to the coil power control, but couldn't find anything else... Any help?

subscribing

Thanks for the update. Nothing major popping up on MacOS sierra 10.12.6. Just one question, which I already wanted to ask in the past but forgot to. As I read in the release notes "Exposed some fields for themes that want to take advantage of them", is there an easy way to know what are exactly the new "exposed" fields in TD every time they get added? And while I'm on it, does anybody think it would be useful to "expose" the cold-ohm-reading without actually acquiring it but just showing the value (together with the corresponding room temp) and letting the user decide if acquire it or not? Trying to clarify what I have in mind: expose a (couple of) field(s) that would let you obtain the same effect you get in Escribe with the "Measure Ohms" button in the "General" tab, which fills the "Cold Ohms" and base temperature fields, without changing anything on the device (unless of course you upload settings afterwards) As far as I understand it, that's what happens (and you can control) in a "New Atomizer" screen in Theme designer, where you're shown with the new cold-ohm value and base temp and you can accept it or discard it, but I wasn't able to programmatically activate a functional "New Atomizer" screen, IOW I can trigger it to appear, but unless the device has actually detected a new atomizer, the values I'm interested in are not populated. So, in other words, I'd like to be able to have a theme where I can "peek" into what the current cold-ohm value and base temperature _WOULD_ be, without actually locking them in unless I really want to. Why? Because since we don't have refinement anymore, I find myself many times wondering "is the current ohm reading still in line with what I read N days ago?" especially with atomizers/connections that are not 100% TC-friendly. Yes, I know I could just resample it, but sometimes I just want to "peek" and see, without actually changing anything in the current setup. Well, maybe it's just me, but I felt like putting this out as a potential suggestion in case it doesn't require a lot of implementation effort or in case I have missed something and it is already possible to do so... Also, I can see this might not even be the right place to ask, but I wasn't sure if opening a new thread for "suggestions" would be frowned upon or not, so feel free to just move this to another place as needed.

Wow! I'm currently out and only have with me the ERM 75C with a SS316L, so I can't do too much testing, but I run atomizer analyzer just before and after applying this beta 12's FW and you can see the difference in the attached screenshots. By the way, since it is still called SP25, to be perfectly clear: the "BEFORE" picture refers to the SP25 that came yesterday with mac escribe beta 10, the "AFTER" picture refers to this latest SP25 that came with mac escribe beta 12: The first room temperature ~87F is almost exact, the second one appears higher probably due to the effect of FW update that you mentioned in your previous post (i.e. it resets to board temperature after an upgrade) Needless to say, this even seems too good to be true... ;-). I could even back-off temperature down to 380F maintaining smooth regulation. I can't currently do any further (e.g. cotton burn) testing as I'm out and about, but when I'll get home tomorrow I'll compare these readings with what I can get from my DNA200/75 and report back. BEFORE: (SP25 FW from mac beta 10) AFTER: (SP25 FW from mac beta 12)

Thanks, James. I can confirm now Available Materials are correctly saved. After upgrading the two 75C, Therion and the ERM, with the SP25, I noticed cold ohms seem systematically read again a bit lower (tried atomizer analyzer right before and right after applying the service pack). On the therion I have an SS316L coil that was reading ~0.682 with SP24 and went to 0.662 right after applying SP25. On the ERM another SS316L coil went from 0.859 on SP24 to 0.843. The weird thing is that the vape doesn't seem to be affected too much, as far as the very few puffs I've taken since upgrading. So I think I need some more time to be sure of the vape quality, but I wanted to put this out as soon as possible to check if this could be an expected effect of SP25?

Well, it may very well do. The internal resistance accounts for everything in the current path between the battery/board and the 510. It just takes sub-optimal soldering, a slightly thinner wire or some oxidization on a ground connection and your internal resistance will "know" it... Now for a mass-produced mod this big of a variation shouldn't happen, but I can confirm you that after setting mod resistance to 0 in Escribe and running atomizer analyzer with a copper plug screwed in, I get a pretty stable ~0.004 reading. I suggest you check it for yourself to be sure you don't have an "unlucky" one in your hands. If you don't have a copper plug, a dripper with solid 510 connection and a beefy copper wire dead-shorting the posts should do the job just fine

Yes, I checked with a copper plug and it's pretty much spot on ~0.004.

I didn't find any major issue with the mac version in all these iterations, but there's something related to materials' csv handling that I'm not sure about: I'm pretty sure in the windows version whatever material you imported from file or moved from a mod (i.e. transferred from the right "Materials on Device" to the left "Available Materials" listbox), was retained across restarts of Escribe. That doesn't seem to be the case with the Mac version, where as soon as you restart it, the "Available Materials" listbox seems to reset to its defaults, and you have to navigate to the CSV file of any material that is not in that default list.

Reporting back after having a chance to better test SP24 on two different mods / atomizers. MODS: Evolv reference 75C / Therion 75C ATOMS: Kayfun 5 with a ~0.86 ohm SS316L / Serpent SMM with a ~0.68 clapton 26/36 SS316L (more on this later....) My initial impressions remain confirmed: ohm reading seems on par with the other DNAs (200, 75). Swapping atomizers between mods gave consistent and repeatable results. Also, I was finally able to perform cotton burn tests, which I couldn't do before SP24 as it seemed like the 75C was completely cutting off power with a dry coil, and this has given me the opportunity to get interesting results with the Serpent SMM (see below) VAPE QUALITY: Kayfun 5: it is now performing as I was used to, good vape at ~390F on both the ERM and Therion, no need to crank up the temperature. Just a tiny hint of pulsing (confirmed by device monitor) when chain vaping and hence forcing temperature control to engage more aggressively, don't know if this is still being investigated... Serpent SMM: There's something here, but it turned out in this case it didn't depend on the mod nor on the atomizer itself... Despite cold ohm being read quite correctly as ~0.679 (0.68 / 0.682 on a DNA200 / 75), the vape was anemic and I had to crank the temperature up to ~510F. And this seemed particularly resonating with @Jonski post. The fact is that, at least in my case, it was performing poorly on the DNA200/75 too. Being able to do a cotton burn test, I found out that cotton actually singed at ~515F when using the SS316L profile from steam engine (which roughly corresponds to a 0,000828 TCR). Iterating on the cotton burn test, I found that a TCR ~0.00108 was giving cotton singing at 410F so I used that value and the Serpent started to work as expected. Now, it's entirely possible that my clapton wire is actually not 316L, or it might be that for some reason the coil mass makes the nominal TCR unsuitable (although that doesn't really fit with my understanding of how temp control works) and of course I'm not saying that this is what's happening to everybody with a Serpent SMM, but there's a good chance that fancy wire with high thermal mass is being used in the Serpent SMM, and so I'd first make sure that everything is OK on the TCR side of things...

Early feedback, after installing SP24 on the ERM 75C: looks very promising! The SS316L build I have on it was consistently reading ~0.84 (against ~0.86 on DNA200/75) with SP <= 23. On SP24 I'm getting repeatable 0.859 / 0.862 cold ohm values and an apparently smoother power regulation (looking at device monitor on the mod only, as I'm on the move so I can't currently use Escribe too much), which might as well just be a side effect of the higher res sampling, preventing too aggressive throttling maybe? Once back at home I'll do some more extensive testing and report back if I find anything meaningful. All in all seems quite a good step forward for now.

Hi @James just tried this on the therion 75C I used in the comparison in my previous post and I get these 1) After a couple of puffs: I=-0.156A, V=-0.037V 2) After R=SAMPLE OFFSETS: I=-0.154A, V=-0.045V I just unlocked it with the unlock sequence, then connected to Escribe and issued the commands you suggested after firing (I fired while connected to USB, for that matter). I also realized I did this with the cold ohm value manually corrected to 0.695 (as it was reported by Vaporshark DNA200) instead of the 0.676 that coil sampling would have produced. I don't know if this makes any difference and/or impairs the results in any way. If you need me to do it again with a standard sampled value for cold ohms, just let me know and I'll let the coil rest for a while and repeat...

Well, I'm pretty much confirming all of the above: 1) SP23 improved "precision" of cold ohm sampling. Note I used "precision" as what has improved is the stability (or repeatability) of the measure. If I take several samplings, I get much more consistent and similar values (barring the physiological slight increase due to the measurement slightly warming the coil) than before (where it was more jumping here and there across different back-to-back measurements) 2) SP23 doesn't seem to have improved "accuracy" of cold ohm sampling: I took the same atomizer (a TC-friendly one, with no springs, direct center-pin-to-post positive path) with a SS316L coil on the therion 75C, the vaporshark 200 and an EvolvReferenceMod 200 and you can see the output from AA here below. Keep in mind real room temperature is ~86F, so the ERM is the most accurate as far as room temperature goes. The headline is: the 75C still reads lower, _my_ therion seems to be ~ 0.024 below (instead of 0.04), but that's still enough to swing the temperature by ~60F with SS316L. Unfortunately at the moment I don't have my other 75C which is out for repair, so I couldn't put that to test as well. Oh, as a final note, manually correctly the cold ohm value on the 75C, brings the temperature value I have to use back to its normal 390/400F range, instead of the "tuned-by-taste" 475F value I need after a "real" cold ohm sampling. Here we go: EDIT: I'm sorry but I can't seem to find a way to avoid the attached screenshot being duplicated... I see each of them only once in preview, but then when I save the message they get duplicated...

For the benefit of whoever else might get tripped by this, after I sent my .ecig files to @James, he came back with a resolution that he allowed me to share here: Basically I was using a steam-engine curve for 316L that was, for some reason, missing the lowest -58F point so that the curve started at 68F (maybe something got screwed up when I downloaded the csv and imported it in escribe, I don't know). This caused noise-induced errors to the measurements performed during the initial phase of firing to fall below the minimum allowed temperature of 68F, hence the temp protect error. Replacing that TFR curve with the stock 316 that comes with escribe did indeed solve the problems. Now, using the stock profile is not mandatory, the important thing is to be sure that the curve starts well below what we consider the minimum ambient temperature we'll be vaping at, to avoid initial lower readings to be considered "out-of-range". I'm not sure I've thanked James enough for finding this out... ;-)