@wetturtle45 If you are adding 2 and 1, then which bits of each number map to a, b, c or d?

@wizzwizz4 I heard a similar urban legend alooooong time ago, except it was with a (student?) doctor, a 9 volt battery and some saline soaked bandages on each wrist. But as pointed out, it's not the voltage, it's the current that will kill you, but dry skin is a very good insulator.

I don't know about the actual grounding of planes. But what is critically important is that there is no potential between the fuel and the tanker when refueling - otherwise you get the potential for a big bang (pun intended) So the fuel tanks as a reference makes sense

The task was implemented in a manner that works. However my time has a dollar cost associated with it, and with all the other tasks performed on that project the purchase order was totally drained. So arbitrarily changing one working methodology to another one would mean working without a PO - effectively working for free. That is something I only do when there is a really compelling reason, and this doesn't even come close. And I also don't go to those sorts of parties :P

What you are suggesting is basically what AJN suggests. However in your case you are suggesting converting the data into 1 second blocks vs oversampling in order to treat the data as 1ms samples. Programmatically both approaches will end up having a similar amount of instructions. Computationally your approach could be more efficient, but that isn't a concern in my system. Numerically your approach may require variables of a smaller bit width, but again I have sufficient overhead that I can absorb AJNs approach. And finally I've already implemented it and I'm not redoing it! LOL

Now I know. It's been a really long time since I've had to work in this area so I am not familiar with the terminology. But it looks like that is the solution to my problem

@user1850479 I think I was thinking of oversampling as a physical rather than a computational operation. It looks like Andy's answer has set me straight on that

I don't have the specs handy, but more than enough to even out the sampling to make it pretend sampling at a higher speed. I'm going to call that pseudo oversampling

OK we're taking about the same thing I think

I can only run code at the sample rate. They are in lock step

Hmm .. however I could pretend that I run the code at a faster rate. EG design for a 1 ms rate and run X iterations at each code execution point, where X is the time between samples

except that my code runs at the same speed as the sample rate. Or another way the sample rate is same speed as my code execution rate. I can't process data faster than the sample rate.

@ajn that is a close summary. But basically true

@user1850479 I can't resample because my code is running in a free running system that does not execute at a uniform rate. Instead the cycle time is based on the execution code paths taken at any given time. And the sample time is in lock step with the cycle time. This is an absolute constraint that cannot be changed.

@AJN I have absolutely no control over the speed of the sampling, either in my system or in the final system. Nothing, nada, zilch, zip. Maybe I need to put that in 32 point bold font lol

@user1850479 Because I can't do that. It is inherent in the system I am dealing with. That is a absolute that cannot be changed.