You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I forked this repo quite some time ago and started porting it to the BME688. I mainly came up with the same set of changes as you now. But when I started to compare all the constants, I noted a number of differences.
(Bosch also reads and processes a third set of coefficients).
So this stopped me from going on (there are more differences, e.g. in the array-indices, and it would need way more time to figure out where and how all those constants are used). I also ran a program with the Bosch-Code and with my code (which is almost identical to your code) and the results did not match.
All of this is not really related to the BME688, at least Bosch claims their BME68x code works with both sensors. So I wonder if the python-bme680-package has ever produced correct results or if Bosch is wrong.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I forked this repo quite some time ago and started porting it to the BME688. I mainly came up with the same set of changes as you now. But when I started to compare all the constants, I noted a number of differences.
E.g. you have
and Bosch has
(Bosch also reads and processes a third set of coefficients).
So this stopped me from going on (there are more differences, e.g. in the array-indices, and it would need way more time to figure out where and how all those constants are used). I also ran a program with the Bosch-Code and with my code (which is almost identical to your code) and the results did not match.
All of this is not really related to the BME688, at least Bosch claims their BME68x code works with both sensors. So I wonder if the python-bme680-package has ever produced correct results or if Bosch is wrong.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: