Total Ascent Values Exaggerated by 50% [Bug 29]

[Przekątny]

Mine is a V4


When I saved the activity, it adopted the calibration value that I entered manually in the morning.
and this creates these deviations which are of course more noticeable on flat routes. and are hardly noticeable on hills, mountains or short distances.

Manually entered altitude value above sea level, even if it deviates from the actual value (incorrect),
does not affect the value of ascents and descents, with the "Calibrate once" setting.

For the altimeter it does not matter what the entered value is,
the device records falls and rises based on atmospheric pressure.

The value of ascents and declines should be the same regardless of whether the altitude value above sea level is correct or incorrect.

[Domi93CH]

But changes in air pressure of meteorological origin are also considered as descent/ascent, so the satellite signal should indicate the altitude and continuously adjust the deviation. 1hPa change in pressure is then about 10m difference in altitude, but the continuous calibration doesn't work properly and therefore at the end of my skiing day today I have a deviation upwards of 150m (i.e. in the same place where I was at 1080m in the morning, it is at 1230m in the evening) and yes my calibration is on “Continuous” at FW 4.80

[Przekątny]

Continuous calibration will not work until you change the calibration settings.

[Domi93CH]

As already mentioned, I have already set it up that way and it doesn't work. or where do I have to set it? I have already set it to continuous in the altimeter settings

[Przekątny]

Checking the operation of calibration - continuous:

Set to Continuous mode
On the trip computer screen, set the Altitude and GPS Altitude fields.
Bring the device to the window.
Manually enter the height 50 m lower than the actual height and wait.
You should notice the first effect after 2 minutes (an increase of about 5 m in height.

[Domi93CH]

I did this and it don't calibrate (my FW is 4.80) what is yours?

[RickN55]

Garmin got back in touch with me and compared my Epix and 67 logs with each other and apparently there is no issue with the 67 and it is down to the recording intervals set which sounds a load of crap to me as I explained I have the same recording intervals set on my 62s and that records within a few feet ascent and descent of the Epix...

[Domi93CH]

Did these idiots at least tell you how to set the recording intervals “correctly”?

Let's see what they say about my problem with the altimeter calibration not working.


so my request again:
Take a look at your FW 6.60 to see if the automatic continuous calibration works. I suspect that it does, but adds the correction values ​​to the rise/descend sums

[RickN55]

Sorry for the trouble here but we work within a 24 working hour reply service. if there are any issues with this here please feel free to reply to me here and we can review this together and I will get back to you as soon as I can. But to give some more context here:


The first comparison point was comparing the two activity of 28th's hike with the two devices in the same spot. 
This was just comparing their elevation chart to show they were within the same readings as each other.


The second Comparison is the local walking activity you gave just showing their recorded elevation vs the local known corrections. So these devices are working and well within spec here. The troublesome point which Paris had discussed here with you is that the total ascent is higher on the GPS map due to the given settings as the section of the total ascent on the activity breakdown just records and totals all given barometer readings in a activity into one spot. Which is why it is higher on one device when compared to another if one is using a faster GPS ping method. 

As well as this if you adjust the activity itself to have its elevation corrected it will show the local known total of ascent based on known elevation data. 


So the point of issue here from what we can see from the data we have is the concern of the total ascent section of which is something I appreciate the feedback on but any requests for how this works and to be changed would need to be directed at the feedback link here due to legal reasons. 


To note as well on your comment. The naming of the settings on the epix is not the same as the 67, as naming conventions differ. But setting the 67 to the highest refresh rate is akin to setting the epix to every second recording.

[RickN55]

That was the reply I got, so because on the graph the 67 and epix are recording the same line there's nothing wrong and the recording rate on the 67 is apparently to high. But they won't answer or know WHY the 67 is giving such over inflated figures on the Ascent and Descent.

As I wrote back surely no matter what the refresh rate the 67 should still be the most accurate of them all given it's their flagship most expensive handheld GPSMAP.

So I very much doubt this issue will ever get fixed!