LabRadar: Great Data - Terrible Implementation. (partial solution inside)

[jimbires]

I got this one , and I did get one other one that was way out of line . both of these happened just before my battery went dead .

 

[entoptics]

I actually updated my firmware awhile back, probably not long after I made the original post.

The spurious readings seems to have been greatly reduced. I still check most all of my data by running it through my spreadsheet, but since the firmware update, the difference in ES/SD of spreadsheet culled data vs the original summary data that LabRadar outputs has shrunken dramatically.

I've checked a couple dozen 5-10 shot strings since, and I'm almost to the point that I trust the LabRadar output enough to no longer bother with my spreadsheet unless I notice something obviously out of order.

 

[Gone Ballistic]

As I've mentioned numerous times, the LabRadar algorithm (and interface) is horrific. This device is technological marvel, but with a user interface and internal calculator which appears to have been designed by Elmer Fudd and Foghorn Leghorn.

A few folks have questioned my observations on the veracity of the LabRadar's canned output (i.e. set distance velocities), so I figured I'd go ahead and demonstrate the problems, and more importantly, offer a solution.

The bad news? It's not convenient.
The good news? The data the unit collects is outstanding, and with some work, can be rescued.

The issue I've documented below is spurious readings at set distances, and particularly the "V0" velocity. The unit clearly is not using the entire shot tracking record to calculate the velocity at each of the 5 distances the user can manually select. Worse, it's strongly biasing the calculation based on a couple of readings near the set distance.

To summarize the problem: The unit ignores a wealth of data, has no filters for clearly bad data, and blithely spits out a number based on a tiny fraction of the information it has at hand. This is a grievous example of "Can't see the forest for the trees", and an embarrassing "software" failure for otherwise outstanding hardware.

So...What do I mean...? See the following graphs for examples. In each graph, I've plotted the tracking information for the shot, regressed a line through the data, then used that regression to calculate the muzzle velocity (V0). As you'll see, my simple Excel spreadsheet is far superior to the built in software (firmware?) on the LabRadar unit. I took it a step further, and set up an algorithm for culling the bad readings, which cleans up the shot track and produces a robust equation for calculating the velocity at any distance along the path.

Example 1.
LabRadar V0 = 7684. Note the first bad reading has biased the idiotic LabRadar algorithm.
Unculled Regression V0 = 2828
Culled Regression V0 = 2833
Though I've renamed my rifle to 300 Win Mag Creedmoor, I'm not sure even adding Creedmoor to the name will get me 7 times the speed of sound.

View attachment 137924

View attachment 137925

Example 2.
This is where things get a little more insidious. Nobody will believe a 7700 fps V0, but if the V0 is reasonable, even if wrong, then it's far more likely to be believed.

Labradar V0 = 2864
Unculled Regression V0 = 2870
Culled Regression V0 = 2870
Difference = 6 fps
The discrepancy is due to the second reading the LabRadar got. Note that my raw and culled regression gave the same value. That's due to data density. One bad point has little effect on 100 good points. For some reason, LabRadar engineers don't seem to know this basic statistical fact...

View attachment 137926

View attachment 137927

Example 3.
Labradar V0 = 2834 fps
Regression V0 = 2865 fps
Culled Regression V0 = 2867 fps
Difference = 31 fps


View attachment 137928

View attachment 137929

For load development I put each and every shot track through my spreadsheet. Here's a summary of the last several. As you can see, in almost all cases the LabRadar overestimates ES/SD. Sometimes more nearly triple.

View attachment 137930



The firmware/software implementation for the LabRadar is a freaking war crime. How is it possible that a company that is capable of making a portable doppler chronograph couldn't put a simple linear regression algorithm into the calculation?

That being said, I freely offer my spreadsheet to anyone who wants to use it. You can open each track log (requires SD card data), and with a couple clicks and keyboard shortcuts, you can cull and view the data, and get the regressed value. It's tedious, but if you want to get all the information the LabRadar unit can provide, it's the only way I know of, short of an email/go-fund-me campaign to get the people at LabRadar to fix their product.

If demand is sufficient, I will make a video tutorial of how to use my spreadsheet. It may be a month out, as I will be traveling for the next 3 weeks.

Someone located your post and notified me where to find it as I have been experiencing this same problem with my Lab. The problem I was finding was when I used both my Magneto Speed on my pod and my Lab congruently during each shot. To rule out if one or the other was defective I borrowed another one of each and repeated the process. The MS was consistent with the other MS but the Lab showed huge amounts of deviations. Now I know why, thanks to you.

 

[entoptics]

Someone located your post and notified me where to find it as I have been experiencing this same problem with my Lab. The problem I was finding was when I used both my Magneto Speed on my pod and my Lab congruently during each shot. To rule out if one or the other was defective I borrowed another one of each and repeated the process. The MS was consistent with the other MS but the Lab showed huge amounts of deviations. Now I know why, thanks to you.

I actually updated my firmware awhile back, probably not long after I made the original post.

The spurious readings seems to have been greatly reduced. I still check most all of my data by running it through my spreadsheet, but since the firmware update, the difference in ES/SD of spreadsheet culled data vs the original summary data that LabRadar outputs has shrunken dramatically.

I've checked a couple dozen 5-10 shot strings since, and I'm almost to the point that I trust the LabRadar output enough to no longer bother with my spreadsheet unless I notice something obviously out of order.

I suggest updating your firmware if you haven't recently. This problem has been greatly reduced for me as of the post above your reply (July 2019).

This reminds me that I should check my current firmware version. There could be other improvements in the last six months.

 

[cohunt]

Lr site shows 1.1.5 and 1.2.4 as downloadable versions--- I tried to update mine and my lr shows version 1.2.2--- strange

 

[Quicksilver338]

So if there is still some discrepancy at V0 being at or close to muzzle, wouldn't grabbing velocity at say 25 yards be a more accurate source and just input the offset into your ballistics engine as to where your velocity was taken from. I know a band aid for a high dollar chronograph but looking for solutions beyond updating any firmware. Seems half the time a little downrange trueing and tweaking is needed anyway.

 

[cohunt]

Lr site shows 1.1.5 and 1.2.4 as downloadable versions--- I tried to update mine and my lr shows version 1.2.2--- strange

So LR changed the way you do firmware updates so my lr didnt do the update-- instruction book says download the update to the sd card, put it in the lr, turn the unit on and bingo

I contacted lr and they told me the sd card now has to be in the chronograph, hook it to a computer with the micro USB patch cord, download and save the update to the sd card on the lr unit while its powered on...then remove the USB cord, power it down, then power it back up again--- same idea as before but more steps and it's not in the instruction book that way

 

[Gone Ballistic]

I suggest updating your firmware if you haven't recently. This problem has been greatly reduced for me as of the post above your reply (July 2019).

This reminds me that I should check my current firmware version. There could be other improvements in the last six months.

I have updated it but the problem surfaced last week after I went out to tryout the Magneto Speed pod I purchased from Wiser Precision. This was the first time I had tried both the Lab and MS together. After borrowing one of each, thinking one of the ones I own wasn't giving correct information, I found that the Lab was the problem. If you get a chance to do what I did, you should be able to see the deviation. After spending the money for the Lab, I will be using my MS from now on as I don't trust the reported velocities it shows. I thought about digging out my old Chro-Poly and seeing how much it deviates from the same distance of my Lab. Then I remembered why I bought my Lab and ate a couple of cookies...

 

[Gone Ballistic]

So LR changed the way you do firmware updates so my lr didnt do the update-- instruction book says download the update to the sd card, put it in the lr, turn the unit on and bingo

I contacted lr and they told me the sd card now has to be in the chronograph, hook it to a computer with the micro USB patch cord, download and save the update to the sd card on the lr unit while its powered on...then remove the USB cord, power it down, then power it back up again--- same idea as before but more steps and it's not in the instruction book that way

It is a pain in the a** to download the updates and, again, I think they have taken a huge step backwards in the world of computer technology. In addition, it took me about five attempts and almost 2 hours to complete the process. I am very disappointed with them and put my Lab back in it's box and am thinking about selling it but I can't honestly sell the problem to someone else.

 

[cohunt]

I have updated it but the problem surfaced last week after I went out to tryout the Magneto Speed pod I purchased from Wiser Precision. This was the first time I had tried both the Lab and MS together. After borrowing one of each, thinking one of the ones I own wasn't giving correct information, I found that the Lab was the problem. If you get a chance to do what I did, you should be able to see the deviation. After spending the money for the Lab, I will be using my MS from now on as I don't trust the reported velocities it shows. I thought about digging out my old Chro-Poly and seeing how much it deviates from the same distance of my Lab. Then I remembered why I bought my Lab and ate a couple of cookies...

Look at it this way...your ms measures the speed at the muzzle...now tell me what the actual speed of your bullet is at 60 yards....it would be a calculation only and it would have errors
Now take the lr and tell me the bullet speed at 60 yards-- it would be way more accurate as it's actually measuring the speed at 60 yards, but the muzzle velocity is only a calculation due to the convergence angle of the radar beam vs your muzzle position--- it's a trade off one way or another--- when it comes to advanced technology the ballistics world is now using radar, but we as consumers cant afford the high end units so we get a small inconvience of a calculated mv rather than a measured one.

In the end, we all end up verifying our in field dope (or should) therefore any calculations will show up with real world numbers to verrify

Personally I can live with a calculated mv ( we did this with the old school chronographs as ww were getting speeds from 10-15yards from muzzle anyway) so I gain the convenience of not having to go downrange to set up equipment or having a possible poi shift from extra weight on the barrel)

Tit or tat really, both are probably more data than most people will ever use. Remember that a bullet is only perfect untill you pull the trigger, then life happens

 

[Gone Ballistic]

Look at it this way...your ms measures the speed at the muzzle...now tell me what the actual speed of your bullet is at 60 yards....it would be a calculation only and it would have errors
Now take the lr and tell me the bullet speed at 60 yards-- it would be way more accurate as it's actually measuring the speed at 60 yards, but the muzzle velocity is only a calculation due to the convergence angle of the radar beam vs your muzzle position--- it's a trade off one way or another--- when it comes to advanced technology the ballistics world is now using radar, but we as consumers cant afford the high end units so we get a small inconvience of a calculated mv rather than a measured one.

In the end, we all end up verifying our in field dope (or should) therefore any calculations will show up with real world numbers to verrify

Personally I can live with a calculated mv ( we did this with the old school chronographs as ww were getting speeds from 10-15yards from muzzle anyway) so I gain the convenience of not having to go downrange to set up equipment or having a possible poi shift from extra weight on the barrel)

Tit or tat really, both are probably more data than most people will ever use. Remember that a bullet is only perfect untill you pull the trigger, then life happens

Your last sentence tells all and everything else you stated above it is correct as well. To me, the Lab was very expensive. I think I was expecting too much out of what it was capable of doing but, I still think that the product owners did a poor job with a product that with a few tweaks and twitches would deliver better information and update far easier than the old school process that they are using. Their service department is like talking to a brick wall as they try to avoid any conversation about their processes.
I really appreciate your advice and information. I will use it in the next trip to my range. Thanks again!

 

[shinbone]

I've run both a Magnetospeed and a Labradar at the same time. In fact, I run both units for the two fouling shots I always fire for each load change, which is two or three times in a range session. Super easy to do, and muzzle velocities are always within 2-4 fps of one another.

After the two fouling shots, since the two units are always in agreement, I put away the MS and just use the Labradar since it doesn't affect barrel harmonics, etc.

I agree that the Labradar is great technology that could've been implemented a little better. For me, once I got past the slight learning curve, the instrument has been great.

The MS is super simple and worked perfectly straight out of the box. It messes with the barrel, though.

 

[Gone Ballistic]

I've run both a Magnetospeed and a Labradar at the same time. In fact, I run both units for the two fouling shots I always fire for each load change, which is two or three times in a range session. Super easy to do, and muzzle velocities are always within 2-4 fps of one another.

After the two fouling shots, since the two units are always in agreement, I put away the MS and just use the Labradar since it doesn't affect barrel harmonics, etc.

I agree that the Labradar is great technology that could've been implemented a little better. For me, once I got past the slight learning curve, the instrument has been great.

The MS is super simple and worked straight out of the box. It messes with the barrel, though.

You might consider purchasing the carbon fiber pod for your MS from Wiser Precision. It works great. Find it at: www.wiserprecision.com
I was able to get an update uploaded to my Lab this morning I hope will give me the same results you are experiencing.
Thanks for your reply and information!

 

[Gone Ballistic]

I've run both a Magnetospeed and a Labradar at the same time. In fact, I run both units for the two fouling shots I always fire for each load change, which is two or three times in a range session. Super easy to do, and muzzle velocities are always within 2-4 fps of one another.

After the two fouling shots, since the two units are always in agreement, I put away the MS and just use the Labradar since it doesn't affect barrel harmonics, etc.

I agree that the Labradar is great technology that could've been implemented a little better. For me, once I got past the slight learning curve, the instrument has been great.

The MS is super simple and worked perfectly straight out of the box. It messes with the barrel, though.

Thanks for your reply. I just wrote you a reply but must have hit the wrong button as I don't see it posted so I will try again.
Take a look at the carbon fiber pod that Wiser Precision makes for the Magneto Speed you can mount and adjust to any barrel length without affecting barrel harmonics. You can find it at: www.wiserprecision.com
I really appreciate your advice and I updated my Lab after it showed I was current on updates. I was advised to do it after contacting the Lab service department, which is another story I will defer from telling. Took me over 2 hours downloading to a micro card and then uploading it on my Lab. Hopefully it will give me the same results you have experienced the next trip to my range.
Thanks again for your reply and Good Shooting!