Skip to main content

ESPCLOCK4 - Deciding which direction to traverse to catch up with the present time

For more obvious cases eg. clock time is 12:05 and present time is 12:00, we don't have to think too hard to decide which direction to take the second hand to match up the two times.

However, suppose the clock time is currently 12:00, and the present time is 6:00. We can move the second hand forward 8x, or backwards 4x. Which direction will result in quicker synchronization of the 2 times?

For both directions, the number of seconds to traverse is 6 x 60 x 60 = 21600 seconds.

If we take the forward direction, the time taken to traverse half the number of seconds i.e. 10800 is 1350 seconds. However, in that time, the present time would have advanced by the same amount, so the number of seconds left to traverse would be 10800 + 1350 = 12150 seconds. If we do this iteratively, we would find the total time required to achieve synchronization is 3085 seconds, with 4 seconds left to catch up.

If we take the reverse direction, the time taken to traverse half would be 10800 / 4 = 2700 seconds. However, the present time would have advanced by the same amount, so the number of seconds left to traverse would be 10800 - 2700 = 8100 seconds. If we do this iteratively, the total time required to achieve synchronization is 4320 seconds, with 1 second left to catch up.

So in this case, traversing in the forward direction will result in  quicker synchronization.

The Python code for performing this calculation is:

def calc_sync_time(direction, duration, speedup):
  result = 0;
  while(duration > speedup*2):
    half = int(duration/2)
    interval = int(half / speedup)
    result += interval
    duration = duration - (interval * speedup) + (interval * direction)
  result += int(duration/speedup)
  print(("Fwd","Rev")[direction == -1], "=", result, duration%speedup)

fwd_duration = 7*60*60 + 2
calc_sync_time( 1, fwd_duration, 8)
calc_sync_time(-1, (12*60*60) - fwd_duration, 4)

With a little trial and eror, I can determine that the dividing line is when fwd_duration = 7*60*60+2 = 25202 eg. when clock time is 4:59:58 and needs to sync to 12:00:00. The forward and reverse timing in this case are both exactly 3600 secs i.e. exactly 1 hour. 

So in my clock logic, I can decide to move the second hand forward if fwd_duration < 25202, and go in reverse if fwd_duration >= 25202.

The logic to calculate the fwd_duration between 2 times (hh1:mm1:ss1) and (hh2:mm1:ss2) is:

d1 = (hh1*3600) + (mm1*60) + ss1; 
d2 = (hh2*3600) + (mm2*60) + ss2; 
fwd_duration = d2 - d1;
if fwd_duration < 0: fwd_duration = (12*60*60) + fwd_duration;

However, as the ULP is 16-bit, signed number range between -32767 and 32768, so the above operation is out of range (12*60*60 = 43200), unless we cook up some 32-bit integer math code.

Another way is decompose everything into even simpler operations:

def time_diff(hh1, mm1, ss1, hh2, mm2, ss2):
  ss3 = ss2 - ss1;
  if ss3 < 0:
    ss3 = ss3 + 60
    mm1 += 1
    if mm1 == 60:
      mm1 = 0
      hh1 += 1
  mm3 = mm2 - mm1
  if mm3 < 0:
    mm3 = mm3 + 60
    hh1 += 1
  if hh1 >= 12: hh1 -= 12
  hh3 = hh2 - hh1
  if hh3 < 0: hh3 = hh3 + 12
  return [hh3, mm3, ss3]

def time_less_than(hh1, mm1, ss1, hh2, mm2, ss2):
  if hh1 < hh2: return True
  if hh1 > hh2: return False
  if mm2 < mm2: return True
  if mm1 > mm2: return False
  return ss1 < ss2

print(time_diff(11, 55, 10, 0, 10, 20))

print(time_less_than(7, 0, 2, 7, 0, 2))

time_diff() is able to compute fwd_duration in [hh, mm, ss] format.

time_less_than() tells you whether one duration given in [hh, mm, ss] format is less than another. Our previous threshold of 25202 secs is [7, 0, 2] in [hh, mm, ss] format.



Popular posts from this blog

Adding "Stereo Mixer" to Windows 7 with Conexant sound card

This procedure worked for my laptop (Thinkpad E530) with a Conexant 20671 sound card, but I suspect it will work for other sound cards in the Conexant family. I was playing with CamStudio to do a video capture of a Flash-based cartoon so that I can put it on the WDTV media player and play it on the big screen in the living room for my kids. The video capture worked brilliantly, but to do a sound capture, I needed to do some hacking. Apparently, there was this recording device called "Stereo Mixer" that was pretty standard in the Windows XP days. This allowed you to capture whatever was played to the speaker in all its digital glory. Then under pressure from various organizations on the dark side of the force, Microsoft and soundcard makers starting disabling this wonderful feature from Windows Vista onwards. So after much Googling around, I found out that for most sound cards, the hardware feature is still there, just not enabled on the software side. Unfortunately, to

Hacking a USB-C to slim tip adapter cable to charge the Thinkpad T450s

This hack is inspired by this post . A year ago, I bought an adapter cable for my wife's Thinkpad X1 Carbon (2nd Gen) that allows her to power her laptop with a 60W-capable portable battery (20V x 3A). A USB-C cable goes from the battery into the adapter, which converts it to the slim tip output required by the laptop. Everything works out of the box, so I didn't give much thought about it. Recently, I decided to buy a similar cable for my Thinkpad T450s. I know technically it should work because the T450s can go as low as 45W (20V x 2.25A) in terms of charging (though I have the 65W charger - 20V x 3.25A).  I went with another adapter cable because it was cheaper and also I prefer the single cable design. So imagine my surprise when the cable came and I plugged it into my laptop and it didn't work! The power manager just cycle in and out of charging mode before giving up with an error message saying there is not enough power. After much research and reading the Thinkwiki

Using Google Dashboard to manage your Android device backup

I used to use AppBrain/Fast Web Install to keep track of which apps I have installed on my phone, and to make it easier to reinstall those apps when the phone gets wiped or replaced. But AppBrain had been going down the tubes, and Fast Web Install had always been a hit-and-miss affair. Android's own "backup to the cloud" system had previously been even more unusable. There isn't a place where you can see what has been backed up. And when you setup a new phone with your Google account, you just have to wait and pray that your favorite apps will be restored to the phone. Typically all the stars have to be aligned just right for this to happen. More often than not, after waiting for an hour or so and nothing happens, you just curse under your breath and proceed to install your favorites apps manually via the Play Store. But I just looked again recently and was pleasantly surprised that things are much more civilized now. Firstly there is a place now where you can loo