From Majordomo@xxx.edu Tue Mar 14 17:13:14 1995 Date: Tue, 14 Mar 95 14:15:51 GMT From: Majordomo@xxx.edu To: wrm@xxx.za Subject: Majordomo file: list 'diy_efi' file 'archive_num_60' -- >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 3 00:42:37 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA15308; Tue, 3 Jan 95 00:42:37 GMT Received: from stimpy.uleth.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA15303; Mon, 2 Jan 95 19:42:32 -0500 Received: by hg.uleth.ca (MX V4.1 VAX) id 380; Mon, 02 Jan 1995 17:42:10 MST Date: Mon, 02 Jan 1995 17:42:42 MST From: furgason@xxx.ca To: DIY_EFI Message-Id: <00989DF0.B5E64A60.380@xxx.ca> Subject: 6811HC Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI I am new to this list so I'm not aware of the ongoing conversation. I was wondering if anyone has experience with the 6811HC processor in engine management applications. I would like to develop a section on automotive computing for a digital electronics course we offer (6811HC seemed like a logical choice, if you have a better suggestion I would like to hear it) so I'm looking for sources of information (including people with experience) on algorithms, design theory, hardware etc. Any suggestions or pointers would be greatly appreciated. Dan Furgason University of Lethbridge Physics Department Lethbridge Alberta Canada >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 3 03:46:25 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA15787; Tue, 3 Jan 95 03:46:25 GMT Received: from acmex.gatech.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA15781; Mon, 2 Jan 95 22:46:22 -0500 Received: (from gt0035b@xxx.edu; Mon, 2 Jan 1995 22:46:22 -0500 From: gt0035b@xxx.edu (Henry) Message-Id: <199501030346.WAA07990@xxx.edu> Subject: Re: 6811HC To: DIY_EFI Date: Mon, 2 Jan 1995 22:46:21 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <00989DF0.B5E64A60.380@xxx.ca" at Jan 2, 95 05:42:42 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 462 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Hey again I saw a picture in a hc11 textbook once and it was labeled " a hc11 in an automtive aplication by GM" the picture was off a GM fuel injection computer. Henry Sommer | gt0035b@xxx.edu | Georgia Institute of Technology _________________________________________________________________________ Formula SAE Mailing list | send mail to fsae-request@xxx.edu fsae@xxx.edu | with the subject of subscribe and no body >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 3 18:21:45 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA22156; Tue, 3 Jan 95 18:21:45 GMT Received: from steadfast.teradyne.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA22151; Tue, 3 Jan 95 13:21:34 -0500 Received: from donatello.ICD.Teradyne.COM by steadfast.teradyne.com (5.0/SMI-4.1/jxh941019) id AA14155; Tue, 3 Jan 1995 13:16:44 -0500 Received: from midnight.icd.teradyne.com by donatello.ICD.Teradyne.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/TER-1.43/donatello-1.6) id AA25692; Tue, 3 Jan 95 13:20:56 EST Date: Tue, 3 Jan 95 13:20:56 EST From: benagh@xxx.com (Jeff Benagh ) Message-Id: <9501031820.AA25692@xxx.COM> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: 6811HC Content-Length: 850 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > I am new to this list so I'm not aware of the ongoing conversation. > I was wondering if anyone has experience with the 6811HC processor in > engine management applications. > > I would like to develop a section on automotive computing for a digital > electronics course we offer (6811HC seemed like a logical choice, if you have > a better suggestion I would like to hear it) so I'm looking for sources of > information (including people with experience) on algorithms, design theory, > hardware etc. Any suggestions or pointers would be greatly appreciated. At some point, someone posted the Eagle/Mitsu Talon/Eclipse 68HC11 code to the eagle talon list. I have hard copies but no copies to mail. Try sending mail to talon@xxx. Note that the code is probably under copyright protection. Jeff >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 3 19:46:24 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA23570; Tue, 3 Jan 95 19:46:24 GMT Received: from steadfast.teradyne.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA23565; Tue, 3 Jan 95 14:46:17 -0500 Received: from donatello.ICD.Teradyne.COM by steadfast.teradyne.com (5.0/SMI-4.1/jxh941019) id AA15507; Tue, 3 Jan 1995 14:40:00 -0500 Received: from midnight.icd.teradyne.com by donatello.ICD.Teradyne.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/TER-1.43/donatello-1.6) id AA26700; Tue, 3 Jan 95 14:44:12 EST Date: Tue, 3 Jan 95 14:44:12 EST From: benagh@xxx.com (Jeff Benagh ) Message-Id: <9501031944.AA26700@xxx.COM> To: DIY_EFI, eric0019@xxx.edu Subject: Talon List Content-Length: 238 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Ryan is indeed correct. The talon list is at: talon-list@xxx.com At least it was in 1992 when I got the message. I switched accounts since I got the stuff. I only have it in hard copy. I'm not willing to do the data entry. Jeff >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 3 20:42:40 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA24081; Tue, 3 Jan 95 20:42:40 GMT Received: from oasys.dt.navy.mil by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA24076; Tue, 3 Jan 95 15:42:36 -0500 Received: from dtnet7-95.dt.navy.mil by oasys.dt.navy.mil (5.61/oasys.dt.navy.mil) id AA26396; Tue, 3 Jan 95 15:42:35 EST Message-Id: <9501032042.AA26396@xxx.mil> X-Sender: paraska@xxx.mil X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 03 Jan 1995 15:42:35 -0500 To: DIY_EFI From: paraska@xxx.mil (Pete Paraska) Subject: Re: Talon List Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI >Ryan is indeed correct. > >The talon list is at: > >talon-list@xxx.com That's old info. As a lurker, I'm happy to finally post something! The Talon list info is: Submissions: talon@xxx.com Administratia: majordomo@xxx.com (send the word "help" in a message body) Home Page URL: http://www.di.com/talon.html Gopher: ccat.sas.upenn.edu:1990 FTP Archives: ftp.di.com:/pub/talon Digest back issues are available for anonymous FTP at ftp.di.com in the directory /pub/talon/digests. This is a great list BTW. Later, ~~~~ Pete (paraska@xxx.mil) /\ IZCC#15 /\ Laurel,Maryland~~~~ >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 3 21:05:26 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA24305; Tue, 3 Jan 95 21:05:26 GMT Received: from linus.mitre.org by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA24300; Tue, 3 Jan 95 16:05:23 -0500 Received: from vlsi (vlsi.mitre.org [129.83.12.2]) by linus.mitre.org (8.6.7/RCF-6S) with SMTP id QAA07222 for ; Tue, 3 Jan 1995 16:05:22 -0500 Received: from zermatt.mitre.org by vlsi (5.61/MITRE-SS2) id AA05031; Tue, 3 Jan 95 16:05:20 -0500 Received: by zermatt.mitre.org (5.61/RCF-4C) id AA07222; Tue, 3 Jan 95 16:05:19 -0500 Message-Id: <9501032105.AA07222@xxx.org> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: Talon List In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 03 Jan 95 14:44:12 EST." <9501031944.AA26700@xxx.COM> Date: Tue, 03 Jan 95 16:05:18 EST From: "Roberto L. Landrau" Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI >Ryan is indeed correct. >The talon list is at: >talon-list@xxx.com No! Please do NOT send any mail to that address. Send your messages to talon@xxx.com >At least it was in 1992 when I got the message. talon-list is (or was) reserved for the manager. Individual messages should go to talon@xxx.com Here is the "official propaganda" To subscribe to the "live feed", send the word "subscribe" in the body of a message to talon-request@xxx. If you would like a daily digest, send "subscribe" to talon-digest-request@xxx. If you are having trouble and would like to talk to a human, send mail to today@xxx. I have an archive of a lot of the old messages. They are available for anonymous ftp from di.com in /pub/talon. You may also send me a formatted IBM or Macintosh disk with return postage and self-addressed envelope and I will snail-mail it back to you. Don't forget to check out our home page http://www.di.com/talon.html Have fun! Todd Day, Moderator today@xxx.com -------- Roberto L. Landrau landrau@xxx.org The MITRE Corporation rll@xxx.org Bedford, MA 01730 rll@xxx.UUCP >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 4 00:45:00 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA25031; Wed, 4 Jan 95 00:45:00 GMT Received: from mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA25026; Tue, 3 Jan 95 19:44:57 -0500 Received: from biscuit-tin.ee.mu.OZ.AU by mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU with SMTP id AA03383 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Wed, 4 Jan 1995 10:44:50 +1000 unauthenticated (rfc931-sender: unauthenticated@xxx.AU) From: robert joseph dingli Received: (dingli@xxx.edu; Wed, 4 Jan 1995 11:43:33 +1100 Message-Id: <199501040043.LAA18975@xxx.AU> Subject: New member intro To: DIY_EFI (DIY_EFI ) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 11:43:32 +1100 (EST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 899 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Hi everyone, My name is Robert Dingli from the University of Melbourne, Australia. As a hobby, some friends of mine and I have developed a programmable EFI/ignition system which is now at small scale production stage. I run the system on my 1974 Daimler Sovereign (XJ6) and have installed them on many other cars (mainly 4 cylider and rotaries). I'm interested in hearing what others have done in the field. Robert -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Dingli r.dingli@xxx.au Power and Control Systems Thermodynamics Research Lab Electrical Engineering Mechanical Engineering (+613) 344 7966 (+613) 344 6728 University of Melbourne, Parkville, 3052, Victoria, AUSTRALIA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 4 13:42:43 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA27738; Wed, 4 Jan 95 13:42:43 GMT Received: from mtu.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA27733; Wed, 4 Jan 95 08:42:40 -0500 Received: from rock.me.mtu.edu.mtu.edu (rock.me.mtu.edu [141.219.25.31]) by mtu.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA07698 for ; Wed, 4 Jan 1995 08:42:39 -0500 From: Mark Shirley X-Authentication-Warning: mtu.edu: Host rock.me.mtu.edu claimed to be rock.me.mtu.edu.mtu.edu Received: by rock.me.mtu.edu.mtu.edu (4.1) id AA10117; Wed, 4 Jan 95 08:42:35 EST Message-Id: <9501041342.AA10117@xxx.edu> Subject: Re: 6811HC To: DIY_EFI Date: Wed, 4 Jan 95 8:42:35 EST In-Reply-To: <9501031820.AA25692@xxx.COM>; from "Jeff Benagh" at Jan 3, 95 1:20 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI I know that several aftermarket ECM's such as the ACCEL./DFI unit use the 68HC11, and the ACCEL unit can do just about anything you would need. Mark >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 4 17:41:05 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA29666; Wed, 4 Jan 95 17:41:05 GMT Received: from beach.silcom.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA29653; Wed, 4 Jan 95 12:40:55 -0500 Received: from bbfm.di.com by Beach.silcom.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA11753; Wed, 4 Jan 95 09:42:14 PST Received: from tune.di.com (tune.di.com [204.74.64.2]) by bbfm.di.com (8.6.9/TD-1.1) with SMTP id JAA14572 for ; Wed, 4 Jan 1995 09:41:34 -0800 Message-Id: <199501041741.JAA14572@xxx.com> X-Sender: today@xxx.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 04 Jan 1995 09:41:02 -0800 To: DIY_EFI From: today@xxx.com (Todd Day) Subject: Re: 6811HC Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI >At some point, someone posted the Eagle/Mitsu Talon/Eclipse 68HC11 code to >the eagle talon list. I have hard copies but no copies to mail. I better jump on this one before it gets out of control. The DSM ecu's do not use the 68HC11. It is a custom processor. Further, I never posted code, but did post a uuencoded dump of the EPROM. The address for the list is talon-digest-request@xxx. -todd- Todd Day today@xxx.com >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 4 18:20:08 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA00131; Wed, 4 Jan 95 18:20:08 GMT Received: from JULIET.WX.LL.MIT.EDU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA00125; Wed, 4 Jan 95 13:19:42 -0500 Received: from fuelrod ([129.55.57.2]) by juliet.ll.mit.edu id AA06996g; Wed, 4 Jan 95 13:24:28 EST Received: from isotope.reactor by fuelrod (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03978; Wed, 4 Jan 95 11:18:43 MST Date: Wed, 4 Jan 95 11:18:42 MST From: jvp%fuelrod@xxx.edu ( Jim Pieronek) Message-Id: <9501041818.AA03978@fuelrod> Received: by isotope.reactor (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17223; Wed, 4 Jan 95 11:22:27 MST To: DIY_EFI Subject: Hall Effect Gear Tooth Sensor Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Can anyone give me a source for a Hall Effect Sensor for detecting the teeth on a ring gear? Any advice or experience on mounting and using such a sensor would be appreciated also. Jim >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 4 15:05:14 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA29666; Wed, 4 Jan 95 17:41:05 GMT Received: from beach.silcom.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA29653; Wed, 4 Jan 95 12:40:55 -0500 Received: from bbfm.di.com by Beach.silcom.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA11753; Wed, 4 Jan 95 09:42:14 PST Received: from tune.di.com (tune.di.com [204.74.64.2]) by bbfm.di.com (8.6.9/TD-1.1) with SMTP id JAA14572 for ; Wed, 4 Jan 1995 09:41:34 -0800 Message-Id: <199501041741.JAA14572@xxx.com> X-Sender: today@xxx.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 04 Jan 1995 09:41:02 -0800 To: DIY_EFI From: today@xxx.com (Todd Day) Subject: Re: 6811HC Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI >At some point, someone posted the Eagle/Mitsu Talon/Eclipse 68HC11 code to >the eagle talon list. I have hard copies but no copies to mail. I better jump on this one before it gets out of control. The DSM ecu's do not use the 68HC11. It is a custom processor. Further, I never posted code, but did post a uuencoded dump of the EPROM. The address for the list is talon-digest-request@xxx. -todd- Todd Day today@xxx.com >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 4 15:20:14 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA00131; Wed, 4 Jan 95 18:20:08 GMT Received: from JULIET.WX.LL.MIT.EDU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA00125; Wed, 4 Jan 95 13:19:42 -0500 Received: from fuelrod ([129.55.57.2]) by juliet.ll.mit.edu id AA06996g; Wed, 4 Jan 95 13:24:28 EST Received: from isotope.reactor by fuelrod (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03978; Wed, 4 Jan 95 11:18:43 MST Date: Wed, 4 Jan 95 11:18:42 MST From: jvp%fuelrod@xxx.edu ( Jim Pieronek) Message-Id: <9501041818.AA03978@fuelrod> Received: by isotope.reactor (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17223; Wed, 4 Jan 95 11:22:27 MST To: DIY_EFI Subject: Hall Effect Gear Tooth Sensor Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Can anyone give me a source for a Hall Effect Sensor for detecting the teeth on a ring gear? Any advice or experience on mounting and using such a sensor would be appreciated also. Jim >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 4 23:47:21 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA05207; Wed, 4 Jan 95 23:47:21 GMT Received: from pine.cse.nau.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA05202; Wed, 4 Jan 95 18:47:18 -0500 Received: (from met@xxx.edu; Wed, 4 Jan 1995 16:39:04 -0700 Message-Id: <199501042339.QAA20221@xxx.edu> From: met@xxx.edu (MTN-KAT) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 16:39:03 -0700 In-Reply-To: jvp%fuelrod@xxx.edu ( Jim Pieronek) "Hall Effect Gear Tooth Sensor" (Jan 4, 11:18am) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: Hall Effect Gear Tooth Sensor Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI I mounted my flywheel on a rotary table on a vertical mill and installed 8 magnets. I am using some Hall sensors that are Unipolar, they are made by Panasonic and I got them from Digi-Key. I don't know that you'd be able to magnetize the ring-gear teeth in a uniform manner that would result in all of the teeth having the proper polarity. I had considered using an LED transmitter/receiver unit gating through the ring-gear, problem would be keeping the optics clean. As far as mounting the sensor goes, I just carved up a chunk of acrylic and ran the leads through it. I left ears that have screw clearance holes that correspond to the tapped holes in the engine to bellhousing plate that I cut. Millam >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 5 01:06:34 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA05341; Thu, 5 Jan 95 01:06:34 GMT Received: from naitgate.nait.ab.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA05336; Wed, 4 Jan 95 20:06:29 -0500 Received: by naitgate.nait.ab.ca (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA28675; Wed, 4 Jan 1995 18:02:32 -0700 Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 18:02:32 -0700 (MST) From: Grant Beattie Subject: Re: Hall Effect Gear Tooth Sensor To: Jim Pieronek Cc: DIY_EFI In-Reply-To: <9501041818.AA03978@fuelrod> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI On Wed, 4 Jan 1995, Jim Pieronek wrote: > Can anyone give me a source for a Hall Effect Sensor for detecting the > teeth on a ring gear? Any advice or experience on mounting and using > such a sensor would be appreciated also. I'm no expert on this, but ELECTRO has a whole pile of things called VRS sensors, digital sensors and proximity sensors that are used for producing either square pulses or sine waves in response to gear teeth wizzing by. Their catalog seems quite complete and has applications info too. Electro Corp. 1845 - 57th Street Sarasota, FL 34243 voice: 813-355-8411 fax: 813-355-3120 Grant Beattie >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 5 06:21:11 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA07053; Thu, 5 Jan 95 06:21:11 GMT Received: from curly.cc.swin.edu.au by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA07048; Thu, 5 Jan 95 01:21:02 -0500 Received: from romulus.mm.swin.edu.au by curly.cc.swin.edu.au (5.65c/1.34) id AA03318; Thu, 5 Jan 1995 17:20:50 +1100 Received: From MECHMAN/WORKQUEUE by romulus.mm.swin.edu.au via Charon-4.0-VROOM with IPX id 100.950105172025.384; 05 Jan 95 17:20:52 -1100 Message-Id: To: DIY_EFI From: "A.DENNISON -EN320/TEL.8296" Organization: Swinburne University Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 17:20:22 EST-11 Subject: Re: Hall Effect Gear Tooth Sensor Priority: normal X-Mailer: WinPMail v1.0 (R1) Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI On Wed, 4 Jan 1995, Jim Pieronek wrote: > Can anyone give me a source for a Hall Effect Sensor for detecting > the teeth on a ring gear? Any advice or experience on mounting and > using such a sensor would be appreciated also. I would use an inductive pickup. These are used on most EFI cars and are also available from other sources. These sensors produce an AC signal which you could interface to a uP with an NPN and a few resistors: VCC | \ / Rc \ |---- To uP input Rin C -/\/\--- B BC548, etc. | | E | | | Sensor Cb --- | | --- | |________|___| GND The RC time constant on the input filters out some sensor noise. All values are arbitrary. Try: Rc = 4k7 Rin = 10k Cin = 0.1uF You could use a comparitor with hysteresis if you want but this should work OK. You can interface RS232 in the same way if you want if you don't want to waste space on a MAX232 and associated caps. I hope this helps.... Andrew ------------------------------------ Andrew Dennison - Research Associate The CIM Centre Melbourne, AUSTRALIA Phone: +61 3 214 8296 Fax: +61 3 214 4949 WWW: http://cim.mm.swin.edu.au/welcome.html >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 5 18:52:59 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA10524; Thu, 5 Jan 95 18:52:59 GMT Received: from eehpx21.cen.uiuc.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA10510; Thu, 5 Jan 95 13:52:55 -0500 Received: by eehpx21.cen.uiuc.edu id AA29740 (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for DIY_EFI@xxx.edu); Thu, 5 Jan 1995 12:49:33 -0600 Message-Id: <199501051849.AA29740@xxx.edu> Subject: Re: Hall Effect Gear Tooth Sensor To: DIY_EFI Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 12:49:33 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <9501041818.AA03978@fuelrod> from "Jim Pieronek" at Jan 4, 95 11:18:42 am From: Jay Monkman X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 543 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Previously Jim Pieronek babbled: > > Can anyone give me a source for a Hall Effect Sensor for detecting the > teeth on a ring gear? Any advice or experience on mounting and using > such a sensor would be appreciated also. Allegro seems to make some nice ones (we have some, but haven't used them yet) Their number is 1-508-ALLEGRO. Jay Monkman The truth knocks on the door and you say "Go away, I'm monkman@xxx. - from _Zen_and_the_Art_of_Motorcycle_Maintenance_ >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 5 18:59:34 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA10735; Thu, 5 Jan 95 18:59:34 GMT Received: from eehpx21.cen.uiuc.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA10730; Thu, 5 Jan 95 13:59:31 -0500 Received: by eehpx21.cen.uiuc.edu id AA29778 (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for DIY_EFI@xxx.edu); Thu, 5 Jan 1995 12:56:10 -0600 Message-Id: <199501051856.AA29778@xxx.edu> Subject: Re: Hall Effect Gear Tooth Sensor To: DIY_EFI Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 12:56:10 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <199501042339.QAA20221@xxx.edu> from "MTN-KAT" at Jan 4, 95 04:39:03 pm From: Jay Monkman X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 785 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Previously MTN-KAT babbled: > I don't know that you'd be able to magnetize the ring-gear teeth in a uniform > manner that would result in all of the teeth having the proper polarity. Is that really necessary? I was looking through Allegro's application notes, and they showed a hall-effect sensor between a metal gear and a magnet. I didn't see any mention of the gear being magnetized. I tested it sort of. I used a magnet, the sensor, and a small screw. I could see the signal change as I moved the screw over the sensor. I hope that we won't need to magnetize the gear. Jay Monkman The truth knocks on the door and you say "Go away, I'm monkman@xxx. - from _Zen_and_the_Art_of_Motorcycle_Maintenance_ >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 5 20:23:13 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA11473; Thu, 5 Jan 95 20:23:13 GMT Received: from gw1.att.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA11468; Thu, 5 Jan 95 15:23:10 -0500 Received: from uscbu.ih.att.com by ig1.att.att.com id AA06051; Thu, 5 Jan 95 14:22:32 EST Received: by uscbu.ih.att.com (4.1/EMS-1.1.1 SunOS) id AA22216; Thu, 5 Jan 95 13:20:34 CST Received: from usgp1.ih.att.com by uscbu.ih.att.com (4.1/EMS-1.1.1 SunOS) id AA22035; Thu, 5 Jan 95 13:19:58 CST Received: by usgp1.ih.att.com (5.0/EMS-1.1 Sol2) id AA06166; Thu, 5 Jan 1995 13:24:01 +0600 Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 13:24:01 +0600 Message-Id: <9501051924.AA06166@xxx.com> From: bohdan@xxx.com (Bohdan L Bodnar) To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: Hall Effect Gear Tooth Sensor Content-Type: text Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Huh? Magnetization of gear teeth for "proper polarity"? You guys better read up on the Hall Effect. All that is required is something which will block/unblock a magnetic field (i.e., something that is ferromagnetic). Sze's SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE PHYSICS is a good starting place...and it's readable, too! Back to drinking coffee... Bohdan >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 5 20:42:48 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA11662; Thu, 5 Jan 95 20:42:48 GMT Received: from JULIET.WX.LL.MIT.EDU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA11657; Thu, 5 Jan 95 15:42:45 -0500 Received: from fuelrod ([129.55.57.2]) by juliet.ll.mit.edu id AA15874g; Thu, 5 Jan 95 15:47:40 EST Received: from isotope.reactor by fuelrod (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04602; Thu, 5 Jan 95 13:41:53 MST Date: Thu, 5 Jan 95 13:41:53 MST From: jvp%fuelrod@xxx.edu ( Jim Pieronek) Message-Id: <9501052041.AA04602@fuelrod> Received: by isotope.reactor (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17311; Thu, 5 Jan 95 13:45:40 MST To: DIY_EFI In-Reply-To: <199501051856.AA29778@xxx.edu> Subject: Re: Hall Effect Gear Tooth Sensor Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Jay Monkman writes: > Previously MTN-KAT babbled: > > > I don't know that you'd be able to magnetize the ring-gear teeth in a uniform > > manner that would result in all of the teeth having the proper polarity. > > Is that really necessary? I was looking through Allegro's application > notes, and they showed a hall-effect sensor between a metal gear and > a magnet. The following bizarre ASCII-gram shows the way the sensors are usually used. A magnet (MM) is slapped right on the face of the sensor (HH) and a ferrous metal clip ("|+-") is routed from the other face of the magnet to make a gap in the vicinity of the other side of the sensor. As the ferrous teeth (Fe) of the gear pass by the gap they "complete" the magnetic circuit which increases the flux through the sensor. A similar arrangement is used for distributor sensors. FeFe FeFeFe +----- FeFeFeFe |MMHH- FeFeFe FeFe Fe FeFe FeFeFe FeFeFeFe FeFeFe I thought I had seen sensors that had the magnet built in and the whole thing was encapsulated in a threaded tube about 3/8" in diameter. The gap was visible at one end of the tube, and wires came from the other end. You just screwed the thing into an appropriate hole, being careful to orient the gap correctly, and tighten a control nut behind it to hold it in place. Anyone else seen such a thing? Do I need to have my medication changed again? Jim >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 5 21:57:36 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA12380; Thu, 5 Jan 95 21:57:36 GMT Received: from stimpy.uleth.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA12375; Thu, 5 Jan 95 16:57:31 -0500 Received: by hg.uleth.ca (MX V4.1 VAX) id 104; Thu, 05 Jan 1995 14:26:02 MST Date: Thu, 05 Jan 1995 14:26:45 MST From: furgason@xxx.ca To: DIY_EFI Message-Id: <0098A030.D4EE96A0.104@xxx.ca> Subject: hall effect Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI I have seen a test tach for diesel engines which I always assumed was a Hall effect sensor. You just hold it up to the teeth on a rotating flywheel and it works. If it is important, I'll chase the info. Dan Furgason >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 5 23:56:42 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA12971; Thu, 5 Jan 95 23:56:42 GMT Received: from shiva.trl.OZ.AU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA12966; Thu, 5 Jan 95 18:56:03 -0500 Received: by shiva.trl.OZ.AU id AA14486 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for DIY_EFI@xxx.edu); Fri, 6 Jan 1995 10:55:40 +1100 From: Craig Pugsley Message-Id: <199501052355.AA14486@xxx.AU> Subject: Re: New member intro To: DIY_EFI Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 10:55:39 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: <199501040043.LAA18975@xxx.AU> from "robert joseph dingli" at Jan 4, 95 11:43:32 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1604 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Robert, > My name is Robert Dingli from the University of Melbourne, Australia. > As a hobby, some friends of mine and I have developed a programmable > EFI/ignition system which is now at small scale production stage. I > run the system on my 1974 Daimler Sovereign (XJ6) and have installed > them on many other cars (mainly 4 cylider and rotaries). > > I'm interested in hearing what others have done in the field. Good to have another melbournite on board! (I work at Telecom Research near monash uni). Please tell us more about your injection computer! It seems you are one of the first people on this mailing list to get something up and going. What processor are you using? 68HC11? 8051? What method are you using, speed density (MAP sensor based), or with an airflow sensor of some description (trapdoor, hot wire, karman vortex). Tell us a bit about your algorithms, as this is always a talking point here. I'm currently designing an ECU based on the 8051 family (80C552 to be precise), supposedly this chip was used in the bathurst skyline GTRs. My application is rotary turbos/peripheral ports so I plan on using speed-density, combined with throttle position for the peripheral ports (very little vacuum in a peri-port with more than about 1/4 throttle, and air flow sensors cost too much, unless I can make one). I have some measurements of an aftermarket ECUs performace if you're interested. Incidentally, has anyone else out there got a design to make a hot wire or karman vortex sensor? I wouldn't imagine hot wire would be overly difficult. Cheers, Craig. pugsley@xxx.au >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 6 00:32:26 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA13018; Fri, 6 Jan 95 00:32:26 GMT Received: from mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA13013; Thu, 5 Jan 95 19:32:21 -0500 Received: from biscuit-tin.ee.mu.OZ.AU by mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU with SMTP id AA24251 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 6 Jan 1995 10:31:49 +1000 unauthenticated (rfc931-sender: unauthenticated@xxx.AU) From: robert joseph dingli Received: (dingli@xxx.edu; Fri, 6 Jan 1995 11:30:12 +1100 Message-Id: <199501060030.LAA20720@xxx.AU> Subject: Crank position sensors To: DIY_EFI (DIY_EFI ) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 11:30:10 +1100 (EST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 4040 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Hi everyone, I'm hoping that my first semi technical post will clear a few misunderstandings that I personally went through about two years ago. The computer I've made for my Daimler has been tested and will operate from the following distributor/crank pickups : a) neg side of coil (as for a tacho) b) optical pickup in dizzy c) OEM inductive pickup in dizzy d) hall effect pickup on crank e) digital output inductive pickup on crank f) analogue output inductive pickup on crank Firstly, fuelling control is MUCH simpler than ignition control since the user cannot normally tell if the fuelling misses a beat while a missed ignition event is very noticable. For any beginners, I'd recommend toying with fuel only control initially (and prefferably on a cheap four cylinder that you don't mind destroying at some stage). Secondly, sequential injection only benefits over parallel injection for idle and low load conditions where the injector duty cycle is relatively low. A typical high performance system will be operating near 100% duty cycle at full load at high revs. I have opted for a twin bank system as a comprimise, mainly to minimise the fuel rail pressure drops as the injectors open. Sequential injection also requires much more programming and hardware given that the HC11 only has 4 OC outputs. Sequential injection also require a half crank speed sensor from the cams or distributor and thus another input. For a fuel only system, it's hard to beat a tacho like coil trigger as these can be made to be very immune to noise. One must be careful to fully protect the digital electronics from the 400V spikes that will enter the ECU and to carefully lay the PCB to minimise noise problems internally. The optical pickup in the dizzy works well for fuelling and ignition control. The OEM inductive pickup in the distributor, as used in many Japanese systems (made by Nippondenso), uses a 24 tooth wheel spinning in front of an inductive pickup. With some careful grinding this wheel can be modified to any configuration required. The hall effect sensors I've encountered require a magnetised thingy spinning past them and have thus been dumped as a useful choice. Inductive pickups just require some ferrous metal to whiz past to get them all excited. They do tend to pickup noise and can be over sensitive if used incorrectly but are my final choice for cars which don't have OEM inductive dizzy distributor pickups to modify. One important point is that the spinning disk should have the trigger points sticking out rather than holes (which I know are easier to machine). This make them much more immune to noise. Forget digital output inductive pickups as you will want to have control over the input filtering and sensitivity of the input signal before it enters the digital phase of the circuit. They tend to be hyper sensitive to noise and minor irregularities in the toothed disk (esp. runout). The bigger the analogue sensor the better. I recommend a Bosch, Delco or similar unit as OEM sensors tend to be much tougher than the stuff sold through convential elecrtronic suppliers. Oh yes, and don't forget to through out those solid core ignition leads. I hope this helps. Since my unit is now in commercial production I can't download code or schematics but will be very happy to answer any questions. :-) There are about 10 aftermarket systems available here, mostly made in Australia with one from the US that I know of and one from New Zealand. I'd like to find out what's available in other parts of the world. Robert ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Dingli r.dingli@xxx.au Power and Control Systems Thermodynamics Research Lab Electrical Engineering Mechanical Engineering (+613) 344 7966 (+613) 344 6728 University of Melbourne, Parkville, 3052, Victoria, AUSTRALIA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 6 01:33:11 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA13139; Fri, 6 Jan 95 01:33:11 GMT Received: from mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA13134; Thu, 5 Jan 95 20:33:07 -0500 Received: from biscuit-tin.ee.mu.OZ.AU by mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU with SMTP id AA25788 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 6 Jan 1995 11:33:01 +1000 unauthenticated (rfc931-sender: unauthenticated@xxx.AU) From: robert joseph dingli Received: (dingli@xxx.6) id MAA20962; Fri, 6 Jan 1995 12:31:29 +1100 Message-Id: <199501060131.MAA20962@xxx.AU> Subject: Re: New member intro To: DIY_EFI Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 12:31:25 +1100 (EST) Cc: DIY_EFI (DIY_EFI ) In-Reply-To: <199501052355.AA14486@xxx.AU> from "Craig Pugsley" at Jan 6, 95 10:55:39 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 3119 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Hi Craig et al. > Please tell us more about your injection computer! It seems you are one > of the first people on this mailing list to get something up and going. > What processor are you using? 68HC11? 8051? What method are you using, > speed density (MAP sensor based), or with an airflow sensor of some > description (trapdoor, hot wire, karman vortex). Tell us a bit about your > algorithms, as this is always a talking point here. Our system is based on, you guessed it, a HC11. I originally used an E2 chip with 2K of EEPROM which was very convenient but the 2K became restrictive and now are using an E9 with 12K (UV EPROM for testing and OTPROM for production). The beauty of both versions is that they come with a security option which is very important for commercial applications. The system uses the traditional Bosch style speed-density lookup table approach which is clearly described in their little red electronics handbook. I use manifold pressure as a load signal for most applications that use intake plenums except rotaries which tend to have poor vacuum signals. Throttle position is used otherwise. The system can be switched between manifold pressure or throttle position based acceleration enrichment. > I'm currently designing an ECU based on the 8051 family (80C552 to be > precise), supposedly this chip was used in the bathurst skyline GTRs. > My application is rotary turbos/peripheral ports so I plan on using > speed-density, combined with throttle position for the peripheral ports > (very little vacuum in a peri-port with more than about 1/4 throttle, > and air flow sensors cost too much, unless I can make one). I have some > measurements of an aftermarket ECUs performace if you're interested. We've converted many a rotary including road reg RX2's,3's,4's and 7's, rally cars, sport sedans, club racers, Super seven replicas, six ports, brigdes ports, turbos etc. A current project is a triple rotor 20B twin turbo going into a heavily modified 323 drag car. 450 HP and 600 kg should be a lethal combination. I'd appreciate any info on available ECUs. > Incidentally, has anyone else out there got a design to make a hot wire > or karman vortex sensor? I wouldn't imagine hot wire would be overly > difficult. I wouldn't bother. The last thing you would want to do is remake a part that can be bought off the shelf. Air mass flow measurement systems have no benefit over speed-density systems except for OEM production where the air mass flow sensor can compensate somewhat for production tolerances. They are expensive, fragile and require more complex calibration. > Cheers, > Craig. Robert -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Dingli r.dingli@xxx.au Power and Control Systems Thermodynamics Research Lab Electrical Engineering Mechanical Engineering (+613) 344 7966 (+613) 344 6728 University of Melbourne, Parkville, 3052, Victoria, AUSTRALIA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 6 04:21:04 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA14025; Fri, 6 Jan 95 04:21:04 GMT Received: from jsun.agen.okstate.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA14020; Thu, 5 Jan 95 23:21:00 -0500 Received: by jsun.agen.okstate.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA11111; Thu, 5 Jan 95 22:24:31 CST Date: Thu, 5 Jan 95 22:24:31 CST From: gcouger@xxx.edu (Gordon Couger) Message-Id: <9501060424.AA11111@xxx.edu> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: New member intro Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI What does your setup cost for an R7 Mazda 1980 model? thanks Gordon >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 6 05:27:35 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA14207; Fri, 6 Jan 95 05:27:35 GMT Received: from mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA14202; Fri, 6 Jan 95 00:27:30 -0500 Received: from biscuit-tin.ee.mu.OZ.AU by mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU with SMTP id AA03167 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 6 Jan 1995 15:27:26 +1000 unauthenticated (rfc931-sender: unauthenticated@xxx.AU) From: robert joseph dingli Received: (dingli@xxx.edu; Fri, 6 Jan 1995 16:25:53 +1100 Message-Id: <199501060525.QAA21288@xxx.AU> Subject: RX 7 efi To: DIY_EFI Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 16:25:46 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: <9501060424.AA11111@xxx.edu> from "Gordon Couger" at Jan 5, 95 10:24:31 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1678 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Hi Gordon > What does your setup cost for an R7 Mazda 1980 model? Since I don't know where you come from, I'll give you prices in Australian dollars (Aus$1 = US$0.75) neglecting any import duties or taxes for the place where you live. I presume that your '80 model is carburetted. I'd recommend buying a 13B 6 port injected motor with injectors and manifolding. Failing that, you can use twin throttle body inlet trumpets with injector mounting holes that bolt onto Weber down draught inlet manifolds. You'll also need a surge tank as well as the usual EFI plumbing and pump. None of this comes with the system. The system includes: ECU detachable hand controller wiring loom temperature sensors injector connectors Price : $1500 Options include: ignition amp for ignition control (two, three or four coils) ~$200 crank pickup (req for ignition control) ~$100 external oxy meter (exhaust gas oxygen rich/lean meter) ~$75 A typical injection system usually costs about double the price of a second hand Jap engine here. There are also emissions laws to think about. I hope this doesn't scare you away. :-) I will give a full description to the group some time. Robert -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Dingli r.dingli@xxx.au Power and Control Systems Thermodynamics Research Lab Electrical Engineering Mechanical Engineering (+613) 344 7966 (+613) 344 6728 University of Melbourne, Parkville, 3052, Victoria, AUSTRALIA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 6 14:38:23 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA16527; Fri, 6 Jan 95 14:38:23 GMT Received: from geni10.arl.mil by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA16522; Fri, 6 Jan 95 09:38:20 -0500 Received: by lamp0.arl.army.mil (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA06418; Fri, 6 Jan 1995 09:38:12 -0500 Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 09:38:12 -0500 Message-Id: <9501061438.AA06418@xxx.mil> X-Sender: faustini@xxx.mil Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: r.dingli@xxx.au From: faustini@xxx.mil (Lou Faustini) Subject: EFI and Accidents... Cc: DIY_EFI X-Mailer: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Hello! I couldn't help but notice in one of you're messages you said to try and experiment on a "cheap 4-cyl" that you don't mind blowing up. I have worked with many high-perf V8's over the years, and short of RPM runaway, I haven't blown one up yet. But I don't know all there is to know about engine building, and I also get the feeling that I have been very lucky. What are some of the things that can lead to engine destruction? I know that lean-out can be a problem, but in a 4-cycle its ususally not destructive. (Unless that lean out occurs when the Nitrous button in pressed....ooops!) Any help would be appreciated.. ----- Lou >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 6 14:37:37 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA16511; Fri, 6 Jan 95 14:37:37 GMT Received: from steadfast.teradyne.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA16503; Fri, 6 Jan 95 09:37:19 -0500 Received: from donatello.ICD.Teradyne.COM by steadfast.teradyne.com (5.0/SMI-4.1/jxh941019) id AA21510; Fri, 6 Jan 1995 09:33:00 -0500 Received: from midnight.icd.teradyne.com by donatello.ICD.Teradyne.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1/TER-1.43/donatello-1.6) id AA18653; Fri, 6 Jan 95 09:37:14 EST Date: Fri, 6 Jan 95 09:37:14 EST From: benagh@xxx.com (Jeff Benagh ) Message-Id: <9501061437.AA18653@xxx.COM> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Bosh Fuel Handbook Content-Length: 102 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI The Bosh Fuel Handbook (little red book someone mentioned): What is it and where can I buy it? Jeff >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 6 15:16:20 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA16781; Fri, 6 Jan 95 15:16:20 GMT Received: from wotan.compaq.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA16776; Fri, 6 Jan 95 10:16:16 -0500 Received: from twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com by wotan.compaq.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #12) id m0rQGOz-000vItC; Fri, 6 Jan 95 09:16 CST Received: from bangate.compaq.com by twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #10) id m0rQGOl-000uHLC; Fri, 6 Jan 95 09:16 CST Message-Id: Received: by bangate.compaq.com with VINES ; Fri, 6 Jan 95 09:16:14 CST Date: Fri, 6 Jan 95 09:10:51 CST From: Steve=Ravet%Prj=Eng%PCPD=Hou@xxx.com Subject: re: Re: New member intro To: diy_efi Cc: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI | > Incidentally, has anyone else out there got a design to make a hot wire | > or karman vortex sensor? I wouldn't imagine hot wire would be overly | > difficult. | | I wouldn't bother. The last thing you would want to do is remake a part | that can be bought off the shelf. Air mass flow measurement systems | have no benefit over speed-density systems except for OEM production | where the air mass flow sensor can compensate somewhat for production | tolerances. They are expensive, fragile and require more complex | calibration. The advantage to MAF is that the computer can automatically adapt to engine modifications like a less restrictive exhaust or heads that flow better, right? SD requires that the volumetric efficiency table be updated any time mods are done to the engine. --steve >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 6 17:38:24 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA17391; Fri, 6 Jan 95 17:38:24 GMT Received: from dns004.ford.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA17386; Fri, 6 Jan 95 12:38:20 -0500 Received: from srlns1.srl.ford.com (SRLNS1.SRL.FORD.COM [128.5.192.132]) by dns004.ford.com (8.6.7/8.6.6) with ESMTP id MAA16360 for ; Fri, 6 Jan 1995 12:39:22 -0500 From: tsakiris@xxx.com Received: from ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com (ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com [19.3.98.21]) by srlns1.srl.ford.com (8.6.8/FordSRL 1.0) with SMTP id MAA27418 for ; Fri, 6 Jan 1995 12:38:17 -0500 Received: by ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA20197; Fri, 6 Jan 1995 12:38:30 -0500 Received: from localhost by pt9254.ped.pto.ford.com (5.65/PED-CLIENT) id AA26894; Fri, 6 Jan 1995 12:38:29 -0500 Message-Id: <9501061738.AA26894@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI Cc: tsakiris@xxx.com Subject: Re: New member intro In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 06 Jan 95 09:10:51 CST." Date: Fri, 06 Jan 95 12:38:29 -0500 X-Mts: smtp Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI | The advantage to MAF is that the computer can automatically adapt to engine | modifications like a less restrictive exhaust or heads that flow better, | right? SD requires that the volumetric efficiency table be updated any time | mods are done to the engine This is true, but only at steady-state. During (air flow) transients a value for volumetric efficiency is still needed if you are trying to account for first-order intake manifold dynamics. Tony >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 6 19:22:57 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA18355; Fri, 6 Jan 95 19:22:57 GMT Received: from wotan.compaq.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA18350; Fri, 6 Jan 95 14:22:54 -0500 Received: from twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com by wotan.compaq.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #12) id m0rQKFf-000vIcC; Fri, 6 Jan 95 13:23 CST Received: from bangate.compaq.com by twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #10) id m0rQKFR-000uIcC; Fri, 6 Jan 95 13:22 CST Message-Id: Received: by bangate.compaq.com with VINES ; Fri, 6 Jan 95 13:22:51 CST Date: Fri, 6 Jan 95 13:20:07 CST From: Steve=Ravet%Prj=Eng%PCPD=Hou@xxx.com Subject: re: Re: New member intro To: diy_efi Cc: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI tsakiris@xxx.com Wrote: | | | || The advantage to MAF is that the computer can automatically adapt to engine || modifications like a less restrictive exhaust or heads that flow better, || right? SD requires that the volumetric efficiency table be updated any time || mods are done to the engine | |This is true, but only at steady-state. During (air flow) transients a value | for volumetric efficiency is still needed if you are trying to account for | first-order intake manifold dynamics. | | Tony Interesting -- can you elaborate further? Suction through the MAF sensor "seems" pretty steady, although I imagine there is quite a lot of turbulence further down in the manifold. What dynamics do you need to account for? --steve >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 6 20:58:01 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA19394; Fri, 6 Jan 95 20:58:01 GMT Received: from dns004.ford.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA19389; Fri, 6 Jan 95 15:57:58 -0500 Received: from srlns1.srl.ford.com (SRLNS1.SRL.FORD.COM [128.5.192.132]) by dns004.ford.com (8.6.7/8.6.6) with ESMTP id PAA27338 for ; Fri, 6 Jan 1995 15:57:57 -0500 From: tsakiris@xxx.com Received: from ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com (ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com [19.3.98.21]) by srlns1.srl.ford.com (8.6.8/FordSRL 1.0) with SMTP id PAA29576 for ; Fri, 6 Jan 1995 15:57:57 -0500 Received: by ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA22128; Fri, 6 Jan 1995 15:58:02 -0500 Received: from localhost by pt9254.ped.pto.ford.com (5.65/PED-CLIENT) id AA27040; Fri, 6 Jan 1995 15:58:01 -0500 Message-Id: <9501062058.AA27040@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI Cc: tsakiris@xxx.com Subject: Re: New member intro In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 06 Jan 95 13:20:07 CST." Date: Fri, 06 Jan 95 15:58:00 -0500 X-Mts: smtp Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Steve and all, >>This is true, but only at steady-state. During (air flow) transients a value >>for volumetric efficiency is still needed if you are trying to account for >>first-order intake manifold dynamics. >> >>Tony >Interesting -- can you elaborate further? Suction through the MAF sensor >"seems" pretty steady, although I imagine there is quite a lot of turbulence >further down in the manifold. What dynamics do you need to account for? I'm sorry I can't elaborate in full detail. I'm working on these types of issues for a large company and must maintain an appropriate degree of confidentiality. I can however discuss what is already public information (e.g. SAE papers, ASME Journals). The intake manifold is a dynamic system. It can be analyzed as a simple control volume, with inflows and outflows of air. The air that flows out is not the same as the air that flows in. The inflow is measured by the sensor. The outflow can be approximated from the conditions of the air inside the manifold. The difference is flows is what accounts for changes in manifold pressure. In the simplest of models, the dynamics can be approximated as a first-order lag (i.e. a differential equation for pressure can be written which is first-order). The time constant in such an equation may include a term representing volumetric efficiency. At steady flows, the dynamics are irrelevant, obviously. During transients however, the time constant, and therefore the volumetric efficiency, comes into play. So even though a mass flow sensor measures the air flow directly, volumetric efficiency may still be needed. It's true a mass flow sensor measures the actual flow into the manifold, but we are most likely more interested in the flow OUT of the manifold. Both mass flow and speed density systems have advantages. I'd be interested in people's opinions on and experiences with speed density systems. Tony >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 6 21:35:03 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA19623; Fri, 6 Jan 95 21:35:03 GMT Received: from wotan.compaq.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA19618; Fri, 6 Jan 95 16:34:59 -0500 Received: from twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com by wotan.compaq.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #12) id m0rQMHC-000vIcC; Fri, 6 Jan 95 15:32 CST Received: from bangate.compaq.com by twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #10) id m0rQMGy-000uHIC; Fri, 6 Jan 95 15:32 CST Message-Id: Received: by bangate.compaq.com with VINES ; Fri, 6 Jan 95 15:32:36 CST Date: Fri, 6 Jan 95 15:09:27 CST From: Steve=Ravet%Prj=Eng%PCPD=Hou@xxx.com Subject: re: MAF and SD (was re: Re: New member intro) To: diy_efi Cc: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI tsakiris@xxx.com Wrote: | | I'm sorry I can't elaborate in full detail. I'm working on these types of | issues for a large company and must maintain an appropriate degree of | confidentiality. I can however discuss what is already public information | (e.g. SAE papers, ASME Journals). Hmmmmm..... that large company wouldn't be ford, now would it? | | The intake manifold is a dynamic system. It can be analyzed as a simple | control volume, with inflows and outflows of air. The air that flows out is |not the same as the air that flows in. The inflow is measured by the sensor. | The outflow can be approximated from the conditions of the air inside the | manifold. The difference is flows is what accounts for changes in manifold | pressure. Duh, that makes sense. But it still seems like you'd have more problems with SD. Simply driving to a different altitude would change the density of the air, and throw off the calculation. Or would it? Maybe I'm missing something wrt SD. | | In the simplest of models, the dynamics can be approximated as a first-order | lag (i.e. a differential equation for pressure can be written which is | first-order). The time constant in such an equation may include a term | representing volumetric efficiency. Geez, I hate differential equations :-). I assume what you mean is that if you suddenly accelerate or decelerate the engine, the change in airflow won't be seen immediately at the MAF sensor due to the fact that the manifold takes some time to respond. I can see that, but can you elaborate on how significant that really is? Since manifolds are designed to have little restriction it would seem that their time constant would also be small, especially when compared to the max delta rpm you are likely to see. Anyone else care to comment and/or straighten me out? --steve >From owner-diy_efi Sat Jan 7 16:50:19 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA21913; Sat, 7 Jan 95 16:50:19 GMT Received: from gold.tc.umn.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA21908; Sat, 7 Jan 95 11:50:18 -0500 Received: from dialup-3-228.gw.umn.edu by gold.tc.umn.edu; Sat, 7 Jan 95 10:49:06 -0500 Date: Sat, 7 Jan 95 10:49:25 GMT From: "Matthew Lee Franklin" Message-Id: <16732.fran0054@xxx.edu> X-Minuet-Version: Minuet1.0_Beta_11 X-Popmail-Charset: English To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: Hall Effect Gear Tooth Sensor Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Jim Wrote: >I thought I had seen sensors that had the magnet built in and the >whole thing was encapsulated in a threaded tube about 3/8" in >diameter. The gap was visible at one end of the tube, and wires came >from the other end. You just screwed the thing into an appropriate >hole, being careful to orient the gap correctly, and tighten a control >nut behind it to hold it in place. > >Anyone else seen such a thing? Do I need to have my medication >changed again? Yes. And maybe. I think ELECTRO CORP, of Sarasota Florida has those also. I don't have their complete address but someone else posted it earlier yesterday or today. Matt >From owner-diy_efi Sat Jan 7 16:49:51 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA21907; Sat, 7 Jan 95 16:49:51 GMT Received: from gold.tc.umn.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA21902; Sat, 7 Jan 95 11:49:49 -0500 Received: from dialup-3-228.gw.umn.edu by gold.tc.umn.edu; Sat, 7 Jan 95 10:48:33 -0500 Date: Sat, 7 Jan 95 10:48:53 GMT From: "Matthew Lee Franklin" Message-Id: <16703.fran0054@xxx.edu> X-Minuet-Version: Minuet1.0_Beta_11 X-Popmail-Charset: English To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: Bosh Fuel Handbook Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI On Fri, 6 Jan 95 09:37:14 EST, Jeff Benagh wrote: >The Bosh Fuel Handbook (little red book someone mentioned): >What is it and where can I buy it? The little red book is the "Automotive Electric/Electronic Handbook" by BOSCH. The little blue book is the "Automotive Handbook" by BOSCH. The blue has more about cars in general while the red has more fuel, ignition, starting and charging system stuff. Both are worth buying. I would guess they are both around $30-40 each from SAE. BUT there are other references that also look good. Talk to SAE and get their most recent flier. (412)776-4970 (412)776-0790 FAX They accept crdit cards, too. Or if you know a menber you can probably save 20%. >From owner-diy_efi Sun Jan 8 03:48:32 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA23129; Sun, 8 Jan 95 03:48:32 GMT Received: from eagle.natinst.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA23124; Sat, 7 Jan 95 22:48:26 -0500 Received: from localhost (klopfer@xxx.edu; Sat, 7 Jan 1995 21:48:15 -0600 Date: Sat, 7 Jan 1995 21:48:15 -0600 From: Mike Klopfer Message-Id: <199501080348.VAA05252@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI I'm interested in coming up with a fuel control algorithm. Perhaps eventually even a semiautomated means of arriving at a good algorithm given an arbitrary SI engine. Unfortunately I don't have access to a fuel injected engine. So I was wondering if there is enough interest by people who do have the capability of performaing measurements on an engine to perhaps collaborate on a control algorithm. In an attempt to figure out what this might involve I've been looking at some of the SAE "Electronics Engine Controls" books. I'm trying to see if I can use the information from the paper SAE 940373 "Adaptive Air-Fuel Ratio Control of a Spark-Ignition Engine" in the book "Electronic Engine Controls 1994" to derive a control algorithm. This was for a single cyliner engine so I'm not sure how much difficulty would be involved in extending it to a multicylinder engine. Perhaps someone could suggest a better set of equations. Anyway the these researchers acheived <.5% rms deviation of the air-fuel ration for step changes of throttle angle of 10 degree. This engine model tells nothing about the power of efficiency of the engine. Perhaps that would be of more interest but perhaps it is also more difficult to arrive at an accurate model. Below is a description of the equations and some random ideas on how to begin to use them to come up with a control algorithm. The fuel dynamics equations are: fp(k+1)= (1-f_b) fp(k) + (1-f_a) on(k) phie(k+1)= (f_b fp(k) + f_a on(k))/ (injSt(k)- t0) /* equation A */ phid(k+1)= phie(k) phim(k+1)= g2 phie(k) + g1 phid(k) + g- phim(k) on= inj - t0 g0= exp(-T/te) g1= exp(-m T/te)-exp(-T/te) g2= 1-exp(-m T/te) m= 2-td/T fp = fuel puddle mass equivalent time phie= unit cycle delay of equivalence ratio of cylinder air-fuel ratio phid= unit cycle delay of phie phim= UEGO sensor measurement of equivalence ratio inj= injector pulse width injSt= steady state pulse width yielding air-fuel equivalence ratio of 1 t0= injector no flow time f_a= fraction of injected fuel entering cylinder f_b= fraction of puddle mass entering cylinder T= engine cycle period td= transport delay te= UEGO sensor time constant The system parameters are f_a, f_b, t0, te, td, and injSt. These discrete time equations appear to have been derived from a continuous time equations much like the following from John S Gwynne : > ----> C2 --->| > | | >desired F/A --> + --(error)--> C1 --->| + ---> C4--->exhaust F/A > | | | > ^ (-) ----> C3 --->| | > | | > | | > ----- [sensor] <-------- C5 <--------------- > >where C1 = Control law > C2 = Inlet manifold (fast fuel) = 1/(t_1 s + 1) > C3 = Inlet manifold (slow fuel) = 1/(t_2 s + 1) > C4 = time delay (engine rotation...) = e^(-s T) > C5 = Sensor lag (exhaust gases mixing in the manifold) > = 1/(t s + 1) > sensor = sensor characteristic; Vout as a function of F/A The authors seem to mainly consider the case where injSt, f_a and f_b are functions of throttle angle and RPM. It seems possible that air temperature, coolant temperature and air pressure could affect these as well. The following control law is derived: on(k)= (injSt(k)-t0) phiDes - (f_b(k)/f_a(k)) {efp(k)-[(1-f_a(k))/f_b(k)](injSt(k)-t0) phiDes} = [(injSt(k)-t0) phiDes/f_a(k)]-[(f_b(k)efp(k))/f_a(k)] Where efp(k) is the estimated fuel puddle mass and phiDes(k+1) is the desired value of phie . The authors estimated efp(k) using an extended Kalman filter. I didn't follow there description of how they derived the above equation (something aoubt a Ricatti equation) but since it just seem to be equation A above solved for on(k) I didn't pursue it. The following are the equations I have found for the Kalman filter which seems to apply to the discrete nonstationary equations given above. However I'm not sure if this is the "extended Kalman filter". For a system of the following form where y(k) is the measured variable: x(k+1)= A(k)x(k)+ B(k)u(k) + v(k) y(k)= C(k)x(k)+w(k) where v(k) and w(k) are zero mean random variables with variance E(v(k)v(k))= Q(k) and E(w(k)w(k))= R(k) we can estimate x(k+1|k) (i.e. x at time k+1 given measurements up to and includeing time k) using the following equations: x(k+1|k)= A(x)x(k|k) + B(k)u(k) x(k|k)= x(k|k-1)+K(k)[y(k)-C(k)x(k|k-1)] P(k+1|k)= A(k)P(k|k)A'(k) + Q(k) K(k)= P(k|k-1)C'(k) inverse[C(k)P(k|k-1)C'(k)+R(k)] P(k|k)= P(k|k-1)-K(k)C(k)P(k|k-1)= [I-K(k)C(k)]P(k|k-1) Letting x'= [fp phie phid phim] and y= [phim] the following matrices are obtained from the above equations: 1-f_b(k) 0 0 0 f_b(k)/[injSt(k)-t0] 0 0 0 A(k)= 0 1 0 0 0 g2(k) g1(k) g0(k) 1-f_a(k) B(k)= f_a(k)/[injSt(k)-t0] 0 0 C(k)= [0 0 0 1] The discrete equation for the UEGO sensor output was obtained from the following continuous time equation: te phim'(t) + phim(t) = phie(t-td) The continuous time solution to this equation is the following: phim(t)= exp(-(t-t_0)/te) phim(t_0) + integral{d,t_0,t,{exp(-(t-d)/te) phie(d-td)/te}] where integral[u,v,x,y] is the integral with respect to variable u of the expression y from v to x. Evaluating this as discrete times t_0,t_1, ... ,t_k,t_k+1, ... the following equations can be derived: phim(t_k)= exp(-t_k/te) { exp(t_0/te) phim(t_0) + integral[d,t_0,t_k,{exp(d/te) phie(d-td)/te}]} phim(t_k+1)= exp(-t_k+1/te) { exp(t_0/te) phim(t_0) + integral[d,t_0,t_k+1,{exp(d/te) phie(d-td)/te}]} = exp(-(t_k+1 - t_k)/te) phim(t_k) + exp(-t_k+1 /te) integral[d,t_k,t_k+1,{exp(d/te) phie(d-td)/te}] Assuming that phie(t)= phie(t_k) for t_j =< t < t_j+1 for all j (i.e phie is constant between sampling times, and assuming that td < t_k+1 - t_k the following can be derived: exp(-t_k+1 /te) integral[d,t_k,t_k+1,{exp(d/te) phie(d-td)/te}] = phie(t_k-1)[exp(-(t_k+1 - t_k - td)/te) - exp(-(t_k+1 - t_k)/te)] + phie(t_k)[1- exp(-(t_k+1 - t_k - td)/te)] These equations for phim (letting T= t_k+1- t_k) are the same as those from the paper except that in this case m= 1- td/T instead of m= 2- td/T. I'm not sure what is the source of this discrepancy but since they don't show the derivation of their equations its hard to figure out. Unless someone could point out an error in my derivation. The transport delay (td) was estimated by controlling the throttle plate angle with square wave pattern. The UEGO sensor output was then used to estimate td using some nonlinear equation fitting method. Perhaps a similar approach could be applied for a multicylinder engine. For example one cylinder could be given a rich air fuel mixture relative to the other cylinders. If anyone is interested in making the measurements of EGO, throttle angle, RPM, injection pulse width and frequency and any other parameters of a running engine available I would like to try to figure out how to extract the model parameters from such a data log. One part of the transient behavior that isn't modeled in the above equations is the manifold dynamics. It would be interesting to see whether and under what circumstances this portion of the engine behavior significantly impacts the air-fuel ratio. The SAE papers 930856 and 910258 suggest that the manifold dynamics does significantly effect the air-fuel ratio during transients. The latter is a nice introduction to what is apparently a fairly simple and accurate mathematical model of spark ignition engines called the Mean Value Engine Model (MVEM). I didn't see anything in these models that would help in choosing the ignition timing though. >From owner-diy_efi Sun Jan 8 23:17:20 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA25049; Sun, 8 Jan 95 23:17:20 GMT Received: from localhost.eng.ohio-state.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA25044; Sun, 8 Jan 95 18:17:17 -0500 Message-Id: <9501082317.AA25044@xxx.edu> To: DIY_EFI Cc: jsg Subject: Re: Fuel control algorithm In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 07 Jan 95 21:48:15 CST." <199501080348.VAA05252@xxx.com> Date: Sun, 08 Jan 95 18:17:17 -0500 From: John S Gwynne Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI -------- In message <199501080348.VAA05252@xxx.com> , you write: <....> | looking at some of the SAE "Electronics Engine Controls" books. I'm trying to | see if I can use the information from the | paper SAE 940373 "Adaptive Air-Fuel Ratio Control of a Spark-Ignition | Engine" in the book "Electronic Engine Controls 1994" to derive a control | algorithm. This was for a single cyliner engine so I'm not sure how much <...> Nice summary, Mike. I have three basic questions/comments with regard to this approach. (1) execution speed. I presume x(k+1|k), x(k|k), P(k+1|k), K(k), P(k|k), and on(k) would have to be evaluated for each power stroke of the engine (something like 67 times a second at 8000 RPM for a four-cycle). At least the inverse operation in K(k) is on a 1x1 matrix.... Where any comments made regarding how this was implemented and on what type of processor? (2) how were f_a and f_b measured/estimated? (3) Q(k) has 16 unknown variances/covariances (also a function of throttle position and RPM?)... Since x(k) can not really be measured (and the equations for x(k|k) and x(k+1|k) depend on Q(k)), how would you find Q(k)? John S Gwynne Gwynne.1@xxx.edu _______________________________________________________________________________ T h e O h i o - S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ElectroScience Laboratory, 1320 Kinnear Road, Columbus, Ohio 43212, USA Telephone: (614) 292-7981 * Fax: (614) 292-7292 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Mon Jan 9 14:13:30 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA26719; Mon, 9 Jan 95 14:13:30 GMT Received: from dns004.ford.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA26714; Mon, 9 Jan 95 09:13:26 -0500 Received: from srlns1.srl.ford.com (SRLNS1.SRL.FORD.COM [128.5.192.132]) by dns004.ford.com (8.6.7/8.6.6) with ESMTP id JAA08101 for ; Mon, 9 Jan 1995 09:13:17 -0500 From: tsakiris@xxx.com Received: from ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com (ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com [19.3.98.21]) by srlns1.srl.ford.com (8.6.8/FordSRL 1.0) with SMTP id JAA03341 for ; Mon, 9 Jan 1995 09:13:16 -0500 Received: by ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA00211; Mon, 9 Jan 1995 09:13:21 -0500 Received: from localhost by pt9254.ped.pto.ford.com (5.65/PED-CLIENT) id AA28837; Mon, 9 Jan 1995 09:13:20 -0500 Message-Id: <9501091413.AA28837@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI Cc: tsakiris@xxx.com Subject: Re: MAF and SD (was re: Re: New member intro) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 06 Jan 95 15:09:27 CST." Date: Mon, 09 Jan 95 09:13:20 -0500 X-Mts: smtp Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI |Hmmmmm..... that large company wouldn't be ford, now would it? Oh dear. I've been found out. Yes, I work for Ford Motor Company, as is obvious from my e-mail address. || The intake manifold is a dynamic system. It can be analyzed as a simple || control volume, with inflows and outflows of air. The air that flows out is ||not the same as the air that flows in. The inflow is measured by the sensor. || The outflow can be approximated from the conditions of the air inside the || manifold. The difference is flows is what accounts for changes in manifold || pressure. |Duh, that makes sense. But it still seems like you'd have more problems with |SD. Simply driving to a different altitude would change the density of the |air, and throw off the calculation. Or would it? Maybe I'm missing something |wrt SD. Speed density systems that I know of include a barometric pressure sensor. I don't really know who the audience is here yet, so if my comments are to generalized or simplified I apologize. || In the simplest of models, the dynamics can be approximated as a first-order || lag (i.e. a differential equation for pressure can be written which is || first-order). The time constant in such an equation may include a term || representing volumetric efficiency. |Geez, I hate differential equations :-). I assume what you mean is that if |you suddenly accelerate or decelerate the engine, the change in airflow won't |be seen immediately at the MAF sensor due to the fact that the manifold takes |some time to respond. I can see that, but can you elaborate on how |significant that really is? Since manifolds are designed to have little |restriction it would seem that their time constant would also be small, |especially when compared to the max delta rpm you are likely to see. The time constant in the equation ranges from about 10 to about 300 milliseconds (over a variety of engines and engine speeds). It's more a matter of size (manifold volume vs. engine displacement volume) than flow restriction. You're correct on the engine speed effect. Engine speed changes relatively slowly, due to the inertia of the engine. Manifold pressure is affected by the inflow of air to the manifold also though, and this can be changed quite drastically in a very short time simply by moving the throttle plate. For everyone out there interested in more details, the following published papers might be interested reading. SAE 880561 - Frequency Domain Characterization of Mass Flow Sensors, by W. C. Follmer, 1988. FISITA - Adaptive Transient Air-Fuel Ratio Control to Minimize Gasoline Engine Emissions, by Beaumont, Noble, and Scarisbrick, 1992. SAE 900616 - Mean Value Modelling of Spark Ignition Engines, by Hendricks and Sorenson, 1990. And just one more comment, if you're interest is purely to increase power, most of this is irrelevant. Just run rich. Manufacturers are trying to solve many, many other problems (e.g. emissions, driveability issues, cost, and fuel consumption). Tony >From owner-diy_efi Mon Jan 9 21:36:09 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA29068; Mon, 9 Jan 95 21:36:09 GMT Received: from acmex.gatech.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA29063; Mon, 9 Jan 95 16:36:05 -0500 Received: (from gt0035b@xxx.edu; Mon, 9 Jan 1995 16:36:05 -0500 From: gt0035b@xxx.edu (Henry) Message-Id: <199501092136.QAA06354@xxx.edu> Subject: Re: New member intro To: DIY_EFI Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 16:36:05 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <9501062058.AA27040@xxx.com" at Jan 6, 95 03:58:00 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 619 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI tsakiris@xxx.com wrote > It's true a mass flow sensor measures the actual flow into the manifold, but > we are most likely more interested in the flow OUT of the manifold. Both > mass flow and speed density systems have advantages. I'd be interested in > people's opinions on and experiences with speed density systems. This is probably a dumb question but why don't you put the sensor between the intake and the head? Would the presure fluxuations from the vavles cuaes to many problems or do you just want to reduce the number of sensor imputs that the software has to deal with. Henry Sommer >From owner-diy_efi Mon Jan 9 23:41:17 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA29405; Mon, 9 Jan 95 23:41:17 GMT Received: from dns004.ford.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA29400; Mon, 9 Jan 95 18:41:11 -0500 Received: from srlns1.srl.ford.com (SRLNS1.SRL.FORD.COM [128.5.192.132]) by dns004.ford.com (8.6.7/8.6.6) with ESMTP id SAA13814 for ; Mon, 9 Jan 1995 18:41:13 -0500 From: tsakiris@xxx.com Received: from ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com (ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com [19.3.98.21]) by srlns1.srl.ford.com (8.6.8/FordSRL 1.0) with SMTP id SAA09072 for ; Mon, 9 Jan 1995 18:41:10 -0500 Received: by ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA04500; Mon, 9 Jan 1995 18:41:18 -0500 Received: from localhost by pt9254.ped.pto.ford.com (5.65/PED-CLIENT) id AA29223; Mon, 9 Jan 1995 18:41:17 -0500 Message-Id: <9501092341.AA29223@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI Cc: tsakiris@xxx.com Subject: Re: New member intro In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 09 Jan 95 16:36:05 EST." <199501092136.QAA06354@xxx.edu> Date: Mon, 09 Jan 95 18:41:17 -0500 X-Mts: smtp Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI >> It's true a mass flow sensor measures the actual flow into the manifold, but >> we are most likely more interested in the flow OUT of the manifold. Both >> mass flow and speed density systems have advantages. I'd be interested in >> people's opinions on and experiences with speed density systems. > This is probably a dumb question but why don't you put the sensor >between the intake and the head? Would the presure fluxuations from the >vavles cuaes to many problems or do you just want to reduce the number of >sensor imputs that the software has to deal with. > >Henry Sommer Pulsations would be a difficulty. Sensors would also be exposed to higher temperatures, much more recirculated exhaust gas (most systems place a single sensor upstream of this), crankcase ventilation, and greater vibrations. These are mass produced components, not military or medical grade parts. Cost is a very important issue. As a customer, how would you feel about paying for four or eight sensors instead of one? According to media reports of public response at the North American Auto Show, people think cars cost too much already. Most sensors use a small sensing element, small when compared to the size of the flow passage. To determine the bulk flow through the passage, approximations of the distribution of the flow over the entire cross-sectional area must be made. The more pulsations and the greater the pressure range the harder this will most likely be. (Note: mass flow sensors located upstream of the throttle, as most are, are exposed to essentially constant ambient pressure. Sensors in or downstream of the intake manifold will be exposed to pressures ranging from full vacuum to ambient pressure.) And we haven't even touched on software and electronic loads. Tony p.s. (Don't think there are any dumb questions. I'm still interested in people's experiences with speed-density systems.) >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 00:54:48 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA29561; Tue, 10 Jan 95 00:54:48 GMT Received: from curly.cc.swin.edu.au by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA29556; Mon, 9 Jan 95 19:54:43 -0500 Received: from romulus.mm.swin.edu.au by curly.cc.swin.edu.au (5.65c/1.34) id AA12947; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 11:54:35 +1100 Received: From MECHMAN/WORKQUEUE by romulus.mm.swin.edu.au via Charon-4.0-VROOM with IPX id 100.950110115421.480; 10 Jan 95 11:54:37 -1100 Message-Id: To: DIY_EFI From: "A.DENNISON -EN320/TEL.8296" Organization: Swinburne University Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 11:54:16 EST-11 Subject: Exhaust Temperature for tuning Priority: normal X-Mailer: WinPMail v1.0 (R1) Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI I am interested in using exhaust temperature for optomising the mixture - ideally for closed loop control. I saw this mentioned in the archives (which finish in May 1994 - where is the rest of it?) and I was wondering if anyone has some information on what temperatures to expect. Have you used thermocouples attached externally to the exhaust or in the exhaust gas stream? I think this idea should give more information than a lambda sensor and also work for leaded and unleaded petrol. Comments anyone? Andrew ------------------------------------ Andrew Dennison - Research Associate The CIM Centre Melbourne, AUSTRALIA Phone: +61 3 214 8296 Fax: +61 3 214 4949 WWW: http://cim.mm.swin.edu.au/welcome.html >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 01:21:37 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA29626; Tue, 10 Jan 95 01:21:37 GMT Received: from eigen.ee.ualberta.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA29621; Mon, 9 Jan 95 20:21:34 -0500 Message-Id: <9501100121.AA29621@xxx.edu> Received: by eigen.ee.ualberta.ca (1.37.109.4/15.6) id AA24285; Mon, 9 Jan 95 18:21:32 -0700 From: Dale Ulan Subject: Re: MAF and SD (was re: Re: New member intro) To: DIY_EFI Date: Mon, 9 Jan 95 18:21:31 MST In-Reply-To: <9501091413.AA28837@xxx.com" at Jan 09, 95 9:13 am Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > Speed density systems that I know of include a barometric pressure sensor. I > don't really know who the audience is here yet, so if my comments are to > generalized or simplified I apologize. Actually, the GM 1991 pickup truck (6801 processor, TBI, hydraulic tranny,350) uses an estimate of barometric pressure, calculated when the throttle is quite open at low engine speeds. I could get the actual numbers used... Speed-density usually measures the absolute pressure in the intake, so the inlet side of the engine is already compensated for. The backpressure from the exhaust side changes, though, so there are correction tables for the EGR flow rate (MAP vs BARO) and volumtric efficiency (BARO only). The base VE is from MAP and RPM, as expected. Baro also affects the idle control actions. This is what I gather from reading the code, anyways. >|Geez, I hate differential equations :-). ... Engine controllers generally solve a lot of them at once. Normally in the form of difference equations (discrete time). I simple GM controller I mentioned solves at least 15 of them constantly, and another couple when the engine is knocking. > SAE 900616 - Mean Value Modelling of Spark Ignition Engines, by Hendricks > and Sorenson, 1990. There are more really good SAE papers. I don't have the numbers with me, but Hendricks and Sorenson also did a few followup papers, covering using the Mean Value Engine Model (MVEM) embedded into the control algorithms rather than the traditional linear SISO control methods with 'tweaks' done in the older GM code that I ripped apart. Also, open and closed loop observers are discussed. These are basically an engine model operating in real time, using the sensors to tweak the model. This allows the model to predict the 'true' value at any given time, rather than the lagging sensor value. These are covered in papers ranging from 1991 through 1993. In 1994, Hendricks (and co-authors) cover theoretical advantages and disadvantages of time vs crank angle based sampling systems. Pretty cool stuff. I don't know what the current state of development of any of the manufacturer's software, but I know the stuff I ripped through was kind of ugly. It was obviously written by a couple of assembler gurus, and is the 'classical' semi-static control algorithm designs. Fortunately, the 'perturbation' tweaks appear to have been designed not too badly, but this makes things a bit more complicated. I would think that an MVEM based controller would actually be simpler in some respects than a 'standard' one. Maybe my opinions are wrong??? -Dale >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 02:41:31 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA29974; Tue, 10 Jan 95 02:41:31 GMT Received: from localhost.eng.ohio-state.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA29963; Mon, 9 Jan 95 21:41:28 -0500 Message-Id: <9501100241.AA29963@xxx.edu> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: New member intro In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 06 Jan 95 15:58:00 EST." <9501062058.AA27040@xxx.com> Date: Mon, 09 Jan 95 21:41:28 -0500 From: John S Gwynne Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI -------- In message <9501062058.AA27040@xxx.com> , you write: | >Interesting -- can you elaborate further? Suction through the MAF sensor | >"seems" pretty steady, although I imagine there is quite a lot of turbulence | | >further down in the manifold. What dynamics do you need to account for? | | I'm sorry I can't elaborate in full detail. I'm working on these types of | issues for a large company and must maintain an appropriate degree of | confidentiality. I can however discuss what is already public information | (e.g. SAE papers, ASME Journals). <....> | Tony I'm curious, Tony. When it comes to solving manifold problems, is everything modeled (i.e., boundary value problem with a pressure field...full blown numerical models) or are the basic properties/dynamics modeled empirically/heuristically? (what's the state-of-the-art?) John S Gwynne Gwynne.1@xxx.edu _______________________________________________________________________________ T h e O h i o - S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ElectroScience Laboratory, 1320 Kinnear Road, Columbus, Ohio 43212, USA Telephone: (614) 292-7981 * Fax: (614) 292-7292 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 02:53:32 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA00059; Tue, 10 Jan 95 02:53:32 GMT Received: from localhost.eng.ohio-state.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA00054; Mon, 9 Jan 95 21:53:30 -0500 Message-Id: <9501100253.AA00054@xxx.edu> To: DIY_EFI Subject: admin: bounce/host unavailable Date: Mon, 09 Jan 95 21:53:30 -0500 From: John S Gwynne Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI -------- If you mail service is interrupted and DIY_EFI mail is bounced (or just setting in my mail queue of for a day or so), it is likely that I will drop your name from the list. If this happens to you, please just re-subscribe when your service is restored (check the membership list and/or the archive if you think something is wrong). Thanks. John S Gwynne Gwynne.1@xxx.edu _______________________________________________________________________________ T h e O h i o - S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ElectroScience Laboratory, 1320 Kinnear Road, Columbus, Ohio 43212, USA Telephone: (614) 292-7981 * Fax: (614) 292-7292 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 03:22:02 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA00254; Tue, 10 Jan 95 03:22:02 GMT Received: from knuth.mtsu.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA00248; Mon, 9 Jan 95 22:22:00 -0500 Received: by knuth.mtsu.edu (Smail3.1.28.1 #21) id m0rRX90-000D0bC; Mon, 9 Jan 95 21:21 CST Message-Id: From: lusky@xxx. Lusky) Subject: Re: MAF and SD (was re: Re: New member intro) To: DIY_EFI Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 21:21:14 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <9501091413.AA28837@xxx.com" at Jan 9, 95 09:13:20 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24alpha3] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1050 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI tsakiris@xxx.com writes: > |Duh, that makes sense. But it still seems like you'd have more problems with > |SD. Simply driving to a different altitude would change the density of the > |air, and throw off the calculation. Or would it? Maybe I'm missing something > |wrt SD. It doesn't matter what the ambient air density is. Air density in the intake manifold is all that matters. > Speed density systems that I know of include a barometric pressure sensor. I > don't really know who the audience is here yet, so if my comments are to > generalized or simplified I apologize. GM speed density uses only MAP. Did Ford's aborted attempt at speed density use a BAP sensor? (the worst comments I've heard about that system have all come from Dearborn :) -- Jonathan R. Lusky lusky@xxx.edu http://frank.mtsu.edu/~lusky/ (615) 726-8700 ------------------------------------- ------------------------------ 68 Camaro Convertible - 350 / TH350 \_/ 80 Toyota Celica - 20R / 5spd >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 04:56:49 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA00633; Tue, 10 Jan 95 04:56:49 GMT Received: from eagle.natinst.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA00628; Mon, 9 Jan 95 23:56:42 -0500 Received: from localhost (klopfer@xxx.edu; Mon, 9 Jan 1995 22:56:25 -0600 Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 22:56:25 -0600 From: Mike Klopfer Message-Id: <199501100456.WAA11246@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI from message <9501082317.AA25044@xxx.edu> ... > I have three basic questions/comments with >regard to this approach. > >(1) execution speed. I presume x(k+1|k), x(k|k), P(k+1|k), >K(k), P(k|k), and on(k) would have to be evaluated for each >power stroke of the engine (something like 67 times a second >at 8000 RPM for a four-cycle). At least the inverse operation >in K(k) is on a 1x1 matrix.... Where any comments made >regarding how this was implemented and on what type of >processor? 80C196KR >(2) how were f_a and f_b measured/estimated? They give what seems to me to be a generic description of using a least squared error estimate of the parameters. From there description it seems that they provided a square wave input to the throttle plate and used a dynamo to keep RPM constant. Assuming that the model parameters are only dependent on throttle plate angle and RPM you could fit the data by assuming two values for the model parameters depending on what the throttle angle is at the time (i.e. you would use two variables for f_a -- f_a1 and f_a2 and for f_b -- f_b1 and f_b2). The author even suggests that something like this could be done during normal operation of the vehicle by waiting for the RPM to stay constant and then introducing dithers in the throttle plate that are imperceptible to the driver but measurable by the o2 sensor. I would guess a similar and possibly easier method would be to keep the throttle angle and RPM constant and dither the injection time. That way you would only have to fit one set of the model parameters. Perhaps a dynamo wouldn't be all that necessary for keeping the RPM constant provided the dithers are pretty fast and your driving a sufficiently heavy vehicle on a sufficiently straight road. Note that my comments ore my interpretation of the author and not necessarily similar to what he actually said. >(3) Q(k) has 16 unknown variances/covariances (also a >function of throttle position and RPM?)... Since x(k) >can not really be measured (and the equations for x(k|k) and >x(k+1|k) depend on Q(k)), how would you find Q(k)? The value of Q(k) I would guess would be arrived at from the same data that is used to estimate model parameters. Basically the model parameters will be the values that minimize the error variance for the data set. I suppose Q(k) could depend on throttle position and RPM. I would hope that either they don't or that the goodness of the algorithm isn't extremely sensitive to accurate values for these. This paper didn't mention these statistics explicitly but SAE 930856? describes a method for keeping statistics on the difference between measured and modelled output values and using these statistics to modify Q(k). But I would guess that this wouldn't be that useful in the case that Q(k) varies considerably with throttle angle or RPM. >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 07:20:36 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA00817; Tue, 10 Jan 95 07:20:36 GMT Received: from eigen.ee.ualberta.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA00812; Tue, 10 Jan 95 02:20:33 -0500 Message-Id: <9501100720.AA00812@xxx.edu> Received: by eigen.ee.ualberta.ca (1.37.109.4/15.6) id AA25135; Tue, 10 Jan 95 00:20:31 -0700 From: Dale Ulan Subject: Re: MAF and SD To: DIY_EFI Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 0:20:30 MST In-Reply-To: It doesn't matter what the ambient air density is. Air density in the > intake manifold is all that matters. Yes, except that the other end of the engine sees barometric pressure... ie. the end of the exhaust pipe. > GM speed density uses only MAP. Did Ford's aborted attempt at speed > density use a BAP sensor? (the worst comments I've heard about that > system have all come from Dearborn :) Yea, but if you look at the code, it finds BARO using the MAP sensor under certain conditions. In fact... RPM < $C0 ($FF = 6400 rpm) TPS > $A6 DTPS < $05 (don't remember the sample time...) then MAP -> BARO via some wierd transfer function involving TPS... here's the table. FF EC 55 2B 1B Then, it uses the BARO to play with the POWER threshold (baro- corrected TPS), and EGR flow rates. It also has a table ranging from $88 to $80, multiplying the BPC, which appears to be the compensator for exhaust pipe backpressure vs. BARO. -Dale >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 13:15:13 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA01372; Tue, 10 Jan 95 13:15:13 GMT Received: from ra.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA01366; Tue, 10 Jan 95 08:13:35 -0500 Received: from diana by ra.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (5.65/1.341) id AA25394; Tue, 10 Jan 95 14:10:47 +0100 Received: from bal by diana (4.1/SMI-4.1N) id AA27015; Tue, 10 Jan 95 14:10:44 +0100 Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 14:10:44 +0100 From: knick@xxx.de (Jens Knickmeyer) Message-Id: <9501101310.AA27015@diana> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: VW Digifant ECU Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 13:57:37 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA01435; Tue, 10 Jan 95 13:57:37 GMT Received: from gw1.att.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA01430; Tue, 10 Jan 95 08:57:35 -0500 Received: from uscbu.ih.att.com by ig1.att.att.com id AA15609; Tue, 10 Jan 95 08:54:46 EST Received: by uscbu.ih.att.com (4.1/EMS-1.1.1 SunOS) id AA16031; Tue, 10 Jan 95 07:52:53 CST Received: from usgp1.ih.att.com by uscbu.ih.att.com (4.1/EMS-1.1.1 SunOS) id AA16027; Tue, 10 Jan 95 07:52:49 CST Received: by usgp1.ih.att.com (5.0/EMS-1.1 Sol2) id AA10186; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 07:57:06 +0600 Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 07:57:06 +0600 Message-Id: <9501101357.AA10186@xxx.com> From: bohdan@xxx.com (Bohdan L Bodnar) To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: MAF and SD (was re: Re: New member intro) Content-Type: text Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI >> Speed density systems that I know of include a barometric pressure sensor. I >> don't really know who the audience is here yet, so if my comments are to >> generalized or simplified I apologize. >GM speed density uses only MAP. Did Ford's aborted attempt at speed >density use a BAP sensor? (the worst comments I've heard about that >system have all come from Dearborn :) >-- >Jonathan R. Lusky lusky@xxx.edu >http://frank.mtsu.edu/~lusky/ (615) 726-8700 >------------------------------------- ------------------------------ >68 Camaro Convertible - 350 / TH350 \_/ 80 Toyota Celica - 20R / 5spd *ALL* SD systems require a barometric pressure reading. On GM, Ford, etc. the reading is taken under two conditions: (1) engine cranking (when MAP is close to BP) and (2) close to WOT. Early (GM) CCC systems for carbureted engines also used a "baro" sensor. The baro sensor is nothing more than a MAP and BP sensors with an analog subtraction circuit to output the difference of the two. The really early stuff used separate BP and MAP sensors (made by Bendix). I'm not so certain that Ford's "attempt" at SD controls is "aborted"; almost ALL the Ford stuff that's rolling on the roads is SD and it certainly appears to be functioning properly. Regards, Bohdan Bodnar >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 13:57:17 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA01428; Tue, 10 Jan 95 13:57:17 GMT Received: from dns004.ford.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA01423; Tue, 10 Jan 95 08:57:14 -0500 Received: from srlns1.srl.ford.com (SRLNS1.SRL.FORD.COM [128.5.192.132]) by dns004.ford.com (8.6.7/8.6.6) with ESMTP id IAA25243 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 08:57:18 -0500 From: tsakiris@xxx.com Received: from ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com (ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com [19.3.98.21]) by srlns1.srl.ford.com (8.6.8/FordSRL 1.0) with SMTP id IAA16912 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 08:57:13 -0500 Received: by ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA06991; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 08:57:19 -0500 Received: from localhost by pt9254.ped.pto.ford.com (5.65/PED-CLIENT) id AA29762; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 08:57:18 -0500 Message-Id: <9501101357.AA29762@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI Cc: tsakiris@xxx.com Subject: Re: New member intro In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 09 Jan 95 21:41:28 EST." <9501100241.AA29963@xxx.edu> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 08:57:18 -0500 X-Mts: smtp Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI >I'm curious, Tony. When it comes to solving manifold problems, >is everything modeled (i.e., boundary value problem with a >pressure field...full blown numerical models) or are the basic >properties/dynamics modeled empirically/heuristically? >(what's the state-of-the-art?) > > John S Gwynne > Gwynne.1@xxx.edu It's somewhere in the middle. For some topics, theoretically derived models are used, for others purely empirically derived approachs are used. In my experience, the theoretical models are based on physical principles but are very, very simple (conservation of mass, ideal gas law, etc.) I think the simplicity stems from the time constraints. There is so much to do. Making 4 million of something a year is much different than making 4000 a year. It can be very frustrating at times. The majority of topics are dealt with empirically. There's a large development community working in cars everyday, collecting data and monitoring behavior. These observations get boiled down to algorithms. The reliance on empirical methods is both (corporate) culture and resource driven. Real measurements are often difficult to obtain. For example, try measuring the air actually inducted into a cylinder, not just in a research lab, but on 20 different types of test vehicles (Escorts to F-250 trucks, 1.3 liter I-4s to 7.5 liter V-8s) in the field. In the past, I worked at a large supplier's R & D center. Now, I work in a production environment, not in a plant, but dealing with daily engineering problems for designs one to five years out. Very different worlds. Perhaps the greatest challenge is merging the two and ensuring the efficient and accurate transfer of information from one to the other (in both directions). I don't want to go off on a topic outside the scope of the list. I'd like to talk about it more, but I'll stop now to see how the above is taken by the group. Maybe we can continue the discussion later. Tony >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 14:12:27 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA01487; Tue, 10 Jan 95 14:12:27 GMT Received: from geni10.arl.mil by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA01482; Tue, 10 Jan 95 09:12:25 -0500 Received: by lamp0.arl.army.mil (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA12357; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 09:12:21 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 09:12:21 -0500 Message-Id: <9501101412.AA12357@xxx.mil> X-Sender: faustini@xxx.mil Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: ulan@xxx.ca From: faustini@xxx.mil (Lou Faustini) Subject: 6801??? not the '11? Cc: DIY_EFI X-Mailer: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI In a message you wrote: > Actually, the GM 1991 pickup truck (6801 processor, TBI, hydraulic tranny,350) > uses an estimate of barometric pressure, calculated when the throttle is > quite open at low engine speeds. I could get the actual numbers used... Did GM really use a 6801 on that truck? I thought that the General only used the 6811 on all of their cars/trucks. I understand that it was specifically developed for GM. ---- Lou >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 14:34:08 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA01624; Tue, 10 Jan 95 14:34:08 GMT Received: from geni10.arl.mil by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA01619; Tue, 10 Jan 95 09:33:48 -0500 Received: by lamp0.arl.army.mil (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA12445; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 09:33:48 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 09:33:48 -0500 Message-Id: <9501101433.AA12445@xxx.mil> X-Sender: faustini@xxx.mil Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: DIY_EFI From: faustini@xxx.mil (Lou Faustini) Subject: a few questions... X-Mailer: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Hi. Does anyone out there have any information on how to decypher the data stream on the GM ALDL? I have played with it a little, and all I have come up with is the baud rate (8192bps) and what appears to be the markers for start-of-frame. I have no idea what the data it is sending me is supposed to mean. I assume things like airflow and RPM are being sent, but I have no way of knowing how they are encoded. I really don't feeel like disasembling the 32k of 'hc11 code in the ECU, so any help would be appreciated. Next question-- This isn't really a fuel-injection question, but I am sure some of you know the answer to this one: Kawasaki and Yamaha just announced their 1995 jet-skii lineup. In the spotlight are their new 3-cylinder motors. They range from 900 to 1100 cc's in displacement. After I stoped drooling at the pictures, I read a little about the motors. 2-cycle water-cooled, tripple carbs. No black magic... Until you read abot the compression ratio. The Kaw motor has a compression ratio of 5.5 to 1 !! the Yamaha motor runs 5.1 to 1 !! This is very low in contrast to their 750cc motors, which run typical stock ratios of 8-ish to 1. Aftermarkit kits for compression ratios of 10 to 1 are very popular for the 750 motors, and have proven to be a powerful and reliable combination. So my question is, why would ANYONE design a motor to run at 5-ish to one compression? I heard once that in-line 6-cylinder 4-cycle motors have problems spinning at high rpm's. I dont recall why. Is a 3-cylinder 2-cycle motor subject to the same problems? Are these problems for real? Any help would be appreciated. ----- Lou Faustini >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 15:57:46 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA02257; Tue, 10 Jan 95 15:57:46 GMT Received: from wotan.compaq.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA02252; Tue, 10 Jan 95 10:57:43 -0500 Received: from twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com by wotan.compaq.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #12) id m0rRiap-000vIaC; Tue, 10 Jan 95 09:34 CST Received: from bangate.compaq.com by twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #10) id m0rRiaZ-000uGtC; Tue, 10 Jan 95 09:34 CST Message-Id: Received: by bangate.compaq.com with VINES ; Tue, 10 Jan 95 09:34:26 CST Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 09:26:13 CST From: Steve=Ravet%Prj=Eng%PCPD=Hou@xxx.com Subject: re: a few questions... To: diy_efi Cc: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI faustini@xxx.mil (Lou Faustini) Wrote: | | | Hi. | Does anyone out there have any information on how to decypher | the data | stream on the GM ALDL? I have played with it a little, and all I | have come | up with is the baud rate (8192bps) and what appears to be the | markers for | start-of-frame. I have no idea what the data it is sending me is | supposed to | mean. I assume things like airflow and RPM are being sent, but I | have no | way of knowing how they are encoded. I really don't feeel like | disasembling | the 32k of 'hc11 code in the ECU, so any help would be | appreciated. Good question -- This topic was raised on the vettenet a month or so ago, and the consensus was that GM isn't telling, at least not without a non-disclosure agreement. A fellow on the buick gn/t-type list decoded the data stream for the GN, but it is a different type (about 100 baud, not an even rate, the ECM just sends a bit whenever it gets some time). He did it the hard way, a scope to determine the baud rate, watch the frames, decipher what the stuff is. He had a tech-1 diagnostic computer or whatever also, which aided the job some. I have tried calling GM/Chevrolet to get the info, to no avail, but I only spent one afternoon doing it. You are correct about the baud rate, but it is TTL level, not RS-232. This will drive most serial ports, however, if you use a very short cable. I experimented with this a little with my car ('89 corvette), but then I wrecked it, so I haven't done much since then. There are aftermarket diagnostic computers, though, so the information must be available somewhere. --steve | | Next question-- | This isn't really a fuel-injection question, but I am sure | some of you | know the answer to this one: | | Kawasaki and Yamaha just announced their 1995 jet-skii lineup. | In the | spotlight are their new 3-cylinder motors. They range from 900 to | 1100 cc's | in displacement. After I stoped drooling at the pictures, I read | a little | about the motors. 2-cycle water-cooled, tripple carbs. No black | magic... | Until you read abot the compression ratio. The Kaw motor has a | compression | ratio of 5.5 to 1 !! the Yamaha motor runs 5.1 to 1 !! This is | very low in | contrast to their 750cc motors, which run typical stock ratios of | 8-ish to | 1. Aftermarkit kits for compression ratios of 10 to 1 are very | popular for | the 750 motors, and have proven to be a powerful and reliable | combination. | So my question is, why would ANYONE design a motor to run at | 5-ish to one | compression? I heard once that in-line 6-cylinder 4-cycle motors | have | problems spinning at high rpm's. I dont recall why. Is a | 3-cylinder 2-cycle | motor subject to the same problems? Are these problems for real? | Any help | would be appreciated. | | ----- Lou Faustini | | >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 17:09:07 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA02645; Tue, 10 Jan 95 17:09:07 GMT Received: from uunet.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA02633; Tue, 10 Jan 95 12:09:01 -0500 Received: from gateway.prior.com ([142.77.252.4]) by mail.uunet.ca with SMTP id <124773-5>; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 11:29:55 -0500 Received: by gateway.prior.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23788; Tue, 10 Jan 95 11:17:46 EST Received: from odin.gallium.com(192.139.238.33) by gateway.gallium.com via smap (V1.3) id sma023786; Tue Jan 10 11:17:26 1995 Received: from ivan.gallium.com by odin.gallium.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17544; Tue, 10 Jan 95 11:12:29 EST Received: by ivan.gallium.com (931110.SGI/930416.SGI) for @xxx.edu id AA09300; Tue, 10 Jan 95 11:28:31 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 11:28:31 -0500 From: MSargent@xxx. Sargent) Message-Id: <9501101628.AA09300@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: Exhaust Temperature for tuning Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Using a thermocouple won't allow you to differentiate between a heavy load and a lean mixture. Will it? +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Michael F. Sargent | Net: msargent@xxx.com | Phone: 1(613)721-0902 | | Gallium Software Inc.| | FAX: 1(613)721-1278 | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 17:13:25 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA02675; Tue, 10 Jan 95 17:13:25 GMT Received: from us.dynix.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA02670; Tue, 10 Jan 95 12:13:04 -0500 Received: from cpu.us.dynix.com by dnxjcit.us.dynix.com with SMTP id AA02883 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for ); Tue, 10 Jan 1995 09:54:56 -0700 Received: by cpu.us.dynix.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA100061; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 09:44:18 -0700 Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 09:40:05 -700 (MST) From: Jim Conforti Subject: Re: ALDL To: DIY_EFI In-Reply-To: <9501101433.AA12445@xxx.mil> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI I have the ALDL specs from a 1988 2.0l PFI Turbo GM engine .. >From memory ... 8192 baud ... You'll need a level covertor like a MAX232 to "properly" make up an RS-232 data stream .. if you choose to go that route ... I'll have to take a look tonite to get the manual and bring it with me tomorrow .. PS: Lou: bug me in a day or so .. Jim Conforti PPS: When are the bleeding manufacturers going to learn that they are only fostering bad will amongst there most die-hard customers by withholding this type of tech. info. ... Does GM really think that witholding the ALDL format will keep say .. Ford out of their computers .. NOT! >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 17:19:00 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA02706; Tue, 10 Jan 95 17:19:00 GMT Received: from geni10.arl.mil by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA02701; Tue, 10 Jan 95 12:18:56 -0500 Received: by lamp0.arl.army.mil (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA13014; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 11:46:19 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 11:46:19 -0500 Message-Id: <9501101646.AA13014@xxx.mil> X-Sender: faustini@xxx.mil Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: DIY_EFI From: faustini@xxx.mil (Lou Faustini) Subject: Re: New member intro Cc: tsakiris@xxx.com X-Mailer: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Making 4 million of something a year is much different than making 4000 >a year. It can be very frustrating at times. >I don't want to go off on a topic outside the scope of the list. I'd like >to talk about it more, but I'll stop now to see how the above is taken by >the group. Maybe we can continue the discussion later. > >Tony > I am interested... Please tell more.. --- Lou >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 17:24:12 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA02731; Tue, 10 Jan 95 17:24:12 GMT Received: from dns004.ford.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA02726; Tue, 10 Jan 95 12:24:07 -0500 Received: from srlns1.srl.ford.com (SRLNS1.SRL.FORD.COM [128.5.192.132]) by dns004.ford.com (8.6.7/8.6.6) with ESMTP id LAA25127 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 11:49:58 -0500 From: tsakiris@xxx.com Received: from ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com (ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com [19.3.98.21]) by srlns1.srl.ford.com (8.6.8/FordSRL 1.0) with SMTP id LAA18662 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 11:49:53 -0500 Received: by ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA08103; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 11:50:05 -0500 Received: from localhost by pt9254.ped.pto.ford.com (5.65/PED-CLIENT) id AA29906; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 11:50:04 -0500 Message-Id: <9501101650.AA29906@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI Cc: tsakiris@xxx.com Subject: Re: MAF and SD (was re: Re: New member intro) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 10 Jan 95 07:57:06 +0600." <9501101357.AA10186@xxx.com> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 11:50:04 -0500 X-Mts: smtp Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI >>GM speed density uses only MAP. Did Ford's aborted attempt at speed >>density use a BAP sensor? (the worst comments I've heard about that >>system have all come from Dearborn :) >>-- >>Jonathan R. Lusky lusky@xxx.edu >*ALL* SD systems require a barometric pressure reading. On GM, Ford, etc. >the reading is taken under two conditions: (1) engine cranking (when MAP is >close to BP) and (2) close to WOT. Early (GM) CCC systems for carbureted >engines also used a "baro" sensor. The baro sensor is nothing more than a MAP >and BP sensors with an analog subtraction circuit to output the difference of >the two. The really early stuff used separate BP and MAP sensors (made by >Bendix). > >I'm not so certain that Ford's "attempt" at SD controls is "aborted"; almost >ALL the Ford stuff that's rolling on the roads is SD and it certainly appears >to be functioning properly. > >Regards, > >Bohdan Bodnar Good points. For unrelated reasons (I used to work on superchargers), I was thinking primarily of a boosted engine. I believe it had a BP sensor in addition to a mass air flow sensor. Just a few more quick comments: 'Functioning properly' is becoming less perceptible to the driver and more a matter of passing Federal certification tests. The tests may or may not represent the desires of the buying public, but that discussion is a philosophical one. With regard to speed-density vs. mass air flow, has anyone considered the robustness (not in a control sense) of the two systems to errors such as air leaks and sources of inflow downstream of the throttlebody? Is a speed-density system more resistant to or accepting of such disturbances? Tony >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 17:24:56 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA02750; Tue, 10 Jan 95 17:24:56 GMT Received: from wmata.wd.Cubic.COM by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA02733; Tue, 10 Jan 95 12:24:29 -0500 Received: from wmata.wd.cubic.com by wmata.wd.cubic.com; Tue, 10 Jan 95 08:55 PST Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 08:55:34 -0800 (PST) From: Bill Martin X-Sender: wwm@wmata To: DIY_EFI Cc: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: Exhaust Temperature for tuning In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Length: 1541 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI On Tue, 10 Jan 1995, A.DENNISON -EN320/TEL.8296 wrote: > Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 11:54:16 EST-11 > From: A.DENNISON -EN320/TEL.8296 > To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu > Subject: Exhaust Temperature for tuning > > I am interested in using exhaust temperature for optomising the > mixture - ideally for closed loop control. I saw this mentioned in > the archives (which finish in May 1994 - where is the rest of it?) > and I was wondering if anyone has some information on what > temperatures to expect. > Have you used thermocouples attached externally to the exhaust or in > the exhaust gas stream? I think this idea should give more > information than a lambda sensor and also work for leaded and > unleaded petrol. > > Comments anyone? > > Andrew > ------------------------------------ > Andrew Dennison - Research Associate > The CIM Centre > Melbourne, AUSTRALIA > Phone: +61 3 214 8296 > Fax: +61 3 214 4949 > WWW: http://cim.mm.swin.edu.au/welcome.html > > Well, acouple of comments...first, responce times for egt probes are kinda slow and you will always be "behind" the real-time conditions. Second, egt is sensitive to more than just mixture, ie. ignition advance and engine loading both have big effects on egt. I don't see how you will be able to separate the effects by measuring "just" egt. Obviously, you can compute/look up corrections for the other factors, but I really don't think the feedback loop will be fast enough to work well dynamically. Bill Martin >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 17:33:05 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA02939; Tue, 10 Jan 95 17:33:05 GMT Received: from dt.uleth.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA02933; Tue, 10 Jan 95 12:33:01 -0500 Received: by hg.uleth.ca (MX V4.1 VAX) id 701; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 10:32:23 MST Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 10:33:19 MST From: furgason@xxx.ca To: DIY_EFI Message-Id: <0098A3FE.0CEE8A80.701@xxx.ca> Subject: A FEW QUESTIONS Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI YES, I DO. I INTERFACED MY SUBURBAN TO MY PC AWHILE BACK. IT'S EASIER TO FAX YOU THAN POST IT (DIAGRAMS), SO SEND ME A NUMBER. BY THE WAY THE ADLD TO FAX YOU THAN POST IT (DIAGRAMS), SO SEND ME A NUMBER. BY THE WAY THE ALDL ON MINE ECU IS 160 BITS PER SEC. Dan Furgason University of Lethbridge Physics Dept Lethbridge Alberta Canada >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 18:50:28 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA04203; Tue, 10 Jan 95 18:50:28 GMT Received: from geni10.arl.mil by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA04198; Tue, 10 Jan 95 13:50:24 -0500 Received: by lamp0.arl.army.mil (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA13612; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 13:50:23 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 13:50:23 -0500 Message-Id: <9501101850.AA13612@xxx.mil> X-Sender: faustini@xxx.mil Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: DIY_EFI From: faustini@xxx.mil (Lou Faustini) Subject: Cc: Steve=Ravet%Prj=Eng%PCPD=Hou@xxx.com X-Mailer: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > You are correct about the baud rate, but it is > TTL level, not RS-232. This will drive most serial ports, however, if you use > a very short cable. Yeah, it's TTL alright, but I just used a max 233 level shifter. I also think its the wrong polairity... Note that the MAX233 inverts as well as level shifts.. I dont remember if I inverted the siginal prior to feeding it into the MAX233, but it may be necessery. Its also helpfull to note that the PC's UART can be SOFTWARE configured to almost any baud rate. It has a 16-bit divisor that sets the rate. This means you dont need any special hardware (besides the level shifter) to hack at this project. ---- Louis Faustini >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 19:07:31 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA05088; Tue, 10 Jan 95 19:07:31 GMT Received: from geni10.arl.mil by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA05083; Tue, 10 Jan 95 14:07:27 -0500 Received: by lamp0.arl.army.mil (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA13666; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 14:07:26 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 14:07:26 -0500 Message-Id: <9501101907.AA13666@xxx.mil> X-Sender: faustini@xxx.mil Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: DIY_EFI From: faustini@xxx.mil (Lou Faustini) Subject: Re: MAF and SD (was re: Re: New member intro) X-Mailer: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI >With regard to speed-density vs. mass air flow, has anyone considered the >robustness (not in a control sense) of the two systems to errors such as >air leaks and sources of inflow downstream of the throttlebody? Is a >speed-density system more resistant to or accepting of such disturbances? > >Tony > Tony: I know this... If you are going to put in an aftermarket cam in an EFI engine, you are much more likely to like the results if its a MAF type setup. I think thats because the MAF is less sensitive to the vaccum loss associated with a "big cam" motor.. ----- Lou Faustini >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 19:32:13 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA06522; Tue, 10 Jan 95 19:32:13 GMT Received: from gw1.att.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA06517; Tue, 10 Jan 95 14:32:10 -0500 Received: from uscbu.ih.att.com by ig2.att.att.com id AA24400; Tue, 10 Jan 95 14:29:07 EST Received: by uscbu.ih.att.com (4.1/EMS-1.1.1 SunOS) id AA29868; Tue, 10 Jan 95 13:25:29 CST Received: from usgp1.ih.att.com by uscbu.ih.att.com (4.1/EMS-1.1.1 SunOS) id AA29831; Tue, 10 Jan 95 13:25:08 CST Received: by usgp1.ih.att.com (5.0/EMS-1.1 Sol2) id AA13366; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 13:29:26 +0600 Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 13:29:26 +0600 Message-Id: <9501101929.AA13366@xxx.com> From: bohdan@xxx.com (Bohdan L Bodnar) To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: MAF and SD (was re: Re: New member intro) Content-Type: text Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI >With regard to speed-density vs. mass air flow, has anyone considered the >robustness (not in a control sense) of the two systems to errors such as >air leaks and sources of inflow downstream of the throttlebody? Is a >speed-density system more resistant to or accepting of such disturbances? > >Tony > On a speed-density system, an air leak will result in an increase in idle speed whereas on a mass air flow/vane air flow system this will result in rough idle. In fact, on a SD system running open loop a large air leak will easily result in the engine screaming like a banshee trying to win a hollering contest. This occurs because the MAP sensor is used as the primary engine load sensor. A large air leak is interpreted as a WOT condition. On a MAF/VAF system this same air leak will result in enleanment of the a/f mixture; hence, the rough idle. On my 1986 Le Baron (2.5 liters engine, TBI, SD controlled) running in closed loop I can increase the idle rpm by about 100 rpm by opening up a moderate leak at the power brake booster; in open loop on a cold engine, this same leak results in about 700 rpm increase. It's also interesting to watch the computer compensate for the air leak...the rpms gradually drop to the programmed value. These observations are standard diagnostic checks used in the field. Cordially, Bohdan Bodnar >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 19:41:42 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA06691; Tue, 10 Jan 95 19:41:42 GMT Received: from acmey.gatech.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA06686; Tue, 10 Jan 95 14:41:37 -0500 Received: (from gt0035b@xxx.edu; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 14:41:36 -0500 From: gt0035b@xxx.edu Message-Id: <199501101941.OAA20696@xxx.edu> Subject: Re: New member intro To: DIY_EFI Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 14:41:35 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <9501100241.AA29963@xxx.edu> from "John S Gwynne" at Jan 9, 95 09:41:28 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 644 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI John S Gwynne wrote > I'm curious, Tony. When it comes to solving manifold problems, > is everything modeled (i.e., boundary value problem with a > pressure field...full blown numerical models) or are the basic > properties/dynamics modeled empirically/heuristically? > (what's the state-of-the-art?) I don't know who uses it but a freind of mine works for a company called Ricadro that has a software package deisgn specificly to do computation fluid dynamics for intakes of I.C. engines. I beleive it is intended for designing of intakes but I'm sure the data could be used for other things. I imagine it is rather expensive. Henry Sommer >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 19:59:24 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA06876; Tue, 10 Jan 95 19:59:24 GMT Received: from gold.tc.umn.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA06865; Tue, 10 Jan 95 14:59:18 -0500 Received: from dialup-3-205.gw.umn.edu by gold.tc.umn.edu; Tue, 10 Jan 95 13:57:49 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 13:58:06 GMT From: "Matthew Lee Franklin" Message-Id: <16850.fran0054@xxx.edu> X-Minuet-Version: Minuet1.0_Beta_11 X-Popmail-Charset: English To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: MAF and SD (was re: Re: New member intro) Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI On Mon, 9 Jan 1995 21:21:14 -0600 (CST, Jonathan R. Lusky wrote: >GM speed density uses only MAP... I think they use MAT also, and possibly corrections for coolant temperature. At least on the QUAD-4 they did. An ' 87 SAE paper talked about that in pretty inderstandable terms. The main author was Thomson (spelled correctly without a "p"). I don't have the full number handy. I have had experience with a crude speed density system (speed pressure actually, since we don't measure temperature). We have applied it to two port fuel injected natural gas engines. A VW 1.7 and a Hercules G1600 industrial 163 cu in engine. I say crude because we were free to be crude. Our main focus was an adaptive, thermal efficiency maximizing algorithm, based on small perturbations in spark timing and manifold pressure (at constant fuel per cycle). (Two recent SAE papers and one ASME paper cover it pretty well). We run it with a simple fuel control and then constantly, synchronously, adaptively fine tune to set pulse width and spark timing for best efficiency. This system can compensate for changes in fuel composition or system wear or other changes which are normally difficult to measure or correct for. It is exciting to see how it really works! Anyway, our crude speed pressure sets pulse width as a linear function of MAP and that is all. It runs fine for our purposes. By the way, I'm graduating soon with a PhD in mechanical engineering. Does anybody have any openings within the next year or so? I could use a real salary. Later, Matt >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 10 20:33:40 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA07695; Tue, 10 Jan 95 20:33:40 GMT Received: from dns004.ford.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA07690; Tue, 10 Jan 95 15:33:37 -0500 Received: from srlns1.srl.ford.com (SRLNS1.SRL.FORD.COM [128.5.192.132]) by dns004.ford.com (8.6.7/8.6.6) with ESMTP id PAA10081 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 15:33:42 -0500 From: tsakiris@xxx.com Received: from ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com (ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com [19.3.98.21]) by srlns1.srl.ford.com (8.6.8/FordSRL 1.0) with SMTP id PAA20953 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 15:33:36 -0500 Received: by ed8200.ped.pto.ford.com (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA10098; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 15:33:47 -0500 Received: from localhost by pt9254.ped.pto.ford.com (5.65/PED-CLIENT) id AA00273; Tue, 10 Jan 1995 15:33:46 -0500 Message-Id: <9501102033.AA00273@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI Cc: tsakiris@xxx.com Subject: Re: MAF and SD (was re: Re: New member intro) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 10 Jan 95 14:07:26 EST." <9501101907.AA13666@xxx.mil> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 15:33:46 -0500 X-Mts: smtp Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI >>With regard to speed-density vs. mass air flow, has anyone considered the >>robustness (not in a control sense) of the two systems to errors such as >>air leaks and sources of inflow downstream of the throttlebody? Is a >>speed-density system more resistant to or accepting of such disturbances? >> >>Tony >> > Tony: > > I know this... If you are going to put in an aftermarket cam in an EFI >engine, you are much more likely to like the results if its a MAF type >setup. I think thats because the MAF is less sensitive to the vaccum loss >associated with a "big cam" motor.. > > ----- Lou Faustini Most definitely. I'm just thinking of the majority of people who never modify their engines. For the minority, Ford Motorsport sells MAF upgrade kits so that people can experiment with manifolds, heads, and cams more easily. (Granted the kits are very expensive.) I'm curious about all this from a stock production perspective. Tony >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 11 04:10:09 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA10567; Wed, 11 Jan 95 04:10:09 GMT Received: from ume.med.ucalgary.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA10562; Tue, 10 Jan 95 23:10:06 -0500 Received: by ume.med.ucalgary.ca (4.1/CPSC-BACS4.1) id AA07243; Tue, 10 Jan 95 21:13:21 MST Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 21:13:21 MST From: ebeaubie@xxx.ca (Eliot Beaubien) Message-Id: <9501110413.AA07243@xxx.ca> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Where to get 80C188? Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Hi there! I was wondering if anyone knows where I would be able to order the 80C188. I would like to build a single board computer so that I could do data aquisition and eventually would like to set up some sort of digital ignition. I don't really care what uProcessor I use, but I'm just doing this as a hobby, and since I am familiar with the 80X86 assembly language, I would like to stick with that. I also have the proper assembler, and don't want to buy the necessary cross assembler for another uP. Thanks in advance for any help. Garrett. >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 11 04:25:16 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA10599; Wed, 11 Jan 95 04:25:16 GMT Received: from mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA10594; Tue, 10 Jan 95 23:25:12 -0500 Received: from biscuit-tin.ee.mu.OZ.AU by mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU with SMTP id AA15539 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Wed, 11 Jan 1995 14:25:10 +1000 unauthenticated (rfc931-sender: unauthenticated@xxx.AU) From: robert joseph dingli Received: (dingli@xxx.6) id PAA24655; Wed, 11 Jan 1995 15:23:17 +1100 Message-Id: <199501110423.PAA24655@xxx.AU> Subject: Re: EFI and Accidents... To: faustini@xxx.mil (Lou Faustini) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 15:23:14 +1100 (EST) Cc: DIY_EFI (DIY_EFI ) In-Reply-To: <9501061438.AA06418@xxx.mil> from "Lou Faustini" at Jan 6, 95 09:38:12 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2449 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Hi Lou , > I couldn't help but notice in one of you're messages you said to try and > experiment on a "cheap 4-cyl" that you don't mind blowing up. I have worked > with many high-perf V8's over the years, and short of RPM runaway, I haven't > blown one up yet. But I don't know all there is to know about engine > building, and I also get the feeling that I have been very lucky. What are > some of the things that can lead to engine destruction? I know that lean-out > can be a problem, but in a 4-cycle its ususally not destructive. (Unless > that lean out occurs when the Nitrous button in pressed....ooops!) > > Any help would be appreciated.. > > ----- Lou Blowing up is a bit of a generic term I use for any type of engine damage. I managed to partially sieze a couple of piston during some high speed and load testing on a dyno. A rebore and a new set of pistons solved the problem but it was still a pain to have to strip down the motor. BTW it's a Jag XK 4.2 which isn't the cheapest engine to rebuild. Over fuelling can wash the oil film off the bores resulting in poor cylinder lubrication while under fuelling increases the burn time and results in more heat being transferred to the pistons, valves etc. I've encountered both scenarios in my testing and believe my test engine suffered due to both. Spark timing problems can obviously result in knock for too much advance or high combustion temperatures for too much retard. All of these concepts are fairly basic to anyone who has done any engine work. I guess its just a bit easier when you can the freedom of EFI to meter the fuel. The other beauty of small engines is that there are less parts (eg injectors) to buy and that they are generally easier to work upon (??). In Australia they are very easy to find already injected which makes manifolding much easier. (They also use less fuel during dyno and road testing). I hope this helps. Robert -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Dingli r.dingli@xxx.au Power and Control Systems Thermodynamics Research Lab Electrical Engineering Mechanical Engineering (+613) 344 7966 (+613) 344 6728 University of Melbourne, Parkville, 3052, Victoria, AUSTRALIA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 11 04:47:45 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA10628; Wed, 11 Jan 95 04:47:45 GMT Received: from mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA10623; Tue, 10 Jan 95 23:47:39 -0500 Received: from biscuit-tin.ee.mu.OZ.AU by mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU with SMTP id AA16066 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Wed, 11 Jan 1995 14:47:38 +1000 unauthenticated (rfc931-sender: unauthenticated@xxx.AU) From: robert joseph dingli Received: (dingli@xxx.edu; Wed, 11 Jan 1995 15:45:44 +1100 Message-Id: <199501110445.PAA24676@xxx.AU> Subject: MAF v SD To: DIY_EFI Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 15:45:41 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: > The advantage to MAF is that the computer can automatically adapt to engine > modifications like a less restrictive exhaust or heads that flow better, > right? SD requires that the volumetric efficiency table be updated any time > mods are done to the engine. > > --steve I've never used a MAF sensor and would guess that you are quite correct here. There are a couple of important points to be made though : Firstly, I presume that in the context of DIY EFI one will be aiming to design a system which is adjustable and thus any major change such as an engine mod will simply require some recalibration. Secondly, the hardware required for SD system requires one less component (the MAF meter) which are regarded as fragile at the best of times. Lastly, the SD map between speed/load and fuel output doesn't just reflect volumetric efficiency. It also reflects desired air fuel ratio which is also a function of speed and load position. When I drive down the highway tuning my car, I'm not aiming to estimate volumetric efficiency, but the output of the whole system which includes the way the engine performs from accelerator feel and the output from an EGO sensor in the exhaust. I aim for a very lean cruise, rich WOT and near WOT, and a stable idle. (I don't have to worry about emmisions of course.) Any similar MAF system would require a similar map and similar programming. Robert -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Dingli r.dingli@xxx.au Power and Control Systems Thermodynamics Research Lab Electrical Engineering Mechanical Engineering (+613) 344 7966 (+613) 344 6728 University of Melbourne, Parkville, 3052, Victoria, AUSTRALIA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 11 05:14:43 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA10801; Wed, 11 Jan 95 05:14:43 GMT Received: from mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA10796; Wed, 11 Jan 95 00:14:39 -0500 Received: from biscuit-tin.ee.mu.OZ.AU by mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU with SMTP id AA17153 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Wed, 11 Jan 1995 15:14:33 +1000 unauthenticated (rfc931-sender: unauthenticated@xxx.AU) From: robert joseph dingli Received: (dingli@xxx.edu; Wed, 11 Jan 1995 16:12:33 +1100 Message-Id: <199501110512.QAA24793@xxx.AU> Subject: Adaptive algorithms To: DIY_EFI Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 16:12:31 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: <16850.fran0054@xxx.edu> from "Matthew Lee Franklin" at Jan 10, 95 01:58:06 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2579 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Hi Matt, My own research (PhD) is into very similar systems. In fact a recent paper I preseneted at FISITA 94 in Beijing in October was all about self tuning AFR control of a NG engine. (It was a modified Ford EA26MPI engine actually.) Work by some of my colleagues is also focussing in port NG injection for taxi use in the local market. (Ford EECV (eeech!) EFI system). I was wondering whether the system was put into a vehicle or even a real world stationary application (as our work was) and, secondly, what sort of feedback did the adaptive system use. My own work is similar in concept to that done at Ohio State and other places using crank speed fluctuation to calculate engine torque for performance measurement. I'd be very intered to get references to your work as it sounds very interesting. > I have had experience with a crude speed density system (speed pressure > actually, since we don't measure temperature). We have applied it to two > port fuel injected natural gas engines. A VW 1.7 and a Hercules G1600 > industrial 163 cu in engine. I say crude because we were free to be > crude. Our main focus was an adaptive, thermal efficiency maximizing > algorithm, based on small perturbations in spark timing and manifold > pressure (at constant fuel per cycle). (Two recent SAE papers and one ASME > paper cover it pretty well). We run it with a simple fuel control and then > constantly, synchronously, adaptively fine tune to set pulse width and > spark timing for best efficiency. This system can compensate for changes > in fuel composition or system wear or other changes which are normally > difficult to measure or correct for. It is exciting to see how it really > works! Anyway, our crude speed pressure sets pulse width as a linear > function of MAP and that is all. It runs fine for our purposes. > > By the way, I'm graduating soon with a PhD in mechanical engineering. Does > anybody have any openings within the next year or so? I could use a real > salary. > I'll be in the same position in about a year. Good luck! > Later, > Matt Robert -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Dingli r.dingli@xxx.au Power and Control Systems Thermodynamics Research Lab Electrical Engineering Mechanical Engineering (+613) 344 7966 (+613) 344 6728 University of Melbourne, Parkville, 3052, Victoria, AUSTRALIA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 11 22:56:29 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA02030; Wed, 11 Jan 95 22:56:29 GMT Received: from gold.tc.umn.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA02025; Wed, 11 Jan 95 17:56:26 -0500 Received: from dialup-3-233.gw.umn.edu by gold.tc.umn.edu; Wed, 11 Jan 95 16:51:13 -0500 Date: Wed, 11 Jan 95 16:51:31 GMT From: "Matthew Lee Franklin" Message-Id: <18731.fran0054@xxx.edu> X-Minuet-Version: Minuet1.0_Beta_11 X-Popmail-Charset: English To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: Adaptive algorithms Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Robert wrote, >My own research (PhD) is into very similar systems. In fact a recent paper I >preseneted at FISITA 94 in Beijing in October was all about self tuning AFR >control of a NG engine... My search of optimization in the literature has been a little weak, so I was unaware of anything like that done at Ohio or Melbourne. I'd be curious to get exact numbers for references on the subject. Our system holds fuel injected per cycle constant during an eight revolution dither cycle. The MAP is dithered about 1% high for four revs and back for four. This, while the spark goes through a two rev advanced two rev retarded repeating cycle. From this we estimate TORQUE fluctuation. If there is a torque fluctuation a small correction is made in the direction of the improvement. In this way we work toward the most efficient air fuel ratio and spark timing. (Remember that if fuel flow is held constant the max torque equivalence ratio is also the most efficient.) Corrections are extermely small because cycle to cycle variation is orders of magnitude larger than the fluctuation due to our dithering. On average it works quite well. The concept is similar to a lock-in amplifier, if you are familiar with those. Future work will involve getting fast response without wild wander from the noise in our signal. Also, we would like to try the system on an engine with single point fuel addition (TBI or carburetted). RECENT REFERENCES: US Patent 5168853 SAE 940546, 940547 ASME ICE-Vol. 22, p73-83, October 1994 (the system is running much better now than in any of those papers) >I was wondering whether the system was put into a vehicle or even a real >world stationary application (as our work was)... And, no, we have not yet put this into a vehicle. Probable the first application will be on a stationary cogeneration engine with an electronic controlled carb hopefully running on land fill gas. Thanks for your interest. Later, Matt >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 12 00:07:08 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA02186; Thu, 12 Jan 95 00:07:08 GMT Received: from eigen.ee.ualberta.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA02181; Wed, 11 Jan 95 19:07:05 -0500 Message-Id: <9501120007.AA02181@xxx.edu> Received: by eigen.ee.ualberta.ca (1.38.193.4/15.6) id AA06532; Wed, 11 Jan 1995 17:13:39 -0700 From: Dale Ulan Subject: Re: MAF v SD To: DIY_EFI Date: Wed, 11 Jan 95 17:13:39 MST In-Reply-To: <199501110445.PAA24676@xxx.AU>; from "robert joseph dingli" at Jan 11, 95 3:45 pm Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > Lastly, the SD map between speed/load and fuel output doesn't just reflect > volumetric efficiency. It also reflects desired air fuel ratio which is > also a function of speed and load position. When I drive down the highway ... A lot of production applications actually separate the A:F requirements and mixture requirements into separate tables. This allows more creative compensation algorithms, and also more theoretically correct. This allows proper compensations to be made for manifold effects and other such problems. Such compensations usually require volumetric efficiency as a separate entity. -Dale >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 13 18:38:59 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA26920; Fri, 13 Jan 95 18:38:59 GMT Received: from pine.cse.nau.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA26914; Fri, 13 Jan 95 13:38:51 -0500 Received: (from met@xxx.2-nau) id LAA14783; Fri, 13 Jan 1995 11:38:48 -0700 Message-Id: <199501131838.LAA14783@xxx.edu> From: met@xxx.edu (MTN-KAT) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 1995 11:38:48 -0700 In-Reply-To: jvp%fuelrod@xxx.edu ( Jim Pieronek) "Re: Hall Effect Gear Tooth Sensor" (Jan 5, 1:41pm) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: Hall Effect Gear Tooth Sensor Cc: d24-28@xxx.edu Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI [Bohdan snidely speaks...] -Huh? Magnetization of gear teeth for "proper polarity"? You guys better -read up on the Hall Effect. All that is required is something which will -block/unblock a magnetic field (i.e., something that is ferromagnetic). -Sze's SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE PHYSICS is a good starting place...and it's readable, -too! -Bohdan Thanks for the info, I'll check this book out. [Jim explains...] -The following bizarre ASCII-gram shows the way the sensors are usually -used. A magnet (MM) is slapped right on the face of the sensor (HH) -and a ferrous metal clip ("|+-") is routed from the other face of the -magnet to make a gap in the vicinity of the other side of the sensor. -As the ferrous teeth (Fe) of the gear pass by the gap they "complete" -the magnetic circuit which increases the flux through the sensor. A -similar arrangement is used for distributor sensors. - FeFe - FeFeFe - +----- FeFeFeFe - |MMHH- FeFeFe - FeFe - Fe - FeFe - FeFeFe - FeFeFeFe - FeFeFe -Jim I dug out both of my college Physics texts in a vain attempt to correct my interpretation of the texts explanation of the Hall Effect. I can see how the sensor described above would work. Its 'amazing' how much better one can understand text materials when the ideas are actually put to use. ;) I also looked at the booklet that I had ordered with my Panasonic Hall Effect sensors, every application description shows the sensor in a stand-alone design. They are all merely simple magnetic switches without anything even vaguely resembling the above diagram. Maybe they don't understand either? :):) This new information changes my engine position sensor design significantly!!! Thank You very much Jim for spending the time to explain this to me and anyone else who had a somewhat limited knowledge of Hall Effect sensor applications. Millam >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 13 21:51:22 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA28341; Fri, 13 Jan 95 21:51:22 GMT Received: from JULIET.WX.LL.MIT.EDU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA28336; Fri, 13 Jan 95 16:51:17 -0500 Received: from fuelrod ([129.55.57.2]) by juliet.ll.mit.edu id AA05945g; Fri, 13 Jan 95 16:56:14 EST Received: from isotope.reactor by fuelrod (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06376; Fri, 13 Jan 95 14:50:20 MST Date: Fri, 13 Jan 95 14:50:20 MST From: jvp%fuelrod@xxx.edu ( Jim Pieronek) Message-Id: <9501132150.AA06376@fuelrod> Received: by isotope.reactor (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17963; Fri, 13 Jan 95 14:54:18 MST To: DIY_EFI In-Reply-To: <199501131838.LAA14783@xxx.edu> Subject: Re: Hall Effect Gear Tooth Sensor Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI MTN-KAT writes: [Much appreciated commendation snipped for sake of brevity.] > I also looked at the booklet that I had ordered with my Panasonic Hall Effect > sensors, every application description shows the sensor in a stand-alone > design. They are all merely simple magnetic switches without anything even > vaguely resembling the above diagram. Maybe they don't understand either? :):) I have noticed this in TI's data books. Their examples have a Hall effect sensor wedged into a gap in a torroidal coil. Perhaps the tooth-counting application that we are engaged in is a bit of a niche compared to all of the applications of these devices. Another reason that they may leave applications like this out is that they require some understanding of magnetic circuits, and that would require them to add another page or two to the app notes. Finally, I now recall where I saw the "Hall Effect Sensor in a Tube" that I mentioned in a previous post. I worked for GM on the Quad-4 engine. It has (at least the pre-production units _had_) a crankshaft position Hall Effect sensor. There was a balancing wheel cast in the shaft between cylinders 2 and 3. It was about 6 inches in diameter and 3/4 inch thick as I recall (10 years ago now). The wheel had a machined rim that had six equally-spaced slots cut in it (about 1/16 inch wide & deep) and one extra slot cut near the TDC slot. The short interval between the TDC slot and the sync slot was used to sync the computer to the engine. The sensor was shoved into a hole in the block that put it right where it needed to be. I'm going to visit my friendly auto parts store and see if they sell those sensors. They ought to work great on the ring gear. I'll report my findings next week. Jim >From owner-diy_efi Mon Jan 16 01:10:08 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA04708; Mon, 16 Jan 95 01:10:08 GMT Received: from mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA04703; Sun, 15 Jan 95 20:10:03 -0500 Received: by mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU id AA21485 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for DIY_EFI@xxx.edu); Mon, 16 Jan 1995 11:10:01 +1000 (rfc931-sender: @) From: robert joseph dingli Message-Id: <199501160110.AA21485@xxx.AU> Subject: Re: Adaptive algorithms To: DIY_EFI Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 12:10:01 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: <18731.fran0054@xxx.edu> from "Matthew Lee Franklin" at Jan 11, 95 04:51:31 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 3941 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Continuing our familiarisation Matt wrote > > My search of optimization in the literature has been a little weak, so I > was unaware of anything like that done at Ohio or Melbourne. I'd be > curious to get exact numbers for references on the subject. Our system I'll pass on the SAE ref # when I find where I put my copy of the FISITA 94 proceedings. The title was "Adaptive Control of Air-Fuel Ratio for Optimizing the Efficiency of a Lean Burn Natural Gas Engine." Proc of FISITA 94 Vol 3 Other work into self tuning optimization and general automotive adaptive control systems includes research at UMIST (assoc with Lucas) (P Wellstead, P Scotson, etc) Ohio State University (G Rizzoni, W Ribbens, F Connolly, etc) Ford / Ricardo (A Beaumont, A Noble, A Scarisbrick) UC Berkeley, MIT, Princeton (J K Hedrick, D Cho, J Moskwa, C Nesbit, etc) plus a car load of others I'm in the process of writing a reference list. Mail me later for exact details. > holds fuel injected per cycle constant during an eight revolution dither > cycle. The MAP is dithered about 1% high for four revs and back for four. > This, while the spark goes through a two rev advanced two rev retarded > repeating cycle. From this we estimate TORQUE fluctuation. If there > is a torque fluctuation a small correction is made in the direction of the > improvement. In this way we work toward the most efficient air fuel ratio > and spark timing. (Remember that if fuel flow is held constant the max > torque equivalence ratio is also the most efficient.) Corrections are > extermely small because cycle to cycle variation is orders of magnitude > larger than the fluctuation due to our dithering. On average it works > quite well. The concept is similar to a lock-in amplifier, if you are > familiar with those. Future work will involve getting fast response > without wild wander from the noise in our signal. Also, we would like to > try the system on an engine with single point fuel addition (TBI or > carburetted). Now that you mention it I remember reading one of your papers (SAE 892142). The system is a basic hill climbing technique that is unfortunately very susceptible to noise and multiple extrema. The work I'm implementing is different in that it forms a 2 or 3 dimensional quadratic model and statistically fits available data to estimate the position of the peak. The system can then 'jump' straight to the estimated optimum and re-tune from there. The system is very immune to noise and tunes in within about 3 or 4 iterations. New data is incorporated recursively and is inherently filtered in the algorithm. The current work is aimed at calulating engine output (torque or efficiency) in real time without using torque transducers. I'm experimenting with various crank speed based algorithms. The fact the the work has been applied to NG engines is primarily because of funding issues and secondly because of the fact that such engines will happily run at very lean AFR's with efficiency peaking further away from stoic than for petrol. More recent work is into optimising a lean burn petrol engine which uses a hyrogen assisted ignition system allowing AFR's as lean as lambda = 5. > RECENT REFERENCES: > US Patent 5168853 > SAE 940546, 940547 > ASME ICE-Vol. 22, p73-83, October 1994 > (the system is running much better now than in any of those papers) > > Thanks for your interest. > Thanks for the references. Robert -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Dingli r.dingli@xxx.au Power and Control Systems Thermodynamics Research Lab Electrical Engineering Mechanical Engineering (+613) 344 7966 (+613) 344 6728 University of Melbourne, Parkville, 3052, Victoria, AUSTRALIA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Mon Jan 16 20:32:45 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA07246; Mon, 16 Jan 95 20:32:45 GMT Received: from hac2arpa.hac.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA07241; Mon, 16 Jan 95 15:32:42 -0500 Received: from EDEN1.HAC.COM by hac2arpa.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA18274; Mon, 16 Jan 95 12:32:12 PST Received: from hyperion.hdos.hac.com by EDEN1.HAC.COM (PMDF V4.3-13 #5884) id <01HLWXCR38Y8001XGP@xxx.COM>; Mon, 16 Jan 1995 12:31:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from daedalus.hdos.hac.com by hyperion.hdos.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08702; Mon, 16 Jan 95 15:32:05 EST Received: From HDOS_DPC/WORKQUEUE by daedalus.hdos.hac.com via Charon-4.0A-VROOM with IPX id 100.950116152828.480; 16 Jan 95 15:30:53 +0500 Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 15:28:19 ET From: John T Stein Subject: Retrieving ECM data with PC To: DIY_EFI Message-Id: X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail/Windows (v1.22) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Priority: normal Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI I am trying to find software (PC) to read out, decommutate, and display data stored in a General Motors engine control computer. Does anyone have, or know of the existence of any such software? Any other information about the format and organization of the telemetry available at the ALDL connector; e.g word sizes, baud rates, data order, etc. would be appreciated as well. I would expect the ALDL data rate to be low enough to allow the data to be received by the PC serial data port. I would also expect that the only hardware needed would be a line receiver for the ALDL data and a suitable driver to sink the ALDL test pin to ground. Are these assumptions valid? I am sure this has all been done by someone already, does anyone out there have any experience they could share with me? Thanks, John >From owner-diy_efi Mon Jan 16 21:31:01 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA07373; Mon, 16 Jan 95 21:31:01 GMT Received: from wotan.compaq.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA07367; Mon, 16 Jan 95 16:30:54 -0500 Received: from twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com by wotan.compaq.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #12) id m0rTz12-000vJQC; Mon, 16 Jan 95 15:31 CST Received: from bangate.compaq.com by twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #10) id m0rTz0m-000uH1C; Mon, 16 Jan 95 15:30 CST Message-Id: Received: by bangate.compaq.com with VINES ; Mon, 16 Jan 95 15:30:51 CST Date: Mon, 16 Jan 95 14:42:16 CST From: Steve=Ravet%Prj=Eng%PCPD=Hou@xxx.com Subject: re: Retrieving ECM data with PC To: diy_efi Cc: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI John T Stein Picked up his electron pen and wrote: | I am trying to find software (PC) to read out, decommutate, and | display data stored in a General Motors engine control computer. | Does anyone have, or know of the existence of any such software? Delco manufactures the Tech-1A, the definitive scan tool for GM products. I have no idea how much it costs, but I believe it is in the $1000 range. It is stand-alone hardware that plugs into the ALDL and prints/records the frames as they come out. It can be set to trigger on various conditions. A company called diacom makes software to run on a PC that hooks to the ALDL via the parallel port, not serial. I believe it costs $400 or so. I have heard that it can be purchased thru NAPA auto parts stores, and via mail order from speed shops. I have been told that it offers nearly the same functionality as the tech-1a, with a better presentation format. I could find out more info about this if you are interested, since someone on the vette net recently purchased it. If you are interested in a Buick GN/Ttype or similar, Ken Mosher has written a program which he sells for $100 to read the ALDL info and print frames. This only works with a certain version of engine computer which sends data at a much lower rate (see below). You can check out the GN/Ttype list to get more info on this. | | Any other information about the format and organization of the | telemetry available at the ALDL connector; e.g word sizes, baud | rates, data order, etc. would be appreciated as well. There are at least two types of engine computers, which use different data rates. All that is commonly known about the faster one (I should say, all that I have been able to figure out) is that the baud rate is 8192, TTL level. The UART in a PC cannot be programmed to 8192 exactly, but a divisor of 14 yields 8228, which should be close enough, esp. since the UART in PCs uses 16x oversampling. The TTL voltage should drive an RS232 port with a very short cable, if not a MAX level shifter could be used. I have no information on how the data is partitioned, not even if it lies on byte boundaries or not. I would assume it does. You have to know what type of engine computer you are dealing with. The computers in the buick GN-ttype cars uses a much lower baud rate, about 110 or so, and it is self clocked in some manner. Apparently the computer does not send data continuously, but sends a bit whenever it finds the time. I believe all corvettes (84-up) use the faster data rate. Other cars I have no idea. In a few years, the ALDL will be gone, replaced with OBD-II, a standard interface across car manufacturers. The specs will be public, so if you want to roll your own, it shouldn't be too hard. The 94 Corvette is partially OBD compliant. | | I would expect the ALDL data rate to be low enough to allow the data | to be received by the PC serial data port. I would also expect that | the only hardware needed would be a line receiver for the ALDL data | and a suitable driver to sink the ALDL test pin to ground. Are these | assumptions valid? Here is what I know/have guessed from the corvette service manual. ALDL data is present all the time. The engine computer can be in one of three modes, ALDL, 10K, and backup. ALDL mode is normal mode, ie you can collect data while you are driving, etc. 10K maintains engine rpm at 1000, and disables some features, like O2 feedback, etc. Backup mode cuts the ECM out all together, and simulates the fallback mode that takes over should the ECM totally bug out. I am not sure how to set these modes, but I believe different resistances from the test pin to ground will do it. | | I am sure this has all been done by someone already, does anyone | out there have any experience they could share with me? It's been done, but unfortunately it's only been done commercially, and no-one wants to talk about it. I have tried calling GM about it, but haven't ever managed to get ahold of someone who knows what I am talking about, much less knows if the info can be released or not. | | Thanks, | | John | Anyone else? --steve >From owner-diy_efi Mon Jan 16 22:46:20 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA07726; Mon, 16 Jan 95 22:46:20 GMT Received: from shiva.trl.OZ.AU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA07721; Mon, 16 Jan 95 17:46:15 -0500 Received: by shiva.trl.OZ.AU id AA16982 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for DIY_EFI@xxx.edu); Tue, 17 Jan 1995 09:46:06 +1100 From: Craig Pugsley Message-Id: <199501162246.AA16982@xxx.AU> Subject: Re: Retrieving ECM data with PC To: DIY_EFI Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 09:46:06 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: from "John T Stein" at Jan 16, 95 03:28:19 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1605 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > > I am trying to find software (PC) to read out, decommutate, and > display data stored in a General Motors engine control computer. > Does anyone have, or know of the existence of any such software? > > Any other information about the format and organization of the > telemetry available at the ALDL connector; e.g word sizes, baud > rates, data order, etc. would be appreciated as well. > > I would expect the ALDL data rate to be low enough to allow the data > to be received by the PC serial data port. I would also expect that > the only hardware needed would be a line receiver for the ALDL data > and a suitable driver to sink the ALDL test pin to ground. Are these > assumptions valid? > > I am sure this has all been done by someone already, does anyone > out there have any experience they could share with me? There's a guy on the GN mailing list who makes a product called 'Turbolink'. This consists of a special cable (with ALDL connector, interface electronics and PC serial port plug) and software that interrogates the ALDL data stream (_Note_ it is specifically tailored to the ECUs as fitted to buick grand nationals, so may not work with all ALDL data streams). It converts the ALDL into bargraphs on the screen and saves the data to memory/disk, and was designed as a tuning tool (Beleive me, the guys on the GN list are speed nuts :-). Cost was under $US100. There is/was an FTPable demo version that allows you to view some of the saved data files, but not capture your own (ie no ALDL). I'll try to find out where this is located today. Craig pugsley@xxx.au >From owner-diy_efi Mon Jan 16 22:56:04 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA07744; Mon, 16 Jan 95 22:56:04 GMT Received: from stimpy.uleth.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA07739; Mon, 16 Jan 95 17:55:59 -0500 Received: by hg.uleth.ca (MX V4.1 VAX) id 73; Mon, 16 Jan 1995 15:57:46 MST Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 15:57:47 MST From: furgason@xxx.ca To: diy_efi Message-Id: <0098A8E2.5F1C86C0.73@xxx.ca> Subject: aldl to pc Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI I just got off the phone with the guys at GM . This is an SAE reference for the new data stream standard .... SAE J1850. I haven't got it yet so I don't know if it fits the bill. I do have the ALDL stuff for 1989 and I can share it on a limited basis. Opps Above it should read "There is an SAE"....... I promised some info to a few people, I will make good on that shortly Dan Furgason >From owner-diy_efi Mon Jan 16 23:15:32 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA07813; Mon, 16 Jan 95 23:15:32 GMT Received: from wotan.compaq.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA07808; Mon, 16 Jan 95 18:15:30 -0500 Received: from twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com by wotan.compaq.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #12) id m0rU0eH-000vIwC; Mon, 16 Jan 95 17:15 CST Received: from bangate.compaq.com by twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #10) id m0rU0e0-000uHPC; Mon, 16 Jan 95 17:15 CST Message-Id: Received: by bangate.compaq.com with VINES ; Mon, 16 Jan 95 17:15:28 CST Date: Mon, 16 Jan 95 17:11:18 CST From: Steve=Ravet%Prj=Eng%PCPD=Hou@xxx.com Subject: re: aldl to pc To: diy_efi Cc: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI furgason@xxx.ca Wrote: | | | I just got off the phone with the guys at GM . This is an SAE reference | for the new data stream standard .... SAE J1850. I haven't got it yet | so I don't know if it fits the bill. I do have the ALDL stuff for 1989 and | I can share it on a limited basis. Opps Above it should read | "There is an SAE"....... SAE J1850 is a hardware specification for a single or double wire automotive bus. It is a part of OBD-II (On Board Diagnostics). J1850 specifies how information packets are placed on the wire, but I don't think it specifies what is in the packets. But OBD does, and it will be here soon. I would be *very* interested in the ALDL stuff from '89, if it is the fast data rate stuff and not the slow. Is it proprietary? And if so, how did you get ahold of it? | | | I promised some info to a few people, I will make good on that | shortly | | Dan Furgason | --steve >From owner-diy_efi Mon Jan 16 23:15:37 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA07820; Mon, 16 Jan 95 23:15:37 GMT Received: from hwking.cca.rockwell.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA07815; Mon, 16 Jan 95 18:15:35 -0500 Received: by hwking.cca.rockwell.com (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA06349; Mon, 16 Jan 1995 17:15:27 -0600 Received: by star.cca.rockwell.com (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA06849; Mon, 16 Jan 1995 17:15:24 -0600 Message-Id: <9501162315.AA06849@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: Retrieving ECM data with PC In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 17 Jan 95 09:46:06 +1100." <199501162246.AA16982@xxx.AU> Date: Mon, 16 Jan 95 17:15:12 -0600 From: sdbartho@xxx.com X-Mts: smtp Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI >There is/was an FTPable demo version that allows you to view some of the >saved data files, but not capture your own (ie no ALDL). >I'll try to find out where this is located today. Ken's Turbolink demo is at: ftp://ni.umd.edu Look around under the gnttype directory. He's been kicking around the idea of adapting it to the GMC Syclone/Typhoon, (which uses ALDLII) but hasn't yet. Later, Dig sdbartho@xxx.com Syclone/Typhoon mailing list- Feel the power of the wind. >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 17 00:08:55 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA07979; Tue, 17 Jan 95 00:08:55 GMT Received: from shiva.trl.OZ.AU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA07974; Mon, 16 Jan 95 19:08:37 -0500 Received: by shiva.trl.OZ.AU id AA23383 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for DIY_EFI@xxx.edu); Tue, 17 Jan 1995 11:08:34 +1100 From: Craig Pugsley Message-Id: <199501170008.AA23383@xxx.AU> Subject: Re: Retrieving ECM data with PC To: DIY_EFI Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 11:08:33 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: <9501162315.AA06849@xxx.com" at Jan 16, 95 05:15:12 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 507 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > > > >There is/was an FTPable demo version that allows you to view some of the > >saved data files, but not capture your own (ie no ALDL). > >I'll try to find out where this is located today. > > Ken's Turbolink demo is at: > > ftp://ni.umd.edu > Oh well, I'm half a day behind again.. The FTP address is as above, the directory is /gnttype/turbolink There's about 1/2 dozen files in there - I'm not sure what they all are (it's been several months since I last played around with this stuff) Craig. >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 17 02:32:14 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA08634; Tue, 17 Jan 95 02:32:14 GMT Received: from eigen.ee.ualberta.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA08629; Mon, 16 Jan 95 21:32:11 -0500 Message-Id: <9501170232.AA08629@xxx.edu> Received: by eigen.ee.ualberta.ca (1.38.193.4/15.6) id AA24913; Mon, 16 Jan 1995 19:32:11 -0700 From: Dale Ulan Subject: re: Retrieving ECM data with PC To: DIY_EFI Date: Mon, 16 Jan 95 19:32:11 MST In-Reply-To: oversampling. The TTL voltage should drive an RS232 port with a very short > cable, if not a MAX level shifter could be used. I have no information on how > the data is partitioned, not even if it lies on byte boundaries or not. I > would assume it does. Yes, you need a level shifter. Also, the data line is bidirectional, so you need an open-collector driver on the line. Note that the ALDL data is like the data right out of the UART, so it must be inverted as well. Basically, you need to run it through a MAX232. The 'transmit' (TTL out of the MAX232) should go through a diode to simulate an open-collector line. Normally, the ECM stays quiet until you ask it to talk. The data is actually sent in response to a poll request, and is just various bytes and words of the ECM's RAM. This implies that byte-derived data is aligned normally. Some things, like all of the I/O ports and flag bits are sent as a byte as well. ie. one byte may have the following flags in it: CLOOP RICH CLONCE UNFLOOD PUSHSTART LOWVOLTAGE LEARN-EN ASYNC-PLS This is just an example. I don't know if I got the bit order right... and that 'PUSHSTART' is just a guess as well... :-) > You have to know what type of engine computer you are dealing with. The > computers in the buick GN-ttype cars uses a much lower baud rate, about 110 or > so, and it is self clocked in some manner. Apparently the computer does not >send data continuously, but sends a bit whenever it finds the time. I believe It is sent at 160 baud, and is sent almost immediately after the pace/heartbeat interrupt is received by the processor. There are about 160 lines of code between the interrupt and the actual data, so the baud rate appears to drift. This is pretty much only bit skew, as far as I can tell. This 160 lines of code can vary in execution time quite a bit, but that 160 Hz heartbeat appears to occur in a very regular fashion. > Here is what I know/have guessed from the corvette service manual. ALDL data > is present all the time. The engine computer can be in one of three modes, > ALDL, 10K, and backup. ALDL mode is normal mode, ie you can collect data > while you are driving, etc. 10K maintains engine rpm at 1000, and disables > some features, like O2 feedback, etc. Backup mode cuts the ECM out all > together, and simulates the fallback mode that takes over should the ECM > totally bug out. I am not sure how to set these modes, but I believe > different resistances from the test pin to ground will do it. There are several modes: 0K mode: engine off: blink codes engine on: blink CHECK ENGINE with RICH/LEAN flag 3.9K mode: fuel backup mode 10K mode: as described above Open mode: normal operation. This goes between 'A' and 'B' on the ALDL connector. In addition, the bidirectional data bus on the 8192 ECMs can place the ECM in many strange test modes. I haven't traced any of them out yet... ALDL data on the 8192 ECMs doesn't get spewed out all of the time... as far as I can tell, anyways. The ECM spits out its data stream only when the device at the other end of the wire interrogates it. This can occur any time the CPU is running normal code. I don't think the CPU stops even when you are in fuel backup mode, but don't quote me on that. As far as I could tell, it only stops the fuel watchdog. > wants to talk about it. I have tried calling GM about it, but haven't ever > managed to get ahold of someone who knows what I am talking about, much less > knows if the info can be released or not. Yea, I know the feeling. -Dale >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 17 12:45:00 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA09389; Tue, 17 Jan 95 12:45:00 GMT Received: from merlin.nando.net by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA09384; Tue, 17 Jan 95 07:44:55 -0500 Received: by merlin.nando.net (4.1/davel-nando/june94) id AA08051; Tue, 17 Jan 95 07:43:30 EST Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 07:43:29 -0500 (EST) From: David Cooley To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: Retrieving ECM data with PC In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI On Mon, 16 Jan 1995, John T Stein wrote: > I am trying to find software (PC) to read out, decommutate, and > display data stored in a General Motors engine control computer. > Does anyone have, or know of the existence of any such software? > > Any other information about the format and organization of the > telemetry available at the ALDL connector; e.g word sizes, baud > rates, data order, etc. would be appreciated as well. > > I would expect the ALDL data rate to be low enough to allow the data > to be received by the PC serial data port. I would also expect that > the only hardware needed would be a line receiver for the ALDL data > and a suitable driver to sink the ALDL test pin to ground. Are these > assumptions valid? > > I am sure this has all been done by someone already, does anyone > out there have any experience they could share with me? > > Thanks, > > John > > John, Rinda Technologies sells a package called DIACOM. Software for the PC and a cable from the PARALLEL port to the ALDL connector. About 300.00 Later, Dave Cooley >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 17 12:52:32 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA09409; Tue, 17 Jan 95 12:52:32 GMT Received: from merlin.nando.net by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA09404; Tue, 17 Jan 95 07:52:29 -0500 Received: by merlin.nando.net (4.1/davel-nando/june94) id AA09007; Tue, 17 Jan 95 07:51:03 EST Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 07:51:03 -0500 (EST) From: David Cooley To: DIY_EFI Subject: re: aldl to pc In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI On Mon, 16 Jan 1995 Steve=Ravet%Prj=Eng%PCPD=Hou@xxx.com wrote: > furgason@xxx.ca Wrote: > | > | > | I just got off the phone with the guys at GM . This is an SAE reference > | for the new data stream standard .... SAE J1850. I haven't got it yet > | so I don't know if it fits the bill. I do have the ALDL stuff for 1989 and > | I can share it on a limited basis. Opps Above it should read > | "There is an SAE"....... > > SAE J1850 is a hardware specification for a single or double wire automotive > bus. It is a part of OBD-II (On Board Diagnostics). J1850 specifies how > information packets are placed on the wire, but I don't think it specifies > what is in the packets. But OBD does, and it will be here soon. > > I would be *very* interested in the ALDL stuff from '89, if it is the fast > data rate stuff and not the slow. Is it proprietary? And if so, how did you > get ahold of it? > > | > | > | I promised some info to a few people, I will make good on that > | shortly > | > | Dan Furgason > | > > --steve > > > SAE handbook HS-3000 has all the papers relating to OBD_II including SAE J2201, Universal interface for OBD_II scan tool. I am currently working with an engineer from Chrysler and one from Harris semiconductor on designing and marketing a OBD_II scan tool. Chrysler has had a CCD bus for 5 or 6 years now... It has been 99.9% OBD_II the whole time. Now all manufacturers have to use one of 3 variants of this standard for communications. All messages and commands will be standard (J1850 & 2178) the connector will be the same (J1962) Finally, one interface will support all cars.. No swapping cartridges etc. Later, Dave >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 17 15:22:16 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA10656; Tue, 17 Jan 95 15:22:16 GMT Received: from geni10.arl.mil by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA10651; Tue, 17 Jan 95 10:22:08 -0500 Received: by lamp0.arl.army.mil (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA21229; Tue, 17 Jan 1995 10:22:00 -0500 Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 10:22:00 -0500 Message-Id: <9501171522.AA21229@xxx.mil> X-Sender: faustini@xxx.mil Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: JSTEIN@xxx.com From: faustini@xxx.mil (Lou Faustini) Subject: aldl codes Cc: DIY_EFI X-Mailer: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI I have worked on the ALDL serial data stream. There are two "flavors" of GM data streams. On later models the data rate is 8192 baud. This is the only data stream I have worked with. The earlier stuff worked at approx 166 baud (-I think-). I never actually cracked either data format. I can tell you hardware wise you will need a level-shifter/inverter to interface to the PC. I used a MAX233 serial line driver. You can program the 8250 UART in the PC to get close enough to 8192 baud to work without errors. You will have to program the 16-bit divisor in the 8250 with port-IO commands. If its not too much trouble, please let me know if you get anywhere on decoding the GM data stream. ------- Lou >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 20 17:57:54 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA02580; Fri, 20 Jan 95 17:57:54 GMT Received: from stimpy.uleth.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA02575; Fri, 20 Jan 95 12:57:50 -0500 Received: by hg.uleth.ca (MX V4.1 VAX) id 148; Fri, 20 Jan 1995 10:59:18 MST Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 10:59:22 MST From: furgason@xxx.ca To: diy_efi Message-Id: <0098ABDD.58F6A160.148@xxx.ca> Subject: looking for steve Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Steve, You asked for some info, but my messages keep bouncing back. Can you send me your e-mail address?? Dan Furgason >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 20 18:18:09 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA02677; Fri, 20 Jan 95 18:18:09 GMT Received: from nss1.CC.Lehigh.EDU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA02672; Fri, 20 Jan 95 13:18:07 -0500 Received: from ns3-1.CC.Lehigh.EDU (vpl2@xxx.edu>; Fri, 20 Jan 1995 13:18:07 -0500 Received: (vpl2@xxx.9) id NAA111599; Fri, 20 Jan 1995 13:18:05 -0500 Message-Id: <199501201818.NAA111599@xxx.EDU> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 13:18:03 EST From: vpl2@xxx.EDU (Vinny Loccisano) X-Mailer: SENDM [Version 2.0.12] Subject: intake design To: DIY_EFI Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI First off I would like to introduce myself. I am a Mechanical engineering major at Lehigh University, working on our second Formula SAE car. This car is based around a 600 cc motorcycle engine. We're in the process of incorporating electronic fuel injection into the car. By the restrictions of the competition, we're forced to run a a 20 mm restrictor in our intake. The factory carbs must be replaced with a single unit (if we were staying with carbs that is). I was wondering if anyone has any knowledge on determining proper intake port length for this application. Currently we are in the process of machining a 2 inch throttle body (placed before the restrictor) The EFI unit is a Bosche Motronic unit from a Porsche 962. We will be using mass air flow, and 13 or 16 lb injectors. Any ideas on what would be the best intake setup, such as an airbox vs. individual runners. Any thoughts about proper length. Thanks in advance Vinny Loccisano Lehigh University vpl2@xxx.edu (610) 861-4458 >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 20 21:19:49 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA03586; Fri, 20 Jan 95 21:19:49 GMT Received: from system3.lcs.gov.bc.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA03581; Fri, 20 Jan 95 16:19:46 -0500 Received: from by system3.lcs.gov.bc.ca with SMTP (1.38.193.5/16.2) id AA09171; Fri, 20 Jan 1995 13:15:18 -0800 From: Evernden_Wes_A/lcs_system3@xxx.ca X-Openmail-Hops: 1 Date: Fri, 20 Jan 95 13:14:31 -0800 Message-Id: <0F282462@MHS> Subject: RE: intake design To: vpl2@xxx.EDU, DIY_EFI Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Dr. Gordon Blairs book "Two Stroke Engine Design" goes into this in great detail. He even supplies some programs written in Basic to calculate lengths. Its published by SAE & in the publications catalog. Wes Evernden Victoria, BC ---------- Any thoughts about proper length. Thanks in advance Vinny Loccisano Lehigh University vpl2@xxx.edu (610) 861-4458 >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 20 21:31:13 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA03627; Fri, 20 Jan 95 21:31:13 GMT Received: from spectre.uunet.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA03622; Fri, 20 Jan 95 16:31:07 -0500 Received: from gateway.prior.com ([142.77.252.4]) by spectre.uunet.ca with SMTP id <2056>; Fri, 20 Jan 1995 16:29:54 -0500 Received: by gateway.prior.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14230; Fri, 20 Jan 95 12:46:44 EST Received: from odin.gallium.com(192.139.238.33) by gateway.gallium.com via smap (V1.3) id sma014228; Fri Jan 20 12:46:29 1995 Received: from ivan.gallium.com by odin (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01389; Fri, 20 Jan 95 12:40:22 EST Received: by ivan.gallium.com (931110.SGI/930416.SGI) for @xxx.edu id AA05031; Fri, 20 Jan 95 12:57:45 -0500 Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 12:57:45 -0500 From: MSargent@xxx. Sargent) Message-Id: <9501201757.AA05031@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Balancing Injectors vs Air Flow Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI This is something that just crossed my mind this morning while driving to work, so feel free to shoot it full of holes.... When an engine is blueprinted (and especially if it is not) the air flow through the manifolds and heads will not be identical for each cylinder. Also, injectors will not have exactly the same flow rate. This means that when you assemble an EFI engine, you can still have a situation where you have lean cylinders and rich cylinders. This is my suggestion for balancing these effects. 1) Number the injectors so you can tell them apart. Put injector 1 in cyl 1, I2 in C2, etc. 2) Run the engine (preferably on a dyno) at full power, and record the exhaust temperature for each exhaust port after things have stabilized. 3) Rotate the injectors, so I1 is now in C2, I2 in C3, etc. 4) Repeat 2) and 3) until all injectors have been tested in all cyls. 5) You'll end up with a table like the following (4 cyl engine): Port 1 Te1i1 Te1i2 Te1i3 Te1i4 2 Te2i1 Te2i2 Te2i3 Te2i4 3 Te3i1 Te3i2 Te3i3 Te3i4 4 Te4i1 Te4i2 Te4i3 Te4i4 Where TeNiM means the exhaust gas temperature exhaust port N using injector M. 6) Add up the exhaust port temperatures for each port for all injectors (i.e., sum all Te1i*, Te2i*, ...). This will let you determine which is the hotest port. 7) Add up the exhaust port temperatures for all ports for each injector (i.e., sum all Te*i1, Te*i2, ...). This will let you know which is the hotest (leanest) injector. 8) If any of the values in 6) or 7) is significantly different from the others (> 10%???), then you may have another problem worth looking at (bad injector or poor flow through one cyl) that should be dealt with first. 9) If all are not too far off, then pair the hottest injector with the coolest port, etc. down to the coolest injector with the hottest port. 10) A final dyno run should show exhaust gas temperatures that are fairly uniform, indicating that each cylinder is doing almost the same amount of work. 11) Finally, in a DIY_EFI controller, a small amount of per injector correction could be added to completely balance the engine. Well how does this sound? Am I completely out to lunch? Or is this to small of an adjustment to be worthwhile? Mike +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Michael F. Sargent | Net: msargent@xxx.com | Phone: 1(613)721-0902 | | Gallium Software Inc.| | FAX: 1(613)721-1278 | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >From owner-diy_efi Sun Jan 22 23:51:38 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA09703; Sun, 22 Jan 95 23:51:38 GMT Received: from [203.5.74.1] by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA09698; Sun, 22 Jan 95 18:51:30 -0500 Received: from cs81b.iaccess.com.au (cs81b.iaccess.com.au [203.5.74.102]) by heimdall.iaccess.com.au (8.6.9/8.6.5) with SMTP id KAA09269 for ; Mon, 23 Jan 1995 10:51:53 +1100 Received: by localhost (IBM OS/2 SENDMAIL VERSION 1.3.6)/1.0um) id AA0024; Mon, 23 Jan 95 10:32:57 -0800 Message-Id: <9501231832.AA0024@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 23 Jan 95 09:01:27 +0000 From: pds@xxx.au To: DIY_EFI Subject: Injector firing circuits X-Mailer: Ultimedia Mail/2 Lite, IBM T. J. Watson Research Center Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Id: <23_73_1_790869689> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Description: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Hi, I'm in the process of transplanting a Ford throttle body injection unit from their Australian Falcon inline 6 cylinder engine onto my Peugeot V6. The idea is to replace the elaborate carby system (one single barrel and one twin barrel plus levers vacuum acuators etc. etc) with efi. I've had a manifold welded, machined and drilled to accept the TBI unit. The computer I've designed is based on the Dallas 80C320 running at 24 Mhz. Essentially it's equivalent to an 8031 running at about 66 Mhz. I designed it for another project and I have 4 left over. I'm going to use the MAP sensor from the falcon along with the throttle position sensor mounted on the throttle body. Water temp will come from the existing sensor mounted on the water pump. Air temp is from a sensor mounted in a hole drilled in the manifold near the right rear cylinder intake. The two injectors used in the falcon seem to be peak and hold types. Scoping up the ECU up reveals a 700-800 uS pulse at full battery volts followed by a variable time current limited tail, with 50 volt spikes at the transitions. The question is what is the =best= circuit to use to achive this type of drive. I've looked at IRF530 powerFETs but the drive circuitry seems too fiddly. It seems that they need about 160 mA to overcome the gate capacitance. Bipolar transisors all seem to have very low current gains and take a long time to switch off. This has led me to the Philips BUK101-50GL device which seems to be designed as an automotive solenoid driver. The data says they can be connected directly to the micro. As the 80C320 doesn't have a PWM output I may try the following circuit. Tweaking the RC will get the 700-800 uS peak pulse while the other half will hold the tail. The BUKs have protection built in too so that's less work for me. Incidentally, if you used a PWM output to do the current control, wouldn't that cause lots and lots of EMI? Thinking about it, why don't efi engines cause lots of radio interference. The injectors cause quite large (50 volt) spikes which usually cause emi. ----------*-> To injector |\ |\ |\ |--| | Input >------| 0-*-||-*---*--| 0--| 0-----| | Bank 0 |/ | | | |/ |/ |--| | | | \ | | | --- / --- | | /_\ \ - | | | / 2 x Philips BUK101-50GL | | | | | | ----* current limit | | | ---\/\/\--| | --- | resistor | - |--| -------------------------| |--| | --- - Comments please from budding efi designers!! As you've probably guessed by now, my background is electronics, computers and communications. So, I don't really know what I'm doing here, which will probably help me, because if I did know I probably wouldn't have started this project. //---------------------------------------------------------------------------- // Phillip Bertolus _ |\ // Program Development Systems / |_| \ // 57 Purtell Street (P.O. Box 21) .' \ // East Bentleigh, 3165 / \ // Melbourne Australia. \ _ / // Phone: +61 3 563 7755 \_.-' \_*/ // Fax:BBS:FaxBack:Voice Prompt:Network: +61 3 563 7855 v >From owner-diy_efi Mon Jan 23 00:58:14 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA09791; Mon, 23 Jan 95 00:58:14 GMT Received: from mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA09786; Sun, 22 Jan 95 19:58:09 -0500 Received: from biscuit-tin.ee.mu.OZ.AU by mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU with SMTP id AA23518 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Mon, 23 Jan 1995 10:58:03 +1000 unauthenticated (rfc931-sender: unauthenticated@xxx.AU) From: robert joseph dingli Received: (dingli@xxx.edu; Mon, 23 Jan 1995 11:57:40 +1100 Message-Id: <199501230057.LAA03861@xxx.AU> Subject: Re: Balancing Injectors vs Air Flow To: DIY_EFI Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 11:57:37 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: <9501201757.AA05031@xxx. Sargent" at Jan 20, 95 12:57:45 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2267 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Mike writes, > > This is something that just crossed my mind this morning while driving > to work, so feel free to shoot it full of holes.... > > When an engine is blueprinted (and especially if it is not) the air > flow through the manifolds and heads will not be identical for each > cylinder. Also, injectors will not have exactly the same flow rate. > > This means that when you assemble an EFI engine, you can still have a > situation where you have lean cylinders and rich cylinders. This is my > suggestion for balancing these effects. > ............. > Well how does this sound? Am I completely out to lunch? Or is this to small > of an adjustment to be worthwhile? > Mike The method you described is cumbersome but would obviously optimise the given system. Group A Touring Cars here in Australia often use exhaust temperature as the prime tuning feedback to balance injectors. With individual trims they can compensate for differing airflows and injector dynamics in one hit without swapping anything. It does pay to choose a balanced set of injectors to begin with, as it is mush easier to measure injector flow rates with the injectors out of the engine. An OEM solution is to model the delays in the engine dynamics to determine which cylinder is producing the puff of exhaust which is currently passing the EGO sensor. The injectors can then be trimmed individually. Ref "Individual Cylinder AFR Control with a Single EGO Sensor", Grizzle J, Cook J and Dobbins K, American Control Conference 1990 pp 2881-2886. The higher priced aftermarket ECU's allow individual cylinder trims, but for most aftermarket applications (which are close to OEM tolerances and tend to run rich under load anyway) it's probably not worth the effort. Robert -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Dingli r.dingli@xxx.au Power and Control Systems Thermodynamics Research Lab Electrical Engineering Mechanical Engineering (+613) 344 7966 (+613) 344 6728 University of Melbourne, Parkville, 3052, Victoria, AUSTRALIA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Mon Jan 23 00:58:26 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA09798; Mon, 23 Jan 95 00:58:26 GMT Received: from spectre.uunet.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA09793; Sun, 22 Jan 95 19:58:21 -0500 Received: from gateway.prior.com ([142.77.252.4]) by spectre.uunet.ca with SMTP id <9009>; Sun, 22 Jan 1995 17:50:28 -0500 Received: by gateway.prior.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14546; Fri, 20 Jan 95 16:11:24 EST Received: from odin.gallium.com(192.139.238.33) by gateway.gallium.com via smap (V1.3) id sma014544; Fri Jan 20 16:10:54 1995 Received: from ivan.gallium.com by odin (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03012; Fri, 20 Jan 95 16:04:45 EST Received: by ivan.gallium.com (931110.SGI/930416.SGI) for @xxx.edu id AA05650; Fri, 20 Jan 95 16:22:09 -0500 Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 16:22:09 -0500 From: MSargent@xxx. Sargent) Message-Id: <9501202122.AA05650@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: intake design Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Summit Racing sells a program called Engine Analyzer which can be used to determine optimal intake and exhaust design. Basically, you enter all of the salient engine parameters (bore, stroke, num cyls, cam specs, throttle plate sizes, etc., etc.) and it will simulate the engine. The results look like a typical dyno sheet. After establishing a baseline that mathes your real engine, you can vary parameters to study the effects. The program will do certain calculations for you, and those include intake and exhaust manifold design. The program sells for abou $80. The people who produce Engine Analyzer also have a Pro version (about $450) which accepts more engine parameters and uses a more sophiticated engine model (includes better valve train dynamics). You might find the Pro version more useful. Mike +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Michael F. Sargent | Net: msargent@xxx.com | Phone: 1(613)721-0902 | | Gallium Software Inc.| | FAX: 1(613)721-1278 | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >From owner-diy_efi Mon Jan 23 03:29:02 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA10151; Mon, 23 Jan 95 03:29:02 GMT Received: from nss1.CC.Lehigh.EDU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA10146; Sun, 22 Jan 95 22:28:57 -0500 Received: from ns3-1.CC.Lehigh.EDU (vpl2@xxx.edu>; Sun, 22 Jan 1995 22:28:53 -0500 Received: (vpl2@xxx.9) id WAA109438; Sun, 22 Jan 1995 22:28:52 -0500 Message-Id: <199501230328.WAA109438@xxx.EDU> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 1995 22:28:49 EST From: vpl2@xxx.EDU (Vinny Loccisano) X-Mailer: SENDM [Version 2.0.12] Subject: Re: intake design To: DIY_EFI Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Mike, Thanks for the info on the engine analyser program. It definitly seems like a good place to start. Sincerely Vinny Loccisano >From owner-diy_efi Mon Jan 23 04:56:34 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA10526; Mon, 23 Jan 95 04:56:34 GMT Received: from eigen.ee.ualberta.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA10521; Sun, 22 Jan 95 23:56:31 -0500 Message-Id: <9501230456.AA10521@xxx.edu> Received: by eigen.ee.ualberta.ca (1.38.193.4/15.6) id AA02055; Sun, 22 Jan 1995 21:56:32 -0700 From: Dale Ulan Subject: Re: Injector firing circuits To: DIY_EFI Date: Sun, 22 Jan 95 21:56:31 MST In-Reply-To: <9501231832.AA0024@xxx.au" at Jan 23, 95 9:01 am Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > The idea is to replace the elaborate carby system (one single barrel and > one twin barrel plus levers vacuum acuators etc. etc) with efi. Cool. I'm doing something similar to my Buick 350. > > Essentially it's equivalent to an 8031 running at about 66 Mhz. I designed That's pretty good. I wish production ECMs had speed like that... > The two injectors used in the falcon seem to be peak and hold types. > Scoping up the ECU up reveals a 700-800 uS pulse at full battery volts > followed by a variable time current limited tail, with 50 volt spikes at > the transitions. Try the MC3484S4 TBI injector drivers. Data should be available from Motorola. Also, National Semiconductor has such a beast that uses a bipolar transistor and a sense resistor, but the Motorola chip is much nicer. You apply a TTL level signal to it, and it takes care of constant-current control after the 4A peak. The current is 1/4 of the peak current. You put in an external (usually 35 or so) volt zener to absorb that spike. The National Semi chp is the LM1949 Injector Drive Controller. >From owner-diy_efi Mon Jan 23 21:26:11 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA02642; Mon, 23 Jan 95 21:26:11 GMT Received: from igate1.hac.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA02637; Mon, 23 Jan 95 16:26:06 -0500 Received: from EDEN1.HAC.COM by igate1.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03488; Mon, 23 Jan 95 13:24:26 PST Received: from hyperion.hdos.hac.com by EDEN1.HAC.COM (PMDF V4.3-13 #5884) id <01HM6R7QDQ1S004URA@xxx.COM>; Mon, 23 Jan 1995 13:23:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from daedalus.hdos.hac.com by hyperion.hdos.hac.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA10893; Mon, 23 Jan 95 16:24:08 EST Received: From HDOS_DPC/WORKQUEUE by daedalus.hdos.hac.com via Charon-4.0A-VROOM with IPX id 100.950123162030.480; 23 Jan 95 16:22:47 +0500 Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 16:20:14 ET From: John T Stein Subject: MAT sensor data To: DIY_EFI Message-Id: X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail/Windows (v1.22) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Priority: normal Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Thanks to all who posted responses to my recent query about software to retreive ECM data. At $400 I must try to find some "deep pockets" to split the cost for "Diacom" with. I am presently "tinkering" with a 2.5 liter four in a Pontiac Fiero and am puzzled as to what information the ECM gleans from the air temperature (MAT) sensor which is mounted in the (heated) intake manifold. It seems that if the ECM wanted the temperature of the ambient air the sensor would be placed in the air filter or other non-heated part of the intake. Granted the ambient temperature could be INFERRED from readings from this sensor, engine speed, and MAP but that sounds rather 'round about. Is this sensor yielding other intelligence?? >From owner-diy_efi Mon Jan 23 22:54:28 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA02892; Mon, 23 Jan 95 22:54:28 GMT Received: from heimdall.iaccess.com.au by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA02887; Mon, 23 Jan 95 17:54:22 -0500 Received: from cs81a.iaccess.com.au (cs81a.iaccess.com.au [203.5.74.101]) by heimdall.iaccess.com.au (8.6.9/8.6.5) with SMTP id JAA22504 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 1995 09:54:54 +1100 Received: by cs81a.iaccess.com.au (IBM OS/2 SENDMAIL VERSION 1.3.6)/1.0um) id AA0027; Tue, 24 Jan 95 09:37:04 -0800 Message-Id: <9501241737.AA0027@xxx.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 09:31:34 +0000 From: pds@xxx.au To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: Injector firing circuits X-Mailer: Ultimedia Mail/2 Lite, IBM T. J. Watson Research Center Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Id: <21_65_1_790957896> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Description: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI >Try the MC3484S4 TBI injector drivers. Data should be available from Motorola. >The National Semi chp is the LM1949 Injector Drive Controller. Thanks Dale, I'll chase those parts up. I've ordered 10 of the Philips parts to have a play. They'll probably go fffft! when they get hit with the big spike, but the data says they're protected so we'll see. //---------------------------------------------------------------------------- // Phillip Bertolus _ |\ // Program Development Systems / |_| \ // 57 Purtell Street (P.O. Box 21) .' \ // East Bentleigh, 3165 / \ // Melbourne Australia. \ _ / // Phone: +61 3 563 7755 \_.-' \_*/ // Fax:BBS:FaxBack:Voice Prompt:Network: +61 3 563 7855 v >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 24 06:43:14 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA06696; Tue, 24 Jan 95 06:43:14 GMT Received: from eigen.ee.ualberta.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA06691; Tue, 24 Jan 95 01:43:09 -0500 Message-Id: <9501240643.AA06691@xxx.edu> Received: by eigen.ee.ualberta.ca (1.38.193.4/15.6) id AA08228; Mon, 23 Jan 1995 23:43:09 -0700 From: Dale Ulan Subject: Re: MAT sensor data To: DIY_EFI Date: Mon, 23 Jan 95 23:43:09 MST In-Reply-To: ; from "John T Stein" at Jan 23, 95 4:20 pm Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > temperature (MAT) sensor which is mounted in the (heated) intake manifold. It > the intake. Granted the ambient temperature could be INFERRED from > readings from this sensor, engine speed, and MAP but that sounds rather 'round > about. Is this sensor yielding other intelligence?? Yes. Intake air temperature at the *port* of the engine, which is exactly where the port mass flow is determined via the speed-density airflow estimation system. I don't think the differnece is that much. Probably an economic decision: maybe that sensor was cheaper than the alternative.. etc. -Dale >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 24 16:39:18 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA10159; Tue, 24 Jan 95 16:39:18 GMT Received: from cebaf4.cebaf.gov by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA10153; Tue, 24 Jan 95 11:39:14 -0500 Received: by cebaf4.cebaf.gov (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA25047; Tue, 24 Jan 1995 11:39:12 -0500 Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 11:39:12 -0500 From: bowling@xxx.gov (Bruce Bowling) Message-Id: <9501241639.AA25047@xxx.gov> To: DIY_EFI Subject: New person Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Hello, I am new to this mailserver, and I have a LOT of questions that some of can answer! I am involved with converting a '72 Camaro from carburetor to EFI system. The engine is a 355 CID small block which has been outfitted with the usual high-performance stuff. The engine has been dyno-ed several times, with the latest peak HP around 425 HP (corrected). This car is totally "streetable", a daily-driver. The next goals are to increase the HP to around 475 and install a EFI system. The HP increase should be straight-forward to acheive by inprovements in head-porting and a roller cam setup. The EFI system is another story.......... I have been tracking the aftermarket EFI systems available for a few years now. Some features I wish to see in a system is adjustablity of system parameters via laptop, individual drivers for each fuel injector, etc. So far, the TEC system from Electromotive seems to be the closest candidate. Most of the FI parameters are adjustable, but it appears to use the "wasted-squirt" where two cylinders are linked together, so only four drivers are needed for 8 cylinders. It would be very nice to be able to tailor each cylinder individually, with "tweek" values that are diferent for each cyclinder, derived from information from dyno results (like outer cylinders needing a different A/F ratio from inner ones due to intake manifold flow). TEC also uses their own ignition system, wasted spark, which I would rather not use. The current setup with the Multiple-spark-discharge ignition appears to be sufficient, so I wonder if the TEC system can run without their ignition setup, if the TEC EFI computer is provided a spark-event signal? Also, is there another candidate I may not know about? I have also toyed with constructing a EFI unit on my own. I have played with the idea of using a 68HC11 (which I have a lot of experience with), some MC3484S4 injector drivers, and pressure and temperature sensors. There seems to be some useful pressure transducers from Motorola which are ready to use without a lot of hassle (electronically). The goal over what is available (to my knowledge) is to make a system that can have feedback over each cylinder individually. Why don't existing systems use thermocouples on each exhaust port providing feedback to the ECU for each cylinder? Is this a dumb idea? The car that this system would be used is "pre-emissions", so the 14.7 ratio does not have to apply. Another question: After seeing all of the information (or misinformation) on fuel injectors and performing a few calculations, it appears I may need to use 50Lb/hr injectors. Do these injectors have enought "dynamic range" to allow the car to idle in a decent manner? It appears to me that the injector is open a very short period of time at idle and the injectors may not be stable in providing the same amount of fuel each and every shot. Could one help the situation be somehow lowering the fuel pressure at lower RPMs and raising it at high RPMS? Maybe apply a PWM signal to the fuel pump, with a fuel pressure sensor on the fuel rail, with PID feedback. Is this a screwy idea? ANY information will be appreciated. ----------------------------------------------------- <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------- Bruce A. Bowling Staff Scientist - Instrumentation and Controls The Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility 12000 Jefferson Ave - Newport News, VA 23602 (804) 249-7240 bowling@xxx.gov ----------------------------------------------------- <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 24 17:26:55 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA10631; Tue, 24 Jan 95 17:26:55 GMT Received: from cebaf4.cebaf.gov by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA10626; Tue, 24 Jan 95 12:26:52 -0500 Received: by cebaf4.cebaf.gov (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA25258; Tue, 24 Jan 1995 12:26:47 -0500 Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 12:26:47 -0500 From: bowling@xxx.gov (Bruce Bowling) Message-Id: <9501241726.AA25258@xxx.gov> To: DIY_EFI Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Hello, I am new to this mailserver, and I have a LOT of questions that some of can answer! I am involved with converting a '72 Camaro from carburetor to EFI system. The engine is a 355 CID small block which has been outfitted with the usual high-performance stuff. The engine has been dyno-ed several times, with the latest peak HP around 425 HP (corrected). This car is totally "streetable", a daily-driver. The next goals are to increase the HP to around 475 and install a EFI system. The HP increase should be straight-forward to acheive by inprovements in head-porting and a roller cam setup. The EFI system is another story.......... I have been tracking the aftermarket EFI systems available for a few years now. Some features I wish to see in a system is adjustablity of system parameters via laptop, individual drivers for each fuel injector, etc. So far, the TEC system from Electromotive seems to be the closest candidate. Most of the FI parameters are adjustable, but it appears to use the "wasted-squirt" where two cylinders are linked together, so only four drivers are needed for 8 cylinders. It would be very nice to be able to tailor each cylinder individually, with "tweek" values that are diferent for each cyclinder, derived from information from dyno results (like outer cylinders needing a different A/F ratio from inner ones due to intake manifold flow). TEC also uses their own ignition system, wasted spark, which I would rather not use. The current setup with the Multiple-spark-discharge ignition appears to be sufficient, so I wonder if the TEC system can run without their ignition setup, if the TEC EFI computer is provided a spark-event signal? Also, is there another candidate I may not know about? I have also toyed with constructing a EFI unit on my own. I have played with the idea of using a 68HC11 (which I have a lot of experience with), some MC3484S4 injector drivers, and pressure and temperature sensors. There seems to be some useful pressure transducers from Motorola which are ready to use without a lot of hassle (electronically). The goal over what is available (to my knowledge) is to make a system that can have feedback over each cylinder individually. Why don't existing systems use thermocouples on each exhaust port providing feedback to the ECU for each cylinder? Is this a dumb idea? The car that this system would be used is "pre-emissions", so the 14.7 ratio does not have to apply. Another question: After seeing all of the information (or misinformation) on fuel injectors and performing a few calculations, it appears I may need to use 50Lb/hr injectors. Do these injectors have enought "dynamic range" to allow the car to idle in a decent manner? It appears to me that the injector is open a very short period of time at idle and the injectors may not be stable in providing the same amount of fuel each and every shot. Could one help the situation be somehow lowering the fuel pressure at lower RPMs and raising it at high RPMS? Maybe apply a PWM signal to the fuel pump, with a fuel pressure sensor on the fuel rail, with PID feedback. Is this a screwy idea? ANY information will be appreciated. ----------------------------------------------------- <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------- Bruce A. Bowling Staff Scientist - Instrumentation and Controls The Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility 12000 Jefferson Ave - Newport News, VA 23602 (804) 249-7240 bowling@xxx.gov ----------------------------------------------------- <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 25 03:55:58 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA16814; Wed, 25 Jan 95 03:55:58 GMT Received: from localhost.eng.ohio-state.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA16809; Tue, 24 Jan 95 22:55:55 -0500 Message-Id: <9501250355.AA16809@xxx.edu> To: diy_efi Subject: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 22:55:55 -0500 From: John S Gwynne Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI -------- I'm real close to releasing the next version (1.00) of EFI68k, and would like your feedback to make this smoother. First, the highlights of version 1.00. This board (still 4"x6"--complete except for power supply) has greatly exceeded my expectations (credit goes to the FSF and Cygnus for the free software they have created... I just pulled the pieces together.) I now have running ANSI C, C++, newlib (ANSI C library), libg++ (C++ library), and much more... At this point, I think I can build any software that (1) does not make UNIX system calls (i.e., fork...) nor (2) requires a file system (i.e., fread, fopen...). This release of EFI68k has the following major components (I'll give more details latter) (a) 256k SRAM (km681000l), (b) 256 EPROM (27C010), (c) DP8570A (clock/timer/calendar), (d) MAX791 (cpu supervisory chip with battery backup switch-over and watch dog timer), and (e) NS16550DN (UART). Additionally, the 68hc000 cpu is 30% faster now running at 16Mhz and the following interrupt have been added: UART, TIMER, Watch Dog, and Low Line voltage (trips at 4.85V; enough time to save the cpu reg before reset is asserted on power down). I'm about ready to start the companion board which will contain only EFI related components such as an ADC and, what now looks like, a SSI 67F687. Anyhow, I would like to know how many of you are interested in EFI68k as this will dictate the amount of effort I put into the release. I will definitely release the schematics (in the same manner as version 0.90), but if you would like my wire-wrap layout, a point-to-point wire list,etc... say so now. Also, EFI68k can now be run remotely. If I set up a mail account where you could mail an ANSI C, C++, and/or assembly language program to EFI68k to compile and run then mail you back the results, would this help determine your interest? Please either mail your comments directly to me or post them to the list. *** I REALLY want to know who's interested in EFI68k before I invest the time in releasing the schematics and software. *** John S Gwynne Gwynne.1@xxx.edu _______________________________________________________________________________ T h e O h i o - S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ElectroScience Laboratory, 1320 Kinnear Road, Columbus, Ohio 43212, USA Telephone: (614) 292-7981 * Fax: (614) 292-7292 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 25 04:41:35 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA16932; Wed, 25 Jan 95 04:41:35 GMT Received: from azgw.aztec.co.za by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA16927; Tue, 24 Jan 95 23:41:30 -0500 Received: by aztec.co.za (Smail3.1.28.1 #17) id m0rWzWW-000KeWC; Wed, 25 Jan 95 06:40 EET Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 06:40:04 +0200 (SAT) From: Wouter de Waal Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey To: DIY_EFI In-Reply-To: <9501250355.AA16809@xxx.edu> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI On Tue, 24 Jan 1995, John S Gwynne wrote: [Good news deleted] > > I'm about ready to start the companion board which > will contain only EFI related components such as an > ADC and, what now looks like, a SSI 67F687. I'm sold on that chip too! > *** I REALLY want to know who's interested in EFI68k > before I invest the time in releasing the schematics > and software. *** I'd like to see the schematics. I havn't been doing much on this, but it seems as if everything you've got can also be run under MSDOG. That is the route I'll be going for at first. Thanks Wouter >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 25 05:31:51 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA17122; Wed, 25 Jan 95 05:31:51 GMT Received: from curly.cc.swin.edu.au by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA17117; Wed, 25 Jan 95 00:31:47 -0500 Received: from romulus.mm.swin.edu.au by curly.cc.swin.edu.au (5.65c/1.34) id AA14813; Wed, 25 Jan 1995 16:31:40 +1100 Received: From MECHMAN/WORKQUEUE by romulus.mm.swin.edu.au via Charon-4.0-VROOM with IPX id 100.950125163128.480; 25 Jan 95 16:31:44 -1100 Message-Id: From: "Andrew Dennison" Organization: Swinburne University To: DIY_EFI Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 16:31:22 EST-11 Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Priority: normal X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail/Windows (v1.20-pr2) Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > I'm about ready to start the companion board which > will contain only EFI related components such as an > ADC and, what now looks like, a SSI 67F687. Could someone please post some information on the 67F687? I've heard about it in general terms but I would like some specific information on its capabilities. Andrew ------------------------------------ Andrew Dennison - Research Associate The CIM Centre Melbourne, AUSTRALIA Phone: +61 3 214 8296 Fax: +61 3 214 4949 WWW: http://cim.mm.swin.edu.au/welcome.html >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 25 15:20:52 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA18698; Wed, 25 Jan 95 15:20:52 GMT Received: from uunet.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA18693; Wed, 25 Jan 95 10:20:49 -0500 Received: from gateway.prior.com ([142.77.252.4]) by mail.uunet.ca with SMTP id <123823-3>; Wed, 25 Jan 1995 10:20:59 -0500 Received: by gateway.prior.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA21920; Wed, 25 Jan 95 10:15:31 EST Received: from odin.gallium.com(192.139.238.33) by gateway.gallium.com via smap (V1.3) id sma021918; Wed Jan 25 10:15:23 1995 Received: from ivan.gallium.com by odin (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17959; Wed, 25 Jan 95 10:08:40 EST Received: by ivan.gallium.com (931110.SGI/930416.SGI) for @xxx.edu id AA05609; Wed, 25 Jan 95 10:26:40 -0500 Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 10:26:40 -0500 From: MSargent@xxx. Sargent) Message-Id: <9501251526.AA05609@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI That looks really (!) good John. I'm probably very interested. Can you post the preliminary specs for the EFI card? Will it have sufficient I/O to so SEFI and distributorless ignition? Mike +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Michael F. Sargent | Net: msargent@xxx.com | Phone: 1(613)721-0902 | | Gallium Software Inc.| | FAX: 1(613)721-1278 | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 25 15:59:05 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA19081; Wed, 25 Jan 95 15:59:05 GMT Received: from pine.cse.nau.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA19076; Wed, 25 Jan 95 10:59:02 -0500 Received: (from met@xxx.edu; Wed, 25 Jan 1995 08:59:00 -0700 Message-Id: <199501251559.IAA16813@xxx.edu> From: met@xxx.edu (MTN-KAT) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 08:59:00 -0700 In-Reply-To: John S Gwynne "[EFI68k] new release and group survey" (Jan 24, 10:55pm) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI John I for one am very interested in a release. I'm still moving along on mine, I have decided to take a class at my alma-mater, PC breadboard design. Should help me to get through the breadboard bit easier. :) Did you get a real-time code working? Millam >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 25 16:39:38 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA19570; Wed, 25 Jan 95 16:39:38 GMT Received: from wotan.compaq.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA19565; Wed, 25 Jan 95 11:39:35 -0500 Received: from twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com by wotan.compaq.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #12) id m0rXAl5-000vIaC; Wed, 25 Jan 95 10:39 CST Received: from bangate.compaq.com by twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #10) id m0rXAkm-000uKFC; Wed, 25 Jan 95 10:39 CST Message-Id: Received: by bangate.compaq.com with VINES ; Wed, 25 Jan 95 10:39:31 CST Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 10:17:53 CST From: Steve=Ravet%Prj=Eng%PCPD=Hou@xxx.com Subject: re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey To: diy_efi Cc: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI John S Gwynne Wrote: | I'm about ready to start the companion board which | will contain only EFI related components such as an | ADC and, what now looks like, a SSI 67F687. Is the EFI bus the same? | *** I REALLY want to know who's interested in EFI68k | before I invest the time in releasing the schematics | and software. *** Count me in. Have you considered one of the 68xxx embedded types? (ie 68332) What are the pro's and cons of these versus a 68000? --steve >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 25 20:42:02 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA21782; Wed, 25 Jan 95 20:42:02 GMT Received: from localhost.eng.ohio-state.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA21777; Wed, 25 Jan 95 15:41:59 -0500 Message-Id: <9501252041.AA21777@xxx.edu> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 25 Jan 95 10:26:40 EST." <9501251526.AA05609@xxx.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 15:41:59 -0500 From: John S Gwynne Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI -------- In message <9501251526.AA05609@xxx.com> , you write: | Can you post | the preliminary specs for the EFI card? Will it have sufficient I/O to so | SEFI and distributorless ignition? yes, by virtue of the 67F687 it will support both. features list from the 67f687 data sheet: * 2 or 4 cycle engines * parallel microprocessor bus control * configurable for a variety of sensor patterns * variable reluctance or Hall Effect sensor inputs * engine position angle counter to 10,000 RPM * 4 ignition outputs (8 individual spark advance values) * 8 injection outputs * dwell timer * ignition coil current limit (for use with external power transistors) * injector driver short circuit protection * diagnostics * 8 programmable I/O lines * PWM outputs * edge detect inputs * on chip oscillator * +5V operation * CMOS * operating temperature range -40 to +125 C * 68-pin PLCC John S Gwynne Gwynne.1@xxx.edu _______________________________________________________________________________ T h e O h i o - S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ElectroScience Laboratory, 1320 Kinnear Road, Columbus, Ohio 43212, USA Telephone: (614) 292-7981 * Fax: (614) 292-7292 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 25 20:50:13 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA21833; Wed, 25 Jan 95 20:50:13 GMT Received: from localhost.eng.ohio-state.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA21827; Wed, 25 Jan 95 15:50:10 -0500 Message-Id: <9501252050.AA21827@xxx.edu> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 25 Jan 95 08:59:00 MST." <199501251559.IAA16813@xxx.edu> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 15:50:10 -0500 From: John S Gwynne Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI -------- In message <199501251559.IAA16813@xxx.edu> , you write: | Did you get a real-time code working? I've made the changes to RTEMS to support the 68000 and EFI68k, but have not tested it. I have *no* doubt that it will work. As soon as I get some more free time, I'll focus on finishing that. John S Gwynne Gwynne.1@xxx.edu _______________________________________________________________________________ T h e O h i o - S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ElectroScience Laboratory, 1320 Kinnear Road, Columbus, Ohio 43212, USA Telephone: (614) 292-7981 * Fax: (614) 292-7292 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Wed Jan 25 21:40:43 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA22166; Wed, 25 Jan 95 21:40:43 GMT Received: from localhost.eng.ohio-state.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA22161; Wed, 25 Jan 95 16:40:41 -0500 Message-Id: <9501252140.AA22161@xxx.edu> To: DIY_EFI Subject: 68000-vs-68332 (long) was Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey From: jsg Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 16:40:40 -0500 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI -------- In message , you write: | Is the EFI bus the same? The bus on version 1.00 is the same as version 0.90 with the addition of an external address select and external data acknowledge lines. | Have you considered one of the 68xxx embedded types? (ie 68332) | What are the pro's and cons of these versus a 68000? I now have a couple of 16MHz 332's and will (someday) have a 332 version of this board that will have the same bus and be code compatible. These are the trade-offs as I see them - 16MHz 68332 is 50% faster than 16MHz 68ch000 (that's on average) - neither chips have the bit field instructions (020 and higher only) - 68332 has a vbr register (makes porting code from say a 68020 easier) - 68332 chip count will probably drop by 4 or 5 - 68332 is (approx.) $55 68hc000 is (approx.) $17 - several weeks worth of "free-time" to redeveloped the board. :( I believe that with the 67f687, the 68hc000 is more than fast enough for EFI (IMHO). For more information, try the comp.sys.m68k FAQ on bode.ee.ualberta.ca:/pub/motorola/general. John S Gwynne Gwynne.1@xxx.edu _____________________________________________________________________________ T h e O h i o - S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ElectroScience Laboratory, 1320 Kinnear Road, Columbus, Ohio 43212, USA Telephone: (614) 292-7981 * Fax: (614) 292-7292 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 26 04:19:10 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA23962; Thu, 26 Jan 95 04:19:10 GMT Received: from eigen.ee.ualberta.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA23957; Wed, 25 Jan 95 23:19:07 -0500 Message-Id: <9501260419.AA23957@xxx.edu> Received: by eigen.ee.ualberta.ca (1.38.193.4/15.6) id AA20446; Wed, 25 Jan 1995 21:19:07 -0700 From: Dale Ulan Subject: Re: 68000-vs-68332 (long) was Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey To: DIY_EFI Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 21:19:07 MST In-Reply-To: <9501252140.AA22161@xxx.edu" at Jan 25, 95 4:40 pm Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > - 68332 is (approx.) $55 68hc000 is (approx.) $17 > - several weeks worth of "free-time" to redeveloped > the board. :( > Not to mention the lack of product from Motorola. I only have one 68332, and so far, any orders that I have placed for more 68332's have resulted in Motorola saying they can't deliver. So far, *any* Motorola distributor I have contacted say they cannot deliver anything for at least six months. I can sure get a Toshiba 68HC000 to do the same job in a big hurry. How many 'Northern Telecoms' does Motorola need to loose before they realize that screwing around the customer is bad business? 'Oh yea, we forgot about that one... :-)' They obviously don't hear the small-lot purchasers complaining. Maybe they'll have to loose Delco Electronics and Chrysler, too, before they notice. -Dale >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 26 04:24:18 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA23984; Thu, 26 Jan 95 04:24:18 GMT Received: from pine.liii.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA23979; Wed, 25 Jan 95 23:24:15 -0500 Received: from oak.liii.com by pine.liii.com with SMTP (5.67b/15Feb94-Long Island Information) id AA22641; Wed, 25 Jan 1995 23:26:26 -0500 Received: by oak.liii.com (5.67b/15Feb94-Long Island Information) id AA14127; Wed, 25 Jan 1995 23:25:33 -0500 Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 23:25:29 -0500 (EST) From: Bob Valentine To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey In-Reply-To: <9501250355.AA16809@xxx.edu> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI On Tue, 24 Jan 1995, John S Gwynne wrote: > -------- > > I'm real close to releasing the next version (1.00) > of EFI68k, and would like your feedback to make this > smoother. All the add-ins looked GREAT! > release the schematics (in the same manner as version > 0.90), but if you would like my wire-wrap layout, a > point-to-point wire list,etc... say so now. Also, If you can, it would be great.... I never even saw the first version. > *** I REALLY want to know who's interested in EFI68k > before I invest the time in releasing the schematics > and software. *** You can count me in. 8^) --> Bob Valentine <-- --> ravalent@xxx.com <-- "Hard Acceleration Saves Costly Aggravation" >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 26 04:38:22 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA24196; Thu, 26 Jan 95 04:38:22 GMT Received: from vcc11.vcc.bc.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA24191; Wed, 25 Jan 95 23:38:18 -0500 Received: by vcc11.vcc.bc.ca (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA45787; Wed, 25 Jan 1995 20:38:14 -0800 Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 20:38:13 -0800 (PST) From: Jim Davies Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey To: DIY_EFI In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > > > *** I REALLY want to know who's interested in EFI68k > > before I invest the time in releasing the schematics > > and software. *** Me, too! Jim Davies >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 26 06:00:43 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA24537; Thu, 26 Jan 95 06:00:43 GMT Received: from tibalt.supernet.ab.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA24532; Thu, 26 Jan 95 01:00:34 -0500 Received: by tibalt.supernet.ab.ca (1.38.193.5/16.2) id AA02421; Wed, 25 Jan 1995 23:00:30 -0700 Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 23:00:28 -0700 (MST) From: Marcel Chichak To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI On Wed, 25 Jan 1995, Bob Valentine wrote: ** > > On Tue, 24 Jan 1995, John S Gwynne wrote: > > > -------- > > > > I'm real close to releasing the next version (1.00) > > of EFI68k, and would like your feedback to make this > > smoother. > > All the add-ins looked GREAT! > > > release the schematics (in the same manner as version > > 0.90), but if you would like my wire-wrap layout, a > > point-to-point wire list,etc... say so now. Also, > > If you can, it would be great.... I never even > saw the first version. > > > *** I REALLY want to know who's interested in EFI68k > > before I invest the time in releasing the schematics > > and software. *** > > You can count me in. 8^) > > --> Bob Valentine <-- > --> ravalent@xxx.com <-- > "Hard Acceleration Saves Costly Aggravation" > > >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 26 07:50:50 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA24688; Thu, 26 Jan 95 07:50:50 GMT Received: from kaiwan.kaiwan.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA24683; Thu, 26 Jan 95 02:50:47 -0500 Received: from kaiwan009.kaiwan.com (1300@xxx.5) with ESMTP id XAA18245; Wed, 25 Jan 1995 23:50:42 -0800 *** KAIWAN Internet Access *** Received: (from patriot@xxx.9) id XAA23339; Wed, 25 Jan 1995 23:50:42 -0800 *** KAIWAN Internet Access *** Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 23:50:36 -0800 (PST) From: Nate To: DIY_EFI, mc68hc11@xxx.edu Subject: New Board, feedback needed Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI A friend that has no access to the Net is going to come out with a new board for HC11. He told me that it would be 2 X 4.5 inches and contain a HC11 (A8 type) and a ROM socket (up to 27256). It's a simple thing, just the CPU, a 10 pin .100 center header and surface mounted for most of the chips (HC11 is direct on board) the rest is all prototyping area full of drilled pads. The idea was for him to use it for control applications, in this case his car, and he would add parts as per each application he would think up. I guess you could mount a HC11 with 2K EEPROM and wire the ROM socket for a RAM chip if you ran into a situation where you would need RAM. OH! I forgot he includes a MAX-232 converter chip on board for RS-232 communication (and -10V if you want I guess). The questions are: What would you pay for a tested unit? (be fair) What would you pay for a blank board, and would you be interested in a blank board since most of it is surface mount? Should he bother producing this for the hobby market anyway? Are people going to say "basic stamp is better" ? He may include some sample C code for driving things he will use for his car, and I may add to it with my code I will generate for it (yes I talked him into one for me!). He is only running a few for now, but wants to run 100 or 200 for first "production" run. Is this crazy? Does anyone recomend a company for boards that is CHEAP (who cares about time!). Your feedback is appreciated. >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 26 16:06:44 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA25644; Thu, 26 Jan 95 16:06:44 GMT Received: from mordor.cs.du.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA25632; Thu, 26 Jan 95 11:06:40 -0500 Received: from nyx10.cs.du.edu by mordor.cs.du.edu with SMTP id AA12649 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for ); Thu, 26 Jan 1995 08:57:14 -0700 Received: by nyx10.cs.du.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA15063; Thu, 26 Jan 95 09:05:10 MST X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University of Denver. The University has neither control over nor responsibility for the opinions or correct identity of users. Date: Thu, 26 Jan 1995 09:05:08 -0700 (MST) From: Brian Lane To: DIY_EFI Cc: mc68hc11@xxx.edu Subject: Re: New Board, feedback needed In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI On Wed, 25 Jan 1995, Nate wrote: > > A friend that has no access to the Net is going to come out with a new > board for HC11. > > What would you pay for a tested unit? (be fair) $50-$80 there are already several companies that sell bare-bones HC11 boards like this for about $89 I think it is.(See ads in Circuit Cellar Ink). > > What would you pay for a blank board, and would you be interested in a > blank board since most of it is surface mount? A unpopulated board with parts. Sometimes it's hard to find everything you need when you need it. > > Should he bother producing this for the hobby market anyway? Might as well, we're not much different from the 'commercial consultant' market, and there is alot of crossover between the two. > > Are people going to say "basic stamp is better" ? Ain't no way. A HC11 has much more than a basic stamp. Maybe someone who prefers to do their embedded development in basic instead of ASM or 'C' would say this, but not most. Brian ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Everyone is a prisoner holding their own key." | Chaos Labs (360)569-2911 http://nyx10.cs.du.edu:8001/~blane/home.html | Electronics/uP files ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 26 17:58:59 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA26389; Thu, 26 Jan 95 17:58:59 GMT Received: from gw1.att.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA26384; Thu, 26 Jan 95 12:58:55 -0500 Received: from uscbu.ih.att.com by ig1.att.att.com id AA04023; Thu, 26 Jan 95 12:35:40 EST Received: by uscbu.ih.att.com (4.1/EMS-1.1.1 SunOS) id AA16486; Thu, 26 Jan 95 11:33:49 CST Received: from usgp1.ih.att.com by uscbu.ih.att.com (4.1/EMS-1.1.1 SunOS) id AA16310; Thu, 26 Jan 95 11:33:03 CST Received: by usgp1.ih.att.com (5.0/EMS-1.1 Sol2) id AA03333; Thu, 26 Jan 1995 11:34:44 +0600 Date: Thu, 26 Jan 1995 11:34:44 +0600 Message-Id: <9501261734.AA03333@xxx.com> From: bohdan@xxx.com (Bohdan L Bodnar) To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: 68000-vs-68332 (long) was Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Content-Type: text Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > - 68332 is (approx.) $55 68hc000 is (approx.) $17 > - several weeks worth of "free-time" to redeveloped > the board. :( > >>Not to mention the lack of product from Motorola. I only have >>one 68332, and so far, any orders that I have placed for more >>68332's have resulted in Motorola saying they can't deliver. >> >>So far, *any* Motorola distributor I have contacted say they >>cannot deliver anything for at least six months. I can sure get >>a Toshiba 68HC000 to do the same job in a big hurry. >> >>How many 'Northern Telecoms' does Motorola need to loose before >>they realize that screwing around the customer is bad business? >>'Oh yea, we forgot about that one... :-)' They obviously don't >>hear the small-lot purchasers complaining. Maybe they'll have to >>loose Delco Electronics and Chrysler, too, before they notice. >> >>-Dale Perhaps you should inquire as to why Motorola can't deliver. Are there manufacturing problems? Did some big buyer put in a huge order? Are there shortages of some crucial component such as ultra-pure silicon dies? Several years ago I did some statistical modeling which involved the MC68040's performance. Most of that data was passed to Motorola under a non-disclosure agreement (take a look at the MC68060's round-robin cache replacement algorithm -- that's my design). At that time, the tech reps gave me some interesting information regarding obtaining parts (ATT was having similar problems as yours)... The biggest purchaser of the MC68xxx family was Apple Computers. I suppose that this is still the situation. We, at Bell Labs, received early samples of Motorola's chips not because we used a lot of them, but because we ran them at conditions that no other OEM in the world did. Motorola therefore obtained information that they would never otherwise obtain. To cite a personal example: Motorola engineers knew exactly how their caches would perform under *real* real-time load across a large spectrum of cache architectures, where performance trade-offs could be made, etc. However, when it came to mass purchases, guess who got priority? Yes, it's the company with the fruit. I truly doubt that Motorola will lose any automotive manufacturer -- there's simply too much $$$ involved whereas individuals like you and I are mere nits. Here's something you might try: call your local Motorola tech support office and see if you can convince them to send you a freebie. This worked for me in the early 1980s when I was working on my MSEE (I needed a DMA controller chip -- all the vendors I contacted claimed something like three months lead time whereas I needed one ASAP). I contacted the local office, explained the situation, and within two weeks had spec sheets + one free $80 chip. In any capitalistic society, money talks. Regards, Bohdan Bodnar >From owner-diy_efi Thu Jan 26 20:31:05 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA26951; Thu, 26 Jan 95 20:31:05 GMT Received: from mordor.cs.du.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA26946; Thu, 26 Jan 95 15:30:57 -0500 Received: from nyx10.cs.du.edu by mordor.cs.du.edu with SMTP id AA15092 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for ); Thu, 26 Jan 1995 13:22:31 -0700 Received: by nyx10.cs.du.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA00910; Thu, 26 Jan 95 13:30:40 MST X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University of Denver. The University has neither control over nor responsibility for the opinions or correct identity of users. Date: Thu, 26 Jan 1995 13:30:37 -0700 (MST) From: Brian Lane To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: 68000-vs-68332 (long) was Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey In-Reply-To: <9501261734.AA03333@xxx.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI On Thu, 26 Jan 1995, Bohdan L Bodnar wrote: > > Perhaps you should inquire as to why Motorola can't deliver. Are there > manufacturing problems? Did some big buyer put in a huge order? Are there > shortages of some crucial component such as ultra-pure silicon dies? Several A 'rumor' that I have hard is Motorola's internal divisions get precedence over everyone else(why shouldn't they?), and with the explosion in cell-phones, etc. that Motorola actually manufactures they are using up alot of their own parts. We've had problems with long lead-times on C8's and HC11s. I don't know how much this effects 68k processors. Brian P.S. I like the idea of a 68k based Engine control computer doing ignition(distributorless) and fuel injection. As long as it can handle 8 cylinders at WOT. I have a S-10 that is on it's last leg. When the 2.5 liter goes it's going to become a test bed for my own EFI experiments. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Everyone is a prisoner holding their own key." | Chaos Labs (360)569-2911 http://nyx10.cs.du.edu:8001/~blane/home.html | Electronics/uP files ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 27 01:09:14 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA27895; Fri, 27 Jan 95 01:09:14 GMT Received: from maxwell.ee.washington.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA27890; Thu, 26 Jan 95 20:09:10 -0500 Received: by maxwell.ee.washington.edu (1.37.109.4/UW-NDC Revision: 2.26 ) id AA26425; Thu, 26 Jan 95 17:08:54 -0800 From: Mike Gruber Message-Id: <9501270108.AA26425@xxx.edu> Subject: Re: 68000-vs-68332 (long) was Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey To: DIY_EFI Date: Thu, 26 Jan 95 17:08:53 PST In-Reply-To: <9501261734.AA03333@xxx.com>; from "Bohdan L Bodnar" at Jan 26, 95 11:34 am Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > the early 1980s when I was working on my MSEE (I needed a DMA controller chip > -- all the vendors I contacted claimed something like three months lead time > whereas I needed one ASAP). I contacted the local office, explained the > situation, and within two weeks had spec sheets + one free $80 chip. > This worked for me, in the last year. They sent me 10 68HC711E9's! I only asked for one. I have gotten a lot of free parts from National as well. -- Mike Gruber '88 Supercharged MR2 (ASP) '72 Datsun 510 (In progress ... perpetually!) >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 27 14:24:07 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA00288; Fri, 27 Jan 95 14:24:07 GMT Received: from cosmail2.ctd.ornl.gov by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA00283; Fri, 27 Jan 95 09:24:04 -0500 Received: from a7fpc1 (a7fpc1.etd.ornl.gov [128.219.133.29]) by cosmail2.ctd.ornl.gov (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA25266 for ; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 09:23:55 -0500 Date: Fri, 27 Jan 1995 09:23:55 -0500 Message-Id: <199501271423.JAA25266@xxx.gov> X-Sender: a7f@xxx.gov Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: DIY_EFI From: a7f@xxx. Armfield) Subject: EFI 68k X-Mailer: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Count me in on EFI 68k. Any plans to include an OBD (SAE J1850) type chip on the second board? Jeff Armfield (not mailing from my usual account) >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 27 15:59:49 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA00679; Fri, 27 Jan 95 15:59:49 GMT Received: from uunet.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA00674; Fri, 27 Jan 95 10:59:46 -0500 Received: from gateway.prior.com ([142.77.252.4]) by mail.uunet.ca with SMTP id <86683-4>; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 10:59:59 -0500 Received: by gateway.prior.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA25705; Fri, 27 Jan 95 10:42:30 EST Received: from odin.gallium.com(192.139.238.33) by gateway.gallium.com via smap (V1.3) id sma025703; Fri Jan 27 10:42:06 1995 Received: from ivan.gallium.com by odin (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09885; Fri, 27 Jan 95 10:35:08 EST Received: by ivan.gallium.com (931110.SGI/930416.SGI) for @xxx.edu id AA26327; Fri, 27 Jan 95 10:46:20 -0500 Date: Fri, 27 Jan 1995 10:46:20 -0500 From: MSargent@xxx. Sargent) Message-Id: <9501271546.AA26327@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI John- Two more points came to mind this morning: 1) Will the MAX791 and KM681000L allow the contents of the SRAM to be retained over power off? How much current will be drawn to keep the SRAM contents alive? (Mine would go in a boat, and drain may be a problem if the boat isn't run for week or two.) 2) Downloading 256KB or code at 9600 baud will take two minutes. Is there any way to speed this up? (i.e. much higher baud rate, or parallel interface) Thanks, Mike +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Michael F. Sargent | Net: msargent@xxx.com | Phone: 1(613)721-0902 | | Gallium Software Inc.| | FAX: 1(613)721-1278 | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 27 16:44:48 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA00853; Fri, 27 Jan 95 16:44:48 GMT Received: from localhost.eng.ohio-state.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA00846; Fri, 27 Jan 95 11:44:45 -0500 Message-Id: <9501271644.AA00846@xxx.edu> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: EFI 68k In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 27 Jan 95 09:23:55 EST." <199501271423.JAA25266@xxx.gov> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 95 11:44:45 -0500 From: John S Gwynne Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI -------- In message <199501271423.JAA25266@xxx.gov> , you write: | Any plans to include an OBD (SAE J1850) type chip on | the second board? I would prefer not to build this into the prototype, but I see no reason why it could not be added latter. John S Gwynne Gwynne.1@xxx.edu _______________________________________________________________________________ T h e O h i o - S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ElectroScience Laboratory, 1320 Kinnear Road, Columbus, Ohio 43212, USA Telephone: (614) 292-7981 * Fax: (614) 292-7292 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 27 17:24:26 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA00954; Fri, 27 Jan 95 17:24:26 GMT Received: from cebaf4.cebaf.gov by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA00949; Fri, 27 Jan 95 12:24:23 -0500 Received: by cebaf4.cebaf.gov (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA03822; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 12:24:23 -0500 Date: Fri, 27 Jan 1995 12:24:23 -0500 From: bowling@xxx.gov (Bruce Bowling) Message-Id: <9501271724.AA03822@xxx.gov> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: 68000-vs-68332 (long) was Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI YES - Motorola is extraordinary generous with samples, and documentation. I personally will use Motorola first above any other manufacturer because I know I can get the info I need from them easily, and their tech reps are excellent. Bruce Bowling CEBAF bowling@xxx.gov >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 27 18:03:28 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA01097; Fri, 27 Jan 95 18:03:28 GMT Received: from localhost.eng.ohio-state.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA01092; Fri, 27 Jan 95 13:03:25 -0500 Message-Id: <9501271803.AA01092@xxx.edu> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 27 Jan 95 10:46:20 EST." <9501271546.AA26327@xxx.com> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 95 13:03:25 -0500 From: John S Gwynne Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI -------- In message <9501271546.AA26327@xxx.com> , you write: | 1) Will the MAX791 and KM681000L allow the contents of the SRAM to be retaine | d | over power off? How much current will be drawn to keep the SRAM contents | alive? (Mine would go in a boat, and drain may be a problem if the boat | isn't run for week or two.) yes, it will store RAM and continue to keep time. I believe I measured less than 100uA at room temp. This should not be a problem for a car/boat battery but I would like to see a separate battery. I believe nicad batteries have "problems" at temperatures below freezing (??? is this true ???) and I have not tried to find the temperature range of a lithium battery. I would love to find a battery that would recharge while the engine was running, have a temperature range compatible with the car's environment, and be about the size of a quarter (in the 2-4.5V range). Any ideas? | 2) Downloading 256KB or code at 9600 baud will take two minutes. Is there any | way to speed this up? (i.e. much higher baud rate, or parallel interface) (256*1024)/(9600/10)/60=4.5 minutes (binary transfer) ??? I've been running at 38400 (limited by the host) but am also transferring s-records. That's about 1920 bytes/sec. I've heard of 16550's running at over 100k baud. I have not given parallel port transfer much thought since I don't believe the parallel port on an SGI Indigo is bidirectional :(. The C library tends to be about 24k (mostly stdio stuff) while the C++ library is on the order of 80k. RTEMS is suppose to be about 16k. The EFI software should be much less complicated than all of these... maybe 12k (blind guess) with all the options for a total of 24+16+12=52k. I hope to use a good portion of RAM as a "data recorder". John S Gwynne Gwynne.1@xxx.edu _______________________________________________________________________________ T h e O h i o - S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ElectroScience Laboratory, 1320 Kinnear Road, Columbus, Ohio 43212, USA Telephone: (614) 292-7981 * Fax: (614) 292-7292 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 27 18:32:58 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA01565; Fri, 27 Jan 95 18:32:58 GMT Received: from cebaf4.cebaf.gov by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA01560; Fri, 27 Jan 95 13:32:55 -0500 Received: by cebaf4.cebaf.gov (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA03966; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 13:32:54 -0500 Date: Fri, 27 Jan 1995 13:32:54 -0500 From: bowling@xxx.gov (Bruce Bowling) Message-Id: <9501271832.AA03966@xxx.gov> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI 2) Downloading 256KB or code at 9600 baud will take two minutes. Is there any way to speed this up? (i.e. much higher baud rate, or parallel interface). Has anyone thought of using PCMCIA SRAM cards? I am using them in a current design (a datalogger) and can give some info. The nice thing about them is that they are battery-backup, and unplugging them from the EFI and plugging them into a laptop for instant access to stored data and storage of new running conditions and constants. - Bruce Bruce Bowling CEBAF bowling@xxx.gov >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 27 21:36:17 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA03007; Fri, 27 Jan 95 21:36:17 GMT Received: from kcbbs.gen.nz by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA03002; Fri, 27 Jan 95 16:36:13 -0500 Received: from localhost (steveb@xxx.5) id KAA20114; Sat, 28 Jan 1995 10:27:59 +1300 From: Steve Baldwin Message-Id: <199501272127.KAA20114@xxx.nz> Subject: EFI68k PCB To: DIY_EFI Date: Sat, 28 Jan 1995 10:27:59 +1300 (NZDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 126 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Oops. The PCB I mentioned would be PTH but no solder mask or silkscreen. Just thought I had better mention that. :-) Steve. >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 27 22:17:41 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA03165; Fri, 27 Jan 95 22:17:41 GMT Received: from uunet.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA03160; Fri, 27 Jan 95 17:17:38 -0500 Received: from gateway.prior.com ([142.77.252.4]) by mail.uunet.ca with SMTP id <88115-5>; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 17:18:28 -0500 Received: by gateway.prior.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA26225; Fri, 27 Jan 95 14:44:38 EST Received: from odin.gallium.com(192.139.238.33) by gateway.gallium.com via smap (V1.3) id sma026222; Fri Jan 27 14:44:14 1995 Received: from ivan.gallium.com by odin (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA12356; Fri, 27 Jan 95 14:37:16 EST Received: by ivan.gallium.com (931110.SGI/930416.SGI) for @xxx.edu id AA26742; Fri, 27 Jan 95 14:48:25 -0500 Date: Fri, 27 Jan 1995 14:48:25 -0500 From: MSargent@xxx. Sargent) Message-Id: <9501271948.AA26742@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > I believe I measured less than 100uA at room temp. Well that certainly won't be a problem! With that sort of low power consumption, you could get away with just using a super-cap. They are available from 1 to 5 Farads (not uF). That is exactly the job they were designed for. Put in an isolating diode (low leakage), and just connect that to +5. As soon as power is supplied, the super-cap will be charged, and at 100 uA it will take weeks (if not months) to discharge. This also offers wonderful protection against low voltage when the starter is grinding. All in all, this is probably a much better bet than a battery. > (256*1024)/(9600/10)/60=4.5 minutes (binary transfer) ??? All right, I was just figuring in my head! I will probably be running from a laptop PC, so I can probably get 115K baud so that would take around 23 seconds to download 256 KB. I would probably burn a PROM monitor, the C RTL, and RTEMS into a ROM so that they would not need to be reloaded. If the EFI code is (say) 64K, then the download time would only be about 6 seconds. That's no problem. No need for a parallel connection. Architecturally, I would probably build the EFI code to use a set of jump tables to call major functions. On startup, the jump tables would be copied to RAM. A baseline build could be burnt into EPROM. Part of the normal operation of the EFI code (background task) would look for communication with a host and allow code/data to be downloaded. If a new function is downloaded, then only the address in the jump table needs to be updated and the new function in RAM will be called rather than the old code in EPROM. Primarily this is done to avoid having to blow PROMs too often. With battery backup of the SRAM, the patch code/table doesn't even need to be reloaded unless needed. All in all, this is starting to sound very nice! Mike +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Michael F. Sargent | Net: msargent@xxx.com | Phone: 1(613)721-0902 | | Gallium Software Inc.| | FAX: 1(613)721-1278 | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 27 23:28:36 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA03748; Fri, 27 Jan 95 23:28:36 GMT Received: from localhost.eng.ohio-state.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA03743; Fri, 27 Jan 95 18:28:33 -0500 Message-Id: <9501272328.AA03743@xxx.edu> From: Steve Baldwin Subject: EFI68k board To: DIY_EFI Date: Fri, 27 Jan 95 18:28:33 -0500 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI I'm forwarding this: (messages that have words like list, help, subscribe get bounced.) -- jsg ============================================================== | John, | Add me to the list of (very) interested people. | | I would really like to see what you have changed as there were quite a | few changes and additions I would have made to the earlier board. Some | you have already mentioned. | Replacing the Dalas NVRAMs with standard static and discrete battery | backup. (I am getting about 20uA for 768k and an RTC on another job. A | button cell will last for around a year.) | Use 5V flash rather than EPROM with in situ programming. | Automotify (?) the power supply. Having done automotive electronics | commercially, this is _very_ important. | | I prefer to use SMD and PLCC parts where possible and will probably have | a PCB made since the cost vs. reliability makes it worth it in my view. | I would be able to supply a PCB for around US$40 +p&p (which wouldn't be | much) if others are interested. | If there is interest, I could price up kits of parts too. | | Steve. John S Gwynne Gwynne.1@xxx.edu _______________________________________________________________________________ T h e O h i o - S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ElectroScience Laboratory, 1320 Kinnear Road, Columbus, Ohio 43212, USA Telephone: (614) 292-7981 * Fax: (614) 292-7292 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Fri Jan 27 23:49:24 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA03972; Fri, 27 Jan 95 23:49:24 GMT Received: from localhost.eng.ohio-state.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA03967; Fri, 27 Jan 95 18:49:21 -0500 Message-Id: <9501272349.AA03967@xxx.edu> To: diy_efi Subject: Re: EFI68k board Date: Fri, 27 Jan 95 18:49:21 -0500 From: John S Gwynne Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI My goal has been to make a *minimal* board that fully supports RTEMS/C/C++. I have been using version 1.00 now for about 3 weeks and the C/C++ environment is good. If anyone has any suggestions, I would like to hear them. | (I am getting about 20uA for 768k and an RTC on another job. A | button cell will last for around a year.) the Dallas NVRAM's were guaranteed for five years and were predicted to last for ten. I still have one going that's 8 years old. Has anyone tried any of the vanadium pentoxide lithium rechargeable batteries? (I don't have temperature data for them either) My calculations show a 3F cap will only last about 2 days. John S Gwynne Gwynne.1@xxx.edu _______________________________________________________________________________ T h e O h i o - S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ElectroScience Laboratory, 1320 Kinnear Road, Columbus, Ohio 43212, USA Telephone: (614) 292-7981 * Fax: (614) 292-7292 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Sat Jan 28 15:22:29 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA05475; Sat, 28 Jan 95 15:22:29 GMT Received: from willow.uml.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA05470; Sat, 28 Jan 95 10:22:26 -0500 Received: by woods.uml.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) id 9871; Sat, 28 Jan 1995 10:22:21 EST Date: Sat, 28 Jan 1995 10:22:20 EST From: MRGATE%WOODS.dnet@xxx.edu To: DIY_EFI X-Vmsmail-To: MX%"DIY_EFI@xxx.edu" Message-Id: <0098B221.7F9425A0.9871@xxx.edu> Subject: Message Router delivery notification message Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI RE Message ID: 73210172105991/866335@WOODS UA content ID: EFI 68k Attempted delivery to: Route : @AM <-- Userid : VAHEG Arrival date : 28-JAN-1995 10:12 This delivery failed. Failure reason was "transfer failure". Diagnostic was "max time expired". Message-id: 73210172105991/866335@WOODS From: MX%"DIY_EFI@xxx.edu"@MRGATE@WOODS Subject: EFI 68k Precedence: 1 To: VAHEG@AM Return-Path: Received: from coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu by aspen.uml.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 10:12:29 EST Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for VAHEG@xxx.EDU id AA00288; Fri, 27 Jan 95 14:24:07 GMT Received: from cosmail2.ctd.ornl.gov by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA00283; Fri, 27 Jan 95 09:24:04 -0500 Received: from a7fpc1 (a7fpc1.etd.ornl.gov [128.219.133.29]) by cosmail2.ctd.ornl.gov (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA25266 for ; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 09:23:55 -0500 Date: Fri, 27 Jan 1995 09:23:55 -0500 Message-ID: <199501271423.JAA25266@xxx.gov> X-Sender: a7f@xxx.gov MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu From: a7f@xxx. Armfield) Subject: EFI 68k X-Mailer: Sender: owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu Count me in on EFI 68k. Any plans to include an OBD (SAE J1850) type chip on the second board? Jeff Armfield (not mailing from my usual account) >From owner-diy_efi Sat Jan 28 17:35:07 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA05919; Sat, 28 Jan 95 17:35:07 GMT Received: from willow.uml.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA05914; Sat, 28 Jan 95 12:35:04 -0500 Received: by woods.uml.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) id 10118; Sat, 28 Jan 1995 12:34:56 EST Date: Sat, 28 Jan 1995 12:34:51 EST From: MRGATE%WOODS.dnet@xxx.edu To: DIY_EFI X-Vmsmail-To: MX%"DIY_EFI@xxx.edu" Message-Id: <0098B234.02DE8240.10118@xxx.edu> Subject: Message Router delivery notification message Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI RE Message ID: 74922172105991/866824@WOODS UA content ID: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Attempted delivery to: Route : @AM <-- Userid : VAHEG Arrival date : 28-JAN-1995 12:30 This delivery failed. Failure reason was "transfer failure". Diagnostic was "max time expired". Message-id: 74922172105991/866824@WOODS From: MX%"DIY_EFI@xxx.edu"@MRGATE@WOODS Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Precedence: 1 To: VAHEG@AM Return-Path: Received: from coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu by aspen.uml.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 12:29:44 EST Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for VAHEG@xxx.EDU id AA00679; Fri, 27 Jan 95 15:59:49 GMT Received: from uunet.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA00674; Fri, 27 Jan 95 10:59:46 -0500 Received: from gateway.prior.com ([142.77.252.4]) by mail.uunet.ca with SMTP id <86683-4>; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 10:59:59 -0500 Received: by gateway.prior.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA25705; Fri, 27 Jan 95 10:42:30 EST Received: from odin.gallium.com(192.139.238.33) by gateway.gallium.com via smap (V1.3) id sma025703; Fri Jan 27 10:42:06 1995 Received: from ivan.gallium.com by odin (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09885; Fri, 27 Jan 95 10:35:08 EST Received: by ivan.gallium.com (931110.SGI/930416.SGI) for @xxx.edu id AA26327; Fri, 27 Jan 95 10:46:20 -0500 Date: Fri, 27 Jan 1995 10:46:20 -0500 From: MSargent@xxx. Sargent) Message-ID: <9501271546.AA26327@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Sender: owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu John- Two more points came to mind this morning: 1) Will the MAX791 and KM681000L allow the contents of the SRAM to be retained over power off? How much current will be drawn to keep the SRAM contents alive? (Mine would go in a boat, and drain may be a problem if the boat isn't run for week or two.) 2) Downloading 256KB or code at 9600 baud will take two minutes. Is there any way to speed this up? (i.e. much higher baud rate, or parallel interface) Thanks, Mike +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Michael F. Sargent | Net: msargent@xxx.com | Phone: 1(613)721-0902 | | Gallium Software Inc.| | FAX: 1(613)721-1278 | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >From owner-diy_efi Sat Jan 28 17:49:34 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA05942; Sat, 28 Jan 95 17:49:34 GMT Received: from willow.uml.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA05937; Sat, 28 Jan 95 12:49:31 -0500 Received: by woods.uml.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) id 10066; Sat, 28 Jan 1995 12:49:26 EST Date: Sat, 28 Jan 1995 12:49:25 EST From: MRGATE%WOODS.dnet@xxx.edu To: DIY_EFI X-Vmsmail-To: MX%"DIY_EFI@xxx.edu" Message-Id: <0098B236.0BC8B220.10066@xxx.edu> Subject: Message Router delivery notification message Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI RE Message ID: 73832172105991/866857@WOODS UA content ID: Re: EFI 68k Attempted delivery to: Route : @AM <-- Userid : VAHEG Arrival date : 28-JAN-1995 12:39 This delivery failed. Failure reason was "transfer failure". Diagnostic was "max time expired". Message-id: 73832172105991/866857@WOODS From: MX%"DIY_EFI@xxx.edu"@MRGATE@WOODS Subject: Re: EFI 68k Precedence: 1 To: VAHEG@AM Return-Path: Received: from coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu by aspen.uml.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 12:38:32 EST Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for VAHEG@xxx.EDU id AA00853; Fri, 27 Jan 95 16:44:48 GMT Received: from localhost.eng.ohio-state.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA00846; Fri, 27 Jan 95 11:44:45 -0500 Message-ID: <9501271644.AA00846@xxx.edu> To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu Subject: Re: EFI 68k In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 27 Jan 95 09:23:55 EST." <199501271423.JAA25266@xxx.gov> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 95 11:44:45 -0500 From: John S Gwynne Sender: owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu -------- In message <199501271423.JAA25266@xxx.gov> , you write: | Any plans to include an OBD (SAE J1850) type chip on | the second board? I would prefer not to build this into the prototype, but I see no reason why it could not be added latter. John S Gwynne Gwynne.1@xxx.edu _______________________________________________________________________________ T h e O h i o - S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ElectroScience Laboratory, 1320 Kinnear Road, Columbus, Ohio 43212, USA Telephone: (614) 292-7981 * Fax: (614) 292-7292 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Sat Jan 28 18:25:17 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA06292; Sat, 28 Jan 95 18:25:17 GMT Received: from willow.uml.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA06287; Sat, 28 Jan 95 13:25:14 -0500 Received: by woods.uml.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) id 10196; Sat, 28 Jan 1995 13:25:07 EST Date: Sat, 28 Jan 1995 13:25:05 EST From: MRGATE%WOODS.dnet@xxx.edu To: DIY_EFI X-Vmsmail-To: MX%"DIY_EFI@xxx.edu" Message-Id: <0098B23B.075EFD20.10196@xxx.edu> Subject: Message Router delivery notification message Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI RE Message ID: 63513172105991/866982@WOODS UA content ID: Re: 68000-vs-68332 (long) was Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Attempted delivery to: Route : @AM <-- Userid : VAHEG Arrival date : 28-JAN-1995 13:15 This delivery failed. Failure reason was "transfer failure". Diagnostic was "max time expired". Message-id: 63513172105991/866982@WOODS From: MX%"DIY_EFI@xxx.edu"@MRGATE@WOODS Subject: Re: 68000-vs-68332 (long) was Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Precedence: 1 To: VAHEG@AM Return-Path: Received: from coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu by aspen.uml.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 13:15:33 EST Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for VAHEG@xxx.EDU id AA00954; Fri, 27 Jan 95 17:24:26 GMT Received: from cebaf4.cebaf.gov by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA00949; Fri, 27 Jan 95 12:24:23 -0500 Received: by cebaf4.cebaf.gov (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA03822; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 12:24:23 -0500 Date: Fri, 27 Jan 1995 12:24:23 -0500 From: bowling@xxx.gov (Bruce Bowling) Message-ID: <9501271724.AA03822@xxx.gov> To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu Subject: Re: 68000-vs-68332 (long) was Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Sender: owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu YES - Motorola is extraordinary generous with samples, and documentation. I personally will use Motorola first above any other manufacturer because I know I can get the info I need from them easily, and their tech reps are excellent. Bruce Bowling CEBAF bowling@xxx.gov >From owner-diy_efi Sat Jan 28 19:26:04 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA06498; Sat, 28 Jan 95 19:26:04 GMT Received: from willow.uml.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA06493; Sat, 28 Jan 95 14:26:01 -0500 Received: by woods.uml.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) id 10327; Sat, 28 Jan 1995 14:25:57 EST Date: Sat, 28 Jan 1995 14:25:57 EST From: MRGATE%WOODS.dnet@xxx.edu To: DIY_EFI X-Vmsmail-To: MX%"DIY_EFI@xxx.edu" Message-Id: <0098B243.87D29EA0.10327@xxx.edu> Subject: Message Router delivery notification message Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI RE Message ID: 54224172105991/867197@WOODS UA content ID: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Attempted delivery to: Route : @AM <-- Userid : VAHEG Arrival date : 28-JAN-1995 14:23 This delivery failed. Failure reason was "transfer failure". Diagnostic was "max time expired". Message-id: 54224172105991/867197@WOODS From: MX%"DIY_EFI@xxx.edu"@MRGATE@WOODS Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Precedence: 1 To: VAHEG@AM Return-Path: Received: from coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu by aspen.uml.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 14:22:38 EST Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for VAHEG@xxx.EDU id AA01097; Fri, 27 Jan 95 18:03:28 GMT Received: from localhost.eng.ohio-state.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA01092; Fri, 27 Jan 95 13:03:25 -0500 Message-ID: <9501271803.AA01092@xxx.edu> To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 27 Jan 95 10:46:20 EST." <9501271546.AA26327@xxx.com> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 95 13:03:25 -0500 From: John S Gwynne Sender: owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu -------- In message <9501271546.AA26327@xxx.com> , you write: | 1) Will the MAX791 and KM681000L allow the contents of the SRAM to be retaine | d | over power off? How much current will be drawn to keep the SRAM contents | alive? (Mine would go in a boat, and drain may be a problem if the boat | isn't run for week or two.) yes, it will store RAM and continue to keep time. I believe I measured less than 100uA at room temp. This should not be a problem for a car/boat battery but I would like to see a separate battery. I believe nicad batteries have "problems" at temperatures below freezing (??? is this true ???) and I have not tried to find the temperature range of a lithium battery. I would love to find a battery that would recharge while the engine was running, have a temperature range compatible with the car's environment, and be about the size of a quarter (in the 2-4.5V range). Any ideas? | 2) Downloading 256KB or code at 9600 baud will take two minutes. Is there any | way to speed this up? (i.e. much higher baud rate, or parallel interface) (256*1024)/(9600/10)/60=4.5 minutes (binary transfer) ??? I've been running at 38400 (limited by the host) but am also transferring s-records. That's about 1920 bytes/sec. I've heard of 16550's running at over 100k baud. I have not given parallel port transfer much thought since I don't believe the parallel port on an SGI Indigo is bidirectional :(. The C library tends to be about 24k (mostly stdio stuff) while the C++ library is on the order of 80k. RTEMS is suppose to be about 16k. The EFI software should be much less complicated than all of these... maybe 12k (blind guess) with all the options for a total of 24+16+12=52k. I hope to use a good portion of RAM as a "data recorder". John S Gwynne Gwynne.1@xxx.edu _______________________________________________________________________________ T h e O h i o - S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ElectroScience Laboratory, 1320 Kinnear Road, Columbus, Ohio 43212, USA Telephone: (614) 292-7981 * Fax: (614) 292-7292 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Sat Jan 28 20:13:14 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA07135; Sat, 28 Jan 95 20:13:14 GMT Received: from willow.uml.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA07130; Sat, 28 Jan 95 15:13:11 -0500 Received: by woods.uml.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) id 10439; Sat, 28 Jan 1995 15:12:59 EST Date: Sat, 28 Jan 1995 15:12:56 EST From: MRGATE%WOODS.dnet@xxx.edu To: DIY_EFI X-Vmsmail-To: MX%"DIY_EFI@xxx.edu" Message-Id: <0098B24A.1847C360.10439@xxx.edu> Subject: Message Router delivery notification message Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI RE Message ID: 73605172105991/867335@WOODS UA content ID: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Attempted delivery to: Route : @AM <-- Userid : VAHEG Arrival date : 28-JAN-1995 15:07 This delivery failed. Failure reason was "transfer failure". Diagnostic was "max time expired". Message-id: 73605172105991/867335@WOODS From: MX%"DIY_EFI@xxx.edu"@MRGATE@WOODS Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Precedence: 1 To: VAHEG@AM Return-Path: Received: from coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu by aspen.uml.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 15:06:32 EST Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for VAHEG@xxx.EDU id AA01565; Fri, 27 Jan 95 18:32:58 GMT Received: from cebaf4.cebaf.gov by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA01560; Fri, 27 Jan 95 13:32:55 -0500 Received: by cebaf4.cebaf.gov (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA03966; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 13:32:54 -0500 Date: Fri, 27 Jan 1995 13:32:54 -0500 From: bowling@xxx.gov (Bruce Bowling) Message-ID: <9501271832.AA03966@xxx.gov> To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Sender: owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu 2) Downloading 256KB or code at 9600 baud will take two minutes. Is there any way to speed this up? (i.e. much higher baud rate, or parallel interface). Has anyone thought of using PCMCIA SRAM cards? I am using them in a current design (a datalogger) and can give some info. The nice thing about them is that they are battery-backup, and unplugging them from the EFI and plugging them into a laptop for instant access to stored data and storage of new running conditions and constants. - Bruce Bruce Bowling CEBAF bowling@xxx.gov >From owner-diy_efi Sun Jan 29 20:02:16 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA10279; Sun, 29 Jan 95 20:02:16 GMT Received: from willow.uml.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA10274; Sun, 29 Jan 95 15:02:13 -0500 Received: by woods.uml.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) id 12033; Sun, 29 Jan 1995 15:02:07 EST Date: Sun, 29 Jan 1995 15:02:05 EST From: MRGATE%WOODS.dnet@xxx.edu To: DIY_EFI X-Vmsmail-To: MX%"DIY_EFI@xxx.edu" Message-Id: <0098B311.BECC5DA0.12033@xxx.edu> Subject: Message Router delivery notification message Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI RE Message ID: 63754182105991/869073@WOODS UA content ID: Message Router delivery notification message Attempted delivery to: Route : @AM <-- Userid : VAHEG Arrival date : 29-JAN-1995 14:57 This delivery failed. Failure reason was "transfer failure". Diagnostic was "max time expired". Message-id: 63754182105991/869073@WOODS From: MX%"DIY_EFI@xxx.edu"@MRGATE@WOODS Subject: Message Router delivery notification message Precedence: 1 To: VAHEG@AM Return-Path: Received: from coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu by aspen.uml.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; Sat, 28 Jan 1995 14:57:13 EST Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for VAHEG@xxx.edu id AA06498; Sat, 28 Jan 95 19:26:04 GMT Received: from willow.uml.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA06493; Sat, 28 Jan 95 14:26:01 -0500 Received: by woods.uml.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) id 10327; Sat, 28 Jan 1995 14:25:57 EST Date: Sat, 28 Jan 1995 14:25:57 EST From: MRGATE%WOODS.dnet@xxx.edu To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu X-Vmsmail-To: MX%"DIY_EFI@xxx.edu" Message-ID: <0098B243.87D29EA0.10327@xxx.edu> Subject: Message Router delivery notification message Sender: owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu RE Message ID: 54224172105991/867197@WOODS UA content ID: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Attempted delivery to: Route : @AM <-- Userid : VAHEG Arrival date : 28-JAN-1995 14:23 This delivery failed. Failure reason was "transfer failure". Diagnostic was "max time expired". Message-id: 54224172105991/867197@WOODS From: MX%"DIY_EFI@xxx.edu"@MRGATE@WOODS Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey Precedence: 1 To: VAHEG@AM Return-Path: Received: from coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu by aspen.uml.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 14:22:38 EST Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for VAHEG@xxx.EDU id AA01097; Fri, 27 Jan 95 18:03:28 GMT Received: from localhost.eng.ohio-state.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA01092; Fri, 27 Jan 95 13:03:25 -0500 Message-ID: <9501271803.AA01092@xxx.edu> To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu Subject: Re: [EFI68k] new release and group survey In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 27 Jan 95 10:46:20 EST." <9501271546.AA26327@xxx.com> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 95 13:03:25 -0500 From: John S Gwynne Sender: owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu -------- In message <9501271546.AA26327@xxx.com> , you write: | 1) Will the MAX791 and KM681000L allow the contents of the SRAM to be retaine | d | over power off? How much current will be drawn to keep the SRAM contents | alive? (Mine would go in a boat, and drain may be a problem if the boat | isn't run for week or two.) yes, it will store RAM and continue to keep time. I believe I measured less than 100uA at room temp. This should not be a problem for a car/boat battery but I would like to see a separate battery. I believe nicad batteries have "problems" at temperatures below freezing (??? is this true ???) and I have not tried to find the temperature range of a lithium battery. I would love to find a battery that would recharge while the engine was running, have a temperature range compatible with the car's environment, and be about the size of a quarter (in the 2-4.5V range). Any ideas? | 2) Downloading 256KB or code at 9600 baud will take two minutes. Is there any | way to speed this up? (i.e. much higher baud rate, or parallel interface) (256*1024)/(9600/10)/60=4.5 minutes (binary transfer) ??? I've been running at 38400 (limited by the host) but am also transferring s-records. That's about 1920 bytes/sec. I've heard of 16550's running at over 100k baud. I have not given parallel port transfer much thought since I don't believe the parallel port on an SGI Indigo is bidirectional :(. The C library tends to be about 24k (mostly stdio stuff) while the C++ library is on the order of 80k. RTEMS is suppose to be about 16k. The EFI software should be much less complicated than all of these... maybe 12k (blind guess) with all the options for a total of 24+16+12=52k. I hope to use a good portion of RAM as a "data recorder". John S Gwynne Gwynne.1@xxx.edu _______________________________________________________________________________ T h e O h i o - S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ElectroScience Laboratory, 1320 Kinnear Road, Columbus, Ohio 43212, USA Telephone: (614) 292-7981 * Fax: (614) 292-7292 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 31 04:53:18 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA20734; Tue, 31 Jan 95 04:53:18 GMT Received: from mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA20729; Mon, 30 Jan 95 23:53:09 -0500 Received: by mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU id AA10354 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for DIY_EFI@xxx.edu); Tue, 31 Jan 1995 14:52:48 +1000 (rfc931-sender: @) From: robert joseph dingli Message-Id: <199501310452.AA10354@xxx.AU> Subject: Re: New person To: DIY_EFI Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 15:52:48 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: <9501241639.AA25047@xxx.gov> from "Bruce Bowling" at Jan 24, 95 11:39:12 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 5109 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Hi Bruce, > > I am involved with converting a '72 Camaro ... > > I have been tracking the aftermarket EFI systems available for a > few years now. Some features I wish to see in a system is adjustablity > of system parameters via laptop, individual drivers for each fuel > injector, etc. So far, the TEC system from Electromotive seems to be > the closest candidate. Most of the FI parameters are adjustable, > but it appears to use the "wasted-squirt" where two cylinders are linked > together, so only four drivers are needed for 8 cylinders. It would be > very nice to be able to tailor each cylinder individually, with > "tweek" values that are diferent for each cyclinder, derived from > information from dyno results (like outer cylinders needing a different > A/F ratio from inner ones due to intake manifold flow). TEC also uses > their own ignition system, wasted spark, which I would rather not use. > The current setup with the Multiple-spark-discharge ignition appears to > be sufficient, so I wonder if the TEC system can run without their > ignition setup, if the TEC EFI computer is provided a spark-event > signal? Also, is there another candidate I may not know about? > Try a Motec or Autronic unit. These units are made here in Australia and used extensively by Group A race teams among other applications. (Group A is basically Chev or Ford powered 5 litre Commodores or Falcons). Note that in the lastest version of the Motec system (which is regarded by many as being the best around) that they have opted for 4 injector output groups rather than the eight they had previously. Expect to pay around $2000 - $3000 for a fully mapped sequential system, not including injector hardware. I haven't found anyone here who has successfully used a TEC system. What is wasted with "wasted squirt" injection? If you ere serious about performance you would also want to discard the distributor and control the ignition electronically. Do you have any reason to doubt the performance of wasted spark systems? > I have also toyed with constructing a EFI unit on my own. I have played > with the idea of using a 68HC11 (which I have a lot of experience with), > some MC3484S4 injector drivers, and pressure and temperature sensors. > There seems to be some useful pressure transducers from Motorola which > are ready to use without a lot of hassle (electronically). The goal > over what is available (to my knowledge) is to make a system that can > have feedback over each cylinder individually. Why don't existing > systems use thermocouples on each exhaust port providing feedback to > the ECU for each cylinder? Is this a dumb idea? The car that this > system would be used is "pre-emissions", so the 14.7 ratio does not have > to apply. > The HC11, while used in many aftermarket ECU's including the one I designed and market locally, would be no where near fast enough to provide all of the outputs you require. Feedback from exhaust temperature thermocouples would be too slow for a computer to make adjustments with. This system has been used to balance injector flows in sequential systems manually. > Another question: After seeing all of the information (or > misinformation) on fuel injectors and performing a few calculations, it > appears I may need to use 50Lb/hr injectors. Do these injectors > have enought "dynamic range" to allow the car to idle in a decent > manner? It appears to me that the injector is open a very short > period of time at idle and the injectors may not be stable in > providing the same amount of fuel each and every shot. Probably not. The highest dynamic range and flow rates I've encountered are for Mazda rotary NA and turbo applications. The flow of fuel required at full load is huge compared to that at idle. The only solution has been to fit more than one injector per rotor with the second pair being staged so that they are shut during low load situations. The accuraccy of any injector near the point of injector cutoff (around 1 mS pulse width) is relatively poor. Twin injector per cylinder cars certainly exist (especially for methanol injection). > Could one > help the situation be somehow lowering the fuel pressure at lower > RPMs and raising it at high RPMS? Maybe apply a PWM signal to the > fuel pump, with a fuel pressure sensor on the fuel rail, with PID > feedback. Is this a screwy idea? This tends to occur naturally as the fuel rail pressure is linked to the inlet manifold pressure by the fuel pressure regulator. The fuel pump should be running flat out continuously, returning the unwanted fuel back to the tank. Robert -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Dingli r.dingli@xxx.au Power and Control Systems Thermodynamics Research Lab Electrical Engineering Mechanical Engineering (+613) 344 7966 (+613) 344 6728 University of Melbourne, Parkville, 3052, Victoria, AUSTRALIA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 31 19:43:09 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA24227; Tue, 31 Jan 95 19:43:09 GMT Received: from slate.Mines.Colorado.EDU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA24222; Tue, 31 Jan 95 14:43:06 -0500 Received: from sparky.Mines.Colorado.EDU by slate.Mines.Colorado.EDU (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA83983; Tue, 31 Jan 1995 12:43:02 -0700 Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 12:43:02 -0700 Message-Id: <9501311943.AA83983@xxx.EDU> X-Sender: mtaylor@xxx.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: DIY_EFI From: mtaylor@xxx.EDU (Mike Taylor) Subject: LOTS_O_HP'S Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI I'm a senior at the Colorado School of Mines (graduating in 92 more days!!!!) and I'm currently taking a class that involved a micro-controller (Motorola mc68hc11 flavored) that the automotive industry utilizes. This "controller" does analog to digital voltage conversions and pulse width modulation output control, the EXACT same thing the boys in Detroit do. I want to utilize a air mass meter (I can get them for around $100). I plan on using this system on other vehicles. MAP sensors a very particular. Once a program is written for a certain application (the boat), the system would not work on another system (a car). I'll need to set-up a crank trigger pick-up that will synchronize which cylinder gets fuel and I'll need a pick-up that determines when #1 fires so as to get sequential fuel injection. An air temperature sensor is necessary in "tweaking" the air-fuel ratio to optimum level. An oxygen sensor would also be needed to "close the loop" and have feedback controlling the amount of fuel injected. And what this is all for is...... ......A 600 hp small block Chevy for a speed boat ('74 Starbuck) I purchased in summer of '93. I currently have about a 350 hp 350 small block Chevy engine in the boat that I rebuilt in High School ('86). It's ok, but the boat needs more power. Now, how does one get 600 hp's off a small block Chevy? TURBOSUPERCHARGERS!!!!! I plan on installing two t-4 Fairbanks turbochargers to another small block engine (I currently have the turbos). I'll need two intercoolers plumbed after the turbos to rid the possibility for detonation. I plan on using Saab intercoolers but modifying them so that water will be the heat exchange medium (since the boat's on water, I'll have plenty at my disposal). The injection manifold will be the standard TPI found on current 5.0 and 5.7 TPI engines. The engine itself will be a 350 4-bolt main, unless I can find a reasonably priced 400 4-bolt main. I plan on using about 7-1 compression pistons so I can boost the hell out of it (I plan on running 30-40 psi (I've seen it done)). With so much boost, detonation possibilities are increased. Saab used a control system that entails a detonation sensor and "boost pressure regulator". When detonation occurs, it opens a valve that opens the waste gate and bleeds off boost pressure. My biggest problem is camshaft selection. I've built three performance engines and read plenty of HOT ROD and CAR CRAFT magazines to give me a good feel for selecting naturally aspirated camshafts, but I'm clueless to the turbo realm. Any other suggestions are appreciated. And do you know if there are places to turn to on the "information highway" about turbocharging. Thanks!! -- Mike Taylor >From owner-diy_efi Tue Jan 31 20:37:26 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA24620; Tue, 31 Jan 95 20:37:26 GMT Received: from hwking.cca.rockwell.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA24615; Tue, 31 Jan 95 15:37:22 -0500 Received: by hwking.cca.rockwell.com (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA24796; Tue, 31 Jan 1995 14:37:06 -0600 Received: by star.cca.rockwell.com (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA03079; Tue, 31 Jan 1995 14:37:05 -0600 Message-Id: <9501312037.AA03079@xxx.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 1.5.3 12/28/94 To: DIY_EFI Cc: sdbartho@xxx.com Subject: Re: LOTS_O_HP'S In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 31 Jan 95 12:43:02 MST." <9501311943.AA83983@xxx.EDU> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 14:36:58 -0600 From: sdbartho@xxx.com X-Mts: smtp Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > > TURBOSUPERCHARGERS!!!!! > > I plan on installing two t-4 Fairbanks turbochargers to another > small block engine (I currently have the turbos). I'll need two > intercoolers plumbed after the turbos to rid the possibility for detonation. > I plan on using Saab intercoolers but modifying them so that water will be > the heat exchange medium (since the boat's on water, I'll have plenty at my > disposal). The injection manifold will be the standard TPI found on current > 5.0 and 5.7 TPI engines. You'll need to know whether or not the turbos you have will be the right ones for your application- It's not like slapping on a blower. I'd highly recommend the Hugh McInnes book TURBOCHARGING- It gives a lot of theory on compressor/ turbine selection as well as a lot of other nice things you'll need to know. It's a little dated, but is still valid from a general theory standpoint. It contains a good deal of boat info too, which is a plus for you. Banks, M&W, and Spearco all did a lot of work with boats in the early 80's. They might have some custom parts that'll make you life easier. Electronic boost control can be established really cheap by getting a wastegate modulator valve off a '86-'87 Buick GN. It takes a variable pulse width and an input pressure line from the manifold and outputs a variable pressure based on the pulse width. Feed this pressure back into a conventional screw-type wastegate, and you have the control you seek. The '91-'92-'93 Syclone/Typhoon also uses this, as does some of the Sunbird turbos I think. Many will tell you to abandon turbos- "Too expensive, too much work, unreliable" Don't be too ready to believe them. I've been around them since the late '70s and I know they can be made to do amazing things with proper engineering. > Any other suggestions are appreciated. And do you know if there are > places to turn to on the "information highway" about turbocharging. Thanks!! > -- The archives for the hotrod list had some info about turbos, and there are many knowledgeable folks floating around the net. If I can find the hr archive location (It's around here somewhere) I'll pass it along to ya if I see it. Also, you might want to check out the 68HC711G7. It has extended pwm channels over the plain vanilla varieties. I'm looking at it for a data logger for the Sy/Ty. Later, Dig Syclone/Typhoon mailing list. Feel the power of the wind. '91 Sy- 12.65 @xxx. >From owner-diy_efi Wed Feb 1 01:49:58 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA06594; Wed, 1 Feb 95 01:49:58 GMT Received: from mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA06585; Tue, 31 Jan 95 20:49:42 -0500 Received: from biscuit-tin.ee.mu.OZ.AU by mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU with SMTP id AA07513 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Wed, 1 Feb 1995 11:49:30 +1000 unauthenticated (rfc931-sender: unauthenticated@xxx.AU) From: robert joseph dingli Received: (dingli@xxx.edu; Wed, 1 Feb 1995 12:48:26 +1100 Message-Id: <199502010148.MAA10544@xxx.AU> Subject: Re: LOTS_O_HP'S To: DIY_EFI Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 12:48:24 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: <9501311943.AA83983@xxx.EDU> from "Mike Taylor" at Jan 31, 95 12:43:02 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2546 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Hi Mike as someone who has driven around daily with a custom HC11 based EFI/ignition system for about two years, I thought I'd point out a couple of things > I want to utilize a air mass meter (I can get them for around $100). > I plan on using this system on other vehicles. MAP sensors a very > particular. Once a program is written for a certain application (the boat), > the system would not work on another system (a car). I recommend using the MAP sensor for your application. If you are programming the system yourself then a nice user interface allowing on-line adjustments is a must and thus you shouldn't have any problems readjusting. > I'll need to set-up a crank trigger pick-up that will synchronize > which cylinder gets fuel and I'll need a pick-up that determines when #1 > fires so as to get sequential fuel injection. At high power outputs the injectors will be open for near 90-100% duty cycle. Sequential injection will thus make absolutely no difference. Local 5.0 litre Chev, Ford and Holden powered race cars get in excess of 550 HP running unleaded fuel without the aid of supercharging. Seqential injection has been tested and found to offer no benefits for this application. > An air temperature sensor is necessary in "tweaking" the air-fuel > ratio to optimum level. An oxygen sensor would also be needed to "close the > loop" and have feedback controlling the amount of fuel injected. Air temp is mandatory (especially for boosted applications where the air temp will varing by over 100 deg C). Closed loop control is impossible using EGO sensors as you will be running very rich anyway. > Now, how does one get 600 hp's off a small block Chevy? > > TURBOSUPERCHARGERS!!!!! 600 HP should be very feasable with much less than 30-40 psi boost. We intend to tweak our 2.0 litre Toyotas (ex GT4 Rallye Celica) to well over 300 HP without taking the cam covers off the standard engine. 600 HP from 3.0 litre turbo Nissan engines has been done here. > Mike Taylor Robert -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Dingli r.dingli@xxx.au Power and Control Systems Thermodynamics Research Lab Electrical Engineering Mechanical Engineering (+613) 344 7966 (+613) 344 6728 University of Melbourne, Parkville, 3052, Victoria, AUSTRALIA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >From owner-diy_efi Wed Feb 1 04:45:53 1995 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA13762; Wed, 1 Feb 95 04:45:53 GMT Received: from knuth.mtsu.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA13757; Tue, 31 Jan 95 23:45:48 -0500 Received: by knuth.mtsu.edu (Smail3.1.28.1 #21) id m0rZWw2-000Cx0C; Tue, 31 Jan 95 22:44 CST Message-Id: From: lusky@xxx. Lusky) Subject: Re: LOTS_O_HP'S To: DIY_EFI Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 22:44:54 +73800 (CST) In-Reply-To: <9501311943.AA83983@xxx.EDU> from "Mike Taylor" at Jan 31, 95 12:43:02 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24alpha3] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2672 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Mike Taylor writes: > > ......A 600 hp small block Chevy for a speed boat ('74 Starbuck) I > purchased in summer of '93. I currently have about a 350 hp 350 small block > Chevy engine in the boat that I rebuilt in High School ('86). It's ok, but > the boat needs more power. > Now, how does one get 600 hp's off a small block Chevy? > > TURBOSUPERCHARGERS!!!!! > > I plan on installing two t-4 Fairbanks turbochargers to another > small block engine (I currently have the turbos). I'll need two > intercoolers plumbed after the turbos to rid the possibility for detonation. > I plan on using Saab intercoolers but modifying them so that water will be > the heat exchange medium (since the boat's on water, I'll have plenty at my > disposal). What the flow rating like on those? Most of the OEM intercoolers I've seen are majorly inadequate and fairly restrictive--on a little engine. > The injection manifold will be the standard TPI found on current > 5.0 and 5.7 TPI engines. What RPM range are you planning to run? Stock TPI is only good for about 4500 rpm in general. For a boat you'll be running a fairly narrow RPM range, right? If so, I think you'd be able to get better results with a standard tunnel ram basewith a box plenum on top. > The engine itself will be a 350 4-bolt main, unless I can find a > reasonably priced 400 4-bolt main. You are much better off machining a two bolt block for splayed 4-bolt caps than running a factory style 4-bolt block. > My biggest problem is camshaft selection. I've built three > performance engines and read plenty of HOT ROD and CAR CRAFT magazines to > give me a good feel for selecting naturally aspirated camshafts, but I'm > clueless to the turbo realm. Forget everything you have ever read in car craft, hotrod, etc about choosing cams :). Figure out exactly what you want the cam to do and then call someone like Crower, Lunati, etc and be prepared to run up a nice little long distance bill. They probably have something that will do whatever you want--it's just not going to be anything you see listed in Summit Catalog :). > Any other suggestions are appreciated. And do you know if there are > places to turn to on the "information highway" about turbocharging. Thanks!! You didn't mention heads... what are you planning to run for heads? -- Jonathan R. Lusky lusky@xxx.edu http://www.mtsu.edu/~lusky/ (615) 726-8700 ------------------------------------- ------------------------------ 68 Camaro Convertible - 350 / TH350 \_/ 80 Toyota Celica - 20R / 5spd ÿ