DIY_EFI Digest Sunday, 29 September 1996 Volume 01 : Number 291 In this issue: Re: Combustion chamber heat Re: EEC IV reprogramming Re: DIY_EFI Digest V1 #290 See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Robert Harris" Date: Sat, 28 Sep 1996 06:05:23 -0700 Subject: Re: Combustion chamber heat This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_01BBAD03.09508680 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Attached is a site on the west coast that does extensive ceramic coating - check it out. - ----- Cut here - personal comment follows ----- Q: What's the difference between Jane Fonda and Bill Clinton? A: She had the balls to go to Viet Nam Robert Harris - ---------- > From: Shaun Brady > To: diy_efi@xxx.edu > Subject: Re: Combustion chamber heat > Date: Friday, September 27, 1996 8:06 PM > > > >Is your motorcycle engine air cooled? If so, did you run into problems > >with the larger expansion/contraction of air cooled's parts? > - ------=_NextPart_000_01BBAD03.09508680 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="High Performance Coatings.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Description: High Performance Coatings (Internet Shortcut) Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="High Performance Coatings.url" W0ludGVybmV0U2hvcnRjdXRdDQpVUkw9aHR0cDovL3d3dy53Y28uY29tL35zYzc1MDAvbGVhZDIu aHRtbABsAKDRQwDZ/9n/1//X/9b/1v/l/+X/4f/h/67/rv91/3X/ - ------=_NextPart_000_01BBAD03.09508680-- ------------------------------ From: "Brian Warburton, c/o Turbo Systems Ltd" Date: Sat, 28 Sep 1996 14:27:53 Subject: Re: EEC IV reprogramming Note: These are my own opinions based on my experience with Ford, and elsewhere. Just because they may differ from someone elses doesn't necessarily make either of us right ..... or wrong. >>> > Q: are you wanting to know the 8061 opcodes because >>> > you would like to >>> > change the way the eec handles the information it receives? .. >>> > ... or do you just want the eec to 'respond' differently to a set of >>> > inputs? >>> > The only reason to know the 8061/8065 opcodes is if you intend to re-program the way the EEC works, if you just want to change the way it responds for a given set of input data, you only need to change the calibration, i.e. the data in the maps etc. >>it happens that the eec gets 1 and only 1 timing signal from the tfi >>unit. it is called the pip (Profile Ignition Pickup ??). on a 4 cyl the >>output of the pip is 45 - 55Hz @ 1000 RPM, on a 6 cyl the output of the >>pip is 45 - 55Hz @ 1000 RPM, and finally on an 8cyl the output (and >>you guessed it) is 45 - 55Hz @ 1000RPM (oh: the duty cycle on all of these >>should be 50%) these numbers are true for all ford engines except the >>SEFI 8cyl (the SEFI 6 cylinders are the same. the 8 cyl must need >>tighter timing indexes) I missed the start of this discussion so I'm purely speculating on the original question/inquiry but here goes anyway. The EEC's only see one Crankshaft Position Sensor signal, but where it comes from depends on the age of the EEC. Early EEC's used a sectored wheel in the distributor which produced a square wave of frequency of Number-Cylinders per 2-revs with a nominal 50% dutycycle unless SEFI was used wherupon there was a "short" tooth. The spark was output by a TFI unit. The later (and to the best of my knowledge) all current EEC's including the EEC-v utilise a 36-1 tooth wheel for CPS which is pre-processed by a unit known as the EDIS (Electronic DIStributor). The EDIS converts the 36-1 into a 2 pulses/rev 50% dutycycle square wave which is then fed into the EEC to be used for RPM and injector timing calculations. The EEC sends a PWM signal to the EDIS defining the spark advance required, and the EDIS unit then times out the signals to the coils (wasted spark). This gives a more accurate spark delivery as the EDIS has access to timing data which is updated every 10 crank degrees whereas the EEC only gets timing data every 90 degrees. >>what i gleened from this is that the pip does 2 things: >>1) it lets the eec know how fast the engine is turning (frequency alone) >>2) it gives a base signal to be sent back to the tfi after being delayed >> a bit. this delay or phase change (realitive to the pip) is what lets >> the eec control timing, but indirectly, the tfi is doing _most_ of the >> work. >> The return signal from the EEC to the EDIS is unrelated to the PIP. It purely indicates to the EDIS unit the amount of spark advance required. >>mike wesley has said .. >> "you'll see that ford does not use the CPU as it was designed (to be >> used?) . . . they waste so much CPU it's pitiful" >> Having spent from 1986 to 1994 full-time consulting to Ford (both in Europe for FOB and in the U.S. for NAAO) on EEC-iv/EEC-v design and programming, I'd be genuinely interested to hear the basis for those comments. >>i'm betting he's refering to the fact that the CPU is just looking up a >>bunch of tables. (remember superchips .. just tables no code) >>the cpu only has to look up injector "on time" and SPOUT "phase shift" >>for any certain rpm, mass air, and engine temperature and its job is >>done. add on a few more bells and whistles and its done. A real >>programmer would use the CPU to "compute" these outputs not look them up. I'll deliberately pass on the "real-programmer" comment, suffice to say that I'd love to see the algorythm that could calculate required/optimium Spark Advance under all conditions to enable the engine to meet its operating criteria of power, driveability and most importantly emissions given the input data available to an EEC, i.e. CPS timing data, engine temperature, air-charge temperature, throttle position, EGO data and Cylinder-ID to name the significant ones. It's (relatively) easy to determine/calculate the spark required for optimium power, but the compromises made to meet emissions and driveability makes it a whole new ball game. >>moral is: if you want to make your own controller (and i'm interested) >>all you have to do is figure out the "TFI secret" and half your job is >>done. the injector pulsing is a piece of cake compared to trying to fire >>a spark at the proper time ... every time. >> No secret to the EDIS, it knows the required spark advance from the EEC and has accurate and regularly updated timing data for current crankshaft position, what else do you need to deliver an accurate spark ? >>i think you CAN use any eec with any other engine (all the fuel injectors >>are in banks of two ... choose the proper size and fuel pressure ... pick >>the proper TFI ( is there a difference??) and adjust for wiring >>differences.. <;-) I think you'll find the "TFI" (EDIS) units are all very similar, the differences are in the EEC. You can't just switch EEC's for different EEC's, they are generally electrically similar (not identical) but totally different in terms of code and calibration content. >From my understanding of Mikes box, you can map out the internal PROM and use external memory which would let you run any program/calibration you wanted (and had copies of) in an EEC. I'd guess you'd need a permanent piggy-back type board with an EPROM and address decoder PAL on it (a la Super-Chips) to make permanent changes tho'....... I for one would be interested to hear more about these boxes, especially if they're to become commercially available. I could find a good use for one ! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Brian Warburton, "Still searching for the perfect curve....." email: bwarb@xxx.net Advanced Automotive Electronics Ltd, Van-Nuys House, Scotlands Drive, Farnham Common, England. SL2-3ES ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ From: talltom Date: Sat, 28 Sep 1996 21:59:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V1 #290 > >From: cloud@xxx.edu (tom cloud) >Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 15:06:09 -0500 >Subject: Re: EEC IV reprogramming *** [THE LIST] *** > >Man, did I stir sumpin up or what? Lots of people seem to be interested. > >Here is my current list of who I've found that are specifically interested >in EEC-IV (or has offered an opinion). None of these has said they want out. >I don't know which of these is getting duplicate postings because they are >on diy_efi or FordNatics -- or both. > >I would like to think that all of you would subscribe to diy_efi?? I >don't want to start a new list -- don't know how, don't wanna know how. >I just wanna be able to fiddle with my Fords !! (Just like the rest of >you.) > >I teach a class where students have to build a project (including >a simple PCB). I can always tell who has experience -- the guy that >wants to lay out a PCB or design a circuit doesn't have any. If he did, >he'd know how time intensive it is and that a 3-1/2 month semester >is too short (some folks do pull it off, though -- takes real intestinal >fortitude). Well, I'd like to know all about the EEC. I know that if >I had all the tools: code, assembler, C++ compiler, debugger, logic >analyzer, 'scope, EPROM burner, computer, tools, and money (and I have >all of those -- except for the code, assembler, debugger and money), >I still wouldn't have the time. Seems like Mike's doo-dad is the best >deal for the money -- if we could only get one. Isn't a real problem >for me, though, since I'm not really quite ready for it just yet anyway. > >Josh >Alex Cazin >Derek Deeter >Tom Cloud >Dave Compton >Jim Dibble >Pat >Craig Eid >Terry Fair >Gary Graham >Todd King >Todd Knighton >Cliff Koch >Jonathan Lloyd >George Najarian >Bob Nell >James Pearl >Bradford Peterson >Sven Pruett >Eric Riggert >Steve Sadler >Jody Shapiro >"Dr. Shidel; BA, BS, MS, PhD" >Dan Stokes >James Weiler >Donald Whisnant >Travis Willis > >Thanks, >Tom Cloud There's an outfit on the web that advertises reprogramable eec's, with a price that's not totally ridicoulous. I enquired and they replied with a request for more vehicle info. Maybe it's me, but when somebody can't provide product info without trying some propietary single vehicle scam I lose interest in a hurry. My reply to them stated that if they had to have a particular vehicle use a 54 cornbinder, thought that would give them a good baseline. Guess what? No reply! My cornbinder is turbocharged, has injection provisions, and 500 cu. in. Anyhow, I'm looking for a tool that can be used on all cars if the right sensors and wiring are put in place, not something that has to be junked with every car. Anyhow, if anything like this comes out of this, add me to the list. >------------------------------ > >From: "Johnny" >Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 16:17:50 -0700 >Subject: Re: Wires and such > >AMP makes a pretty good one for about 80 bucks. It comes with one set of >dies for your regular "car type" crimp connectors and many other die sets >are available, like for BNC's etc. It pays to use "real" connectors too. >The AMP connectors give good results, and they make just about any >connector you can think of. > >Like David said, soldering don't cut it when you are talking about wires >that move around. Even wires that attach to a circuit board are (gasp) >wrapped, not soldered, when used in high vibration environments. > >Once you have used a real crimper on real connectors... well, the next time >you are at Al's and you see that glorious $6.95 connector kit with the >crimper and the the connectors you will enjoy snickering as you pass by. If >you want a real good laugh, just ask the doofass behind the counter "hey, >where do you keep the real crimpers". > >- -j- > >- ---------- >> From: Steve Ciciora >> To: diy_efi@xxx.edu >> Subject: Re: Wires and such >> Date: Friday, September 27, 1996 12:14 PM >> >> > >> > Okay, you said it, but did anyone get it?? If you're gonna crimp -- and >> > want it to be reliable -- hafta use the right tool!! Trust me, it's >> > not the Champ or Klein you gots in your tool box. A good tool that >> > works on most crimp-ons costs between $35 and $50. Snap-ON sells one >> > (Forget who really makes it). >> > >> >> I once had to buy a mil-spec crimper to crimp a PTO6A-14-12C bendix >> connector to get power from a ER-2 (U-2) spy plane... I believe >> the crimper ran about $300! There is a difference in aircraft >> crimp connectors and automotive crimp connectors... >> - Steven Ciciora > >------------------------------ > >From: smtjr@xxx.edu (steve m trindade) >Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 21:10:50 -0500 >Subject: Re: Checking fuel pressure? > >mike, >i am not sure if it would work or not, but I wouldn't recommend it. they do >make special high pressure gauges specifically for measuring fuel pressure. >in my experience i have never seen a test port that was a schrader valve >anyway. there is another benefit to using the right test gauge. they screw >on and seal and usually come with a fairly long hose. with this you can >usually go for a drive with the gauge peeking from under the cowl of the >hood so you can read while you drive. that's where you get your good >information from. > > >Steve Trindade (smtjr@xxx.edu) >P1 Engineering >Austin, Tx. USA > >------------------------------ > >From: Shaun Brady >Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 20:06:25 -0700 >Subject: Re: Combustion chamber heat > >>Is your motorcycle engine air cooled? If so, did you run into problems >>with the larger expansion/contraction of air cooled's parts? > >The motor is a Honda Hawk. 647 cc, Liquid cooled, aluminum, V-Twin, 3 >Valves per cylinder. I assembled the engine at a local shop that sponsers >me, and while it sat on the bench an old car oval track racer came in and >shared his experiences with coatings. They were much more expensive in his >day, and not widely known. They coated an aluminum headed small block >chevy's pistons and combustion chambers. Initially they didn't see much of >an improvement on the dyno, but they couldn't get the oil or water >temperature into the normal range either. After they had revised the >cooling systems and carb jetting, they saw a 35 hp improvement on a 500 hp >motor. It startled me how close this comes to Vizards publications. This >was a fully developed motor configuration they had been using for years. >The Hawk motor was good for 71 Hp from 40 cubes. Stock was 42 Hp. The >motor had 11.5:1 compression, a fairly radical cam, cleaned up ports, stock >valves, low restriction exhaust and intake systems. The motor output is >limited by the valve sizes, a really poor combustion chamber design, and an >exhaust port with limitations similar to a Cleveland ford. I selected a >piston manufactured from a material that allowed tighter piston-bore >clearances, coated it, and assembled the motor with clearances on the tight >side of recommended. > >>Can you give more details of exactly what brand and type of coatings you >>used? Were they Jet Hot, or ceramic, or what? > >I used the Polydyn Coatings (713-694-3296), as mentioned in Vizards book. >It was a very thin baked on coating, probably ceramic, probably serving a >reflective rather than insulating function. Summit (330-630-3030) sells 3 >oz bottles for less than $30. There are separate coatings for Aluminum and >Iron. They are sprayed on and then baked at either 350 F (Al) or 450 F >(Fe). Polydyn Coats Piston tops for $14, combustion chambers $28, valves $5 >ea. They will also do the backside of valves and exhaust ports. I've seen >Harley pistons for sale precoated with the other coating system Vizard >mentions (Swain Technologies). Friction reducing coatings are also popular >among motorcycle racers, but I've heard their useful life on piston skirts >is fairly short. I spent more on the UPS than I did the coatings, and that >was for little motorcycle parts. I'd like to do a 460 ford boat motor I'm >building, but can't imagine the shipping costs this would involve, and will >probably give the Summit coatings a try. > >I would think that everything you can do to keep the heat out of an air >cooled motor would be a good thing. Vizard suggests that the secondary >modifications allowed by coatings would improve power further yet. Things >like narrower valve seats. Tighter piston clearances are another >posibility. Do car guys use Nikasil bores yet? > >I see reference after reference to proffesional engine builders using these >coatings, it is more than a fad. If you can find someone who specializes in >your engine, and will sell you a set of coated pistons, assemble them to the >clearances they've developed. Otherwise, your left with starting with the >tight side of recommended. > >Good Luck > >SBrady > >------------------------------ > >End of DIY_EFI Digest V1 #290 >***************************** > >To subscribe to DIY_EFI-Digest, send the command: > > subscribe diy_efi-digest > >in the body of a message to "Majordomo@xxx. > >A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to >subscribe to that instead, replace "diy_efi-digest" in the command > above with "diy_efi". > > "a society that will trade a little freedom for a little order deserves neither" Thomas Jefferson Clinton doesn't want anything Hitler didn't have. What do you get with Bob Dole, Bill Clinton, and Dolly Parton in the same room? Two boobs and a country singer! Harry Browne for president 96! Talltom ------------------------------ End of DIY_EFI Digest V1 #291 ***************************** To subscribe to DIY_EFI-Digest, send the command: subscribe diy_efi-digest in the body of a message to "Majordomo@xxx. A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace "diy_efi-digest" in the command above with "diy_efi".