DIY_EFI Digest Monday, 22 June 1998 Volume 03 : Number 289 In this issue: FW: 700R4 Manual Re: INCOMING Checksum question Re: 700R4 (yeah, i know its off topic) Re: Jaguar V12's Re: Checksum question Re: Checksum question Re: experimenters box Re: Checksum question Re: Checksum question Re: Checksum question Pulse shaped CDI ignition Re: Problems with Haltech F7 at high RPM's FTP site Programming 101 Re: Programming 808 where to obtain cheap electronics Re: GM/Delco ECU Information Re: Checksum question Re: Problems with Haltech F7 at high RPM's simple analog fuel injection Re: Programming 808 Re: Programming 808 Programming 808 Re: Bench racing ecms Even if ya hate 101 please read I/O Board ... Re: FTP site Re: Problems with Haltech F7 at high RPM's Re: simple analog fuel injection New feature to Programming 808 Where-is Programming 101 ? O-scope reading Re: Where-is Programming 101 ? progam101+808 Does Anyone Have an Extra Delco 1227749 ECM? See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Grant Gatenby Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 22:05:21 +1200 Subject: FW: 700R4 Manual Sorry for having to reply to the group but mail to original sender bounced, anyhow can someone send this on to me ??? Was wondering if you could send me a copy of your 700R4 manual too....except you will have to send it to themanor@xxx.nz cause my iname account won't handle files over 500k Cheers Grant ------------------------------ From: Jason Weir Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 07:15:09 -0400 Subject: Re: INCOMING Bruce Plecan wrote: > I gotz 3 paged scanned of stuff for 332 incoming that needs posted > there. > ie wiring stuff for pro808. > Cheers > Bruce nacelp@xxx.net Fwd it too me and I will zip it and upload it.. Jason - -- Jason Weir - 88 YJ - 258 / Howell TBI 145K and counting Fayetteville, North Carolina JTW Web pages at http://home.att.net/~jweir mailto:jweir@xxx.net ------------------------------ From: Jason Weir Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 08:00:16 -0400 Subject: Checksum question Why when using 3 different editors do I get 3 different checksums? I am using GME, Hex Workshop, and Needham's PB-10 Software? All the same bin file, have I got the settings wrong? must have, can anyone shed any light on this for me? thanks Jason Weir - -- Jason Weir - 88 YJ - 258 / Howell TBI 145K and counting Fayetteville, North Carolina JTW Web pages at http://home.att.net/~jweir mailto:jweir@xxx.net ------------------------------ From: Mike Hoenes Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 08:06:00 -0400 Subject: Re: 700R4 (yeah, i know its off topic) depending on the year there are a number of mods that need to be done to the 700r4. if you have a pre-87 then you need to either get a 10 vane upgrade kit for your pump or just get a 10 vane pump. if you have a 84 or earlier, get a newer input shaft - they are beefier. also change the fron & rear sprags to the new design. Fairbanks has a billet second gear servo thats worth getting along with the WOT sleeve. Shift Technologies (same company as Faibanks under different name) puts out a shift kit that substitutes a number of valve body springs, etc; and has directions for modding your seperator plates, etc. its relatively inexpensive at about $35. i went with a rebuilt corvette converter - 2000 rpm stall. there are two manuals put out by ATSG for the 700. one is a rebuild manual, the other is an upgrade manual. buy them both. they are a bargain at $10 apiece. buy some auto trans assembly grease too. total rebuild cost on my 86 700r4, including the $50 for the core i bought at the boneyard - $225. i never rebuilt a tranny before, but it came out perfectly. consider doing it yourself. if you need a question answered, drop me a note. mike hoenes 85 355ci TPI s-10 4wd ---------- From: Brian Hartman To: diy_efi@xxx.edu Subject: Re: 700R4 Date: Sun, Jun 21, 1998 10:28PM Gwyn Reedy wrote: > Hi, > > How may I get access to that manual? I can send it to you after I d/l the latest SouthPark episode. The manual ia almost complete but is done enough for all the mods. It's about 2 Mb big. It has all the places to get all the supplies and the prices you should pay. You'll save about 300-400 dollars getting the parts yourself. > I have a 700R4 in the back of my truck > to be taken to be rebuilt. Would be nice to know the right way for it to be > done. What did the tranny come out of? You may need stiffer springs in some areas if it wasn't at least a Corvette Tranny. Talk to you in a bit. Tell me if you still want the manual and your MB can handle 2 Mb. Brian > > > Gwyn Reedy > Brandon, FL > > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Hartman > To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> > Date: Sunday, June 21, 1998 8:38 PM > Subject: Re: 700R4 > > >These mods open into other necessary mods for strength and durability. I > >have a manual that I wrote describing the best build possible for hard > shifts > >and the best durability > > > >Brian > >Sy 1810 > >Sy 1972 > >73 Cuda 440-6 > > > >Thomas Matthews wrote: > > > >> This same sleeve is available through GM and is originally used on > >> the B4C police pkg. GM pt # is 8673948. Suggest upgrading the 3-4 > >> clutch pack also as it's weak and may burn after some WOT upshifts. > >> The sleeve's price is about $15 or so. > >> Tom > >> > >> Brian Hartman wrote: > >> > > >> > You need to call Fairbanks and get a UPSHIFT SLEEVE that will allow WOT > >> > upshifts 3-4. You may need to tinker with the governor too and lighten > >> > the springs a hair. > >> > > >> > If you have more Tranny Questions, That's my realm. > >> > > >> > Brian Hartman > >> > > >> > Sy 1810 > >> > Sy 1972 > >> > 73 Cuda 440-6 > >> > > >> > peter paul fenske wrote: > >> > > >> > > Hi Bruce > >> > > > >> > > Bruce do you know what mods are involved in reprogramming > >> > > the 700R4 in order for a WOT 3 to 4 shift to occur > >> > > Durn S10 won't shift into 4th at 120 MPH. > >> > > > >> > > Tnx:peter > > > > > > ------------------------------ From: "Andrew W. Macfadyen" Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 13:23:31 +0100 Subject: Re: Jaguar V12's The Lucas Hotwire system ? An idea but it might be possible to gain extra enrichment by fooling the ECU that the engine was breathing more air by altering the signal from the hotwire bridge to the ECU --- don't know enough about how the ECU processes the data to say if it will work ????? Matthias Fouquet-Lapar wrote: > > > > Just joined this list, you guys seem to get right into this stuff... > > I'm hoping to find information on, or kits for, or just to hear from anyone > > with experience with Jag V12s. The early HE motors don't have any engine > > management and have Lucas Digital-P injection, which is not readily > > modifyable (or not to me anyway). All information and experience will be > > welcome. > > > > Hi, > > I also joined a couple of days back and I plan on modifying my '88 Jag > V12 ECU. It's a Lucas 16CU. If anyone has information on this, I would > be most interested > > Thanks > > - Matthias ------------------------------ From: "TBK" Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 06:16:41 -0700 Subject: Re: Checksum question PB-10 does the traditional checksum for ALL bytes. GME does it according to the GM rules. Not all bytes are checksum'd. Which ones are left out varies from year to year. I don't know about Hex Workshop. The version of GME I put in Incoming is for the 85 6870 ECM only. It will not work for any other year. TK - -----Original Message----- From: Jason Weir To: DIY_EFI Date: Monday, June 22, 1998 5:39 AM Subject: Checksum question >Why when using 3 different editors do I get 3 different checksums? I am >using GME, Hex Workshop, and Needham's PB-10 Software? All the same bin >file, have I got the settings wrong? must have, can anyone shed any >light on this for me? thanks Jason Weir > >-- >Jason Weir - 88 YJ - 258 / Howell TBI 145K and counting >Fayetteville, North Carolina >JTW Web pages at http://home.att.net/~jweir >mailto:jweir@xxx.net > > > ------------------------------ From: "Ian Jones" Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 14:21:33 +0100 Subject: Re: Checksum question >Why when using 3 different editors do I get 3 different checksums? I am >using GME, Hex Workshop, and Needham's PB-10 Software? All the same bin >file, have I got the settings wrong? must have, can anyone shed any >light on this for me? thanks Jason Weir > I believe the Needham software produces different checksums depending on the device selected. If you ensure an 8 bit EPROM is selected of the correct size then the checksum generated should match the Checksum - 16 with Hex Workshop ( when in hex mode and 1 and 2's compliment turned off ). If you zero the first 6 bytes in Hex workshop then the checksum generated should match GME. Regards Ian Jones Cobi Electronics - Electronic design consultants for automotive chip tuners. ian@xxx.uk ------------------------------ From: Shannen Durphey Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 07:11:36 -0600 Subject: Re: experimenters box Been thinking about this one. Got some time? Leaving your ECM case submerged in vinegar should take most of the coating off. May take a few days, as vinegar is pretty mild as acids go. Also, some sandpaper scuffing first will speed things up a bit. Frees you up to untangle harnesses and stuff. Shannen Bruce Plecan wrote: > > Just to have a uncluttered run bench was thinking of putting all > the engine simulation stuff in an old ecm, and use the oem > connectors. One trouble is how do you clean off all that clear > paint to solder on things. I got a low tolerance for fumes (really > low) so I can't spent a bunch of time experimenting.. > Cheers > Bruce ------------------------------ From: "TBK" Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 06:26:29 -0700 Subject: Re: Checksum question Since the checksum is part of the rom data, it can't be included in the checksum. That would make it self modifying. Once you calculated it, it would change the checksum. The checksum, vin, and usually the prom ID are not in the checksum calc (on some, the ID is part of the checksum range). TK - -----Original Message----- From: Jason Weir To: DIY_EFI Date: Monday, June 22, 1998 5:39 AM Subject: Checksum question >Why when using 3 different editors do I get 3 different checksums? I am >using GME, Hex Workshop, and Needham's PB-10 Software? All the same bin >file, have I got the settings wrong? must have, can anyone shed any >light on this for me? thanks Jason Weir > >-- >Jason Weir - 88 YJ - 258 / Howell TBI 145K and counting >Fayetteville, North Carolina >JTW Web pages at http://home.att.net/~jweir >mailto:jweir@xxx.net > > > ------------------------------ From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:32:30 -0400 Subject: Re: Checksum question - -----Original Message----- From: Jason Weir Subject: Checksum question >Why when using 3 different editors do I get 3 different checksums? I am >using GME, Hex Workshop, and Needham's PB-10 Software? All the same bin >file, have I got the settings wrong? must have, can anyone shed any >light on this for me? thanks Jason Weir >Jason Weir If you have gme for what your working on just use it. Also, depending on what chip your working on the checksums are figured differently from style to style in some instances. Depending on what I'm doing I always run a bin thru an editor make one little change, and let it recal the checksum. My "procedure" is usually start with the bin, if doing something the editor doesn't allow the use Needhams's make the editing change, then throw the changed bin into a chip editor, and make one timing change of 1d at some silly place, and let the editor recal the checksum. Also, requardless of what ya do if ya do enough of them you'll everyonce inna while have a checksum error code. Least I do. Cheers Bruce ------------------------------ From: Jason Weir Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:43:45 -0400 Subject: Re: Checksum question TBK wrote: > Since the checksum is part of the rom data, it can't be included in > the > checksum. That would make it self modifying. Once you calculated it, > it > would change the checksum. The checksum, vin, and usually the prom ID > are > not in the checksum calc (on some, the ID is part of the checksum > range). That would explain why it changed everytime I tried to calculate it.. thanks for the help - -- Jason Weir - 88 YJ - 258 / Howell TBI 145K and counting Fayetteville, North Carolina JTW Web pages at http://home.att.net/~jweir mailto:jweir@xxx.net ------------------------------ From: Jim Zurlo Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 08:54:26 -0500 Subject: Pulse shaped CDI ignition Has anyone been able to download parts 1 & 2? I have a slow internet connection and file transfer stops before I can finish downloading. Could anyone e-mail me parts 1 & 2 please? Thanks in advance. Jim Zurlo zurlo@xxx.com ------------------------------ From: Matthew Harding Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 23:51:43 +1000 Subject: Re: Problems with Haltech F7 at high RPM's At 01:00 22/06/98 -0700, you wrote: >> the injectors are probably running at 100%(+) duty cycle !, they >> wouldn't >> have even closed, and they'd be trying to open again...... > >> What sort of injector pulse width (ms) is it trying to ouput at 7800 + >> rpm, >> under WOT ? > >> and is it running simultanious or sequential injection ? >> > >Pulse width is being kept under 75% duty cycle (5ms). Injection is >simultaneous. Looks like problem was with our particular Haltech unit >(or revision) though.Thanks stop me any time if i'm wrong.... I am assuming that the injectors fire 1.5 times per rpm, ie. it takes two revolutions for all cylinders to fire once.... 7800 rpm * 1.5 cyls.... = 11700 injector pulses per minute.... = 195 pulses per second = .195 pulses per millisecond = 1 pulse every 5.128 milliseconds and you say 5 ms is 75% duty cycle ? actually 3.846 ms pulse width would be 75% duty cycle at 7800 rpm for a 3 cylinder 2 stroke engine..... or am i wrong somewhere..... This would mean the reason for it working on the test bench and not on the road would be because of the additional load on the engine. On the test bench with no, or little load, the injector pulse width would not be as long. Matthew Harding - --------------- reply to any of these.... mharding@xxx.au bernie@xxx.au bernie@xxx.au ------------------------------ From: Jason Weir Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:54:06 -0400 Subject: FTP site Who is running the FTP site, it could use a little organization, if you don't have the time let me know and I can spend some time making it a little easier to get around, per the lists input of course, Jason - -- Jason Weir - 88 YJ - 258 / Howell TBI 145K and counting Fayetteville, North Carolina JTW Web pages at http://home.att.net/~jweir mailto:jweir@xxx.net ------------------------------ From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:58:43 -0400 Subject: Programming 101 The purpose of this series is educational, and about engine management. In this case we're looking at the gm 1227747. Using this information may be in violation of your laws. It is your responsibility to find this out. This information if used on an actual engine should be done with adult supervision. Also, you must read the tuning doc, and txt at 332 incoming. If you have not been following along then please read the acrhives under Programming 101. This information was posted once before but may be difficult to find, and with recent events is a good reminder that it exists. In the table/switch/setting areas of the prom files there are a set of parameters that must be meet for closed loop operation to begin. At 029E-02A3, are where these parameters are. The ones I have a high confidence of are 029E MAPH 029F TPS 02A0 open loop off (rpm) 02A1 open loop on (rpm) 02A02+3 I don't have figured out If repling to this posting to DIY, please change the heading to something else, so people can do archive searches easily without excessive duplication. If you want to "talk" to me about errors please write me at nacelp@xxx.net, also no need to quote the entire text to me. If I am in error I have no problems admitting that just at times it's easier to check with others, and get back to you, and amend the 101 posting once rather than clutter things up with excessive mail. Again I'm not an EE, or Software type, just a mechanic sharing what I've found, or had sent to me. Cheers Bruce ------------------------------ From: flying.monkey@xxx.com (WAYNE JOHNSON) Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:02:21 -0400 Subject: Re: Programming 808 Although I have been a member of this group for a while, this is my first post. Up until now I have been sitting in the corner wearing my CHS. I don't know where I will be able to contribute much to this group (this is such knowledgeable group) but I am very much willing to help out where possible. I have been following the 101 stuff and am excited about the 808 & 165. My car has the 165, its an 89 corvette. I have been compairing bin files and it appears that the address of the tables in the bin file are different from the 86-88 models. Am I correct about this? can anyone shed some light on this? Do I need to go back to the corner? _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] ------------------------------ From: steve ravet Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 08:50:01 +0000 Subject: where to obtain cheap electronics mattz@xxx.com wrote: > The best place to obtain cheap electronic parts is to contact your local > ham radio club .. > I go to the local ham festavals at leasat 2x a year.. I bought a dual trace > scope for $20.00 (50mhz) > several powersupplies by the pound (yea they are ugly and old but for the > $$ you cant touch it) > They had a "free" pile there also, you put something that looked good and > you got to take something out.. > I dumped some old junk rf generators and picked a signal tracer and some > other crap.. I know there are some people here from Austin... What's the closest place to find one of these hamfests? I know there's a second saturday thing in Dallas, but what about here? - --steve - -- Steve Ravet International Meta Systems http://www.imes.com steve@xxx.com ------------------------------ From: steve ravet Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:13:00 +0000 Subject: Re: GM/Delco ECU Information Scot Sealander wrote: > > Ian Levy wrote: > > > There are two possibilities: > > One is off by itself : 16129239 > > I would hazard a guess that this is the software number. Have you > hooked up a scanner? Is the PROM ID 9239? > > > The other is labelled 'Service No: 16132241' > > This is probably the ECM number. Never seen it. As I recall, George > mentioned that these cars had "extra" injectors that came on during > an "overboost" condition. Not sure what that meant. Did find some > stuff in the other lotus bin that may have been for that. That is just > from memory. Haven't looked at it in a long time. It's in the big list of ECM numbers that David Garnier posted a while ago: 16132241 EFI-4 84 to 93 and later ECM's found on the following systems David, a lot of the entries in the list end like that, "found on the following systems". Makes me think there's supposed to be a list of models or something following it, but there isn't anything???? - --steve - -- Steve Ravet International Meta Systems http://www.imes.com steve@xxx.com ------------------------------ From: "Gregory A. Parmer" Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:28:46 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: Checksum question On Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Jason Weir wrote: > > Since the checksum is part of the rom data, it can't be included in > > checksum. That would make it self modifying. Once you calculated it, > > would change the checksum. The checksum, vin, and usually the prom ID > > not in the checksum calc (on some, the ID is part of the checksum > > That would explain why it changed everytime I tried to calculate it.. > thanks for the help The EPROM burner SW for my programmer allows you to set the addresses you're calculating the CS for. Ie, I set it to start calc'ing the CS from 8 (something like that) thru the end. Look for a similar option in your SW, verify the CS on a known good bin, then try it on your modified one. - -greg PS-Mine is a XELTEK rommasterII and the Sw is avail as a free download from www.xeltek.com. If ya try it, be warned that it's a parallel port programmer so running it with a printer attached instead will freak out your printer. ------------------------------ From: "Gregory A. Parmer" Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:39:57 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: Problems with Haltech F7 at high RPM's On Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Matthew Harding wrote: > stop me any time if i'm wrong.... I am assuming that the injectors fire > 1.5 times per rpm, ie. it takes two revolutions for all cylinders to fire > once.... Errr...one or the other of us is missing a little math. If it takes 2 rpms to fire once that'd be 0.5 times per rpm. Some systems apparently fire once/rev, but we'd hopefully agree on the math for that one. :) I think they've figgered out the problem anyhoo. Cheers, - -greg ------------------------------ From: John Wickerham Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:21:39 -0400 Subject: simple analog fuel injection A while back, Peter Wales and some others were discussing a simple analog fuel injection system using a MAF from a Mitsibishi vehicle along with a 555 timer as a one shot.. I believe the name of the thread was EFI555. I am interested in using this system in a couple of applications and since every attempt to contact Peter Wales directly has failed, I am resorting to asking the group. My questions are: 1. What other hardware is necessary to outfit a typical carbureted chevy 350 engine? I know you need the MAF and the 555 with associated cap's and resitors and such. And certainly, I need to get TBI throttle body or something similar off of a late model chevy pickup truck. Also need a decent fuel pump. 2. Would a thermister submersed in the engine coolant work as a secondary control over the pulse width from the 555 to give decent cold starts? 3. I have an S10 Blazer that I'd like to run some experiments on that require shorter pulse widths. I have been unable to get the computer to cooperate much in leaning out the mixture. I have tried biasing the O2 sensor so that it appears to the computer that the engine is running rich, but this only made it increase EGR flow. I had an idea that I may be able to use the signal to the injectors that the comuter is already sending. I would use this to trigger a pulse from a 555 that I could custom tailor to fire the injectors instead of the stock computer. I am new on the list and would appreciate any comments that anyone might have. I've spent much time pouring over stuff on the web, so I've pretty much exhausted the obvious sources of information. I am trying to keep this pretty cheap and learn something at the same time, so I'm not really considering any of the aftermarket ECU's unless they are awfully cheap. Thanks John Wickerham ------------------------------ From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:03:11 -0400 Subject: Re: Programming 808 - -----Original Message----- From: WAYNE JOHNSON Subject: Re: Programming 808 >I don't know where I will be able to contribute much to this group (this >is such knowledgeable group) but I am very much willing to help out where possible. > >I have been following the 101 stuff and am excited about the 808 & 165. > >My car has the 165, its an 89 corvette. I have been compairing bin files >and it appears that the address of the tables in the bin file are >different from the 86-88 models. Am I correct about this? First the 89 uses 8 injectors, whereas the 86-88 use 9 (cold start). Usually 89 code considered better, newer more refined. Yes they are different. Bins can vary from, tranny types/body style/ engine size/no cylinders/nationality/year. can anyone shed >some light on this? Do I need to go back to the corner? Most of us just take turns sitting in the corner, just don't be affraid to ask questions. BTW, while I usually do it in private I spend lots of time sitting in numerous different corners. > Cheers Bruce ------------------------------ From: peter paul fenske Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 08:04:05 -0700 Subject: Re: Programming 808 Howday Yep the 89 is different. Most changes are minor. Some tables are longer in length. But the code is similiar. What is throwing you is most tables are moved in location. Have fun:Peter >My car has the 165, its an 89 corvette. I have been compairing bin files >and it appears that the address of the tables in the bin file are >different from the 86-88 models. Am I correct about this? can anyone shed >some light on this? Do I need to go back to the corner? > >_____________________________________________________________________ >You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. >Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com >Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] > > ------------------------------ From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:34:28 -0400 Subject: Programming 808 Like all educational items you'll have some homework here. First is a list of supplies, and I'll tell ya where to look, but part of the homework is you making an effort, ie looking for urls etc.. OK, 808 applies to the Austrailian Holden ecm part number 1227808. This a version of a 1227165, or depending on how you look at things is visa, versa. It is also a minimum code/table/ switch setting devise (It still however has 282 entries, not including code). So while 101 was about the 32K proms, this is about a low code 128K prom (logical, eh). To participate and understand this you need to get over to Ludis's cruzer site, and copy down the disassembled 808 info., at 332 incoming is a file called asbx, delco_edit, gnu, and v8wire.exe. the v8 wire is self extracting pinout of the 808 ecm.. Using delco edit has been covered in 101. Again this is for educational purposes for understanding engine management. If you want to apply this information, the it is your responsibility to find out if it is legal for you too, and do so it with adult supervision. Also, read everthing to date on Programming 101. The math for the conversions, has been covered. The malfunction flag information has been covered, ie how to interupt the malfunction flag material. I am not a EE, or trained software specialist, this material is how I understand things to be. Others have helped, and I take no credit good or bad for the following material. Time available will dictate how detailed the infomation will be. The big stuff ie main timing, fuel tables are rather easy, and examples exist on what they look like. But for say TCC/TPS setting I may get no further than telling you where they are, and you'll have to experiment some on your own, on how to set them. This is about participation, if you get ahead of me, or find something I out I would expect you to share it with the list, if you want to do it without credit, e-mail it to me, and I'll post it. If you want to bench run ecms, or actually use this information you do so at your own risk. To be able to make chips, and modify them you'll need the following hardware, a chip burning program, an eraser, and spare memcals. If you really get stuck write me or the list. Since so much as recently been covered if I lack too much in detail, I'll rewrite it, but if ya just got here, I expect you to try and catch up. If you have troubles e-mail me. But, I don't want to hold everyone up for playing catch up. BY looking at the dissassebled bin file it becomes easy to see where the tables are. When you see an area of say 11 columns, and 12 rows it would look to be important, IF it has entries. So if you scan down the page at 0044 you see exactly that. For a table starting at 0044 and running 11x12 you have the main spark table vertical being rpm, and horizontial MAP (expressed in K/Pa). The malfunction flags are at 01DD-01DF. The relative malfunction codes are in the following order 12,13,14,15,21,22,23,24,25,31,32,33,34,35,41,42,43,45,51,52,53,54,55 HTH Bruce ------------------------------ From: Sandy Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:17:10 -0700 Subject: Re: Bench racing ecms Even if ya hate 101 please read At 11:39 AM 6/18/98 -0700, you wrote: >>From my experience working with ABS valves (solenoid) it would seem foolish for the injector (solenoid) power to not be regulated. If it is regulated there would not be any need to correct for voltage changes in software. Software is cheep, adding hardware will rasie the cost, add to the package size, reliability, etc. To do the software compensation is pretty easy, just a small correction can save a bunch of regulators. Sandy ------------------------------ From: Sandy Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:39:00 -0700 Subject: I/O Board ... >Robert McGhie (your mail bounce, so here it is) The driver boad has a generic approach, the injector are not really specificly tied to an output, the I/O on the 68332 does impose some limits, as it totals only 16 TPU I/O lines. So I would say that driving the extra injectors with the approach of 2 I/O boards may not be the simplest, but may work with some hacking on the 68332 size. It may not really be necessary, as I think may be some other outputs that can be made available on the 332'. These could be used to a couple of Driver Boards. Some Buffering will be needed as the CPU can't drive the injector drivers directly (or shouldnt) but if you don't mind the extra injectors not being tied to the main 8, it may be much easier to just do them in a batch mode. One the motor is past the low idle speeds, it has been argued that the direct injecton doesn't buy that much, so you could really just make use of a couple of extra output lines and pulse a bank of the extra injectors that way. Or, you could just get some 72lb/hr injectors and be done with it ;-). Check some of the injector size programs for the engine and hp requirements, you will be surprised how much a 52lb injector can make at 80% duty cycle, even more by the 72lb/hr. The down side is that the big injectors are expensive and the spray is not as 'atomized' as the smaller units. Sandy At 06:34 PM 6/20/98 -0800, you wrote: >I know that you are busy so I will make this short. >1. Am I correct that the I/O board is limited to 8 injectors (2 >driver boards) plus 4 ignition coils (1 additional driver board)? >2. Can 2 I/O boards be used with a single CPU board so as to drive 16 >injectors? >Reason for question is to be able to switch or add additional >injectors on a turbocharged V8 engine > >Thanks >Robert McGhie > ------------------------------ From: steve ravet Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:41:04 +0000 Subject: Re: FTP site Jason Weir wrote: > > Who is running the FTP site, it could use a little organization, if you > don't have the time let me know and I can spend some time making it a > little easier to get around, per the lists input of course, Jason > > -- > Jason Weir - 88 YJ - 258 / Howell TBI 145K and counting > Fayetteville, North Carolina > JTW Web pages at http://home.att.net/~jweir > mailto:jweir@xxx.net I just volunteered for that job. I'm going to be working on the diyefi html this week. What's in store? The programming 101 project, converted to html is first. When I get that done I want to make an index to all the files on the ftp site, what they are and clickable links to download them. The search engine is also broken, I'll have a look and see if I can fix it. Also the injector flow bench article that Bruce scanned. After that? Send me suggestions. - --steve - -- Steve Ravet International Meta Systems http://www.imes.com steve@xxx.com ------------------------------ From: Doug Yip Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:42:08 -0700 Subject: Re: Problems with Haltech F7 at high RPM's > > stop me any time if i'm wrong.... I am assuming that the injectors fire > 1.5 times per rpm, ie. it takes two revolutions for all cylinders to fire > once.... > > 7800 rpm * 1.5 cyls.... > > = 11700 injector pulses per minute.... > > = 195 pulses per second > > = .195 pulses per millisecond > > = 1 pulse every 5.128 milliseconds > > and you say 5 ms is 75% duty cycle ? > > actually 3.846 ms pulse width would be 75% duty cycle at 7800 rpm for a 3 > cylinder 2 stroke engine..... > > or am i wrong somewhere..... > > This would mean the reason for it working on the test bench and not on the > road would be because of the additional load on the engine. On the test > bench with no, or little load, the injector pulse width would not be as long. > Injectors are batch fired once per rev. At 9000 RPM this is 150hz, or 6.67 ms max per injection. 75% duty cycle = 5 ms. Problem seems to be that we're feeding Haltech normal tach signal of 3x/rev. Will try to change this to 1x, then change divisor on Haltech. Douglas A. Yip Digicon Engineering Inc. http://www.digiconeng.com ------------------------------ From: Chris Morriss Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 20:06:45 +0100 Subject: Re: simple analog fuel injection In message <14213947142659@xxx.net>, John Wickerham writes >A while back, Peter Wales and some others were discussing a simple >analog fuel injection system using a MAF from a Mitsibishi vehicle >along with a 555 timer as a one shot.. I believe the name of the >thread was EFI555. > >I am interested in using this system in a couple of applications >and since every attempt to contact Peter Wales directly has failed, >I am resorting to asking the group. My questions are: > (original deleted) MAF isn't such a good idea for a simple analogue EFI (not easy to implement anyway). If you use a MAP sensor, and fire the injectors once per revolution, you will find that a pulse length linearly proportional to MAP will suffice. You will need to have a gain and an offset pot. The gain sets the slope of the pulse-width versus MAP, and the offset pot shifts the whole curve (or rather, straight line) up and down the y axis. You can even use the offset pot as a manual 'choke' equivalent. The system won't be as good as a real modern EFI, but I have found that on a small tuned 4 cylinder engine (998cc Hillman Imp) it works better than the old twin 1.25 carbs ever did. (I only suggest you try this on vehicles that aren't subjected to stringent emissions checks. BTW, I made up a plenum chamber to bolt onto Weber alpha injector elbows, which in turn bolted onto a twin-40DCOE aluminium inlet manifold (not easy to find for an Imp). The throttle body was of a (UK) Ford Escort. The electronics were breadboarded on double sided veroboard. I intend to get a proper PCB produced by the time I get the Clan Crusader back on the road. - -- Chris Morriss ------------------------------ From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:08:28 -0400 Subject: New feature to Programming 808 If you use the wiring diagrams, as listed for 4 cyl + 6 cyl versions and use the appropriate asbx4cyl.bin, or asbx6cyl.bin base files , as listed at 332 incoming programming 808 should cover the 4 and 6 cylinder variants. Rather than go thru all the non-code stuff, I've got it for ya. You'll notice on the 4 cyl wiring they have a module for the spark so it looks like DIS, you may have to invert the dist. signal to run it with a dizzy (I'm very sure if it). For the 4 cylinder motorcycles ya have some work to do, but I see no reason that you can't mix and match enough stuff. to run a delco box up to 12,000 rpm. One of the bench items I want to test to verify is that. If one of the software folks have any insight to this please let me/the list know. Also, while this is a "bolt-in" for the 165, if you use a 165 memcal, you can run a 730/727 off of this information. If all you have is a 256 type prom from a 730 you can load this info., from 0000-3FFF, and again from 4000-7FFF, and be able to run it, on a 256 prom instead of a 128 like the stock 165 uses. You can run a 730 with a 128 prom calibration on a 128 prom, just fine. Boy, if I got these postings all right, I'll be amazed. Cheers Bruce ------------------------------ From: "Peterson, Lew [Cont]" Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:27:42 -0400 Subject: Where-is Programming 101 ? As a newbie to the list, where do I find the subject tutorial material? Is there a special e-mail address for the list administrator for requests like this? Sorry to bother everyone with this stuff. Lew Calgary ------------------------------ From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:03:27 -0400 Subject: O-scope reading As far as reading the injector pulses, does it matter if I use an incadesent bulb, or LED?. Just curious if having a hot filament adds something to the mix. Cheers Bruce ------------------------------ From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:17:10 -0400 Subject: Re: Where-is Programming 101 ? - -----Original Message----- From: Peterson, Lew [Cont] To: 'DIY_EFI' Date: Monday, June 22, 1998 4:55 PM Subject: Where-is Programming 101 ? >As a newbie to the list, where do I find the subject tutorial material? >Is there a special e-mail address for the list administrator for requests >like this? >Sorry to bother everyone with this stuff. >Lew >Calgary > At DIY_EFI at the bottom of the page it says archives, click there. Next page search areas by title/content, enter 101 will list all postings mentioning 101. Return to home page bottom of page says 332 go there at that page read down towards the bottom says incoming click there. Listed are files grab a copy of what ya need. Ludis's site is hpp://www.cruzers.com/~ludis Bruce ------------------------------ From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 18:03:55 -0400 Subject: progam101+808 Like I keep repeating this is for educational purposes. Various bins that have been posted relative to this exercise are starting points. ie., checksums might not be right, ID numbers may be strange, Checksum checks disabled. But, the code should be right. The basics are there, for you to work with. Cheers Bruce Safety tip from CSH, HQ prom burning does not involve matchs or open flames. Also, please keep matches out of reach of Cone Shaped Hat wearers ------------------------------ From: "Peterson, Lew [Cont]" Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:53:51 -0400 Subject: Does Anyone Have an Extra Delco 1227749 ECM? I would like to have one of these to experiment on. How about the DFI converts or Stokes fun-box owners? Lew Calgary ------------------------------ End of DIY_EFI Digest V3 #289 ***************************** 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".