DIY_EFI Digest            Sunday, 31 January 1999      Volume 04 : Number 078

In this issue:

	Re: <all> home dyno kit??
	RE: Love This
	Re: <all> home dyno kit??
	Re: replace an EPROM with an EEPROM?
	Re: Lambda Valve
	Adam vs Vapor
	RE: Switch Pitch
	Re: Adjusting parameters that determine BLM cell - GM ECM
	Re: <all> home dyno kit??
	RE: DIY_EFI Digest V4 #60
	RE: Love This
	Re: Adjusting parameters that determine BLM cell - GM ECM
	Re: Adjusting parameters that determine BLM cell - GM ECM
	Re: replace an EPROM with an EEPROM?
	UEGO IDEA was(Re: More UEGO stuff)
	Re: More UEGO stuff
	RE: fuel pumps
	Re: replace an EPROM with an EEPROM?
	Tweak your Delco's boys!!!!.
	Re: Love This

See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the 
DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann)
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 09:17:12 -0700
Subject: Re: <all> home dyno kit??

>> About 6 - 8 years ago (?) in Road & Track there was a Tech Tidbit
>> (or some such) article about accelerometers / stopwatch / coastdown
>> to determine rolling and wind resistance and horsepower. Does
>> anybody have the reference?
>>
>> TIA,
>> Jay
>>
>Power  is change in kinetic energy over a time
>1/2*m*(v^2f-vi^2) /t   where vf is final velocity
>vi=initial velocity  m = mass of car and  t=time
>potential energy= 0
>alex
>alex
>
There is a thorough description of how to do it in the McInnes Turbo book.

Regards, Greg

------------------------------

From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann)
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 09:22:29 -0700
Subject: RE: Love This

>> >I know Toyota uses the system in the 1ZZ-FE and claims lower evap
>> >emissions as the reason, FWIW. Less vapor lock?

Keeping the fuel in the tank cooler keeps its vapor pressure down, and
helps reduce evap emissions. Yes, keeping the tank cooler also provides
more net positive suction head (NPSH) to an in line fuel pump, but it does
nothing to help with keeping fuel vapor out of the fuel rails during
hard/hot running or after a hot soak.

With no bypass fuel flow, this second problem WILL be worse.

Greg
>>
>> DO NOT let mfgr BS about less evap emissions get confused with getting the
>> vapor bubbles out of the fuel rails!!!
>>
>The evap. test has been increased from 1 hr to 3 days so is more
>difficult to past.  Does any one know where i can get a low
>permeation fuel neck hose?
>alex

------------------------------

From: goflo@xxx.net
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 10:16:38 -0800
Subject: Re: <all> home dyno kit??

There is a very clear explanation of one way to do this in
"Turbochargers", by Hugh MacInnes. HP books.

Jack

> > About 6 - 8 years ago (?) in Road & Track there was a Tech Tidbit
> > (or some such) article about accelerometers / stopwatch / coastdown
> > to determine rolling and wind resistance and horsepower. Does
> > anybody have the reference?
> > TIA,
> > Jay

> Power  is change in kinetic energy over a time
> 1/2*m*(v^2f-vi^2) /t   where vf is final velocity
> vi=initial velocity  m = mass of car and  t=time
> potential energy= 0
> alex

------------------------------

From: "David A. Cooley" <n5xmt@xxx.net>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 13:02:07 -0500
Subject: Re: replace an EPROM with an EEPROM?

There may be problems...  there are CE and PGM on the 28256, Guess if you
pulled it to reprogram, it would be a little easier than erasing a UV eprom.  

At 10:43 AM 1/31/99 +1100, you wrote:
>
>
>>Pinouts are different... 27C256 is a 28 pin, 28256 is a 32 pin...
>
>
>But electrically would it work?, an adaptor would be no prob really.
>I assume the extra pins are for re-programming?.
>I agree with Ted, this method would save so much time.
>
>>At 05:06 PM 1/29/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>>Has anyone tried to replace an Eprom with and EEprom?
>>>Specifically, Replace the 27c256 in a Memcal with a 28256?
>>>Does anyone know if it would work?  or is the pinout somehow different?
>>>The reason I'm interested in doing this is because it would be more
>economical
>>>and efficient.
>>>
>>>Also, what do people do about removing and replacing their Eproms from the
>>>Memcals when reprogramming them?  Do you solder in ZIF sockets?
>>>
>>>I want to start lookin at and modifying my Memcal, but have never done any
>of
>>>this stuff before.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>Ted
>>
>>===========================================================
>>           David Cooley N5XMT           Internet: N5XMT@xxx.net
>>     Packet: N5XMT@xxx. Member #7068
>>       I am Pentium of Borg...division is futile...you will be
>approximated.
>>===========================================================
>>
>

===========================================================
           David Cooley N5XMT           Internet: N5XMT@xxx.net
     Packet: N5XMT@xxx. Member #7068
       I am Pentium of Borg...division is futile...you will be approximated.
===========================================================

------------------------------

From: "Clarence L.Snyder" <clare.snyder.on.ca@xxx.net>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 17:57:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Lambda Valve

Robert Harris wrote:
> 
> Before anyone else runs off into fantasy land, it might help to know what a
> "Lambda Valve" is.   What it most definitely is not is a Fuel Pressure
> Regulator in any classical sense.
SNIPP
>   It looks similar to a Fuel Injector but its not.  It opens and >closes in a similar manner, but its opening and closing do not meter >fuel. 
Whoa!! Hold on there!
How does it  control the pressure on the lower chanber? The fuel is fed
to that chamber through a calibrated orifice, which allows only so much
fuel through - but much more than is required. This extra fuel is
"injected" back into the return line, limiting the control pressure
(lower side of the chanber) which controls injection volume / pressure.
So in operation, it IS a pressure regulator. The same type of setup CAN
be used as an EFI pressure regulator. Regulate the flow into the FI log
with  a restrictor (OK, just use the fuel line if you want) that allows
more fuel into the log than the injectors will ever need to pass. This
builds pressure. Limit the pressure by "injecting: it back into the
return line. Control the "injection" with a PWM and pressure sensor. If
you want to get fancy you "restrict" the FI feed by slowing the pump
with another PWM, based on power requirement (read MAP sensor). The fuel
pump always needs to deliver some excess volume (to build pressure)
which is the regulated by the "injector" in the return line. The MAP
sensor can compensate for boost as well - by raising fuel pump output
and providing an "add" to the fuel pressure control, lowering the pulse
width or frequency of the "regulator injector". By matching the fuel
pump speed and injector capacity, a fairly small injector, running at
the middle of it's range, should be able to provide exceptionally fine
fuel pressure control.Mabee even a "lambda valve".
> Rather the amount of
> time the valve remains open - bleeding control fuel back to the tank -
> controls the pressure in the lower chambers of the differential pressure
> valves.  This in turn, changes upper chamber pressure to change the pressure
> drop and change enrichment.
> 
> Simple terms - its a solenoid valve - pure plain and simple. 

And what is an injector?


> Its on time is
> determined by the pulse width.  Open Closed.   That's it that's all there is.
> 
> But - it can be used for anything you want.  A Frequency/Pulse width modulated
> valve that can handle up to about 100 PSI.   Think about it - you might come
> up with a dark side idea.
> 
> 1963 Ford C-600 Prison Bus Conversion "Home"
> 1971 Lincoln Continental 460 "Christine"
> 1972 "Whale" Mustang awaiting transplant
> 1978 Dodge Long Bed Peeek Up "Bundymobile"
> 
> Habaneros - not just for breakfast anymore

------------------------------

From: "Bruce Plecan" <nacelp@xxx.net>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 18:21:55 -0500
Subject: Adam vs Vapor

On another list it was mentioned some of the blokes in Oz may have
compared some IR Carb'd stuff to Plenum, EFI, using maybe even the
same size runners.  Was curious if anyone around here was involved,
or know directly what the results were....
Cheers
Bruce        

------------------------------

From: "Gwyn Reedy" <mgr@xxx.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 18:42:09 -0500
Subject: RE: Switch Pitch

Jim,

You obviously know a lot more about this than I do. Would you care to
elaborate on the Simpson planetary gearset patent and the Ravigneaux design?
Or where can one learn more?

Gwyn Reedy
Brandon, Florida
mailto:mgr@xxx.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu
> [mailto:owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu]On Behalf Of Jim Davies
> Sent: Thursday, January 28, 1999 9:37 PM
> To: diy_efi@xxx.edu
> Subject: RE: Switch Pitch
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 28 Jan 1999, Gwyn Reedy wrote:
>
> > There were comments about the similarity between the DynaFlow and
> > Powerglide. I'm wondering if there weren't more similarities
> between DF and
> > TurboGlide? The latter was a no-shift transmission.
> >
> Yes, the turboglide, dynaflow and the first 2 years of the powerglide were
> similar, non-shifting, multi-element torque converter efforts from GM, who
> did not wish to pay royalties for the Simpson planetary patent and also
> didnt want to use Borg-Warners Ravigneaux-based transmissions.
>
> > Thinking back about all these earlier transmissions: Was
> Detroit slow to see
> > the need for better performance or was the market all attuned
> to smoothness
> > (or so thought Detroit)?
> >
> These 50s era horrible automatics were all GM. Ford was an early user of
> the Ravigneaux, although the early ones were 2 speeds. GM really dropped
> the ball [IMO] after the industry-first single coupling hydro went out of
> production in 1956. It wasnt until the BW 400 came out in 1964 that they
> had another first class automatic. Mopar, of course, introduced a Simpson
> type 3 speed in 1955. Even Nash used 3 speed automatics in the 1950s.
>
>

------------------------------

From: trinity@xxx.net (Mike)
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 18:58:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Adjusting parameters that determine BLM cell - GM ECM

>My car is quite modified (different cam, higher idle).
>
>I am looking at readjusting the parameters that determine what BLM cell is
used where.  I
>have determined the code that controls it and understand it.
>
>Right now:
>
>First:
>BLM = 0 		RPM 	< 700
>BLM = 1		 700 <	RPM 	< 1200
>BLM = 2		1200 <  RPM 	< 2000
>BLM = 3		2000 <  RPM
>
>Then:
>BLM = BLM		$0154	< 0x20
>BLM += 4	0x20 <	$0154	< 0x32
>BLM += 8	0x32 < 	$0154	< 0x50
>BLM += 12	0x50 <  $0154
>
>I don't at this time know what $0154, I am figuring it is map related, and
I going to
>determine what it is later today.
>

I had a quick look at 0154 and it appears to be a convoluted representation
of filtered MAP in actual kPa:

    MAP kPa = (0154*256 + 0155) / 256

or more simply (and somewhat less accurately) by eliminating the fractional
part:
    
    MAP kPa = 0154

So, say, 0154 = 0x55 means 85kPa MAP pressure.

It's hard to see what they're doing with 015B which seems to be used as the
next value to be added to the filtered 014E value. But 014E is initialized
to the raw MAP counts so it's safe to assume, I think, that 015B is a MAP
derived value.

>Have others changed the parameters to move BLM Cells around?
>
>Right now, I have rather bad BLM cell coverage.  With 4 or so hours
>of data I dont get into BLM cells 0,1 4,5 8,9 12,13 at all.   Those
>cells are the ones indexed by rpm (0-700,700-1200), my idle is raised 
>to more like 900 (out of gear), 950 (in gear).
>
>Also right now my BLM are way out of tune (ie BLM values close to the
bottom rail (110 or
>so average), so everything is going to have to be tuned.
>		Any help is appreciated from others with
>		knowledge about this subject.


If your BLM is at 110 or so, your running way fat. Any chance of turning
down the fuel pressure a pound or two or three? Or is it okay up top and
rich down low?


- --
 Mike

------------------------------

From: Stuart Baly <S.Baly@xxx.au>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 10:57:53 +1100
Subject: Re: <all> home dyno kit??

The procedure is described in the Bosch Automotive Handbook. My copy has headed for parts unknown, so I can't help you more than that.

Stuart Baly.


> About 6 - 8 years ago (?) in Road & Track there was a Tech Tidbit
> (or some such) article about accelerometers / stopwatch / coastdown
> to determine rolling and wind resistance and horsepower. Does
> anybody have the reference?
> 
> TIA,
> Jay

begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT
M>)\^(C<7`0:0" `$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y 0```````#H``$(@ <`
M& ```$E032Y-:6-R;W-O9G0@xxx.;W1E`#$(`0V ! `"`````@`"``$$
MD 8`] $```$````0`````P``, (````+``\.``````(!_P\!````6P``````
M``"!*Q^DOJ,0&9UN`-T!#U0"`````&1I>5]E9FE 97-L+F5N9RYO:&EO+7-T
M871E+F5D=0!33510`&1I>5]E9FE 97-L+F5N9RYO:&EO+7-T871E+F5D=0``
M'@`", $````%````4TU44 `````>``,P`0```!\```!D:7E?969I0&5S;"YE
M;F<N;VAI;RUS=&%T92YE9'4```,`%0P!`````P#^#P8````>``$P`0```"$`
M```G9&EY7V5F:4!E<VPN96YG+F]H:6\M<W1A=&4N961U)P`````"`0LP`0``
M`"0```!33510.D1)65]%1DE 15-,+D5.1RY/2$E/+5-4051%+D5$50`#```Y
M``````L`0#H!````'@#V7P$````?````9&EY7V5F:4!E<VPN96YG+F]H:6\M
M<W1A=&4N961U```"`?=?`0```%L`````````@2L?I+ZC$!F=;@#=`0]4`@``
M``!D:7E?969I0&5S;"YE;F<N;VAI;RUS=&%T92YE9'4`4TU44 !D:7E?969I
M0&5S;"YE;F<N;VAI;RUS=&%T92YE9'4```,`_5\!`````P#_7P`````"`?8/
M`0````0````````"D70!!( !`!H```!293H@/&%L;#X@:&]M92!D>6YO(&MI
M=#\_`$T(`06 `P`.````SP<!`!\`"@`Y`#4```!N`0$@@ ,`#@```,\'`0`?
M``H`,P`P````8P$!"8 !`"$```!"-D5!-#,P.$8V0CA$,C$Q03@X1# P-C P
M.$0R-S,V.0`-!P$#D 8`\ 0``" ````+``(``0````L`(P```````P`F````
M```+`"D```````,`-@``````0 `Y`,"JX5FL3+X!'@!P``$````:````4F4Z
M(#QA;&P^(&AO;64@9'EN;R!K:70_/P````(!<0`!````%@````&^3*Q9V@A#
MZK>X]A'2J(T`8 C2<VD``!X`'@P!````!0```%--5% `````'@`?# $````2
M````4RY"86QY0&)O;2YG;W8N874````#``80)CTA; ,`!Q U`0``'@`($ $`
M``!E````5$A%4%)/0T5$55)%25-$15-#4DE"141)3E1(14)/4T-(05543TU/
M5$E614A!3D1"3T]+35E#3U!92$%32$5!1$5$1D]24$%25%-53DM.3U=.+%-/
M24-!3E1(14Q064]534]210`````"`0D0`0```. !``#<`0``/P(``$Q:1G4`
MT%+%`P`*`')C<&<Q,C4&,@xxx.#HQ`?<@`J0#XP(`8VC!"L!S970P
M( <3`H!R?0J!=6,`4 L#"[4@H%1H92!P`V!C"8"W"' 38 0`( $`!/)B"8!+
M%! #H'0344)O!/!H"1%P=70#<&]T:785$V!(`'!D!N!O:R[I!=!Y( 6@<!<@
M$0`$('T34&$!`!30`A %P JQ= $$('5N:VYO=V[ +"!S;R!)%S `<(8G!4 3
M4&QP('D(8#X@!& 3\14@`Y$;`70NQPJB"H0*@%-T=1B1%5#M!T!Y&YL;I#X1
M< ;@%=# (#8@+2 X&F 7X!$1("!A9QF *#\IIQ3B" `7\" F$S!R`-#6:Q42
M$_%W%Z%A$S %D*<5H =@%J!I=!WF* 6Q[QEP!X 98!(P:!_@&)$-X/YL$V !
MH!Z"`- 3L"0P`V&W$4 $D 0@+QE@%>!P(6">=!61); %H!>@=&09(>\=YA7@
M%$$E86T+@!-@`V#T;&P+@&<?<!:0(5 +@'\4T EP`) ET !P$[ HXV@[!; 1
M,' 9( 20%O!$;]<'D!WF`'!Y!N!D%W(60=L5(@EP9B$A*?$_'>8=YA!424$L
M'>9*87DO&Z@xxx. #`! 0``````,`$1 ``````P" $/____] ``<P
M@-S/?ZM,O@% ``@P@-S/?ZM,O@$+``" "" &``````# ````````1@`````#
MA0````````,``H (( 8``````, ```````!&`````!"%`````````P`%@ @@
M!@``````P ```````$8`````4H4``+<-```>`"6 "" &``````# ````````
M1@````!4A0```0````0````X+C ``P`F@ @@!@``````P ```````$8`````
M`84````````+`"^ "" &``````# ````````1@xxx.A0````````,`,( (
M( 8``````, ```````!&`````!&%`````````P`R@ @@!@``````P ``````
M`$8`````&(4````````>`$& "" &``````# ````````1@`````VA0```0``
M``$`````````'@!"@ @@!@``````P ```````$8`````-X4```$````!````
M`````!X`0X (( 8``````, ```````!&`````#B%```!`````0`````````>
9`#T``0````$``````````P`--/TW``"=!@``
`
end

------------------------------

From: "Ward Spoonemore" <spoonie@xxx.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 16:02:02 -0800
Subject: RE: DIY_EFI Digest V4 #60

Oh boy ! that was inforitive !
Ward

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu
[mailto:owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu]On Behalf Of Auburn
Performance Equipment
Sent: Sunday, January 31, 1999 11:15 AM
To: DIY_EFI-Digest-Owner@xxx.edu;
diy_efi@xxx.edu
Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V4 #60


Date sent:      	Mon, 25 Jan 1999 21:57:28 -0500
From:           	DIY_EFI-Digest-Owner@xxx.edu
To:             	DIY_EFI-Digest@xxx.edu
Subject:        	DIY_EFI Digest V4 #60
Send reply to:  	diy_efi@xxx.edu

> 
> From: "ron.boley" <ron.boley@xxx.net>
> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 15:39:06 -0500
> Subject: Re: SpeedBrain
> 
> Matt:
> 
> I looked at your site and read the contents on the SpeedBrain.  I'd like
> to understand what the dynamic range of the SpeedBrain is versus the Ford
> EEC-IV.  Is it a complete equivalent except for added programmability or
> is it designed to cure other hi performance ills.

The range is very similar, which areas specifically would you like to 
compare?

It is designed to out perform the stock computer and software.
It is designed to be user friendly, as well as eliminate some 
headache areas that are obstacales to higher performance.
 
> Is it more adaptable than EEC-IV? How would it handle a aftermarket cam
> with sufficent overlap to reduce vacuum at idle.

It idles.cruises, and performs better than the stock eec.
 
Thanks,

Matt


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AUBURN PERFORMANCE EQUIPMENT 
Home of the world's fastest 4.6 Cobra!
1998 Winner 160mph class Big Bend Classic roadrace, Ft Stockton, TX
1998 Winner 160mph class Gamblers Run roadrace, Elko, NV
1998 Winner 165mph class Silverstate Classic roadrace, Ely, NV

We just don't sell and install parts, we make them perform.

ORDER LINE   1-508-752-7683  
24 hr FAX LINE (508)752-5269   TECH LINE (508)797-9728
WEBSITE & ON-LINE CATALOG: http://www.tiac.net/users/goape/index.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

------------------------------

From: "Ward Spoonemore" <spoonie@xxx.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 16:09:27 -0800
Subject: RE: Love This

I think you should check the temp of your fuel after about 30 minutes
running it should be 20- 30 deg less than the coolant temp, remember most of
the fuel is being returned (hot) to the tank at normal driving, The major
problem is keep the pump from running dry and tearing up the pump.

The "no return" systems came into favor as a result of more restrictive
rules on evap system's. If the fuel isn't returned to the tank the vapor
pressure is much reduced because the fuel is no at ambient temp, (except for
bone head door stop Camaros that have the tank in top of the muffler).


Ward


- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu
[mailto:owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu]On Behalf Of Greg
Hermann
Sent: Sunday, January 31, 1999 8:22 AM
To: diy_efi@xxx.edu
Subject: RE: Love This


>> >I know Toyota uses the system in the 1ZZ-FE and claims lower evap
>> >emissions as the reason, FWIW. Less vapor lock?

Keeping the fuel in the tank cooler keeps its vapor pressure down, and
helps reduce evap emissions. Yes, keeping the tank cooler also provides
more net positive suction head (NPSH) to an in line fuel pump, but it does
nothing to help with keeping fuel vapor out of the fuel rails during
hard/hot running or after a hot soak.

With no bypass fuel flow, this second problem WILL be worse.

Greg
>>
>> DO NOT let mfgr BS about less evap emissions get confused with getting
the
>> vapor bubbles out of the fuel rails!!!
>>
>The evap. test has been increased from 1 hr to 3 days so is more
>difficult to past.  Does any one know where i can get a low
>permeation fuel neck hose?
>alex

------------------------------

From: Roger Heflin  <rah@xxx.net>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 18:17:33 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: Adjusting parameters that determine BLM cell - GM ECM

On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Mike wrote:

> 
> I had a quick look at 0154 and it appears to be a convoluted representation
> of filtered MAP in actual kPa:
> 
>     MAP kPa = (0154*256 + 0155) / 256
> 
> or more simply (and somewhat less accurately) by eliminating the fractional
> part:
>     
>     MAP kPa = 0154
> 
> So, say, 0154 = 0x55 means 85kPa MAP pressure.
> 
> It's hard to see what they're doing with 015B which seems to be used as the
> next value to be added to the filtered 014E value. But 014E is initialized
> to the raw MAP counts so it's safe to assume, I think, that 015B is a MAP
> derived value.
> 

I am still digging through it.   It looks like the rpm part may be the
what is really causing the problem.  The lowest default setting is
700, which originally was above idle.  Now it is well below idle, so
probably I will try boosting the rpm values by 300 rpm.  The spread
with the $0154 parameter looks like it is spread out fairly well, ie I
hit all areas that are determined by it. 

 > >Have others changed the parameters to move BLM Cells
around? > >
> >Right now, I have rather bad BLM cell coverage.  With 4 or so hours
> >of data I dont get into BLM cells 0,1 4,5 8,9 12,13 at all.   Those
> >cells are the ones indexed by rpm (0-700,700-1200), my idle is raised 
> >to more like 900 (out of gear), 950 (in gear).
> >
> >Also right now my BLM are way out of tune (ie BLM values close to the
> bottom rail (110 or
> >so average), so everything is going to have to be tuned.
> >		Any help is appreciated from others with
> >		knowledge about this subject.
> 
> 
> If your BLM is at 110 or so, your running way fat. Any chance of turning
> down the fuel pressure a pound or two or three? Or is it okay up top and
> rich down low?
> 

The part throttle tables are rather rich.  At wot I am running 850-870
mv which should be pretty good.  It also varies quite a bit from cell
to cell on how excessivly rich things are.  There is at least 3 cells
that are within a reasonable amount.

			Roger

------------------------------

From: trinity@xxx.net (Mike)
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 20:26:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Adjusting parameters that determine BLM cell - GM ECM

>> 
>> If your BLM is at 110 or so, your running way fat. Any chance of turning
>> down the fuel pressure a pound or two or three? Or is it okay up top and
>> rich down low?
>> 
>
>The part throttle tables are rather rich.  At wot I am running 850-870
>mv which should be pretty good.  It also varies quite a bit from cell
>to cell on how excessivly rich things are.  There is at least 3 cells
>that are within a reasonable amount.
>

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the block learn multiplier and integrator are
ignored at WOT (or more correctly, open loop), at any RPM, so any tuning you
do here won't affect WOT operation. If the system is running closed-loop,
there aren't any tables per se (except maybe the block cells which are
derived from the integrator anyway) that are used to adjust fuel. It's all
done off the integrator and O2 sensor. I wonder if you can find if there's
an injector "scaling" factor that could be used to apply a reduction in IPW
rather than tweaking the logic.

To me, 850-870 on the O2 still sounds a tad fat but it's really a call that
should be made after dyno pulls with other O2 voltages seen for comparison.
I thought the Buick GN crowd shoot for somewhere around 700-800mV...


- --
 Mike

------------------------------

From: Chad Clendening <clendenc@xxx.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 19:28:37 -0600
Subject: Re: replace an EPROM with an EEPROM?

I used a 28C256 ( 28 pin 32Kx8 EEPROM chip) in place of a 2764 in an ECM.  I was
lucky as the board had the unused pins of the 2764 pulled high ( /WE and the
highest 1 or 2 address lines of the 28C256.) I believe the only odd thing I did
was to load the program at 2 differant offsets to get it right.  This worked fine
once the offset was correct.  You shouldn't have to play with offsets if you are
using the same size of chips.  Just get the pinout correct when making the
adapter.

I did put ZIF sockets into this ECM as the original chips were soldered in.  No
more bending of leads.

Chad



David A. Cooley wrote:

> There may be problems...  there are CE and PGM on the 28256, Guess if you
> pulled it to reprogram, it would be a little easier than erasing a UV eprom.
>
> At 10:43 AM 1/31/99 +1100, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Pinouts are different... 27C256 is a 28 pin, 28256 is a 32 pin...
> >
> >
> >But electrically would it work?, an adaptor would be no prob really.
> >I assume the extra pins are for re-programming?.
> >I agree with Ted, this method would save so much time.
> >
> >>At 05:06 PM 1/29/99 -0500, you wrote:
> >>>Has anyone tried to replace an Eprom with and EEprom?
> >>>Specifically, Replace the 27c256 in a Memcal with a 28256?
> >>>Does anyone know if it would work?  or is the pinout somehow different?
> >>>The reason I'm interested in doing this is because it would be more
> >economical
> >>>and efficient.
> >>>
> >>>Also, what do people do about removing and replacing their Eproms from the
> >>>Memcals when reprogramming them?  Do you solder in ZIF sockets?
> >>>
> >>>I want to start lookin at and modifying my Memcal, but have never done any
> >of
> >>>this stuff before.
> >>>
> >>>Thanks,
> >>>Ted
> >>
> >>===========================================================
> >>           David Cooley N5XMT           Internet: N5XMT@xxx.net
> >>     Packet: N5XMT@xxx. Member #7068
> >>       I am Pentium of Borg...division is futile...you will be
> >approximated.
> >>===========================================================
> >>
> >
>
> ===========================================================
>            David Cooley N5XMT           Internet: N5XMT@xxx.net
>      Packet: N5XMT@xxx. Member #7068
>        I am Pentium of Borg...division is futile...you will be approximated.
> ===========================================================

------------------------------

From: "Walter Sherwin" <wsherwin@xxx.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 21:02:39 -0800
Subject: UEGO IDEA was(Re: More UEGO stuff)

Sounds like there is a lot of pent up UEGO talent out there.  Here is an
idea for a product that about half of us could really use right now  (I'd
buy two if I could find such an animal).   Picture
this........................................................you are working
on a GM style MAP based system, that is to be converted to artificial
aspiration.  Perhaps it was originally artificially aspirated, or perhaps it
was not.   Once the basic control "system" is in place, you and I are still
faced with the challenge of remappping the open loop VE tables.   Remapping
the VE's can be done labouriously, through data logging, and post hex
editing.

What about a control box which would take a UEGO signal, and perform an
appropriate transform equation, and then export the resultant signal to an
output port which one could connect to the O2 sensor pin of an OEM  MAP
computer.    The goal would be to make an artificial setpoint (say 11.5:1
A/F ratio) appear to the OEM computer as stoich.  If this were possible,
then one could use the OEM computer to generate BLM's and iteratively (read
this as safely) reach the perfect "MAP" while driving, or while on a chassis
dyno.  Imagine, in one afternoon, you could do the work of several days.
This would even help the normally aspirated guys.

Just food for thought.  If anyone comes up with one of these (or knows where
I can find one)  then let me know, please.



Thanks;
Walt.











- -----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Plecan <nacelp@xxx.net>
To: diy_efi@xxx.edu>
Date: Saturday, January 30, 1999 9:39 PM
Subject: Re: More UEGO stuff


>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Raymond C Drouillard <cosmic.ray@xxx.com>
>To: diy_efi@xxx.edu>
>Date: Saturday, January 30, 1999 11:39 PM
>Subject: Re: More UEGO stuff
>
>Gee, sounds so easy.  Hmm, care to whip up a ION?.
>I certainly hope you weren't making light of Steve's work.
>Bruce
>
>
>>I would buy one.  Of course, if I happen to "stumble" across a design
>>before the kit is available, I would simply build it myself.  The
>>circuitry on a UEGO isn't all that complicated.  In its most basic form,
>>it is a single op-amp and a few discretes.  Add a few more components for
>>a double-ended power supply, something to shut off the ion pump when it's
>>not warm, something to regulate the heater, and you have it.
>>
>>Ray Drouillard
>>
>>
>>On Sat, 30 Jan 1999 14:25:13 -0600 Steve Gorkowski <kb4mxo@xxx.net>
>>writes:
>>>If one would come as a kit for under $200.00 with sensor. How many
>>>would
>>>buy the kit ? No sense to design if one if no one was interested in a
>>>wide O2 meter.
>>>
>>>Steve
>>>
>>>Mike Pitts wrote:
>>>
>>>> Any interest?  Is this a waste of bandwidth?
>>>>
>>>> "This invention provides an self-calibrating buffer amplifier
>>>> for a Universal Exhaust Gas Oxygen sensor interface circuit
>>>> which couples and processes a voltage signal proportional
>>>> to pumping cell current to a level and reference voltage suitable
>>>> for input to an A-to-D convertor. The goal of this invention is to
>>>> increase the accuracy of air-to-fuel ratio control by continually
>>>> correcting for the effects of offset quantities in the amplifier
>>>> stage necessary to the interface circuitry. This goal is
>>>accomplished
>>>> by an approach which effectively generates and subtracts these
>>>> offset quantities from the processed signal. "
>>>>
>>>> http://patent.womplex.ibm.com/details?pn=US05211154__
>>>>
>>>> -Mike
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>___________________________________________________________________
>>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/getjuno.html
>>or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
>>
>

------------------------------

From: "Ross Myers" <ponty@xxx.au>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 13:27:17 +1100
Subject: Re: More UEGO stuff

>Hi all,
>        Any idea how much the EGOR would cost?
>        In another message someone mentioned building something for under
>$200 .Would this be a wide range sensor and viewed on an LCD screen? Could
>a PIC be used to read the info and send it to the screen?
>PAUL


Just to add my bit, I know Motec sells a wide band monitoring device for
over $1000, it also uses a 68332 Micro!!!, go here to view -
http://www.motec.com.au/lambda.htm

Regards

Ross Myers

------------------------------

From: Marc Piccioni <mpiccioni@xxx.net>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 19:09:55 -0700
Subject: RE: fuel pumps

Agreed, that a suitable location away from heat sources is preferred. I totally agree that AN fittings and line would be required.

- ----------
From: 	Bruce Plecan[SMTP:nacelp@xxx.net]
Sent: 	January 30, 1999 7:06 PM
To: 	diy_efi@xxx.edu
Subject: 	Re: fuel pumps


- -----Original Message-----
From: Marc Piccioni <mpiccioni@xxx.net>
To: 'diy_efi@xxx.edu>
Date: Saturday, January 30, 1999 8:34 PM
Subject: RE: fuel pumps

I'm not being smart or a wise a--, but do you like fires?.
Have as absolutely few as possible connections, even, under the hood.
Use only AN Lines, and Fittings, and practice making a couple dozen lines
before you try it for the final fitting.
I've seen everything possible that could go wrong go wrong under the hood,
and way too many fires.
   Keeping the pump, filter, seperator, accumulator (mini storage tank) and
as much misc fuel stuff by the tank and away from any heat source.
Sorry to ramble I just hate engine fires
Bruce


>I will also be converting to EFI shortly and wonder if the following will
>work:
>
>Use a low pressure electric pump mounted by the tank feeding forward to an
>insulated fuel resovoir ( say 1 liter in size) mounted in the engine
>compartment equipped with a float to keep the level constant. Then feed the
>high pressure pump locally from the bottom of the resovoir and route the
>regulator bypass outlet back to the top of the resovoir. The only problem
>that I can see is possibly vapour being trapped at the top of the tank.
>
>----------
>From: Fran and Bud[SMTP:quest100@xxx.net]
>Sent: January 30, 1999 2:17 AM
>To: diy_efi@xxx.edu
>Subject: Re: fuel pumps
>
>Best performance will be gained by mounting the pump low and as close to
>the
>gas tank as possible, making the low pressure (inlet) flow circuit short.
>Most pumps don't do well with suction, but are happy pushing all the gas
>they can get.
>----------
>>From: "Mike Pilkenton" <mpilkent@xxx.com>
>>To: "DIY-EFI" <DIY_EFI@xxx. Performance"
><DomesticPerformance@xxx.com>
>>Subject: fuel pumps
>>Date: Sat, Jan 30, 1999, 4:34 PM
>>
>
>>Well I'm deep into my engine conversion project and need to install an
>>electric fuel pump for the EFI engine (3.1L V6).  Question is do I have to
>>put the fuel pump back in the tank or can I install the pump up by the
>>engine.  I know I need the high pressure type made for FI engines and not
>>the carb (low pressure).  Mounting anaftermarket in-line pump up by the
>>engine sure would be more convenient.  Any advice would be appreciated.
>>
>>Mike Pilkenton
>>
>
>
>
>



begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT
M>)\^(CH"`0:0" `$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y 0```````#H``$-@ 0`
M`@````(``@`!!) &`& !```!````# ````,``# #````"P`/#@`````"`?\/
M`0```&$`````````@2L?I+ZC$!F=;@#=`0]4`@````!D:7E?969I0&5F:3,S
M,BYE;F<N;VAI;RUS=&%T92YE9'4`4TU44 !D:7E?969I0&5F:3,S,BYE;F<N
M;VAI;RUS=&%T92YE9'4`````'@`", $````%````4TU44 `````>``,P`0``
M`"(```!D:7E?969I0&5F:3,S,BYE;F<N;VAI;RUS=&%T92YE9'4````#`!4,
M`0````,`_@\&````'@`!, $````D````)V1I>5]E9FE 969I,S,R+F5N9RYO
M:&EO+7-T871E+F5D=2<``@$+, $````G````4TU44#I$25E?149)0$5&23,S
M,BY%3D<N3TA)3RU35$%412Y%1%4```,``#D`````"P! .@$````"`?8/`0``
M``0````````#GD@!"( '`!@```!)4$TN36EC<F]S;V9T($UA:6PN3F]T90`Q
M" $$@xxx.````SP<!`!\`$P`)
M`#<```!)`0$@xxx.3A#
M-#-#1#-&0CE$,C$Q0D4Y0S0T-#4U,S4T,# P, `'!P$#D 8`' D``!(````+
M`",```````,`)@xxx.0``X,'UATV^`1X`
M< `!````#P```%)%.B!F=65L('!U;7!S```"`7$``0```!8````!ODV']<'-
M0XQ*N3\1TKZ<1$535 `````>`!X,`0````4```!33510`````!X`'PP!````
M& ```&UP:6-C:6]N:4!A='1C86YA9&$N;F5T``,`!A"^N-(D`P`'$#T(```>
M``@xxx.05=!6492
M3TU(14%44T]54D-%4TE34%)%1D524D5$251/5$%,3%E!1U)%151(051!3D9)
M5%1)3D=304Y$3$E.15=/54Q$0D52``````(!"1 !````I0<``*$'``!C#@``
M3%I&=>IU>,G_``H!#P(5`J@%ZP*#`% "\@D"`&-H"L!S970R-P8`!L,"@S(#
MQ0(`<')"<1'B<W1E;0*#,[<"Y <3`H,T$LP4Q7T*@xxx.Q>?,C4U`H '
M"H$-L0M@;F<Q,#/O%% +"A11"_)C`$ 4L G",&0L('01@ 5 82"(<W5I`9%L
M92 7,!IC'2!I`B =0'=A>:(@`U(@:&4=(7,(8?9C!Y$$`" 34 W !) 7H2@N
M($D<\&\!D&QLS1[ 80G"'/1!3A[0'9#O'D :H 0@`'!D'? +@!W@:G<(8&PC
M$&(=X!>@<1\=@""2"H4*BR,P,3@PP0+1:2TQ-#0-\ S0<R:#"UDQ-@J@`V 3
MT&-]!4 M**<*AR=;## H)D8=`V$Z*:XH)@R"($)R,G4?P"!0'= >(&Y;0%--
M5% Z;@#091!L<$!B!1!G:'3R+B-0=%TI3RI=!F ",&LKCRR;2@!P=0K 'L S
M$C <X#$Y-) @-SHT,#8ML$TOKRI=5&]#,>\LFV1I>5\-P&DF0#F!&N R+@GP
M9RZT;V@>4"T3P!T@93H@C&1U-4\POG5B:BAATS=O+)M293W 9@I0`R!@<'5M
M<',DKR6S,[XV)R<;U2@F"H4HHT\O`:\+@ = != 'D',A@&4H^A4K1$T*P&,M
ML&EC8[$>46D@xxx.E[=
M2,9$.N$]P 80= AP2&"&>1S@xxx.C,T-1B9/5=213_/0-=))Q\0?FXA$"/1
M(J$=8 # `" @xxx.!BPG4%0&1O('D(8",A3FL=X")@%Z!S
M/R262.QA=E5A(M%B'X *0!/03R%1(& 'X%@!<&\$$&F['<(%H&XC4"AP'E%S
M'.#J95?0;AS@=2,`!) <\=D=X&AO!' DEE5540(@NR%1(C%,(T%:@2+R1B)U
MOUV$$U `T!Y +9$`P&M40KL=4 6@=0M0'>!6$'H)\+\C(T!V(^ "$!>@5C-T
M-!'_'9 >T 6Q6W(B8$22(F4DEO]3H%?1$;!@xxx.Q
M9U8@xxx.!'L%6XB26:T%+">"_1V!445MR
M4G(<X")@;!/0]G(<X!&P< 20'2 %L%V!CT;04H CH&UR("AM"X _1R 3P 6P
M11$<\ !P:RG_(N)I!@0@;A 1<%] ! !&D/M2(Q/ =0W0(]!IT5N!;W+?(N,>
MF&I"'SDDEE,%L#01.R$`) !A!M =T2#@:G7_$\ ?(#KA6J :H"-"5M,*A?<M
M8T","H4^(. #\"% '4!^;!^ (])9X641(I)U4D7Z1B#@<UNP`" A4FF"`B#_
M6S(&D&+$!O 7, /P5%%YPN-Y)B. <FLZ>29Y)EQR_QU0?8$@(@00"'!VH2W1
M8B#_1L!28U] "& ", F <>L@8/\)@%1"89$>H L@=5(`<'DF/PN '7!N,8)A
M4B-6\6]V_F\D4&Z '6 >L1Q@xxx.@`)!@<&^P@A:'@5MR_W;$>28%
MH%*05*$'@ (P6J#])#%P;4!ID1V0<- =4!IP_F\=(75A5J!KH%MC'=!7T-\#
M(%GA.L$","# 5!\P`Z#_@xxx.H O(("8@<,>`K\A0A[C6W(&X ) 'P%O
M?/2_AA<B\@xxx.6A>@9VXE_W'P"K $$9,1'=!4`0#0<I#[=6%R(V^!\)'-
MC:-<I"@A_1W!;7DF'0,@X"WQ9*(?\_-99![ =F%94 AP5!5B(/^:X(KRB]*6
M+&]R))9_=RBO'CXK1"M `Y$B\D)U9!<N)"0P!Y!T&L P0&<;.O$O:3XQI$]O
M,CHQ]C<4L#4V/C="2]\Z7Z)6]U%G/[]_2D*A42 @!)!AD>\#@2V1><,CX6<+
M<8)D@xxx. >B@+
M@)51;["+H0?@WT;@'[ =@7NDG8=-66"JD=-2@E8!;B=5\W<NL ,@_XLS'7!:
M,U6T"L!;D9O!F!'_=C!E8R$Q6V.P$:[I'L"9DI=%(+2(GI\^GZ4B35:2W4:P
M;%:@`C "(")',[V#<D %,'<NB>%_=Z43(G!$25DM>W&]\< 17X][<:7?35@<
MX"(T+S4`J$-Y;"# 4*K((GDFW\"@`W"A44; PYE `B NL/\$`"] OOL]5ZC/
MO(!.9T]#.S0W'. T4(N\@xxx./E>_MG)3H@VPC%$+@'5A;1[ _W;%>I0`D!YA
M*"$]@B+C(U#?CC)6((4A(2*$>3Z!-\@'!V*'>W)VQ2@S+C%,D"!6-BD@P"!1
MH4)_'E(@xxx.#0EJTG8 !Q
MY=$X=M/4L?T@xxx.#0%%N"CRO^=)3 7S(-L&*#TX<BU%/AU[P76W(>
M('(M0"B :M2B_[4@xxx.'OP1@
M8;%ZDP,`,;'4L4%J4?U(4'9?$B.'F\$7H$;@A7+_G8>_*+T<ZG_M#W\<0(]!
MGET58C(2L$,-%L$`\R ````#`! 0``````,`$1 &````0 `',"!SSKV'3;X!
B0 `(,"!SSKV'3;X!'@`]``$````%````4D4Z( ````#C*@`'
`
end

------------------------------

From: "David A. Cooley" <n5xmt@xxx.net>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 22:06:16 -0500
Subject: Re: replace an EPROM with an EEPROM?

Where'd you find a 28 pin 28C256?
They are 32 pin devices. The 28C64 and 28C128 are 28 pin like the 27C64.

At 07:28 PM 1/31/99 -0600, you wrote:
>I used a 28C256 ( 28 pin 32Kx8 EEPROM chip) in place of a 2764 in an ECM.  I 
>was
>lucky as the board had the unused pins of the 2764 pulled high ( /WE and the
>highest 1 or 2 address lines of the 28C256.) I believe the only odd thing
I did
>was to load the program at 2 differant offsets to get it right.  This worked 
>fine
>once the offset was correct.  You shouldn't have to play with offsets if you 
>are
>using the same size of chips.  Just get the pinout correct when making the
>adapter.
>
>I did put ZIF sockets into this ECM as the original chips were soldered
in.  No
>more bending of leads.

===========================================================
           David Cooley N5XMT           Internet: N5XMT@xxx.net
     Packet: N5XMT@xxx. Member #7068
       I am Pentium of Borg...division is futile...you will be approximated.
===========================================================

------------------------------

From: "Ross Myers" <ponty@xxx.au>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 14:19:06 +1100
Subject: Tweak your Delco's boys!!!!.

Hi All,

Most of the Aussies on the list will know about this company, but for the
other folks who don't they have some nice stuff.

http://www.efidirect.com.au/kalmakermenu.htm

It's a plugin module for 88 - 98 Delco ECM's/PCM's that allows major
tweaking of calibrations in real time. Also can use C.E light as knock
indicator and more.
Check it out.

Regards

Ross Myers

------------------------------

From: Tom Sharpe <twsharpe@xxx.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 21:37:48 -0600
Subject: Re: Love This

ron.boley wrote:

> Adding to Rogers comments,
>
> I would drive the pump in a PWM (Pulse Width Modulation) mode such that
> I can control the pressure.  If we flip it around and I can control the
> fuel pressure the engine controller can keep the Fuel Injector pulse
> width fixed for longer periods of time.  While its not what I would do
> with the faster CPU's these days it might make for a less expensive
> engine controller which appeals to the marketing people
>
> Ron

1. Raise fuel pressure with RPM (to lower pulse width) to get more capacity from
small injectors. 2. Allow heat in rails to heat fuel for better vaporization and
economy under cruse conditions.3. Reduce load on electrical system when not WOT
(better economy).

How do you PWM a 15 amp load??? Someone design a circuit please. Can the driver
board be mase to work??

TIA  TOM

------------------------------

End of DIY_EFI Digest V4 #78
****************************

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".