DIY_EFI Digest Monday, 1 February 1999 Volume 04 : Number 081 In this issue: Re: delco_edit Re: Thoughts on a new list... proj101 PWM driver Re: Thoughts on a new list... proj101 RE: SV: fuel pumps/reservoirs 730 variations Re: Intake Runner Length Re: Love This Re: PWM driver Re: Throttle Body Fuel Pressure Regulator Calling all Ignition gurus . . . Re: 730 variations RE: Looking for injectors RE: Intake Runner Length TC's and manual trans (was: Re: Smooth strategy) Re: 730 variations Re: 730 variations Re: fuel pumps Re: fusible link questions Re: Calling all Ignition gurus . . . RE: Calling all Ignition gurus . . . Re: 730 variations Re: Rising rate fuel pressure regulator Re: TC's and manual trans (was: Re: Smooth strategy) New Binary editing s/w Re: UEGO IDEA was(Re: More UEGO stuff) Re: TC's and manual trans (was: Re: Smooth strategy) Re: UEGO IDEA was(Re: More UEGO stuff) See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 14:31:11 -0500 Subject: Re: delco_edit - -----Original Message----- From: Guenther,Max To: 'diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Monday, February 01, 1999 2:04 PM Subject: delco_edit Name changed to Promedit, bottom half of page FTP Bruce > Where is delco edit. I looked in 332 incoming but can't find it. >Found gnuplot.exe. though. Could someone e-mail it to me if its not >there anymore. And if I'm blind please let me know! > > >It appears to me that # of cylinders does not determine the ECM.? In >other words I might find a Grand Am with the same ECM as the Corvette? >1227727 I believe. Just change the chip and away? >Thanks, >Max > ------------------------------ From: steve ravet Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 13:29:58 -0600 Subject: Re: Thoughts on a new list... proj101 I think it's an excellent idea. I agree with both Bruce's and Roger's comments also, if it covered a half dozen GM ecms or so that'd be great. Since I'm already on the diy_efi and efi_332 pages I can do the 101 page also. - --steve jsg@xxx.com wrote: > > I'm becoming more and more interested in understanding the > code (not just tables) of my 165. I would like to see > a forum were we could more openly share such information. > (is that possible?). > > I would like your comments on setting up a third > mailing list that focuses on the project 101 material. > This list would complement diy_efi and efi332 and serve > to separate project 101 material into its own archive. > I would also like a volunteer to actively maintain a web > page for it (at the efi332 site). > > Possible name: proj101@xxx.edu > > john gwynne ------------------------------ From: rauscher@xxx.com Date: Mon, 01 Feb 99 15:09:22 -0500 Subject: PWM driver I can throw together a circuit to do this. I've used PWM for DC motor control circuits before. How about a low side driver, it would be easier to do. (This is a switch that grounds the motor). For input control, just an analog 0-12V for stopped to full on, with all speeds in-between. I'll get it together and scanned hopefully before the week is out. Oh, do fuel pumps really draw 15 Amps? Ouch. One word of caution thou, PWM is electrically noisy. You will want to put the controller close to the pump, as not to disrupt every electrical device in your car. BobR. Tom Sharpe wrote: >How do you PWM a 15 amp load??? Someone design a circuit please. Can the driver >board be mase to work?? > >TIA TOM > - ------------------------------ ------------------------------ From: "Gregory A. Parmer" Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 14:14:46 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: Thoughts on a new list... proj101 > I would probably try to add a generic understand and reversing > manufacturers ECM code list. Alot of the code is very similar > between all of the different ECM's. The code is different, but the > functions are very very similar. Maybe call the list gmecm? or > something similar? I like this "gmecm" idea too. Much of the prog101 work has already been done for certain ECMs. For those of us who like the idea of a single piece of software to edit several different ECMs, an ".ecu" file (for promedit) for each known prom shouldn't be all that difficult. Known ECMs I've seen detailed info about recently: 1) '7148 from a Turbo Regal/GN -- http://www.gnttype.org/techarea/chips/gmprom.html 2) '7749 from Syclone/Typhoon -- www.syty.org (also http://gunther.infohwy.com/~rgregory/proms.html) 3) '7747 from '90 P/U efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu/diy_efi/oem/gm 4) 16159278 from '93 Z28 http://www.hit.net/~rah/disassnotes.html I'd bet that the '165 from a TPI F-Body and several of the 'vette models have been hacked too, but I can't come up with the URLs at the moment. - -greg ------------------------------ From: Eric Aos Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 12:21:58 -0800 Subject: RE: SV: fuel pumps/reservoirs I saw one several years ago (mid 80's). It was used on a Mechanical FI, but IMO it should work fine here. Little John Buttera (built funny cars, and an Indy car) did this for a street car. He used a small tank, with a float bowl from a Holley carb mounted to the side for level control, and ran the return line back to the original tank. I presume it was to keep the fuel from sitting under the hood too long, and absorbing too much heat (?). Just seems safer than 1 litter (however much that is) of fuel under pressure that near a hot motor. ------------------------------ From: Eric Aos Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 12:40:12 -0800 Subject: 730 variations After several weeks of lurking, and reading through the archives, I have a question. I am working on doing an IR Pontiac. It seems the ideal ECM to use is the 730. I have read in several places that the best setup is 90-92. I have a feeling that just saying Camaro will double the price of the parts, would one of the 6 cylinder applications be the same? Is the difference in the ECM, or is it just the Memcal (or is that Mempack ?). ------------------------------ From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 14:22:15 -0700 Subject: Re: Intake Runner Length > The D port is from what "chev" has done with the exhaust port, >probably some else did it first, it's just they are so common...... >Bruce IIRC, the exhaust ports on the Ford 427 FE "cammer" were the first to be D shaped---with the flat on the short side of the curve. In other words, round, except for where the flow would separate anywayz. Believe it was claimed to help keep velocity up, and more importantly, turbulence down. Regards, Greg >> Thanks for all the inputs.....Tim. >> ------------------------------ From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 14:22:17 -0700 Subject: Re: Love This >Tom Sharpe wrote: >> > >> >> How do you PWM a 15 amp load??? Someone design a circuit please. Can the >>driver >> board be mase to work?? >> >> TIA TOM >That's a good question. How do they PWM the coolant fans? I know I >can hear the relay clicking away.. >Shannen I believe it's (the actual switching) done with an SCR, but that is coming from a total klutz in terms of electronics. Regards, Greg ------------------------------ From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 16:27:03 -0500 Subject: Re: PWM driver - -----Original Message----- From: rauscher@xxx.com> To: DIY_EFI@xxx.edu> Date: Monday, February 01, 1999 3:26 PM Subject: PWM driver Might think about using two IRFZ20's The surge on is big. I think on a TRex pump we went to 25A fuses, once. I'm no EE, but from what I looked at ganging some Power MOSFETs on the output looked like the hot setup, then add or minus as ya want Bruce > > >I can throw together a circuit to do this. I've used PWM for DC motor >control circuits before. How about a low side driver, it would be easier >to do. (This is a switch that grounds the motor). > >For input control, just an analog 0-12V for stopped to full on, with >all speeds in-between. > >I'll get it together and scanned hopefully before the week is out. > >Oh, do fuel pumps really draw 15 Amps? Ouch. > >One word of caution thou, PWM is electrically noisy. You will want to >put the controller close to the pump, as not to disrupt every electrical >device in your car. > >BobR. > > > > > >Tom Sharpe wrote: > >>How do you PWM a 15 amp load??? Someone design a circuit please. Can the driver >>board be mase to work?? >> >>TIA TOM >> >------------------------------ > > ------------------------------ From: Teller.John@xxx.com Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 16:23:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Throttle Body Fuel Pressure Regulator Great! By press I meant an arbor press, which I have used to press insulation displacement connectors onto ribbon cables. The regulator housing and bracket are pretty filthy, so I think I will brave the GM lawyers and disassemble the thing for cleaning... Thanks! - --- John T. To: diy_efi@xxx.edu cc: (bcc: John Teller/ORBVA) Subject: Re: Throttle Body Fuel Pressure Regulator There's a diaphragm and a spring inside. Be prepared for it, and all will be fine. A press is probably overkill. Consider a lawyer working for GM. "Take it apart? What if it starts leaking fuel? That could be dangerous!" At least that was the impression one of the GM instructors left me with. Shannen ------------------------------ From: brucep@xxx.net Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 16:28:02 -0500 Subject: Calling all Ignition gurus . . . I've lurked long enough and watched all the discussion here and learned alot . . . now I have some questions I am building an ignition system for a one cylinder tractor, This will be used on a 30 cid alcohol burning 1/4 scale pulling tractor. My plan after reading all there is to read about ignitions in the archive is to use a GM HEI coil. My system will be setup like this: Homemade nylon/plastic collar with epoxied in metal trigger(steel or iron?) attached to the crank, Ford distibutor coil pickup, (using the ford due to size) hooked to the 4 pin GM module, which in turn will be hooked to the HEI coil. In theory this appears to work, will it? Anyone do it yet? Will a GM coil run a single cylinder up to 8000rpms? I saw some info saying above 5000 rpms the coil drops off but that would be on a multiengine car right, since u would have one trigger per rev not 4,6 or 8? I realize that I will have a wasted spark on the exhaust stroke. My advance will be a manual cable that will rotate the pickup coil after the engine is started. Might play with a vacuum advance/or electronic setup later on in the season if this even works (anyone wanna help out I'm electronic stupid)? After reading all the info here I kinda think that it wouldn't be all that hard to put a GM (?) fuel injection system on this tractor, hardest part would be a chip for a single cylinder I guess? Carb rules for this class says must be normal aspiration so injection is legal, saw one guy running a hilborn at the nationals this past weekend. Cost is a big factor in this design, I need to use "junk yard parts" since I do not have alot to spend, besides it sure is alot better to beat the big $$$ guys with "junk" Thanks in advance for any info, and if this wasn't a good posting for this group sorry, but it is my first post in a year :) Bruce "advanced dealer in the great material continuum" ------------------------------ From: "Andrew K. Mattei" Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 16:30:41 -0500 Subject: Re: 730 variations I pulled a 730 out of a really rusty '89 Cavalier Wagon about 2 weeks ago. I paid about $100 for the whole *car*. ;^D I plan on using the '90-92 TPI Camaro Memcal with it. Hopefully just the Memcal won't be too much :) Oh, and count me in on that "new" GM ECM list as well. Love to learn more about my 165... - -Andrew Eric Aos wrote: > > After several weeks of lurking, and reading through the archives, I have > a question. I am working on doing an IR Pontiac. It seems the ideal ECM > to use is the 730. I have read in several places that the best setup is > 90-92. I have a feeling that just saying Camaro will double the price of > the parts, would one of the 6 cylinder applications be the same? Is the > difference in the ECM, or is it just the Memcal (or is that Mempack ?). - -- *********************************************************************** I tell my son that there are 22 letters in the alphabet, and 4 verbs... Be, see, tee, and pee... Exist, look around, play golf, and pee... Drives my wife crazy... ;^) -Andrew ------------------------------ From: "Van Setten, Tim (AZ75)" Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 14:34:56 -0700 Subject: RE: Looking for injectors > << What kind? Type, brand, flow rate, O-ring, Hose-barb????? > >> > 24,27,32lb For GM TPI > Can't help you there, however I do have some sources for port-style injectors. Sorry.....Tim. ------------------------------ From: "Van Setten, Tim (AZ75)" Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 14:56:18 -0700 Subject: RE: Intake Runner Length > >> What for ecm?. > > We ended up conjuring our own. (Mainly by swiping circuits out of > >every known ecm in the free world). We wanted a box with knobs on it > that > >controls the basic fuel curve. It's not a good idea to take a lap top > out > >into the sand dunes to change the fuel curve. > > > Care to give any details about the ecm?. > The ecm started out using a 68HC11, but to make a very long story short, we ended up making an analog system. The digital stuff is a nightmare. You have to remember that this IS the most electrically noisy environment around. Magnesium engines, steel frames, aluminum do-dads, high RF fields from radios, lots of emi from magneto's, (to really screw up a ecm, watch what a MSD 7AL2 multi-spark does using solid core wires), but the topper is when some of these village-idiots use a garden tractor battery to try starting a 13:1 compression motor! Yes it can be done, and when we did this years ago, we were heading for a box the size of a coffin to buffer, hold-up, condition, isolate, the signals. The killer was using methanol and trying to convince the O2 sensor to stay alive. When we went to a basic analog system, 99.99999% of the problems went away. (No processor resets, endless loops, watch-dog timers, etc..etc..). Going to a speed-density system, (TPS and Tach), sequential-double fire, we could use pot to trim overall curve, idle, mid, top end. Adding a MAP gave us the additional curve for the boost correction fuel. I can't go into schematics without giving up too many secrets, but I'll try to answer questions. (Hope I answered some of your questions Bruce). Tim. ------------------------------ From: d houlton x0710 Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 15:06:51 -0700 (MST) Subject: TC's and manual trans (was: Re: Smooth strategy) Shannen Durphey wrote: > > If you have any chances to roll around some of the car shows with well > restored examples from the early 40's to late 50's, you'll see that > the upper scale cars were designed to be very smooth. In the > transmissions, there were vacuum powered clutches, variable speed > transmissions, standard trans with torque converters. Even ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Oooh!, the magic words. I was just about to ask about this. Can anyone give me some info or point me to a source about torque convertors and how exactly they work. Are these tightly interdependant on an automatic trans (because of the fluid used) or could they possibly be used independantly? I.e., adapted for use on a manual trans. Forgetting for the moment about the specific machiningg, adapters, etc that would be required to physically hook it up, is it possible or feasible to make it work outside of an automatic trans? Is it's hydraulic fluid supply sealed inside the convertor? Could you fill the convertor and seal it and expect it to work for very long or does it need a continuous flow of fluid for cooling? If so, would pressure need to be modulated for any reason or does it just need a continuous flow? thanks for any info - --Dan ------------------------------ From: Tedscj@xxx.com Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 17:07:55 EST Subject: Re: 730 variations In a message dated 2/1/99 4:30:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, EOA@xxx.com writes: << After several weeks of lurking, and reading through the archives, I have a question. I am working on doing an IR Pontiac. It seems the ideal ECM to use is the 730. I have read in several places that the best setup is 90-92. I have a feeling that just saying Camaro will double the price of the parts, would one of the 6 cylinder applications be the same? Is the difference in the ECM, or is it just the Memcal (or is that Mempack ?). >> FYI, The 727 is identical to 730 except it is designed to be mounted in the engine compartment. (possibly more convenient when doing a conversion). You can get a 727 and the entire harness and sensors from the engine compartment of any late '80s or early '90s Pontiac Grand Prix with a v6 (I believe '88 to @xxx. Then you just put a V8 Memcal in it. Check this sight out: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/p4xref.html#1227727 I have the memcal I pulled from a 727('88 Grand Prix) running in my 730 right now (I have an I6). If I had known this from the beginning, I would not have had to drill a whole in my firewall to run the harness, and I would now have more room in my glove department (where my 730 now resides). Ted ------------------------------ From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 17:19:11 -0500 Subject: Re: 730 variations - -----Original Message----- From: Eric Aos To: 'diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Monday, February 01, 1999 4:39 PM Subject: 730 variations There are lots of late 80's FWD cars using the 730. The memcal is the difference, yes. As long as the tag says 1227730 an the original board is inside you'll be fine. Bruce >After several weeks of lurking, and reading through the archives, I have >a question. I am working on doing an IR Pontiac. It seems the ideal ECM >to use is the 730. I have read in several places that the best setup is >90-92. I have a feeling that just saying Camaro will double the price of >the parts, would one of the 6 cylinder applications be the same? ------------------------------ From: "Gary Derian" Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 17:15:08 -0500 Subject: Re: fuel pumps Not only fires but locate it so that even in a severe crash, the tank and lines will not get crushed or torn loose. A tank under the back seat area with the fuel pump nearby is a good location. You don't need floats or other stuff, feed a cone shaped tank tangentially at the bottom. Vent the top back to the main fuel tank, supply the high pressure pump from the middle of the bottom. Gary Derian > >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: "Gary Derian" Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 17:18:12 -0500 Subject: Re: fusible link questions I think most newer cars have done away with fusible links and use high amp fuses. Fuse size is determined by the wire gauge it feeds, not necessarily the circuit load. Of course, the circuit load determines the wire gauge. Gary Derian >> gents, >> >> Can somebody tell me why fusible links are all the rage now rather >> than a fuse? Is there some niffty piece of info on these things that I'm >> missing? > >Fusible links are designed to take a brief overloads without failing. >They're great for things like fan motors, which have high initial >current draw. According to a service bulletin, fuses can blow because >of expansion/contraction of the element due to quick high loads. I'm >not making this up, they called it thermal fatigue. And fuses need a >fuse holder and extra wiring. (Co$t) > >> >> Secondly, how do you convert fusible link guage to Amps? i.e. 20 GA >> fusible link will blow at what amperage? >I don't know that, but a fusible link should be 2 AWG sizes smaller >than the wire it's attached to. 10 ga wire should have 14 ga fusible >link. Length should be kept to a minimum. >Shannen >> >> thanks to all in advance >> jw ------------------------------ From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 17:26:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Calling all Ignition gurus . . . - -----Original Message----- From: brucep@xxx.net> To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Monday, February 01, 1999 4:42 PM Subject: Calling all Ignition gurus . . . Ahhh pulling tractors 30CID Single?. If you magnet/pickup will light a LED it'll fire the gm module. An 8,000 rpm single, I can't off hand think of an answer for the ecm. Bruce >I've lurked long enough and watched all the discussion here and learned alot >. . . now I have some questions > >I am building an ignition system for a one cylinder tractor, This will be >used on a 30 cid alcohol burning 1/4 scale pulling tractor. My plan after >reading all there is to read about ignitions in the archive is to use a GM >HEI coil. My system will be setup like this: > >Homemade nylon/plastic collar with epoxied in metal trigger(steel or iron?) >attached to the crank, Ford distibutor coil pickup, (using the ford due to >size) hooked to the 4 pin GM module, which in turn will be hooked to the HEI >coil. In theory this appears to work, will it? Anyone do it yet? > >Will a GM coil run a single cylinder up to 8000rpms? I saw some info saying >above 5000 rpms the coil drops off but that would be on a multiengine car >right, since u would have one trigger per rev not 4,6 or 8? > >I realize that I will have a wasted spark on the exhaust stroke. My advance >will be a manual cable that will rotate the pickup coil after the engine is >started. Might play with a vacuum advance/or electronic setup later on in >the season if this even works (anyone wanna help out I'm electronic stupid)? > >After reading all the info here I kinda think that it wouldn't be all that >hard to put a GM (?) fuel injection system on this tractor, hardest part >would be a chip for a single cylinder I guess? Carb rules for this class >says must be normal aspiration so injection is legal, saw one guy running a >hilborn at the nationals this past weekend. > >Cost is a big factor in this design, I need to use "junk yard parts" since I >do not have alot to spend, besides it sure is alot better to beat the big >$$$ guys with "junk" Thanks in advance for any info, and if this wasn't a >good posting for this group sorry, but it is my first post in a year :) > >Bruce > >"advanced dealer in the great material continuum" > ------------------------------ From: "Van Setten, Tim (AZ75)" Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 15:54:53 -0700 Subject: RE: Calling all Ignition gurus . . . > Homemade nylon/plastic collar with epoxied in metal trigger(steel or > iron?) > attached to the crank, Ford distibutor coil pickup, (using the ford due to > size) hooked to the 4 pin GM module, which in turn will be hooked to the > HEI > coil. In theory this appears to work, will it? Anyone do it yet? > Yes, I have on my father's 1897 Fairbanks-Morris. (The one with the two big flywheels on it. Used to have a moving-contact ignitor. What a pain in the ^&^%). It now doing work on a home-made log splitter. I used a large bolt in one of the flywheels that goes past a Ford Magnetic Pick-up. No advance needed because top RPM is around 450. > Will a GM coil run a single cylinder up to 8000rpms? I saw some info > saying > above 5000 rpms the coil drops off but that would be on a multiengine car > right, since u would have one trigger per rev not 4,6 or 8? Yes it will run a single cyl. past 8000 rpms. We are using it now on some 4-cyl. engines to over 8000 now! Make sure that you use the GM HEI coil. They make a fender mount one that has a HV tower on it for hooking up a coil wire to. Tim. ------------------------------ From: trinity@xxx.net (Mike) Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 18:02:30 -0500 Subject: Re: 730 variations >After several weeks of lurking, and reading through the archives, I have >a question. I am working on doing an IR Pontiac. It seems the ideal ECM >to use is the 730. I have read in several places that the best setup is >90-92. I have a feeling that just saying Camaro will double the price of >the parts, would one of the 6 cylinder applications be the same? Is the >difference in the ECM, or is it just the Memcal (or is that Mempack ?). > My old 1988 Cavalier Z24 had a '730 in it. I think any FWD MPFI 2.8 or 3.1L V6 from about 1988 to 1991 or so had the '730 - Celebrity, Sunbird, Cavalier, Lumina - ...they're as common as dirt. The only thing to watch out for on older '730s is poor solder joints causing stalling, hesitation etc. Later ECMs are better in this regard. MEMCAL is the preferred term. AFAIK, the ECMs are the same and only the MEMCAL changes. If you're going to make use of the knock sensor, you need to make sure you get a MEMCAL from the engine you're putting in the car (e.g. a 305 MEMCAL for a 305 engine) - even if you change the PROM - because the knock filter assembly on the MEMCAL is designed for each engine type and may not function well on other engine lines. - -- Mike ------------------------------ From: Tom Sharpe Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 17:19:01 -0600 Subject: Re: Rising rate fuel pressure regulator Daniel Houlton wrote: > Mike Pitts wrote: > > > > Some of you may remember my recent post about my desire to > > build a rising rate pressure regulator to mount in the stock location. > > Carl Summers informed me that he already has such a device. > > > > > http://www.emi.net/~mpitts/reg.htm > > > > Couple of questions: How much or a rising rate do you get? 2:1, > 3.2:1 , 5:1? Is this amount adjustable? How much was it? I'm > looking for one too and was planning on the Kenne Bell version. > Kinda procrastinating because it's about $200. > > --Dan How about a PWM controller with the Fuel pressure sensor under Love it and a simple pic type of control that delivers say 25 psi at 0-2000 rpm and 75 psi above 6000 rpm and a straight line between the two points. Need a pressure sensor and a tach lead.... simple.. replace the regulator with a small jet, a-la mechanical fuel injection. Someone come up with the circuit and I'll prototype it. Regards Tom ------------------------------ From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 16:18:55 -0700 Subject: Re: TC's and manual trans (was: Re: Smooth strategy) >Shannen Durphey wrote: >> >> If you have any chances to roll around some of the car shows with well >> restored examples from the early 40's to late 50's, you'll see that >> the upper scale cars were designed to be very smooth. In the >> transmissions, there were vacuum powered clutches, variable speed >> transmissions, standard trans with torque converters. Even > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >Oooh!, the magic words. I was just about to ask about this. Can >anyone give me some info or point me to a source about torque convertors >and how exactly they work. Are these tightly interdependant on an >automatic trans (because of the fluid used) or could they possibly be >used independantly? I.e., adapted for use on a manual trans. > >Forgetting for the moment about the specific machiningg, adapters, etc that >would be required to physically hook it up, is it possible or feasible >to make it work outside of an automatic trans? Is it's hydraulic fluid >supply sealed inside the convertor? Could you fill the convertor and >seal it and expect it to work for very long or does it need a continuous >flow of fluid for cooling? If so, would pressure need to be modulated >for any reason or does it just need a continuous flow? > >thanks for any info >--Dan Don't recall whatinell they called it, but for a while Porsche used a fluid coupling AND a vacuum operated clutch (which was triggered by a microswitch on the manual shift lever) in front of a manual tranny in the 911's. The fluid coupling ran in engine oil, IIRC. (A fluid coupling does not multiply torque, has only two elements, called pump and turbine.) Easiest way to think of how one works (at least for me) is to think of a centrifugal pump driving a centrifugal turbine--and then eliminate the two housings, and all the attendant weight and inefficiencies, by just wrapping the impeller and turbine wheels into a taurus shape, and mounting them face to face. Regards, Greg ------------------------------ From: "Ian Jones" Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 23:23:27 -0000 Subject: New Binary editing s/w For peoples interest I have uploaded some DOS binary file editing software to ftp://efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu/incoming/EMUL16.ZIP Ian Jones Cobi Electronics ------------------------------ From: "Walter Sherwin" Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 18:59:48 -0800 Subject: Re: UEGO IDEA was(Re: More UEGO stuff) Not quite Bruce. Picture the following "Remapping" procedure............................... Create a cal which defeats all of the A/F modifiers such as AE, EGR, ECT, etc. Also, disable open loop PE enrichment so that the computer stays in closed loop under all conditions. Basically, you would now have a VE driven cal, with closed loop correction capability. But, instead of "learning" towards stoich, the system would learn towards a safe setpoint (of say 11.5:1) defined by the electronic gizmo I had proposed. You could never map a turbo/supercharged car to stoich, but 11.5 should be safe under most conditions. Warm the engine, and verify that it is indeed in closed loop. Attach the little gizmo and drive the vehicle. As you drive, the computer will iterate towards a set of BLM's. Stop every once in awhile, and check that you have covered all of the BLM cells and perhaps even massage some of the raw VE tables in order to help speed up the process. When you are done, you will have a VE map of correct "shape", but incorrect "magnitude". When you are happy with the BLM learning exercise, then you must shift the new VE map to reflect stoich rather than the atrificial setpoint. This is just a ratiometric number crunching exercise that is easily handled in something like Exel, or Lotus, with data parsing. After the "new" map has been dumped into the cal, restore the A/F modifiers and PE function, and PRESTO, you would have a pretty good baseline cal that you can begin to fine tune. This is similar to the procedure that I use for remapping my MAP based projects, but that elusive little electronic gizmo would make my life a lot easier and would eliminate a lot of iterative data manipulation. Any thoughts, suggestions, recommendations? Again, build a wide band A/F meter that can emulate a zirconia oxygen sensor, and accommodate a user setpoint, and much of the world could be at your doorstep. Walt. - -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Plecan To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Monday, February 01, 1999 6:16 AM Subject: Re: UEGO IDEA was(Re: More UEGO stuff) > >-----Original Message----- >From: Walter Sherwin >To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> >Date: Sunday, January 31, 1999 9:13 PM >Subject: UEGO IDEA was(Re: More UEGO stuff) > >This idea, just universally raises the entire table. Seldon is what is >needed. >Playing with the coolant temp/MAT, and MAP signals all do the same thing. >There ain't no short cuts, reprogramming done right, takes time. >Bruce > > >>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 >>To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> >>Date: Saturday, January 30, 1999 9:39 PM >>Subject: Re: More UEGO stuff >> >> >>> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: Raymond C Drouillard >>>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 >>>>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: JRECPA@xxx.com Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 19:03:58 EST Subject: Re: TC's and manual trans (was: Re: Smooth strategy) In a message dated 2/1/99 3:10:31 PM US Mountain Standard Time, tc75918@xxx.com writes: << Forgetting for the moment about the specific machiningg, adapters, etc that would be required to physically hook it up, is it possible or feasible to make it work outside of an automatic trans? Is it's hydraulic fluid supply sealed inside the convertor? Could you fill the convertor and seal it and expect it to work for very long or does it need a continuous flow of fluid for cooling? If so, would pressure need to be modulated for any reason or does it just need a continuous flow? thanks for any info --Dan >> you should expect to provide some cooling fluid flow depending on the stall speed and if you will have a lockup converter you will need to control that with fluid pressure. Your best bet is to take a front pump and converter from a donor tranmission. James ------------------------------ From: "Walter Sherwin" Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 19:24:18 -0800 Subject: Re: UEGO IDEA was(Re: More UEGO stuff) The "gizmo", would be used as part of a specific remapping procedure. All of the details are outlined in a response to Bruce's similar question/statement. You could not use this approach while the computer was in open loop. It has to be "forced" into artificial closed loop for tuning purposes. I am always interested in automating the recalibration process. See the other message, and feel free if you have thoughts/comments. Walt. - -----Original Message----- From: Stuart Bunning To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Sunday, January 31, 1999 11:51 PM Subject: Re: UEGO IDEA was(Re: More UEGO stuff) > >Sounds Good But wouldn't this only work for OPEN LOOP mode?? > >Once you nail it of your car is cold and hasn't enable closed loop mode even >if the ECU still generated BLM's at WOT or cruise when cold based on O2 >sencor voltage it doesn't alter fueling to try to stay at 14.7:1 anyway. or >am i wrong ???? > > > >>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. >> > > >Best Regards, > >STUART BUNNING >SALES ENGINEER >KENELEC PTY LTD > >23-25 REDLAND DRIVE >MITCHAM VICTORIA 3132 >AUSTRALIA > >PHONE: 61 3 9873 1022 >FAX: 61 3 9873 0200 >EMAIL: stuart@xxx.au >WEB: http://www.kenelec.com.au/ > ------------------------------ End of DIY_EFI Digest V4 #81 **************************** 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".