From owner-diy_efi Wed Nov 30 09:40:54 1994 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA12821; Wed, 30 Nov 94 09:40:54 GMT Received: from aztec.co.za by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA12816; Wed, 30 Nov 94 04:40:46 -0500 Received: by aztec.co.za (Smail3.1.28.1 #5) id m0rClVr-000KdfC; Wed, 30 Nov 94 11:39 EET Date: Wed, 30 Nov 1994 11:39:46 +0200 (SAT) From: Wouter de Waal Subject: re: gcc, 68K and ignition advance To: DIY_EFI In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI On Tue, 29 Nov 1994 Steve=Ravet%Prj=Eng%PCPD=Hou@bangate.compaq.com wrote: [ r.e. my gcc port ] > > Post this, and send it to fridman@cpsc.ucalgary.ca so he can put it on the WWW > server. Am I glad someone finally did this! I've been meaning to do it under As soon as I get the stuff in a distributable form, I will. > Anyway, I don't think cross-compilers are pre-built anywhere, and if they are, > they probably don't exist for DOS, since the FSF code doesn't support DOS. FSF supports DJGPP, which is a DOS extender. All FSF stuff can (well most) be ported to DJGPP. gcc is the DJGPP compiler. > > is there really a site called ftp.pooh.com? Yes. Somewhere in California, I think. And they _do_ have a copy of gcc targeted to 68k and running under MSDOS. Would somebody out there that is also interested in compiling 68k code from DOS grab the files from pooh and check them out? If they work better than my setup, I would recommend using them. What _I_ intend doing (RSN) is applying the Cygnus patches for embedded applications to gcc, and then porting the patched version to MSDOS. This might be better than the pooh compiler, but I don't know exactly what the pooh stuff does. So somebody, check it out and let us know please! Thanks for the rest of the comments, appreciated. From owner-diy_efi Wed Nov 30 09:44:34 1994 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA12836; Wed, 30 Nov 94 09:44:34 GMT Received: from aztec.co.za by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA12831; Wed, 30 Nov 94 04:44:19 -0500 Received: by aztec.co.za (Smail3.1.28.1 #5) id m0rClZI-000KdaC; Wed, 30 Nov 94 11:43 EET Date: Wed, 30 Nov 1994 11:43:19 +0200 (SAT) From: Wouter de Waal Subject: Re: comments on ignition timing To: DIY_EFI In-Reply-To: <199411292100.PAA15559@uahcs2.cs.uah.edu> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI On Tue, 29 Nov 1994, Ken King wrote: > >The thing sucks +- 950 liters/second @ 6000rpm, so it needs BIG air channels. > my math: ((950 litres/sec)*(60 sec/min)) / (6000 rev/min) =9.5 litres/rev! > however, 4 stroke engine takes 2 revolutions to complete, 19 litres or > 1178 cubic inches! yowsa! even pre-supposing a huffer/turbo doubling the > atmospheric pressure, that makes for a 580 cubic inches! mid-engined! if > i can get out there, can i get a ride!?! :) i'm presumming one of us muffed > the math... :) still, sounds like quite a car. a gt40? just curious... Wow! No that's not _quite_ what I meant... The thing is 1700cc _air cooled_, so it sucks air to keep cool. The maths is right I think, VW engineers did it, or measured it, or guessed it, or something... CU Wouter From owner-diy_efi Wed Nov 30 09:47:23 1994 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA12852; Wed, 30 Nov 94 09:47:23 GMT Received: from aztec.co.za by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA12847; Wed, 30 Nov 94 04:47:06 -0500 Received: by aztec.co.za (Smail3.1.28.1 #5) id m0rClc4-000KdaC; Wed, 30 Nov 94 11:46 EET Date: Wed, 30 Nov 1994 11:46:12 +0200 (SAT) From: Wouter de Waal Subject: Re: EFI68k update and gcc for host=msdos target=m68k-coff available now! To: DIY_EFI In-Reply-To: <9411300455.AA12275@coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI On Tue, 29 Nov 1994, John S Gwynne wrote: > (2) this was posted to one of the news groups: > > Subject: gcc for host=msdos target=m68k-coff available now! > > | I promised to write a message on this newsgroup when I had it available. > | > | There are now binaries (and the changed source files for anyone interested) > | available via anon. ftp. The binaries are gcc 2.6.0 for djgpp (msdos) host > | and 68000 family embedded target. The ftp address is: > | > | ftp.lysator.liu.se in directory /pub/msdos/gnu/gcc-dos-m68k > | Well I guess that answers one of my previous questions. And relieves me of the responsibility of getting what I have into usable format :-) Wouter From owner-diy_efi Wed Nov 30 11:11:05 1994 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA12952; Wed, 30 Nov 94 11:11:05 GMT Received: from kaiwan.kaiwan.com by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA12947; Wed, 30 Nov 94 06:11:01 -0500 Received: from kaiwan009.kaiwan.com (1300@kaiwan009.kaiwan.com [192.215.30.9]) by kaiwan.kaiwan.com (8.6.9/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA10102 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 1994 03:10:56 -0800 *** KAIWAN Internet Access *** Received: (from patriot@localhost) by kaiwan009.kaiwan.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) id DAA22393; Wed, 30 Nov 1994 03:10:59 -0800 *** KAIWAN Internet Access *** Date: Wed, 30 Nov 1994 03:10:58 -0800 (PST) From: Nate To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: gcc, 68K and ignition advance In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI On Tue, 29 Nov 1994, Wouter de Waal wrote: [in part] > * The air/fuel mix takes a constant _time_ to burn. But the time it has to burn changes with RPM doesn't it? > * Now obviously, you can't fire the plug before the inlet valve is closed. Why not? How far is it from the plug? Doesn't it take a while for pressure to get there? The valve doesn't "snap" on and off, it takes time to close too. > * And the next tricky point - vacuum advance. The vacuum is an indication > of engine load. But why is it a good thing to advance the timing when > the engine is loaded? Some one probably already jumped on this, but it's the venturi vacume, and it increases as you suck more air into the carb. If you could get two carbs off of some newer cars, you could control the mixture with your computer too! It might be real fun! From owner-diy_efi Wed Nov 30 14:05:59 1994 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA13318; Wed, 30 Nov 94 14:05:59 GMT Received: from eigen.ee.ualberta.ca by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA13313; Wed, 30 Nov 94 09:05:56 -0500 Message-Id: <9411301405.AA13313@coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu> Received: by eigen.ee.ualberta.ca (1.37.109.4/15.6) id AA07536; Wed, 30 Nov 94 07:05:53 -0700 From: Dale Ulan Subject: Re: gcc, 68K and ignition advance To: DIY_EFI Date: Wed, 30 Nov 94 7:05:52 MST In-Reply-To: ; from "Nate" at Nov 30, 94 3:10 am Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > > On Tue, 29 Nov 1994, Wouter de Waal wrote: > > Some one probably already jumped on this, but it's the venturi vacume, > and it increases as you suck more air into the carb. > > If you could get two carbs off of some newer cars, you could control the > mixture with your computer too! It might be real fun! > The VW is the only car I've seen that uses venturi vacuum to advance the spark. That's because they didn't put a centrifugal advance in their distributor. Actually, this isn't always true... some VW's did have a cent. advance. Everybody else uses a ported or manifold vacuum source to advance the spark under light loads, and they use a centrifugal advance to move the spark up at higher speeds. -Dale From owner-diy_efi Wed Nov 30 23:03:50 1994 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA16326; Wed, 30 Nov 94 23:03:50 GMT Received: from shiva.trl.OZ.AU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA16311; Wed, 30 Nov 94 18:03:41 -0500 Received: by shiva.trl.OZ.AU id AA18143 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for DIY_EFI@coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu); Thu, 1 Dec 1994 10:03:23 +1100 From: Craig Pugsley Message-Id: <199411302303.AA18143@shiva.trl.OZ.AU> Subject: Re: VW airflow (!) To: DIY_EFI Date: Thu, 1 Dec 1994 10:03:21 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: from "Wouter de Waal" at Nov 30, 94 11:32:03 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 721 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI > > what kind of engine can pull 950 liters/sec? > > VW 1700. No big deal. All aircooled VWs suck about that much air, the 950 > liters/sec at 6000rpm comes straight from the manual. You need a _lot_ of > air to keep these babies cool at high ambient temperatures. They probably draw 950 l/sec of *cooling* air, and I'm no mech.eng., but 6000 rpm = 100 revs/second. Therefore 950/100 = 9.5l/rotation. 9.5l/1.7l (*100%) = 550% V.E. Assuming the average V.E. for a worked normally aspirated engine is 75% (guesstimate), you might shove in that much air with a turbo pushing around 100 psi., and making about 700+ hp. I think there's a typo in the manual. 95.0 l/sec would be beleivable. Craig. (no flame intended) From owner-diy_efi Fri Dec 2 01:28:15 1994 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA21402; Fri, 2 Dec 94 01:28:15 GMT Received: from smtp.utexas.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA21397; Thu, 1 Dec 94 20:28:11 -0500 Received: from mail.utexas.edu (mail.utexas.edu [128.83.126.1]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with ESMTP id TAA28507 for ; Thu, 1 Dec 1994 19:26:12 -0600 From: BigBrother@MAIL.UTEXAS.EDU Received: from [128.83.128.21] (slip-6-5.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.128.21]) by mail.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id TAA10478 for ; Thu, 1 Dec 1994 19:23:21 -0600 Date: Thu, 1 Dec 1994 19:23:21 -0600 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: DIY_EFI Subject: support components for non-MCU controllers.. Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Question: If a true CPU is used in a controller ( like John's 68HC000 EFI board ) instead of a microcontroller, what compnents are needed? This seems quite difficult! I guess A/D converters aren't too hard to interface. And I've seen how the UART handles serial I/O But most importantly, how do you do real-time input/output interupt based events? We need real-time INPUTS for the crankshaft and cam position sensors, and real-time OUTPUTS for all injectors. Is there some special chip that works right on the bus to handle this? I know the 68hc11 has over 70,000 transistors in the IC/OC (input compare/output compare) section for the real time stuff. From owner-diy_efi Fri Dec 2 03:25:50 1994 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA22990; Fri, 2 Dec 94 03:25:50 GMT Received: from localhost.eng.ohio-state.edu by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA22979; Thu, 1 Dec 94 22:25:46 -0500 Message-Id: <9412020325.AA22979@coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu> To: DIY_EFI Subject: Re: support components for non-MCU controllers.. In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 01 Dec 94 19:23:21 CST." Date: Thu, 01 Dec 94 22:25:46 -0500 From: John S Gwynne Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI -------- In message , you write: | Question: | | If a true CPU is used in a controller ( like | John's 68HC000 EFI board ) instead of a | microcontroller, what compnents are needed? | | This seems quite difficult! No.... as you will see :) .... | But most importantly, how do you do | real-time input/output interrupt based events? As easily as any other chip. 68k, for example, has 192 user interrupt vectors; however, I run the EFI68k in "autovector" mode with only seven. There is nothing special about any of the microcontrollers other than having incorporated may of the commonly added devices like timers/pio's/UART's etc. If you want to see something neat, look at the 68302 which has a CPU32 core *and* a RISC communications processor. | We need real-time INPUTS for the crankshaft | and cam position sensors, and real-time OUTPUTS | for all injectors. | | Is there some special chip that works right | on the bus to handle this? Yes, the SSI67F687 was one such chip mentioned here on this list. Silicon Systems was more than happy to send me some of there propaganda. I also believe I could use a 82C54 with a GAL or two (... flywheel tooth counter and a PLL ...) to do this also. | I know the 68hc11 has over 70,000 transistors | in the IC/OC (input compare/output compare) | section for the real time stuff. Don't be impressed by transistor count; we aren't building AM radios in the early seventies here. General purpose programmable timers have been around for decades. That's how Motorola knew what to put in the 68HC11! If we were going to produce thousands of these EFI controllers, then the choice of processor would be important to reduce cost. As we (I) am only making one or two of these things, my choice is to make a controller generalized enough to be used in something else and to create a friendly software environment so I don't spend all my time writing software. I'm not vary concerned with the chip count. John S Gwynne Gwynne.1@osu.edu _______________________________________________________________________________ T h e O h i o - S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ElectroScience Laboratory, 1320 Kinnear Road, Columbus, Ohio 43212, USA Telephone: (614) 292-7981 * Fax: (614) 292-7292 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-diy_efi Fri Dec 2 08:45:03 1994 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA23608; Fri, 2 Dec 94 08:45:03 GMT Received: from shiva.trl.OZ.AU by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA23603; Fri, 2 Dec 94 03:44:58 -0500 Received: by shiva.trl.OZ.AU id AA19865 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for DIY_EFI@coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu); Fri, 2 Dec 1994 19:44:53 +1100 From: Craig Pugsley Message-Id: <199412020844.AA19865@shiva.trl.OZ.AU> Subject: A simple question.. To: DIY_EFI Date: Fri, 2 Dec 1994 19:44:52 +1100 (EST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1434 Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI Hi there, I've got a simple (dumb) question to finish off the week. With memory chips (Eprom / static ram), can you just tie the chip select lines to ground (!CS ---> active low inputs), presuming you only have one of each. IE will the outputs all be tristate unless it's reading or writing. I ask this as the chip I'm using (80C552, from 8051 family) outputs the same memory address range for the ROM and RAM, with 3 control lines: No. 1 --> Read the program memory (IE the EPROM, this signal is !PSEN) No. 2 --> Read the data memory (IE the RAM, " " " !RD) No. 3 --> Write to the data memory(IE the RAM, " " " !WR) IE, you can read location 1234 in EPROM with the !PSEN signal active, or " " " " " " RAM " " !RD " " __ For me to derive a CS input for each memory device would be a major pain, so do I need it or can I just always have them selected? Also, what do you need to do turn a RAM into a non-volatile? Just disable the !WR signal when voltage drops below 4.8ish volts, so the micro going haywire won't write over the ram? (Obviously with a battery / diode arrangement to keep power on the ram), OR would it just be easier to use a proprietary (eg DALLAS) nvram module, or maybe even flash eeprom? Assume data won't change much.(Maybe 2 or 3 writes max per day). Craig. pugsley@trl.oz.au From owner-diy_efi Fri Dec 2 11:03:09 1994 Received: by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) id AA23745; Fri, 2 Dec 94 11:03:09 GMT Received: from aztec.co.za by coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu via SMTP (920330.SGI/920502.SGI) for /usr/local/mail/majordomo-1.92/wrapper resend -p bulk -M 10000 -l Diy_Efi -f Diy_Efi-Owner -h coulomb.eng.ohio-state.edu -s -r DIY_EFI diy_efi-outgoing id AA23740; Fri, 2 Dec 94 06:02:59 -0500 Received: from wrm.aztec.co.za by aztec.co.za with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #5) id m0rDVkQ-000KdMC; Fri, 2 Dec 94 13:01 EET Message-Id: Date: Fri, 2 Dec 94 13:01 EET X-Sender: wrm@aztec.co.za Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: DIY_EFI From: wrm@aztec.co.za (Wouter de Waal) Subject: Re: A simple question.. X-Mailer: Sender: owner-diy_efi Precedence: bulk Reply-To: DIY_EFI [deleted] >I ask this as the chip I'm using (80C552, from 8051 family) outputs the >same memory address range for the ROM and RAM, with 3 control lines: > >No. 1 --> Read the program memory (IE the EPROM, this signal is !PSEN) >No. 2 --> Read the data memory (IE the RAM, " " " !RD) >No. 3 --> Write to the data memory(IE the RAM, " " " !WR) > >IE, you can read location 1234 in EPROM with the !PSEN signal active, >or " " " " " " RAM " " !RD " " > __ >For me to derive a CS input for each memory device would be a major >pain, so do I need it or can I just always have them selected? I've done this before, using 64K EPROM and 32K RAM. Enable the EPROM /CS and tie /PSEN to /OE. Use A15 for the RAM /CS, and /WR to R/W. Use A15 inverted for IO devices. > >Also, what do you need to do turn a RAM into a non-volatile? >Just disable the !WR signal when voltage drops below 4.8ish volts, so >the micro going haywire won't write over the ram? (Obviously with a >battery / diode arrangement to keep power on the ram), Did this too... (Same board). Used a 4001 or something similar to gate the write signal. The 4001 needs Vbatt too, of course... > >OR would it just be easier to use a proprietary (eg DALLAS) nvram module, >or maybe even flash eeprom? Assume data won't change much.(Maybe 2 or 3 >writes max per day). I can get hold of the circuitry to use flash. Using some skullduggery it's possible to execute out of the same flash that you can program (You run out of RAM while programming the FLASH). So you have the RAM for temporary data storage, and the flash for programs that can be downloaded. I don't think this is exactly what you want to do, though. The Dallas sockets are nice, since you get some with built in clocks. Pretty expensive locally, unfortunately. Wouter ________ / \ _____ _____ ___ ______ | Y Y \\__ \\__ \ / \/ ___/ Manie Steyn | | | / / __ \/ __ \ Y \___ \ msteyn@maxwell.ctech.ac.za |___|__| / (____ \____ \_| /____ > CCII Systems _______\/_______\/_____\/__\/_____\/__Cape_Town,_South-Africa___ |________________________________________________________________|