From b.shaw at comcast.net Thu Dec 14 20:00:54 2006 From: b.shaw at comcast.net (Bill Shaw) Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 21:00:54 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] J1850 (obdII) Message-ID: <458201D6.7060108@comcast.net> Talking to my Freescale contacts, there are no more microprocessors being built with J1850 communications modules built in. The 68hc58 BDLC (Byte Data Link Controller) stand-alone J1850 chip is obsolete and has been so for some time now. Motorola says J1850 is declining on popularity. Anyone know what they're replacing it with in new designs? Bill From jlg-sep at comcast.net Thu Dec 14 20:54:30 2006 From: jlg-sep at comcast.net (Scott Peitzsch) Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 21:54:30 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] J1850 (obdII) References: <458201D6.7060108@comcast.net> Message-ID: <000801c71ff4$58d39110$6501a8c0@HPDESKTOP> Most '06 and newer vehicles are now CAN bus compliant. You can now use your favorite USB-to-CAN or RS232-to-CAN converter for the hardware interface. -Scott > Talking to my Freescale contacts, there are no more microprocessors > being built with J1850 communications modules built in. The 68hc58 BDLC > (Byte Data Link Controller) stand-alone J1850 chip is obsolete and has > been so for some time now. Motorola says J1850 is declining on > popularity. Anyone know what they're replacing it with in new designs? > > Bill From benof1987 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 20 01:30:56 2006 From: benof1987 at hotmail.com (Ben P) Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 17:30:56 +1000 Subject: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. Message-ID: Hi people. Just another of my less crazy ideas, I was wondering what it would take to build a computer that can make a pulsewidth output based primarily on a voltage (ie air flow meter). The idea would be to have four or five tables: 1: Air-flow/Pulsewidth (with pulsewidth the output) 2: TPS/RPM (pulsewidth output, overrides table one while rpm AND throttle position are in range) 3: TPS change/Time (pulsewidth output, added to table one/two) 4: Temperature/Pulsewidth multiplier (simple warmup strategy, or a master rich/lean knob) 5: O2/Pulsewidth multiplier (simple closed loop under certain TPS and temp conditions) I can see this being a simple computer for converting naturally aspirated engines to single point efi, with a minimum of wiring required, primarily for economy. so how would you go about building something that can do this? My electronics ability is limited to assembling kits and understanding how simple components (transistors, capacitors, diodes etc) work, along with limited BASIC programming. My main interest is in how to program the EEPROM chip, and how to get the inputs to the correct format (ie frequency is easy enough to do, but converting a voltage into a digital signal is something I know nothing about). I am presuming that an EEPROM chip can make a pulsewidth output directly (with the aid of a transistor of course), is this correct? thanks Ben _________________________________________________________________ Advertisement: Fresh jobs daily. Stop waiting for the newspaper. Search Now! www.seek.com.au http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fninemsn%2Eseek%2Ecom%2Eau&_t=757263760&_r=Hotmail_EndText_Dec06&_m=EXT From benof1987 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 20 01:31:16 2006 From: benof1987 at hotmail.com (Ben P) Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 17:31:16 +1000 Subject: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. Message-ID: Hi people. Just another of my less crazy ideas, I was wondering what it would take to build a computer that can make a pulsewidth output based primarily on a voltage (ie air flow meter). The idea would be to have four or five tables: 1: Air-flow/Pulsewidth (with pulsewidth the output) 2: TPS/RPM (pulsewidth output, overrides table one while rpm AND throttle position are in range) 3: TPS change/Time (pulsewidth output, added to table one/two) 4: Temperature/Pulsewidth multiplier (simple warmup strategy, or a master rich/lean knob) 5: O2/Pulsewidth multiplier (simple closed loop under certain TPS and temp conditions) I can see this being a simple computer for converting naturally aspirated engines to single point efi, with a minimum of wiring required, primarily for economy. so how would you go about building something that can do this? My electronics ability is limited to assembling kits and understanding how simple components (transistors, capacitors, diodes etc) work, along with limited BASIC programming. My main interest is in how to program the EEPROM chip, and how to get the inputs to the correct format (ie frequency is easy enough to do, but converting a voltage into a digital signal is something I know nothing about). I am presuming that an EEPROM chip can make a pulsewidth output directly (with the aid of a transistor of course), is this correct? thanks Ben _________________________________________________________________ Advertisement: Meet Sexy Singles Today @ Lavalife - Click here http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Flavalife9%2Eninemsn%2Ecom%2Eau%2Fclickthru%2Fclickthru%2Eact%3Fid%3Dninemsn%26context%3Dan99%26locale%3Den%5FAU%26a%3D23769&_t=754951090&_r=endtext_lavalife_dec_meet&_m=EXT From kaizen__ at hotmail.com Wed Dec 20 01:44:32 2006 From: kaizen__ at hotmail.com (Bevan Weiss) Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 20:44:32 +1300 Subject: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4588E9E0.8040102@hotmail.com> Hi Ben, This certainly is most easily done using a microcontroller. If you obtain a micro with ADC inputs then you can easily convert from an analog voltage into the digital domain, the micro can then operate on this to provide a pulse width modulated (PWM) output signal (either via dedicated PWM hardware, or through a software PWM implementation). The main difficulty becomes conditioning the analog signal for input to the ADCs. Things like O2 sensors don't have a very straight forward signal path and so additional control is required for them. Most other sensors are relatively simple, being ratiometric to supply voltage, and hence only require an appropriate supply voltage to give a sufficient output signal. An EEPROM chip itself is capable of very little, it certainly can't produce a PWM output unless additional circuitry is used around it. I would strongly favour a microcontroller for this task. With micros like the ARM7TDMI readily available for very cheap this is not a difficult task. You would however want to pick up another programming language (C preferably, though some ARM assembler would likely be beneficial too). You would also want additional hardware development skills, but it would be an interesting project to learn on. If you're just after something plug and play, then you should look more towards the megasquirt range that Bruce et al designed. If you're just after the end product it's the way to go. If you're after the learning then doing it yourself would certainly be enlightening, however I would caution that it will never be as 'easy' as you first imagine. Regards, Bevan > Hi people. > > Just another of my less crazy ideas, I was wondering what it would > take to build a computer that can make a pulsewidth output based > primarily on a voltage (ie air flow meter). > > The idea would be to have four or five tables: > 1: Air-flow/Pulsewidth (with pulsewidth the output) > 2: TPS/RPM (pulsewidth output, overrides table one while rpm AND > throttle position are in range) > 3: TPS change/Time (pulsewidth output, added to table one/two) > 4: Temperature/Pulsewidth multiplier (simple warmup strategy, or a > master rich/lean knob) > 5: O2/Pulsewidth multiplier (simple closed loop under certain TPS and > temp conditions) > > I can see this being a simple computer for converting naturally > aspirated engines to single point efi, with a minimum of wiring > required, primarily for economy. > > so how would you go about building something that can do this? My > electronics ability is limited to assembling kits and understanding > how simple components (transistors, capacitors, diodes etc) work, > along with limited BASIC programming. My main interest is in how to > program the EEPROM chip, and how to get the inputs to the correct > format (ie frequency is easy enough to do, but converting a voltage > into a digital signal is something I know nothing about). I am > presuming that an EEPROM chip can make a pulsewidth output directly > (with the aid of a transistor of course), is this correct? > > thanks > Ben From niche at iinet.net.au Wed Dec 20 11:22:35 2006 From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike) Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 01:22:35 +0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. In-Reply-To: <4588E9E0.8040102@hotmail.com> References: <4588E9E0.8040102@hotmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20061221011752.02a38370@iinet.net.au>> If you really like bit banging and havent grown out of a challenge you can use an RC for the A/D convertor and interleave that with the PWM coding. An absolute minimum of components and really basic cpu but in reasonable case could make for a low end type EFI for around $20 or so in small qty... Have also been musing on doing a really low end basic design with some minimal comms but virtually inevitable featuritus has routinely found fertile ground in my management style, that and the donkey between multiple haystacks paradigm has me all in a tizzy ;) Regards mike At 03:44 PM 12/20/06, you wrote: >Hi Ben, > >This certainly is most easily done using a microcontroller. >If you obtain a micro with ADC inputs then you can easily convert from an analog voltage into the digital domain, the micro can then operate on this to provide a pulse width modulated (PWM) output signal (either via dedicated PWM hardware, or through a software PWM implementation). > >The main difficulty becomes conditioning the analog signal for input to the ADCs. Things like O2 sensors don't have a very straight forward signal path and so additional control is required for them. >Most other sensors are relatively simple, being ratiometric to supply voltage, and hence only require an appropriate supply voltage to give a sufficient output signal. > >An EEPROM chip itself is capable of very little, it certainly can't produce a PWM output unless additional circuitry is used around it. I would strongly favour a microcontroller for this task. > >With micros like the ARM7TDMI readily available for very cheap this is not a difficult task. > >You would however want to pick up another programming language (C preferably, though some ARM assembler would likely be beneficial too). >You would also want additional hardware development skills, but it would be an interesting project to learn on. > >If you're just after something plug and play, then you should look more towards the megasquirt range that Bruce et al designed. If you're just after the end product it's the way to go. If you're after the learning then doing it yourself would certainly be enlightening, however I would caution that it will never be as 'easy' as you first imagine. > > >Regards, >Bevan > > >>Hi people. >> >>Just another of my less crazy ideas, I was wondering what it would take to build a computer that can make a pulsewidth output based primarily on a voltage (ie air flow meter). >> >>The idea would be to have four or five tables: >>1: Air-flow/Pulsewidth (with pulsewidth the output) >>2: TPS/RPM (pulsewidth output, overrides table one while rpm AND throttle position are in range) >>3: TPS change/Time (pulsewidth output, added to table one/two) >>4: Temperature/Pulsewidth multiplier (simple warmup strategy, or a master rich/lean knob) >>5: O2/Pulsewidth multiplier (simple closed loop under certain TPS and temp conditions) >> >>I can see this being a simple computer for converting naturally aspirated engines to single point efi, with a minimum of wiring required, primarily for economy. >> >>so how would you go about building something that can do this? My electronics ability is limited to assembling kits and understanding how simple components (transistors, capacitors, diodes etc) work, along with limited BASIC programming. My main interest is in how to program the EEPROM chip, and how to get the inputs to the correct format (ie frequency is easy enough to do, but converting a voltage into a digital signal is something I know nothing about). I am presuming that an EEPROM chip can make a pulsewidth output directly (with the aid of a transistor of course), is this correct? >> >>thanks >>Ben > >_______________________________________________ >Diy_efi mailing list >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi Regards from Mike Massen Network Power Systems Lab 08 9444 8961 Mb 0438 048961 Perth, Western Australia * VL/VK GMH Commodore Fuse Rail that wont warp or melt, second generation in pilot trials ! * RB30 Skyline/Nissan/VL Milspec ignition drivers now in economy trials * Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars * Industrial grade PolyVinyliDeneChloride (PVDC Copolymer) in bulk, the best oxygen and water protective barrier you can find for circuit boards. Web site under construction http://niche.iinet.net.au From nospam at higginstribe.com Wed Dec 20 12:03:28 2006 From: nospam at higginstribe.com (Mark Higgins) Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 13:03:28 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. References: <4588E9E0.8040102@hotmail.com> Message-ID: <002201c72461$26dcca20$8000a8c0@swift> For something this simple an 8bit chip would far easier to work with than an ARM chip, especially for a beginner. An ARM7 would be overkill. PIC is the most popular and then probably the AVR for hobby electronics. There's plenty of Google info on these and include ADC's. I'd recommend the Zilog Z8 Encore! $40 development kit from Digikey or Mouser. Comes with the programming cable and a simple development/experiment board. Free toolset including C compiler and assembler, linker, in circuit debugger, and full development environment from Zilog. Mark Higgins ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bevan Weiss" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 2:44 AM Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. > Hi Ben, > > This certainly is most easily done using a microcontroller. > If you obtain a micro with ADC inputs then you can easily convert from an > analog voltage into the digital domain, the micro can then operate on this > to provide a pulse width modulated (PWM) output signal (either via > dedicated PWM hardware, or through a software PWM implementation). > > The main difficulty becomes conditioning the analog signal for input to > the ADCs. Things like O2 sensors don't have a very straight forward > signal path and so additional control is required for them. > Most other sensors are relatively simple, being ratiometric to supply > voltage, and hence only require an appropriate supply voltage to give a > sufficient output signal. > > An EEPROM chip itself is capable of very little, it certainly can't > produce a PWM output unless additional circuitry is used around it. I > would strongly favour a microcontroller for this task. > > With micros like the ARM7TDMI readily available for very cheap this is not > a difficult task. > > You would however want to pick up another programming language (C > preferably, though some ARM assembler would likely be beneficial too). > You would also want additional hardware development skills, but it would > be an interesting project to learn on. > > If you're just after something plug and play, then you should look more > towards the megasquirt range that Bruce et al designed. If you're just > after the end product it's the way to go. If you're after the learning > then doing it yourself would certainly be enlightening, however I would > caution that it will never be as 'easy' as you first imagine. > > > Regards, > Bevan > > >> Hi people. >> >> Just another of my less crazy ideas, I was wondering what it would take >> to build a computer that can make a pulsewidth output based primarily on >> a voltage (ie air flow meter). >> >> The idea would be to have four or five tables: >> 1: Air-flow/Pulsewidth (with pulsewidth the output) >> 2: TPS/RPM (pulsewidth output, overrides table one while rpm AND throttle >> position are in range) >> 3: TPS change/Time (pulsewidth output, added to table one/two) >> 4: Temperature/Pulsewidth multiplier (simple warmup strategy, or a master >> rich/lean knob) >> 5: O2/Pulsewidth multiplier (simple closed loop under certain TPS and >> temp conditions) >> >> I can see this being a simple computer for converting naturally aspirated >> engines to single point efi, with a minimum of wiring required, primarily >> for economy. >> >> so how would you go about building something that can do this? My >> electronics ability is limited to assembling kits and understanding how >> simple components (transistors, capacitors, diodes etc) work, along with >> limited BASIC programming. My main interest is in how to program the >> EEPROM chip, and how to get the inputs to the correct format (ie >> frequency is easy enough to do, but converting a voltage into a digital >> signal is something I know nothing about). I am presuming that an EEPROM >> chip can make a pulsewidth output directly (with the aid of a transistor >> of course), is this correct? >> >> thanks >> Ben > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From kaizen__ at hotmail.com Wed Dec 20 12:39:14 2006 From: kaizen__ at hotmail.com (Bevan Weiss) Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 07:39:14 +1300 Subject: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. In-Reply-To: <002201c72461$26dcca20$8000a8c0@swift> References: <4588E9E0.8040102@hotmail.com> <002201c72461$26dcca20$8000a8c0@swift> Message-ID: <45898352.2010905@hotmail.com> The PICs are horrible to program, unless you go to the 16 or 18 series and can use C, in which case you pretty much have to purchase a compiler. The AVR is ok, though expensive for what they are, and if you wanted a large FLASH for tables, then you start to fight the architecture just to address the memory. The MSP430 are good, but the higher end devices cost too much for what they have. I've never used a Zilog Z8 micro, however Olimex also have a US$40 development kit for the LPC2103 Philips ARM. The JTAG connector is separate and costs another US$20 but is usable on all ARMs. The ARMs also have available the GCC C compiler, which just can't be beaten for value for money. The ARMs aren't that difficult to program, and if you're just learning are no harder than an alternative micro. The ARM7s are also really really cheap, and you can generally get samples of them pretty easily. http://www.olimex.com have some good development boards. I'd still recommend the ARM, it's nice to not have to worry about FLASH size or algorithm complexity, which for a beginner is probably the best thing. A beginner can't approximate the compiled code size from lines of C code, nor can they truely comprehend the number of operations required for particular C constructs and so can't estimate the algorithm complexity in many situations. Bevan > For something this simple an 8bit chip would far easier to work with > than an ARM chip, especially for a beginner. An ARM7 would be overkill. > > PIC is the most popular and then probably the AVR for hobby > electronics. There's plenty of Google info on these and include > ADC's. I'd recommend the Zilog Z8 Encore! $40 development kit from > Digikey or Mouser. Comes with the programming cable and a simple > development/experiment board. Free toolset including C compiler and > assembler, linker, in circuit debugger, and full development > environment from Zilog. > > Mark Higgins > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bevan Weiss" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 2:44 AM > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. > > >> Hi Ben, >> >> This certainly is most easily done using a microcontroller. >> If you obtain a micro with ADC inputs then you can easily convert >> from an analog voltage into the digital domain, the micro can then >> operate on this to provide a pulse width modulated (PWM) output >> signal (either via dedicated PWM hardware, or through a software PWM >> implementation). >> >> The main difficulty becomes conditioning the analog signal for input >> to the ADCs. Things like O2 sensors don't have a very straight >> forward signal path and so additional control is required for them. >> Most other sensors are relatively simple, being ratiometric to supply >> voltage, and hence only require an appropriate supply voltage to give >> a sufficient output signal. >> >> An EEPROM chip itself is capable of very little, it certainly can't >> produce a PWM output unless additional circuitry is used around it. >> I would strongly favour a microcontroller for this task. >> >> With micros like the ARM7TDMI readily available for very cheap this >> is not a difficult task. >> >> You would however want to pick up another programming language (C >> preferably, though some ARM assembler would likely be beneficial >> too). You would also want additional hardware development skills, but >> it would be an interesting project to learn on. >> >> If you're just after something plug and play, then you should look >> more towards the megasquirt range that Bruce et al designed. If >> you're just after the end product it's the way to go. If you're >> after the learning then doing it yourself would certainly be >> enlightening, however I would caution that it will never be as 'easy' >> as you first imagine. >> >> >> Regards, >> Bevan >> >> >>> Hi people. >>> >>> Just another of my less crazy ideas, I was wondering what it would >>> take to build a computer that can make a pulsewidth output based >>> primarily on a voltage (ie air flow meter). >>> >>> The idea would be to have four or five tables: >>> 1: Air-flow/Pulsewidth (with pulsewidth the output) >>> 2: TPS/RPM (pulsewidth output, overrides table one while rpm AND >>> throttle position are in range) >>> 3: TPS change/Time (pulsewidth output, added to table one/two) >>> 4: Temperature/Pulsewidth multiplier (simple warmup strategy, or a >>> master rich/lean knob) >>> 5: O2/Pulsewidth multiplier (simple closed loop under certain TPS >>> and temp conditions) >>> >>> I can see this being a simple computer for converting naturally >>> aspirated engines to single point efi, with a minimum of wiring >>> required, primarily for economy. >>> >>> so how would you go about building something that can do this? My >>> electronics ability is limited to assembling kits and understanding >>> how simple components (transistors, capacitors, diodes etc) work, >>> along with limited BASIC programming. My main interest is in how to >>> program the EEPROM chip, and how to get the inputs to the correct >>> format (ie frequency is easy enough to do, but converting a voltage >>> into a digital signal is something I know nothing about). I am >>> presuming that an EEPROM chip can make a pulsewidth output directly >>> (with the aid of a transistor of course), is this correct? >>> >>> thanks >>> Ben >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Diy_efi mailing list >> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > From cwrxr at earthlink.net Wed Dec 20 13:17:11 2006 From: cwrxr at earthlink.net (Curtis Richards) Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 14:17:11 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style Message-ID: <45898C37.5080306@earthlink.net> Hi Ben, What you are outlining sounds like a simplified version of Megasquirt. Since Megasqurt has been built by many people for many different vehicles and has Megastim and Megatune software available for debugging and tuning the EFI aren't you 'reinventing the wheel'? I looked at using one of the $20 TI eZ430-F2013 ( complete system in a USB thumb drive with development software included ) for my !946 Jeep in order to be able to take the ECU with me and stop thieves from hot wiring it. Designing a board, writing the code and then writing a version of Megatune for the new system would be a LOT of work. Especially when you consider that you can buy an assembles Megasquirt on eBay for a few hundred dollars: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Megasquirt-v2-2-MS-engine-fuel-management-EFI-ECU_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ33553QQihZ004QQitemZ140065205754QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW Curt > Hi people. > > Just another of my less crazy ideas, I was wondering what it would > take to build a computer that can make a pulsewidth output based > primarily on a voltage (ie air flow meter). > > The idea would be to have four or five tables: > 1: Air-flow/Pulsewidth (with pulsewidth the output) > 2: TPS/RPM (pulsewidth output, overrides table one while rpm AND > throttle position are in range) > 3: TPS change/Time (pulsewidth output, added to table one/two) > 4: Temperature/Pulsewidth multiplier (simple warmup strategy, or a > master rich/lean knob) > 5: O2/Pulsewidth multiplier (simple closed loop under certain TPS and > temp conditions) > > I can see this being a simple computer for converting naturally > aspirated engines to single point efi, with a minimum of wiring > required, primarily for economy. > > so how would you go about building something that can do this? My > electronics ability is limited to assembling kits and understanding > how simple components (transistors, capacitors, diodes etc) work, > along with limited BASIC programming. My main interest is in how to > program the EEPROM chip, and how to get the inputs to the correct > format (ie frequency is easy enough to do, but converting a voltage > into a digital signal is something I know nothing about). I am > presuming that an EEPROM chip can make a pulsewidth output directly > (with the aid of a transistor of course), is this correct? > > thanks > Ben -- Curtis W Richards -- "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it." --Thomas Jefferson From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Wed Dec 20 15:45:24 2006 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 15:45:24 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bevan Weiss > Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 12:39 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. > > The PICs are horrible to program, unless you go to the 16 or > 18 series and can use C, in which case you pretty much have > to purchase a compiler. I'm using my last PIC processor right now. It's an 18 and I use C but I still don't like it. > The ARMs aren't that difficult to program, and if you're just > learning are no harder than an alternative micro. The ARM7s > are also really really cheap, and you can generally get > samples of them pretty easily. > http://www.olimex.com have some good development boards. I agree, go with the ARM :-) --steve From spyro at f2s.com Wed Dec 20 16:29:34 2006 From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton) Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 22:29:34 +0000 Subject: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. In-Reply-To: <45898352.2010905@hotmail.com> References: <4588E9E0.8040102@hotmail.com> <002201c72461$26dcca20$8000a8c0@swift> <45898352.2010905@hotmail.com> Message-ID: <4589B94E.5030704@f2s.com> Bevan Weiss wrote: > The ARMs aren't that difficult to program, You're not wrong. the arm instruction set is beautifully orthogonal and very easy to memorise, and they have nice, easy flat address space. plus low power, fast, and robust. From donegan at donegan.org Wed Dec 20 17:23:39 2006 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 15:23:39 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1166657019.1939.2.camel@wopr.donegan.org> My current interceptor board uses a PIC 16F876A - fairly fast and a lot of resources for a PIC. And being lazy on this design I'm just using MBASIC. However, since I am a C programmer and do have a couple of LPC2106 based dev boards my next design will use an ARM. If they were just available in non-surface mount packages I would be really happy - doing surface mount at home is a real challenge... On Wed, 2006-12-20 at 15:45 -0600, Steve Ravet wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org > > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bevan Weiss > > Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 12:39 PM > > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. > > > > The PICs are horrible to program, unless you go to the 16 or > > 18 series and can use C, in which case you pretty much have > > to purchase a compiler. > > I'm using my last PIC processor right now. It's an 18 and I use C but I > still don't like it. > > > The ARMs aren't that difficult to program, and if you're just > > learning are no harder than an alternative micro. The ARM7s > > are also really really cheap, and you can generally get > > samples of them pretty easily. > > http://www.olimex.com have some good development boards. > > I agree, go with the ARM :-) > > --steve > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From b.shaw at comcast.net Wed Dec 20 17:51:51 2006 From: b.shaw at comcast.net (Bill Shaw) Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 18:51:51 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. In-Reply-To: <1166657019.1939.2.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <1166657019.1939.2.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <4589CC97.7070003@comcast.net> Renesas has some nice small processors also. The dev environment is free if you can live with a 64k code size limit, and you flash & debug through a USB dongle you get with an eval board. I've stopped using PICs after a few dozen products and move to Renesas. And surface mount at home isn't so tough, you just have to get a different soldering iron :-) ... https://www.articulationllc.com/categoryNavigationDocument.hg?categoryId=6 Bill Steven P. Donegan wrote: > My current interceptor board uses a PIC 16F876A - fairly fast and a lot > of resources for a PIC. And being lazy on this design I'm just using > MBASIC. However, since I am a C programmer and do have a couple of > LPC2106 based dev boards my next design will use an ARM. If they were > just available in non-surface mount packages I would be really happy - > doing surface mount at home is a real challenge... > > On Wed, 2006-12-20 at 15:45 -0600, Steve Ravet wrote: > >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org >>> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bevan Weiss >>> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 12:39 PM >>> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >>> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. >>> >>> The PICs are horrible to program, unless you go to the 16 or >>> 18 series and can use C, in which case you pretty much have >>> to purchase a compiler. >>> >> I'm using my last PIC processor right now. It's an 18 and I use C but I >> still don't like it. >> >> >>> The ARMs aren't that difficult to program, and if you're just >>> learning are no harder than an alternative micro. The ARM7s >>> are also really really cheap, and you can generally get >>> samples of them pretty easily. >>> http://www.olimex.com have some good development boards. >>> >> I agree, go with the ARM :-) >> >> --steve >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Diy_efi mailing list >> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi >> > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > From donegan at donegan.org Wed Dec 20 20:03:53 2006 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 18:03:53 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. In-Reply-To: <4589CC97.7070003@comcast.net> References: <1166657019.1939.2.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <4589CC97.7070003@comcast.net> Message-ID: <1166666633.1939.7.camel@wopr.donegan.org> For the moment I'll forego the home reflow system :-) There are enough vendors out there (www.olimex.com) that will do that part of PCB assembly for you too cheaply to even consider doing it yourself. I expect my next project will be a megasquirt clone, using an LPC2106 (128K flash/64K RAM) with FreeRTOS as a real time multi-tasking OS :-) I already have that part working on an Olimex prototype board - adding the megasquirt equivalent I/O is actually the easy part. On Wed, 2006-12-20 at 18:51 -0500, Bill Shaw wrote: > Renesas has some nice small processors also. The dev environment is > free if you can live with a 64k code size limit, and you flash & debug > through a USB dongle you get with an eval board. I've stopped using > PICs after a few dozen products and move to Renesas. > > And surface mount at home isn't so tough, you just have to get a > different soldering iron :-) ... > > https://www.articulationllc.com/categoryNavigationDocument.hg?categoryId=6 > > Bill > > > Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > My current interceptor board uses a PIC 16F876A - fairly fast and a lot > > of resources for a PIC. And being lazy on this design I'm just using > > MBASIC. However, since I am a C programmer and do have a couple of > > LPC2106 based dev boards my next design will use an ARM. If they were > > just available in non-surface mount packages I would be really happy - > > doing surface mount at home is a real challenge... > > > > On Wed, 2006-12-20 at 15:45 -0600, Steve Ravet wrote: > > > >> > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org > >>> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bevan Weiss > >>> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 12:39 PM > >>> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > >>> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] EEPROM based efi compter, DIY style. > >>> > >>> The PICs are horrible to program, unless you go to the 16 or > >>> 18 series and can use C, in which case you pretty much have > >>> to purchase a compiler. > >>> > >> I'm using my last PIC processor right now. It's an 18 and I use C but I > >> still don't like it. > >> > >> > >>> The ARMs aren't that difficult to program, and if you're just > >>> learning are no harder than an alternative micro. The ARM7s > >>> are also really really cheap, and you can generally get > >>> samples of them pretty easily. > >>> http://www.olimex.com have some good development boards. > >>> > >> I agree, go with the ARM :-) > >> > >> --steve > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Diy_efi mailing list > >> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Diy_efi mailing list > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From philhunt at comcast.net Sat Dec 23 18:37:24 2006 From: philhunt at comcast.net (Phil) Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 19:37:24 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head Message-ID: <008401c726f3$aeb11de0$6401a8c0@juliephil> Bob Griffith/BHP Development, BMC "A" series tuner extroidinaire (bhpdev at juno.com) asks: how to solve mixture distribution problems of injecting siamesed ports of 1071cc A series motor w/rev range to 10,000rpm. We think you'd need a sequential sytem w/2injectors/runner. Anybody on this?? Phil Hunt From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com Sat Dec 23 19:07:08 2006 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 17:07:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head In-Reply-To: <008401c726f3$aeb11de0$6401a8c0@juliephil> Message-ID: <202530.68946.qm@web32210.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Phil wrote: > We think you'd need a sequential sytem > w/2injectors/runner. Anybody on this? That sounds reasonable. Is this the old MG inline 4? A lot would depend on port shape, I would think; if the split starts at the mating face for the manifold, it might take some trial and error regarding injection timing, but it should not be too much bother to get one injector per cylinder running without much "crosstalk" between cylinders. If the split is an inch or more from the mating surface inside the head, this will become much more challenging, and you may wish to machine the head so that the injectors will fire directly into the port(s) after the split. This may be techinically very difficult, and may also violate the class rules, depending on your racing org. | Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne) Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)| | "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it | | didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to. | | They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. | | The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun | | had come up again." -Kurt Vonnegut | | M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com - http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze | __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From philhunt at comcast.net Sun Dec 24 11:05:58 2006 From: philhunt at comcast.net (Phil) Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2006 12:05:58 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head References: <202530.68946.qm@web32210.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <009501c7277d$c81b3510$6401a8c0@juliephil> positioning injectors near split/valves impossible; injectors need to be in runners; we assume the problem lies in that the pairs of cyls (1&2/, 3&4) are adjacent in firing order followed by 2 rest periods, and that if injection was in that sequence it would resolve fuel distriibution anamly. Engine app is higly tuned short stroke Cooper "S" (sixties) BMC A series. phil ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adam Wade" To: Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 8:07 PM Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head > --- Phil wrote: > >> We think you'd need a sequential sytem >> w/2injectors/runner. Anybody on this? > > That sounds reasonable. Is this the old MG inline 4? > A lot would depend on port shape, I would think; if > the split starts at the mating face for the manifold, > it might take some trial and error regarding injection > timing, but it should not be too much bother to get > one injector per cylinder running without much > "crosstalk" between cylinders. If the split is an > inch or more from the mating surface inside the head, > this will become much more challenging, and you may > wish to machine the head so that the injectors will > fire directly into the port(s) after the split. This > may be techinically very difficult, and may also > violate the class rules, depending on your racing org. > > | Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne) Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)| > | "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it | > | didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to. | > | They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. | > | The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun | > | had come up again." -Kurt Vonnegut | > | M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com - http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze | > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From jean at jeanbelanger.net Sun Dec 24 11:25:13 2006 From: jean at jeanbelanger.net (Jean Belanger) Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2006 12:25:13 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head In-Reply-To: <009501c7277d$c81b3510$6401a8c0@juliephil> Message-ID: <00c301c72780$7a461960$6401a8c0@intel253> Phil, There's been quite a few discussions on that subject on the Megasquirt forum and the TurboMinis.co.uk forum. Marcel Chichak's web site (http://www.planet.eon.net/~chichm/efi/siamese.htm) goes into the details of the problem of injecting the A-series engine and his own failed attempt (http://www.planet.eon.net/~chichm/efi/efi.htm). You can also have a look at Rover's patent for the MPi Mini which shows how they went about implementing port fuel injection for the A-series engine. I am currently modifying the MS2 code to support the needs of the siamese port injection. I should have a first alpha version before the end of the year. If you're interested go to the TurboMinis.co.uk forum where I'll be making the announcement when the code is ready. Regards, Jean > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On > Behalf Of Phil > Sent: December 24, 2006 12:06 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Cc: bob griffith > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head > > positioning injectors near split/valves impossible; injectors need to be > in > runners; we assume the problem lies in that > the pairs of cyls (1&2/, 3&4) are adjacent in firing order followed by 2 > rest periods, and that if injection was in that sequence it would resolve > fuel distriibution anamly. Engine app is higly tuned short stroke Cooper > "S" > (sixties) BMC A series. phil > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Adam Wade" > To: > Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 8:07 PM > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head > > > > --- Phil wrote: > > > >> We think you'd need a sequential sytem > >> w/2injectors/runner. Anybody on this? > > > > That sounds reasonable. Is this the old MG inline 4? > > A lot would depend on port shape, I would think; if > > the split starts at the mating face for the manifold, > > it might take some trial and error regarding injection > > timing, but it should not be too much bother to get > > one injector per cylinder running without much > > "crosstalk" between cylinders. If the split is an > > inch or more from the mating surface inside the head, > > this will become much more challenging, and you may > > wish to machine the head so that the injectors will > > fire directly into the port(s) after the split. This > > may be techinically very difficult, and may also > > violate the class rules, depending on your racing org. > > > > | Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne) Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)| > > | "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it | > > | didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to. | > > | They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. | > > | The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun | > > | had come up again." -Kurt Vonnegut | > > | M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com - http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze | > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > Diy_efi mailing list > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/601 - Release Date: > 24/12/2006 > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.26/601 - Release Date: 24/12/2006 From clshore at yahoo.com Tue Dec 26 09:25:35 2006 From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 07:25:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head In-Reply-To: <00c301c72780$7a461960$6401a8c0@intel253> Message-ID: <5458.21932.qm@web35704.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I face a similar situation with 1147 Spitfire motors, siamesed intake ports. Here's my plan of attack: 1) Use 4 injectors, in sequential order, synchronized to crank TDC, and a camshaft sensor. 2) Choose injectors that have a narrow spray angle. 3) Choose the injector flow such that max fuel requirements for a single cylinder requires < 50% duty cycle. 4) Orient spray away from adjacent cylinder. Item 4 means that the injection axes will probably not be parallel, which complicates the plumbing somewhat; i.e. indiviual fuel hoses to each injector rather than a common rail. Item 3 means that minimum pulsewidth at idle may be an issue, so P&H injectors are probably needed. The injection scheduling algorithm may require variable timing with respect to RPM and/or throttle position to compensate for unequal airflow split. Carter Shore --- Jean Belanger wrote: > Phil, > > There's been quite a few discussions on that subject > on the Megasquirt forum > and the TurboMinis.co.uk forum. Marcel Chichak's web > site > (http://www.planet.eon.net/~chichm/efi/siamese.htm) > goes into the details of > the problem of injecting the A-series engine and his > own failed attempt > (http://www.planet.eon.net/~chichm/efi/efi.htm). You > can also have a look at > Rover's patent for the MPi Mini which shows how they > went about implementing > port fuel injection for the A-series engine. > > I am currently modifying the MS2 code to support the > needs of the siamese > port injection. I should have a first alpha version > before the end of the > year. If you're interested go to the > TurboMinis.co.uk forum where I'll be > making the announcement when the code is ready. > > Regards, > Jean > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From jean at jeanbelanger.net Tue Dec 26 11:44:42 2006 From: jean at jeanbelanger.net (Jean Belanger) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 12:44:42 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head In-Reply-To: <5458.21932.qm@web35704.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <009901c72915$88107360$6401a8c0@intel253> Carter, The problem with the way you want to do this is that you need injectors that flow enough fuel at < 25% duty cycle and not 50%. So your idle problem is even worse that you thought. You don't really need to have 2 injectors per port. If you only inject when the intake valves are open then the fuel will be carried to the right cylinder. This will simplify packaging and injector selection, and help idle. The scheduling algorithm will then be required to inject for each injector in a sequence such as pulse, pulse, wait, wait. In my first version this will even be simplified. You only _need_ to inject when the intake valve is open for cylinders 1 and 4 (assuming firing order 1342 as for A-series engine). Any fuel injected in the rest of the time will automatically go to cylinders 2 and 3 when their intake valve opens. So the injection sequence can then be for both ports: pulse, wait, pulse, wait, where the first pulse is timed with the open intake valve of cylinder 1 and the second pulse is timed with cylinder 4. The first pulse of the second port will inject on closed valves but will go to cylinder 3 when the valve opens and similarly for the second pulse to cylinder 2. This has the advantage of not requiring any cam sensor and could even be done with a single injector driver. Another advantage is that you don't need to worry about the injector speed because you have plenty of time between pulses for the injector opening time. Have a look at Marcel Chichak's web site for more details. This is not optimal because there will be differences in wall wetting between cylinders but it should be good enough to get things going and actually test how much non-optimal this is. A later version will have the "correct" sequence. I agree about the variable timing aspect. I'm planning to time the injection pulse with respect to the middle of the pulse and to have a timing table that varies timing with respect to RPM and load (either MAP or TPS). By the way, are you designing your own ECU or are you using an available one? Jean > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On > Behalf Of Carter Shore > Sent: December 26, 2006 10:26 AM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head > > I face a similar situation with 1147 Spitfire motors, > siamesed intake ports. > > Here's my plan of attack: > > 1) Use 4 injectors, in sequential order, synchronized > to crank TDC, and a camshaft sensor. > 2) Choose injectors that have a narrow spray angle. > 3) Choose the injector flow such that max fuel > requirements for a single cylinder requires < 50% duty > cycle. > 4) Orient spray away from adjacent cylinder. > > Item 4 means that the injection axes will probably not > be parallel, which complicates the plumbing somewhat; > i.e. indiviual fuel hoses to each injector rather than > a common rail. > > Item 3 means that minimum pulsewidth at idle may be an > issue, so P&H injectors are probably needed. > > The injection scheduling algorithm may require > variable timing with respect to RPM and/or throttle > position to compensate for unequal airflow split. > > Carter Shore > > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 26/12/2006 From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com Tue Dec 26 14:37:45 2006 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 12:37:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head In-Reply-To: <009901c72915$88107360$6401a8c0@intel253> Message-ID: <20061226203746.93720.qmail@web32202.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Jean Belanger wrote: > If you only inject when the intake valves are open > then the fuel will be carried to the right cylinder. I think you are forgetting that the intake openings of the cylinders sharing the siamesed port overlap each other, so unfortunately it's not nearly as simple as you appear to be claiming. You might be able to manage with a single injector, but I would wager it would be easier to implement with multiple injectors. In particular, as I understand it, you cannot inject fuel prior to the closing of the "inside" cylinder's intake valve and have any of that fuel end up in the "outside" cylinder -- for cylinders 2 and 3, you are limited to the time between the closing of the #2/3 intake valve and the closing of the #1/4 intake valve, which is a pretty short period, especially at higher rpms. In fact, you posted the link to the info on this just the other day! His site has been moved, though. I think a staged injector system might be in order here; in fact, it's possible that the optimal combination would be a single sat. drive injector for cylinders 2 and 3 (since you can inject fuel starting when the "outer" cylinder closes its intake valve, you have a decent amount of time to allow injection of sufficient fuel volume before the "inner" cylinder opens its intake valve, even with a smallish sat. drive injector), and staged dual injectors for cylinders 1 and 4, which would allow a honkin' big injector for higher-load running and a small injector to handle idle control. Timing the injection on the center pair of cylinders will be critical. | Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne) Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)| | "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it | | didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to. | | They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. | | The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun | | had come up again." -Kurt Vonnegut | | M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com - http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze | __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From jean at jeanbelanger.net Tue Dec 26 15:51:55 2006 From: jean at jeanbelanger.net (Jean Belanger) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 16:51:55 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head In-Reply-To: <20061226203746.93720.qmail@web32202.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00b201c72938$10f83d80$6401a8c0@intel253> --- Adam Wade wrote: > > --- Jean Belanger wrote: > > > If you only inject when the intake valves are open > > then the fuel will be carried to the right cylinder. > > I think you are forgetting that the intake openings of > the cylinders sharing the siamesed port overlap each > other, so unfortunately it's not nearly as simple as > you appear to be claiming. You might be able to > manage with a single injector, but I would wager it > would be easier to implement with multiple injectors. I was not forgetting that, I was just simplifying things for a general explanation. As for making it easier with multiple injectors, Rover did not seem to think so when they made the MPi Mini. They only use a single injector per port. You should have a look at the Rover patent because they describe 2 modes of operation. One mode is the obvious pulse on an open valve and the second is a single pulse which starts when the number 2 (or 3) cylinder valve is open and finishes when the number 1 (or 4) cylinder valve is open covering the overlap region. I don't know if the MPi engine uses them both but it seems the best way to go to high RPM and still have a reasonable size injector without worrying about the time needed to open and close the injector during the intake overlap. I assume that this mode also requires a cam which does not have an excessive amount of overlap between intake and exhaust otherwise you'd be injecting fuel out the exhaust. > In particular, as I understand it, you cannot inject > fuel prior to the closing of the "inside" cylinder's > intake valve and have any of that fuel end up in the > "outside" cylinder -- for cylinders 2 and 3, you are > limited to the time between the closing of the #2/3 > intake valve and the closing of the #1/4 intake valve, > which is a pretty short period, especially at higher > rpms. In fact, you posted the link to the info on > this just the other day! His site has been moved, > though. > http://www.shell-4000-rally.org/starchak/efi/siamese.htm This is true for discrete injection pulse per cylinder but with the mode described above it is no longer true if you time the pulse correctly (which has to be done anyway). During the intake overlap, some fuel will go to both cylinders but the amount to each should be similar from cycle to cycle. So you just need to time the injection pulse to get a constant AFR between the cylinder pair. > > I think a staged injector system might be in order > here; in fact, it's possible that the optimal > combination would be a single sat. drive injector for > cylinders 2 and 3 (since you can inject fuel starting > when the "outer" cylinder closes its intake valve, you > have a decent amount of time to allow injection of > sufficient fuel volume before the "inner" cylinder > opens its intake valve, even with a smallish sat. > drive injector), and staged dual injectors for > cylinders 1 and 4, which would allow a honkin' big > injector for higher-load running and a small injector > to handle idle control. And this is simpler than one injector per port? It seems quite complex for both hardware and software. I agree that staged injectors are a good way to have a better dynamic range and it's going to be an option with the code I'm writing. This is almost essential for turbo engines which require quite big injectors for top end power but would have problems idling with those. But for this staging you only need 2 injectors per port not the 3 you're suggesting (or is it 5 total?). > Timing the injection on the > center pair of cylinders will be critical. I agree that timing is critical but it's for the outside cylinders. They're the ones with the smaller injection window. Jean -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 26/12/2006 From clshore at yahoo.com Tue Dec 26 19:52:52 2006 From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 17:52:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head In-Reply-To: <009901c72915$88107360$6401a8c0@intel253> Message-ID: <57050.32916.qm@web35714.mail.mud.yahoo.com> On 12/26/2005 Jean Belanger wrote: > The problem with the way you want to do this is that > you need injectors that > flow enough fuel at < 25% duty cycle and not 50%. So > your idle problem is > even worse that you thought. Yah, that's true. One way to extend the dynamic range of the injectors at low RPM is to put fuel pressure under ECU control; the Ford return-less setup uses a fuel pressure sensor and PWM to the fuel pump, so this is do-able. > You don't really need to have 2 injectors per port. > If you only inject when > the intake valves are open then the fuel will be > carried to the right > cylinder. This will simplify packaging and injector > selection, and help > idle. The scheduling algorithm will then be required > to inject for each > injector in a sequence such as pulse, pulse, wait, > wait. I'm still up for 4 injectors, if only to preserve the option of tweaking 'per cylinder' as needed. I'm not subject to 'bean counter' constraints like the factory engineers. And I also don't need to worry about CAFE and other regulatory issues. > I agree about the variable timing aspect. I'm > planning to time the injection > pulse with respect to the middle of the pulse and to > have a timing table > that varies timing with respect to RPM and load > (either MAP or TPS). > > By the way, are you designing your own ECU or are > you using an available > one? The control hardware will be custom, and I have not settled on a platform yet. I'm considering a distributed architecture, where semi-independent nodes manage fuel and ignition on a 'per-cylinder' basis. A central node sends out high level status/commands, and serves as a collaboration node on common issues through a shared communication network. This gives me a lot of freedom in platform selection, as the timing and control issues relate to just one task, and autonomous operation is possible for 'limp-home' mode. By defining the ECU as an architectural interface and functional responsibilities, I can implement any node with the appropriate hardware/software to do the job, and change those out with newer/better ones as needed without throwing away the whole thing and starting over. Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From clshore at yahoo.com Tue Dec 26 19:53:49 2006 From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 17:53:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head In-Reply-To: <009901c72915$88107360$6401a8c0@intel253> Message-ID: <637581.23084.qm@web35710.mail.mud.yahoo.com> On 12/26/2005 Jean Belanger wrote: > The problem with the way you want to do this is that > you need injectors that > flow enough fuel at < 25% duty cycle and not 50%. So > your idle problem is > even worse that you thought. Yah, that's true. One way to extend the dynamic range of the injectors at low RPM is to put fuel pressure under ECU control; the Ford return-less setup uses a fuel pressure sensor and PWM to the fuel pump, so this is do-able. > You don't really need to have 2 injectors per port. > If you only inject when > the intake valves are open then the fuel will be > carried to the right > cylinder. This will simplify packaging and injector > selection, and help > idle. The scheduling algorithm will then be required > to inject for each > injector in a sequence such as pulse, pulse, wait, > wait. I'm still up for 4 injectors, if only to preserve the option of tweaking 'per cylinder' as needed. I'm not subject to 'bean counter' constraints like the factory engineers. And I also don't need to worry about CAFE and other regulatory issues. > I agree about the variable timing aspect. I'm > planning to time the injection > pulse with respect to the middle of the pulse and to > have a timing table > that varies timing with respect to RPM and load > (either MAP or TPS). > > By the way, are you designing your own ECU or are > you using an available > one? The control hardware will be custom, and I have not settled on a platform yet. I'm considering a distributed architecture, where semi-independent nodes manage fuel and ignition on a 'per-cylinder' basis. A central node sends out high level status/commands, and serves as a collaboration node on common issues through a shared communication network. This gives me a lot of freedom in platform selection, as the timing and control issues relate to just one task, and autonomous operation is possible for 'limp-home' mode. By defining the ECU as an architectural interface and functional responsibilities, I can implement any node with the appropriate hardware/software to do the job, and change those out with newer/better ones as needed without throwing away the whole thing and starting over. Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From ebuckler at icehouse.net Tue Dec 26 20:02:44 2006 From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 18:02:44 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] 5 port head? Message-ID: <005101c7295b$193e3b20$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Gotta ask why this is a 5 port head on a 4-cyl engine? I can understand siamesed intakes, 2 ports, and dualled-up exhausts, 2 more ports - but where does the 5th one come from? Ernie B. From airhawk at hawkgt.net Tue Dec 26 20:12:14 2006 From: airhawk at hawkgt.net (The AirHawk) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 20:12:14 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] 5 port head? References: <005101c7295b$193e3b20$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Message-ID: <002d01c7295c$741fa730$0302a8c0@MajorDisaster> Three Intake (one and four are each single port, two and three are siamesed) and Two exhaust ports (one and two, three and four). -Scott C. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ernest Buckler" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 8:02 PM Subject: [Diy_efi] 5 port head? Gotta ask why this is a 5 port head on a 4-cyl engine? I can understand siamesed intakes, 2 ports, and dualled-up exhausts, 2 more ports - but where does the 5th one come from? Ernie B. _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 12:23 PM From jean at jeanbelanger.net Tue Dec 26 20:27:14 2006 From: jean at jeanbelanger.net (Jean Belanger) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 21:27:14 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] 5 port head? In-Reply-To: <002d01c7295c$741fa730$0302a8c0@MajorDisaster> Message-ID: <00ee01c7295e$88ea2760$6401a8c0@intel253> Actually, it's the opposite. Two intake ports and 3 exhaust ports. It would have been simpler if it had been 3 intakes because port injection would have been trivial then. But it was designed decades before EFI (at least common modern EFI). Jean > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On > Behalf Of The AirHawk > Sent: December 26, 2006 9:12 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] 5 port head? > > Three Intake (one and four are each single port, two and three are > siamesed) and Two exhaust ports > (one and two, three and four). > > -Scott C. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ernest Buckler" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 8:02 PM > Subject: [Diy_efi] 5 port head? > > > Gotta ask why this is a 5 port head on a 4-cyl engine? I can understand > siamesed intakes, 2 ports, > and dualled-up exhausts, 2 more ports - but where does the 5th one come > from? > Ernie B. > _______________________________________________ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 26/12/2006 From clshore at yahoo.com Tue Dec 26 20:29:40 2006 From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 18:29:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] 5 port head? In-Reply-To: <005101c7295b$193e3b20$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Message-ID: <764296.36056.qm@web35715.mail.mud.yahoo.com> On 2006-12-26 Ernest Buckler wrote: > Gotta ask why this is a 5 port head on a 4-cyl > engine? I can understand siamesed intakes, 2 ports, > and dualled-up exhausts, 2 more ports - but where > does the 5th one come from? > Ernie B. Ernest, The two center exhaust ports are also siamesed, while the outer ones have their own ports. Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From airhawk at hawkgt.net Tue Dec 26 21:35:45 2006 From: airhawk at hawkgt.net (The AirHawk) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 21:35:45 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] 5 port head? References: <00ee01c7295e$88ea2760$6401a8c0@intel253> Message-ID: <001701c72968$1eca9900$0302a8c0@MajorDisaster> Doh! That's right - got it bass-ackwards! I've never worked on one, and only seen but a handful of the series A engines, and never paid all that much attention to them. The mistake comes from a failin' mem'ry here. The older I get, the stupider I get............ -Scott C. Actually, it's the opposite. Two intake ports and 3 exhaust ports. It would have been simpler if it had been 3 intakes because port injection would have been trivial then. But it was designed decades before EFI (at least common modern EFI). Jean From A6intruder at myo-p.com Tue Dec 26 21:47:29 2006 From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 22:47:29 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head In-Reply-To: <637581.23084.qm@web35710.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Here's a stupid question, Does it actually have to be sequential? We tend to focus on sequential since most autos use that but the OEM went to sequential primarily for emissions reasons at low RPM. What if you thought more along batch-fire lines. Put your injectors back up in the intake runner a few inches (no machining on the head itself this way) and then fire all the injectors every time an intake valve opens for 1/4 the PW (on 4-cylinder). Not claiming to have it all worked out but trying to keep minds open. Batch fire systems have worked great for a long time, especially at other than idle RPM. These engines probably won't know the difference between fuel injection or carburetion as long as they get the fuel they need. KISS! Good luck, interesting projects! LOVE to hear more about the Spitfire engine project! Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Carter Shore Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 8:54 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head On 12/26/2005 Jean Belanger wrote: > The problem with the way you want to do this is that > you need injectors that > flow enough fuel at < 25% duty cycle and not 50%. So > your idle problem is > even worse that you thought. Yah, that's true. One way to extend the dynamic range of the injectors at low RPM is to put fuel pressure under ECU control; the Ford return-less setup uses a fuel pressure sensor and PWM to the fuel pump, so this is do-able. > You don't really need to have 2 injectors per port. > If you only inject when > the intake valves are open then the fuel will be > carried to the right > cylinder. This will simplify packaging and injector > selection, and help > idle. The scheduling algorithm will then be required > to inject for each > injector in a sequence such as pulse, pulse, wait, > wait. I'm still up for 4 injectors, if only to preserve the option of tweaking 'per cylinder' as needed. I'm not subject to 'bean counter' constraints like the factory engineers. And I also don't need to worry about CAFE and other regulatory issues. > I agree about the variable timing aspect. I'm > planning to time the injection > pulse with respect to the middle of the pulse and to > have a timing table > that varies timing with respect to RPM and load > (either MAP or TPS). > > By the way, are you designing your own ECU or are > you using an available > one? The control hardware will be custom, and I have not settled on a platform yet. I'm considering a distributed architecture, where semi-independent nodes manage fuel and ignition on a 'per-cylinder' basis. A central node sends out high level status/commands, and serves as a collaboration node on common issues through a shared communication network. This gives me a lot of freedom in platform selection, as the timing and control issues relate to just one task, and autonomous operation is possible for 'limp-home' mode. By defining the ECU as an architectural interface and functional responsibilities, I can implement any node with the appropriate hardware/software to do the job, and change those out with newer/better ones as needed without throwing away the whole thing and starting over. Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From jean at jeanbelanger.net Tue Dec 26 22:35:18 2006 From: jean at jeanbelanger.net (Jean Belanger) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 23:35:18 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <010101c72970$6aba78f0$6401a8c0@intel253> Think about it this way: the two paired cylinders are 180 degrees apart so any fuel injected into the intake runner during 180 degrees is going to the outside cylinder and all the fuel injected during the remaining 540 degrees is going to the inner cylinder. This is actually not exact since the cam opens the intake valve for more than 180 degrees but at best the real split is worse than 1/3 and 2/3. There are 2 ways I see to overcome this. The first one is what has been discussed previously and is to time the injection pulses with the valve opening. The second is to move the injectors up the intake tract such that all injectors are seen by all cylinders so that any fuel injected can be ingested by the cylinder on its intake cycle. This is basically throttle body injection and is the other available Mini engine the SPi (single point injection). A lot of the custom fuel injected A-series engines that claim to have port injection actually have some variation of this second case but that?s a different story. If you see another method to make this work let us know because I'm sure there are quite a few people interested in it. This type of engine is, to my knowledge, the only one which requires sequential injection to make port injection work and not just for emission or other reasons. On the other hand port injection is probably not required and the engine will surely work very well with some sort of throttle body injection. By the way, I don't think anyone is planning to machine the head to put the injectors there. The port injection discussed places the injectors in the manifold as in other engine but as close to the head as possible for timing precision reasons. Jean > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On > Behalf Of Daniel Nicoson > Sent: December 26, 2006 10:47 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head > > Here's a stupid question, Does it actually have to be sequential? We tend > to focus on sequential since most autos use that but the OEM went to > sequential primarily for emissions reasons at low RPM. > > What if you thought more along batch-fire lines. Put your injectors back > up > in the intake runner a few inches (no machining on the head itself this > way) > and then fire all the injectors every time an intake valve opens for 1/4 > the > PW (on 4-cylinder). Not claiming to have it all worked out but trying to > keep minds open. Batch fire systems have worked great for a long time, > especially at other than idle RPM. > > These engines probably won't know the difference between fuel injection or > carburetion as long as they get the fuel they need. > > KISS! > > Good luck, interesting projects! LOVE to hear more about the Spitfire > engine project! > > Dan Nicoson > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 26/12/2006 From phil at injec.com Tue Dec 26 23:07:45 2006 From: phil at injec.com (Phil Lamovie) Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 16:07:45 +1100 Subject: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head References: <00b201c72938$10f83d80$6401a8c0@intel253> Message-ID: <4591FFA1.F6EE8C70@injec.com> It seems the time has come for some DIY direct injection work. Solution 1.0 Fit Direct injection to head 2.0 Use 1 per cylinder 3.0 Tune & drive Port injection has always been a kludge. Why use a method that is so unsuitable to the problem? phil From ebuckler at icehouse.net Tue Dec 26 23:49:38 2006 From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 21:49:38 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] 5 port head? References: <005101c7295b$193e3b20$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> <002d01c7295c$741fa730$0302a8c0@MajorDisaster> Message-ID: <006501c7297a$cbddad00$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> One and Four are seperate, Two & Four are siamesed...Aha, got it, thanks. Ernie B. From ebuckler at icehouse.net Tue Dec 26 23:54:26 2006 From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 21:54:26 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] 5 port head? References: <00ee01c7295e$88ea2760$6401a8c0@intel253> Message-ID: <006c01c7297b$775c1c70$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Top reply: Aha, AHA, double thanks. Center (2 & 3) exhausts are doubled, 1 & 4 ex. are singles, while 1 & 2 intakes are siamesed, 3 & 4 intakes are also siamesed. Now I can follow the discussion better. Ernie Actually, it's the opposite. Two intake ports and 3 exhaust ports. It would have been simpler if it had been 3 intakes because port injection would have been trivial then. But it was designed decades before EFI (at least common modern EFI). Jean > Three Intake (one and four are each single port, two and three are > siamesed) and Two exhaust ports > (one and two, three and four). > > -Scott C. From clshore at yahoo.com Wed Dec 27 08:26:19 2006 From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore) Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 06:26:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20061227142619.87319.qmail@web35703.mail.mud.yahoo.com> On 2006-12-26 Daniel Nicoson wrote: > Here's a stupid question, Does it actually have to > be sequential? We tend > to focus on sequential since most autos use that but > the OEM went to > sequential primarily for emissions reasons at low > RPM. > > What if you thought more along batch-fire lines. > Put your injectors back up > in the intake runner a few inches (no machining on > the head itself this way) > and then fire all the injectors every time an intake > valve opens for 1/4 the > PW (on 4-cylinder). Not claiming to have it all > worked out but trying to > keep minds open. Batch fire systems have worked > great for a long time, > especially at other than idle RPM. > > These engines probably won't know the difference > between fuel injection or > carburetion as long as they get the fuel they need. > Using TBI would be a lot simpler, but there are still issues. Ideally, the intake manifold would be filled with a homogeneous air/fuel mixture, as in a properly set up carb system. The issues of timing, etc. would go away. But since EFI controls mixture by duty cycle, even with TBI, there will be regions of rich and lean inside the manifold. One solution is to deliberately introduce turbulence, but that will work against VE at WOT. Another scheme is to increase the pulse frequency, so that each intake charge to a given cylinder will consist of many small injection events instead of a few larger ones. Another issue to consider with the Spitfire dual carb manifold and TBI is that the 'balance tube' between the main intake runners actually draws charge accross from both carbs (throttle bodies) during intake events. So attempts to synchronize the injection events may need to consider that flow. I've also considered putting the injectors into the head, rather than the manifold. This is do-able on a Spitfire, not sure about a BMC-A. Carter __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From buckwill33 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 27 11:24:33 2006 From: buckwill33 at hotmail.com (Buck Williams) Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 10:24:33 -0700 Subject: [Diy_efi] 5 port head? Message-ID: hi thiss is sbuck,,, what is the engineee nad what is the firinggg order,?? > From: ebuckler at icehouse.net> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] 5 port head?> Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 21:54:26 -0800> > Top reply:> Aha, AHA, double thanks. Center (2 & 3) exhausts are doubled, 1 & 4 ex. are > singles, while 1 & 2 intakes are siamesed, 3 & 4 intakes are also siamesed. > Now I can follow the discussion better.> Ernie> > Actually, it's the opposite. Two intake ports and 3 exhaust ports. It would> have been simpler if it had been 3 intakes because port injection would have> been trivial then. But it was designed decades before EFI (at least common> modern EFI).> > Jean> > > Three Intake (one and four are each single port, two and three are> > siamesed) and Two exhaust ports> > (one and two, three and four).> >> > -Scott C.> > _______________________________________________> Diy_efi mailing list> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From clshore at yahoo.com Wed Dec 27 14:16:20 2006 From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore) Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 12:16:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] 5 port head? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <585426.74117.qm@web35707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> On 2006-12-27 Buck Williams wrote: > hi thiss is sbuck,,, what is the engineee nad what > is the firinggg order,?? It's the BMC-A motor, 4 cyl OHV, 850-1300 cc, firing order is 1342. Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From buckwill33 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 27 14:57:27 2006 From: buckwill33 at hotmail.com (Buck Williams) Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 13:57:27 -0700 Subject: [Diy_efi] 5 port head? Message-ID: reasonnn i askedd is thatt since the centerr intakee is shared dual for2 and three that the injector sequeance should be simple,there are only two firing orderss for a4s ,1342 and 1243 in any case the firing an intake sequaence for the center set cylinders are widely sepearateddd for intake i events,, so there could hardly be any cross fuelling or puddlaing of fuel, for 4 injector systemm the fuel and airstrream is goaing to gott to the cylinder ingesting at that particular time,, seemsss u shosuld be able to add two injectors in the intake stream for the centerr paired cylinder sets with each injector firiang at its appropriaate cylinder without the added problems of probrammingg for double the time firinag for just one injector for two cylinders, the airstreeam is going to the cylinder drawaing at athtqt time, years ago i put mechanical bosch injection pump on old rd450 gash internationalll six with siamesed ports, i ran out of fuell for ;the 450 cubes, did not have enoaugh injection, but it ran fine and could find no evidenace of puddling, buck, i believeee i would plumb and injectr the enginee as if the center intakeee duct were a cylinder port with two injectorsss and i also believe the engine > Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 12:16:20 -0800> From: clshore at yahoo.com> Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] 5 port head?> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org> > On 2006-12-27 Buck Williams wrote:> > > hi thiss is sbuck,,, what is the engineee nad what> > is the firinggg order,??> > It's the BMC-A motor, 4 cyl OHV, 850-1300 cc, > firing order is 1342.> > Carter Shore> > > > __________________________________________________> Do You Yahoo!?> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________> Diy_efi mailing list> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From brian.j.geddes at intel.com Wed Dec 27 14:59:10 2006 From: brian.j.geddes at intel.com (Geddes, Brian J) Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 12:59:10 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? Message-ID: <25E9841AB6E6D742B7388832BBACDE9501AEB9F5@fmsmsx417.amr.corp.intel.com> Hey all - I'm looking for a source for inexpensive pressure transducers. I've seen lots in the $100-$150 range, but I'm willing to bet that they can be had for significantly cheaper. :) 1/8 or 1/4 NPT fitting, 5VDC (or 12VDC) power, 0-5 VDC output. Need to tolerate oil/fuel. 100 or 150 PSI would be perfect. Any ideas? Thanks, - Brian Geddes From A6intruder at myo-p.com Wed Dec 27 15:08:06 2006 From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 16:08:06 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? In-Reply-To: <25E9841AB6E6D742B7388832BBACDE9501AEB9F5@fmsmsx417.amr.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: I think the oil pressure "sender" on my Mustang costs $6.00 at NAPA. It's really just a variable resistor. I'm not sure what the response curve is but it shouldn't be too hard to figure out if you have a pressure gauge and a pressure source. Of course your control circuit would have to interpret this variable resistance to be of use. Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Geddes, Brian J Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:59 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? Hey all - I'm looking for a source for inexpensive pressure transducers. I've seen lots in the $100-$150 range, but I'm willing to bet that they can be had for significantly cheaper. :) 1/8 or 1/4 NPT fitting, 5VDC (or 12VDC) power, 0-5 VDC output. Need to tolerate oil/fuel. 100 or 150 PSI would be perfect. Any ideas? Thanks, - Brian Geddes _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From davida1 at hiwaay.net Wed Dec 27 15:18:47 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 15:18:47 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? References: Message-ID: <006c01c729fc$a96b08d0$0600a8c0@yancey.com> I 've used a "sender" for a transducer before and it worked. But only after I carefully logged the resistance versus pressure curve and programmed a PIC to interpolate this table into a linear "transducer-like" output. Still cost less than a real transducer but what a PITA just to save a few $. The curve on these elcheapo senders is horrible. Repeatability sucks, and they degrade over time. The sensing element is a bourdon tube with a copper "arm" rubbing on nichrome wire. It wears noticabley in a few hundred hours of use. The following company supplies the OEM I work for with transducers that are not too bad expensive and are a very nice piece. We use the 300 series in a pressure/ vac; 100 PSIa, 150PSIa, 1000PSIa and 10,000 PSIa versions. I've 'copped' a couple used ones and have great success datalogging with them while tuning my engine. They even sell online. http://www.meas-spec.com/myMeas/default/index.asp Hope this saves you some time! David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Nicoson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:08 PM Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? >I think the oil pressure "sender" on my Mustang costs $6.00 at NAPA. It's > really just a variable resistor. I'm not sure what the response curve is > but it shouldn't be too hard to figure out if you have a pressure gauge > and > a pressure source. Of course your control circuit would have to interpret > this variable resistance to be of use. > > Dan Nicoson > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Geddes, Brian J > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:59 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > Hey all - > > I'm looking for a source for inexpensive pressure transducers. I've > seen lots in the $100-$150 range, but I'm willing to bet that they can > be had for significantly cheaper. :) > > 1/8 or 1/4 NPT fitting, 5VDC (or 12VDC) power, 0-5 VDC output. Need to > tolerate oil/fuel. 100 or 150 PSI would be perfect. > > Any ideas? > > Thanks, > - Brian Geddes > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > From A6intruder at myo-p.com Wed Dec 27 15:36:08 2006 From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 16:36:08 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? In-Reply-To: <006c01c729fc$a96b08d0$0600a8c0@yancey.com> Message-ID: David, Great info on the OEM sensors. I didn't know they were that crappy (tech term). I looked at the link you gave. Nice site, they actually give good info on the products. Thanks, Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of David Allen Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 4:19 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I 've used a "sender" for a transducer before and it worked. But only after I carefully logged the resistance versus pressure curve and programmed a PIC to interpolate this table into a linear "transducer-like" output. Still cost less than a real transducer but what a PITA just to save a few $. The curve on these elcheapo senders is horrible. Repeatability sucks, and they degrade over time. The sensing element is a bourdon tube with a copper "arm" rubbing on nichrome wire. It wears noticabley in a few hundred hours of use. The following company supplies the OEM I work for with transducers that are not too bad expensive and are a very nice piece. We use the 300 series in a pressure/ vac; 100 PSIa, 150PSIa, 1000PSIa and 10,000 PSIa versions. I've 'copped' a couple used ones and have great success datalogging with them while tuning my engine. They even sell online. http://www.meas-spec.com/myMeas/default/index.asp Hope this saves you some time! David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Nicoson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:08 PM Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? >I think the oil pressure "sender" on my Mustang costs $6.00 at NAPA. It's > really just a variable resistor. I'm not sure what the response curve is > but it shouldn't be too hard to figure out if you have a pressure gauge > and > a pressure source. Of course your control circuit would have to interpret > this variable resistance to be of use. > > Dan Nicoson > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Geddes, Brian J > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:59 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > Hey all - > > I'm looking for a source for inexpensive pressure transducers. I've > seen lots in the $100-$150 range, but I'm willing to bet that they can > be had for significantly cheaper. :) > > 1/8 or 1/4 NPT fitting, 5VDC (or 12VDC) power, 0-5 VDC output. Need to > tolerate oil/fuel. 100 or 150 PSI would be perfect. > > Any ideas? > > Thanks, > - Brian Geddes > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From davida1 at hiwaay.net Wed Dec 27 15:58:04 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 15:58:04 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? References: Message-ID: <007501c72a02$178c2470$0600a8c0@yancey.com> Yeah, the good info is what sells them. Each sensor comes with a datasheet packaged with it. The datasheet even lists the Metripack connector that mates to the transducer. One more reason I hate mechanical senders- I thought I had lost the engine in my Nova, but it was just a bad oil pressure sender. All the nichrome wire had gotten untangled in the housing and the arm that moved against it was no longer making good contact. It would show some pressure but at higher pressures it would fluctuate and fall, just like a damaged engine with excessive bearing clearances loosing pressure at high RPM!!! I've got a hydraulic quick-disconnect test-port on the fuel pressure system on my turbo car. I can snap one of these transducers onto this port and plug it into my TE datalogger for making sure I'm not dropping pressure under boost or anything. Plus it is accurate for setting the base fuel pressure. Thanks, David > David, > > Great info on the OEM sensors. I didn't know they were that crappy (tech > term). I looked at the link you gave. Nice site, they actually give good > info on the products. > > Thanks, > > Dan Nicoson > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of David Allen > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 4:19 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > I 've used a "sender" for a transducer before and it worked. But only > after I carefully logged the resistance versus pressure curve and > programmed > a PIC to interpolate this table into a linear "transducer-like" output. > Still cost less than a real transducer but what a PITA just to save a few > $. The curve on these elcheapo senders is horrible. Repeatability sucks, > and they degrade over time. The sensing element is a bourdon tube with a > copper "arm" rubbing on nichrome wire. It wears noticabley in a few > hundred > hours of use. > The following company supplies the OEM I work for with transducers that > are not too bad expensive and are a very nice piece. We use the 300 series > in a pressure/ vac; 100 PSIa, 150PSIa, 1000PSIa and 10,000 PSIa versions. > I've 'copped' a couple used ones and have great success datalogging with > them while tuning my engine. > They even sell online. > http://www.meas-spec.com/myMeas/default/index.asp > Hope this saves you some time! > David > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Daniel Nicoson" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:08 PM > Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > >>I think the oil pressure "sender" on my Mustang costs $6.00 at NAPA. It's >> really just a variable resistor. I'm not sure what the response curve is >> but it shouldn't be too hard to figure out if you have a pressure gauge >> and >> a pressure source. Of course your control circuit would have to >> interpret >> this variable resistance to be of use. >> >> Dan Nicoson >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On >> Behalf Of Geddes, Brian J >> Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:59 PM >> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >> Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? >> >> Hey all - >> >> I'm looking for a source for inexpensive pressure transducers. I've >> seen lots in the $100-$150 range, but I'm willing to bet that they can >> be had for significantly cheaper. :) >> >> 1/8 or 1/4 NPT fitting, 5VDC (or 12VDC) power, 0-5 VDC output. Need to >> tolerate oil/fuel. 100 or 150 PSI would be perfect. >> >> Any ideas? >> >> Thanks, >> - Brian Geddes >> _______________________________________________ >> Diy_efi mailing list >> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Diy_efi mailing list >> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi >> > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > From clair.davis at charter.net Wed Dec 27 22:50:08 2006 From: clair.davis at charter.net (Clair Davis) Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 22:50:08 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] TPS Specs / PN's Message-ID: <004701c72a3b$a684b320$6501a8c0@davis> I've run in to an issue with my TPS that may become a problem in the near future. I'm using a Mopar Performance billet 4V 1000cfm throttle body that came with Mopar-type sensors (MAP, IAC, TPS) as it is the "off-road" replacement for the Magnum V8 throttle body. Although the MAP and IAC seem to be pretty straight forward, the TPS is both non-adjustable, and doesn't seem to reach full voltage at WOT. By relocating the mounting holes, I was able to achieve 0.5V at idle, but I can now only get about 3.8V at WOT. I'm not sure how the Magnum trucks dealt with this issue, but I don't think my '7730 is going to be happy as-is. I suspect that I may be able to program around the WOT voltage limit, but I'd prefer not to if at all possible. This now brings me to my question... is there a resource out there that discusses the various options for TPS's? I'd like to see if there is something out there that will give +/- 5.0V at WOT and still give 0.5V at idle, AND be correctly "handed" for my application. I would estimate that the throttle shafts turn about 80-85% of the GM TB I have in the garage when at WOT. I've got a catalog on TPS units made by Tomco.com, but it doesn't get in to the guts of the specs, just PN's and ID photos. Any help greatly appreciated, especially now that the critter is running. Idles OK (needs IAC tweaking), throttle response is nice (not moving yet), but I want to make sure it KNOWS that it's at WOT when it is. Clair 69 Valiant 340/'7730 FTWTX From niche at iinet.net.au Thu Dec 28 00:55:26 2006 From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike) Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 14:55:26 +0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] TPS Specs / PN's In-Reply-To: <004701c72a3b$a684b320$6501a8c0@davis> References: <004701c72a3b$a684b320$6501a8c0@davis> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20061228145345.027236a0@iinet.net.au>> an LM 324 op amp would do it, few app notes on that around the web, its a 14 PIN ic with 4 x opamps, select resistors for multiply by 5/3.8 and use one as buffer amp at front end for 1:1, that and a zener regulator would be all you need... cheers mike At 12:50 PM 12/28/06, you wrote: >I've run in to an issue with my TPS that may become a problem in the near >future. I'm using a Mopar Performance billet 4V 1000cfm throttle body that >came with Mopar-type sensors (MAP, IAC, TPS) as it is the "off-road" >replacement for the Magnum V8 throttle body. Although the MAP and IAC seem >to be pretty straight forward, the TPS is both non-adjustable, and doesn't >seem to reach full voltage at WOT. By relocating the mounting holes, I was >able to achieve 0.5V at idle, but I can now only get about 3.8V at WOT. I'm >not sure how the Magnum trucks dealt with this issue, but I don't think my >'7730 is going to be happy as-is. > >I suspect that I may be able to program around the WOT voltage limit, but >I'd prefer not to if at all possible. This now brings me to my question... >is there a resource out there that discusses the various options for TPS's? >I'd like to see if there is something out there that will give +/- 5.0V at >WOT and still give 0.5V at idle, AND be correctly "handed" for my >application. I would estimate that the throttle shafts turn about 80-85% of >the GM TB I have in the garage when at WOT. I've got a catalog on TPS units >made by Tomco.com, but it doesn't get in to the guts of the specs, just PN's >and ID photos. > >Any help greatly appreciated, especially now that the critter is running. >Idles OK (needs IAC tweaking), throttle response is nice (not moving yet), >but I want to make sure it KNOWS that it's at WOT when it is. > >Clair >69 Valiant 340/'7730 >FTWTX > > >_______________________________________________ >Diy_efi mailing list >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From bpatten at centurytel.net Thu Dec 28 23:34:38 2006 From: bpatten at centurytel.net (Brendan Patten) Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 23:34:38 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000201c72b0b$0ba11850$0b00a8c0@p42000> I've got source to pressure transducers from Chrysler 45RFE transmissions. They mount external to the trans. I work for company that rebuilds them, and every unit gets a new one... Many are probably fine. The trans runs from 35-200 psi at times..so It should have broad range. Let me know if you are interested. Just pay shipping. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Nicoson Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:36 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? David, Great info on the OEM sensors. I didn't know they were that crappy (tech term). I looked at the link you gave. Nice site, they actually give good info on the products. Thanks, Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of David Allen Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 4:19 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I 've used a "sender" for a transducer before and it worked. But only after I carefully logged the resistance versus pressure curve and programmed a PIC to interpolate this table into a linear "transducer-like" output. Still cost less than a real transducer but what a PITA just to save a few $. The curve on these elcheapo senders is horrible. Repeatability sucks, and they degrade over time. The sensing element is a bourdon tube with a copper "arm" rubbing on nichrome wire. It wears noticabley in a few hundred hours of use. The following company supplies the OEM I work for with transducers that are not too bad expensive and are a very nice piece. We use the 300 series in a pressure/ vac; 100 PSIa, 150PSIa, 1000PSIa and 10,000 PSIa versions. I've 'copped' a couple used ones and have great success datalogging with them while tuning my engine. They even sell online. http://www.meas-spec.com/myMeas/default/index.asp Hope this saves you some time! David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Nicoson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:08 PM Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? >I think the oil pressure "sender" on my Mustang costs $6.00 at NAPA. It's > really just a variable resistor. I'm not sure what the response curve is > but it shouldn't be too hard to figure out if you have a pressure gauge > and > a pressure source. Of course your control circuit would have to interpret > this variable resistance to be of use. > > Dan Nicoson > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Geddes, Brian J > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:59 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > Hey all - > > I'm looking for a source for inexpensive pressure transducers. I've > seen lots in the $100-$150 range, but I'm willing to bet that they can > be had for significantly cheaper. :) > > 1/8 or 1/4 NPT fitting, 5VDC (or 12VDC) power, 0-5 VDC output. Need to > tolerate oil/fuel. 100 or 150 PSI would be perfect. > > Any ideas? > > Thanks, > - Brian Geddes > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From don.broadus at exeloncorp.com Fri Dec 29 08:39:10 2006 From: don.broadus at exeloncorp.com (don.broadus at exeloncorp.com) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 08:39:10 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? Message-ID: Is that trans the front drive transaxle for the Concord ? That transaxle is the most compact I've seen and wondered could you run it with just a trans module or does it run from the car PCM ? -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Brendan Patten Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 11:35 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I've got source to pressure transducers from Chrysler 45RFE transmissions. They mount external to the trans. I work for company that rebuilds them, and every unit gets a new one... Many are probably fine. The trans runs from 35-200 psi at times..so It should have broad range. Let me know if you are interested. Just pay shipping. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Nicoson Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:36 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? David, Great info on the OEM sensors. I didn't know they were that crappy (tech term). I looked at the link you gave. Nice site, they actually give good info on the products. Thanks, Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of David Allen Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 4:19 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I 've used a "sender" for a transducer before and it worked. But only after I carefully logged the resistance versus pressure curve and programmed a PIC to interpolate this table into a linear "transducer-like" output. Still cost less than a real transducer but what a PITA just to save a few $. The curve on these elcheapo senders is horrible. Repeatability sucks, and they degrade over time. The sensing element is a bourdon tube with a copper "arm" rubbing on nichrome wire. It wears noticabley in a few hundred hours of use. The following company supplies the OEM I work for with transducers that are not too bad expensive and are a very nice piece. We use the 300 series in a pressure/ vac; 100 PSIa, 150PSIa, 1000PSIa and 10,000 PSIa versions. I've 'copped' a couple used ones and have great success datalogging with them while tuning my engine. They even sell online. http://www.meas-spec.com/myMeas/default/index.asp Hope this saves you some time! David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Nicoson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:08 PM Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? >I think the oil pressure "sender" on my Mustang costs $6.00 at NAPA. It's > really just a variable resistor. I'm not sure what the response curve is > but it shouldn't be too hard to figure out if you have a pressure gauge > and > a pressure source. Of course your control circuit would have to interpret > this variable resistance to be of use. > > Dan Nicoson > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Geddes, Brian J > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:59 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > Hey all - > > I'm looking for a source for inexpensive pressure transducers. I've > seen lots in the $100-$150 range, but I'm willing to bet that they can > be had for significantly cheaper. :) > > 1/8 or 1/4 NPT fitting, 5VDC (or 12VDC) power, 0-5 VDC output. Need to > tolerate oil/fuel. 100 or 150 PSI would be perfect. > > Any ideas? > > Thanks, > - Brian Geddes > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi ----------------------------------------- ************************************************** This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon Corporation family of Companies. This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. Thank You. ************************************************** From congenialgene at msn.com Fri Dec 29 09:25:35 2006 From: congenialgene at msn.com (Eugene Terryll) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 07:25:35 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? Message-ID: please delete me from this list tnx e terryll ----- Original Message ----- From: don.broadus at exeloncorp.com Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 6:40 AM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? Is that trans the front drive transaxle for the Concord ? That transaxle is the most compact I've seen and wondered could you run it with just a trans module or does it run from the car PCM ? -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Brendan Patten Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 11:35 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I've got source to pressure transducers from Chrysler 45RFE transmissions. They mount external to the trans. I work for company that rebuilds them, and every unit gets a new one... Many are probably fine. The trans runs from 35-200 psi at times..so It should have broad range. Let me know if you are interested. Just pay shipping. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Nicoson Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:36 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? David, Great info on the OEM sensors. I didn't know they were that crappy (tech term). I looked at the link you gave. Nice site, they actually give good info on the products. Thanks, Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of David Allen Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 4:19 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I 've used a "sender" for a transducer before and it worked. But only after I carefully logged the resistance versus pressure curve and programmed a PIC to interpolate this table into a linear "transducer-like" output. Still cost less than a real transducer but what a PITA just to save a few $. The curve on these elcheapo senders is horrible. Repeatability sucks, and they degrade over time. The sensing element is a bourdon tube with a copper "arm" rubbing on nichrome wire. It wears noticabley in a few hundred hours of use. The following company supplies the OEM I work for with transducers that are not too bad expensive and are a very nice piece. We use the 300 series in a pressure/ vac; 100 PSIa, 150PSIa, 1000PSIa and 10,000 PSIa versions. I've 'copped' a couple used ones and have great success datalogging with them while tuning my engine. They even sell online. http://www.meas-spec.com/myMeas/default/index.asp Hope this saves you some time! David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Nicoson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:08 PM Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? >I think the oil pressure "sender" on my Mustang costs $6.00 at NAPA. It's > really just a variable resistor. I'm not sure what the response curve is > but it shouldn't be too hard to figure out if you have a pressure gauge > and > a pressure source. Of course your control circuit would have to interpret > this variable resistance to be of use. > > Dan Nicoson > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Geddes, Brian J > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:59 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > Hey all - > > I'm looking for a source for inexpensive pressure transducers. I've > seen lots in the $100-$150 range, but I'm willing to bet that they can > be had for significantly cheaper. :) > > 1/8 or 1/4 NPT fitting, 5VDC (or 12VDC) power, 0-5 VDC output. Need to > tolerate oil/fuel. 100 or 150 PSI would be perfect. > > Any ideas? > > Thanks, > - Brian Geddes > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi ----------------------------------------- ************************************************** This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon Corporation family of Companies. This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. Thank You. ************************************************** _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efiGet more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com From ebuckler at icehouse.net Fri Dec 29 09:52:36 2006 From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 07:52:36 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? References: Message-ID: <000e01c72b61$5cc49e40$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Don, I'd like to stay in touch re this trans, as I 'm also thinking of using it another project due to its compact dimensions. Ernest Buckler Spokane ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 6:39 AM Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? Is that trans the front drive transaxle for the Concord ? That transaxle is the most compact I've seen and wondered could you run it with just a trans module or does it run from the car PCM ? -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Brendan Patten Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 11:35 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I've got source to pressure transducers from Chrysler 45RFE transmissions. They mount external to the trans. I work for company that rebuilds them, and every unit gets a new one... Many are probably fine. The trans runs from 35-200 psi at times..so It should have broad range. Let me know if you are interested. Just pay shipping. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Nicoson Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:36 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? David, Great info on the OEM sensors. I didn't know they were that crappy (tech term). I looked at the link you gave. Nice site, they actually give good info on the products. Thanks, Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of David Allen Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 4:19 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I 've used a "sender" for a transducer before and it worked. But only after I carefully logged the resistance versus pressure curve and programmed a PIC to interpolate this table into a linear "transducer-like" output. Still cost less than a real transducer but what a PITA just to save a few $. The curve on these elcheapo senders is horrible. Repeatability sucks, and they degrade over time. The sensing element is a bourdon tube with a copper "arm" rubbing on nichrome wire. It wears noticabley in a few hundred hours of use. The following company supplies the OEM I work for with transducers that are not too bad expensive and are a very nice piece. We use the 300 series in a pressure/ vac; 100 PSIa, 150PSIa, 1000PSIa and 10,000 PSIa versions. I've 'copped' a couple used ones and have great success datalogging with them while tuning my engine. They even sell online. http://www.meas-spec.com/myMeas/default/index.asp Hope this saves you some time! David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Nicoson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:08 PM Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? >I think the oil pressure "sender" on my Mustang costs $6.00 at NAPA. It's > really just a variable resistor. I'm not sure what the response curve is > but it shouldn't be too hard to figure out if you have a pressure gauge > and > a pressure source. Of course your control circuit would have to interpret > this variable resistance to be of use. > > Dan Nicoson > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Geddes, Brian J > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:59 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > Hey all - > > I'm looking for a source for inexpensive pressure transducers. I've > seen lots in the $100-$150 range, but I'm willing to bet that they can > be had for significantly cheaper. :) > > 1/8 or 1/4 NPT fitting, 5VDC (or 12VDC) power, 0-5 VDC output. Need to > tolerate oil/fuel. 100 or 150 PSI would be perfect. > > Any ideas? > > Thanks, > - Brian Geddes > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi ----------------------------------------- ************************************************** This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon Corporation family of Companies. This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. Thank You. ************************************************** _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Fri Dec 29 10:39:16 2006 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 08:39:16 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] PCM/ECM wish list question Message-ID: <1167410356.14531.49.camel@wopr.donegan.org> I am designing an ECM/PCM (based on an LPC2138 ARM CPU). So far I have the following inputs: Manifold Absolute Pressure Manifold Air Temperature Coolant Temperature Oil Temperature Oil Pressure Detonation Sensor Throttle Position Mass Air Flow (GM frequency style) 4(ea) O2 sensors (my vehicle has 2 pre-cat and 2 post cat sensors) Crank Position Sensor Cam Position Sensor What if anything am I missing on the input side of things? On the output side of things I have: 8(ea) coil-on-plug triggers 8(ea) injector triggers FYI - this will be an open source project similar to Megasquirt. All code will be written in C under the FreeRTOS operating system. Right now the hardware design looks like a primarily passive 'motherboard' with daughter cards for the analog inputs, the outputs, and the CPU (see www.olimex.com and the LPCH2138 part for the CPU description). For those who have 1998-2000 LS1 based Camaro's this will be intended to be a 100% direct replacement for the stock computer. From don.broadus at exeloncorp.com Fri Dec 29 10:47:02 2006 From: don.broadus at exeloncorp.com (don.broadus at exeloncorp.com) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 10:47:02 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? Message-ID: The possibilities with the trans are endless. You could use it with a plate on the torque converter and run a short drive shaft to an engine like the Corvette does, Yard carts,sand buggies hot garden tractor, I would really like find out how to run the trans with a stand alone module. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Ernest Buckler Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 9:53 AM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? Don, I'd like to stay in touch re this trans, as I 'm also thinking of using it another project due to its compact dimensions. Ernest Buckler Spokane ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 6:39 AM Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? Is that trans the front drive transaxle for the Concord ? That transaxle is the most compact I've seen and wondered could you run it with just a trans module or does it run from the car PCM ? -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Brendan Patten Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 11:35 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I've got source to pressure transducers from Chrysler 45RFE transmissions. They mount external to the trans. I work for company that rebuilds them, and every unit gets a new one... Many are probably fine. The trans runs from 35-200 psi at times..so It should have broad range. Let me know if you are interested. Just pay shipping. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Nicoson Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:36 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? David, Great info on the OEM sensors. I didn't know they were that crappy (tech term). I looked at the link you gave. Nice site, they actually give good info on the products. Thanks, Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of David Allen Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 4:19 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I 've used a "sender" for a transducer before and it worked. But only after I carefully logged the resistance versus pressure curve and programmed a PIC to interpolate this table into a linear "transducer-like" output. Still cost less than a real transducer but what a PITA just to save a few $. The curve on these elcheapo senders is horrible. Repeatability sucks, and they degrade over time. The sensing element is a bourdon tube with a copper "arm" rubbing on nichrome wire. It wears noticabley in a few hundred hours of use. The following company supplies the OEM I work for with transducers that are not too bad expensive and are a very nice piece. We use the 300 series in a pressure/ vac; 100 PSIa, 150PSIa, 1000PSIa and 10,000 PSIa versions. I've 'copped' a couple used ones and have great success datalogging with them while tuning my engine. They even sell online. http://www.meas-spec.com/myMeas/default/index.asp Hope this saves you some time! David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Nicoson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:08 PM Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? >I think the oil pressure "sender" on my Mustang costs $6.00 at NAPA. It's > really just a variable resistor. I'm not sure what the response curve is > but it shouldn't be too hard to figure out if you have a pressure gauge > and > a pressure source. Of course your control circuit would have to interpret > this variable resistance to be of use. > > Dan Nicoson > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Geddes, Brian J > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:59 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > Hey all - > > I'm looking for a source for inexpensive pressure transducers. I've > seen lots in the $100-$150 range, but I'm willing to bet that they can > be had for significantly cheaper. :) > > 1/8 or 1/4 NPT fitting, 5VDC (or 12VDC) power, 0-5 VDC output. Need to > tolerate oil/fuel. 100 or 150 PSI would be perfect. > > Any ideas? > > Thanks, > - Brian Geddes > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi ----------------------------------------- ************************************************** This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon Corporation family of Companies. This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. Thank You. ************************************************** _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From ebuckler at icehouse.net Fri Dec 29 13:09:38 2006 From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 11:09:38 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Chrysler transaxle as stand-alone References: Message-ID: <004b01c72b7c$e30170d0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Don, Thanks for the reply, I'm heading for our Pull n Save salvage yard soon to get a close look. Will be very interested in what you figure out. Ernest ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 8:47 AM Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? The possibilities with the trans are endless. You could use it with a plate on the torque converter and run a short drive shaft to an engine like the Corvette does, Yard carts,sand buggies hot garden tractor, I would really like find out how to run the trans with a stand alone module. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Ernest Buckler Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 9:53 AM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? Don, I'd like to stay in touch re this trans, as I 'm also thinking of using it another project due to its compact dimensions. Ernest Buckler Spokane ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 6:39 AM Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? Is that trans the front drive transaxle for the Concord ? That transaxle is the most compact I've seen and wondered could you run it with just a trans module or does it run from the car PCM ? -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Brendan Patten Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 11:35 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I've got source to pressure transducers from Chrysler 45RFE transmissions. They mount external to the trans. I work for company that rebuilds them, and every unit gets a new one... Many are probably fine. The trans runs from 35-200 psi at times..so It should have broad range. Let me know if you are interested. Just pay shipping. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Nicoson Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:36 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? David, Great info on the OEM sensors. I didn't know they were that crappy (tech term). I looked at the link you gave. Nice site, they actually give good info on the products. Thanks, Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of David Allen Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 4:19 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I 've used a "sender" for a transducer before and it worked. But only after I carefully logged the resistance versus pressure curve and programmed a PIC to interpolate this table into a linear "transducer-like" output. Still cost less than a real transducer but what a PITA just to save a few $. The curve on these elcheapo senders is horrible. Repeatability sucks, and they degrade over time. The sensing element is a bourdon tube with a copper "arm" rubbing on nichrome wire. It wears noticabley in a few hundred hours of use. The following company supplies the OEM I work for with transducers that are not too bad expensive and are a very nice piece. We use the 300 series in a pressure/ vac; 100 PSIa, 150PSIa, 1000PSIa and 10,000 PSIa versions. I've 'copped' a couple used ones and have great success datalogging with them while tuning my engine. They even sell online. http://www.meas-spec.com/myMeas/default/index.asp Hope this saves you some time! David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Nicoson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:08 PM Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? >I think the oil pressure "sender" on my Mustang costs $6.00 at NAPA. It's > really just a variable resistor. I'm not sure what the response curve is > but it shouldn't be too hard to figure out if you have a pressure gauge > and > a pressure source. Of course your control circuit would have to interpret > this variable resistance to be of use. > > Dan Nicoson > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Geddes, Brian J > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:59 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > Hey all - > > I'm looking for a source for inexpensive pressure transducers. I've > seen lots in the $100-$150 range, but I'm willing to bet that they can > be had for significantly cheaper. :) > > 1/8 or 1/4 NPT fitting, 5VDC (or 12VDC) power, 0-5 VDC output. Need to > tolerate oil/fuel. 100 or 150 PSI would be perfect. > > Any ideas? > > Thanks, > - Brian Geddes > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi ----------------------------------------- ************************************************** This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon Corporation family of Companies. This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. Thank You. ************************************************** _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Fri Dec 29 13:16:06 2006 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 11:16:06 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Chrysler transaxle as stand-alone In-Reply-To: <004b01c72b7c$e30170d0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> References: <004b01c72b7c$e30170d0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Message-ID: <1167419767.14531.55.camel@wopr.donegan.org> If someone can tell me what the inputs/outputs are on this tranny I may be able to build that desired stand-alone module... On Fri, 2006-12-29 at 11:09 -0800, Ernest Buckler wrote: > Don, > Thanks for the reply, I'm heading for our Pull n Save salvage yard soon to > get a close look. Will be very interested in what you figure out. > Ernest > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 8:47 AM > Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > > The possibilities with the trans are endless. You could use it with a plate > on the torque converter and run a short drive shaft to an engine like the > Corvette does, Yard carts,sand buggies hot garden tractor, I would really > like find out how to run the trans with a stand alone module. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Ernest Buckler > Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 9:53 AM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > > Don, > I'd like to stay in touch re this trans, as I 'm also thinking of using it > another project due to its compact dimensions. > Ernest Buckler > Spokane > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 6:39 AM > Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > > Is that trans the front drive transaxle for the Concord ? That transaxle is > the most compact I've seen and wondered could you run it with just a trans > module or does it run from the car > PCM ? > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Brendan Patten > Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 11:35 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > > I've got source to pressure transducers from Chrysler 45RFE > transmissions. They mount external to the trans. I work for company > that rebuilds them, and every unit gets a new one... Many are probably > fine. The trans runs from 35-200 psi at times..so It should have broad > range. > > Let me know if you are interested. Just pay shipping. > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] > On Behalf Of Daniel Nicoson > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:36 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > David, > > Great info on the OEM sensors. I didn't know they were that crappy > (tech > term). I looked at the link you gave. Nice site, they actually give > good > info on the products. > > Thanks, > > Dan Nicoson > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of David Allen > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 4:19 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > I 've used a "sender" for a transducer before and it worked. But only > after I carefully logged the resistance versus pressure curve and > programmed > a PIC to interpolate this table into a linear "transducer-like" output. > Still cost less than a real transducer but what a PITA just to save a > few > $. The curve on these elcheapo senders is horrible. Repeatability > sucks, > and they degrade over time. The sensing element is a bourdon tube with > a > copper "arm" rubbing on nichrome wire. It wears noticabley in a few > hundred > hours of use. > The following company supplies the OEM I work for with transducers > that > are not too bad expensive and are a very nice piece. We use the 300 > series > in a pressure/ vac; 100 PSIa, 150PSIa, 1000PSIa and 10,000 PSIa > versions. > I've 'copped' a couple used ones and have great success datalogging with > them while tuning my engine. > They even sell online. > http://www.meas-spec.com/myMeas/default/index.asp > Hope this saves you some time! > David > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Daniel Nicoson" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:08 PM > Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > > >I think the oil pressure "sender" on my Mustang costs $6.00 at NAPA. > It's > > really just a variable resistor. I'm not sure what the response curve > is > > but it shouldn't be too hard to figure out if you have a pressure > gauge > > and > > a pressure source. Of course your control circuit would have to > interpret > > this variable resistance to be of use. > > > > Dan Nicoson > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > > Behalf Of Geddes, Brian J > > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:59 PM > > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > > > Hey all - > > > > I'm looking for a source for inexpensive pressure transducers. I've > > seen lots in the $100-$150 range, but I'm willing to bet that they can > > be had for significantly cheaper. :) > > > > 1/8 or 1/4 NPT fitting, 5VDC (or 12VDC) power, 0-5 VDC output. Need > to > > tolerate oil/fuel. 100 or 150 PSI would be perfect. > > > > Any ideas? > > > > Thanks, > > - Brian Geddes > > _______________________________________________ > > Diy_efi mailing list > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Diy_efi mailing list > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > ----------------------------------------- > ************************************************** > This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon > Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, > confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon > Corporation family of Companies. > This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or > entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended > recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any > dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation > to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly > prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail > in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently > delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. > Thank You. > ************************************************** > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From clair.davis at charter.net Fri Dec 29 13:48:56 2006 From: clair.davis at charter.net (Clair Davis) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 13:48:56 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? References: Message-ID: <002101c72b82$60fa2ea0$6501a8c0@davis> I *BELIEVE* the 545RFE/45RFE is the 5-speed (or 4-speed w/variable upshift/downshift gears) RWD trans used behind the current crop of 5.7/4.7/3.7L engines. It's a nice unit, but currently ignored in transplant projects due to the electronic control requirements. I'd be interested in a couple/few of those transducers, as well, if only from a "good to have" standpoint. Clair ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 8:39 AM Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? Is that trans the front drive transaxle for the Concord ? That transaxle is the most compact I've seen and wondered could you run it with just a trans module or does it run from the car PCM ? -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Brendan Patten Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 11:35 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I've got source to pressure transducers from Chrysler 45RFE transmissions. They mount external to the trans. I work for company that rebuilds them, and every unit gets a new one... Many are probably fine. The trans runs from 35-200 psi at times..so It should have broad range. Let me know if you are interested. Just pay shipping. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Nicoson Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:36 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? David, Great info on the OEM sensors. I didn't know they were that crappy (tech term). I looked at the link you gave. Nice site, they actually give good info on the products. Thanks, Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of David Allen Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 4:19 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I 've used a "sender" for a transducer before and it worked. But only after I carefully logged the resistance versus pressure curve and programmed a PIC to interpolate this table into a linear "transducer-like" output. Still cost less than a real transducer but what a PITA just to save a few $. The curve on these elcheapo senders is horrible. Repeatability sucks, and they degrade over time. The sensing element is a bourdon tube with a copper "arm" rubbing on nichrome wire. It wears noticabley in a few hundred hours of use. The following company supplies the OEM I work for with transducers that are not too bad expensive and are a very nice piece. We use the 300 series in a pressure/ vac; 100 PSIa, 150PSIa, 1000PSIa and 10,000 PSIa versions. I've 'copped' a couple used ones and have great success datalogging with them while tuning my engine. They even sell online. http://www.meas-spec.com/myMeas/default/index.asp Hope this saves you some time! David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Nicoson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:08 PM Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? >I think the oil pressure "sender" on my Mustang costs $6.00 at NAPA. It's > really just a variable resistor. I'm not sure what the response curve is > but it shouldn't be too hard to figure out if you have a pressure gauge > and > a pressure source. Of course your control circuit would have to interpret > this variable resistance to be of use. > > Dan Nicoson > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Geddes, Brian J > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:59 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > Hey all - > > I'm looking for a source for inexpensive pressure transducers. I've > seen lots in the $100-$150 range, but I'm willing to bet that they can > be had for significantly cheaper. :) > > 1/8 or 1/4 NPT fitting, 5VDC (or 12VDC) power, 0-5 VDC output. Need to > tolerate oil/fuel. 100 or 150 PSI would be perfect. > > Any ideas? > > Thanks, > - Brian Geddes > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi ----------------------------------------- ************************************************** This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon Corporation family of Companies. This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. Thank You. ************************************************** _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From clair.davis at charter.net Fri Dec 29 13:54:10 2006 From: clair.davis at charter.net (Clair Davis) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 13:54:10 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] TPS Specs / PN's References: <004701c72a3b$a684b320$6501a8c0@davis> <7.0.1.0.0.20061228145345.027236a0@iinet.net.au>> Message-ID: <002601c72b83$1bf1f3a0$6501a8c0@davis> I guess at some point, I'd do myself a favor if I learned something about op amps and other little electronic widgets I could make myself, but I know squat about them at the moment. I still have my "Principles & Applications of Electrical Engineering" text, but only because it was so full of errata that the bookstore wouldn't buy it back after that semester... I'd really prefer to have a PN/application that I could ask for at any given parts store should the thing fail out in BFE. Clair ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike" To: Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 12:55 AM Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] TPS Specs / PN's > an LM 324 op amp would do it, few app notes on that around the > web, its a 14 PIN ic with 4 x opamps, select resistors for multiply > by 5/3.8 and use one as buffer amp at front end for 1:1, that and a > zener regulator would be all you need... cheers > > mike > > At 12:50 PM 12/28/06, you wrote: > >I've run in to an issue with my TPS that may become a problem in the near > >future. I'm using a Mopar Performance billet 4V 1000cfm throttle body that > >came with Mopar-type sensors (MAP, IAC, TPS) as it is the "off-road" > >replacement for the Magnum V8 throttle body. Although the MAP and IAC seem > >to be pretty straight forward, the TPS is both non-adjustable, and doesn't > >seem to reach full voltage at WOT. By relocating the mounting holes, I was > >able to achieve 0.5V at idle, but I can now only get about 3.8V at WOT. I'm > >not sure how the Magnum trucks dealt with this issue, but I don't think my > >'7730 is going to be happy as-is. > > > >I suspect that I may be able to program around the WOT voltage limit, but > >I'd prefer not to if at all possible. This now brings me to my question... > >is there a resource out there that discusses the various options for TPS's? > >I'd like to see if there is something out there that will give +/- 5.0V at > >WOT and still give 0.5V at idle, AND be correctly "handed" for my > >application. I would estimate that the throttle shafts turn about 80-85% of > >the GM TB I have in the garage when at WOT. I've got a catalog on TPS units > >made by Tomco.com, but it doesn't get in to the guts of the specs, just PN's > >and ID photos. > > > >Any help greatly appreciated, especially now that the critter is running. > >Idles OK (needs IAC tweaking), throttle response is nice (not moving yet), > >but I want to make sure it KNOWS that it's at WOT when it is. > > > >Clair > >69 Valiant 340/'7730 > >FTWTX > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Diy_efi mailing list > >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > From davida1 at hiwaay.net Fri Dec 29 14:17:02 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:17:02 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? References: <002101c72b82$60fa2ea0$6501a8c0@davis> Message-ID: <004901c72b86$5814aaf0$0700a8c0@yancey.com> I know nothing of the Chrysler transmission; however Delco makes a stand-alone transmission controler with LOTS of parameters. It's the16128420 transmission ECM. Natively used to control a 4L80E in diesel trucks which have no engine ECM. I think it may be limited to 4-speeds (or less) with TCC clutch. It is OEM hardware (read-well built) and is supported by TunerCAT and uses a socketed EPROM and can be real-time tuned with an emulator. Also diagnostics supported by many scan tools including EASE and Snap-On. No idea what sort of interface adapter hardware would need to be created to allow it to work with a non-native tranny. I'm fixing to jump in head-first and setup a stand-alone 4T65E based on it. Will be fun! Later, David > > Is that trans the front drive transaxle for the Concord ? That transaxle > is > the most compact I've seen and wondered could you run it with just a > trans > module or does it run from the car > PCM ? From brian.j.geddes at intel.com Fri Dec 29 15:00:46 2006 From: brian.j.geddes at intel.com (Geddes, Brian J) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 13:00:46 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? In-Reply-To: <000201c72b0b$0ba11850$0b00a8c0@p42000> Message-ID: <25E9841AB6E6D742B7388832BBACDE9501AEBFCA@fmsmsx417.amr.corp.intel.com> What's the connection for the pressure line on these transducers? Physical dimensions? Just need to get a feel for whether I can fit them where they need to go. :) Thanks, - Brian -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Brendan Patten Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 9:35 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I've got source to pressure transducers from Chrysler 45RFE transmissions. They mount external to the trans. I work for company that rebuilds them, and every unit gets a new one... Many are probably fine. The trans runs from 35-200 psi at times..so It should have broad range. Let me know if you are interested. Just pay shipping. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Nicoson Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:36 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? David, Great info on the OEM sensors. I didn't know they were that crappy (tech term). I looked at the link you gave. Nice site, they actually give good info on the products. Thanks, Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of David Allen Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 4:19 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I 've used a "sender" for a transducer before and it worked. But only after I carefully logged the resistance versus pressure curve and programmed a PIC to interpolate this table into a linear "transducer-like" output. Still cost less than a real transducer but what a PITA just to save a few $. The curve on these elcheapo senders is horrible. Repeatability sucks, and they degrade over time. The sensing element is a bourdon tube with a copper "arm" rubbing on nichrome wire. It wears noticabley in a few hundred hours of use. The following company supplies the OEM I work for with transducers that are not too bad expensive and are a very nice piece. We use the 300 series in a pressure/ vac; 100 PSIa, 150PSIa, 1000PSIa and 10,000 PSIa versions. I've 'copped' a couple used ones and have great success datalogging with them while tuning my engine. They even sell online. http://www.meas-spec.com/myMeas/default/index.asp Hope this saves you some time! David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Nicoson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:08 PM Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? >I think the oil pressure "sender" on my Mustang costs $6.00 at NAPA. It's > really just a variable resistor. I'm not sure what the response curve is > but it shouldn't be too hard to figure out if you have a pressure gauge > and > a pressure source. Of course your control circuit would have to interpret > this variable resistance to be of use. > > Dan Nicoson > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Geddes, Brian J > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:59 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > Hey all - > > I'm looking for a source for inexpensive pressure transducers. I've > seen lots in the $100-$150 range, but I'm willing to bet that they can > be had for significantly cheaper. :) > > 1/8 or 1/4 NPT fitting, 5VDC (or 12VDC) power, 0-5 VDC output. Need to > tolerate oil/fuel. 100 or 150 PSI would be perfect. > > Any ideas? > > Thanks, > - Brian Geddes > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From don.broadus at exeloncorp.com Fri Dec 29 15:05:25 2006 From: don.broadus at exeloncorp.com (don.broadus at exeloncorp.com) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 15:05:25 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? Message-ID: Thanks for the input, sounds like a good way to go. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of David Allen Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 2:17 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? I know nothing of the Chrysler transmission; however Delco makes a stand-alone transmission controler with LOTS of parameters. It's the16128420 transmission ECM. Natively used to control a 4L80E in diesel trucks which have no engine ECM. I think it may be limited to 4-speeds (or less) with TCC clutch. It is OEM hardware (read-well built) and is supported by TunerCAT and uses a socketed EPROM and can be real-time tuned with an emulator. Also diagnostics supported by many scan tools including EASE and Snap-On. No idea what sort of interface adapter hardware would need to be created to allow it to work with a non-native tranny. I'm fixing to jump in head-first and setup a stand-alone 4T65E based on it. Will be fun! Later, David > > Is that trans the front drive transaxle for the Concord ? That transaxle > is > the most compact I've seen and wondered could you run it with just a > trans > module or does it run from the car > PCM ? _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi ----------------------------------------- ************************************************** This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon Corporation family of Companies. This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. Thank You. ************************************************** From ebuckler at icehouse.net Fri Dec 29 15:12:57 2006 From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 13:12:57 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? References: <002101c72b82$60fa2ea0$6501a8c0@davis> Message-ID: <008901c72b8e$1d69eca0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Clair, Thanks for clarification, am gonna have to check out the numbers, as the trans. I have seen (and need) is FWD behind a longitudinally installed V-whatever. Ernie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Clair Davis" To: Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 11:48 AM Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? >I *BELIEVE* the 545RFE/45RFE is the 5-speed (or 4-speed w/variable > upshift/downshift gears) RWD trans used behind the current crop of > 5.7/4.7/3.7L engines. It's a nice unit, but currently ignored in > transplant > projects due to the electronic control requirements. > > I'd be interested in a couple/few of those transducers, as well, if only > from a "good to have" standpoint. > > Clair > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 8:39 AM > Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > > Is that trans the front drive transaxle for the Concord ? That transaxle > is > the most compact I've seen and wondered could you run it with just a > trans > module or does it run from the car > PCM ? > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Brendan Patten > Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 11:35 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > > I've got source to pressure transducers from Chrysler 45RFE > transmissions. They mount external to the trans. I work for company > that rebuilds them, and every unit gets a new one... Many are probably > fine. The trans runs from 35-200 psi at times..so It should have broad > range. > > Let me know if you are interested. Just pay shipping. > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] > On Behalf Of Daniel Nicoson > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:36 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > David, > > Great info on the OEM sensors. I didn't know they were that crappy > (tech > term). I looked at the link you gave. Nice site, they actually give > good > info on the products. > > Thanks, > > Dan Nicoson > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of David Allen > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 4:19 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > I 've used a "sender" for a transducer before and it worked. But only > after I carefully logged the resistance versus pressure curve and > programmed > a PIC to interpolate this table into a linear "transducer-like" output. > Still cost less than a real transducer but what a PITA just to save a > few > $. The curve on these elcheapo senders is horrible. Repeatability > sucks, > and they degrade over time. The sensing element is a bourdon tube with > a > copper "arm" rubbing on nichrome wire. It wears noticabley in a few > hundred > hours of use. > The following company supplies the OEM I work for with transducers > that > are not too bad expensive and are a very nice piece. We use the 300 > series > in a pressure/ vac; 100 PSIa, 150PSIa, 1000PSIa and 10,000 PSIa > versions. > I've 'copped' a couple used ones and have great success datalogging with > them while tuning my engine. > They even sell online. > http://www.meas-spec.com/myMeas/default/index.asp > Hope this saves you some time! > David > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Daniel Nicoson" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:08 PM > Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > > >>I think the oil pressure "sender" on my Mustang costs $6.00 at NAPA. > It's >> really just a variable resistor. I'm not sure what the response curve > is >> but it shouldn't be too hard to figure out if you have a pressure > gauge >> and >> a pressure source. Of course your control circuit would have to > interpret >> this variable resistance to be of use. >> >> Dan Nicoson >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On >> Behalf Of Geddes, Brian J >> Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:59 PM >> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >> Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? >> >> Hey all - >> >> I'm looking for a source for inexpensive pressure transducers. I've >> seen lots in the $100-$150 range, but I'm willing to bet that they can >> be had for significantly cheaper. :) >> >> 1/8 or 1/4 NPT fitting, 5VDC (or 12VDC) power, 0-5 VDC output. Need > to >> tolerate oil/fuel. 100 or 150 PSI would be perfect. >> >> Any ideas? >> >> Thanks, >> - Brian Geddes >> _______________________________________________ >> Diy_efi mailing list >> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Diy_efi mailing list >> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi >> > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > ----------------------------------------- > ************************************************** > This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon > Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, > confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon > Corporation family of Companies. > This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or > entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended > recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any > dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation > to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly > prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail > in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently > delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. > Thank You. > ************************************************** > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > From efi at dyakron.com Fri Dec 29 16:17:56 2006 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:17:56 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? References: <002101c72b82$60fa2ea0$6501a8c0@davis> <004901c72b86$5814aaf0$0700a8c0@yancey.com> Message-ID: <002a01c72b97$3134fa00$6501a8c0@IBMm> David, do you know if the same controller could be used with a 4L60E? That sounds alot less expensive than the aftermarket controlllers. MV ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Allen" To: Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 3:17 PM Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Source for inexpensive fuel/oil pressure sensors? > I know nothing of the Chrysler transmission; however Delco makes a > stand-alone transmission controler with LOTS of parameters. It's > the16128420 transmission ECM. Natively used to control a 4L80E in diesel > trucks which have no engine ECM. I think it may be limited to 4-speeds (or > less) with TCC clutch. > It is OEM hardware (read-well built) and is supported by TunerCAT and > uses a socketed EPROM and can be real-time tuned with an emulator. Also > diagnostics supported by many scan tools including EASE and Snap-On. > No idea what sort of interface adapter hardware would need to be created > to allow it to work with a non-native tranny. I'm fixing to jump in > head-first and setup a stand-alone 4T65E based on it. Will be fun! > Later, > David > >> >> Is that trans the front drive transaxle for the Concord ? That transaxle >> is >> the most compact I've seen and wondered could you run it with just a >> trans >> module or does it run from the car >> PCM ? > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From ssealander at Stny.rr.com Fri Dec 29 16:43:40 2006 From: ssealander at Stny.rr.com (Scot Sealander) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:43:40 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] TPS Specs / PN's In-Reply-To: <002601c72b83$1bf1f3a0$6501a8c0@davis> Message-ID: <200612292243.kBTMhbnx003124@ms-smtp-01.nyroc.rr.com> You don't have to use an op-amp to do what you want to do! First, are you sure that the throttle blade is fully opening? If it is, and the 3.8 is all the volts it gets, that is OK. Just change the gain factor inside the ECM code to reflect that 3.8V is the max value. If it is set to 0.5 volts at idle, and the max is 3.8V, then you need to change the gain factor to the value X, where (3.8V - 0.5V)X = 5.0 volts. 5.0/3.3 = 1.5, so the gain value is 1.5 The stock gain value is 1.65, so it looks like the stock code considers your 3.8 volts WOT no problem. If you have a scan tool, look at the scaled TPS value, and see if it reaches 100% TPS, I suspect that it already does. Scot -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Clair Davis Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 2:54 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] TPS Specs / PN's I guess at some point, I'd do myself a favor if I learned something about op amps and other little electronic widgets I could make myself, but I know squat about them at the moment. I still have my "Principles & Applications of Electrical Engineering" text, but only because it was so full of errata that the bookstore wouldn't buy it back after that semester... I'd really prefer to have a PN/application that I could ask for at any given parts store should the thing fail out in BFE. Clair ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike" To: Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 12:55 AM Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] TPS Specs / PN's > an LM 324 op amp would do it, few app notes on that around the > web, its a 14 PIN ic with 4 x opamps, select resistors for multiply > by 5/3.8 and use one as buffer amp at front end for 1:1, that and a > zener regulator would be all you need... cheers > > mike > > At 12:50 PM 12/28/06, you wrote: > >I've run in to an issue with my TPS that may become a problem in the near > >future. I'm using a Mopar Performance billet 4V 1000cfm throttle body that > >came with Mopar-type sensors (MAP, IAC, TPS) as it is the "off-road" > >replacement for the Magnum V8 throttle body. Although the MAP and IAC seem > >to be pretty straight forward, the TPS is both non-adjustable, and doesn't > >seem to reach full voltage at WOT. By relocating the mounting holes, I was > >able to achieve 0.5V at idle, but I can now only get about 3.8V at WOT. I'm > >not sure how the Magnum trucks dealt with this issue, but I don't think my > >'7730 is going to be happy as-is. > > > >I suspect that I may be able to program around the WOT voltage limit, but > >I'd prefer not to if at all possible. This now brings me to my question... > >is there a resource out there that discusses the various options for TPS's? > >I'd like to see if there is something out there that will give +/- 5.0V at > >WOT and still give 0.5V at idle, AND be correctly "handed" for my > >application. I would estimate that the throttle shafts turn about 80-85% of > >the GM TB I have in the garage when at WOT. I've got a catalog on TPS units > >made by Tomco.com, but it doesn't get in to the guts of the specs, just PN's > >and ID photos. > > > >Any help greatly appreciated, especially now that the critter is running. > >Idles OK (needs IAC tweaking), throttle response is nice (not moving yet), > >but I want to make sure it KNOWS that it's at WOT when it is. > > > >Clair > >69 Valiant 340/'7730 > >FTWTX > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Diy_efi mailing list > >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From clair.davis at charter.net Fri Dec 29 20:27:13 2006 From: clair.davis at charter.net (Clair Davis) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 20:27:13 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] TPS Specs / PN's References: <200612292243.kBTMhbnx003124@ms-smtp-01.nyroc.rr.com> Message-ID: <005701c72bba$045c0780$6501a8c0@davis> Thanks, Scot, That's next on my list of projects over the long weekend (if I get my Daytona put back together, that is). I've got TunerProRT that I've been using to diagnose the basics of what was going on during the no-start debacle (TPS wired wrong so ECM saw 100% throttle at startup, i.e., clear flood...), and now that it's running, I can sort out the IAC issue I think I have. I can easily check the %throttle then. I am sure that the blades are fully open, and I was checking the TPS while mounted/wired. Best case, this can be solved with software; worst case, something that I have to put together on a steep learning curve... Clair ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scot Sealander" To: Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 4:43 PM Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] TPS Specs / PN's > > You don't have to use an op-amp to do what you want to do! > > First, are you sure that the throttle blade is fully opening? If it is, and > the 3.8 is all the volts it gets, that is OK. Just change the gain factor > inside the ECM code to reflect that 3.8V is the max value. If it is set to > 0.5 volts at idle, and the max is 3.8V, then you need to change the gain > factor to the value X, where (3.8V - 0.5V)X = 5.0 volts. 5.0/3.3 = 1.5, so > the gain value is 1.5 > > The stock gain value is 1.65, so it looks like the stock code considers your > 3.8 volts WOT no problem. > > If you have a scan tool, look at the scaled TPS value, and see if it reaches > 100% TPS, I suspect that it already does. > > Scot > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On > Behalf Of Clair Davis > Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 2:54 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] TPS Specs / PN's > > I guess at some point, I'd do myself a favor if I learned something about op > amps and other little electronic widgets I could make myself, but I know > squat about them at the moment. I still have my "Principles & Applications > of Electrical Engineering" text, but only because it was so full of errata > that the bookstore wouldn't buy it back after that semester... > > I'd really prefer to have a PN/application that I could ask for at any given > parts store should the thing fail out in BFE. > > Clair > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mike" > To: > Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 12:55 AM > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] TPS Specs / PN's > > > > an LM 324 op amp would do it, few app notes on that around the > > web, its a 14 PIN ic with 4 x opamps, select resistors for multiply > > by 5/3.8 and use one as buffer amp at front end for 1:1, that and a > > zener regulator would be all you need... cheers > > > > mike > > > > At 12:50 PM 12/28/06, you wrote: > > >I've run in to an issue with my TPS that may become a problem in the near > > >future. I'm using a Mopar Performance billet 4V 1000cfm throttle body > that > > >came with Mopar-type sensors (MAP, IAC, TPS) as it is the "off-road" > > >replacement for the Magnum V8 throttle body. Although the MAP and IAC > seem > > >to be pretty straight forward, the TPS is both non-adjustable, and > doesn't > > >seem to reach full voltage at WOT. By relocating the mounting holes, I > was > > >able to achieve 0.5V at idle, but I can now only get about 3.8V at WOT. > I'm > > >not sure how the Magnum trucks dealt with this issue, but I don't think > my > > >'7730 is going to be happy as-is. > > > > > >I suspect that I may be able to program around the WOT voltage limit, but > > >I'd prefer not to if at all possible. This now brings me to my > question... > > >is there a resource out there that discusses the various options for > TPS's? > > >I'd like to see if there is something out there that will give +/- 5.0V > at > > >WOT and still give 0.5V at idle, AND be correctly "handed" for my > > >application. I would estimate that the throttle shafts turn about 80-85% > of > > >the GM TB I have in the garage when at WOT. I've got a catalog on TPS > units > > >made by Tomco.com, but it doesn't get in to the guts of the specs, just > PN's > > >and ID photos. > > > > > >Any help greatly appreciated, especially now that the critter is running. > > >Idles OK (needs IAC tweaking), throttle response is nice (not moving > yet), > > >but I want to make sure it KNOWS that it's at WOT when it is. > > > > > >Clair > > >69 Valiant 340/'7730 > > >FTWTX > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >Diy_efi mailing list > > >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > > Diy_efi mailing list > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > From kml_daniel at yahoo.com Sat Dec 30 08:28:20 2006 From: kml_daniel at yahoo.com (K DANIEL) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 06:28:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] PCM/ECM wish list question Message-ID: <20061230142820.33963.qmail@web51715.mail.yahoo.com> Hi The following are missing from the output side Main relay driver Fuel pump relay driver IAC drivers SES lamp driver Nothing is mentioned about the on board diagnostic such as the OBDII which is very important Kamal Daniel ----- Original Message ---- From: Steven P. Donegan To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 8:39:16 AM Subject: [Diy_efi] PCM/ECM wish list question I am designing an ECM/PCM (based on an LPC2138 ARM CPU). So far I have the following inputs: Manifold Absolute Pressure Manifold Air Temperature Coolant Temperature Oil Temperature Oil Pressure Detonation Sensor Throttle Position Mass Air Flow (GM frequency style) 4(ea) O2 sensors (my vehicle has 2 pre-cat and 2 post cat sensors) Crank Position Sensor Cam Position Sensor What if anything am I missing on the input side of things? On the output side of things I have: 8(ea) coil-on-plug triggers 8(ea) injector triggers FYI - this will be an open source project similar to Megasquirt. All code will be written in C under the FreeRTOS operating system. Right now the hardware design looks like a primarily passive 'motherboard' with daughter cards for the analog inputs, the outputs, and the CPU (see www.olimex.com and the LPCH2138 part for the CPU description). For those who have 1998-2000 LS1 based Camaro's this will be intended to be a 100% direct replacement for the stock computer. _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From donegan at donegan.org Sat Dec 30 09:00:36 2006 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 07:00:36 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] PCM/ECM wish list question In-Reply-To: <20061230142820.33963.qmail@web51715.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20061230142820.33963.qmail@web51715.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1167490836.14531.68.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Thank you for the feedback. What do the Main relay driver and the SES lamp driver actually do? I had not thought of OBDII at all as the system talks via RS-232 already. I suppose to make it a complete plug-compatable unit OBDII will be required. I have no intention of feeding any data to the car's black box (ie the air bag controller) other than that required for the air bags to function. On Sat, 2006-12-30 at 06:28 -0800, K DANIEL wrote: > Hi > The following are missing from the output side > Main relay driver > Fuel pump relay driver > IAC drivers > SES lamp driver > > Nothing is mentioned about the on board diagnostic such as the OBDII which is very important > Kamal Daniel > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Steven P. Donegan > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 8:39:16 AM > Subject: [Diy_efi] PCM/ECM wish list question > > > I am designing an ECM/PCM (based on an LPC2138 ARM CPU). So far I have > the following inputs: > > Manifold Absolute Pressure > Manifold Air Temperature > Coolant Temperature > Oil Temperature > Oil Pressure > Detonation Sensor > Throttle Position > Mass Air Flow (GM frequency style) > 4(ea) O2 sensors (my vehicle has 2 pre-cat and 2 post cat sensors) > Crank Position Sensor > Cam Position Sensor > > What if anything am I missing on the input side of things? > > On the output side of things I have: > > 8(ea) coil-on-plug triggers > 8(ea) injector triggers > > FYI - this will be an open source project similar to Megasquirt. All > code will be written in C under the FreeRTOS operating system. Right now > the hardware design looks like a primarily passive 'motherboard' with > daughter cards for the analog inputs, the outputs, and the CPU (see > www.olimex.com and the LPCH2138 part for the CPU description). For those > who have 1998-2000 LS1 based Camaro's this will be intended to be a 100% > direct replacement for the stock computer. > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Sun Dec 31 00:30:01 2006 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 00:30:01 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] PCM/ECM wish list question Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Steven P. Donegan > Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 9:01 AM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] PCM/ECM wish list question > > Thank you for the feedback. What do the Main relay driver and > the SES lamp driver actually do? I had not thought of OBDII > at all as the system talks via RS-232 already. I suppose to > make it a complete plug-compatable unit OBDII will be > required. I have no intention of feeding any data to the > car's black box (ie the air bag controller) other than that > required for the air bags to function. The airbag and any other boxes in the car (anti theft? body control module?) will expect to communicate over the OBD2 bus with the engine computer. How the computer talks to diagnostic equipment is up to you, but if you include OBD2 (GM's version of OBD2 is called VPW) in your computer then maybe it makes sense to use it for diagnostics and reflashing as well. There is a VPW interface chip from motorola that is pretty easy to use, I'm working on a project right now that uses it. Not sure about main relay, but SES is the driver for the service engine soon light. In your computer you might be able to put back the "use SES to blink out error codes" function that was deleted when OBD2 came along. --steve From kml_daniel at yahoo.com Sun Dec 31 01:19:05 2006 From: kml_daniel at yahoo.com (K DANIEL) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 23:19:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] PCM/ECM wish list question Message-ID: <20061231071905.90896.qmail@web51706.mail.yahoo.com> The main relay driver suplays power to all parts of of the engine such as the injectors, ignition coil and power on to the ECM itself. The SES lamp is fault indicator lamp. The RS 232 is not a standard diagnostic protocol all the ECM works with OBDII ----- Original Message ---- From: Steven P. Donegan To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 7:00:36 AM Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] PCM/ECM wish list question Thank you for the feedback. What do the Main relay driver and the SES lamp driver actually do? I had not thought of OBDII at all as the system talks via RS-232 already. I suppose to make it a complete plug-compatable unit OBDII will be required. I have no intention of feeding any data to the car's black box (ie the air bag controller) other than that required for the air bags to function. On Sat, 2006-12-30 at 06:28 -0800, K DANIEL wrote: > Hi > The following are missing from the output side > Main relay driver > Fuel pump relay driver > IAC drivers > SES lamp driver > > Nothing is mentioned about the on board diagnostic such as the OBDII which is very important > Kamal Daniel > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Steven P. Donegan > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 8:39:16 AM > Subject: [Diy_efi] PCM/ECM wish list question > > > I am designing an ECM/PCM (based on an LPC2138 ARM CPU). So far I have > the following inputs: > > Manifold Absolute Pressure > Manifold Air Temperature > Coolant Temperature > Oil Temperature > Oil Pressure > Detonation Sensor > Throttle Position > Mass Air Flow (GM frequency style) > 4(ea) O2 sensors (my vehicle has 2 pre-cat and 2 post cat sensors) > Crank Position Sensor > Cam Position Sensor > > What if anything am I missing on the input side of things? > > On the output side of things I have: > > 8(ea) coil-on-plug triggers > 8(ea) injector triggers > > FYI - this will be an open source project similar to Megasquirt. All > code will be written in C under the FreeRTOS operating system. Right now > the hardware design looks like a primarily passive 'motherboard' with > daughter cards for the analog inputs, the outputs, and the CPU (see > www.olimex.com and the LPCH2138 part for the CPU description). For those > who have 1998-2000 LS1 based Camaro's this will be intended to be a 100% > direct replacement for the stock computer. > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Sun Dec 31 17:20:17 2006 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 17:20:17 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] test, please read Message-ID: It seems that the guy that hosts diy-efi.org let the domain expire and someone else has taken it. Not sure what the implications are but I think the lists should still be working. If you don't get this email, then that means they aren't working. --steve ------------------- Steve Ravet ARM steve.ravet at arm.com