From olpaint at hotmail.com  Thu Nov  2 19:16:43 2006
From: olpaint at hotmail.com (terence difalco)
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 18:16:43 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] RE: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <BAY0-MC2-F16IXwGO5E00338281@bay0-mc2-f16.bay0.hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY105-F335CC3332657C1AB83B83FAEFE0@phx.gbl>

hello all,
I'm new to the list and not sure how to use it yet (so far I can't find 
archives or anything that resembles a discussion board) but I'm working on 
something and could use some help. The project is a jag v12 and what I'm 
doing is replacing the hoses and old style fuel rail with a more modern 
o-ring style fuel rail. I have the fuel rails, hoses etc but need a 
substitute injector. (low impedence, 18.1 lbs per hour.) So far my choice is 
a ford white (Escort 1.9L) which matches specs quite closely but I have two 
questions. First the jag specs say peak and hold and the escort is I believe 
saturated. Is that about the ECU or the injectors? Second, can I exchange 
the tops of similar bosch injectors without destroying the inner workings. I 
could destroy an injector to find out but I'd rather hear from someone who 
has done this whether successful or not.
Thanks in advance
Terry diFalco

any information is welcome


>From: diy_efi-request at diy-efi.org
>Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subject: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 1
>Date: 1 Nov 2006 10:00:20 -0800
>
>Send Diy_efi mailing list submissions to
>	diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>	http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>	diy_efi-request at diy-efi.org
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>	diy_efi-owner at diy-efi.org
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of Diy_efi digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Porsche electronic fuel injection (fox at hiwaay.net)
>    2. Re: Porsche electronic fuel injection (Bobqzzi)
>    3. Re: Porsche electronic fuel injection (Mike)
>    4. Re: Porsche electronic fuel injection (Adam Wade)
>    5. Re: BMW/Siemens stratified direct injection, link (Bernd Felsche)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:46:49 -0600 (CST)
>From: fox at hiwaay.net
>Subject: [Diy_efi] Porsche electronic fuel injection
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Message-ID: <1162324009.4547a8296ba81 at webmail.hiwaay.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>Hi -
>
>Does anyone know the name of the company that makes an electronic FI
>conversion for 911 Porsches with CIS injection ('78 to '83)?
>
>Charlie
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:55:06 -0500
>From: Bobqzzi <bobqzzi at cox.net>
>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Porsche electronic fuel injection
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20061031145426.00b6ffc0 at pop.east.cox.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
>Rensport
>50 Tripp Street, # 16
>Framingham, MA 01702
>
>
>508-875-8911
>Fax: 508-872-7361
>
>Email: rensport at cs.com
>
>I've seen the development done on the dyno- excellent power and 
>driveabilty.
>
>
>At 01:46 PM 10/31/2006 -0600, you wrote:
> >Hi -
> >
> >Does anyone know the name of the company that makes an electronic FI
> >conversion for 911 Porsches with CIS injection ('78 to '83)?
> >
> >Charlie
> >_______________________________________________
> >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
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:06:20 -0600
>From: Mike <mls928 at sbcglobal.net>
>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Porsche electronic fuel injection
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Message-ID:
>	<6.2.0.14.2.20061031140538.030f1200 at pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
>www.bitzracing.com
>
>Mike
>
>
>At 01:46 PM 10/31/06, you wrote:
> >Hi -
> >
> >Does anyone know the name of the company that makes an electronic FI
> >conversion for 911 Porsches with CIS injection ('78 to '83)?
> >
> >Charlie
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 12:49:11 -0800 (PST)
>From: Adam Wade <espresso_doppio at yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Porsche electronic fuel injection
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Message-ID: <20061031204911.88288.qmail at web32208.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>--- fox at hiwaay.net wrote:
>
> > Does anyone know the name of the company that makes
> > an electronic FI conversion for 911 Porsches with
>CIS
> > injection ('78 to '83)?
>
>TWM has throttle bodies with fuel rail and
>regulator...  I knwo that for sure.  They may have an
>appropriate ECU for you to work with as well, or you
>could do something yourself (convert a GM unit, build
>a MegaSquirt, etc.) just using their throttle bodies.
>
>| 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 |
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>Cheap Talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates
>(http://voice.yahoo.com)
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 5
>Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 11:33:05 +0800
>From: Bernd Felsche <bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au>
>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] BMW/Siemens stratified direct injection, link
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Message-ID: <200611011133.05795 at death.2.spammers>
>Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>On Monday 30 October 2006 23:04, d at davidhunt.net wrote:
> > I'm curious.
>
>We agree on that, for sure! :-)
>
>But please explain why you included the entire previous article when
>you don't appear to refer to any of it?
>
> > 1) If the fuel is delivered to the back of the intake valve and allowed
> > to heat - is the 'atomization' required?  I realize that a larger O2
> > charge is available if the fuel evaporates in the chamber, but what if
> > full evaporation is the actual requirement?
>
>That's not direct injection. Direct injection is directly into the
>cylinder.  There is no valve between the injector and the combustion
>chamber.
>
>All the latent heat of evaporation absorbed by the fuel is then from
>the gases being compressed in the combustion chamber. It provides
>less time for evaporation so the droplet size has to be smaller.
>
>There is no need to allow for "wetting" of inlet tracts and valves
>with direct injection so the injected quantities can be far more
>precise; resulting in greater power, fuel efficiency and better
>control of emissions.
>
>In terms of stratified charge, an ignitable rich "bubble" of
>air-fuel mixture can be concentrated fairly reliably near the spark
>gap; and allow the engine to run much "leaner" than a homogeneous
>charge engine fed by port injection, TBI or fuel dripping from a
>sponge into the inlet manifold.
>
>Stratified charge is useful because the (Otto cycle) engine can
>operate much more efficiently under light load conditions. That is
>especially so when the throttle valve can be fully opened and the
>power output regulated by mixture (and EGR flow) control.
>
> > 2) If the fuel is evaporated at the intake valve, is there a serious
> > problem mixing fuel with O2 in the chamber?
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Bernd Felsche" <bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au>
> > To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 11:23 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] BMW/Siemens stratified direct injection, link
>
>[198 lines snipped]
>
>--
>/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
>\ /  ASCII ribbon campaign | "If we let things terrify us,
>  X   against HTML mail     |  life will not be worth living."
>/ \  and postings          | Lucius Annaeus Seneca, c. 4BC - 65AD.
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>
>
>End of Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 1
>**************************************

_________________________________________________________________
Stay in touch with old friends and meet new ones with Windows Live Spaces 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&mkt=en-us



From clair.davis at charter.net  Thu Nov  2 21:35:13 2006
From: clair.davis at charter.net (Clair Davis)
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 21:35:13 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Jag V-12 Injectors (was Digest Vol 21...)
References: <BAY105-F335CC3332657C1AB83B83FAEFE0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <006101c6fef9$156b4060$6501a8c0@davis>

Terry,
I think Dodge Magnum V-8 injectors are 19 #/hr, but I also think they run at
a higher pressure than some other engines.  I'm guessing they're rated at
that pressure, but I'm not sure about that.  318's and 360's (5.2 or 5.9L)
both use the same injector as far as I know.

Out of curiosity, why change out the Jag injectors?  My dad has a Jag V-12
that he's thinking about putting in an Allard kit car, and we'd like to keep
the EFI on that as well.  I hadn't planned on replacing any of the injectors
or other hard parts, but had sort of toyed with the idea of ditching the ECM
(which I suspect is a GM unit anyway).  I know the injectors are funky, but
as long as they worked, they were going to stay.  I have exactly zero
experience with Jag stuff at this point...

Clair


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "terence difalco" <olpaint at hotmail.com>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 7:16 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] RE: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 1


> hello all,
> I'm new to the list and not sure how to use it yet (so far I can't find
> archives or anything that resembles a discussion board) but I'm working on
> something and could use some help. The project is a jag v12 and what I'm
> doing is replacing the hoses and old style fuel rail with a more modern
> o-ring style fuel rail. I have the fuel rails, hoses etc but need a
> substitute injector. (low impedence, 18.1 lbs per hour.) So far my choice
is
> a ford white (Escort 1.9L) which matches specs quite closely but I have
two
> questions. First the jag specs say peak and hold and the escort is I
believe
> saturated. Is that about the ECU or the injectors? Second, can I exchange
> the tops of similar bosch injectors without destroying the inner workings.
I
> could destroy an injector to find out but I'd rather hear from someone who
> has done this whether successful or not.
> Thanks in advance
> Terry diFalco
>
> any information is welcome
>
>
> >From: diy_efi-request at diy-efi.org
> >Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >Subject: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 1
> >Date: 1 Nov 2006 10:00:20 -0800
> >
> >Send Diy_efi mailing list submissions to
> > diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >
> >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > diy_efi-request at diy-efi.org
> >
> >You can reach the person managing the list at
> > diy_efi-owner at diy-efi.org
> >
> >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> >than "Re: Contents of Diy_efi digest..."
> >
> >
> >Today's Topics:
> >
> >    1. Porsche electronic fuel injection (fox at hiwaay.net)
> >    2. Re: Porsche electronic fuel injection (Bobqzzi)
> >    3. Re: Porsche electronic fuel injection (Mike)
> >    4. Re: Porsche electronic fuel injection (Adam Wade)
> >    5. Re: BMW/Siemens stratified direct injection, link (Bernd Felsche)
> >
> >
> >----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >Message: 1
> >Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:46:49 -0600 (CST)
> >From: fox at hiwaay.net
> >Subject: [Diy_efi] Porsche electronic fuel injection
> >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >Message-ID: <1162324009.4547a8296ba81 at webmail.hiwaay.net>
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> >
> >Hi -
> >
> >Does anyone know the name of the company that makes an electronic FI
> >conversion for 911 Porsches with CIS injection ('78 to '83)?
> >
> >Charlie
> >
> >
> >------------------------------
> >
> >Message: 2
> >Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:55:06 -0500
> >From: Bobqzzi <bobqzzi at cox.net>
> >Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Porsche electronic fuel injection
> >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20061031145426.00b6ffc0 at pop.east.cox.net>
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
> >
> >Rensport
> >50 Tripp Street, # 16
> >Framingham, MA 01702
> >
> >
> >508-875-8911
> >Fax: 508-872-7361
> >
> >Email: rensport at cs.com
> >
> >I've seen the development done on the dyno- excellent power and
> >driveabilty.
> >
> >
> >At 01:46 PM 10/31/2006 -0600, you wrote:
> > >Hi -
> > >
> > >Does anyone know the name of the company that makes an electronic FI
> > >conversion for 911 Porsches with CIS injection ('78 to '83)?
> > >
> > >Charlie
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >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
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------
> >
> >Message: 3
> >Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:06:20 -0600
> >From: Mike <mls928 at sbcglobal.net>
> >Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Porsche electronic fuel injection
> >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >Message-ID:
> > <6.2.0.14.2.20061031140538.030f1200 at pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com>
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
> >
> >www.bitzracing.com
> >
> >Mike
> >
> >
> >At 01:46 PM 10/31/06, you wrote:
> > >Hi -
> > >
> > >Does anyone know the name of the company that makes an electronic FI
> > >conversion for 911 Porsches with CIS injection ('78 to '83)?
> > >
> > >Charlie
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------
> >
> >Message: 4
> >Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 12:49:11 -0800 (PST)
> >From: Adam Wade <espresso_doppio at yahoo.com>
> >Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Porsche electronic fuel injection
> >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >Message-ID: <20061031204911.88288.qmail at web32208.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> >
> >--- fox at hiwaay.net wrote:
> >
> > > Does anyone know the name of the company that makes
> > > an electronic FI conversion for 911 Porsches with
> >CIS
> > > injection ('78 to '83)?
> >
> >TWM has throttle bodies with fuel rail and
> >regulator...  I knwo that for sure.  They may have an
> >appropriate ECU for you to work with as well, or you
> >could do something yourself (convert a GM unit, build
> >a MegaSquirt, etc.) just using their throttle bodies.
> >
> >| 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 |
> >
> >
> >
>
>___________________________________________________________________________
_________
> >Cheap Talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates
> >(http://voice.yahoo.com)
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------
> >
> >Message: 5
> >Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 11:33:05 +0800
> >From: Bernd Felsche <bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au>
> >Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] BMW/Siemens stratified direct injection, link
> >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >Message-ID: <200611011133.05795 at death.2.spammers>
> >Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="iso-8859-1"
> >
> >On Monday 30 October 2006 23:04, d at davidhunt.net wrote:
> > > I'm curious.
> >
> >We agree on that, for sure! :-)
> >
> >But please explain why you included the entire previous article when
> >you don't appear to refer to any of it?
> >
> > > 1) If the fuel is delivered to the back of the intake valve and
allowed
> > > to heat - is the 'atomization' required?  I realize that a larger O2
> > > charge is available if the fuel evaporates in the chamber, but what if
> > > full evaporation is the actual requirement?
> >
> >That's not direct injection. Direct injection is directly into the
> >cylinder.  There is no valve between the injector and the combustion
> >chamber.
> >
> >All the latent heat of evaporation absorbed by the fuel is then from
> >the gases being compressed in the combustion chamber. It provides
> >less time for evaporation so the droplet size has to be smaller.
> >
> >There is no need to allow for "wetting" of inlet tracts and valves
> >with direct injection so the injected quantities can be far more
> >precise; resulting in greater power, fuel efficiency and better
> >control of emissions.
> >
> >In terms of stratified charge, an ignitable rich "bubble" of
> >air-fuel mixture can be concentrated fairly reliably near the spark
> >gap; and allow the engine to run much "leaner" than a homogeneous
> >charge engine fed by port injection, TBI or fuel dripping from a
> >sponge into the inlet manifold.
> >
> >Stratified charge is useful because the (Otto cycle) engine can
> >operate much more efficiently under light load conditions. That is
> >especially so when the throttle valve can be fully opened and the
> >power output regulated by mixture (and EGR flow) control.
> >
> > > 2) If the fuel is evaporated at the intake valve, is there a serious
> > > problem mixing fuel with O2 in the chamber?
> >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Bernd Felsche" <bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au>
> > > To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 11:23 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] BMW/Siemens stratified direct injection, link
> >
> >[198 lines snipped]
> >
> >--
> >/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
> >\ /  ASCII ribbon campaign | "If we let things terrify us,
> >  X   against HTML mail     |  life will not be worth living."
> >/ \  and postings          | Lucius Annaeus Seneca, c. 4BC - 65AD.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Diy_efi mailing list
> >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> >
> >
> >End of Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 1
> >**************************************
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Stay in touch with old friends and meet new ones with Windows Live Spaces
>
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&mkt=en-us
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  3 12:24:42 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 10:24:42 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] RE: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 1
In-Reply-To: <BAY105-F335CC3332657C1AB83B83FAEFE0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <20061103182442.76293.qmail@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- terence difalco <olpaint at hotmail.com> wrote:

> a ford white (Escort 1.9L) which matches specs quite
> closely but I have two questions. First the jag
> specs say peak and hold and the escort is I believe 
> saturated. Is that about the ECU or the injectors?

Both.  Saturated-drive injectors are high impedance;
peak-and-hold are low impedance.  Peak-and-hold
injector drivers are quite different from saturated
drivers.  If you connect high-impedance injectors to a
peak-and-hold driver, it will operate in
saturated-drive mode.  P&H driver ciruitry generates a
lot more heat than sat. drive, and requires more
expensive components, which is why OEMs tend to avoid
it when possible.

> Second, can I exchange the tops of similar bosch
> injectors without destroying the inner workings.

I have not had cause to disassemble injectors, but I
think there is probably a reason why certain shops
charge a decent amount of making custom injectors out
of parts from various different ones; I don't think it
is trivial to disassemble and rebuild injectors. 
Someone with more experience in the matter should
weigh in on that issue, though.

P.S.  Please trim the rest of the digest from your
replies/posts.  

| 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 |


 
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Check out the New Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster. 
(http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta) 



From ScottyGrover at aol.com  Fri Nov  3 14:03:06 2006
From: ScottyGrover at aol.com (ScottyGrover at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 15:03:06 EST
Subject: [Diy_efi] RE: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 1
Message-ID: <c84.6645b81.327cfa7a@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 11/3/2006 10:29:27 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
espresso_doppio at yahoo.com writes:

---  terence difalco <olpaint at hotmail.com> wrote:

> a ford white  (Escort 1.9L) which matches specs quite
> closely but I have two  questions. First the jag
> specs say peak and hold and the escort is I  believe 
> saturated. Is that about the ECU or the  injectors?

Both.  Saturated-drive injectors are high  impedance;
peak-and-hold are low impedance.  Peak-and-hold
injector  drivers are quite different from saturated
drivers.  If you connect  high-impedance injectors to a
peak-and-hold driver, it will operate  in
saturated-drive mode.  P&H driver ciruitry generates a
lot  more heat than sat. drive, and requires more
expensive components, which is  why OEMs tend to avoid
it when possible.

> Second, can I exchange  the tops of similar bosch
> injectors without destroying the inner  workings.

I have not had cause to disassemble injectors, but I
think  there is probably a reason why certain shops
charge a decent amount of  making custom injectors out
of parts from various different ones; I don't  think it
is trivial to disassemble and rebuild injectors. 
Someone with  more experience in the matter should
weigh in on that issue,  though.




Peak-and-hold injectors (at least the ones I have had dealings with) ran in  
series electrically with resistors which increased the resistance and lowered  
the required current in the circuit so as not to increase the drain on the 
power  transistors in the control box.
Scotty


From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  3 16:14:44 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 14:14:44 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] P&H vs. sat (was: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 1)
In-Reply-To: <c84.6645b81.327cfa7a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20061103221444.40569.qmail@web32210.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- ScottyGrover at aol.com wrote:

> Peak-and-hold injectors (at least the ones I have
> had dealings with) ran in series electrically with
> resistors which increased the resistance and lowered
 
> the required current in the circuit so as not to
> increase the drain on the power transistors in the
> control box.

I am so used to thinking in sequential port injection
that I often forget about batch and bank fire
applications.  You can certainly run several
low-impedance injectors in series to allow triggering
of a bank-fire setup with only one "channel" per bank,
thus lowering the cost and heat output of the ECU (I
don't think anyone does this any more in production
vehicles, but it is entirely possible that it was done
on the Jag back in the day, offering the option of
using the stock injectors in a P&H setup with a
sequential fire ECU that would allow a lot of engine
modification without having to upgrade the injectors
themselves).

You can get the same effect by running several
high-impedance injectors in parallel, and then wiring
up such groups serially, so the resistance across the
whole chain is the same as in a single high-impedance
injector; the more injectors you add like that,
though, the more sluggish the individual injectors
will be (since voltage is being split up between the
parallel groups of injectors); I wonder if using caps
on the battery side of the injectors would help with that?

| 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 |


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited 
(http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited)



From ScottyGrover at aol.com  Fri Nov  3 19:14:22 2006
From: ScottyGrover at aol.com (ScottyGrover at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 20:14:22 EST
Subject: [Diy_efi] P&H vs. sat (was: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 1)
Message-ID: <4c0.2a71324.327d436e@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 11/3/2006 2:16:26 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
espresso_doppio at yahoo.com writes:

---  ScottyGrover at aol.com wrote:

> Peak-and-hold injectors (at least the  ones I have
> had dealings with) ran in series electrically with
>  resistors which increased the resistance and lowered

> the required  current in the circuit so as not to
> increase the drain on the power  transistors in the
> control box.

I am so used to thinking in  sequential port injection
that I often forget about batch and bank  fire
applications.  You can certainly run several
low-impedance  injectors in series to allow triggering
of a bank-fire setup with only one  "channel" per bank,
thus lowering the cost and heat output of the ECU  (I
don't think anyone does this any more in production
vehicles, but it  is entirely possible that it was done
on the Jag back in the day, offering  the option of
using the stock injectors in a P&H setup with  a
sequential fire ECU that would allow a lot of engine
modification  without having to upgrade the injectors
themselves).

You can get the  same effect by running several
high-impedance injectors in parallel, and  then wiring
up such groups serially, so the resistance across the
whole  chain is the same as in a single high-impedance
injector; the more  injectors you add like that,
though, the more sluggish the individual  injectors
will be (since voltage is being split up between the
parallel  groups of injectors); I wonder if using caps
on the battery side of the  injectors would help with that?




The systems I was referring to were sequential systems (Type 3 VW, Datsun  
240Z)
Scotty


From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Sat Nov  4 00:09:53 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 22:09:53 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] P&H vs. sat (was: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 1)
In-Reply-To: <4c0.2a71324.327d436e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20061104060953.47168.qmail@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- ScottyGrover at aol.com wrote:

> The systems I was referring to were sequential
> systems (Type 3 VW, Datsun 240Z)

Ah, I misread your previous post.

While if you already had P&H injectors and didn't want
to spend the money on hardware to handle that many
low-impedance injectors, but also didn't want to spend
the money on high-impedance ones, I guess I could see
using resistors in series with the existing
low-impedance injectors.  You lose most of the
advantage that P&H injectors have (wider dynamic range
and better control at short opening durations) by
running them that way, but it is certainly possible to
do.  Running them with a saturated drive ECU without
the resistors will cook the power transistors in the
ECU post haste, and is definitely a no-no...

Since the guy wants a different style of fuel rail and
the injectors he's looking at are high impedance, he's
probably better off getting a less-expensive ECU
designed to drive sat. drive injectors if he wants to
run them sequentially.  Then he has his injectors, he
has his newer-style fuel rail, and he has haved money
on the ECU; the only thing that might suffer slightly
would be idle control, but if he is doing something
requiring more fuel than stock from one of those V-12
engines, chances are its behavior at or near idle is
not of too great importance to him.  ;)

| 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 |


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business 
(http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com) 



From agarbino at gmail.com  Sat Nov  4 10:41:07 2006
From: agarbino at gmail.com (Alex Garbino)
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 10:41:07 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Temperature/Pressure sensors
Message-ID: <4cf37ad00611040841p340c73e6q968654452182ef28@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

I'm trying to build a data acquisition system to monitor various
temperatures and pressures. I've been looking at thermocouples, RTDs, and
thermistors; but they have widely different advatnages and disadvantages. I
was thinking of using thermistors to monitor air intake temperature &
pressure (on a turbocharged car, so I would like to monitor atmospheric,
pre-intercooler, and post-intercooler/manifold) as well as coolant temp, oil
pressure & temp, and EGTs, both before and after the turbocharger.
Thermistors seem the best choice for air intake, since they have a fast
response and are cheap; however, I cannot find good datasheets regarding the
linearization coefficients.

Does anyone have advice on a good way to capture data, as well as any tips
on the best way to mount these sensors (a modular system would be best, so I
could move sensors to different positions and switch them in and out with
minimum hassle)? Also, can anyone recommend a good source of cheap sensors?

The signals will be captured via a PIC18F series' A/D converters/digital
inputs, and relayed immediately onto an on-board computer. Please let me
know of any resources that would be helpful!

Regards,
Alex

For a more detailed discussion on what I'm trying to achieve, please see
http://www.mkiiitech.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=903


From kml_daniel at yahoo.com  Sat Nov  4 11:41:42 2006
From: kml_daniel at yahoo.com (K DANIEL)
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 09:41:42 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Temperature/Pressure sensors
Message-ID: <20061104174142.23850.qmail@web51715.mail.yahoo.com>

Hello
I think it's better to use the sensors of the engine instead of using external sensor all you need to locate the signals of the sensors is the wiring diagram of your engine
Kamal Daniel


----- Original Message ----
From: Alex Garbino <agarbino at gmail.com>
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2006 8:41:07 AM
Subject: [Diy_efi] Temperature/Pressure sensors


Hello,

I'm trying to build a data acquisition system to monitor various
temperatures and pressures. I've been looking at thermocouples, RTDs, and
thermistors; but they have widely different advatnages and disadvantages. I
was thinking of using thermistors to monitor air intake temperature &
pressure (on a turbocharged car, so I would like to monitor atmospheric,
pre-intercooler, and post-intercooler/manifold) as well as coolant temp, oil
pressure & temp, and EGTs, both before and after the turbocharger.
Thermistors seem the best choice for air intake, since they have a fast
response and are cheap; however, I cannot find good datasheets regarding the
linearization coefficients.

Does anyone have advice on a good way to capture data, as well as any tips
on the best way to mount these sensors (a modular system would be best, so I
could move sensors to different positions and switch them in and out with
minimum hassle)? Also, can anyone recommend a good source of cheap sensors?

The signals will be captured via a PIC18F series' A/D converters/digital
inputs, and relayed immediately onto an on-board computer. Please let me
know of any resources that would be helpful!

Regards,
Alex

For a more detailed discussion on what I'm trying to achieve, please see
http://www.mkiiitech.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=903
_______________________________________________
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 agarbino at gmail.com  Sat Nov  4 11:59:14 2006
From: agarbino at gmail.com (Alex Garbino)
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 11:59:14 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Temperature/Pressure sensors
In-Reply-To: <20061104174142.23850.qmail@web51715.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20061104174142.23850.qmail@web51715.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4cf37ad00611040959s79d20428gca01338b0d840bc4@mail.gmail.com>

I've tried this before, but now I want to:
1) have a completely stand alone system, so I can use it in different cars,
as well as having the possibility of using it as a module to replace the
existing ECU
2) using the existing sensors just gives me a varying resistance.... I don't
have any of the calibration/linearization data, so it's difficult to
determine the actual values of what I'm measuring, as well as determining my
error margins...

Regards,
Alex


On 11/4/06, K DANIEL <kml_daniel at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Hello
> I think it's better to use the sensors of the engine instead of using
> external sensor all you need to locate the signals of the sensors is the
> wiring diagram of your engine
> Kamal Daniel
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Alex Garbino <agarbino at gmail.com>
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2006 8:41:07 AM
> Subject: [Diy_efi] Temperature/Pressure sensors
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm trying to build a data acquisition system to monitor various
> temperatures and pressures. I've been looking at thermocouples, RTDs, and
> thermistors; but they have widely different advatnages and disadvantages.
> I
> was thinking of using thermistors to monitor air intake temperature &
> pressure (on a turbocharged car, so I would like to monitor atmospheric,
> pre-intercooler, and post-intercooler/manifold) as well as coolant temp,
> oil
> pressure & temp, and EGTs, both before and after the turbocharger.
> Thermistors seem the best choice for air intake, since they have a fast
> response and are cheap; however, I cannot find good datasheets regarding
> the
> linearization coefficients.
>
> Does anyone have advice on a good way to capture data, as well as any tips
> on the best way to mount these sensors (a modular system would be best, so
> I
> could move sensors to different positions and switch them in and out with
> minimum hassle)? Also, can anyone recommend a good source of cheap
> sensors?
>
> The signals will be captured via a PIC18F series' A/D converters/digital
> inputs, and relayed immediately onto an on-board computer. Please let me
> know of any resources that would be helpful!
>
> Regards,
> Alex
>
> For a more detailed discussion on what I'm trying to achieve, please see
> http://www.mkiiitech.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=903
> _______________________________________________
> 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 WSCowell at aol.com  Sat Nov  4 13:49:34 2006
From: WSCowell at aol.com (WSCowell at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 14:49:34 EST
Subject: [Diy_efi] P&H vs. sat (was: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 1)
Message-ID: <c9e.1f9fd0f.327e48ce@aol.com>

All,
 
We seem to be getting away rapidly from the original premise, which IIRC  was 
to do with the Jaguar V12, to be fitted into a kit car.  If it's a HE  type 
engine there is not much tuning potential because of the small exhaust  valves 
in the Mays head.  There's ample torque and BHP from the stock  engine, 
frankly, unless you own an oil refinery.
 
The injectors were P&H, that's why the engine comes with a resistor  pack.  
It is bank fired, with 3 injectors sharing each of the 4  resistors.  The ECU 
is of course Lucas, aka Prince of Darkness.  
 
AFAIK no information whatsoever has made it into the public domain about  
these ECUs.  Lucas were even more protective than Bosch, and that's saying  
something.  AJ6 Engineering have the wherewithal, and knowledge, to tweak  them but 
jealously guard their trade secrets as you would expect.
 
Someone has successfully fitted MegaSquirt to one of these engines, I  
believe his e-mail address is _neilrob at woosh.co.nz._ (mailto:neilrob at woosh.co.nz)   
I tried to get  him to share his findings, but without success.  Good luck on 
that.
 
Will


From clshore at yahoo.com  Sat Nov  4 16:34:01 2006
From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore)
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 14:34:01 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Temperature/Pressure sensors
In-Reply-To: <4cf37ad00611040841p340c73e6q968654452182ef28@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20061104223401.66990.qmail@web35711.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Check out National Semiconductor,
LM335 yields 10mV/degree K.
Cheap, tiny, easy to interface.

Carter

--- Alex Garbino <agarbino at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I'm trying to build a data acquisition system to
> monitor various
> temperatures and pressures. I've been looking at
> thermocouples, RTDs, and
> thermistors; but they have widely different
> advatnages and disadvantages. I
> was thinking of using thermistors to monitor air
> intake temperature &
> pressure (on a turbocharged car, so I would like to
> monitor atmospheric,
> pre-intercooler, and post-intercooler/manifold) as
> well as coolant temp, oil
> pressure & temp, and EGTs, both before and after the
> turbocharger.
> Thermistors seem the best choice for air intake,
> since they have a fast
> response and are cheap; however, I cannot find good
> datasheets regarding the
> linearization coefficients.
> 
> Does anyone have advice on a good way to capture
> data, as well as any tips
> on the best way to mount these sensors (a modular
> system would be best, so I
> could move sensors to different positions and switch
> them in and out with
> minimum hassle)? Also, can anyone recommend a good
> source of cheap sensors?
> 
> The signals will be captured via a PIC18F series'
> A/D converters/digital
> inputs, and relayed immediately onto an on-board
> computer. Please let me
> know of any resources that would be helpful!
> 
> Regards,
> Alex
> 
> For a more detailed discussion on what I'm trying to
> achieve, please see
> http://www.mkiiitech.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=903
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> 



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business 
(http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com) 



From Steve.Ravet at arm.com  Mon Nov  6 19:21:36 2006
From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet)
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 19:21:36 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Any USB developers out there?
Message-ID: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C743414061178301689E10@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>

This really is EFI related.  I'm working on an open source type hardware
project that will allow connecting a PC to an OBD2 GM PCM via the USB
port.  It'll support 4x mode for reflashing.  I've got a prototype PCB
built but am having problems with the USB enumeration.  Some of the
enumeration info is right but some is wrong, the biggest of which is
that it's being identified as a low speed peripheral instead of a full
speed, even though the pullup resistors are on the right wires.  It's a
microchip microprocessor, which I now recognize to be a poor choice, but
it's what I have.  If anyone has experience with USB, especially
microchip firmware, I could sure use a hand.

thanks,
--steve

-------------------
Steve Ravet
ARM
steve.ravet at arm.com


From Steve.Ravet at arm.com  Mon Nov  6 19:29:32 2006
From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet)
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 19:29:32 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] small engine spark timing
Message-ID: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C743414061178301689E11@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>

I'm now the proud owner of a 1987 Case/Ingersoll 444 garden tractor.
I'm giving it a much needed tuneup, which includes replacing the
condensor with a transistorized ignition module.  Well, that got me to
thinking about advance curves...  The points are driven by the camshaft
(single cylinder Kohler motor), and are kept to trigger the module.  The
module I'm buying won't have any advance but it wouldn't be that hard to
design one that did.  Can these little motors benefit from some kind of
advance?

thanks,
--steve

-------------------
Steve Ravet
ARM
steve.ravet at arm.com


From efi at dyakron.com  Mon Nov  6 20:48:21 2006
From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V)
Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2006 21:48:21 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] small engine spark timing
In-Reply-To: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C743414061178301689E11@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.co
 m>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20061106214514.02f984e0@dyakron.com>

One would have to believe there is power to be gained when
you get away from static timing.  Are you sure there is no means of
spark advance?  Have you put a timing light on it and revved it??
MV

At 07:29 PM 11/6/2006 -0600, you wrote:

>I'm now the proud owner of a 1987 Case/Ingersoll 444 garden tractor.
>I'm giving it a much needed tuneup, which includes replacing the
>condensor with a transistorized ignition module.  Well, that got me to
>thinking about advance curves...  The points are driven by the camshaft
>(single cylinder Kohler motor), and are kept to trigger the module.  The
>module I'm buying won't have any advance but it wouldn't be that hard to
>design one that did.  Can these little motors benefit from some kind of
>advance?



From efi_dude at narwani.org  Tue Nov  7 07:44:35 2006
From: efi_dude at narwani.org (Neil)
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 07:44:35 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Any USB developers out there?
In-Reply-To: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C743414061178301689E10@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C743414061178301689E10@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
Message-ID: <200611070744.36176.efi_dude@narwani.org>

Try asking on Microchip's forums or on the forums at www.piclist.org .
-Neil.


On Monday 06 November 2006 19:21, Steve Ravet wrote:
> This really is EFI related.  I'm working on an open source type hardware
> project that will allow connecting a PC to an OBD2 GM PCM via the USB
> port.  It'll support 4x mode for reflashing.  I've got a prototype PCB
> built but am having problems with the USB enumeration.  Some of the
> enumeration info is right but some is wrong, the biggest of which is
> that it's being identified as a low speed peripheral instead of a full
> speed, even though the pullup resistors are on the right wires.  It's a
> microchip microprocessor, which I now recognize to be a poor choice, but
> it's what I have.  If anyone has experience with USB, especially
> microchip firmware, I could sure use a hand.
>
> thanks,
> --steve
>
> -------------------
> Steve Ravet
> ARM
> steve.ravet at arm.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 don.broadus at exeloncorp.com  Tue Nov  7 09:18:29 2006
From: don.broadus at exeloncorp.com (don.broadus at exeloncorp.com)
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 09:18:29 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] small engine spark timing
Message-ID: <F4F253665838734F841C5B2C63B72F941ACB79@CCCMSXCH01.energy.power.corp>

A retard on start up might be some help. The flathead design of the Kholer really wont respond
to advance like an overhead valve head would. I have a Bolens with a OHV 16 HP Kholer.  The Case Hydraulic drive really lends itself to steady RPM on the Pump. I thought most of the Big Tire 444's were Onan twin powered.         






-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
Behalf Of Steve Ravet
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 7:30 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: [Diy_efi] small engine spark timing


I'm now the proud owner of a 1987 Case/Ingersoll 444 garden tractor.
I'm giving it a much needed tuneup, which includes replacing the
condensor with a transistorized ignition module.  Well, that got me to
thinking about advance curves...  The points are driven by the camshaft
(single cylinder Kohler motor), and are kept to trigger the module.  The
module I'm buying won't have any advance but it wouldn't be that hard to
design one that did.  Can these little motors benefit from some kind of
advance?

thanks,
--steve

-------------------
Steve Ravet
ARM
steve.ravet at arm.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

-----------------------------------------
**************************************************
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 rwhughe at oplink.net  Tue Nov  7 12:31:43 2006
From: rwhughe at oplink.net (Robert W Hughes)
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 12:31:43 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] small engine spark timing
In-Reply-To: <20061107180011.E4F21775F22@mail.oplnk.net>
References: <20061107180011.E4F21775F22@mail.oplnk.net>
Message-ID: <4550D10F.70607@oplink.net>

> I'm now the proud owner of a 1987 Case/Ingersoll 444 garden tractor.
> I'm giving it a much needed tuneup, which includes replacing the
> condensor with a transistorized ignition module.  Well, that got me to
> thinking about advance curves...  The points are driven by the camshaft
> (single cylinder Kohler motor), and are kept to trigger the module.  The
> module I'm buying won't have any advance but it wouldn't be that hard to
> design one that did.  Can these little motors benefit from some kind of
> advance?

If this Kohler is like mine (16hp K34(?) in a 310 Bobcat) the timing is 
set by the point gap and the adjustment is very touchy, must be done 
with the engine running as opposed to a feeler gauge. A little reduction 
in timing can result in a noticeably large loss of power also.

These engines are usually used in a constant speed/load situation like a 
tractor and so can run fixed timing for this load. The Kohler also has a 
builtin compression release to ease starting.

If you get this to work well, I would be interested in hearing what you 
did, mine gives continual point problems.
-- 
Robert W. Hughes (Bob)
BackYard Engineering
29:40.237N, 95:28.726W or perhaps 30:55.265N, 95:20.590W
Houston, Texas "The city with too much Oxygen"
rwhughe at oplink.net


From Steve.Ravet at arm.com  Tue Nov  7 13:08:45 2006
From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet)
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 13:08:45 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] small engine spark timing
Message-ID: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C743414061178301689F86@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>

> 
> If this Kohler is like mine (16hp K34(?) in a 310 Bobcat) the 
> timing is set by the point gap and the adjustment is very 
> touchy, must be done with the engine running as opposed to a 
> feeler gauge. A little reduction in timing can result in a 
> noticeably large loss of power also.

Mine is a 14 HP, not sure of the engine model.

> 
> These engines are usually used in a constant speed/load 
> situation like a tractor and so can run fixed timing for this 
> load. The Kohler also has a builtin compression release to 
> ease starting.

Makes sense...

> 
> If you get this to work well, I would be interested in 
> hearing what you did, mine gives continual point problems.

I ordered the "Ultimate Ignition system" from
http://www.kirkengines.com/.  The points are kept to trigger a
transistorized coil switch, the condensor is discarded.  This kit also
includes a Bosch coil.  There's an LED on the box that is used when
setting timing.

While searching around tractor sites I've seen David Kirk in several
places.  He seems to be an engine designer by profession and has written
quite a bit about modding Kohler engines.  I'll let you now how the kit
works out,

--steve



From kaizen__ at hotmail.com  Tue Nov  7 23:50:02 2006
From: kaizen__ at hotmail.com (Bevan Weiss)
Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2006 18:50:02 +1300
Subject: [Diy_efi] Any USB developers out there?
In-Reply-To: <200611070744.36176.efi_dude@narwani.org>
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C743414061178301689E10@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
	<200611070744.36176.efi_dude@narwani.org>
Message-ID: <4551700A.9040106@hotmail.com>

There's an application called USBview available from Microsoft or FTDI 
that allows you to view all the enumeration data that your device is 
reporting.  That might help.

Try just jumping the pullup onto the other line.  I can't remember which 
way around they go, but if you're device is reporting itself as a low 
speed device then it's likely it's around the wrong way.  Either way 
it'll do no harm to swap it over to test...


Bevan

> Try asking on Microchip's forums or on the forums at www.piclist.org .
> -Neil.
>
>
> On Monday 06 November 2006 19:21, Steve Ravet wrote:
>   
>> This really is EFI related.  I'm working on an open source type hardware
>> project that will allow connecting a PC to an OBD2 GM PCM via the USB
>> port.  It'll support 4x mode for reflashing.  I've got a prototype PCB
>> built but am having problems with the USB enumeration.  Some of the
>> enumeration info is right but some is wrong, the biggest of which is
>> that it's being identified as a low speed peripheral instead of a full
>> speed, even though the pullup resistors are on the right wires.  It's a
>> microchip microprocessor, which I now recognize to be a poor choice, but
>> it's what I have.  If anyone has experience with USB, especially
>> microchip firmware, I could sure use a hand.
>>
>> thanks,
>> --steve
>>
>> -------------------
>> Steve Ravet
>> ARM
>> steve.ravet at arm.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
>
>   



From niche at iinet.net.au  Wed Nov  8 03:47:54 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:47:54 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Any USB developers out there?
In-Reply-To: <4551700A.9040106@hotmail.com>
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C743414061178301689E10@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
	<200611070744.36176.efi_dude@narwani.org>
	<4551700A.9040106@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20061108173811.02a49a80@iinet.net.au>>

At 01:50 PM 11/8/06, you wrote:
>There's an application called USBview available from Microsoft or FTDI that allows you to view all the enumeration data that your device is reporting.  That might help.

Theres an interesting issue about USB which I've thought clarifying somewhere
without having to wade through numerous tech docs and that is the low speed
backward compatability. In theory this would allow almost any, even low
end single chip microprocessors to read the serial stream directly in software
at around 19.2 Kbits/sec ( or thereabouts) without the need for a dedicated
hardware USB chip and handle all the protocols leaving some processing over
for the "real stuff" it is there for in the first place. The consequence clearly is
that any other devices on that USB channel will be also running low but as most
PCs these days have 4 USB ports then - 'what the heck'...  So if this were the case
then a truly low end opportunity exists for good firmware programmers at the low
end embedded level to interface to engine electronics. Is 19.2K the lowest with
a low granularity or could 32K, 56K etc be ok if the cpu can handle it ?

If I had the time (and motivation) I'd join the relevant USB groups but as there appears
to be greater uptake of USB in relation to automotives, then, for the time being, I'm
just offering the above para and looking forward to a comment from anyone that
has already explored that side or is likely too - maybe to get some critical mass going
as, if I/we can get this clarified, then it might open up a few interesting automotive
related opportunities and there are heaps :)   ?




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 !
* 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 Steve.Ravet at arm.com  Wed Nov  8 10:08:17 2006
From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet)
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 10:08:17 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Any USB developers out there?
Message-ID: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830168A162@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org 
> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Mike
> Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 3:48 AM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Any USB developers out there?
> Theres an interesting issue about USB which I've thought 
> clarifying somewhere without having to wade through numerous 
> tech docs and that is the low speed backward compatability. 
> In theory this would allow almost any, even low end single 
> chip microprocessors to read the serial stream directly in 
> software at around 19.2 Kbits/sec ( or thereabouts) without 
> the need for a dedicated hardware USB chip and handle all the 
> protocols leaving some processing over for the "real stuff" 
> it is there for in the first place. The consequence clearly 
> is that any other devices on that USB channel will be also 
> running low but as most PCs these days have 4 USB ports then 
> - 'what the heck'...  So if this were the case then a truly 
> low end opportunity exists for good firmware programmers at 
> the low end embedded level to interface to engine 
> electronics. Is 19.2K the lowest with a low granularity or 
> could 32K, 56K etc be ok if the cpu can handle it ?

Mike, I think you are talking about bit-banging the USB lines using a
microcontroller's general purpose I/O lines, right?  I ran across a
thread about that on the piclist, which I recently joined.  There were
pointers to a couple software USB implementations but the summary seemed
to be that adding a software implementation to the firmware already
required to communicate with the host didn't leave much processing left
over on the cheap uCs.  A more expensive one might be able to do it, but
then the incremental cost of interface hardware doesn't matter as much.

--steve



From HARRIS_JAMES_W at cat.com  Thu Nov  9 13:02:39 2006
From: HARRIS_JAMES_W at cat.com (James W. Harris)
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 14:02:39 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Re: small engine spark timing
Message-ID: <OF75BFAE1E.03B0E7CF-ON85257221.006871E5-85257221.00687ED5@notes.cat.com>

>If this Kohler is like mine (16hp K34(?) in a 310 Bobcat) the timing is 
>set by the point gap and the adjustment is very touchy, must be done 
>with the engine running as opposed to a feeler gauge. A little reduction 
>in timing can result in a noticeably large loss of power also.

I've got a Kohler in a Cub Cadet 129 and have found Bob's comments to be 
right on!!!!  The point cam must have a slow ramp, because a very, very 
small adjustment makes a difference in no-start / kickback on starting / 
no power / power improves as the engine warms up.  A crank triggered 
system on this engine would be able to provide a big improvement, but who 
knows how much power these typically splash lubricated engines can 
tolerate.

Could use single chip HC11, my homemade controller might be a good 
starting point:

http://personal.myvine.com/~jhlh/

So many machines, so little time!

JW


From torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu  Fri Nov 10 10:46:01 2006
From: torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Torbj=F6rn_Forsman?=)
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 17:46:01 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Temperature/Pressure sensors
In-Reply-To: <20061104223401.66990.qmail@web35711.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20061104223401.66990.qmail@web35711.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4554ACC9.1060709@gengas.nu>

The LM335 and most other IC temperature sensors (there are also some 
with digital interface, for example I2C) have a reputation for bad 
reliability in the field, especially in severe environments as in 
vehicle engine compartments, heavy industry etc. There are good reasons 
why all mass produced engine management systems still use NTC or nickel 
resistance (PTC) temperature sensors instead.



For the most common NTC sensors, there are just three basic types to 
take care of.

The "Bosch" temperature sensor, also used by many other japanese and 
european manufacturers, has a characteristic which is to be found here:
http://www.epcos.com/inf/50/db/ntc_06/LeadlessDisks__B57220__K220.pdf

GM's standard sensor, used for many years on their C3 and P4 systems has 
this characteristic:
http://www.epcos.com/inf/50/db/ntc_06/Leaded__NTC__B57962__S962.pdf

Ford uses NTC temperature sensors with a resistance about 33 kohm at +25 
?C. I haven't found any good documentation on those.

Characteristics for nickel PTC sensors (seldomly found, mostly on french 
and japanese systems) can be found here:
http://www.oiml.org/publications/R/R084-e03.pdf


When calculating the temperature - voltage graph, one must know the 
resistance of the pull-up resistor in the ECU as well as the supply 
voltage (almost always 5 V) and if there is any resistor in parallel to 
the sensor. This has to be done by reverse engineering the ECUs.

Bosch typically uses either 1,0 kohm, 2,7 kohm or 2,87 kohm pull-up in 
their Motronic and (digital) Jetronic ECUs. Ignition ECUs (EZ) as well 
as the analog L-jetronic, LE-, LU- and KE- ECUs have completely 
unstandardized pull-up resistors. In some ECUs with 2,7 or 2,87 kohm 
pull-up there may be a parallel resistor.

Japanse ECUs typically have 2,7 kohm pull-up, no parallel resistor.

GM uses 1,0 kohm or 348 ohms pull-up, no parallel resistor. In some 
cases, there are two different pull-up resistors (one 348 ohms and one 
in the 3 kohm range) that can be switched under software control to 
increase the measurement range.

Best regards

Torbj?rn Forsman


Carter Shore wrote:
> Check out National Semiconductor,
> LM335 yields 10mV/degree K.
> Cheap, tiny, easy to interface.
> 
> Carter
> 
> --- Alex Garbino <agarbino at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Hello,
>>
>>I'm trying to build a data acquisition system to
>>monitor various
>>temperatures and pressures. I've been looking at
>>thermocouples, RTDs, and
>>thermistors; but they have widely different
>>advatnages and disadvantages. I
>>was thinking of using thermistors to monitor air
>>intake temperature &
>>pressure (on a turbocharged car, so I would like to
>>monitor atmospheric,
>>pre-intercooler, and post-intercooler/manifold) as
>>well as coolant temp, oil
>>pressure & temp, and EGTs, both before and after the
>>turbocharger.
>>Thermistors seem the best choice for air intake,
>>since they have a fast
>>response and are cheap; however, I cannot find good
>>datasheets regarding the
>>linearization coefficients.
>>
>>Does anyone have advice on a good way to capture
>>data, as well as any tips
>>on the best way to mount these sensors (a modular
>>system would be best, so I
>>could move sensors to different positions and switch
>>them in and out with
>>minimum hassle)? Also, can anyone recommend a good
>>source of cheap sensors?
>>
>>The signals will be captured via a PIC18F series'
>>A/D converters/digital
>>inputs, and relayed immediately onto an on-board
>>computer. Please let me
>>know of any resources that would be helpful!
>>
>>Regards,
>>Alex
>>
>>For a more detailed discussion on what I'm trying to
>>achieve, please see
>>http://www.mkiiitech.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=903
>>_______________________________________________
>>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
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business 
> (http://smallbusiness.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 torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu  Fri Nov 10 10:53:15 2006
From: torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Torbj=F6rn_Forsman?=)
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 17:53:15 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Re: small engine spark timing
In-Reply-To: <OF75BFAE1E.03B0E7CF-ON85257221.006871E5-85257221.00687ED5@notes.cat.com>
References: <OF75BFAE1E.03B0E7CF-ON85257221.006871E5-85257221.00687ED5@notes.cat.com>
Message-ID: <4554AE7B.4040105@gengas.nu>

For many years, i have thought about some simple kind of ignition 
advance on cheap small engines. But of course it must be a very simple 
system, free from the "Rolls Royce syndrome". One possible way would be 
making a simple CDI system using the primary winding of the original 
flywheel magneto ignition coil for charging the capacitor (probably via 
an external transformer or DCDC converter). Then, two inductive pickups 
for triggering the thyristor, one for a late ignition timing for 
starting and one for an earlier fixed timing which is used when the 
engine is running. A good idea of how to arrange the inductive pickups 
can be taken from Briggs&Stratton's breakerless ignition system.
As those engines usually have a high idle rpm (typically 1500-1800), the 
switchover should take place slightly below normal idle (perhaps 
1000-1200 rpm).

Best regards

Torbj?rn Forsman

James W. Harris wrote:
>>If this Kohler is like mine (16hp K34(?) in a 310 Bobcat) the timing is 
>>set by the point gap and the adjustment is very touchy, must be done 
>>with the engine running as opposed to a feeler gauge. A little reduction 
>>in timing can result in a noticeably large loss of power also.
> 
> 
> I've got a Kohler in a Cub Cadet 129 and have found Bob's comments to be 
> right on!!!!  The point cam must have a slow ramp, because a very, very 
> small adjustment makes a difference in no-start / kickback on starting / 
> no power / power improves as the engine warms up.  A crank triggered 
> system on this engine would be able to provide a big improvement, but who 
> knows how much power these typically splash lubricated engines can 
> tolerate.
> 
> Could use single chip HC11, my homemade controller might be a good 
> starting point:
> 
> http://personal.myvine.com/~jhlh/
> 
> So many machines, so little time!
> 
> JW
> _______________________________________________
> 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 torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu  Fri Nov 10 11:01:21 2006
From: torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Torbj=F6rn_Forsman?=)
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 18:01:21 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Any USB developers out there?
In-Reply-To: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830168A162@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830168A162@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
Message-ID: <4554B061.6060009@gengas.nu>

Texas Instruments has several microcontrollers with integrated USB 
controllers that are popular for hobbyist projects. For example, the 
TUSB3410.
When making high-speed or full-speed USB implementations, the circuit 
layout between the controller's USB pins and the connector is critical. 
It is also critical to follow the controller manufacturer's 
recommendations regarding VCC decoupling, possibly separate ground plane 
for the USB transceiver part of the controller and so on.
Make sure that the clock oscillator runs at the correct frequency with 
maximum ?50 ppm error, use a newly calibrated frequency counter for the 
measurement. It is a good idea to design in a oscillator testpoint with 
a voltage divider, so the clock frequency can be measured without 
disturbing the oscillator. Some USB controllers have a buffered CLKOUT 
pin which can be used for a such measurement.

Best regards

Torbj?rn Forsman

Steve Ravet wrote:
>  
> 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org 
>>[mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Mike
>>Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 3:48 AM
>>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Any USB developers out there?
>>Theres an interesting issue about USB which I've thought 
>>clarifying somewhere without having to wade through numerous 
>>tech docs and that is the low speed backward compatability. 
>>In theory this would allow almost any, even low end single 
>>chip microprocessors to read the serial stream directly in 
>>software at around 19.2 Kbits/sec ( or thereabouts) without 
>>the need for a dedicated hardware USB chip and handle all the 
>>protocols leaving some processing over for the "real stuff" 
>>it is there for in the first place. The consequence clearly 
>>is that any other devices on that USB channel will be also 
>>running low but as most PCs these days have 4 USB ports then 
>>- 'what the heck'...  So if this were the case then a truly 
>>low end opportunity exists for good firmware programmers at 
>>the low end embedded level to interface to engine 
>>electronics. Is 19.2K the lowest with a low granularity or 
>>could 32K, 56K etc be ok if the cpu can handle it ?
> 
> 
> Mike, I think you are talking about bit-banging the USB lines using a
> microcontroller's general purpose I/O lines, right?  I ran across a
> thread about that on the piclist, which I recently joined.  There were
> pointers to a couple software USB implementations but the summary seemed
> to be that adding a software implementation to the firmware already
> required to communicate with the host didn't leave much processing left
> over on the cheap uCs.  A more expensive one might be able to do it, but
> then the incremental cost of interface hardware doesn't matter as much.
> 
> --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 clshore at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 10 12:35:03 2006
From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore)
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 10:35:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Temperature/Pressure sensors
In-Reply-To: <4554ACC9.1060709@gengas.nu>
Message-ID: <20061110183503.51584.qmail@web35713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Well yeah, 
the LM335 specified temp range is -40 to 100 C.

But ISTR the poster asked for a cheap, easy way to
interface to an ADC.

cheap: At under $1.00 US in singles, you can buy a bag
of them, they are in effect consumables.

easy: Direct 10mV/degree K.

interface: 2 wires.

Cheap, accurate, reliable: choose 2

Carter Shore

--- Torbj?rn Forsman <torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu>
wrote:

> The LM335 and most other IC temperature sensors
> (there are also some 
> with digital interface, for example I2C) have a
> reputation for bad 
> reliability in the field, especially in severe
> environments as in 
> vehicle engine compartments, heavy industry etc.
> There are good reasons 
> why all mass produced engine management systems
> still use NTC or nickel 
> resistance (PTC) temperature sensors instead.
> 



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com


From atomic at extendwireless.net  Fri Nov 10 23:24:26 2006
From: atomic at extendwireless.net (Charles Woock)
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 23:24:26 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Need an ALDL def for $88
Message-ID: <001401c70551$a8630520$02dea8c0@AIRBRIDGE>

I have downloaded several $88 ALDL .ads files...  I have also edited them all...  I can't get one to send data.  I can get connected but won't get data.  It streams error packets.  I've read all I can on Thirdgen.org and have come up short.  I'm pretty sure someone out there has one that works.  Can you help me?  If you know another good source for technical info about this stuff, links would also be appreciated.

1227727 running $88 (3.1, V6, cavalier type)

Many thanks,
Charles

From bpatten at centurytel.net  Fri Nov 10 23:40:54 2006
From: bpatten at centurytel.net (Brendan Patten)
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 23:40:54 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Need an ALDL def for $88
In-Reply-To: <001401c70551$a8630520$02dea8c0@AIRBRIDGE>
Message-ID: <000c01c70553$f7ff8110$6400a8c0@p42000>

Download EFI Live v4, it will read the $88.  You could also swap out the
Memcal from a 91+ car and run the $A1 code.  Will have to change speedo
info to make it right, other then that all the same.  $A1 works with
FreeSCAN

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]
On Behalf Of Charles Woock
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 11:24 PM
To: 1diy_efi mailing list
Subject: [Diy_efi] Need an ALDL def for $88

I have downloaded several $88 ALDL .ads files...  I have also edited
them all...  I can't get one to send data.  I can get connected but
won't get data.  It streams error packets.  I've read all I can on
Thirdgen.org and have come up short.  I'm pretty sure someone out there
has one that works.  Can you help me?  If you know another good source
for technical info about this stuff, links would also be appreciated.

1227727 running $88 (3.1, V6, cavalier type)

Many thanks,
Charles
_______________________________________________
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 agarbino at gmail.com  Sun Nov 12 22:21:46 2006
From: agarbino at gmail.com (Alex Garbino)
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 22:21:46 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Temperature/Pressure sensors
In-Reply-To: <4554ACC9.1060709@gengas.nu>
References: <20061104223401.66990.qmail@web35711.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<4554ACC9.1060709@gengas.nu>
Message-ID: <4cf37ad00611122021n2532944etee46984a3ab47e08@mail.gmail.com>

That is excellent information! Thank you, it was exactly what I needed.
Although the LM335 is relatively-speaking a lot cheaper, the absolute costs
are still below the ~$20 [personal] upper limit on a sensor. They may be a
good option for a more sensor-heavy application; but these automotive
versions are certain to work in the environment, and I only need 4-5 sensors
total. Their limitation to 100C is also too low for me to use them on a
turbocharged car without worrying about cooking them...
Thanks,
Alex


On 11/10/06, Torbj?rn Forsman <torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu> wrote:
>
> The LM335 and most other IC temperature sensors (there are also some
> with digital interface, for example I2C) have a reputation for bad
> reliability in the field, especially in severe environments as in
> vehicle engine compartments, heavy industry etc. There are good reasons
> why all mass produced engine management systems still use NTC or nickel
> resistance (PTC) temperature sensors instead.
>
>
>
> For the most common NTC sensors, there are just three basic types to
> take care of.
>
> The "Bosch" temperature sensor, also used by many other japanese and
> european manufacturers, has a characteristic which is to be found here:
> http://www.epcos.com/inf/50/db/ntc_06/LeadlessDisks__B57220__K220.pdf
>
> GM's standard sensor, used for many years on their C3 and P4 systems has
> this characteristic:
> http://www.epcos.com/inf/50/db/ntc_06/Leaded__NTC__B57962__S962.pdf
>
> Ford uses NTC temperature sensors with a resistance about 33 kohm at +25
> ?C. I haven't found any good documentation on those.
>
> Characteristics for nickel PTC sensors (seldomly found, mostly on french
> and japanese systems) can be found here:
> http://www.oiml.org/publications/R/R084-e03.pdf
>
>
> When calculating the temperature - voltage graph, one must know the
> resistance of the pull-up resistor in the ECU as well as the supply
> voltage (almost always 5 V) and if there is any resistor in parallel to
> the sensor. This has to be done by reverse engineering the ECUs.
>
> Bosch typically uses either 1,0 kohm, 2,7 kohm or 2,87 kohm pull-up in
> their Motronic and (digital) Jetronic ECUs. Ignition ECUs (EZ) as well
> as the analog L-jetronic, LE-, LU- and KE- ECUs have completely
> unstandardized pull-up resistors. In some ECUs with 2,7 or 2,87 kohm
> pull-up there may be a parallel resistor.
>
> Japanse ECUs typically have 2,7 kohm pull-up, no parallel resistor.
>
> GM uses 1,0 kohm or 348 ohms pull-up, no parallel resistor. In some
> cases, there are two different pull-up resistors (one 348 ohms and one
> in the 3 kohm range) that can be switched under software control to
> increase the measurement range.
>
> Best regards
>
> Torbj?rn Forsman
>
>
> Carter Shore wrote:
> > Check out National Semiconductor,
> > LM335 yields 10mV/degree K.
> > Cheap, tiny, easy to interface.
> >
> > Carter
> >
> > --- Alex Garbino <agarbino at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Hello,
> >>
> >>I'm trying to build a data acquisition system to
> >>monitor various
> >>temperatures and pressures. I've been looking at
> >>thermocouples, RTDs, and
> >>thermistors; but they have widely different
> >>advatnages and disadvantages. I
> >>was thinking of using thermistors to monitor air
> >>intake temperature &
> >>pressure (on a turbocharged car, so I would like to
> >>monitor atmospheric,
> >>pre-intercooler, and post-intercooler/manifold) as
> >>well as coolant temp, oil
> >>pressure & temp, and EGTs, both before and after the
> >>turbocharger.
> >>Thermistors seem the best choice for air intake,
> >>since they have a fast
> >>response and are cheap; however, I cannot find good
> >>datasheets regarding the
> >>linearization coefficients.
> >>
> >>Does anyone have advice on a good way to capture
> >>data, as well as any tips
> >>on the best way to mount these sensors (a modular
> >>system would be best, so I
> >>could move sensors to different positions and switch
> >>them in and out with
> >>minimum hassle)? Also, can anyone recommend a good
> >>source of cheap sensors?
> >>
> >>The signals will be captured via a PIC18F series'
> >>A/D converters/digital
> >>inputs, and relayed immediately onto an on-board
> >>computer. Please let me
> >>know of any resources that would be helpful!
> >>
> >>Regards,
> >>Alex
> >>
> >>For a more detailed discussion on what I'm trying to
> >>achieve, please see
> >>http://www.mkiiitech.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=903
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>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
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> > Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business
> > (http://smallbusiness.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
>


From bigcow_610 at yahoo.com.au  Mon Nov 13 19:44:20 2006
From: bigcow_610 at yahoo.com.au (Damian Long)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 12:44:20 +1100 (EST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty
Message-ID: <375129.25942.qm@web50312.mail.yahoo.com>

Hi,
   
  I have a rather strange ecu. Most likely not many people have used it before. It is a Walbro Bike400. You can get some information from here www.walbro-tdd.com
   
  Since installing and running this ecu I've tuned the vehicle and found I've needed some very stupid injector opening times. At 2bar boost and 5500rpm I need 17mS opening time!
  Vehicle is 1600cc 4cyl turbo.
  The injectors are Nippon denso 16ohm 550cc/min @40psi. part no 1955000-2020. The fuel pump is a Bosch motorsport unit. 150lph @ 5bar. The pump, regulator and rail pressure all check out ok so I've discovered that its an issue with the ecu or wiring to the injectors. Basically the ecu need to send a 17mS opening time in order to get the injector to open long enough to supply fuel. The injectors are well sized for the application. 
  Does anyone have any ideas where I should be looking for a solution to the problem? So far I have the following ideas but now sure if any are relevant.
   
  1. ecu is designed for peak and hold injectors and this is why
  2. wiring to injectors wrong way round. ie. coil polarity wrong
  3. injector voltage offset table set up wrong in ecu
  4. ecu is lying or is just plain cr p and I should burn it
   
  I flow tested injectors. They are ok. Any ideas?
   
  thanks
   
   

 Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 

From galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net  Mon Nov 13 20:05:39 2006
From: galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net (Jason M.)
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 21:05:39 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty
References: <375129.25942.qm@web50312.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <001e01c70791$635f22a0$4101a8c0@BILLYBOB>

Does the fuel pressure regulator compensate for boost pressure?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Damian Long" <bigcow_610 at yahoo.com.au>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 8:44 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty


> Hi,
>
>  I have a rather strange ecu. Most likely not many people have used it 
> before. It is a Walbro Bike400. You can get some information from here 
> www.walbro-tdd.com
>
>  Since installing and running this ecu I've tuned the vehicle and found 
> I've needed some very stupid injector opening times. At 2bar boost and 
> 5500rpm I need 17mS opening time!
>  Vehicle is 1600cc 4cyl turbo.
>  The injectors are Nippon denso 16ohm 550cc/min @40psi. part no 
> 1955000-2020. The fuel pump is a Bosch motorsport unit. 150lph @ 5bar. The 
> pump, regulator and rail pressure all check out ok so I've discovered that 
> its an issue with the ecu or wiring to the injectors. Basically the ecu 
> need to send a 17mS opening time in order to get the injector to open long 
> enough to supply fuel. The injectors are well sized for the application.
>  Does anyone have any ideas where I should be looking for a solution to 
> the problem? So far I have the following ideas but now sure if any are 
> relevant.
>
>  1. ecu is designed for peak and hold injectors and this is why
>  2. wiring to injectors wrong way round. ie. coil polarity wrong
>  3. injector voltage offset table set up wrong in ecu
>  4. ecu is lying or is just plain cr p and I should burn it
>
>  I flow tested injectors. They are ok. Any ideas?
>
>  thanks




From bobqzzi at cox.net  Mon Nov 13 20:03:39 2006
From: bobqzzi at cox.net (Bobqzzi)
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 21:03:39 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty
In-Reply-To: <375129.25942.qm@web50312.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20061113210243.00ba5e40@pop.east.cox.net>

Do you know how much power you are producing at that rpm and what the A/F 
ratio is?


At 12:44 PM 11/14/2006 +1100, you wrote:
>Hi,
>
>   I have a rather strange ecu. Most likely not many people have used it 
> before. It is a Walbro Bike400. You can get some information from here 
> www.walbro-tdd.com
>
>   Since installing and running this ecu I've tuned the vehicle and found 
> I've needed some very stupid injector opening times. At 2bar boost and 
> 5500rpm I need 17mS opening time!
>   Vehicle is 1600cc 4cyl turbo.
>   The injectors are Nippon denso 16ohm 550cc/min @40psi. part no 
> 1955000-2020. The fuel pump is a Bosch motorsport unit. 150lph @ 5bar. 
> The pump, regulator and rail pressure all check out ok so I've discovered 
> that its an issue with the ecu or wiring to the injectors. Basically the 
> ecu need to send a 17mS opening time in order to get the injector to open 
> long enough to supply fuel. The injectors are well sized for the application.
>   Does anyone have any ideas where I should be looking for a solution to 
> the problem? So far I have the following ideas but now sure if any are 
> relevant.
>
>   1. ecu is designed for peak and hold injectors and this is why
>   2. wiring to injectors wrong way round. ie. coil polarity wrong
>   3. injector voltage offset table set up wrong in ecu
>   4. ecu is lying or is just plain cr p and I should burn it
>
>   I flow tested injectors. They are ok. Any ideas?
>
>   thanks
>
>
>
>  Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.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 A6intruder at myo-p.com  Mon Nov 13 20:07:18 2006
From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson)
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 21:07:18 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty
In-Reply-To: <001e01c70791$635f22a0$4101a8c0@BILLYBOB>
Message-ID: <KMEGIPPMDGHIFFAKGOLEAEGBIEAA.A6intruder@myo-p.com>

How does it run?

17ms at 5500 RPM is a pretty high duty cycle but possibly you are just at
the upper end of your injector capabilities?  If it is running well at 2 bar
boost it sounds like it must be fun.

What would you expect the PW to be at this power level?

Dan Nicoson

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
Behalf Of Jason M.
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 9:06 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty

Does the fuel pressure regulator compensate for boost pressure?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Damian Long" <bigcow_610 at yahoo.com.au>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 8:44 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty


> Hi,
>
>  I have a rather strange ecu. Most likely not many people have used it
> before. It is a Walbro Bike400. You can get some information from here
> www.walbro-tdd.com
>
>  Since installing and running this ecu I've tuned the vehicle and found
> I've needed some very stupid injector opening times. At 2bar boost and
> 5500rpm I need 17mS opening time!
>  Vehicle is 1600cc 4cyl turbo.
>  The injectors are Nippon denso 16ohm 550cc/min @40psi. part no
> 1955000-2020. The fuel pump is a Bosch motorsport unit. 150lph @ 5bar. The
> pump, regulator and rail pressure all check out ok so I've discovered that
> its an issue with the ecu or wiring to the injectors. Basically the ecu
> need to send a 17mS opening time in order to get the injector to open long
> enough to supply fuel. The injectors are well sized for the application.
>  Does anyone have any ideas where I should be looking for a solution to
> the problem? So far I have the following ideas but now sure if any are
> relevant.
>
>  1. ecu is designed for peak and hold injectors and this is why
>  2. wiring to injectors wrong way round. ie. coil polarity wrong
>  3. injector voltage offset table set up wrong in ecu
>  4. ecu is lying or is just plain cr p and I should burn it
>
>  I flow tested injectors. They are ok. Any ideas?
>
>  thanks


_______________________________________________
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 turbotuneusltd at triad.rr.com  Mon Nov 13 20:59:47 2006
From: turbotuneusltd at triad.rr.com (Mark Riley)
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 21:59:47 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty
In-Reply-To: <375129.25942.qm@web50312.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000c01c70798$f1f16120$6401a8c0@marke4979cvtme>

I would hook up a fuel pressure guage and see that the fuel pressure does
indeed rise 1 for 1 with the boost level. I would suspect that perhaps the 
Pump is not keeping up at the upper pressure levels. If the guage shows any
fluctuation at over 10 psi boost or does not make the correct pressure rise
all the way to max boost, the pump is not capable. 

Mark Riley

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
Behalf Of Damian Long
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 8:44 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty

Hi,
   
  I have a rather strange ecu. Most likely not many people have used it
before. It is a Walbro Bike400. You can get some information from here
www.walbro-tdd.com
   
  Since installing and running this ecu I've tuned the vehicle and found
I've needed some very stupid injector opening times. At 2bar boost and
5500rpm I need 17mS opening time!
  Vehicle is 1600cc 4cyl turbo.
  The injectors are Nippon denso 16ohm 550cc/min @40psi. part no
1955000-2020. The fuel pump is a Bosch motorsport unit. 150lph @ 5bar. The
pump, regulator and rail pressure all check out ok so I've discovered that
its an issue with the ecu or wiring to the injectors. Basically the ecu need
to send a 17mS opening time in order to get the injector to open long enough
to supply fuel. The injectors are well sized for the application. 
  Does anyone have any ideas where I should be looking for a solution to the
problem? So far I have the following ideas but now sure if any are relevant.
   
  1. ecu is designed for peak and hold injectors and this is why
  2. wiring to injectors wrong way round. ie. coil polarity wrong
  3. injector voltage offset table set up wrong in ecu
  4. ecu is lying or is just plain cr p and I should burn it
   
  I flow tested injectors. They are ok. Any ideas?
   
  thanks
   
   

 Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.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 clshore at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 14 10:04:51 2006
From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 08:04:51 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty
In-Reply-To: <000c01c70798$f1f16120$6401a8c0@marke4979cvtme>
Message-ID: <20061114160451.76081.qmail@web35706.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I have not looked at the link yet, but are you sure
that the ECU is sequential, rather than batch?
The injector pulsewidth/duty cycle only makes sense if
you know what the underlying pulse frequency is, ie
what's the dead time?

--- Mark Riley <turbotuneusltd at triad.rr.com> wrote:

> I would hook up a fuel pressure guage and see that
> the fuel pressure does
> indeed rise 1 for 1 with the boost level. I would
> suspect that perhaps the 
> Pump is not keeping up at the upper pressure levels.
> If the guage shows any
> fluctuation at over 10 psi boost or does not make
> the correct pressure rise
> all the way to max boost, the pump is not capable. 
> 
> Mark Riley
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
> Behalf Of Damian Long
> Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 8:44 PM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector
> duty
> 
> Hi,
>    
>   I have a rather strange ecu. Most likely not many
> people have used it
> before. It is a Walbro Bike400. You can get some
> information from here
> www.walbro-tdd.com
>    
>   Since installing and running this ecu I've tuned
> the vehicle and found
> I've needed some very stupid injector opening times.
> At 2bar boost and
> 5500rpm I need 17mS opening time!
>   Vehicle is 1600cc 4cyl turbo.
>   The injectors are Nippon denso 16ohm 550cc/min
> @40psi. part no
> 1955000-2020. The fuel pump is a Bosch motorsport
> unit. 150lph @ 5bar. The
> pump, regulator and rail pressure all check out ok
> so I've discovered that
> its an issue with the ecu or wiring to the
> injectors. Basically the ecu need
> to send a 17mS opening time in order to get the
> injector to open long enough
> to supply fuel. The injectors are well sized for the
> application. 
>   Does anyone have any ideas where I should be
> looking for a solution to the
> problem? So far I have the following ideas but now
> sure if any are relevant.
>    
>   1. ecu is designed for peak and hold injectors and
> this is why
>   2. wiring to injectors wrong way round. ie. coil
> polarity wrong
>   3. injector voltage offset table set up wrong in
> ecu
>   4. ecu is lying or is just plain cr p and I should
> burn it
>    
>   I flow tested injectors. They are ok. Any ideas?
>    
>   thanks
>    
>    
> 
>  Send instant messages to your online friends
> http://au.messenger.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
> 



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Music Unlimited
Access over 1 million songs.
http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited


From A6intruder at myo-p.com  Tue Nov 14 10:29:37 2006
From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 11:29:37 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty
In-Reply-To: <20061114160451.76081.qmail@web35706.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <KMEGIPPMDGHIFFAKGOLEOEGMIEAA.A6intruder@myo-p.com>

At 550 RPM on a four cycle engine he has just slightly over 20ms available
(6000 RPM a PW=20ms is 100% duty cycle).

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, November 14, 2006 11:05 AM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty

I have not looked at the link yet, but are you sure
that the ECU is sequential, rather than batch?
The injector pulsewidth/duty cycle only makes sense if
you know what the underlying pulse frequency is, ie
what's the dead time?

--- Mark Riley <turbotuneusltd at triad.rr.com> wrote:

> I would hook up a fuel pressure guage and see that
> the fuel pressure does
> indeed rise 1 for 1 with the boost level. I would
> suspect that perhaps the
> Pump is not keeping up at the upper pressure levels.
> If the guage shows any
> fluctuation at over 10 psi boost or does not make
> the correct pressure rise
> all the way to max boost, the pump is not capable.
>
> Mark Riley
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
> Behalf Of Damian Long
> Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 8:44 PM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector
> duty
>
> Hi,
>
>   I have a rather strange ecu. Most likely not many
> people have used it
> before. It is a Walbro Bike400. You can get some
> information from here
> www.walbro-tdd.com
>
>   Since installing and running this ecu I've tuned
> the vehicle and found
> I've needed some very stupid injector opening times.
> At 2bar boost and
> 5500rpm I need 17mS opening time!
>   Vehicle is 1600cc 4cyl turbo.
>   The injectors are Nippon denso 16ohm 550cc/min
> @40psi. part no
> 1955000-2020. The fuel pump is a Bosch motorsport
> unit. 150lph @ 5bar. The
> pump, regulator and rail pressure all check out ok
> so I've discovered that
> its an issue with the ecu or wiring to the
> injectors. Basically the ecu need
> to send a 17mS opening time in order to get the
> injector to open long enough
> to supply fuel. The injectors are well sized for the
> application.
>   Does anyone have any ideas where I should be
> looking for a solution to the
> problem? So far I have the following ideas but now
> sure if any are relevant.
>
>   1. ecu is designed for peak and hold injectors and
> this is why
>   2. wiring to injectors wrong way round. ie. coil
> polarity wrong
>   3. injector voltage offset table set up wrong in
> ecu
>   4. ecu is lying or is just plain cr p and I should
> burn it
>
>   I flow tested injectors. They are ok. Any ideas?
>
>   thanks
>
>
>
>  Send instant messages to your online friends
> http://au.messenger.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
>




____________________________________________________________________________
________
Yahoo! Music Unlimited
Access over 1 million songs.
http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited
_______________________________________________
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  Tue Nov 14 12:01:39 2006
From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 10:01:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty
In-Reply-To: <KMEGIPPMDGHIFFAKGOLEOEGMIEAA.A6intruder@myo-p.com>
Message-ID: <20061114180139.44917.qmail@web35712.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Yes, that's exactly the point of my post; 

Duty cycle is ratio of On-time to Off-time.
If the injectors are not triggered synchronously with
the crankshaft, and all you know is the On-time (17
mS) then either the pulse *frequency* or Off-Time must
be known in order to calculate the duty cycle. 

Some batch-fire schemes are asynchronous with the
crankshaft, but it doesn't appear to me that this is
one of them, after examining the site.

Carter Shore

--- Daniel Nicoson <A6intruder at myo-p.com> wrote:

> At 550 RPM on a four cycle engine he has just
> slightly over 20ms available
> (6000 RPM a PW=20ms is 100% duty cycle).
> 
> 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, November 14, 2006 11:05 AM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector
> duty
> 
> I have not looked at the link yet, but are you sure
> that the ECU is sequential, rather than batch?
> The injector pulsewidth/duty cycle only makes sense
> if
> you know what the underlying pulse frequency is, ie
> what's the dead time?
> 
> --- Mark Riley <turbotuneusltd at triad.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> > I would hook up a fuel pressure guage and see that
> > the fuel pressure does
> > indeed rise 1 for 1 with the boost level. I would
> > suspect that perhaps the
> > Pump is not keeping up at the upper pressure
> levels.
> > If the guage shows any
> > fluctuation at over 10 psi boost or does not make
> > the correct pressure rise
> > all the way to max boost, the pump is not capable.
> >
> > Mark Riley
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
> > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
> > Behalf Of Damian Long
> > Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 8:44 PM
> > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector
> > duty
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >   I have a rather strange ecu. Most likely not
> many
> > people have used it
> > before. It is a Walbro Bike400. You can get some
> > information from here
> > www.walbro-tdd.com
> >
> >   Since installing and running this ecu I've tuned
> > the vehicle and found
> > I've needed some very stupid injector opening
> times.
> > At 2bar boost and
> > 5500rpm I need 17mS opening time!
> >   Vehicle is 1600cc 4cyl turbo.
> >   The injectors are Nippon denso 16ohm 550cc/min
> > @40psi. part no
> > 1955000-2020. The fuel pump is a Bosch motorsport
> > unit. 150lph @ 5bar. The
> > pump, regulator and rail pressure all check out ok
> > so I've discovered that
> > its an issue with the ecu or wiring to the
> > injectors. Basically the ecu need
> > to send a 17mS opening time in order to get the
> > injector to open long enough
> > to supply fuel. The injectors are well sized for
> the
> > application.
> >   Does anyone have any ideas where I should be
> > looking for a solution to the
> > problem? So far I have the following ideas but now
> > sure if any are relevant.
> >
> >   1. ecu is designed for peak and hold injectors
> and
> > this is why
> >   2. wiring to injectors wrong way round. ie. coil
> > polarity wrong
> >   3. injector voltage offset table set up wrong in
> > ecu
> >   4. ecu is lying or is just plain cr p and I
> should
> > burn it
> >
> >   I flow tested injectors. They are ok. Any ideas?
> >
> >   thanks
> >
> >
> >
> >  Send instant messages to your online friends
> > http://au.messenger.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
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
____________________________________________________________________________
> ________
> Yahoo! Music Unlimited
> Access over 1 million songs.
> http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> 



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Cheap talk?
Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.
http://voice.yahoo.com


From A6intruder at myo-p.com  Tue Nov 14 12:32:54 2006
From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 13:32:54 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty
In-Reply-To: <20061114180139.44917.qmail@web35712.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <KMEGIPPMDGHIFFAKGOLEMEHAIEAA.A6intruder@myo-p.com>

Good point.  I made an ASSumption that the injectors were timed to the
crankshaft somehow.  That's the problem with ASSumptions...

I would also note that the original poster has not responded back to any of
the responses.  Must be busy.  I'm betting he could get some help if he did.

Later,

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, November 14, 2006 1:02 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty

Yes, that's exactly the point of my post;

Duty cycle is ratio of On-time to Off-time.
If the injectors are not triggered synchronously with
the crankshaft, and all you know is the On-time (17
mS) then either the pulse *frequency* or Off-Time must
be known in order to calculate the duty cycle.

Some batch-fire schemes are asynchronous with the
crankshaft, but it doesn't appear to me that this is
one of them, after examining the site.

Carter Shore

--- Daniel Nicoson <A6intruder at myo-p.com> wrote:

> At 550 RPM on a four cycle engine he has just
> slightly over 20ms available
> (6000 RPM a PW=20ms is 100% duty cycle).
>
> 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, November 14, 2006 11:05 AM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector
> duty
>
> I have not looked at the link yet, but are you sure
> that the ECU is sequential, rather than batch?
> The injector pulsewidth/duty cycle only makes sense
> if
> you know what the underlying pulse frequency is, ie
> what's the dead time?
>
> --- Mark Riley <turbotuneusltd at triad.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > I would hook up a fuel pressure guage and see that
> > the fuel pressure does
> > indeed rise 1 for 1 with the boost level. I would
> > suspect that perhaps the
> > Pump is not keeping up at the upper pressure
> levels.
> > If the guage shows any
> > fluctuation at over 10 psi boost or does not make
> > the correct pressure rise
> > all the way to max boost, the pump is not capable.
> >
> > Mark Riley
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
> > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
> > Behalf Of Damian Long
> > Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 8:44 PM
> > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector
> > duty
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >   I have a rather strange ecu. Most likely not
> many
> > people have used it
> > before. It is a Walbro Bike400. You can get some
> > information from here
> > www.walbro-tdd.com
> >
> >   Since installing and running this ecu I've tuned
> > the vehicle and found
> > I've needed some very stupid injector opening
> times.
> > At 2bar boost and
> > 5500rpm I need 17mS opening time!
> >   Vehicle is 1600cc 4cyl turbo.
> >   The injectors are Nippon denso 16ohm 550cc/min
> > @40psi. part no
> > 1955000-2020. The fuel pump is a Bosch motorsport
> > unit. 150lph @ 5bar. The
> > pump, regulator and rail pressure all check out ok
> > so I've discovered that
> > its an issue with the ecu or wiring to the
> > injectors. Basically the ecu need
> > to send a 17mS opening time in order to get the
> > injector to open long enough
> > to supply fuel. The injectors are well sized for
> the
> > application.
> >   Does anyone have any ideas where I should be
> > looking for a solution to the
> > problem? So far I have the following ideas but now
> > sure if any are relevant.
> >
> >   1. ecu is designed for peak and hold injectors
> and
> > this is why
> >   2. wiring to injectors wrong way round. ie. coil
> > polarity wrong
> >   3. injector voltage offset table set up wrong in
> > ecu
> >   4. ecu is lying or is just plain cr p and I
> should
> > burn it
> >
> >   I flow tested injectors. They are ok. Any ideas?
> >
> >   thanks
> >
> >
> >
> >  Send instant messages to your online friends
> > http://au.messenger.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
> >
>
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
> ________
> Yahoo! Music Unlimited
> Access over 1 million songs.
> http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>




____________________________________________________________________________
________
Cheap talk?
Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.
http://voice.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 BNRVL at aol.com  Wed Nov 15 14:37:15 2006
From: BNRVL at aol.com (BNRVL at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 15:37:15 EST
Subject: [Diy_efi] Converting from Carburation to TBI
Message-ID: <bd3.854cbdd.328cd47b@aol.com>


  Hello Scott , I am seeking info to convert to TBI from a salvage or donor 
vehicle. 

  My 1933 Dodge  Pick-up has a 69 Corvette 350 CI engine , with an Aluminum 
factory intake and a 4 Bbl Carter Carb . , Sig Erson cam , number unknown , 
Duster 2:46:1 rear end , 15" wheels .
 I do not think this set up will pull an Overdrive trans., but should deliver 
decent Gas Mileage after the conversion . The 700R 4  , of course can be 
added later . 

 Is this a do-able project ?


  Thank you 

 Bob Norville


From bigcow_610 at yahoo.com.au  Thu Nov 16 04:40:25 2006
From: bigcow_610 at yahoo.com.au (Damian Long)
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 21:40:25 +1100 (EST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] RE: problem with ecu and injector duty
Message-ID: <743110.5383.qm@web50315.mail.yahoo.com>

I've checked the rail pressure. It rises steady at 1 to 1 with manifold pressure right up to 2bar. afr sits nicely at 12:1 but I don't want to push the car past here to see what happens to afr past 5500rpm. The injectors are sequential and wired to suit including the ecu. Putting out approx 150kW at 4 wheels. Yes its a lot of fun to drive. The problem definetly lies with the ecu's injector driver, software or something like this. I will put a cro on the injector as soon as I have the engine back up and running to have a look at the dead time. Had a little mishap with the crank angle sensor that cost me an engine so its being rebuilt. Just don't want any more issues when I have it back together.













Yes, that's exactly the point of my post; 

Duty cycle is ratio of On-time to Off-time.
If the injectors are not triggered synchronously with
the crankshaft, and all you know is the On-time (17
mS) then either the pulse *frequency* or Off-Time must
be known in order to calculate the duty cycle. 

Some batch-fire schemes are asynchronous with the
crankshaft, but it doesn't appear to me that this is
one of them, after examining the site.

Carter Shore

--- Daniel Nicoson  wrote:

> At 550 RPM on a four cycle engine he has just
> slightly over 20ms available
> (6000 RPM a PW=20ms is 100% duty cycle).
> 
> 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, November 14, 2006 11:05 AM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector
> duty
> 
> I have not looked at the link yet, but are you sure
> that the ECU is sequential, rather than batch?
> The injector pulsewidth/duty cycle only makes sense
> if
> you know what the underlying pulse frequency is, ie
> what's the dead time?
> 
> --- Mark Riley  wrote:
> 
> > I would hook up a fuel pressure guage and see that
> > the fuel pressure does
> > indeed rise 1 for 1 with the boost level. I would
> > suspect that perhaps the
> > Pump is not keeping up at the upper pressure
> levels.
> > If the guage shows any
> > fluctuation at over 10 psi boost or does not make
> > the correct pressure rise
> > all the way to max boost, the pump is not capable.
> >
> > Mark Riley
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
> > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
> > Behalf Of Damian Long
> > Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 8:44 PM
> > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector
> > duty
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >   I have a rather strange ecu. Most likely not
> many
> > people have used it
> > before. It is a Walbro Bike400. You can get some
> > information from here
> > www.walbro-tdd.com
> >
> >   Since installing and running this ecu I've tuned
> > the vehicle and found
> > I've needed some very stupid injector opening
> times.
> > At 2bar boost and
> > 5500rpm I need 17mS opening time!
> >   Vehicle is 1600cc 4cyl turbo.
> >   The injectors are Nippon denso 16ohm 550cc/min
> > @40psi. part no
> > 1955000-2020. The fuel pump is a Bosch motorsport
> > unit. 150lph @ 5bar. The
> > pump, regulator and rail pressure all check out ok
> > so I've discovered that
> > its an issue with the ecu or wiring to the
> > injectors. Basically the ecu need
> > to send a 17mS opening time in order to get the
> > injector to open long enough
> > to supply fuel. The injectors are well sized for
> the
> > application.
> >   Does anyone have any ideas where I should be
> > looking for a solution to the
> > problem? So far I have the following ideas but now
> > sure if any are relevant.
> >
> >   1. ecu is designed for peak and hold injectors
> and
> > this is why
> >   2. wiring to injectors wrong way round. ie. coil
> > polarity wrong
> >   3. injector voltage offset table set up wrong in
> > ecu
> >   4. ecu is lying or is just plain cr p and I
> should
> > burn it
> >
> >   I flow tested injectors. They are ok. Any ideas?
> >
> >   thanks
> >
> >
> >
> >  Send instant messages to your online friends
> > http://au.messenger.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
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
____________________________________________________________________________
> ________
> Yahoo! Music Unlimited
> Access over 1 million songs.
> http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> 



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Cheap talk?
Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.
http://voice.yahoo.com


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

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 13:32:54 -0500
From: "Daniel Nicoson" 
Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty
To: 
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Good point.  I made an ASSumption that the injectors were timed to the
crankshaft somehow.  That's the problem with ASSumptions...

I would also note that the original poster has not responded back to any of
the responses.  Must be busy.  I'm betting he could get some help if he did.

Later,

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, November 14, 2006 1:02 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty

Yes, that's exactly the point of my post;

Duty cycle is ratio of On-time to Off-time.
If the injectors are not triggered synchronously with
the crankshaft, and all you know is the On-time (17
mS) then either the pulse *frequency* or Off-Time must
be known in order to calculate the duty cycle.

Some batch-fire schemes are asynchronous with the
crankshaft, but it doesn't appear to me that this is
one of them, after examining the site.

Carter Shore

--- Daniel Nicoson  wrote:

> At 550 RPM on a four cycle engine he has just
> slightly over 20ms available
> (6000 RPM a PW=20ms is 100% duty cycle).
>
> 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, November 14, 2006 11:05 AM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector
> duty
>
> I have not looked at the link yet, but are you sure
> that the ECU is sequential, rather than batch?
> The injector pulsewidth/duty cycle only makes sense
> if
> you know what the underlying pulse frequency is, ie
> what's the dead time?
>
> --- Mark Riley  wrote:
>
> > I would hook up a fuel pressure guage and see that
> > the fuel pressure does
> > indeed rise 1 for 1 with the boost level. I would
> > suspect that perhaps the
> > Pump is not keeping up at the upper pressure
> levels.
> > If the guage shows any
> > fluctuation at over 10 psi boost or does not make
> > the correct pressure rise
> > all the way to max boost, the pump is not capable.
> >
> > Mark Riley
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
> > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
> > Behalf Of Damian Long
> > Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 8:44 PM
> > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector
> > duty
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >   I have a rather strange ecu. Most likely not
> many
> > people have used it
> > before. It is a Walbro Bike400. You can get some
> > information from here
> > www.walbro-tdd.com
> >
> >   Since installing and running this ecu I've tuned
> > the vehicle and found
> > I've needed some very stupid injector opening
> times.
> > At 2bar boost and
> > 5500rpm I need 17mS opening time!
> >   Vehicle is 1600cc 4cyl turbo.
> >   The injectors are Nippon denso 16ohm 550cc/min
> > @40psi. part no
> > 1955000-2020. The fuel pump is a Bosch motorsport
> > unit. 150lph @ 5bar. The
> > pump, regulator and rail pressure all check out ok
> > so I've discovered that
> > its an issue with the ecu or wiring to the
> > injectors. Basically the ecu need
> > to send a 17mS opening time in order to get the
> > injector to open long enough
> > to supply fuel. The injectors are well sized for
> the
> > application.
> >   Does anyone have any ideas where I should be
> > looking for a solution to the
> > problem? So far I have the following ideas but now
> > sure if any are relevant.
> >
> >   1. ecu is designed for peak and hold injectors
> and
> > this is why
> >   2. wiring to injectors wrong way round. ie. coil
> > polarity wrong
> >   3. injector voltage offset table set up wrong in
> > ecu
> >   4. ecu is lying or is just plain cr p and I
> should
> > burn it
> >
> >   I flow tested injectors. They are ok. Any ideas?
> >
> >   thanks
> >
> >
> >
> >  Send instant messages to your online friends
> > http://au.messenger.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
> >
>
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
> ________
> Yahoo! Music Unlimited
> Access over 1 million songs.
> http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>




____________________________________________________________________________
________
Cheap talk?
Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.
http://voice.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
http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi


End of Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 11
***************************************


 Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 

From efi at dyakron.com  Thu Nov 16 07:09:07 2006
From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V)
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 08:09:07 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Converting from Carburation to TBI
In-Reply-To: <bd3.854cbdd.328cd47b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20061116080406.0354ebf0@dyakron.com>

Sure! The first thing I thought of was "how rowdy is the cam?"
You say you don't know the number, but is it an RV type cam,
or does it idle like a NHRA SuperStock?  <grin>.   There are
probably members here that can assist more, but speed-density
systems give me fits when the cam has lots of overlap.  - MV

At 03:37 PM 11/15/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>Hello Scott , I am seeking info to convert to TBI from a salvage or donor
>vehicle.
>
>   My 1933 Dodge  Pick-up has a 69 Corvette 350 CI engine , with an Aluminum
>factory intake and a 4 Bbl Carter Carb . , Sig Erson cam , number unknown ,
>Duster 2:46:1 rear end , 15" wheels .
>  I do not think this set up will pull an Overdrive trans., but should 
> deliver
>decent Gas Mileage after the conversion . The 700R 4  , of course can be
>added later .
>
>  Is this a do-able project ?



From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 16 08:50:46 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 06:50:46 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Converting from Carburation to TBI
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20061116080406.0354ebf0@dyakron.com>
Message-ID: <20061116145046.91600.qmail@web32201.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- Mike V <efi at dyakron.com> wrote:

> speed-density systems give me fits when the cam has
> lots of overlap.

Motorcycles do things backwards to how cars do; they
run speed density at idle and snall throttle openings,
and alpha-n at larger throttle openings.  In this way
they can get more precise information about small
changes in throttle angle or load without using a
faster processor (with a plenum between the throttle
and the intake valves, there's a lot less issue in
needing fast and extremely accurate response to what
on a car would be a fairly small change).

They do this in one of two ways, or sometimes a
combination; restrictors and longish tubing for the
MAP sensor, and sampling MAP shortly after the intake
valve opens (which takes care of any "confusion" and
bouncing signal due to reversion).  Either of these
could be a help if there was an issue with speed
density and lumpy cams...

| 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 |


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sponsored Link

Mortgage rates near 39yr lows. 
$310k for $999/mo. Calculate new payment! 
www.LowerMyBills.com/lre


From A6intruder at myo-p.com  Thu Nov 16 09:41:01 2006
From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson)
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 10:41:01 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] RE: problem with ecu and injector duty
In-Reply-To: <743110.5383.qm@web50315.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <KMEGIPPMDGHIFFAKGOLEGEKAIEAA.A6intruder@myo-p.com>

Damian,

It sounds like everything is working fine.  Your AFR is coming out in an OK
range.  What was your target AFR?

I would say if you are planning to go to higher boost with the new engine
you will need larger injectors.  Right now you are at about the limit of
those injectors.  Using your data point 17ms at 5500 RPM, you have about a
78% duty cycle.  Normally the "rule of thumb" is not to exceed about 80%
duty cycle.

Good luck with the project.

Dan Nicoson

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
Behalf Of Damian Long
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 5:40 AM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: [Diy_efi] RE: problem with ecu and injector duty

I've checked the rail pressure. It rises steady at 1 to 1 with manifold
pressure right up to 2bar. afr sits nicely at 12:1 but I don't want to push
the car past here to see what happens to afr past 5500rpm. The injectors are
sequential and wired to suit including the ecu. Putting out approx 150kW at
4 wheels. Yes its a lot of fun to drive. The problem definetly lies with the
ecu's injector driver, software or something like this. I will put a cro on
the injector as soon as I have the engine back up and running to have a look
at the dead time. Had a little mishap with the crank angle sensor that cost
me an engine so its being rebuilt. Just don't want any more issues when I
have it back together.













Yes, that's exactly the point of my post;

Duty cycle is ratio of On-time to Off-time.
If the injectors are not triggered synchronously with
the crankshaft, and all you know is the On-time (17
mS) then either the pulse *frequency* or Off-Time must
be known in order to calculate the duty cycle.

Some batch-fire schemes are asynchronous with the
crankshaft, but it doesn't appear to me that this is
one of them, after examining the site.

Carter Shore

--- Daniel Nicoson  wrote:

> At 550 RPM on a four cycle engine he has just
> slightly over 20ms available
> (6000 RPM a PW=20ms is 100% duty cycle).
>
> 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, November 14, 2006 11:05 AM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector
> duty
>
> I have not looked at the link yet, but are you sure
> that the ECU is sequential, rather than batch?
> The injector pulsewidth/duty cycle only makes sense
> if
> you know what the underlying pulse frequency is, ie
> what's the dead time?
>
> --- Mark Riley  wrote:
>
> > I would hook up a fuel pressure guage and see that
> > the fuel pressure does
> > indeed rise 1 for 1 with the boost level. I would
> > suspect that perhaps the
> > Pump is not keeping up at the upper pressure
> levels.
> > If the guage shows any
> > fluctuation at over 10 psi boost or does not make
> > the correct pressure rise
> > all the way to max boost, the pump is not capable.
> >
> > Mark Riley
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
> > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
> > Behalf Of Damian Long
> > Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 8:44 PM
> > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector
> > duty
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >   I have a rather strange ecu. Most likely not
> many
> > people have used it
> > before. It is a Walbro Bike400. You can get some
> > information from here
> > www.walbro-tdd.com
> >
> >   Since installing and running this ecu I've tuned
> > the vehicle and found
> > I've needed some very stupid injector opening
> times.
> > At 2bar boost and
> > 5500rpm I need 17mS opening time!
> >   Vehicle is 1600cc 4cyl turbo.
> >   The injectors are Nippon denso 16ohm 550cc/min
> > @40psi. part no
> > 1955000-2020. The fuel pump is a Bosch motorsport
> > unit. 150lph @ 5bar. The
> > pump, regulator and rail pressure all check out ok
> > so I've discovered that
> > its an issue with the ecu or wiring to the
> > injectors. Basically the ecu need
> > to send a 17mS opening time in order to get the
> > injector to open long enough
> > to supply fuel. The injectors are well sized for
> the
> > application.
> >   Does anyone have any ideas where I should be
> > looking for a solution to the
> > problem? So far I have the following ideas but now
> > sure if any are relevant.
> >
> >   1. ecu is designed for peak and hold injectors
> and
> > this is why
> >   2. wiring to injectors wrong way round. ie. coil
> > polarity wrong
> >   3. injector voltage offset table set up wrong in
> > ecu
> >   4. ecu is lying or is just plain cr p and I
> should
> > burn it
> >
> >   I flow tested injectors. They are ok. Any ideas?
> >
> >   thanks
> >
> >
> >
> >  Send instant messages to your online friends
> > http://au.messenger.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
> >
>
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
> ________
> Yahoo! Music Unlimited
> Access over 1 million songs.
> http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>




____________________________________________________________________________
________
Cheap talk?
Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.
http://voice.yahoo.com


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

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 13:32:54 -0500
From: "Daniel Nicoson"
Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty
To:
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Good point.  I made an ASSumption that the injectors were timed to the
crankshaft somehow.  That's the problem with ASSumptions...

I would also note that the original poster has not responded back to any of
the responses.  Must be busy.  I'm betting he could get some help if he did.

Later,

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, November 14, 2006 1:02 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector duty

Yes, that's exactly the point of my post;

Duty cycle is ratio of On-time to Off-time.
If the injectors are not triggered synchronously with
the crankshaft, and all you know is the On-time (17
mS) then either the pulse *frequency* or Off-Time must
be known in order to calculate the duty cycle.

Some batch-fire schemes are asynchronous with the
crankshaft, but it doesn't appear to me that this is
one of them, after examining the site.

Carter Shore

--- Daniel Nicoson  wrote:

> At 550 RPM on a four cycle engine he has just
> slightly over 20ms available
> (6000 RPM a PW=20ms is 100% duty cycle).
>
> 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, November 14, 2006 11:05 AM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector
> duty
>
> I have not looked at the link yet, but are you sure
> that the ECU is sequential, rather than batch?
> The injector pulsewidth/duty cycle only makes sense
> if
> you know what the underlying pulse frequency is, ie
> what's the dead time?
>
> --- Mark Riley  wrote:
>
> > I would hook up a fuel pressure guage and see that
> > the fuel pressure does
> > indeed rise 1 for 1 with the boost level. I would
> > suspect that perhaps the
> > Pump is not keeping up at the upper pressure
> levels.
> > If the guage shows any
> > fluctuation at over 10 psi boost or does not make
> > the correct pressure rise
> > all the way to max boost, the pump is not capable.
> >
> > Mark Riley
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
> > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
> > Behalf Of Damian Long
> > Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 8:44 PM
> > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > Subject: [Diy_efi] problem with ecu and injector
> > duty
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >   I have a rather strange ecu. Most likely not
> many
> > people have used it
> > before. It is a Walbro Bike400. You can get some
> > information from here
> > www.walbro-tdd.com
> >
> >   Since installing and running this ecu I've tuned
> > the vehicle and found
> > I've needed some very stupid injector opening
> times.
> > At 2bar boost and
> > 5500rpm I need 17mS opening time!
> >   Vehicle is 1600cc 4cyl turbo.
> >   The injectors are Nippon denso 16ohm 550cc/min
> > @40psi. part no
> > 1955000-2020. The fuel pump is a Bosch motorsport
> > unit. 150lph @ 5bar. The
> > pump, regulator and rail pressure all check out ok
> > so I've discovered that
> > its an issue with the ecu or wiring to the
> > injectors. Basically the ecu need
> > to send a 17mS opening time in order to get the
> > injector to open long enough
> > to supply fuel. The injectors are well sized for
> the
> > application.
> >   Does anyone have any ideas where I should be
> > looking for a solution to the
> > problem? So far I have the following ideas but now
> > sure if any are relevant.
> >
> >   1. ecu is designed for peak and hold injectors
> and
> > this is why
> >   2. wiring to injectors wrong way round. ie. coil
> > polarity wrong
> >   3. injector voltage offset table set up wrong in
> > ecu
> >   4. ecu is lying or is just plain cr p and I
> should
> > burn it
> >
> >   I flow tested injectors. They are ok. Any ideas?
> >
> >   thanks
> >
> >
> >
> >  Send instant messages to your online friends
> > http://au.messenger.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
> >
>
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
> ________
> Yahoo! Music Unlimited
> Access over 1 million songs.
> http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>




____________________________________________________________________________
________
Cheap talk?
Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.
http://voice.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
http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi


End of Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 11
***************************************


 Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.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 joelori at earthlink.net  Sat Nov 18 16:10:17 2006
From: joelori at earthlink.net (Joseph Obernberger)
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 17:10:17 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
Message-ID: <455F84C9.4050007@earthlink.net>

Hi,
    I've read in various places that it is possible to run an engine so 
rich that detonation can occur - or at least the knock sensor would pick 
up what sounded like detonation.  Has anyone ever experienced this?  Any 
truth to it?
Thanks!

-Joe
http://www.lovehorsepower.com


From damonb at avaya.com  Sat Nov 18 18:43:44 2006
From: damonb at avaya.com (Becker, Damon (Damon))
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 17:43:44 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
References: <455F84C9.4050007@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D22F@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>

Hi, Joe!  It's Damon (flyboy) from the MR2 community.  
 
Yes, it's totally possible to get rich detonation.  However, you will usually misfire before you hit this point, unless you are pretty careless with the ignition.  
 
Combustion velocity is what dictates spark timing, and it varies with AFR.  The max velocity is around 11.0 mass air/fuel ratio (the exact value is debatable, but the concept still holds).  Therefore, rich of this value, the combustion velocity increases again, necessitating a reduced spark advance.  
 
If you leave the spark static and add fuel, then very rich mixtures will detonate, assuming the detonation propensity was there to begin with.  

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Joseph Obernberger 
	Sent: Sat 11/18/2006 3:10 PM 
	To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org 
	Cc: 
	Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
	
	

	Hi,
	    I've read in various places that it is possible to run an engine so
	rich that detonation can occur - or at least the knock sensor would pick
	up what sounded like detonation.  Has anyone ever experienced this?  Any
	truth to it?
	Thanks!
	
	-Joe
	http://www.lovehorsepower.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 niche at iinet.net.au  Sun Nov 19 00:58:04 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 14:58:04 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
In-Reply-To: <A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D22F@cof110avexu2.global
	.avaya.com>
References: <455F84C9.4050007@earthlink.net>
	<A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D22F@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20061119145321.02a69610@iinet.net.au>>

Is the rationale for what you say below, excess fuel, or can you
articulate just why the detonation occurs. I understand F1 engines
often shift to  use 4:1 afr (with methanol) and although there is reduced power
than running at just better than stoich for methanol - that the 4:1 ratio
still results in combustion but radically reduce stresses on exhaust
valves - vis a vis cooling the valves immediately after a hard run where the
integral of EGT over the last few seconds exceeds some maxima ?

Rgds

Mike

At 08:43 AM 11/19/06, you wrote:
>Hi, Joe!  It's Damon (flyboy) from the MR2 community.  
> 
>Yes, it's totally possible to get rich detonation.  However, you will usually misfire before you hit this point, unless you are pretty careless with the ignition.  
> 
>Combustion velocity is what dictates spark timing, and it varies with AFR.  The max velocity is around 11.0 mass air/fuel ratio (the exact value is debatable, but the concept still holds).  Therefore, rich of this value, the combustion velocity increases again, necessitating a reduced spark advance.  
> 
>If you leave the spark static and add fuel, then very rich mixtures will detonate, assuming the detonation propensity was there to begin with.  
>
>        -----Original Message----- 
>        From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Joseph Obernberger 
>        Sent: Sat 11/18/2006 3:10 PM 
>        To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org 
>        Cc: 
>        Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
>        
>        
>
>        Hi,
>            I've read in various places that it is possible to run an engine so
>        rich that detonation can occur - or at least the knock sensor would pick
>        up what sounded like detonation.  Has anyone ever experienced this?  Any
>        truth to it?
>        Thanks!
>        
>        -Joe
>        http://www.lovehorsepower.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


From trekfan at globalco.net  Sun Nov 19 14:17:17 2006
From: trekfan at globalco.net (trekfan)
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 15:17:17 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] engine convresion
Message-ID: <CIEFJEOPKLJNCDKEHJDEKEMGCBAA.trekfan@globalco.net>

I?ve been reading this list for some time now, so here goes.
The vehicle I own is a 1992 Lumina APV(van) with the 3.1L Vin ?D? engine and
the 3T40 automatic transaxle. The intake is TBI speed density it also has a
distributor. The only trans control I see is for the TCC. What I would like
to know is does anyone know of a multi-port MAF conversion or any ideas on
what parts (intake head, ECM
etc) to build one from scratch. Thanks for any
help at all

John



From galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net  Sun Nov 19 15:01:26 2006
From: galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net (Jason M.)
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 16:01:26 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] engine convresion
References: <CIEFJEOPKLJNCDKEHJDEKEMGCBAA.trekfan@globalco.net>
Message-ID: <002d01c70c1d$e1c22350$4101a8c0@BILLYBOB>

The only application I know of (there probably are others) of a 60 degree v6 
with multiport injection, MAF sensor distributor and TCC is the 
camaro/firebird from the late 80's  I know this set up was on the 2.8L but 
I'm not sure about the later 3.1.  Although I have heard a stock 2.8 ecu 
will keep up with a 3.4L, with tuning it'd be no problem.

So that will take care of the electronics.  The front wheel drive and rear 
drive 60 degree v6's have a different head/intake set up so you'd need to 
get a multiport intake off a front wheel drive application.

Of course there might be a front drive application you can get everything 
off of.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "trekfan" <trekfan at globalco.net>
To: <gmecm at diy-efi.org>; "Diy_Efi at Diy-Efi.Org" <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 3:17 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] engine convresion


> I've been reading this list for some time now, so here goes.
> The vehicle I own is a 1992 Lumina APV(van) with the 3.1L Vin "D" engine 
> and
> the 3T40 automatic transaxle. The intake is TBI speed density it also has 
> a
> distributor. The only trans control I see is for the TCC. What I would 
> like
> to know is does anyone know of a multi-port MAF conversion or any ideas on
> what parts (intake head, ECM.etc) to build one from scratch. Thanks for 
> any
> help at all
>
> John




From damonb at avaya.com  Sun Nov 19 15:40:27 2006
From: damonb at avaya.com (Becker, Damon (Damon))
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 14:40:27 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
References: <455F84C9.4050007@earthlink.net><A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D22F@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061119145321.02a69610@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D230@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>

I'm not sure what you mean by "shift to use 4:1".  I'm assuming you mean mass ratio, and "shift" means they moved to using that ratio, instead of being associated with gear shifts.  
 
AFR is definitely a thermal management tool, among other things.  What you say does make sense if you are seeing excessive EGT.  If you can infer exhaust valve temp from an integral of the EGT, then that response would definitely make sense.  This doesn't really have much to do with detonation, though.  
 
I'm sure the exact AFR (or lambda) that peak combustion speeds happen differ with fuel.  Although I haven't seen research to this effect, I'm sure it's the case.  I have no idea where 4:1 mass ratio methanol falls on the combustion speed charts, as I haven't played with methanol.  

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Mike 
	Sent: Sat 11/18/2006 11:58 PM 
	To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org 
	Cc: 
	Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
	
	

	Is the rationale for what you say below, excess fuel, or can you
	articulate just why the detonation occurs. I understand F1 engines
	often shift to  use 4:1 afr (with methanol) and although there is reduced power
	than running at just better than stoich for methanol - that the 4:1 ratio
	still results in combustion but radically reduce stresses on exhaust
	valves - vis a vis cooling the valves immediately after a hard run where the
	integral of EGT over the last few seconds exceeds some maxima ?
	
	Rgds
	
	Mike
	
	At 08:43 AM 11/19/06, you wrote:
	>Hi, Joe!  It's Damon (flyboy) from the MR2 community. 
	>
	>Yes, it's totally possible to get rich detonation.  However, you will usually misfire before you hit this point, unless you are pretty careless with the ignition. 
	>
	>Combustion velocity is what dictates spark timing, and it varies with AFR.  The max velocity is around 11.0 mass air/fuel ratio (the exact value is debatable, but the concept still holds).  Therefore, rich of this value, the combustion velocity increases again, necessitating a reduced spark advance. 
	>
	>If you leave the spark static and add fuel, then very rich mixtures will detonate, assuming the detonation propensity was there to begin with. 
	>
	>        -----Original Message-----
	>        From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Joseph Obernberger
	>        Sent: Sat 11/18/2006 3:10 PM
	>        To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
	>        Cc:
	>        Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
	>       
	>       
	>
	>        Hi,
	>            I've read in various places that it is possible to run an engine so
	>        rich that detonation can occur - or at least the knock sensor would pick
	>        up what sounded like detonation.  Has anyone ever experienced this?  Any
	>        truth to it?
	>        Thanks!
	>       
	>        -Joe
	>        http://www.lovehorsepower.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
	_______________________________________________
	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 vg30dett at portugalmail.com  Sun Nov 19 15:22:35 2006
From: vg30dett at portugalmail.com (vg30dett at portugalmail.com)
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 21:22:35 +0000
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
In-Reply-To: <A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D230@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
References: <455F84C9.4050007@earthlink.net><A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D22F@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061119145321.02a69610@iinet.net.au>>
	<A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D230@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
Message-ID: <1163971355.4560cb1b5b4b3@webmail3.portugalmail.pt>

F1 engines dont run on alchool...AFAIK.

Citando "Becker, Damon \\(Damon\\)" <damonb at avaya.com>:

 I'm not sure what you mean by "shift to use 4:1".  I'm assuming you mean mass
 ratio, and "shift" means they moved to using that ratio, instead of being
 associated with gear shifts.  
  
 AFR is definitely a thermal management tool, among other things.  What you say
 does make sense if you are seeing excessive EGT.  If you can infer exhaust
 valve temp from an integral of the EGT, then that response would definitely
 make sense.  This doesn't really have much to do with detonation, though.  
  
 I'm sure the exact AFR (or lambda) that peak combustion speeds happen differ
 with fuel.  Although I haven't seen research to this effect, I'm sure it's the
 case.  I have no idea where 4:1 mass ratio methanol falls on the combustion
 speed charts, as I haven't played with methanol.  
 
 	-----Original Message----- 
 	From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Mike 
 	Sent: Sat 11/18/2006 11:58 PM 
 	To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org 
 	Cc: 
 	Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
 	
 	
 
 	Is the rationale for what you say below, excess fuel, or can you
 	articulate just why the detonation occurs. I understand F1 engines
 	often shift to  use 4:1 afr (with methanol) and although there is reduced
 power
 	than running at just better than stoich for methanol - that the 4:1 ratio
 	still results in combustion but radically reduce stresses on exhaust
 	valves - vis a vis cooling the valves immediately after a hard run where the
 	integral of EGT over the last few seconds exceeds some maxima ?
 	
 	Rgds
 	
 	Mike
 	
 	At 08:43 AM 11/19/06, you wrote:
 	>Hi, Joe!  It's Damon (flyboy) from the MR2 community. 
 	>
 	>Yes, it's totally possible to get rich detonation.  However, you will
 usually misfire before you hit this point, unless you are pretty careless with
 the ignition. 
 	>
 	>Combustion velocity is what dictates spark timing, and it varies with AFR. 
 The max velocity is around 11.0 mass air/fuel ratio (the exact value is
 debatable, but the concept still holds).  Therefore, rich of this value, the
 combustion velocity increases again, necessitating a reduced spark advance. 
 	>
 	>If you leave the spark static and add fuel, then very rich mixtures will
 detonate, assuming the detonation propensity was there to begin with. 
 	>
 	>        -----Original Message-----
 	>        From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Joseph Obernberger
 	>        Sent: Sat 11/18/2006 3:10 PM
 	>        To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
 	>        Cc:
 	>        Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
 	>       
 	>       
 	>
 	>        Hi,
 	>            I've read in various places that it is possible to run an engine
 so
 	>        rich that detonation can occur - or at least the knock sensor would
 pick
 	>        up what sounded like detonation.  Has anyone ever experienced this? 
 Any
 	>        truth to it?
 	>        Thanks!
 	>       
 	>        -Joe
 	>        http://www.lovehorsepower.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
 	_______________________________________________
 	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
 	
 
 



__________________________________________________________
Pare de esbanjar dinheiro!
Compare o pre?o da sua liga??o ? Internet
http://acesso.portugalmail.pt/maisbarato


From jimbutterfield at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 19 18:58:58 2006
From: jimbutterfield at yahoo.com (Jim Butterfield)
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 16:58:58 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] engine convresion
In-Reply-To: <002d01c70c1d$e1c22350$4101a8c0@BILLYBOB>
Message-ID: <20061120005858.1202.qmail@web36706.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Well a 3.1L went to speed density system, as on my 90 Lumina sedan... and I dont know about a 2.8L keeping up with a 3.4.... I have a 3400 in my 97 olds silhouette, and ive smoked quite a few 6's out there... I swear when they built this one it was the perfect combination of factory parts

   
  Jim
  
"Jason M." <galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
  The only application I know of (there probably are others) of a 60 degree v6 
with multiport injection, MAF sensor distributor and TCC is the 
camaro/firebird from the late 80's I know this set up was on the 2.8L but 
I'm not sure about the later 3.1. Although I have heard a stock 2.8 ecu 
will keep up with a 3.4L, with tuning it'd be no problem.

So that will take care of the electronics. The front wheel drive and rear 
drive 60 degree v6's have a different head/intake set up so you'd need to 
get a multiport intake off a front wheel drive application.

Of course there might be a front drive application you can get everything 
off of.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "trekfan" 
To: ; "Diy_Efi at Diy-Efi.Org" 
Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 3:17 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] engine convresion


> I've been reading this list for some time now, so here goes.
> The vehicle I own is a 1992 Lumina APV(van) with the 3.1L Vin "D" engine 
> and
> the 3T40 automatic transaxle. The intake is TBI speed density it also has 
> a
> distributor. The only trans control I see is for the TCC. What I would 
> like
> to know is does anyone know of a multi-port MAF conversion or any ideas on
> what parts (intake head, ECM.etc) to build one from scratch. Thanks for 
> any
> help at all
>
> John


_______________________________________________
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


 
---------------------------------
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.

From galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net  Sun Nov 19 20:38:35 2006
From: galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net (Jason M.)
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 21:38:35 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] engine convresion
References: <20061120005858.1202.qmail@web36706.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <006501c70c4c$fbe62400$4101a8c0@BILLYBOB>

Think you mis-read that, the 2.8 ECU will keep up with a 3.4L.  Maybe not 
clear, you stick a 2.8L electronics* on a 3.4L engine without tuning it 
"should" run well.

*2.8L electronics = MAF not speed density.

btw, I used to own a 2.8L powered 87 camaro.  had all the power a young kid 
should have, enough to get sideways going around corners, chirp the tires at 
the 1-2 shift or 2-1 downshift for acceleration (700r4 automatic).  beating 
the hell out of it, it'd still get 22 mpg.  Sold it to a friend about 6 
years ago, he got 36mpg highway with it.   Still have the original engine 
(long story) and a set of front wheel drive heads that I intend to put on it 
one day.  Using some numbers I found on the net a few years back it should 
be somewhere in the 14.5-15:1 compression range.  Don't have the time, money 
or a vehicle to put such and engine in so it will have to wait.  I'm also 
pretty sure the engine will end up scattering itself with the cast 
internals.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jim Butterfield" <jimbutterfield at yahoo.com>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 7:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] engine convresion


> Well a 3.1L went to speed density system, as on my 90 Lumina sedan... and 
> I dont know about a 2.8L keeping up with a 3.4.... I have a 3400 in my 97 
> olds silhouette, and ive smoked quite a few 6's out there... I swear when 
> they built this one it was the perfect combination of factory parts
>
>
>  Jim


 Although I have heard a stock 2.8 ecu
> will keep up with a 3.4L, with tuning it'd be no problem.
>




From steve at donegan.org  Sun Nov 19 20:47:55 2006
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 18:47:55 -0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] engine convresion
In-Reply-To: <006501c70c4c$fbe62400$4101a8c0@BILLYBOB>
References: <20061120005858.1202.qmail@web36706.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<006501c70c4c$fbe62400$4101a8c0@BILLYBOB>
Message-ID: <1163990875.15684.2.camel@perky.donegan.org>

Almost sad when you think about it - my 1998 LS1 V8 gets 22 MPG around
town and has seen 35 or so MPG on trips - likely about twice the HP of
that 6 :-) Of course that car has a 6 speed manual tranny with 2
overdrives (.85 and .5) and likely weighs a bit less than your 87.

On Sun, 2006-11-19 at 21:38 -0500, Jason M. wrote:
> Think you mis-read that, the 2.8 ECU will keep up with a 3.4L.  Maybe not 
> clear, you stick a 2.8L electronics* on a 3.4L engine without tuning it 
> "should" run well.
> 
> *2.8L electronics = MAF not speed density.
> 
> btw, I used to own a 2.8L powered 87 camaro.  had all the power a young kid 
> should have, enough to get sideways going around corners, chirp the tires at 
> the 1-2 shift or 2-1 downshift for acceleration (700r4 automatic).  beating 
> the hell out of it, it'd still get 22 mpg.  Sold it to a friend about 6 
> years ago, he got 36mpg highway with it.   Still have the original engine 
> (long story) and a set of front wheel drive heads that I intend to put on it 
> one day.  Using some numbers I found on the net a few years back it should 
> be somewhere in the 14.5-15:1 compression range.  Don't have the time, money 
> or a vehicle to put such and engine in so it will have to wait.  I'm also 
> pretty sure the engine will end up scattering itself with the cast 
> internals.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Jim Butterfield" <jimbutterfield at yahoo.com>
> To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 7:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] engine convresion
> 
> 
> > Well a 3.1L went to speed density system, as on my 90 Lumina sedan... and 
> > I dont know about a 2.8L keeping up with a 3.4.... I have a 3400 in my 97 
> > olds silhouette, and ive smoked quite a few 6's out there... I swear when 
> > they built this one it was the perfect combination of factory parts
> >
> >
> >  Jim
> 
> 
>  Although I have heard a stock 2.8 ecu
> > will keep up with a 3.4L, with tuning it'd be no problem.
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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
-- 
"Each new law makes only a single guarantee. It will create new
criminals."-- John Tandervold



From galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net  Sun Nov 19 21:39:24 2006
From: galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net (Jason M.)
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 22:39:24 -0500
Subject: v6 vs v8 slightly off topic was Re: [Diy_efi] engine convresion
References: <20061120005858.1202.qmail@web36706.mail.mud.yahoo.com><006501c70c4c$fbe62400$4101a8c0@BILLYBOB>
	<1163990875.15684.2.camel@perky.donegan.org>
Message-ID: <008101c70c55$bf498b50$4101a8c0@BILLYBOB>

Oddly enough my friend has since sold my old 87 and now has a 98 z28, "5" 
speed 3.73:1 posi.  It gets similiar mileage.  Think he usually sees 
33-34mpg highway.  2nd gear doesn't exsist in his transmission anymore, 
don't know if a shift fork broke or the gears just broke.

He has a LS6 engine with a new set of lingenfelter heads and an intake that 
still need to be put on.  He's planning to buy a new T-56 and put the LS6 in 
there.

The 4th gen f-body is heavier then the 3rd gen.  Couple of websites list the 
98 z28 as 3460lbs (correct, who knows?)  my '87 weighed 3010lbs with me in 
it, so 2830 lbs.  Was weighed when I went to buy metal for a body stand for 
one of my caprices.

Little bit of on topic, that caprice is a 1985, still working on it.  Hoping 
to finish the body work next summer, and the rear suspension.  It is now set 
up for a 425/472/500 cadillac and 700r4.  I have a '76 500 for it.  Will be 
carbureted at first but I plan to go with port injection.  Not sure about 
what ECU system I want to use yet.  megasquirt would be cheap.  Performance 
electronics is supposed to have a new ecu coming out next year that could 
run port injection and 4 dual terminal coil packs.  (they are 18 months 
behind the original release date).  Possibly use a GM unit.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven P. Donegan" <steve at donegan.org>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 9:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] engine convresion


> Almost sad when you think about it - my 1998 LS1 V8 gets 22 MPG around
> town and has seen 35 or so MPG on trips - likely about twice the HP of
> that 6 :-) Of course that car has a 6 speed manual tranny with 2
> overdrives (.85 and .5) and likely weighs a bit less than your 87.




From niche at iinet.net.au  Mon Nov 20 00:56:29 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 14:56:29 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
In-Reply-To: <1163971355.4560cb1b5b4b3@webmail3.portugalmail.pt>
References: <455F84C9.4050007@earthlink.net>
	<A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D22F@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061119145321.02a69610@iinet.net.au>
	<A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D230@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
	<1163971355.4560cb1b5b4b3@webmail3.portugalmail.pt>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20061120145140.02a48200@iinet.net.au>>

At 05:22 AM 11/20/06, you wrote:
>F1 engines dont run on alchool...AFAIK.

ok, I might have been thinking of nascar then, long time ago ~`:o

However, I recall that in respect of F1, the AFR shifted from
just over stoich to 4:1 as that thermal management tool mentioned,
which raises the question - where is this "rich detonation" in that
environment has it been sidestepped, did it exist in the first place ?

Is "rich detonation" a clearly defined effect. Or is it perhaps a consequence
of running very rich, causing huge carbon buildup then when normal stoich
occurs these carbon deposits cause pre-ignition which is interpreted
as if its detonation as it appears to be (closely) caused by the rich
condition - until such time as the preignition or detonation scours most
of the carbon off the various surfaces ?

So what is the mechanism of "rich detonation" ?

rgds

Mike





>Citando "Becker, Damon \\(Damon\\)" <damonb at avaya.com>:
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "shift to use 4:1".  I'm assuming you mean mass
> ratio, and "shift" means they moved to using that ratio, instead of being
> associated with gear shifts.  
>  
> AFR is definitely a thermal management tool, among other things.  What you say
> does make sense if you are seeing excessive EGT.  If you can infer exhaust
> valve temp from an integral of the EGT, then that response would definitely
> make sense.  This doesn't really have much to do with detonation, though.  
>  
> I'm sure the exact AFR (or lambda) that peak combustion speeds happen differ
> with fuel.  Although I haven't seen research to this effect, I'm sure it's the
> case.  I have no idea where 4:1 mass ratio methanol falls on the combustion
> speed charts, as I haven't played with methanol.  
> 
>        -----Original Message----- 
>        From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Mike 
>        Sent: Sat 11/18/2006 11:58 PM 
>        To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org 
>        Cc: 
>        Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
>        
>        
> 
>        Is the rationale for what you say below, excess fuel, or can you
>        articulate just why the detonation occurs. I understand F1 engines
>        often shift to  use 4:1 afr (with methanol) and although there is reduced
> power
>        than running at just better than stoich for methanol - that the 4:1 ratio
>        still results in combustion but radically reduce stresses on exhaust
>        valves - vis a vis cooling the valves immediately after a hard run where the
>        integral of EGT over the last few seconds exceeds some maxima ?
>        
>        Rgds
>        
>        Mike
>        
>        At 08:43 AM 11/19/06, you wrote:
>        >Hi, Joe!  It's Damon (flyboy) from the MR2 community. 
>        >
>        >Yes, it's totally possible to get rich detonation.  However, you will
> usually misfire before you hit this point, unless you are pretty careless with
> the ignition. 
>        >
>        >Combustion velocity is what dictates spark timing, and it varies with AFR. 
> The max velocity is around 11.0 mass air/fuel ratio (the exact value is
> debatable, but the concept still holds).  Therefore, rich of this value, the
> combustion velocity increases again, necessitating a reduced spark advance. 
>        >
>        >If you leave the spark static and add fuel, then very rich mixtures will
> detonate, assuming the detonation propensity was there to begin with. 
>        >
>        >        -----Original Message-----
>        >        From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Joseph Obernberger
>        >        Sent: Sat 11/18/2006 3:10 PM
>        >        To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>        >        Cc:
>        >        Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
>        >       
>        >       
>        >
>        >        Hi,
>        >            I've read in various places that it is possible to run an engine
> so
>        >        rich that detonation can occur - or at least the knock sensor would
> pick
>        >        up what sounded like detonation.  Has anyone ever experienced this? 
> Any
>        >        truth to it?
>        >        Thanks!
>        >       
>        >        -Joe
>        >        http://www.lovehorsepower.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
>        _______________________________________________
>        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
>        
> 
> 
>
>
>
>__________________________________________________________
>Pare de esbanjar dinheiro!
>Compare o pre?o da sua liga??o ? Internet
>http://acesso.portugalmail.pt/maisbarato
>_______________________________________________
>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 atomic at extendwireless.net  Mon Nov 20 01:23:10 2006
From: atomic at extendwireless.net (Charles Woock)
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 01:23:10 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
References: <455F84C9.4050007@earthlink.net><A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D22F@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com><7.0.1.0.0.20061119145321.02a69610@iinet.net.au><A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D230@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com><1163971355.4560cb1b5b4b3@webmail3.portugalmail.pt>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061120145140.02a48200@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <003a01c70c74$bc37ed70$02dea8c0@AIRBRIDGE>

The richer the mix the faster the burn.  The leaner the mix the slower the 
burn.  It is all about ignition timing, however the source of detonation 
aside from improper timing is from poor quality fuel or fuel not suited for 
a specific compression ratio.  Poor fuel combined with hot spots in the 
combustion chamber results in pre-ignition.  I'm not really sure what you 
mean by "rich detonation".  The whole engine is a system... all the parts 
and processes must match.

Good luck
Charles


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike" <niche at iinet.net.au>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 12:56 AM
Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?


At 05:22 AM 11/20/06, you wrote:
>F1 engines dont run on alchool...AFAIK.

ok, I might have been thinking of nascar then, long time ago ~`:o

However, I recall that in respect of F1, the AFR shifted from
just over stoich to 4:1 as that thermal management tool mentioned,
which raises the question - where is this "rich detonation" in that
environment has it been sidestepped, did it exist in the first place ?

Is "rich detonation" a clearly defined effect. Or is it perhaps a 
consequence
of running very rich, causing huge carbon buildup then when normal stoich
occurs these carbon deposits cause pre-ignition which is interpreted
as if its detonation as it appears to be (closely) caused by the rich
condition - until such time as the preignition or detonation scours most
of the carbon off the various surfaces ?

So what is the mechanism of "rich detonation" ?

rgds

Mike





>Citando "Becker, Damon \\(Damon\\)" <damonb at avaya.com>:
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "shift to use 4:1".  I'm assuming you mean 
> mass
> ratio, and "shift" means they moved to using that ratio, instead of being
> associated with gear shifts.
>
> AFR is definitely a thermal management tool, among other things.  What you 
> say
> does make sense if you are seeing excessive EGT.  If you can infer exhaust
> valve temp from an integral of the EGT, then that response would 
> definitely
> make sense.  This doesn't really have much to do with detonation, though.
>
> I'm sure the exact AFR (or lambda) that peak combustion speeds happen 
> differ
> with fuel.  Although I haven't seen research to this effect, I'm sure it's 
> the
> case.  I have no idea where 4:1 mass ratio methanol falls on the 
> combustion
> speed charts, as I haven't played with methanol.
>
>        -----Original Message----- 
>        From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Mike
>        Sent: Sat 11/18/2006 11:58 PM
>        To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>        Cc:
>        Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
>
>
>
>        Is the rationale for what you say below, excess fuel, or can you
>        articulate just why the detonation occurs. I understand F1 engines
>        often shift to  use 4:1 afr (with methanol) and although there is 
> reduced
> power
>        than running at just better than stoich for methanol - that the 4:1 
> ratio
>        still results in combustion but radically reduce stresses on 
> exhaust
>        valves - vis a vis cooling the valves immediately after a hard run 
> where the
>        integral of EGT over the last few seconds exceeds some maxima ?
>
>        Rgds
>
>        Mike
>
>        At 08:43 AM 11/19/06, you wrote:
>        >Hi, Joe!  It's Damon (flyboy) from the MR2 community.
>        >
>        >Yes, it's totally possible to get rich detonation.  However, you 
> will
> usually misfire before you hit this point, unless you are pretty careless 
> with
> the ignition.
>        >
>        >Combustion velocity is what dictates spark timing, and it varies 
> with AFR.
> The max velocity is around 11.0 mass air/fuel ratio (the exact value is
> debatable, but the concept still holds).  Therefore, rich of this value, 
> the
> combustion velocity increases again, necessitating a reduced spark 
> advance.
>        >
>        >If you leave the spark static and add fuel, then very rich 
> mixtures will
> detonate, assuming the detonation propensity was there to begin with.
>        >
>        >        -----Original Message-----
>        >        From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Joseph 
> Obernberger
>        >        Sent: Sat 11/18/2006 3:10 PM
>        >        To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>        >        Cc:
>        >        Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
>        >
>        >
>        >
>        >        Hi,
>        >            I've read in various places that it is possible to run 
> an engine
> so
>        >        rich that detonation can occur - or at least the knock 
> sensor would
> pick
>        >        up what sounded like detonation.  Has anyone ever 
> experienced this?
> Any
>        >        truth to it?
>        >        Thanks!
>        >
>        >        -Joe
>        >        http://www.lovehorsepower.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
>        _______________________________________________
>        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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>__________________________________________________________
>Pare de esbanjar dinheiro!
>Compare o pre?o da sua liga??o ? Internet
>http://acesso.portugalmail.pt/maisbarato
>_______________________________________________
>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 niche at iinet.net.au  Mon Nov 20 01:47:30 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 15:47:30 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
In-Reply-To: <003a01c70c74$bc37ed70$02dea8c0@AIRBRIDGE>
References: <455F84C9.4050007@earthlink.net>
	<A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D22F@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061119145321.02a69610@iinet.net.au>
	<A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D230@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
	<1163971355.4560cb1b5b4b3@webmail3.portugalmail.pt>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061120145140.02a48200@iinet.net.au>
	<003a01c70c74$bc37ed70$02dea8c0@AIRBRIDGE>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20061120153403.027788f0@iinet.net.au>>

At 03:23 PM 11/20/06, you wrote:
>The richer the mix the faster the burn.  The leaner the mix the slower the burn.  It is all about ignition timing, however the source of detonation aside from improper timing is from poor quality fuel or fuel not suited for a specific compression ratio.  Poor fuel combined with hot spots in the combustion chamber results in pre-ignition.  I'm not really sure what you mean by "rich detonation".  The whole engine is a system... all the parts and processes must match.

Thats what I want clarified.  I've been interested in  EFI for 20 years and have
an engineering background in that field since EFI was my subject at uni in 1982,
I appreciate the systems aspect but not heard of this so called "rich detonation"
being any sort of issue, even worth touting as any problem, I also havent heard
of a richer mixture burning that much faster than a lean mixture, well within the bounds of normal range one encounters for road use and in that respect, 
although its sensible to conclude it would burn a little faster but I have not heard
of tuning shops advancing the timing by anything significant if at all when
mapping for a richer mixture from say 12.5:1 to 11:1 to squeeze out a bit more 
power so in that range I am wondering how much would be gained advancing
the timing by say 1deg if its only for the issue of burn speed vs some other
factor in the system overall such as a richer mixture cooling the charge can
allow for less chance of detonation etc

So in addition to the original post - you have raised another query I'd
like clarified:-

Just how much faster does the mixture burn if it goes from say 14:1 to
11:1 is there a graph that is specific to this relationship which isnt
complicated by average temperature rise in chamber etc  *and* why
doesnt it appear that tuning shops advance the timing map (at least a little) when running richer mixtures assuming they are already using the optimum
fuel for that engine configuration.

My post arose as a result of responding to this post by Joseph Obernberger
who started the topic with the same subject line:-


>Hi,
>   I've read in various places that it is possible to run an engine so rich that detonation can occur - or at least the knock sensor would pick up what sounded like detonation.  Has anyone ever experienced this?  Any truth to it?
>Thanks!





>Good luck
>Charles
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike" <niche at iinet.net.au>
>To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
>Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 12:56 AM
>Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
>
>
>At 05:22 AM 11/20/06, you wrote:
>>F1 engines dont run on alchool...AFAIK.
>
>ok, I might have been thinking of nascar then, long time ago ~`:o
>
>However, I recall that in respect of F1, the AFR shifted from
>just over stoich to 4:1 as that thermal management tool mentioned,
>which raises the question - where is this "rich detonation" in that
>environment has it been sidestepped, did it exist in the first place ?
>
>Is "rich detonation" a clearly defined effect. Or is it perhaps a consequence
>of running very rich, causing huge carbon buildup then when normal stoich
>occurs these carbon deposits cause pre-ignition which is interpreted
>as if its detonation as it appears to be (closely) caused by the rich
>condition - until such time as the preignition or detonation scours most
>of the carbon off the various surfaces ?
>
>So what is the mechanism of "rich detonation" ?
>
>rgds
>
>Mike
>
>
>
>
>
>>Citando "Becker, Damon \\(Damon\\)" <damonb at avaya.com>:
>>
>>I'm not sure what you mean by "shift to use 4:1".  I'm assuming you mean mass
>>ratio, and "shift" means they moved to using that ratio, instead of being
>>associated with gear shifts.
>>
>>AFR is definitely a thermal management tool, among other things.  What you say
>>does make sense if you are seeing excessive EGT.  If you can infer exhaust
>>valve temp from an integral of the EGT, then that response would definitely
>>make sense.  This doesn't really have much to do with detonation, though.
>>
>>I'm sure the exact AFR (or lambda) that peak combustion speeds happen differ
>>with fuel.  Although I haven't seen research to this effect, I'm sure it's the
>>case.  I have no idea where 4:1 mass ratio methanol falls on the combustion
>>speed charts, as I haven't played with methanol.
>>
>>       -----Original Message-----        From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Mike
>>       Sent: Sat 11/18/2006 11:58 PM
>>       To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>       Cc:
>>       Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
>>
>>
>>
>>       Is the rationale for what you say below, excess fuel, or can you
>>       articulate just why the detonation occurs. I understand F1 engines
>>       often shift to  use 4:1 afr (with methanol) and although there is reduced
>>power
>>       than running at just better than stoich for methanol - that the 4:1 ratio
>>       still results in combustion but radically reduce stresses on exhaust
>>       valves - vis a vis cooling the valves immediately after a hard run where the
>>       integral of EGT over the last few seconds exceeds some maxima ?
>>
>>       Rgds
>>
>>       Mike
>>
>>       At 08:43 AM 11/19/06, you wrote:
>>       >Hi, Joe!  It's Damon (flyboy) from the MR2 community.
>>       >
>>       >Yes, it's totally possible to get rich detonation.  However, you will
>>usually misfire before you hit this point, unless you are pretty careless with
>>the ignition.
>>       >
>>       >Combustion velocity is what dictates spark timing, and it varies with AFR.
>>The max velocity is around 11.0 mass air/fuel ratio (the exact value is
>>debatable, but the concept still holds).  Therefore, rich of this value, the
>>combustion velocity increases again, necessitating a reduced spark advance.
>>       >
>>       >If you leave the spark static and add fuel, then very rich mixtures will
>>detonate, assuming the detonation propensity was there to begin with.
>>       >
>>       >        -----Original Message-----
>>       >        From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Joseph Obernberger
>>       >        Sent: Sat 11/18/2006 3:10 PM
>>       >        To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>       >        Cc:
>>       >        Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
>>       >
>>       >
>>       >
>>       >        Hi,
>>       >            I've read in various places that it is possible to run an engine
>>so
>>       >        rich that detonation can occur - or at least the knock sensor would
>>pick
>>       >        up what sounded like detonation.  Has anyone ever experienced this?
>>Any
>>       >        truth to it?
>>       >        Thanks!
>>       >
>>       >        -Joe
>>       >        http://www.lovehorsepower.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
>>       _______________________________________________
>>       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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>__________________________________________________________
>>Pare de esbanjar dinheiro!
>>Compare o pre?o da sua liga??o ? Internet
>>http://acesso.portugalmail.pt/maisbarato
>>_______________________________________________
>>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 bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au  Mon Nov 20 04:59:19 2006
From: bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au (Bernd Felsche)
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 18:59:19 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
In-Reply-To: <003a01c70c74$bc37ed70$02dea8c0@AIRBRIDGE>
References: <455F84C9.4050007@earthlink.net>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061120145140.02a48200@iinet.net.au>>
	<003a01c70c74$bc37ed70$02dea8c0@AIRBRIDGE>
Message-ID: <200611201859.19668@death.2.spammers>

On Monday 20 November 2006 15:23, Charles Woock wrote:
> The richer the mix the faster the burn.  The leaner the mix the
> slower the burn.  

How so? There is less probability of oxygen being available for
combustion of a part of the fuel when the mixture is richer than
stoichiometric.

OTOH, the ready availability of oxygen in a lean mixture means that
combustion is hotter and therefore tends more towards detonation.

The flame front will burn at about the same speed in both cases for
mixtures slightly either side of stoichiometric. Basically; if it
burns, it'll burn at the same rate. 

> It is all about ignition timing,

How can that be? You said it was related to the mixture.

> however the source of detonation

It's also about initial gas velocities, mixing, piston speeds,
cooling, internal and external EGR ratios, ...

> aside from improper timing is from poor quality fuel or fuel not
> suited for a specific compression ratio.  Poor fuel combined with
> hot spots in the combustion chamber results in pre-ignition.

Pre-ignition is NOT detonation.

-- 
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ /  ASCII ribbon campaign | "If we let things terrify us,
 X   against HTML mail     |  life will not be worth living."
/ \  and postings          | Lucius Annaeus Seneca, c. 4BC - 65AD.




From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 20 08:10:05 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 06:10:05 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
In-Reply-To: <1163971355.4560cb1b5b4b3@webmail3.portugalmail.pt>
Message-ID: <20061120141005.52400.qmail@web32213.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- vg30dett at portugalmail.com wrote:

> F1 engines dont run on alchool...AFAIK.

I think he probably meant "Champ Cars", which I
believe still run on methanol with turbocharging.

| 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 |


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sponsored Link

Online degrees - find the right program to advance your career.
Www.nextag.com


From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 20 08:16:38 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 06:16:38 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Hot-film MAF sensor of about 3" OD?
Message-ID: <591995.29804.qm@web32215.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

In working with one of the old 6801-based NipponDenso
ECUs, I'd like to get rid of the vane-type AFM (aka
the "flapper"); seems like the easiest way to do that
would be to install a MAF sensor in its place, and
adding a simple analog circuit so the MAF output would
follow the response curve of the original AFM.

Can anyone recommend an uni-directional hot-film MAF
that is somewhere in the neighborhood of 3" (~80 mm)
OD for the flanges?  If I know what vehicles came with
something of that nature, I could go picking through
junkyards for my prototype of an improved box.

Anyone who has MPU experience is welcome to join the
convo here; I am also wanting to create a USB/serial
interface with the ECU that will allow flash
remapping, real-time sensor feeds (with data-logging
capability with a laptop), and ideally, a
"emulator"-style real-time remapping facility. 
However, it looks like the 6801 does not have enough
I/O or clock speed to support that, and rewriting the
runtime code for a different, newer processor,
especially if there are events dictated by counting
MPU clock cycles, is going to prove a challenge not
worth sorting.  However, I can at least force the 6801
to read an outboard EPROM (through masking, I
believe), so I can remap via "burning" EPROMs and
installing them on the board.  Getting rid of the
flapper is also a primary objective...

| 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 |


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sponsored Link

Mortgage rates near 39yr lows. 
$310k for $999/mo. Calculate new payment! 
www.LowerMyBills.com/lre


From joelori at earthlink.net  Mon Nov 20 08:38:25 2006
From: joelori at earthlink.net (Joseph Obernberger)
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 09:38:25 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20061120153403.027788f0@iinet.net.au>>
References: <455F84C9.4050007@earthlink.net>	<A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D22F@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>	<7.0.1.0.0.20061119145321.02a69610@iinet.net.au>	<A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D230@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>	<1163971355.4560cb1b5b4b3@webmail3.portugalmail.pt>	<7.0.1.0.0.20061120145140.02a48200@iinet.net.au>	<003a01c70c74$bc37ed70$02dea8c0@AIRBRIDGE>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061120153403.027788f0@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <4561BDE1.2050909@earthlink.net>

The reason for asking about rich detonation is that in my own experience 
when running AFRs lower than 10, the ECU will sometimes pick up knock - 
or at least interpret the signal from the knock sensor as knock.  This 
causes the ECU to retard ignition timing and lower boost pressure.  
Sometimes this will happen when tuning at not particularly high boost 
pressures, but very rich mixtures.

-Joe
http://www.lovehorsepower.com
http://videos.lovehorsepower.com

Mike wrote:
> At 03:23 PM 11/20/06, you wrote:
>   
>> The richer the mix the faster the burn.  The leaner the mix the slower the burn.  It is all about ignition timing, however the source of detonation aside from improper timing is from poor quality fuel or fuel not suited for a specific compression ratio.  Poor fuel combined with hot spots in the combustion chamber results in pre-ignition.  I'm not really sure what you mean by "rich detonation".  The whole engine is a system... all the parts and processes must match.
>>     
>
> My post arose as a result of responding to this post by Joseph Obernberger
> who started the topic with the same subject line:-
>
>
>   
>> Hi,
>>   I've read in various places that it is possible to run an engine so rich that detonation can occur - or at least the knock sensor would pick up what sounded like detonation.  Has anyone ever experienced this?  Any truth to it?
>> Thanks!
>>     
>
>   
>
>   


From steve at donegan.org  Mon Nov 20 09:34:10 2006
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 07:34:10 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Hot-film MAF sensor of about 3" OD?
In-Reply-To: <591995.29804.qm@web32215.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <591995.29804.qm@web32215.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9043.70.168.146.244.1164036850.squirrel@24.199.42.50>

1998 LS1 Camaro and 1997 and later Corvettes have a sensor that is close
to what you are looking for.

> In working with one of the old 6801-based NipponDenso
> ECUs, I'd like to get rid of the vane-type AFM (aka
> the "flapper"); seems like the easiest way to do that
> would be to install a MAF sensor in its place, and
> adding a simple analog circuit so the MAF output would
> follow the response curve of the original AFM.
>
> Can anyone recommend an uni-directional hot-film MAF
> that is somewhere in the neighborhood of 3" (~80 mm)
> OD for the flanges?  If I know what vehicles came with
> something of that nature, I could go picking through
> junkyards for my prototype of an improved box.
>
> Anyone who has MPU experience is welcome to join the
> convo here; I am also wanting to create a USB/serial
> interface with the ECU that will allow flash
> remapping, real-time sensor feeds (with data-logging
> capability with a laptop), and ideally, a
> "emulator"-style real-time remapping facility.
> However, it looks like the 6801 does not have enough
> I/O or clock speed to support that, and rewriting the
> runtime code for a different, newer processor,
> especially if there are events dictated by counting
> MPU clock cycles, is going to prove a challenge not
> worth sorting.  However, I can at least force the 6801
> to read an outboard EPROM (through masking, I
> believe), so I can remap via "burning" EPROMs and
> installing them on the board.  Getting rid of the
> flapper is also a primary objective...
>
> | 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 |
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Sponsored Link
>
> Mortgage rates near 39yr lows.
> $310k for $999/mo. Calculate new payment!
> www.LowerMyBills.com/lre
> _______________________________________________
> 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 espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 20 10:31:24 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 08:31:24 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
In-Reply-To: <003a01c70c74$bc37ed70$02dea8c0@AIRBRIDGE>
Message-ID: <20061120163125.35359.qmail@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- Charles Woock <atomic at extendwireless.net> wrote:

> The richer the mix the faster the burn.  The leaner
> the mix the slower the burn.

This is incorrect.

With gasoline, the fastest burn rate is slightly lean
of stoichiometric (roughly where best BSFC is
achieved); going in either direction slows the burn
rate, all other things being equal.

| 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 |


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sponsored Link

Mortgage rates near 39yr lows. 
$420k for $1,399/mo. Calculate new payment! 
www.LowerMyBills.com/lre


From damonb at avaya.com  Mon Nov 20 10:39:57 2006
From: damonb at avaya.com (Becker, Damon (Damon))
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 09:39:57 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
References: <455F84C9.4050007@earthlink.net><A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D22F@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com><7.0.1.0.0.20061119145321.02a69610@iinet.net.au><A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D230@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com><1163971355.4560cb1b5b4b3@webmail3.portugalmail.pt><7.0.1.0.0.20061120145140.02a48200@iinet.net.au><003a01c70c74$bc37ed70$02dea8c0@AIRBRIDGE>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061120153403.027788f0@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D234@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>

I too am an mechanical engineer, thermo specialty.  It was news to me when tuning legends like Ben Strader talked about it.  
 
Combustion velocity increases to a max rich point.  That exact point is usually much richer than most cars run.  That's why it's usually a non-issue.  However, stock turbo cars do actually run richer than this point.  

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Mike 
	Sent: Mon 11/20/2006 12:47 AM 
	To: Charles Woock; diy_efi at diy-efi.org 
	Cc: 
	Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
	
	

	At 03:23 PM 11/20/06, you wrote:
	>The richer the mix the faster the burn.  The leaner the mix the slower the burn.  It is all about ignition timing, however the source of detonation aside from improper timing is from poor quality fuel or fuel not suited for a specific compression ratio.  Poor fuel combined with hot spots in the combustion chamber results in pre-ignition.  I'm not really sure what you mean by "rich detonation".  The whole engine is a system... all the parts and processes must match.
	
	Thats what I want clarified.  I've been interested in  EFI for 20 years and have
	an engineering background in that field since EFI was my subject at uni in 1982,
	I appreciate the systems aspect but not heard of this so called "rich detonation"
	being any sort of issue, even worth touting as any problem, I also havent heard
	of a richer mixture burning that much faster than a lean mixture, well within the bounds of normal range one encounters for road use and in that respect,
	although its sensible to conclude it would burn a little faster but I have not heard
	of tuning shops advancing the timing by anything significant if at all when
	mapping for a richer mixture from say 12.5:1 to 11:1 to squeeze out a bit more
	power so in that range I am wondering how much would be gained advancing
	the timing by say 1deg if its only for the issue of burn speed vs some other
	factor in the system overall such as a richer mixture cooling the charge can
	allow for less chance of detonation etc
	
	So in addition to the original post - you have raised another query I'd
	like clarified:-
	
	Just how much faster does the mixture burn if it goes from say 14:1 to
	11:1 is there a graph that is specific to this relationship which isnt
	complicated by average temperature rise in chamber etc  *and* why
	doesnt it appear that tuning shops advance the timing map (at least a little) when running richer mixtures assuming they are already using the optimum
	fuel for that engine configuration.
	
	My post arose as a result of responding to this post by Joseph Obernberger
	who started the topic with the same subject line:-
	
	
	>Hi,
	>   I've read in various places that it is possible to run an engine so rich that detonation can occur - or at least the knock sensor would pick up what sounded like detonation.  Has anyone ever experienced this?  Any truth to it?
	>Thanks!
	
	
	
	
	
	>Good luck
	>Charles
	>
	>
	>----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike" <niche at iinet.net.au>
	>To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
	>Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 12:56 AM
	>Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
	>
	>
	>At 05:22 AM 11/20/06, you wrote:
	>>F1 engines dont run on alchool...AFAIK.
	>
	>ok, I might have been thinking of nascar then, long time ago ~`:o
	>
	>However, I recall that in respect of F1, the AFR shifted from
	>just over stoich to 4:1 as that thermal management tool mentioned,
	>which raises the question - where is this "rich detonation" in that
	>environment has it been sidestepped, did it exist in the first place ?
	>
	>Is "rich detonation" a clearly defined effect. Or is it perhaps a consequence
	>of running very rich, causing huge carbon buildup then when normal stoich
	>occurs these carbon deposits cause pre-ignition which is interpreted
	>as if its detonation as it appears to be (closely) caused by the rich
	>condition - until such time as the preignition or detonation scours most
	>of the carbon off the various surfaces ?
	>
	>So what is the mechanism of "rich detonation" ?
	>
	>rgds
	>
	>Mike
	>
	>
	>
	>
	>
	>>Citando "Becker, Damon \\(Damon\\)" <damonb at avaya.com>:
	>>
	>>I'm not sure what you mean by "shift to use 4:1".  I'm assuming you mean mass
	>>ratio, and "shift" means they moved to using that ratio, instead of being
	>>associated with gear shifts.
	>>
	>>AFR is definitely a thermal management tool, among other things.  What you say
	>>does make sense if you are seeing excessive EGT.  If you can infer exhaust
	>>valve temp from an integral of the EGT, then that response would definitely
	>>make sense.  This doesn't really have much to do with detonation, though.
	>>
	>>I'm sure the exact AFR (or lambda) that peak combustion speeds happen differ
	>>with fuel.  Although I haven't seen research to this effect, I'm sure it's the
	>>case.  I have no idea where 4:1 mass ratio methanol falls on the combustion
	>>speed charts, as I haven't played with methanol.
	>>
	>>       -----Original Message-----        From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Mike
	>>       Sent: Sat 11/18/2006 11:58 PM
	>>       To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
	>>       Cc:
	>>       Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
	>>
	>>
	>>
	>>       Is the rationale for what you say below, excess fuel, or can you
	>>       articulate just why the detonation occurs. I understand F1 engines
	>>       often shift to  use 4:1 afr (with methanol) and although there is reduced
	>>power
	>>       than running at just better than stoich for methanol - that the 4:1 ratio
	>>       still results in combustion but radically reduce stresses on exhaust
	>>       valves - vis a vis cooling the valves immediately after a hard run where the
	>>       integral of EGT over the last few seconds exceeds some maxima ?
	>>
	>>       Rgds
	>>
	>>       Mike
	>>
	>>       At 08:43 AM 11/19/06, you wrote:
	>>       >Hi, Joe!  It's Damon (flyboy) from the MR2 community.
	>>       >
	>>       >Yes, it's totally possible to get rich detonation.  However, you will
	>>usually misfire before you hit this point, unless you are pretty careless with
	>>the ignition.
	>>       >
	>>       >Combustion velocity is what dictates spark timing, and it varies with AFR.
	>>The max velocity is around 11.0 mass air/fuel ratio (the exact value is
	>>debatable, but the concept still holds).  Therefore, rich of this value, the
	>>combustion velocity increases again, necessitating a reduced spark advance.
	>>       >
	>>       >If you leave the spark static and add fuel, then very rich mixtures will
	>>detonate, assuming the detonation propensity was there to begin with.
	>>       >
	>>       >        -----Original Message-----
	>>       >        From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Joseph Obernberger
	>>       >        Sent: Sat 11/18/2006 3:10 PM
	>>       >        To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
	>>       >        Cc:
	>>       >        Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
	>>       >
	>>       >
	>>       >
	>>       >        Hi,
	>>       >            I've read in various places that it is possible to run an engine
	>>so
	>>       >        rich that detonation can occur - or at least the knock sensor would
	>>pick
	>>       >        up what sounded like detonation.  Has anyone ever experienced this?
	>>Any
	>>       >        truth to it?
	>>       >        Thanks!
	>>       >
	>>       >        -Joe
	>>       >        http://www.lovehorsepower.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
	>>       _______________________________________________
	>>       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
	>>
	>>
	>>
	>>
	>>
	>>
	>>__________________________________________________________
	>>Pare de esbanjar dinheiro!
	>>Compare o pre?o da sua liga??o ? Internet
	>>http://acesso.portugalmail.pt/maisbarato
	>>_______________________________________________
	>>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 espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 20 11:11:25 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 09:11:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Hot-film MAF sensor of about 3" OD?
In-Reply-To: <9043.70.168.146.244.1164036850.squirrel@24.199.42.50>
Message-ID: <581377.20780.qm@web32204.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- "Steven P. Donegan" <steve at donegan.org> wrote:

> 1998 LS1 Camaro and 1997 and later Corvettes have a
> sensor that is close to what you are looking for.

Thanks, Steven!  I'll keep my ears open for other
ideas and start scouring the boneyards...

| 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 |


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sponsored Link

Online degrees - find the right program to advance your career.
Www.nextag.com


From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 20 11:51:28 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 09:51:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
In-Reply-To: <A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D234@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
Message-ID: <838029.65651.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- "Becker, Damon (Damon)" <damonb at avaya.com> wrote:

> Combustion velocity increases to a max rich point. 
> That exact point is usually much richer than most
> cars run.  That's why it's usually a non-issue. 

Please trim replies?

That doesn't make sense.  Richer burns cooler, plus
there are not enough oxygen atoms to completely
combust the fuel in any given area.  Less fuel burning
+ fuel burning at lower temp = slower burn rate (on
both counts), if basic physics is correct.  Cooler
temps mean fewer actual molecular breaks and
reformations, as there's less energy available to do
the breaking; fewer oxygen atoms mean that some
fraction of the energy used in breaking apart the
hydrocarbon chains never gets "returned-and-then-some"
from oxidization.

| 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 |


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
The all-new Yahoo! Mail beta
Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster. 
http://new.mail.yahoo.com



From bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au  Mon Nov 20 18:30:11 2006
From: bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au (Bernd Felsche)
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 08:30:11 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
In-Reply-To: <838029.65651.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <838029.65651.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200611210830.11453@death.2.spammers>

On Tuesday 21 November 2006 01:51, Adam Wade wrote:
> --- "Becker, Damon (Damon)" <damonb at avaya.com> wrote:
> > Combustion velocity increases to a max rich point.
> > That exact point is usually much richer than most
> > cars run.  That's why it's usually a non-issue.

> That doesn't make sense.  Richer burns cooler, plus
> there are not enough oxygen atoms to completely
> combust the fuel in any given area.  Less fuel burning

I'd tend to agree; except that I'd be looking for oxygen molecules
as many oxygen atoms are already "otherwise occupied". :-) 

> + fuel burning at lower temp = slower burn rate (on
> both counts), if basic physics is correct.  Cooler
> temps mean fewer actual molecular breaks and
> reformations, as there's less energy available to do
> the breaking; fewer oxygen atoms mean that some
> fraction of the energy used in breaking apart the
> hydrocarbon chains never gets "returned-and-then-some"
> from oxidization.

ISTM that people are mis-interpreting their instrumentation such as
"knock" sensors. There are conditions other than detonation that can
cause those sensors to indicate the presence of knock.

OTOH, in a supercharged engine, there may not actually be as much
combustible fuel injected as is planned for the "desired" AFR,
resulting in a lean mixture with the actual mass of air.

Again, something of a problem with interpreting what the sensors are
saying.

-- 
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ /  ASCII ribbon campaign | "If we let things terrify us,
 X   against HTML mail     |  life will not be worth living."
/ \  and postings          | Lucius Annaeus Seneca, c. 4BC - 65AD.




From niche at iinet.net.au  Mon Nov 20 22:02:42 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 12:02:42 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
In-Reply-To: <4561BDE1.2050909@earthlink.net>
References: <455F84C9.4050007@earthlink.net>
	<A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D22F@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061119145321.02a69610@iinet.net.au>
	<A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D230@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
	<1163971355.4560cb1b5b4b3@webmail3.portugalmail.pt>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061120145140.02a48200@iinet.net.au>
	<003a01c70c74$bc37ed70$02dea8c0@AIRBRIDGE>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061120153403.027788f0@iinet.net.au>
	<4561BDE1.2050909@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20061121115410.0270bc60@iinet.net.au>>

On my car if I run it too rich it will stumble and not fire smoothly,
me thinks that this will cause other items to not run smoothly such
as valve clatter, wider changes in instantanteous acceleration/deacceleration
of the rotational motion of the crank causing maybe timing belt whip,
and who knows what other sympathetic resonances etc etc 

Is it not possible that all this extra lumpy motion is wrongly interpreted
by your sensor ?

fwiw:
I took my detonation sensor off altogether and replaced it with a circuit
that fools the ECU to think its never suffering from detonation, I run 10.5psi
with a 3L RB30ET motor and a 'high flow' T3 turbo and set the mixture
slightly richer than stoich by the flakey pot on the AFM, end result is
improved fuel economy. Have been doing this for years, and last time I had
to take the head off (due to corrosion of a water gallery getting to close to
a chamber) I found no evidence of detonation or any damage to piston
crowns or valves. The engine has done 278,000Kms or so and the only
issue I now have is big end noise from worn big end bearings, last time I
changed these it lasted for about a year, looks like it needs it again, thats
what you get when using s/h bearings - but it still runs smoothly with just
a little big end clatter when revd through certain ranges (at no load I might
add), so its unlikely to be detonation. ie. Big end clatter tends to get queiter
the more load you put on it - unless its really bad...

btw: The detonation sensor  signal on my ecu is ignored anyway beyond
about 3500 rpms - that says sopmething about these devices being susceptible
to a whole host of other noise sources as well as fact that the detonation
sensors dont have a habit of lasting long.

might I suggest try a brand new sensor and ensure the connections to it are
clean and tight

rgds

mike


At 10:38 PM 11/20/06, you wrote:
>The reason for asking about rich detonation is that in my own experience when running AFRs lower than 10, the ECU will sometimes pick up knock - or at least interpret the signal from the knock sensor as knock.  This causes the ECU to retard ignition timing and lower boost pressure.  
>Sometimes this will happen when tuning at not particularly high boost pressures, but very rich mixtures.
>
>-Joe
>http://www.lovehorsepower.com
>http://videos.lovehorsepower.com
>
>Mike wrote:
>>At 03:23 PM 11/20/06, you wrote:
>>  
>>>The richer the mix the faster the burn.  The leaner the mix the slower the burn.  It is all about ignition timing, however the source of detonation aside from improper timing is from poor quality fuel or fuel not suited for a specific compression ratio.  Poor fuel combined with hot spots in the combustion chamber results in pre-ignition.  I'm not really sure what you mean by "rich detonation".  The whole engine is a system... all the parts and processes must match.
>>>    
>>
>>My post arose as a result of responding to this post by Joseph Obernberger
>>who started the topic with the same subject line:-
>>
>>
>>  
>>>Hi,
>>>  I've read in various places that it is possible to run an engine so rich that detonation can occur - or at least the knock sensor would pick up what sounded like detonation.  Has anyone ever experienced this?  Any truth to it?
>>>Thanks!
>>>    
>>
>>  
>>
>>  
>_______________________________________________
>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 damonb at avaya.com  Tue Nov 21 00:51:11 2006
From: damonb at avaya.com (Becker, Damon (Damon))
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 23:51:11 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
References: <838029.65651.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D236@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>

Sorry for not trimming.  
 
Activation energy is being achieved in each case (rich and lean).  I don't think the answer lies in "which molecules break apart under which conditions" type of analysis.  Combustion Kinematics supports the "richer = faster combustion" theory.  To my surprise, there is a rich limit.  I have my degree in this stuff and I, honestly, don't fully understand why that max velocity exists.  
 
Taking the issue one step further to the subject of the thread, I also am not 100% confident in my answer as to why rich detonation occurs.  I suppose I should have made that clear.  
 
My reason this phonemona exists was what makes sense to me, given the research and experience I have, which both of which I think support my conclusions.  

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Adam Wade 
	Sent: Mon 11/20/2006 10:51 AM 
	To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org 
	Cc: 
	Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
	
	That doesn't make sense.  Richer burns cooler, plus
	there are not enough oxygen atoms to completely
	combust the fuel in any given area.  Less fuel burning
	+ fuel burning at lower temp = slower burn rate (on
	both counts), if basic physics is correct.  Cooler
	temps mean fewer actual molecular breaks and
	reformations, as there's less energy available to do
	the breaking; fewer oxygen atoms mean that some
	fraction of the energy used in breaking apart the
	hydrocarbon chains never gets "returned-and-then-some"
	from oxidization.


From niche at iinet.net.au  Tue Nov 21 01:17:24 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 15:17:24 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
In-Reply-To: <A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D236@cof110avexu2.global
	.avaya.com>
References: <838029.65651.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D236@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20061121151617.026ceeb0@iinet.net.au>>

In all your travels on this subject did you ever come across
a graph which shows the relationship of burn speed to mixture
which hopefully includes some real number ?

Rgds

Mike



At 02:51 PM 11/21/06, you wrote:
>content-class: urn:content-classes:message
>Content-Type: text/plain;
>        charset="UTF-8"
>
>Sorry for not trimming.  
> 
>Activation energy is being achieved in each case (rich and lean).  I don't think the answer lies in "which molecules break apart under which conditions" type of analysis.  Combustion Kinematics supports the "richer = faster combustion" theory.  To my surprise, there is a rich limit.  I have my degree in this stuff and I, honestly, don't fully understand why that max velocity exists.  
> 
>Taking the issue one step further to the subject of the thread, I also am not 100% confident in my answer as to why rich detonation occurs.  I suppose I should have made that clear.  
> 


From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 21 11:28:26 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 09:28:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
In-Reply-To: <A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D236@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
Message-ID: <718584.66978.qm@web32214.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- "Becker, Damon (Damon)" <damonb at avaya.com> wrote:

> Activation energy is being achieved in each case
> (rich and lean).  I don't think the answer lies in
> "which molecules break apart under which conditions"
> type of analysis.  Combustion Kinematics supports
> the "richer = faster combustion" theory.  To my
> surprise, there is a rich limit.  I have my degree
> in this stuff and I, honestly, don't fully
> understand why that max velocity exists.  

All the research I have seen shows variations in flame
front expansion under various conditions; some rough
parameters came from that research regarding
detonation, but it was old research.

I would be very interested in seeing anything from the
1960s and later in the way of SAE or other
"journal"-level research on the matter of flame front
propagation, particularly with regard to mixture
homogeneity and composition.  Can you point me toward
some SAE docs or the like?

| 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 |


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sponsored Link

Rates near 39yr lows. $510,000 Loan for $1698/mo. 
Calcuate new payment. www.LowerMyBills.com/lre


From damonb at avaya.com  Tue Nov 21 12:35:39 2006
From: damonb at avaya.com (Becker, Damon (Damon))
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 11:35:39 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
References: <718584.66978.qm@web32214.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D238@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>

I wish.  I'm sorry.  All the stuff I have seen are in hard form, and were dated back to WWII, when they experimented with stuff like turbosupercharging and water injection for airplane engines.  

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of Adam Wade 
	Sent: Tue 11/21/2006 10:28 AM 
	To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org 
	Cc: 
	Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
	
	

	--- "Becker, Damon (Damon)" <damonb at avaya.com> wrote:
	
	> Activation energy is being achieved in each case
	> (rich and lean).  I don't think the answer lies in
	> "which molecules break apart under which conditions"
	> type of analysis.  Combustion Kinematics supports
	> the "richer = faster combustion" theory.  To my
	> surprise, there is a rich limit.  I have my degree
	> in this stuff and I, honestly, don't fully
	> understand why that max velocity exists. 
	
	All the research I have seen shows variations in flame
	front expansion under various conditions; some rough
	parameters came from that research regarding
	detonation, but it was old research.
	
	I would be very interested in seeing anything from the
	1960s and later in the way of SAE or other
	"journal"-level research on the matter of flame front
	propagation, particularly with regard to mixture
	homogeneity and composition.  Can you point me toward
	some SAE docs or the like?
	
	| 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 |
	
	
	
	____________________________________________________________________________________
	Sponsored Link
	
	Rates near 39yr lows. $510,000 Loan for $1698/mo.
	Calcuate new payment. www.LowerMyBills.com/lre
	_______________________________________________
	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 espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 21 12:44:22 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 10:44:22 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
In-Reply-To: <A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D238@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
Message-ID: <20061121184422.16154.qmail@web32201.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- "Becker, Damon (Damon)" <damonb at avaya.com> wrote:

> I wish.  I'm sorry.  All the stuff I have seen are
> in hard form, and were dated back to WWII, when they
> experimented with stuff like turbosupercharging and
> water injection for airplane engines.  

Yeah, most of the stuff I've seen is from "The
Internal Combustion Engine in Theory and Practice" by
Charles Fayette Taylor.  I try to base my
understanding on what's in there much of the time. 
I've been hoping for something more recent, but my
reading of what he has published is that
susceptibility to detonation trails off with
increasing richness.  I may have to go re-read and see
if I'm misunderstanding something.

| 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 |


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sponsored Link

Rates near 39yr lows. $420,000 Loan for $1399/mo. 
Calcuate new payment. www.LowerMyBills.com/lre



From damonb at avaya.com  Tue Nov 21 14:24:00 2006
From: damonb at avaya.com (Becker, Damon (Damon))
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 13:24:00 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
References: <20061121184422.16154.qmail@web32201.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D23D@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>

I wonder if excessively rich mixtures create airborne hot spots with the carbon.  I would love to see a trace of the rich detonation.  If it doesn't start with the end gasses like normal detonation does, then that would answer my question.  

From benof1987 at hotmail.com  Wed Nov 22 04:11:21 2006
From: benof1987 at hotmail.com (Ben P)
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 20:11:21 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap carby)
Message-ID: <BAY106-F32CE59B3D22184EC4F67FEA8E30@phx.gbl>

Hi people, after reading through all of the 'instant fuel economy' sites I 
could find on the net (except stuff like hi-clone), I thought of an idea I 
would like you guys to have a think about (and then go on to poke the s*** 
out of it). Also, whats the deal with these carby mesh systems? My dad's 
telstar (aka Mazda 626) had a heated mesh under the carby, and it went like 
a cut snake, but I am unsure of fuel economy.

Evaporative Carby Evolution

The typical evaporative carby heats the fuel to a gas, which then mixes with 
the air-stream better than a conventional jet/discharge nozzle combination 
would. One major advantage of this type of carburettor (apart from 
apparently huge economy benifits, which would be there, but maybe not so 
dramatic) is the ability to run on pretty much any hydrocarbon fuel, this 
includes (filtered) used crank case oil, if the carby heats enough. The only 
real disdvantages of this carby are a loss of power (hot air tends to do 
that), and if the carby isnt heated enough, 'lighter' parts of the fuel go 
first (giving an impression of huge mileage), then the heavier parts boil 
much later, giving

My idea involves feeding fuel to a heated block (200-300 degrees, maybe 
hotter depending on fuel), which would effectively instantly boil all of its 
components and feed the fuel vapour into the intake stream, prefferably in a 
multipoint configuration. The fuel going to the heated block would be 
controlled by a pulsed valve much like an injector, but just controlling 
flow, not spraying the fuel as well (proper design of the heated block 
should negate the need for that).

As an addition, water could also be added to the block to keep it clean, 
prevent detonation, and keep the engine clean. Although this would mean the 
blocks would need more heat input to mainain the same temperature.

The only disadvantages I can see apart from the slight loss of power are a 
high current draw (if the blocks are electrically heated, the only way to 
get them hot on a cold start), and if the blocks are not electrically 
heated, the problem of what to do while the engine is cold (before the 
exhaust manifold gets hot enough to draw heat from.

thoughts people?

_________________________________________________________________
Advertisement: House hunt online now!  
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fninemsn%2Erealestate%2Ecom%2Eau%2Fcgi%2Dbin%2Frsearch%3Fa%3Dbhp%26t%3Dres%26cu%3DMSN&_t=758874163&_r=HM_EndText_Nov06&_m=EXT



From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 22 04:43:33 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 02:43:33 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap carby)
In-Reply-To: <BAY106-F32CE59B3D22184EC4F67FEA8E30@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <514672.9085.qm@web32210.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- Ben P <benof1987 at hotmail.com> wrote:

> thoughts people?

Pre-ignition, destroying the engine in short order,
even with a painfully low compression ratio; an
inability to fuel appropriately for large values of
delta alpha; reduced power output for a given size
engine (lower CR, plus less total air mass inside the
combustion chamber due to it being heated so much);
vapors condensing back to liquid form in the manifold
and causing a lean condition that would increase the
propensity for pre-ignition and detonation.

I'd be interested to see actualy data of how it
compared to the same engine fueled by a regular
injection system, but I predict it is going to fare
very poorly when a head-to-head is done.

| 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 |


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sponsored Link

Rates near 39yr lows. $510,000 Loan for $1698/mo. 
Calcuate new payment. www.LowerMyBills.com/lre


From A6intruder at myo-p.com  Wed Nov 22 07:54:58 2006
From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson)
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 08:54:58 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap carby)
In-Reply-To: <BAY106-F32CE59B3D22184EC4F67FEA8E30@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <KMEGIPPMDGHIFFAKGOLEMECAIFAA.A6intruder@myo-p.com>

Ben,

Do a google search for "Smokey Yunick".  Filter through the hits and look
for his "adiabatic engine".  He does what you're thinking about but gets
great power.  Thermodynamically he is really turning the hydrocarbon fuel
into producer gas and running the engine on producer gas.  In reality a
modern well researched version of this should "in theory" be able to run
most common hydrocarbon fuels.

Smokey has since passed away but he had some great ideas during his
lifetime.

Dan Nicoson

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
Behalf Of Ben P
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 5:11 AM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap carby)

Hi people, after reading through all of the 'instant fuel economy' sites I
could find on the net (except stuff like hi-clone), I thought of an idea I
would like you guys to have a think about (and then go on to poke the s***
out of it). Also, whats the deal with these carby mesh systems? My dad's
telstar (aka Mazda 626) had a heated mesh under the carby, and it went like
a cut snake, but I am unsure of fuel economy.

Evaporative Carby Evolution

The typical evaporative carby heats the fuel to a gas, which then mixes with
the air-stream better than a conventional jet/discharge nozzle combination
would. One major advantage of this type of carburettor (apart from
apparently huge economy benifits, which would be there, but maybe not so
dramatic) is the ability to run on pretty much any hydrocarbon fuel, this
includes (filtered) used crank case oil, if the carby heats enough. The only
real disdvantages of this carby are a loss of power (hot air tends to do
that), and if the carby isnt heated enough, 'lighter' parts of the fuel go
first (giving an impression of huge mileage), then the heavier parts boil
much later, giving

My idea involves feeding fuel to a heated block (200-300 degrees, maybe
hotter depending on fuel), which would effectively instantly boil all of its
components and feed the fuel vapour into the intake stream, prefferably in a
multipoint configuration. The fuel going to the heated block would be
controlled by a pulsed valve much like an injector, but just controlling
flow, not spraying the fuel as well (proper design of the heated block
should negate the need for that).

As an addition, water could also be added to the block to keep it clean,
prevent detonation, and keep the engine clean. Although this would mean the
blocks would need more heat input to mainain the same temperature.

The only disadvantages I can see apart from the slight loss of power are a
high current draw (if the blocks are electrically heated, the only way to
get them hot on a cold start), and if the blocks are not electrically
heated, the problem of what to do while the engine is cold (before the
exhaust manifold gets hot enough to draw heat from.

thoughts people?

_________________________________________________________________
Advertisement: House hunt online now!
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fninemsn%2Erealestate%2Ecom%2
Eau%2Fcgi%2Dbin%2Frsearch%3Fa%3Dbhp%26t%3Dres%26cu%3DMSN&_t=758874163&_r=HM_
EndText_Nov06&_m=EXT

_______________________________________________
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 bill.washington at nec.com.au  Thu Nov 23 00:13:41 2006
From: bill.washington at nec.com.au (Bill Washington)
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 17:13:41 +1100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Re: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 19
In-Reply-To: <20061122180006.294953B6A5@ns2.nec.com.au>
References: <20061122180006.294953B6A5@ns2.nec.com.au>
Message-ID: <45653C15.1050001@nec.com.au>

Gents,
    What about using an ultrasonic fogger instead of heat to produce a 
vapour?

Regards
Bill

>
> Subject:
> [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap carby)
> From:
> "Ben P" <benof1987 at hotmail.com>
> Date:
> Wed, 22 Nov 2006 20:11:21 +1000
> To:
> diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
> To:
> diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
>
> Hi people, after reading through all of the 'instant fuel economy' 
> sites I could find on the net (except stuff like hi-clone), I thought 
> of an idea I would like you guys to have a think about (and then go on 
> to poke the s*** out of it). Also, whats the deal with these carby 
> mesh systems? My dad's telstar (aka Mazda 626) had a heated mesh under 
> the carby, and it went like a cut snake, but I am unsure of fuel economy.
>
> Evaporative Carby Evolution
>
> The typical evaporative carby heats the fuel to a gas, which then 
> mixes with the air-stream better than a conventional jet/discharge 
> nozzle combination would. One major advantage of this type of 
> carburettor (apart from apparently huge economy benifits, which would 
> be there, but maybe not so dramatic) is the ability to run on pretty 
> much any hydrocarbon fuel, this includes (filtered) used crank case 
> oil, if the carby heats enough. The only real disdvantages of this 
> carby are a loss of power (hot air tends to do that), and if the carby 
> isnt heated enough, 'lighter' parts of the fuel go first (giving an 
> impression of huge mileage), then the heavier parts boil much later, 
> giving
>
> My idea involves feeding fuel to a heated block (200-300 degrees, 
> maybe hotter depending on fuel), which would effectively instantly 
> boil all of its components and feed the fuel vapour into the intake 
> stream, prefferably in a multipoint configuration. The fuel going to 
> the heated block would be controlled by a pulsed valve much like an 
> injector, but just controlling flow, not spraying the fuel as well 
> (proper design of the heated block should negate the need for that).
>
> As an addition, water could also be added to the block to keep it 
> clean, prevent detonation, and keep the engine clean. Although this 
> would mean the blocks would need more heat input to mainain the same 
> temperature.
>
> The only disadvantages I can see apart from the slight loss of power 
> are a high current draw (if the blocks are electrically heated, the 
> only way to get them hot on a cold start), and if the blocks are not 
> electrically heated, the problem of what to do while the engine is 
> cold (before the exhaust manifold gets hot enough to draw heat from.
>
> thoughts people?
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Advertisement: House hunt online now!  
> http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fninemsn%2Erealestate%2Ecom%2Eau%2Fcgi%2Dbin%2Frsearch%3Fa%3Dbhp%26t%3Dres%26cu%3DMSN&_t=758874163&_r=HM_EndText_Nov06&_m=EXT 
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>


From benof1987 at hotmail.com  Thu Nov 23 03:48:17 2006
From: benof1987 at hotmail.com (Ben P)
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 19:48:17 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap carby)
In-Reply-To: <514672.9085.qm@web32210.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY106-F3494300245CAE9C34E4C22A8E20@phx.gbl>

If you could elaborate on why you think each of those things would happen it 
would be better... But I'll give my point of view on what I think your 
arguments are based on.

First up I am assuming that your claims of huge detonation, pre-ignition, 
and (most of the) lack of power centre around intake temperatures. I do not 
think that the intake temperatures would rise much.
*Note: For this I am assuming that both air and evaporated fuel have the 
same specific heat and mass (per litre at STP) which is incorrect, but they 
should be close enough to eachother to get similar numbers I have*
If you have an air-fuel ratio of 14.7:1 (by mass, but given the previous 
assumptions, this also becomes volume), you then have 14.7 litres (or kg) of 
air at 30 degrees celcius, and 1 litre (or kg) of fuel at 300 degrees. When 
you multiply the volume of air by its absolute temperature (kelvin) you get 
4456.3 degrees/litre (I am unsure what to call this measurement, but all we 
are doing is calculating an average), and when you do the same to the fuel, 
you get 573.15 degrees/litre. add them together and you get 5029.5 
degrees/litre. Divide this by litres (15.7 total volume) and you get  320.3 
degrees K, or 47.1 degrees celcius. Not that much of an increase, and 
certainly no worse than most cars in a hot environment. Granted that once 
you have already boiled a fuel and introduce it to the intake it has no 
evaporative cooling effect, the difference in intake temps at the valve is 
likely to be the 17 degrees implied here, it still wont be that dramatic.

As for the fuel condensing on the walls of the intake manifold, this should 
not be a problem with my idea. As the fuel would all eventually evaporate if 
left alone anyway, the only way fuel could condense back to a liquid is if 
the walls of the manifold were very cold, which wouldnt happen outside lab 
conditions anyway (bar extreme climates). Under these conditions not a huge 
amount of fuel systems would work at all anyway. The fuel is simply too hot 
to condense under atmospheric pressure. I believe that the condensing you 
are reffering to is from very fine droplets of fuel that have not evaporated 
fully (ie what carburettors do) hitting the walls of the manifold and 
sticking to it. Gases dont have the problem of sticking to anything...

I am wearing the second low power argument for now (fuels displacing intake 
air), but even at a 12:1 AFR, the fuel would only take just over 7.5% of the 
volume, for the same 7.5% power loss (plus the losses due to heat though, so 
maybe 10-12% overall).

And what on earth do you mean by "an inability to fuel appropriately for 
large values of delta alpha", I can't understand it.

again, explain your theories. Any ignorant person can say things like 'it 
wont work', but not a huge amount of people explain why.

cya
Ben

*I checked out the Smokey Yunick thing and couldnt make sense of any 
information. I get its claims, but no data on its workings.

>From: Adam Wade <espresso_doppio at yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap 
>carby)
>Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 02:43:33 -0800 (PST)
>
>--- Ben P <benof1987 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > thoughts people?
>
>Pre-ignition, destroying the engine in short order,
>even with a painfully low compression ratio; an
>inability to fuel appropriately for large values of
>delta alpha; reduced power output for a given size
>engine (lower CR, plus less total air mass inside the
>combustion chamber due to it being heated so much);
>vapors condensing back to liquid form in the manifold
>and causing a lean condition that would increase the
>propensity for pre-ignition and detonation.
>
>I'd be interested to see actualy data of how it
>compared to the same engine fueled by a regular
>injection system, but I predict it is going to fare
>very poorly when a head-to-head is done.
>
>| 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 |
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>Sponsored Link
>
>Rates near 39yr lows. $510,000 Loan for $1698/mo.
>Calcuate new payment. www.LowerMyBills.com/lre
>_______________________________________________
>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

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Shopping has everything on your holiday list. Get expert picks by style, 
age, and price. Try it! 
http://shopping.msn.com/content/shp/?ctId=8000,ptnrid=176,ptnrdata=200601&tcode=wlmtagline



From niche at iinet.net.au  Thu Nov 23 02:27:55 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 16:27:55 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Re: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 19
In-Reply-To: <45653C15.1050001@nec.com.au>
References: <20061122180006.294953B6A5@ns2.nec.com.au>
	<45653C15.1050001@nec.com.au>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20061123162537.0269ed00@iinet.net.au>>

At 02:13 PM 11/23/06, you wrote:
>Gents,
>   What about using an ultrasonic fogger instead of heat to produce a vapour?

You mean a mist ?
Heat will evaporate the fuel producing a vapour, ultrasonics produces a
mist which might further turn into a vapour if the air is warm enough and it
has enough time before being sucked into chamber. The amount of energy
you'd need with ultrasonics and drive electronics might probably outweigh
any benefit,

rgds

Mike



>Regards
>Bill
>
>>
>>Subject:
>>[Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap carby)
>>From:
>>"Ben P" <benof1987 at hotmail.com>
>>Date:
>>Wed, 22 Nov 2006 20:11:21 +1000
>>To:
>>diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>
>>To:
>>diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>
>>
>>Hi people, after reading through all of the 'instant fuel economy' sites I could find on the net (except stuff like hi-clone), I thought of an idea I would like you guys to have a think about (and then go on to poke the s*** out of it). Also, whats the deal with these carby mesh systems? My dad's telstar (aka Mazda 626) had a heated mesh under the carby, and it went like a cut snake, but I am unsure of fuel economy.
>>
>>Evaporative Carby Evolution
>>
>>The typical evaporative carby heats the fuel to a gas, which then mixes with the air-stream better than a conventional jet/discharge nozzle combination would. One major advantage of this type of carburettor (apart from apparently huge economy benifits, which would be there, but maybe not so dramatic) is the ability to run on pretty much any hydrocarbon fuel, this includes (filtered) used crank case oil, if the carby heats enough. The only real disdvantages of this carby are a loss of power (hot air tends to do that), and if the carby isnt heated enough, 'lighter' parts of the fuel go first (giving an impression of huge mileage), then the heavier parts boil much later, giving
>>
>>My idea involves feeding fuel to a heated block (200-300 degrees, maybe hotter depending on fuel), which would effectively instantly boil all of its components and feed the fuel vapour into the intake stream, prefferably in a multipoint configuration. The fuel going to the heated block would be controlled by a pulsed valve much like an injector, but just controlling flow, not spraying the fuel as well (proper design of the heated block should negate the need for that).
>>
>>As an addition, water could also be added to the block to keep it clean, prevent detonation, and keep the engine clean. Although this would mean the blocks would need more heat input to mainain the same temperature.
>>
>>The only disadvantages I can see apart from the slight loss of power are a high current draw (if the blocks are electrically heated, the only way to get them hot on a cold start), and if the blocks are not electrically heated, the problem of what to do while the engine is cold (before the exhaust manifold gets hot enough to draw heat from.
>>
>>thoughts people?
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Advertisement: House hunt online now!  
>>http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fninemsn%2Erealestate%2Ecom%2Eau%2Fcgi%2Dbin%2Frsearch%3Fa%3Dbhp%26t%3Dres%26cu%3DMSN&_t=758874163&_r=HM_EndText_Nov06&_m=EXT 
>>
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>_______________________________________________
>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
Perth, Western Australia
VK/VL Commodore Fuse Rail panel that wont warp, twist or melt, guaranteed  !
Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
http://niche.iinet.net.au


From phil at injec.com  Thu Nov 23 09:14:16 2006
From: phil at injec.com (Phil Lamovie)
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 02:14:16 +1100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap carby)
References: <BAY106-F3494300245CAE9C34E4C22A8E20@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <4565BAC8.6CBD3FBE@injec.com>


About 15 years ago I worked on a project that was based on the use of
exhaust heat to vaporize the fuel prior to it's "injection" into the manifold.

Some results were as expected some were astonishing.

The temperature needed to vaporize 100% of the fuel was in excess of
600 deg C.

I know that we all know how easily petrol vaporizes but we
also know that if you look inside the inlet manifold of a vehicle with a high
degree of heat transfer from exhaust to inlet such as were being built
in the 70's and 80's there was invariably a thick gooey (technical term) sludge
under the carby.

The physics were good but the engineering was bad. The engines were inline
4's and 6's with inlet and exhaust manifolds one on top of the other.

The were technically bad in so many ways it doesn't pay to base any future
work on the results.

On the other hand... the very complicated "injected" system was awesome for
it's clean burn and stability at 20:1 A/F ratio. It was capable of single digit
HC
reading in the exhaust with no cat.

What it did have was...

An exhaust heat exchanger that had a volume of 3.5 litres
A fuel "dosing" pump to feed the heat exchanger
A vapour pump to move the vapour to the...
Vapour storage tank ( about 1 litre)
An independent control system to keep it all happy
An electric element that was about 1200 watts
A starting procedure that was as complicated as a nuclear (pronounced Noo-ku-la)

    reactor.
A set of large and noisy injectors
A requirement to have intake and exhaust on the same side for packaging reasons.

As we know things have moved on since then.  Although physics hasn't changed.

The project was assassinated by the marketing and money people who wanted to
franchise the world with after market systems.

If they had gone the OEM path they could have managed the costs much better
and had proper integration with the rest of the vehicle systems.
It may have gained some traction in 2nd world arenas such as India at the time.

The US and OZ OEMs of course were already well progressed with planning their
L Jetronic + cat era. The European OEMs were already doing L-Jet on the more
expensive models.

Phil






From niche at iinet.net.au  Thu Nov 23 09:38:44 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 23:38:44 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap carby)
In-Reply-To: <4565BAC8.6CBD3FBE@injec.com>
References: <BAY106-F3494300245CAE9C34E4C22A8E20@phx.gbl>
	<4565BAC8.6CBD3FBE@injec.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20061123233623.02d68680@iinet.net.au>>

mmmm, I remember seeing a large fuel vaporisoring box atop a
VL Commodore RB30 motor in a Sunday Times article about an
Eastern States inventor/engineer so 13 years ago - any relationship ?

Suffice it say, it achieved great emissions with no cat and the same
or slightly better performance with substantial economy gains claimed
of from 20 to 40% but never went further, does that sound familiar ?

Rgds

Mike



At 11:14 PM 11/23/06, you wrote:

>About 15 years ago I worked on a project that was based on the use of
>exhaust heat to vaporize the fuel prior to it's "injection" into the manifold.
>
>Some results were as expected some were astonishing.
>
>The temperature needed to vaporize 100% of the fuel was in excess of
>600 deg C.
>
>I know that we all know how easily petrol vaporizes but we
>also know that if you look inside the inlet manifold of a vehicle with a high
>degree of heat transfer from exhaust to inlet such as were being built
>in the 70's and 80's there was invariably a thick gooey (technical term) sludge
>under the carby.
>
>The physics were good but the engineering was bad. The engines were inline
>4's and 6's with inlet and exhaust manifolds one on top of the other.
>
>The were technically bad in so many ways it doesn't pay to base any future
>work on the results.
>
>On the other hand... the very complicated "injected" system was awesome for
>it's clean burn and stability at 20:1 A/F ratio. It was capable of single digit
>HC
>reading in the exhaust with no cat.
>
>What it did have was...
>
>An exhaust heat exchanger that had a volume of 3.5 litres
>A fuel "dosing" pump to feed the heat exchanger
>A vapour pump to move the vapour to the...
>Vapour storage tank ( about 1 litre)
>An independent control system to keep it all happy
>An electric element that was about 1200 watts
>A starting procedure that was as complicated as a nuclear (pronounced Noo-ku-la)
>
>    reactor.
>A set of large and noisy injectors
>A requirement to have intake and exhaust on the same side for packaging reasons.
>
>As we know things have moved on since then.  Although physics hasn't changed.
>
>The project was assassinated by the marketing and money people who wanted to
>franchise the world with after market systems.
>
>If they had gone the OEM path they could have managed the costs much better
>and had proper integration with the rest of the vehicle systems.
>It may have gained some traction in 2nd world arenas such as India at the time.
>
>The US and OZ OEMs of course were already well progressed with planning their
>L Jetronic + cat era. The European OEMs were already doing L-Jet on the more
>expensive models.
>
>Phil
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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 bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au  Thu Nov 23 09:57:36 2006
From: bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au (Bernd Felsche)
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 23:57:36 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap carby)
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20061123233623.02d68680@iinet.net.au>
References: <BAY106-F3494300245CAE9C34E4C22A8E20@phx.gbl>
	<4565BAC8.6CBD3FBE@injec.com>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061123233623.02d68680@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <200611232357.36599@death.2.spammers>

On Thursday 23 November 2006 23:38, Mike wrote:

> Suffice it say, it achieved great emissions with no cat and the same
> or slightly better performance with substantial economy gains claimed
> of from 20 to 40% but never went further, does that sound familiar ?

Low HC is easy to achieve with lean burn (20:1). The problem that
the lean burn creates his high NOx because of the inherent high
temperature. There's also an increased propensity to knock because
of the very same high temperature.

NOx and the increased propensity to knock can be reduced by (esp.
cooled) EGR, but reducing the fresh air volume also means that the
HC will increase as it finds less O2 with which to react.

The reason why 3-way catalytic convertors came to the fore is
because they make building the engine a lot easier (and thus
cheaper), compared to lean-burn in combination with the plumbing for
cooled EGR.

The same problems are now having to be tackled with DI,
stratified-charge gasoline engines because (3-way) catalytic
convertors have very narrow conversion windows and certainly don't
like being exposed to very hot exhaust, rich in NOx exhaust gases.
They become ineffective at reducing anything.

A common approach is to introduce a NOx storage "catalyst" that's
monitored for when it's full (using a special NOx sendor) and then
purged by making the DI engine run rich with homogeneous charge for
short intervals. That inherently requires a drive-by-wire throttle
so that the driver doesn't experience unintended acceleration during
a NOx purge cycle.

There is no "magic". It's all been done before.

-- 
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ /  ASCII ribbon campaign | "If we let things terrify us,
 X   against HTML mail     |  life will not be worth living."
/ \  and postings          | Lucius Annaeus Seneca, c. 4BC - 65AD.




From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 23 14:00:14 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 12:00:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Re: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 19
In-Reply-To: <45653C15.1050001@nec.com.au>
Message-ID: <775927.22117.qm@web32210.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- Bill Washington <bill.washington at nec.com.au>
wrote:

> What about using an ultrasonic fogger instead of
> heat to produce a vapour?

I wonder, would it be feasible to install such a
device downstream of a regular port injector to
improve mixture homogeneity, especially when cold or
at small engine loads?  I think it might bear
considering if there's a way to install one in a
manifold a few inches downstream without compromising airflow...

| 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!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com


From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 23 14:21:19 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 12:21:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap carby)
In-Reply-To: <BAY106-F3494300245CAE9C34E4C22A8E20@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <334115.82996.qm@web32203.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- Ben P <benof1987 at hotmail.com> wrote:

> First up I am assuming that your claims of huge
> detonation, pre-ignition, and (most of the) lack
> of power centre around intake temperatures.

That's part of it.  Smokey Yunick was using a
draw-through turbocharger, and intake temps were
supposedly above 100 C; in addition, you're running a
very lean mixture, which will contribute toward
detonation; the extremely high intake temp plus forced
induction would account for the pre-ignition

> As for the fuel condensing on the walls of the
> intake manifold, this should not be a problem with
> my idea.

With Yunick's setup, likely not.  If, as you
suggested, the intake temp does not rise much,
"stealing" the heat from the vaporized fuel, that
would cool the vaporized fuel a lot (assuming again no
blower), and I would be concerned that the less
volatile fractions might condense, especially if the
manifold walls are below the temp of the intake air. 
I think this one would bear experimental observation;
it might happen, or it might not (for any given fuel;
I was assuming pump gas).

> I am wearing the second low power argument for now
> (fuels displacing intake air), but even at a 12:1
> AFR, the fuel would only take just over 7.5% of the
> volume, for the same 7.5% power loss (plus the
> losses due to heat though, so maybe 10-12% overall).

Except in port injection engines, much of the fuel
remains in liquid form until after it is inside the
combustion chamber, so the difference between your
example and a "normal" fueling setup would be larger. 
Yunick used turbocharging to make up for the lost air
mass and to keep the fuel in vapor form (and it should
be noted that most experts in the field concluded that
Yunick had some additional trickery, probably in fuel
additives, that allowed this to work.  GM licensed the
technology from him, but never put it into
production...  That speaks volumes in my mind).

> And what on earth do you mean by "an inability to
> fuel appropriately for large values of delta alpha",
> I can't understand it.

Whack the throttle open fast, and see if the fueling
can be richened enough, quickly enough, to keep the
vehicle from stumbling.  Since it seems there is a
time factor here, as well as very lean running, I
doubt very much that throttle response could be
maintained, definitely without ruining the desired
fuel economy.

> *I checked out the Smokey Yunick thing and couldnt
> make sense of any information. I get its claims, but
> no data on its workings.

Apparently he was tight-lipped on such details, and
nothing was ever done with it after the initial splash
of publicity.  Something more was going on there than
what meets the eye, methinks...

| 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 |


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Want to start your own business?
Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/r-index


From krawczuk at dodo.com.au  Thu Nov 23 19:04:55 2006
From: krawczuk at dodo.com.au (mark krawczuk)
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 11:34:55 +1030
Subject: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap carby)
References: <BAY106-F3494300245CAE9C34E4C22A8E20@phx.gbl><4565BAC8.6CBD3FBE@injec.com>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061123233623.02d68680@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <002401c70f64$8eb56fb0$60ba1bcb@markzu35x5eu9m>

hi, when at   TAFE  college , there was a video of a guy that  had  high 
comppressed air mixing ?? in with the fuel injector to make the fuel 
atomise more .

mark k


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike" <niche at iinet.net.au>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 2:08 AM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap 
carby)


> mmmm, I remember seeing a large fuel vaporisoring box atop a
> VL Commodore RB30 motor in a Sunday Times article about an
> Eastern States inventor/engineer so 13 years ago - any relationship ?
>
> Suffice it say, it achieved great emissions with no cat and the same
> or slightly better performance with substantial economy gains claimed
> of from 20 to 40% but never went further, does that sound familiar ?
>
> Rgds
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> At 11:14 PM 11/23/06, you wrote:
>
>>About 15 years ago I worked on a project that was based on the use of
>>exhaust heat to vaporize the fuel prior to it's "injection" into the 
>>manifold.
>>
>>Some results were as expected some were astonishing.
>>
>>The temperature needed to vaporize 100% of the fuel was in excess of
>>600 deg C.
>>
>>I know that we all know how easily petrol vaporizes but we
>>also know that if you look inside the inlet manifold of a vehicle with a 
>>high
>>degree of heat transfer from exhaust to inlet such as were being built
>>in the 70's and 80's there was invariably a thick gooey (technical term) 
>>sludge
>>under the carby.
>>
>>The physics were good but the engineering was bad. The engines were inline
>>4's and 6's with inlet and exhaust manifolds one on top of the other.
>>
>>The were technically bad in so many ways it doesn't pay to base any future
>>work on the results.
>>
>>On the other hand... the very complicated "injected" system was awesome 
>>for
>>it's clean burn and stability at 20:1 A/F ratio. It was capable of single 
>>digit
>>HC
>>reading in the exhaust with no cat.
>>
>>What it did have was...
>>
>>An exhaust heat exchanger that had a volume of 3.5 litres
>>A fuel "dosing" pump to feed the heat exchanger
>>A vapour pump to move the vapour to the...
>>Vapour storage tank ( about 1 litre)
>>An independent control system to keep it all happy
>>An electric element that was about 1200 watts
>>A starting procedure that was as complicated as a nuclear (pronounced 
>>Noo-ku-la)
>>
>>    reactor.
>>A set of large and noisy injectors
>>A requirement to have intake and exhaust on the same side for packaging 
>>reasons.
>>
>>As we know things have moved on since then.  Although physics hasn't 
>>changed.
>>
>>The project was assassinated by the marketing and money people who wanted 
>>to
>>franchise the world with after market systems.
>>
>>If they had gone the OEM path they could have managed the costs much 
>>better
>>and had proper integration with the rest of the vehicle systems.
>>It may have gained some traction in 2nd world arenas such as India at the 
>>time.
>>
>>The US and OZ OEMs of course were already well progressed with planning 
>>their
>>L Jetronic + cat era. The European OEMs were already doing L-Jet on the 
>>more
>>expensive models.
>>
>>Phil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>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  Thu Nov 23 19:22:41 2006
From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen)
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 19:22:41 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Datalogging with knock sensor
Message-ID: <02bf01c70f67$0c18aba0$1c7ca6a6@yancey.com>

  I've been playing with my new 'toy' which is a wideband datalogger.  My AFR is now very close (after some logging and tweaking) and I want to start tweaking the spark timing.  When I started this project I copied and pasted in a "stock" 2-bar sy/ty spark map into my ECM and it runs quite well.  However, there are a few pingy spots at part throttle.
  My ECM does not have a knock sensor and this function is disabled in the calibration.  (I do plan to use this feature eventually.)
  I was thinking about getting an appropriate knock sensor and interface box (the thing between the ECM and knock sensor) for my engine block.  Then logging it with MAP and RPM to look for the areas with detonation; so I know where to edit the table in the ECM.  My ECM has the old slow ALDL which is poor for real-time logging.
  Has anyone any experience with this?  
  Thanks for any ideas!
David


From niche at iinet.net.au  Thu Nov 23 23:51:05 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 13:51:05 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Re: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 21, Issue 19
In-Reply-To: <775927.22117.qm@web32210.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <45653C15.1050001@nec.com.au>
	<775927.22117.qm@web32210.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20061124134155.02718420@iinet.net.au>>

At 04:00 AM 11/24/06, you wrote:

>I wonder, would it be feasible to install such a
>device downstream of a regular port injector to
>improve mixture homogeneity, especially when cold or
>at small engine loads?  I think it might bear
>considering if there's a way to install one in a
>manifold a few inches downstream without compromising airflow...

When engine is cold there is substantial condensation of fuel vapours
on cylinder walls. Eaton gmbh designed ultrasonic (horn)
shaped fuel injectors over 20 years ago (I must dig up the article),
and I referenced them in my EFI thesis in 1982 for uni, at that time
they had a limited number of prototypes and wouldnt sell any. They
were expecting to go into production but dont know what happened.
The fuel economy gains were alleged up to 20% or better depending on
conditions. Makes a lot of sense to maximise atomisation and reducing
in droplet size assuming you could also achieve good distribution
and manifold injection may not be ideal in that latter aspect. The direct
piezo injector type as used on latest bmw biturbo engines seems to
offer an excellent fuel economy for an engine capable of 225Kw on
tap without noticeable turbo lag, something like 7L/100Kms country
for a 3L. Have been offered a test drive by my friendly dealer and have
the full brochure if anyone wants me to up upload any 4mpixel scans
of any pages to an ftp server, I'll include the price list ;-)

Heres the link for the direct piezo injectors for that car:-

http://www.siemensvdo.com/press/releases/powertrain/2006/SV_200604_002_e.htm







Regards from


Mike
Perth, Western Australia
VK/VL Commodore Fuse Rail panel that wont warp, twist or melt, guaranteed  !
Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
http://niche.iinet.net.au


From benof1987 at hotmail.com  Fri Nov 24 03:06:58 2006
From: benof1987 at hotmail.com (Ben P)
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 19:06:58 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap carby)
In-Reply-To: <002401c70f64$8eb56fb0$60ba1bcb@markzu35x5eu9m>
Message-ID: <BAY106-F2093BA936B77B6400B8F93A8E10@phx.gbl>

Phil:

It appears I was a little off the temperature mark... So in the example you 
described, the vapour is made in a seperate canister using a heating element 
that draws near on 100 amps (at 12 volts) in conjunction with the exhaust 
heat to completely vaporise the fuel. There is also a second reservoir, and 
a set of injectors. Is this correct?

>From what I can see the gas production works much like a carburettor 
accellerator pump circuit... The gas is produced/boiled/whatever in the heat 
exchanger until it reaches a certain level/pressure (like a float), from 
which it is moved into the 1L reservoir (much like an accell pump). When it 
is needed it then flows through the injectors and into the intake (like the 
pump when it is working).

This seems like a good system to me, and in operation, I cannot see much of 
a difference between that idea and my own (parts list is completely 
different, and the way it works is too, but the end result of hot fuel vapor 
being injected in a multipoint configuration is the same.

Adam:

Yes I can see your concerns about the heavier parts of the fuel condensing 
again, but given the short length of port between injector and inlet valve, 
the fuel condensing could not possibly be any worse than a normal injector. 
Also injecting fuel as a gas, the gas can be far more directional (fuel has 
to be sprayed, and as we already have a vapour in this idea we can point it 
in one direction and straight into the combustion chamber, the vapour does 
not have to come near a port wall if the ports are straight enough. Yes its 
possible, but it shouldnt happen in most situations and the amount it 
happens would be negligible (and hence its effects would be too).

And my calculations for the horsepower loss were based on 100% air in the 
intake, with no fuel going in (like a direct injection setup), and the 
percentage of air in the mix with gaseous fuels (ie my idea), at a rich 
mixture of 12:1. So the same numbers would apply to the port fuel injection 
(a 7.5% loss due to displaced air).

Also, with the change in throttle problem, the idea was to run the engine at 
14.7:1, which isn't rediculously lean (however lean running would be 
possible). Maybe the blocks could have an accellerator pump of their own (ie 
a surge of power/heat) to cope with the sudden fuel loads it will get. 
However it may be neccessary to have a normal injector at the throttle body 
to cover extreme conditions.

Bernd:

Maybe water injection is the solution to the high combustion temps 
associated with lean burning. Admittedly it means more things to fill, but 
all joe blogs needs is a great big light to say there isn't much water left. 
We all know he is already capable of putting a bottle of valve saver/octane 
injector/miracle juice into his tank, so opening his bonnet and pouring it 
in there shouldnt be a problem. A failsafe (reverting to stiochimetric 
afr's) could also be introduced if someone forgets.

Maybe a rethink of the blocks is in order, maybe this idea needs a spray 
onto a hot block to work more efficiently...

cya
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_nov_meet&_m=EXT



From atomic at extendwireless.net  Fri Nov 24 03:31:31 2006
From: atomic at extendwireless.net (Charles Woock)
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 03:31:31 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
References: <838029.65651.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D236@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
Message-ID: <007b01c70fab$547fe2c0$02dea8c0@AIRBRIDGE>

If you want to see a graph of the ignition timing to AFR relationship, 
download Tunerpro (EFI tuning software) and just look at the spark tables 
for... say... AUJP which is a Chevy 350.  If you study the VE (fuel) and 
spark tables you'll see that at cruising speed, part throttle with 
relatively high manifold vacuum (leaner) the timing is significantly higher 
than at full throttle (richer).  GM also had, but never implemented, a 
"highway mode" which leaned out the fuel.  (to increase economy but 
unfortunately this would have violated some emissions laws).  Highway mode 
required more spark advance.

In the field of race engines, applied science and testing has clearly shown 
that a richer mixture (within limits) burns slower (flame propagation is 
slower).  This is a very generalized statement.  There is of course much 
more to it and every engine/combustion chamber is different.

This is just one link out of hundreds on the net that talk about it.  This 
one isn't the best at describing "why" but it proves the point.  Keep 
looking and you'll uncover many very technical articles on the subject.

http://www.rodandcustommagazine.com/techarticles/0604rc_ignition_timing/

As far as the specific problem... Knock sensor hits at or below AFR of 10, I 
would have to say that is way too much fuel to be useful for gaining power 
(on gas) and that the ignition timing is too advanced for that much fuel. 
But this is just my opinion.

Charles



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Becker, Damon (Damon)" <damonb at avaya.com>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>; <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 12:51 AM
Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?


> Sorry for not trimming.
>
> Activation energy is being achieved in each case (rich and lean).  I don't 
> think the answer lies in "which molecules break apart under which 
> conditions" type of analysis.  Combustion Kinematics supports the "richer 
> = faster combustion" theory.  To my surprise, there is a rich limit.  I 
> have my degree in this stuff and I, honestly, don't fully understand why 
> that max velocity exists.
>
> Taking the issue one step further to the subject of the thread, I also am 
> not 100% confident in my answer as to why rich detonation occurs.  I 
> suppose I should have made that clear.
>
> My reason this phonemona exists was what makes sense to me, given the 
> research and experience I have, which both of which I think support my 
> conclusions.




From niche at iinet.net.au  Fri Nov 24 06:08:37 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 20:08:37 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
In-Reply-To: <007b01c70fab$547fe2c0$02dea8c0@AIRBRIDGE>
References: <838029.65651.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D236@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>
	<007b01c70fab$547fe2c0$02dea8c0@AIRBRIDGE>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20061124200449.02c90360@iinet.net.au>>

Thanks,

But I would like to see a graph of burn speed vs mixture by anyone
on this group who is firm of the opinion that richer mixtures burn
faster - or at least faster enough to have to worry about them in
terms of ignition timing mapping...

ie Ignition timing can only be for a specific engine, burn speed
will of course be influenced by chamber geometry but I want to
see if there is some independent data, such as a tube flame
front test which doesnt rely on turbulence induced by compression ?

Cheers

Mike

At 05:31 PM 11/24/06, you wrote:
>If you want to see a graph of the ignition timing to AFR relationship, download Tunerpro (EFI tuning software) and just look at the spark tables for... say... AUJP which is a Chevy 350.  If you study the VE (fuel) and spark tables you'll see that at cruising speed, part throttle with relatively high manifold vacuum (leaner) the timing is significantly higher than at full throttle (richer).  GM also had, but never implemented, a "highway mode" which leaned out the fuel.  (to increase economy but unfortunately this would have violated some emissions laws).  Highway mode required more spark advance.
>
>In the field of race engines, applied science and testing has clearly shown that a richer mixture (within limits) burns slower (flame propagation is slower).  This is a very generalized statement.  There is of course much more to it and every engine/combustion chamber is different.
>
>This is just one link out of hundreds on the net that talk about it.  This one isn't the best at describing "why" but it proves the point.  Keep looking and you'll uncover many very technical articles on the subject.
>
>http://www.rodandcustommagazine.com/techarticles/0604rc_ignition_timing/
>
>As far as the specific problem... Knock sensor hits at or below AFR of 10, I would have to say that is way too much fuel to be useful for gaining power (on gas) and that the ignition timing is too advanced for that much fuel. But this is just my opinion.
>
>Charles
>
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Becker, Damon (Damon)" <damonb at avaya.com>
>To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>; <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
>Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 12:51 AM
>Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Rich detonation?
>
>
>>Sorry for not trimming.
>>
>>Activation energy is being achieved in each case (rich and lean).  I don't think the answer lies in "which molecules break apart under which conditions" type of analysis.  Combustion Kinematics supports the "richer = faster combustion" theory.  To my surprise, there is a rich limit.  I have my degree in this stuff and I, honestly, don't fully understand why that max velocity exists.
>>
>>Taking the issue one step further to the subject of the thread, I also am not 100% confident in my answer as to why rich detonation occurs.  I suppose I should have made that clear.
>>
>>My reason this phonemona exists was what makes sense to me, given the research and experience I have, which both of which I think support my conclusions.
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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 phil at injec.com  Fri Nov 24 07:20:14 2006
From: phil at injec.com (Phil Lamovie)
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 00:20:14 +1100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap carby)
References: <BAY106-F3494300245CAE9C34E4C22A8E20@phx.gbl>
	<4565BAC8.6CBD3FBE@injec.com>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061123233623.02d68680@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <4566F18E.195DC4DD@injec.com>


Hi Mike,

The setup I referred to was a Queensland University of Technology
plus private enterprise thing and was bolted on to VH Commodore
(like an opel but with a bad engine)

As for the High NOx at 20:1 not so. The NOx curve is mirrored about
the peak at  approx. Lambda 1.1 or 16.7:1.   At 20:1 the NOx is the same
as about 12:1 .

Phil

For reference try The Bosch Automotive Handbook page 487




From efi at dyakron.com  Fri Nov 24 07:30:12 2006
From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V)
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 08:30:12 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Datalogging with knock sensor
In-Reply-To: <02bf01c70f67$0c18aba0$1c7ca6a6@yancey.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20061124082646.03736480@dyakron.com>

Hi David,
you mention the SyTy code and slow ECM logging.  The Typical rate I've seen
from a 7749 SyTy ECM is around 4 frames per second.  Are you using a 7749?
Also, which logging software are you using?
The logs should allow you to roughly determine at which MAP & RPM
your spark knock occurs.  Close anyway..
MV


At 07:22 PM 11/23/2006 -0600, you wrote:

>   I've been playing with my new 'toy' which is a wideband datalogger.  My 
> AFR is now very close (after some logging and tweaking) and I want to 
> start tweaking the spark timing.  When I started this project I copied 
> and pasted in a "stock" 2-bar sy/ty spark map into my ECM and it runs 
> quite well.  However, there are a few pingy spots at part throttle.
>   My ECM does not have a knock sensor and this function is disabled in 
> the calibration.  (I do plan to use this feature eventually.)
>   I was thinking about getting an appropriate knock sensor and interface 
> box (the thing between the ECM and knock sensor) for my engine 
> block.  Then logging it with MAP and RPM to look for the areas with 
> detonation; so I know where to edit the table in the ECM.  My ECM has the 
> old slow ALDL which is poor for real-time logging.
>   Has anyone any experience with this?
>   Thanks for any ideas!
>David



From niche at iinet.net.au  Fri Nov 24 10:41:19 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 00:41:19 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection (evolution of the evap carby)
In-Reply-To: <4566F18E.195DC4DD@injec.com>
References: <BAY106-F3494300245CAE9C34E4C22A8E20@phx.gbl>
	<4565BAC8.6CBD3FBE@injec.com>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061123233623.02d68680@iinet.net.au>
	<4566F18E.195DC4DD@injec.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20061125003940.026d8670@iinet.net.au>>

Interesting thanks Phil,

Whatever happened to these sorts of developments, surely there would
be some mob offering them to even backyard installers, yet they all see to
fizzle out, are there regulatory issues here in Aust or just opportunistic
commercial 'managers' who've spent their doh and lost the plot ;)

?

Regards

Mike



At 09:20 PM 11/24/06, you wrote:

>Hi Mike,
>
>The setup I referred to was a Queensland University of Technology
>plus private enterprise thing and was bolted on to VH Commodore
>(like an opel but with a bad engine)
>
>As for the High NOx at 20:1 not so. The NOx curve is mirrored about
>the peak at  approx. Lambda 1.1 or 16.7:1.   At 20:1 the NOx is the same
>as about 12:1 .
>
>Phil
>
>For reference try The Bosch Automotive Handbook page 487
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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
Perth, Western Australia
VK/VL Commodore Fuse Rail panel that wont warp, twist or melt, guaranteed  !
Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
http://niche.iinet.net.au


From dan at w3eax.umd.edu  Sat Nov 25 13:28:45 2006
From: dan at w3eax.umd.edu (dan at w3eax.umd.edu)
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 14:28:45 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] ABS
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0611251419400.7080@w3eax.umd.edu>


Hi Guys (and gals),

I was wondering if anyone has ever played with making their own 
proportioning valve based on ABS.  I have a Mk1 MR2 and the car uses a 
pressure regulator to control maximum braking on the rear brakes to 
prevent them from locking.  A number of people have commented that the 
regulator is set poorly and causes the rears to be doing very little when 
the front are nearly locked, thats very unfortunate in an MR2 which has 
most of its weight over the back.

I was thinking it'd be neat to try putting in an ABS modulator valve, a 
couple pressure sensors, and a 2 axis-accellerometer, which would keep the 
rear pressure at some proportion of the front pressure by using the ABS 
valve block.  The accellerometer would be able to detect tilt in the car 
and adjust the pressure proportioning as appropriate.

Anyone ever try anything like this?

dan


From chrism at cnx.net  Sat Nov 25 14:09:04 2006
From: chrism at cnx.net (Chris McKinnon)
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 12:09:04 -0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] ABS
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0611251419400.7080@w3eax.umd.edu>
Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20061125120904.014c4d10@cnx.net>

I seem to remember seeing some who had put the whole ABS system off a Mk2
onto his Mk1 for autocross and he seemed to like the results. I can't seem
to find his site though... You could try asking on the MR2OC board maybe.

Chris

>Hi Guys (and gals),
>
>I was wondering if anyone has ever played with making their own 
>proportioning valve based on ABS.  I have a Mk1 MR2 and the car uses a 
>pressure regulator to control maximum braking on the rear brakes to 
>prevent them from locking.  A number of people have commented that the 
>regulator is set poorly and causes the rears to be doing very little when 
>the front are nearly locked, thats very unfortunate in an MR2 which has 
>most of its weight over the back.
>
>I was thinking it'd be neat to try putting in an ABS modulator valve, a 
>couple pressure sensors, and a 2 axis-accellerometer, which would keep the 
>rear pressure at some proportion of the front pressure by using the ABS 
>valve block.  The accellerometer would be able to detect tilt in the car 
>and adjust the pressure proportioning as appropriate.
>
>Anyone ever try anything like this?
>
>dan



From torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu  Sat Nov 25 17:32:45 2006
From: torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Torbj=F6rn_Forsman?=)
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 00:32:45 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] ABS
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0611251419400.7080@w3eax.umd.edu>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0611251419400.7080@w3eax.umd.edu>
Message-ID: <4568D29D.7020606@gengas.nu>

But is this brake proportioning problem really due to a bad design from 
the beginning? Or might it be that parts in the pressure regulator wear 
out or get stuck as time passes? At least, the brake proportioning must 
have been acceptable when the car model was presented to the authorities 
for type approval.

If the pressure regulator is connected to the rear suspension in order 
to permit a higher brake pressure when the rear of the vehicle is 
heavily loaded, then there are often lots of mechanical parts - links, 
springs etc - that may come out of order or need adjustment.

A good mechanical pressure regulator with an integrated accelerometer 
was used on some VW buses (Vanagon/Kleinbus/Transporter) during the 70's 
  and perhaps later too. Take a look at that unit, it is probably easily 
found at breaker's yards.

Best regards

Torbj?rn Forsman

dan at w3eax.umd.edu wrote:
> 
> Hi Guys (and gals),
> 
> I was wondering if anyone has ever played with making their own 
> proportioning valve based on ABS.  I have a Mk1 MR2 and the car uses a 
> pressure regulator to control maximum braking on the rear brakes to 
> prevent them from locking.  A number of people have commented that the 
> regulator is set poorly and causes the rears to be doing very little 
> when the front are nearly locked, thats very unfortunate in an MR2 which 
> has most of its weight over the back.
> 
> I was thinking it'd be neat to try putting in an ABS modulator valve, a 
> couple pressure sensors, and a 2 axis-accellerometer, which would keep 
> the rear pressure at some proportion of the front pressure by using the 
> ABS valve block.  The accellerometer would be able to detect tilt in the 
> car and adjust the pressure proportioning as appropriate.
> 
> Anyone ever try anything like this?
> 
> dan
> _______________________________________________
> 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 dan at w3eax.umd.edu  Sat Nov 25 18:05:52 2006
From: dan at w3eax.umd.edu (dan at w3eax.umd.edu)
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 19:05:52 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Proportioning valves
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0611251846100.8691@w3eax.umd.edu>


My guess is the primary purpose of the regulator is safety.  If the rear 
wheels were to lock up before the fronts in an MR2, most drivers would 
cause disasterous consequences.  As a result, they may have intentionally 
been overly conservative in the settings to ensure that this never 
happens.

I have a VW and I'm aware of the VW load-sensing pressure regulator.  It 
was certainly a darn clever idea.  Unfortunately I don't have a solid axle 
like the VW.  I suppose its possible I could rig it up some how onto the 
strut assembly.

I just thought it would be an interesting project to try a quasi-ABS 
system.  I'm not real clear on how ABS works though.  It was my 
understanding the pump creates a huge amount of excess pressure and then 
the valve block is some how used to control the pressure at the wheels.  I 
wasn't clear whether or not its a PWM in order to maintain a specific 
pressure or if its just a too-much pressure, no pressure, too-much 
pressure, no pressure, too-much, etc.

I don't really see why a pump is needed if you just use the pressure 
applied by the foot and modulate the pressure so that the moment it locks 
up, you alleviate pressure (say 70% of pre-lock pressure or whatever it 
takes to let the wheel spin), then build back up to 95% of pre-lock 
pressure, then slowly walk upward until it locks again and repeat.  (I've 
also wondered if there is someway to sense lockup before it happens.

I realize this isn't EFI, but it is automotive electronic design so I 
figured people here might be interested.

dan


From wopontour at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 25 18:23:08 2006
From: wopontour at hotmail.com (WopOnTour)
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 17:23:08 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] ABS
References: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0611251419400.7080@w3eax.umd.edu>
Message-ID: <BAY122-DAV15C4F47BED5F38D910596BAE70@phx.gbl>

Simple solution?...
just get an adjustable proportioning valve (Willwood makes one) and adjust 
accordingly
HTH
WOT
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <dan at w3eax.umd.edu>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 12:28 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] ABS


>
> Hi Guys (and gals),
>
> I was wondering if anyone has ever played with making their own 
> proportioning valve based on ABS.  I have a Mk1 MR2 and the car uses a 
> pressure regulator to control maximum braking on the rear brakes to 
> prevent them from locking.  A number of people have commented that the 
> regulator is set poorly and causes the rears to be doing very little when 
> the front are nearly locked, thats very unfortunate in an MR2 which has 
> most of its weight over the back.
>
> I was thinking it'd be neat to try putting in an ABS modulator valve, a 
> couple pressure sensors, and a 2 axis-accellerometer, which would keep the 
> rear pressure at some proportion of the front pressure by using the ABS 
> valve block.  The accellerometer would be able to detect tilt in the car 
> and adjust the pressure proportioning as appropriate.
>
> Anyone ever try anything like this?
>
> dan
> _______________________________________________
> 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 phil at injec.com  Sat Nov 25 23:55:33 2006
From: phil at injec.com (Phil Lamovie)
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 16:55:33 +1100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection: or why they all fail
References: <BAY106-F3494300245CAE9C34E4C22A8E20@phx.gbl>
	<4565BAC8.6CBD3FBE@injec.com>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061123233623.02d68680@iinet.net.au>
	<4566F18E.195DC4DD@injec.com>
	<7.0.1.0.0.20061125003940.026d8670@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <45692C55.72294B23@injec.com>


Hi Mike,

The cost of design test and production is often in excess of what a
small market like Australia can return to investors.

It is possible to estimate fairly accurately how many sales you require
per $million invested, then you look at aftermarket uptake rates and
conclude you need "X" million vehicles of an identical build so that the 2%
uptake rate is sufficient.

Really, since the 80's it's not even a pipe dream it's just a silly waste of
money.

There was a rule of thumb back then that if you could lower fuel consumption
by 15% you went aftermarket or if you could lower production cost by 30%
you went OEM.

When our LPG Liquid Injection was ready for market we found that our sponsors
at the time, Ford Australia, had been spending a multimillion dollar budget on
a twin converter vapour system that cost about the same.

This was despite featuring our system on the front cover of the Ford in-house
product magazine and never mentioning their own developments.

It had "special air box retainers" that were essentially springs that were
capable
of saving the airbox from exploding each time the car backfired. The airbox
cost about $300 and the taxi drivers were wrapping them in "ocky straps" as
a solution.

On top of that there is all the costs associated with manuals and training and
testing and spare parts.

Worst of all our conversion had more torque with a std engine than Ford's
Special Vehicle's go fast model with the funny camshafts etc. We all failed
to grasp that even though it was better in every way it didn't fit into their
product line up and thus would never be sold.

We always saw the improvements as a great selling point but it was really
naive of us not to consider their marketing depts horror at the thought.

In the end, the Boss of Tickfords (Ford's Partner in Special Vehicles) Howard
Marsden and his Powertrain Engineering Manager took the car we prepared
for a "drive it like you stole it" ride around the industrial estate.

After 20 minutes they parked in the car park and switched off the engine.
The ticking noises as the exhaust cooled were loud. Nobody moved, the
powertrain manager counted to himself and after 20 to 30 seconds he
restarted the engine. We had just passed a heat soak test without fuel rail
insulation.

As I drove away that day I was thinking about buying an Island for Christmas.

It never happened.

Phil




From damonb at avaya.com  Sun Nov 26 16:37:13 2006
From: damonb at avaya.com (Becker, Damon (Damon))
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 15:37:13 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Proportioning valves
References: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0611251846100.8691@w3eax.umd.edu>
Message-ID: <A49F94D2EEDFB74E816FF4277B7A602C71D241@cof110avexu2.global.avaya.com>

Most Toyotas have this.  The trucks do, and so does my independant suspension 93 Camry.  It's a fantastic idea!  

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org on behalf of dan at w3eax.umd.edu 
	Sent: Sat 11/25/2006 5:05 PM 
	To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org 
	Cc: 
	Subject: [Diy_efi] Proportioning valves
	
	


	My guess is the primary purpose of the regulator is safety.  If the rear
	wheels were to lock up before the fronts in an MR2, most drivers would
	cause disasterous consequences.  As a result, they may have intentionally
	been overly conservative in the settings to ensure that this never
	happens.
	
	I have a VW and I'm aware of the VW load-sensing pressure regulator.  It
	was certainly a darn clever idea.  Unfortunately I don't have a solid axle
	like the VW.  I suppose its possible I could rig it up some how onto the
	strut assembly.
	
	I just thought it would be an interesting project to try a quasi-ABS
	system.  I'm not real clear on how ABS works though.  It was my
	understanding the pump creates a huge amount of excess pressure and then
	the valve block is some how used to control the pressure at the wheels.  I
	wasn't clear whether or not its a PWM in order to maintain a specific
	pressure or if its just a too-much pressure, no pressure, too-much
	pressure, no pressure, too-much, etc.
	
	I don't really see why a pump is needed if you just use the pressure
	applied by the foot and modulate the pressure so that the moment it locks
	up, you alleviate pressure (say 70% of pre-lock pressure or whatever it
	takes to let the wheel spin), then build back up to 95% of pre-lock
	pressure, then slowly walk upward until it locks again and repeat.  (I've
	also wondered if there is someway to sense lockup before it happens.
	
	I realize this isn't EFI, but it is automotive electronic design so I
	figured people here might be interested.
	
	dan
	_______________________________________________
	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 benof1987 at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 26 17:57:04 2006
From: benof1987 at hotmail.com (Ben P)
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 09:57:04 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection: or why they all fail
In-Reply-To: <45692C55.72294B23@injec.com>
Message-ID: <BAY106-F16084A25EA642223650C17A8E70@phx.gbl>

Hmm well that sucks...

And you said something about needing X identical vehicles... what about 
targeting vehicles which have used the same parts in many models. I.e. the 
inlet manifold bolt pattern and port spacing is the same in falcons from 
1988 to current, and they have used the same inlet manifold from 
1994-curent. If you were making inlet manifolds (which this evaporative 
injection system will need) for cars like this, you wouldn't need a whole 
lot of variety to sell a lot of manifolds.

Another option is developing this system for an overseas market. Ie if this 
evaporative injection system was sold in america, the amount of potential 
customers just drew dramatically, especially if you then target common 
models/engines. ie how many americans want better fuel economy from their 
350 chev powered vehicle? it has to be more people than want better economy 
from their 4L OHC falcon...

just a couple of thoughts...

cya
Ben

>From: Phil Lamovie <phil at injec.com>
>Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Evaporative fuel injection: or why they all fail
>Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 16:55:33 +1100
>
>
>Hi Mike,
>
>The cost of design test and production is often in excess of what a
>small market like Australia can return to investors.
>
>It is possible to estimate fairly accurately how many sales you require
>per $million invested, then you look at aftermarket uptake rates and
>conclude you need "X" million vehicles of an identical build so that the 2%
>uptake rate is sufficient.
>
>Really, since the 80's it's not even a pipe dream it's just a silly waste 
>of
>money.
>
>There was a rule of thumb back then that if you could lower fuel 
>consumption
>by 15% you went aftermarket or if you could lower production cost by 30%
>you went OEM.
>
>When our LPG Liquid Injection was ready for market we found that our 
>sponsors
>at the time, Ford Australia, had been spending a multimillion dollar budget 
>on
>a twin converter vapour system that cost about the same.
>
>This was despite featuring our system on the front cover of the Ford 
>in-house
>product magazine and never mentioning their own developments.
>
>It had "special air box retainers" that were essentially springs that were
>capable
>of saving the airbox from exploding each time the car backfired. The airbox
>cost about $300 and the taxi drivers were wrapping them in "ocky straps" as
>a solution.
>
>On top of that there is all the costs associated with manuals and training 
>and
>testing and spare parts.
>
>Worst of all our conversion had more torque with a std engine than Ford's
>Special Vehicle's go fast model with the funny camshafts etc. We all failed
>to grasp that even though it was better in every way it didn't fit into 
>their
>product line up and thus would never be sold.
>
>We always saw the improvements as a great selling point but it was really
>naive of us not to consider their marketing depts horror at the thought.
>
>In the end, the Boss of Tickfords (Ford's Partner in Special Vehicles) 
>Howard
>Marsden and his Powertrain Engineering Manager took the car we prepared
>for a "drive it like you stole it" ride around the industrial estate.
>
>After 20 minutes they parked in the car park and switched off the engine.
>The ticking noises as the exhaust cooled were loud. Nobody moved, the
>powertrain manager counted to himself and after 20 to 30 seconds he
>restarted the engine. We had just passed a heat soak test without fuel rail
>insulation.
>
>As I drove away that day I was thinking about buying an Island for 
>Christmas.
>
>It never happened.
>
>Phil
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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

_________________________________________________________________
Advertisement: 110,000+ cars with the click of a mouse at carsales.com.au  
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fsecure%2Dau%2Eimrworldwide%2Ecom%2Fcgi%2Dbin%2Fa%2Fci%5F450304%2Fet%5F2%2Fcg%5F801577%2Fpi%5F1005244%2Fai%5F838593&_t=757768878&_r=endtext_110000&_m=EXT



From dan at w3eax.umd.edu  Sun Nov 26 19:10:28 2006
From: dan at w3eax.umd.edu (dan at w3eax.umd.edu)
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 20:10:28 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] ABS proportioning valve
Message-ID: <200611270110.kAR1ASZE003791@w3eax.umd.edu>


Well, I looked it up on Howstuffworks, and according to them:

It looks like the valve has three positions: open, closed, release (one-way
allows pressure to bleed off from the brake-side).  They claim the controller
is normally open but then releases if a wheel decellerates very rapidly
until proper behavior decelleration is restored and then its re-openned.

This leaves me with a few questions:

1) Whats the purpose of closed?  It seems like you are always alternating
between release and open.  

2) Can you partially open the valve resulting in a pressure drop across it?
If thats the case then presumably you could just monitor the before and
after pressure and run a simple control loop to control the current into
the valve.

3) Is there a way to detect impending lockup before it locks up? From a
technical point of view what exactly is threshold braking?

dan


From milanoguy at gmail.com  Mon Nov 27 00:59:50 2006
From: milanoguy at gmail.com (Milano Guy)
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 00:59:50 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] ABS
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0611251419400.7080@w3eax.umd.edu>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0611251419400.7080@w3eax.umd.edu>
Message-ID: <d0f9892a0611262259y4030992cm61c087c1dadbfbfa@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Dan

You are way  off course in your analysis. Unless your car has a worn out
proportioning valve( very unlikely) or some other mechanical brake
problem(possible), your MR2 is probably stopping very well. In a short
wheelbase vehicles like your MR2 the front tires will always be doing almost
all of the braking.

You identify weight on the rear wheels as an influence on breaking. It is a
factor, but a minor one, more important factors are CG, wheelbase, weight
transfer, tire contact area, tire grip. There are several good books on
brake systems which cover these factors in great detail.

Bye


On 11/25/06, dan at w3eax.umd.edu <dan at w3eax.umd.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Guys (and gals),
>
> I was wondering if anyone has ever played with making their own
> proportioning valve based on ABS.  I have a Mk1 MR2 and the car uses a
> pressure regulator to control maximum braking on the rear brakes to
> prevent them from locking.  A number of people have commented that the
> regulator is set poorly and causes the rears to be doing very little when
> the front are nearly locked, thats very unfortunate in an MR2 which has
> most of its weight over the back.
>
> I was thinking it'd be neat to try putting in an ABS modulator valve, a
> couple pressure sensors, and a 2 axis-accellerometer, which would keep the
> rear pressure at some proportion of the front pressure by using the ABS
> valve block.  The accellerometer would be able to detect tilt in the car
> and adjust the pressure proportioning as appropriate.
>
> Anyone ever try anything like this?
>
> dan
> _______________________________________________
> 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 niche at iinet.net.au  Wed Nov 29 06:42:37 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 20:42:37 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Passing of Don Sauman last Sunday 26th Nov 2006
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20061129203519.02722d40@iinet.net.au>>

Hullo chaps,

One of our members Don Sauman who I met about half a dozen times
over the course of the last 2 years died of heart failure this last Sunday,
I just found out a few minutes ago as his new email address bounced.

Don was a keen automotive enthusiast and all round great guy, what more
can I say as I only knew him as a technical acquaintance for the most
part but we had great chats when he came over to my lab for a cuppa,
his V8 jeep and VN commodore outlived him, might happen to more
of us the way life happens to be at the moment, RIP.

There is a service next Monday 10:30am at Karakatta (Perth) for those
that are able to pay their respects locally,




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 !
* 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 efi at dyakron.com  Wed Nov 29 08:14:55 2006
From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V)
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 09:14:55 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Passing of Don Sauman last Sunday 26th Nov 2006
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20061129203519.02722d40@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20061129090923.03780ec0@dyakron.com>

Very sorry to hear that Mike.
Don was always contributing and
trying to help other listers.
He seemed like a good guy from my
vantage point on the other side of this small planet.
Thanks for the post.
Best wishes,
mike v.

At 08:42 PM 11/29/2006 +0800, you wrote:

>Don was a keen automotive enthusiast and all round great guy, what more
>can I say as I only knew him as a technical acquaintance for the most
>part but we had great chats when he came over to my lab for a cuppa,
>his V8 jeep and VN commodore outlived him, might happen to more
>of us the way life happens to be at the moment, RIP.



From geoff_h at smartchat.net.au  Wed Nov 29 14:30:35 2006
From: geoff_h at smartchat.net.au (Geoff Harrison)
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 07:30:35 +1100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Passing of Don Sauman last Sunday 26th Nov 2006
References: <7.0.1.0.0.20061129203519.02722d40@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <001001c713f5$3a813510$6500a8c0@fred>


Hi all,

As Mike said, Don was one of those all round great guys.
One of those on my list of must meet one day.

We had several off list comms, sharing several interests 
including
AMC (he will also be missed on the AMC forum also) photography, 
and
fuel injection.

More importantly, a compassionate, friendly sole, with never a 
bad
word about anyone.

Mike, my thoughts are with you as I know you were getting to 
know
the man. Try not to think of this as a loss, but be grateful for 
having
known him. Part of Don will stay with us.

Regards,
Geoff

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike" <niche at iinet.net.au>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 11:42 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] Passing of Don Sauman last Sunday 26th Nov 
2006


> Hullo chaps,
> One of our members Don Sauman who I met about half a dozen 
> times
> over the course of the last 2 years died of heart failure this 
> last Sunday,
> I just found out a few minutes ago as his new email address 
> bounced.
>
> Don was a keen automotive enthusiast and all round great guy, 
> what more
> can I say as I only knew him as a technical acquaintance for 
> the most
> part but we had great chats when he came over to my lab for a 
> cuppa,
> his V8 jeep and VN commodore outlived him, might happen to 
> more
> of us the way life happens to be at the moment, RIP.
>
> There is a service next Monday 10:30am at Karakatta (Perth) 
> for those
> that are able to pay their respects locally,
>
>
>
>
> 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 !
> * 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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 jayrabe at gmail.com  Wed Nov 29 15:23:02 2006
From: jayrabe at gmail.com (Jay Rabe)
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 16:23:02 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] ABS proportioning valve
In-Reply-To: <200611270110.kAR1ASZE003791@w3eax.umd.edu>
References: <200611270110.kAR1ASZE003791@w3eax.umd.edu>
Message-ID: <b52bf8c50611291323g282c0575q9a1faaf6117ce194@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/26/06, dan at w3eax.umd.edu <dan at w3eax.umd.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Well, I looked it up on Howstuffworks, and according to them:
>
> It looks like the valve has three positions: open, closed, release
> (one-way
> allows pressure to bleed off from the brake-side).  They claim the
> controller
> is normally open but then releases if a wheel decellerates very rapidly
> until proper behavior decelleration is restored and then its re-openned.


No, there are 2 types, one chops out (holds back) a certain percentage
(usually a fixed psi drop, not variable) and there are variable
proportioning valves.  Im not sure what your MR2 has, most likely a variable
one.  Some cars dont have a proportioning valve.  If designed correctly
(piston sizes front vs rear) you dont really need one.

This leaves me with a few questions:
>
> 1) Whats the purpose of closed?  It seems like you are always alternating
> between release and open.


Closed would only make sense if the rear wheels came off the ground when you
brake, but wouldnt do you much good cause the rear wheels would be off the
ground anyways.  Closed shouldnt exist.


2) Can you partially open the valve resulting in a pressure drop across it?
> If thats the case then presumably you could just monitor the before and
> after pressure and run a simple control loop to control the current into
> the valve.


Yup, but i'd call that partially closed.  I think you are mixing up an abs
solenoid with a proportioning valve.  The abs solenoid pushes the fluid back
against the master cyl. side of the brakes to lessen pressure to one or both
rear wheels (depending on a 1 or 2 channel system) when the ABS computer
realizes one or more rear wheels are spinning slower by a certain %age vs.
the other tires.  I havent ever seen an electronic proportioning valve,
mechanical seems more practical and safe, but its possible.  I think usually
they try to keep away from electronics that mess with braking unless part
failure can guarantee a safe stop.
   What could be your "issue" is if the rear wheels spin slower than the
front from say left foot braking, etc. the abs might see this and kick in
"early"  where the newer ABS might allow a little more speed difference
before stepping in.

3) Is there a way to detect impending lockup before it locks up? From a
> technical point of view what exactly is threshold braking?


Threshold braking is the absolute most braking force that each tire can
handle.  In a straight line only stop, it would be possible to be able get
the front and rear forces to a maximum.  But, you dont want this in a panic
stop where you swerve or turn.  The rear end could swing out, most people
couldnt handle a car set up like this, its hairy to brake like that and its
dangerous.  Usually front brakes do 70-80% of the braking.   Ever try to
stop with your ebrake?  Its scary.
    You can hear your tires start to 'scrub' at threshold braking.  Basicly
your tires at their traction limit, depending on the tires can make a
scrubbing/scuffing sound.  Besides that and a possible speed difference
between wheels, not that i can think of.

   You might have bad wheel bearings, an air bubble, or spongey brake lines
in the rear. Bad wheel beearings can cause the rotor to tilt, pushing the
piston back into the caliper)  when you go to hit the brakes, force on the
master cyl pushes the brake fluid against the pistons in the front and rear
calipers.  Any play results in either extra brake pedal travel (if front and
rear play are equal) , or lower pressure for one circuit (if just the front
or rear has more play)   They are seperate circuits, so if there is an issue
with one or the other, the pedal can feel firm, but one of the circuits
could be low on pressure.

   Read this site, it most likely makes more sense than i do.
http://stoptech.com/tech_info/tech_white_papers.shtml

Jay


From ronin at aristotle.net  Wed Nov 29 17:26:47 2006
From: ronin at aristotle.net (Dave Williams)
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 17:26:47 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] de-headering script
Message-ID: <456E1737.4080801@aristotle.net>

  A few years back a couple of people here were working on a 
de-headering script to strip off the majority of the mail headers in the 
DIY_EFI archives.  Did that ever get posted anywhere?  I want to strip 
the excess headers out of my own mbox files.

-- 
== http://www.bacomatic.org/~dw/index.htm
== http://autotech.freeforumhost.com/autotech.html


From hoptona at gmail.com  Thu Nov 30 04:54:38 2006
From: hoptona at gmail.com (Andrew Hopton)
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 21:24:38 +1030
Subject: [Diy_efi] Passing of Don Sauman last Sunday 26th Nov 2006
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20061129203519.02722d40@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <000d01c7146d$f0ba7210$0301010a@TOSHIBAM500>

RIP Don, 
I for one, appreciated his contributions over the years.

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]
On Behalf Of Mike
Sent: Wednesday, 29 November 2006 11:13 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: [Diy_efi] Passing of Don Sauman last Sunday 26th Nov 2006
Importance: High


Hullo chaps,

One of our members Don Sauman who I met about half a dozen times over
the course of the last 2 years died of heart failure this last Sunday, I
just found out a few minutes ago as his new email address bounced.

Don was a keen automotive enthusiast and all round great guy, what more
can I say as I only knew him as a technical acquaintance for the most
part but we had great chats when he came over to my lab for a cuppa, his
V8 jeep and VN commodore outlived him, might happen to more of us the
way life happens to be at the moment, RIP.

There is a service next Monday 10:30am at Karakatta (Perth) for those
that are able to pay their respects locally,




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 !
* 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
_______________________________________________
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