From donegan at donegan.org Tue Jan 2 21:04:12 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2007 19:04:12 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] test, please read In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1167793452.32175.12.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Received. Hopefully that is a good sign. To add something somewhat useful to the list in this reply I'll say the Donegan ECM is coming along nicely :-) The input board is going to fab out at about 3.0 inches by 2.2 inches (exactly matching the CPU board - ARM based Steve). Inputs designed in are MAP, MAT, Barometric, Coolant, Throttle, Oil pressure/temp, 4 ea O2 sensors, Crank and Cam position, 2 ea EGT sensors - well pretty much everything everyone told me should be sensor inputs. Fuel pressure input I'll put on the 'relay' control board - that will do PWM control of the fuel pump eliminating the need for a regulator or return line. Happy New Year :-) On Sun, 2006-12-31 at 17:20 -0600, Steve Ravet wrote: > It seems that the guy that hosts diy-efi.org let the domain expire and > someone else has taken it. Not sure what the implications are but I > think the lists should still be working. If you don't get this email, > then that means they aren't working. > > --steve > > ------------------- > Steve Ravet > ARM > steve.ravet at arm.com > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Tue Jan 2 21:14:53 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2007 19:14:53 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] test, please read In-Reply-To: <1167793452.32175.12.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <1167793452.32175.12.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <1167794093.32175.19.camel@wopr.donegan.org> OOOPS - MAT was really MAF and missed Manifold Inlet Temp... Other daughter boards to this design will be Ion sensor board (8 channels), Ignition board (8 channels of MSD output, 1 charged capacitor per coil for coil-on-plug), Injector board (8 channels of injector drivers) and whatever else comes to mind as I develop this. The hardware part is 'easy' the software will be 'fun'... The whole idea is you can use this as a data logger, an EFI controller, an Ignition controller - whatever - just add the daughter boards you want to the mostly dumb mother board. On Tue, 2007-01-02 at 19:04 -0800, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > Received. Hopefully that is a good sign. > > To add something somewhat useful to the list in this reply I'll say the > Donegan ECM is coming along nicely :-) The input board is going to fab > out at about 3.0 inches by 2.2 inches (exactly matching the CPU board - > ARM based Steve). Inputs designed in are MAP, MAT, Barometric, Coolant, > Throttle, Oil pressure/temp, 4 ea O2 sensors, Crank and Cam position, 2 > ea EGT sensors - well pretty much everything everyone told me should be > sensor inputs. Fuel pressure input I'll put on the 'relay' control board > - that will do PWM control of the fuel pump eliminating the need for a > regulator or return line. > > Happy New Year :-) > > On Sun, 2006-12-31 at 17:20 -0600, Steve Ravet wrote: > > It seems that the guy that hosts diy-efi.org let the domain expire and > > someone else has taken it. Not sure what the implications are but I > > think the lists should still be working. If you don't get this email, > > then that means they aren't working. > > > > --steve > > > > ------------------- > > Steve Ravet > > ARM > > steve.ravet at arm.com > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 Steve.Ravet at arm.com Tue Jan 2 21:27:00 2007 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 21:27:00 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] RE: [Gmecm] test, please read Message-ID: Y'all weren't paying enough attention over the holidays... It expired, and if you tried diy-efi.org over the last couple days you were treated to a lovely picture of spring flowers and links to adjustable beds, kitchen wares, and other nice things. Looks like the mail queued up and was delivered, though, so hopefully all is well. --steve > -----Original Message----- > From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Mark Romans > Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 9:14 PM > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] test, please read > > Got it! Web site is still up too! > Mark > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steve Ravet" > To: ; ; > Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 3:20 PM > Subject: [Gmecm] test, please read > > > It seems that the guy that hosts diy-efi.org let the domain expire and > someone else has taken it. Not sure what the implications are but I > think the lists should still be working. If you don't get this email, > then that means they aren't working. > > --steve > > ------------------- > Steve Ravet > ARM > steve.ravet at arm.com > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From efi at dyakron.com Tue Jan 2 21:26:28 2007 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 22:26:28 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] test, please read References: Message-ID: <003401c72ee6$f52b4d40$6501a8c0@IBMm> Oh! I was going through some really bad withdrwls. Thanks for keeping us alive Mr. Steve. MV ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Ravet" To: ; ; Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 6:20 PM Subject: [Diy_efi] test, please read It seems that the guy that hosts diy-efi.org let the domain expire and someone else has taken it. Not sure what the implications are but I think the lists should still be working. If you don't get this email, then that means they aren't working. --steve ------------------- Steve Ravet ARM steve.ravet at arm.com _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From mdacmail at optusnet.com.au Wed Jan 3 17:23:34 2007 From: mdacmail at optusnet.com.au (mdacmail at optusnet.com.au) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 10:23:34 +1100 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Message-ID: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.diy-efi.org/pipermail/diy_efi/attachments/20070104/6df9e6a0/attachment.pl From philhunt at comcast.net Wed Jan 3 18:47:46 2007 From: philhunt at comcast.net (Phil) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2007 19:47:46 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Re: MoTeC for Mini Couper w/ siamese ports References: <20070103.093034.-850689.6.bhpdev@juno.com> Message-ID: <003801c72f99$fa11a2b0$6401a8c0@juliephil> seems you need a 720* cycle, 4 injection events (every 180*) that can provide full load fueling @3.0uS open time (signal duration will be slightly longer) AND can operate to very small durations for idle/low load-maybe some crazy combination including computer controlled fuel pressure; I don't have numbers, but I belive tripling pressure about doubles delivery-at least w/D Jet injectors. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 9:29 AM Subject: Fw: MoTeC for Mini Couper w/ siamese ports > > > bhp 1484 concord ln bethlehem, pa 18015 > > > too early for me to fully process but I'm thinking no- what ya think? > bob g. > > --------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Simon Wagner > To: bhpdev at juno.com > Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2007 16:10:29 -0800 > Subject: MoTeC for Mini Couper w/ siamese ports > Message-ID: <459AF475.9030909 at motec.com> > > Hello Bob, > > When running the engine on a 360 cycle (all fueling events are completed > for the entire cylinder count once per rev) the Motec ECU will fire it's > four outputs in the following manner. The first and second output will > fire and then 180 degrees later the third and fourth outputs will fire. > There would be four ignition events per 720 degrees for the distributor > as well. You have the ability to define the injection timing (when in > crank degrees before TDC) at which the groups will fire. The injection > timing will be the same for each group and can not be made different for > each group. So if you specify that you would like the end-of-injection > point to be at 270 degrees before TDC then the first group will deliver > it's fuel. > > 270 BTDC fuel pulse ends for outputs 1&2 end > 90 BTDC fuel pulse ends for outputs 3&4 end (270 before the other TDC) > > Typically you would connect the injector outputs in firing order: > > output 1 = cylinder 1 > output 2 = cylinder 3 > output 3 = cylinder 4 > output 4 = cylinder 2 > > Assuming we wire in this manner this means the intake runner to 1/2 > would have injector outputs 1 and 4 while intake runner 3/4 would have > injector outputs 2 and 3. For the above timing and wiring, this would > place fuel events in both the 1-2 runner and the 3-4 runner at 270 BTDC > and likewise the 90 BTDC would also have both runners getting a fuel > pulse. This would happen every 360 degrees. > > Meanwhile the ignition system would be running normally and you'd have > full control of the advance curve. > > Does this sound like an acceptable solution? > > -- > Simon Wagner > Motec Systems USA > 5355 Industrial Drive > Huntington Beach, CA 92649 > TEL: (714) 897-6804 x 161 > FAX: (714) 230-3075 > > > > From philhunt at comcast.net Wed Jan 3 18:49:27 2007 From: philhunt at comcast.net (Phil) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2007 19:49:27 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Fw: MoTeC for Mini Couper w/ siamese ports Message-ID: <003f01c72f9a$32356e60$6401a8c0@juliephil> ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 9:29 AM Subject: Fw: MoTeC for Mini Couper w/ siamese ports > > > bhp 1484 concord ln bethlehem, pa 18015 > > > too early for me to fully process but I'm thinking no- what ya think? > bob g. > > --------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Simon Wagner > To: bhpdev at juno.com > Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2007 16:10:29 -0800 > Subject: MoTeC for Mini Couper w/ siamese ports > Message-ID: <459AF475.9030909 at motec.com> > > Hello Bob, > > When running the engine on a 360 cycle (all fueling events are completed > for the entire cylinder count once per rev) the Motec ECU will fire it's > four outputs in the following manner. The first and second output will > fire and then 180 degrees later the third and fourth outputs will fire. > There would be four ignition events per 720 degrees for the distributor > as well. You have the ability to define the injection timing (when in > crank degrees before TDC) at which the groups will fire. The injection > timing will be the same for each group and can not be made different for > each group. So if you specify that you would like the end-of-injection > point to be at 270 degrees before TDC then the first group will deliver > it's fuel. > > 270 BTDC fuel pulse ends for outputs 1&2 end > 90 BTDC fuel pulse ends for outputs 3&4 end (270 before the other TDC) > > Typically you would connect the injector outputs in firing order: > > output 1 = cylinder 1 > output 2 = cylinder 3 > output 3 = cylinder 4 > output 4 = cylinder 2 > > Assuming we wire in this manner this means the intake runner to 1/2 > would have injector outputs 1 and 4 while intake runner 3/4 would have > injector outputs 2 and 3. For the above timing and wiring, this would > place fuel events in both the 1-2 runner and the 3-4 runner at 270 BTDC > and likewise the 90 BTDC would also have both runners getting a fuel > pulse. This would happen every 360 degrees. > > Meanwhile the ignition system would be running normally and you'd have > full control of the advance curve. > > Does this sound like an acceptable solution? > > -- > Simon Wagner > Motec Systems USA > 5355 Industrial Drive > Huntington Beach, CA 92649 > TEL: (714) 897-6804 x 161 > FAX: (714) 230-3075 > > > > From philhunt at comcast.net Wed Jan 3 20:11:36 2007 From: philhunt at comcast.net (Phil) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2007 21:11:36 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Re: MoTeC for Mini Couper w/ siamese ports References: <20070103.093034.-850689.6.bhpdev@juno.com> <003801c72f99$fa11a2b0$6401a8c0@juliephil> Message-ID: <004c01c72fa5$b664ff10$6401a8c0@juliephil> One of Bob's interesting ideas: 2 fuel rails and pressure regulators for rich and lean pairs of cylinders to fine tune a sequential arrangement-not a perfect solution, maybe a perfectly practical one!!?? phil ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phil" To: Cc: Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 7:47 PM Subject: [Diy_efi] Re: MoTeC for Mini Couper w/ siamese ports > seems you need a 720* cycle, 4 injection events (every 180*) that can > provide full load fueling @3.0uS open time (signal duration will be > slightly longer) AND can operate to very small durations for idle/low > load-maybe some crazy combination including computer controlled fuel > pressure; I don't have numbers, but I belive tripling pressure about > doubles delivery-at least w/D Jet injectors. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 9:29 AM > Subject: Fw: MoTeC for Mini Couper w/ siamese ports > > >> >> >> bhp 1484 concord ln bethlehem, pa 18015 >> >> >> too early for me to fully process but I'm thinking no- what ya think? >> bob g. >> >> --------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Simon Wagner >> To: bhpdev at juno.com >> Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2007 16:10:29 -0800 >> Subject: MoTeC for Mini Couper w/ siamese ports >> Message-ID: <459AF475.9030909 at motec.com> >> >> Hello Bob, >> >> When running the engine on a 360 cycle (all fueling events are completed >> for the entire cylinder count once per rev) the Motec ECU will fire it's >> four outputs in the following manner. The first and second output will >> fire and then 180 degrees later the third and fourth outputs will fire. >> There would be four ignition events per 720 degrees for the distributor >> as well. You have the ability to define the injection timing (when in >> crank degrees before TDC) at which the groups will fire. The injection >> timing will be the same for each group and can not be made different for >> each group. So if you specify that you would like the end-of-injection >> point to be at 270 degrees before TDC then the first group will deliver >> it's fuel. >> >> 270 BTDC fuel pulse ends for outputs 1&2 end >> 90 BTDC fuel pulse ends for outputs 3&4 end (270 before the other TDC) >> >> Typically you would connect the injector outputs in firing order: >> >> output 1 = cylinder 1 >> output 2 = cylinder 3 >> output 3 = cylinder 4 >> output 4 = cylinder 2 >> >> Assuming we wire in this manner this means the intake runner to 1/2 >> would have injector outputs 1 and 4 while intake runner 3/4 would have >> injector outputs 2 and 3. For the above timing and wiring, this would >> place fuel events in both the 1-2 runner and the 3-4 runner at 270 BTDC >> and likewise the 90 BTDC would also have both runners getting a fuel >> pulse. This would happen every 360 degrees. >> >> Meanwhile the ignition system would be running normally and you'd have >> full control of the advance curve. >> >> Does this sound like an acceptable solution? >> >> -- >> Simon Wagner >> Motec Systems USA >> 5355 Industrial Drive >> Huntington Beach, CA 92649 >> TEL: (714) 897-6804 x 161 >> FAX: (714) 230-3075 >> >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Thu Jan 4 00:56:17 2007 From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 14:56:17 +0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20070104145324.02739840@iinet.net.au>> Isnt one of the main needs for fuel return the fact the fuel is heated quite a bit in the fuel rail whilst its waiting for injection ? Of course there is a commercial factor as fuel returns used to be so much cheaper than any electronics but getting around the fuel heating etc Also the issue of control feedback is an issue to avoid vapourisation during hot start, the good thing about return is this can be flushed out, and esp for a turbo as a pressure hold tank can "remember" the last max pressure and temporarily raise the fuel rail pressure to this during start to avoid vapour issues... etc Regards Mike At 07:23 AM 1/4/07, you wrote: >This sounds cool...is closed loop control of fuel pressure an oem feature for any new vehicles? Or just something you are trying out? Are you going to use a PI controller? I am guessing when you snap the throttle open the PI controller should know about this quite quickly...not wait to see a drop in fuel pressure? > >> To add something somewhat useful to the list in this reply I'll say the >> Donegan ECM is coming along nicely :-) The input board is going to fab >> out at about 3.0 inches by 2.2 inches (exactly matching the CPU board - >> ARM based Steve). Inputs designed in are MAP, MAT, Barometric, Coolant, >> Throttle, Oil pressure/temp, 4 ea O2 sensors, Crank and Cam position, 2 >> ea EGT sensors - well pretty much everything everyone told me should be >> sensor inputs. Fuel pressure input I'll put on the 'relay' control board >> - that will do PWM control of the fuel pump eliminating the need for a >> regulator or return line. >> >> Happy New Year :-) >_______________________________________________ >Diy_efi mailing list >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Thu Jan 4 09:51:58 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 07:51:58 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> Message-ID: <1167925918.16410.3.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Well, not an original idea of mine - Ford apparently did this at one point. I just thought it would be potentially useful for folks doing nasty cars - less plumbing and a possibility of effectively tuning injectors a bit - ie put a larger injector in and tailor it by injector pulse and some level of fuel pressure tuning - I think you may be able to get +-10% or so from any given injector with that approach. On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 10:23 +1100, mdacmail at optusnet.com.au wrote: > This sounds cool...is closed loop control of fuel pressure an oem feature for any new vehicles? Or just something you are trying out? Are you going to use a PI controller? I am guessing when you snap the throttle open the PI controller should know about this quite quickly...not wait to see a drop in fuel pressure? > > > To add something somewhat useful to the list in this reply I'll say the > > Donegan ECM is coming along nicely :-) The input board is going to fab > > out at about 3.0 inches by 2.2 inches (exactly matching the CPU board - > > ARM based Steve). Inputs designed in are MAP, MAT, Barometric, Coolant, > > Throttle, Oil pressure/temp, 4 ea O2 sensors, Crank and Cam position, 2 > > ea EGT sensors - well pretty much everything everyone told me should be > > sensor inputs. Fuel pressure input I'll put on the 'relay' control board > > - that will do PWM control of the fuel pump eliminating the need for a > > regulator or return line. > > > > Happy New Year :-) > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Thu Jan 4 09:57:40 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 07:57:40 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20070104145324.02739840@iinet.net.au>> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <7.0.1.0.0.20070104145324.02739840@iinet.net.au>> Message-ID: <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> I had not thought of fuel temp at all - every vehicle I drive would consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) However this does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer needs a way to open a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in the rails? Any ideas on how useful that would be in the 'real world' anyone? On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 14:56 +0800, Mike wrote: > Isnt one of the main needs for fuel return the fact the fuel is heated quite a > bit in the fuel rail whilst its waiting for injection ? > > Of course there is a commercial factor as fuel returns used to be so > much cheaper than any electronics but getting around the fuel heating etc > > Also the issue of control feedback is an issue to avoid vapourisation > during hot start, the good thing about return is this can be flushed out, > and esp for a turbo as a pressure hold tank can "remember" the last > max pressure and temporarily raise the fuel rail pressure to this during > start to avoid vapour issues... etc > > Regards > > Mike > > > > At 07:23 AM 1/4/07, you wrote: > > >This sounds cool...is closed loop control of fuel pressure an oem feature for any new vehicles? Or just something you are trying out? Are you going to use a PI controller? I am guessing when you snap the throttle open the PI controller should know about this quite quickly...not wait to see a drop in fuel pressure? > > > >> To add something somewhat useful to the list in this reply I'll say the > >> Donegan ECM is coming along nicely :-) The input board is going to fab > >> out at about 3.0 inches by 2.2 inches (exactly matching the CPU board - > >> ARM based Steve). Inputs designed in are MAP, MAT, Barometric, Coolant, > >> Throttle, Oil pressure/temp, 4 ea O2 sensors, Crank and Cam position, 2 > >> ea EGT sensors - well pretty much everything everyone told me should be > >> sensor inputs. Fuel pressure input I'll put on the 'relay' control board > >> - that will do PWM control of the fuel pump eliminating the need for a > >> regulator or return line. > >> > >> Happy New Year :-) > >_______________________________________________ > >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 cobraman at insightbb.com Thu Jan 4 12:23:26 2007 From: cobraman at insightbb.com (cobraman at insightbb.com) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 12:23:26 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: My "Edelbrick" ProFlow has fuel pressure controlled with engine vacuum. On track sessions on very hot days, the fuel in the rails will boil under hard braking - accelerator closed (low fuel pressure). When you finally step on it (52 psi), nothing happens until the vapor "recirculates" or is expelled. Usually takes a second or so. I don't think dead heading would do any better - probably just need to keep a constant fuel pressure. IMHO, hot fuel should give better economy - easier to vaporize - for those green members. TomS ld > consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) However this > does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer needs a way > to open > a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in the rails? Any > ideas on how > useful that would be in the 'real world' anyone? > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 14:56 +0800, Mike wrote: > > Isnt one of the main needs for fuel return the fact the fuel > is heated quite a > > bit in the fuel rail whilst its waiting for injection ? > > > > Of course there is a commercial factor as fuel returns used to > be so > > much cheaper than any electronics but getting around the fuel > heating etc > > > > Also the issue of control feedback is an issue to avoid > vapourisation> during hot start, the good thing about return is > this can be flushed out, > > and esp for a turbo as a pressure hold tank can "remember" the last > > max pressure and temporarily raise the fuel rail pressure to > this during > > start to avoid vapour issues... etc > > > > Regards > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > At 07:23 AM 1/4/07, you wrote: > > > > >This sounds cool...is closed loop control of fuel pressure an > oem feature for any new vehicles? Or just something you are > trying out? Are you going to use a PI controller? I am guessing > when you snap the throttle open the PI controller should know > about this quite quickly...not wait to see a drop in fuel > pressure? > > > > > >> To add something somewhat useful to the list in this reply > I'll say the > > >> Donegan ECM is coming along nicely :-) The input board is > going to fab > > >> out at about 3.0 inches by 2.2 inches (exactly matching the > CPU board - > > >> ARM based Steve). Inputs designed in are MAP, MAT, > Barometric, Coolant, > > >> Throttle, Oil pressure/temp, 4 ea O2 sensors, Crank and Cam > position, 2 > > >> ea EGT sensors - well pretty much everything everyone told > me should be > > >> sensor inputs. Fuel pressure input I'll put on the 'relay' > control board > > >> - that will do PWM control of the fuel pump eliminating the > need for a > > >> regulator or return line. > > >> > > >> Happy New Year :-) > > >_______________________________________________ > > >Diy_efi mailing list > > >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > > Diy_efi mailing list > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > From donegan at donegan.org Thu Jan 4 12:39:34 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 10:39:34 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <1167935974.16410.14.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Well - for track days I simply put dry ice in my fuel cold-can thing - that solves most vapor-lock style problems and lasts for a couple of hours. Simple low-tech solution to that problem. Given the lack of response to my original posting I believe providing PWM fuel pump control and support for a fuel pressure sensor is useful. Given that I normally run at Willow Springs or Buttonwillow during the winter months temps are not normally a factor anyway. On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 12:23 -0600, cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: > My "Edelbrick" ProFlow has fuel pressure controlled with engine vacuum. On track sessions on very hot days, the fuel in the rails will boil under hard braking - accelerator closed (low fuel pressure). When you finally step on it (52 psi), nothing happens until the vapor "recirculates" or is expelled. Usually takes a second or so. I don't think dead heading would do any better - probably just need to keep a constant fuel pressure. > IMHO, hot fuel should give better economy - easier to vaporize - for those green members. TomS > > > > > > > > ld > > consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) However this > > does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer needs a way > > to open > > a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in the rails? Any > > ideas on how > > useful that would be in the 'real world' anyone? > > > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 14:56 +0800, Mike wrote: > > > Isnt one of the main needs for fuel return the fact the fuel > > is heated quite a > > > bit in the fuel rail whilst its waiting for injection ? > > > > > > Of course there is a commercial factor as fuel returns used to > > be so > > > much cheaper than any electronics but getting around the fuel > > heating etc > > > > > > Also the issue of control feedback is an issue to avoid > > vapourisation> during hot start, the good thing about return is > > this can be flushed out, > > > and esp for a turbo as a pressure hold tank can "remember" the last > > > max pressure and temporarily raise the fuel rail pressure to > > this during > > > start to avoid vapour issues... etc > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > At 07:23 AM 1/4/07, you wrote: > > > > > > >This sounds cool...is closed loop control of fuel pressure an > > oem feature for any new vehicles? Or just something you are > > trying out? Are you going to use a PI controller? I am guessing > > when you snap the throttle open the PI controller should know > > about this quite quickly...not wait to see a drop in fuel > > pressure? > > > > > > > >> To add something somewhat useful to the list in this reply > > I'll say the > > > >> Donegan ECM is coming along nicely :-) The input board is > > going to fab > > > >> out at about 3.0 inches by 2.2 inches (exactly matching the > > CPU board - > > > >> ARM based Steve). Inputs designed in are MAP, MAT, > > Barometric, Coolant, > > > >> Throttle, Oil pressure/temp, 4 ea O2 sensors, Crank and Cam > > position, 2 > > > >> ea EGT sensors - well pretty much everything everyone told > > me should be > > > >> sensor inputs. Fuel pressure input I'll put on the 'relay' > > control board > > > >> - that will do PWM control of the fuel pump eliminating the > > need for a > > > >> regulator or return line. > > > >> > > > >> Happy New Year :-) > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > >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 five10man at commspeed.net Thu Jan 4 12:53:50 2007 From: five10man at commspeed.net (Tom Visel) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 11:53:50 -0700 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1167935974.16410.14.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <1167935974.16410.14.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <459D4D3E.3030603@commspeed.net> Those OEMs that moved the regulator to the fuel tank did it for evaporative emissions control reasons - less heat in the tank means fewer vapors to deal with. This is the same batch of deep thinkers that brought us oxygen sensors after the catalytic converter(s) for measuring catalyst efficiency. If the "Donegan ECU" isn't going to be OBD-II compliant (or did I miss something) why bother to have the extra two oxygen sensor inputs? The poor OEMs only have them so they can guarantee to the EPA that they have a way of measuring catalyst degradation since all emissions systems have to be monitored. TomV Steven P. Donegan wrote: >Well - for track days I simply put dry ice in my fuel cold-can thing - >that solves most vapor-lock style problems and lasts for a couple of >hours. Simple low-tech solution to that problem. Given the lack of >response to my original posting I believe providing PWM fuel pump >control and support for a fuel pressure sensor is useful. > >Given that I normally run at Willow Springs or Buttonwillow during the >winter months temps are not normally a factor anyway. > >On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 12:23 -0600, cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: > > >>My "Edelbrick" ProFlow has fuel pressure controlled with engine vacuum. On track sessions on very hot days, the fuel in the rails will boil under hard braking - accelerator closed (low fuel pressure). When you finally step on it (52 psi), nothing happens until the vapor "recirculates" or is expelled. Usually takes a second or so. I don't think dead heading would do any better - probably just need to keep a constant fuel pressure. >>IMHO, hot fuel should give better economy - easier to vaporize - for those green members. TomS >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>ld >> >> >>>consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) However this >>>does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer needs a way >>>to open >>>a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in the rails? Any >>>ideas on how >>>useful that would be in the 'real world' anyone? >>> >>>On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 14:56 +0800, Mike wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Isnt one of the main needs for fuel return the fact the fuel >>>> >>>> >>>is heated quite a >>> >>> >>>>bit in the fuel rail whilst its waiting for injection ? >>>> >>>>Of course there is a commercial factor as fuel returns used to >>>> >>>> >>>be so >>> >>> >>>>much cheaper than any electronics but getting around the fuel >>>> >>>> >>>heating etc >>> >>> >>>>Also the issue of control feedback is an issue to avoid >>>> >>>> >>>vapourisation> during hot start, the good thing about return is >>>this can be flushed out, >>> >>> >>>>and esp for a turbo as a pressure hold tank can "remember" the last >>>>max pressure and temporarily raise the fuel rail pressure to >>>> >>>> >>>this during >>> >>> >>>>start to avoid vapour issues... etc >>>> >>>>Regards >>>> >>>>Mike >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>At 07:23 AM 1/4/07, you wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>This sounds cool...is closed loop control of fuel pressure an >>>>> >>>>> >>>oem feature for any new vehicles? Or just something you are >>>trying out? Are you going to use a PI controller? I am guessing >>>when you snap the throttle open the PI controller should know >>>about this quite quickly...not wait to see a drop in fuel >>>pressure? >>> >>> >>>>>>To add something somewhat useful to the list in this reply >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>I'll say the >>> >>> >>>>>>Donegan ECM is coming along nicely :-) The input board is >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>going to fab >>> >>> >>>>>>out at about 3.0 inches by 2.2 inches (exactly matching the >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>CPU board - >>> >>> >>>>>>ARM based Steve). Inputs designed in are MAP, MAT, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>Barometric, Coolant, >>> >>> >>>>>>Throttle, Oil pressure/temp, 4 ea O2 sensors, Crank and Cam >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>position, 2 >>> >>> >>>>>>ea EGT sensors - well pretty much everything everyone told >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>me should be >>> >>> >>>>>>sensor inputs. Fuel pressure input I'll put on the 'relay' >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>control board >>> >>> >>>>>>- that will do PWM control of the fuel pump eliminating the >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>need for a >>> >>> >>>>>>regulator or return line. >>>>>> >>>>>>Happy New Year :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>_______________________________________________ >>>>>Diy_efi mailing list >>>>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >>>>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >>>>>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi >>>>> >>>>> >>>>_______________________________________________ >>>>Diy_efi mailing list >>>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >>>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >>>>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi >>>> >>>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>Diy_efi mailing list >>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >>>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi >>> >>> >>> >>_______________________________________________ >>Diy_efi mailing list >>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >Diy_efi mailing list >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > From donegan at donegan.org Thu Jan 4 14:03:45 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 12:03:45 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <459D4D3E.3030603@commspeed.net> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <1167935974.16410.14.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <459D4D3E.3030603@commspeed.net> Message-ID: <1167941025.16410.36.camel@wopr.donegan.org> I have not yet added OBDII to my project - it appears that I have to if it is going to be plug compatable for my Z28 so that will likely happen. My intent for this project is a universal EFI/ECM/PCM/MSD box - something useful on any engine up to 8 cylinders. If it lacks any inputs or outputs tell me and I'll add them :-) On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 11:53 -0700, Tom Visel wrote: > Those OEMs that moved the regulator to the fuel tank did it for > evaporative emissions control reasons - less heat in the tank means > fewer vapors to deal with. This is the same batch of deep thinkers that > brought us oxygen sensors after the catalytic converter(s) for measuring > catalyst efficiency. If the "Donegan ECU" isn't going to be OBD-II > compliant (or did I miss something) why bother to have the extra two > oxygen sensor inputs? The poor OEMs only have them so they can > guarantee to the EPA that they have a way of measuring catalyst > degradation since all emissions systems have to be monitored. > TomV > > Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > >Well - for track days I simply put dry ice in my fuel cold-can thing - > >that solves most vapor-lock style problems and lasts for a couple of > >hours. Simple low-tech solution to that problem. Given the lack of > >response to my original posting I believe providing PWM fuel pump > >control and support for a fuel pressure sensor is useful. > > > >Given that I normally run at Willow Springs or Buttonwillow during the > >winter months temps are not normally a factor anyway. > > > >On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 12:23 -0600, cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: > > > > > >>My "Edelbrick" ProFlow has fuel pressure controlled with engine vacuum. On track sessions on very hot days, the fuel in the rails will boil under hard braking - accelerator closed (low fuel pressure). When you finally step on it (52 psi), nothing happens until the vapor "recirculates" or is expelled. Usually takes a second or so. I don't think dead heading would do any better - probably just need to keep a constant fuel pressure. > >>IMHO, hot fuel should give better economy - easier to vaporize - for those green members. TomS > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>ld > >> > >> > >>>consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) However this > >>>does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer needs a way > >>>to open > >>>a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in the rails? Any > >>>ideas on how > >>>useful that would be in the 'real world' anyone? > >>> > >>>On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 14:56 +0800, Mike wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>Isnt one of the main needs for fuel return the fact the fuel > >>>> > >>>> > >>>is heated quite a > >>> > >>> > >>>>bit in the fuel rail whilst its waiting for injection ? > >>>> > >>>>Of course there is a commercial factor as fuel returns used to > >>>> > >>>> > >>>be so > >>> > >>> > >>>>much cheaper than any electronics but getting around the fuel > >>>> > >>>> > >>>heating etc > >>> > >>> > >>>>Also the issue of control feedback is an issue to avoid > >>>> > >>>> > >>>vapourisation> during hot start, the good thing about return is > >>>this can be flushed out, > >>> > >>> > >>>>and esp for a turbo as a pressure hold tank can "remember" the last > >>>>max pressure and temporarily raise the fuel rail pressure to > >>>> > >>>> > >>>this during > >>> > >>> > >>>>start to avoid vapour issues... etc > >>>> > >>>>Regards > >>>> > >>>>Mike > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>At 07:23 AM 1/4/07, you wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>This sounds cool...is closed loop control of fuel pressure an > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>oem feature for any new vehicles? Or just something you are > >>>trying out? Are you going to use a PI controller? I am guessing > >>>when you snap the throttle open the PI controller should know > >>>about this quite quickly...not wait to see a drop in fuel > >>>pressure? > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>To add something somewhat useful to the list in this reply > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>I'll say the > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>Donegan ECM is coming along nicely :-) The input board is > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>going to fab > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>out at about 3.0 inches by 2.2 inches (exactly matching the > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>CPU board - > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>ARM based Steve). Inputs designed in are MAP, MAT, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>Barometric, Coolant, > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>Throttle, Oil pressure/temp, 4 ea O2 sensors, Crank and Cam > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>position, 2 > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>ea EGT sensors - well pretty much everything everyone told > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>me should be > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>sensor inputs. Fuel pressure input I'll put on the 'relay' > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>control board > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>- that will do PWM control of the fuel pump eliminating the > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>need for a > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>regulator or return line. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Happy New Year :-) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>_______________________________________________ > >>>>>Diy_efi mailing list > >>>>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > >>>>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > >>>>>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>_______________________________________________ > >>>>Diy_efi mailing list > >>>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > >>>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > >>>>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > >>>> > >>>> > >>>_______________________________________________ > >>>Diy_efi mailing list > >>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > >>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > >>>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Diy_efi mailing list > >>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > >> > >> > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Diy_efi mailing list > >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Jan 4 17:00:56 2007 From: bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au (Bernd Felsche) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 08:00:56 +0900 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <7.0.1.0.0.20070104145324.02739840@iinet.net.au>> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <200701050800.56422@death.2.spammers> On Friday 05 January 2007 00:57, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > I had not thought of fuel temp at all - every vehicle I drive > would consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) > However this does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer > needs a way to open a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in > the rails? Any ideas on how useful that would be in the 'real > world' anyone? Superflous if you're running in closed-loop; which you would be if the fuel rail was warm enough to make a difference. If the temperature in the fuel rail is a problem, then a recirculating fuel pressure control system is IMNHSO a better solution. In such a system, there's always "fresh" fuel that's in excess to the amount required for injection from the tank flushing the rail(s). The fuel tank is the cooling environment for the fuel. Pressure regulation also happens at the rail(s), whereas in "dead-end" systems it's at the fuel pump, perhaps a several metres from the rail and therefore the injectors. That increases the difficulty in controlling the pressure (time delays that depend on fuel pressure and temperature); especially if it's to vary dynamically wrt manifold pressure. The ability to vary the fuel rail pressure is at least desirable to get consistent injected quantities due to a fairly constant pressure difference across the injector; between the fuel rail and the manifold where it's injecting. Makes for simpler calculations on injected quantity. If you're stuck with a "dead-end" fuel delivery system, then you need to add a return line and a valve that vents the rail(s) back to the tank in the interval between the fuel pump running and the engine actually being started. The time delay will depend largely on the free-delivery rate of the fuel pump and the volume of the fuel rail(s). That ensures that there's "cold" fuel in the rail(s) before you start injecting it. -- /"\ 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 efi at dyakron.com Thu Jan 4 18:33:24 2007 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 19:33:24 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au><7.0.1.0.0.20070104145324.02739840@iinet.net.au>><1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <200701050800.56422@death.2.spammers> Message-ID: <001d01c73061$2d6c1f10$6501a8c0@IBMm> Related to this, is it okay to have the return line squirtin the fuel in from the top of the tank, or should it be submerged in the fuel? I have a 1941 gas tank that I need to plumb a return lin into. Cheers, MV ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bernd Felsche" To: Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 6:00 PM Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > On Friday 05 January 2007 00:57, Steven P. Donegan wrote: >> I had not thought of fuel temp at all - every vehicle I drive >> would consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) >> However this does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer >> needs a way to open a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in >> the rails? Any ideas on how useful that would be in the 'real >> world' anyone? > > Superflous if you're running in closed-loop; which you would be if > the fuel rail was warm enough to make a difference. > > If the temperature in the fuel rail is a problem, then a > recirculating fuel pressure control system is IMNHSO a better > solution. In such a system, there's always "fresh" fuel that's in > excess to the amount required for injection from the tank flushing > the rail(s). The fuel tank is the cooling environment for the fuel. > > Pressure regulation also happens at the rail(s), whereas in > "dead-end" systems it's at the fuel pump, perhaps a several metres > from the rail and therefore the injectors. That increases the > difficulty in controlling the pressure (time delays that depend on > fuel pressure and temperature); especially if it's to vary > dynamically wrt manifold pressure. > > The ability to vary the fuel rail pressure is at least desirable to > get consistent injected quantities due to a fairly constant pressure > difference across the injector; between the fuel rail and the > manifold where it's injecting. Makes for simpler calculations on > injected quantity. > > If you're stuck with a "dead-end" fuel delivery system, then you > need to add a return line and a valve that vents the rail(s) back to > the tank in the interval between the fuel pump running and the > engine actually being started. The time delay will depend largely on > the free-delivery rate of the fuel pump and the volume of the fuel > rail(s). That ensures that there's "cold" fuel in the rail(s) before > you start injecting it. > > -- > /"\ 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 > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Thu Jan 4 18:46:42 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 16:46:42 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <001d01c73061$2d6c1f10$6501a8c0@IBMm> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <7.0.1.0.0.20070104145324.02739840@iinet.net.au> > <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <200701050800.56422@death.2.spammers> <001d01c73061$2d6c1f10$6501a8c0@IBMm> Message-ID: <1167958002.16410.42.camel@wopr.donegan.org> I have not seen/heard any reasons on where to return fuel to in the tank - unless otherwise informed I would assume anywhere is fine... On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 19:33 -0500, Mike V wrote: > Related to this, is it okay to have the return line squirtin > the fuel in from the top of the tank, or should it be submerged > in the fuel? I have a 1941 gas tank that I need to plumb a return lin into. > Cheers, > MV > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bernd Felsche" > To: > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 6:00 PM > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > > > > On Friday 05 January 2007 00:57, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > >> I had not thought of fuel temp at all - every vehicle I drive > >> would consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) > >> However this does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer > >> needs a way to open a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in > >> the rails? Any ideas on how useful that would be in the 'real > >> world' anyone? > > > > Superflous if you're running in closed-loop; which you would be if > > the fuel rail was warm enough to make a difference. > > > > If the temperature in the fuel rail is a problem, then a > > recirculating fuel pressure control system is IMNHSO a better > > solution. In such a system, there's always "fresh" fuel that's in > > excess to the amount required for injection from the tank flushing > > the rail(s). The fuel tank is the cooling environment for the fuel. > > > > Pressure regulation also happens at the rail(s), whereas in > > "dead-end" systems it's at the fuel pump, perhaps a several metres > > from the rail and therefore the injectors. That increases the > > difficulty in controlling the pressure (time delays that depend on > > fuel pressure and temperature); especially if it's to vary > > dynamically wrt manifold pressure. > > > > The ability to vary the fuel rail pressure is at least desirable to > > get consistent injected quantities due to a fairly constant pressure > > difference across the injector; between the fuel rail and the > > manifold where it's injecting. Makes for simpler calculations on > > injected quantity. > > > > If you're stuck with a "dead-end" fuel delivery system, then you > > need to add a return line and a valve that vents the rail(s) back to > > the tank in the interval between the fuel pump running and the > > engine actually being started. The time delay will depend largely on > > the free-delivery rate of the fuel pump and the volume of the fuel > > rail(s). That ensures that there's "cold" fuel in the rail(s) before > > you start injecting it. > > > > -- > > /"\ 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 > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Thu Jan 4 18:49:11 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 16:49:11 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <200701050800.56422@death.2.spammers> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <7.0.1.0.0.20070104145324.02739840@iinet.net.au> > <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <200701050800.56422@death.2.spammers> Message-ID: <1167958151.16410.45.camel@wopr.donegan.org> I can't quite read this as a yes or a no to fuel pump pressure control - can you give me a binary response :-) I.E. does fuel pressure sensing/fuel pump control make sense for an EFI system or not. Thanks! On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 08:00 +0900, Bernd Felsche wrote: > On Friday 05 January 2007 00:57, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > I had not thought of fuel temp at all - every vehicle I drive > > would consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) > > However this does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer > > needs a way to open a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in > > the rails? Any ideas on how useful that would be in the 'real > > world' anyone? > > Superflous if you're running in closed-loop; which you would be if > the fuel rail was warm enough to make a difference. > > If the temperature in the fuel rail is a problem, then a > recirculating fuel pressure control system is IMNHSO a better > solution. In such a system, there's always "fresh" fuel that's in > excess to the amount required for injection from the tank flushing > the rail(s). The fuel tank is the cooling environment for the fuel. > > Pressure regulation also happens at the rail(s), whereas in > "dead-end" systems it's at the fuel pump, perhaps a several metres > from the rail and therefore the injectors. That increases the > difficulty in controlling the pressure (time delays that depend on > fuel pressure and temperature); especially if it's to vary > dynamically wrt manifold pressure. > > The ability to vary the fuel rail pressure is at least desirable to > get consistent injected quantities due to a fairly constant pressure > difference across the injector; between the fuel rail and the > manifold where it's injecting. Makes for simpler calculations on > injected quantity. > > If you're stuck with a "dead-end" fuel delivery system, then you > need to add a return line and a valve that vents the rail(s) back to > the tank in the interval between the fuel pump running and the > engine actually being started. The time delay will depend largely on > the free-delivery rate of the fuel pump and the volume of the fuel > rail(s). That ensures that there's "cold" fuel in the rail(s) before > you start injecting it. > From spyro at f2s.com Thu Jan 4 18:57:15 2007 From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton) Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 00:57:15 +0000 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1167941025.16410.36.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <1167935974.16410.14.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <459D4D3E.3030603@commspeed.net> <1167941025.16410.36.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <459DA26B.9080207@f2s.com> Steven P. Donegan wrote: > I have not yet added OBDII to my project - it appears that I have to if > it is going to be plug compatable for my Z28 so that will likely > happen. Z28... Datsun Z28? aka 280zx? From spyro at f2s.com Thu Jan 4 18:59:17 2007 From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton) Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 00:59:17 +0000 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1167958151.16410.45.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <7.0.1.0.0.20070104145324.02739840@iinet.net.au> > <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <200701050800.56422@death.2.spammers> <1167958151.16410.45.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <459DA2E5.7090802@f2s.com> Steven P. Donegan wrote: > I can't quite read this as a yes or a no to fuel pump pressure control - > can you give me a binary response :-) > > I.E. does fuel pressure sensing/fuel pump control make sense for an EFI > system or not. I'd like to see it done... but I like ARMs and I want my own custom ECU... not having a return sounds neat to me. From ozimmer at softhome.net Thu Jan 4 19:10:21 2007 From: ozimmer at softhome.net (Oolan Zimmer) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 19:10:21 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] fuel return location In-Reply-To: <1167958002.16410.42.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <7.0.1.0.0.20070104145324.02739840@iinet.net.au> > <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <200701050800.56422@death.2.spammers> <001d01c73061$2d6c1f10$6501a8c0@IBMm> <1167958002.16410.42.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <459DA57D.9030106@softhome.net> Steven P. Donegan wrote: > I have not seen/heard any reasons on where to return fuel to in the tank > - unless otherwise informed I would assume anywhere is fine... > > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 19:33 -0500, Mike V wrote: > >> Related to this, is it okay to have the return line squirtin >> the fuel in from the top of the tank, or should it be submerged >> in the fuel? I have a 1941 gas tank that I need to plumb a return lin into. >> Cheers, >> MV >> >> >> I can think of two reasons not to just squirt from the top of the tank: 1. It will make fuel within the tank evaporate more readily because the fuel-rail heated stream of fuel is traveling through air and then splashing into the fuel at the bottom. 2. If you have a baffled tank or a "tank within a tank", you want to deposit fuel as close to the pickup as possible to keep the area near the pump full of fuel, even under high acceleration. If you deposit the fuel on the wrong side of the baffles, it might take the fuel a while to get to the pickup. This is more of a concern with road course and circle track cars that experience high lateral acceleration. Dedicated dragsters with the pickup at the back of the tank usually don't have to worry about this one. Oolan Zimmer From five10man at commspeed.net Thu Jan 4 19:30:01 2007 From: five10man at commspeed.net (Tom Visel) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 18:30:01 -0700 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <459DA26B.9080207@f2s.com> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <1167935974.16410.14.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <459D4D3E.3030603@commspeed.net> <1167941025.16410.36.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <459DA26B.9080207@f2s.com> Message-ID: <459DAA19.4060100@commspeed.net> It's a full-option Chevrolet Camaro. All the kit except the stiffest suspension bits. Corvette engine. Ian Molton wrote: > Steven P. Donegan wrote: > >> I have not yet added OBDII to my project - it appears that I have to if >> it is going to be plug compatable for my Z28 so that will likely >> happen. > > > Z28... > > Datsun Z28? > > aka 280zx? > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > From donegan at donegan.org Thu Jan 4 19:28:26 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 17:28:26 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <459DA2E5.7090802@f2s.com> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <7.0.1.0.0.20070104145324.02739840@iinet.net.au> > <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <200701050800.56422@death.2.spammers> <1167958151.16410.45.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <459DA2E5.7090802@f2s.com> Message-ID: <1167960507.16410.47.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Z28 as in Camaro Z28 with LS1 aluminum V8 :-) Hot as hell pure stock but like any Engineer I want to mess with it :-) On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 00:59 +0000, Ian Molton wrote: > Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > I can't quite read this as a yes or a no to fuel pump pressure control - > > can you give me a binary response :-) > > > > I.E. does fuel pressure sensing/fuel pump control make sense for an EFI > > system or not. > > I'd like to see it done... but I like ARMs and I want my own custom > ECU... not having a return sounds neat to me. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Thu Jan 4 19:29:38 2007 From: jayrabe at gmail.com (Jay Rabe) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 20:29:38 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1167941025.16410.36.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <1167935974.16410.14.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <459D4D3E.3030603@commspeed.net> <1167941025.16410.36.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: On 1/4/07, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > I have not yet added OBDII to my project - it appears that I have to if > it is going to be plug compatable for my Z28 so that will likely > happen. > My intent for this project is a universal EFI/ECM/PCM/MSD box - > something useful on any engine up to 8 cylinders. If it lacks any inputs > or outputs tell me and I'll add them :-) A few things... If you build this ecu only for a returnless fuel system, this limits what fuel pumps you can use. http://fuel-pumps.net/fuelpumpsfaq7.html#9 When writing the software i assume you'd give the option of a normal relay powered style fuel pump. So all this below would be in my dream standalone computer. This is mostly way over the top. One thing i've always wanted to see implimented is something to make fueling a variable vane (variable ar) turbo engine "easy" to control fuel. I would think an extra pressure transducer to monitor exhaust pressure before it goes into the turbo would be very helpful to give a new compensation for MAP systems. Even MAF systems could probably benefit from this on the ignition side of things. Yeah these are not common, but i think having the ability to fuel them properly will help their popularity and they are being used by a few automakers. This should help them become more common soon. Also some kind of circuitry to control the variable actuator. Maybe a potentiometer to monitor this? Or, maybe just the actuator potentiometer is enough for the fuel/ign compensation? Another thing would be variable cam(s) control. I've been dreaming of a worm gear "solenoid" controled cam timing adjuster for timing belt engines. It would probably need a potentiometer in it to know where it is. This could be very beneficial if done properly. I know, it would be tough to make an adjuster blah, blah, it would be cool tho... I know you can tell where the timing is from the crank signal vs. the cam signal, but i like potentiometers. Grab a meter and see what position its by its voltage instead of an oscilloscope and all that fun. If you could make it OBD-II capable, you just might be building the next step in standalone computers. 96 and newer cars who have to pass OBD port only emissions could actually pass emissions. It would probably never get EPA certified if they knew it was going to be tunable. OBD II port replicators are illegal... Maybe leak some software after the release??? A self learn circuit for fuel/ignition would be cool. Id imagine it would be mostly coding tho... Wideband capability? Not easy, but makes tuning very nice... Boost control? ...gear variable? Traction control input or traction control? Maybe like a rev limiter... Maybe an adjustable slip allowance... Launch control? Full throttle shift? Software/hardware to allow a secondary set of injectors? Anti lag? there is misfire and "jet engine" style I wish i knew more about coding and electronics... Jay From five10man at commspeed.net Thu Jan 4 19:37:30 2007 From: five10man at commspeed.net (Tom Visel) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 18:37:30 -0700 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1167958151.16410.45.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <7.0.1.0.0.20070104145324.02739840@iinet.net.au> > <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <200701050800.56422@death.2.spammers> <1167958151.16410.45.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <459DABDA.3070608@commspeed.net> It's trading mechanical complication for electronic complication. Mechanical fuel pressure regulators are a mature technology, and the math for injectors that have manifold-referenced fuel pressure is simpler than that for injectors with static pressure, or for computer-controlled feedback-requiring variable pressure systems. Also, anything with the pressure control at/near the tank is going to have hysteresis problems which will tend to minimize the gains that might have been found by the increased complexity. My vote is no, but it's not my baby to call ugly or not. TomV Steven P. Donegan wrote: >I can't quite read this as a yes or a no to fuel pump pressure control - >can you give me a binary response :-) > >I.E. does fuel pressure sensing/fuel pump control make sense for an EFI >system or not. > >Thanks! > >On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 08:00 +0900, Bernd Felsche wrote: > > >>On Friday 05 January 2007 00:57, Steven P. Donegan wrote: >> >> >>>I had not thought of fuel temp at all - every vehicle I drive >>>would consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) >>>However this does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer >>>needs a way to open a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in >>>the rails? Any ideas on how useful that would be in the 'real >>>world' anyone? >>> >>> >>Superflous if you're running in closed-loop; which you would be if >>the fuel rail was warm enough to make a difference. >> >>If the temperature in the fuel rail is a problem, then a >>recirculating fuel pressure control system is IMNHSO a better >>solution. In such a system, there's always "fresh" fuel that's in >>excess to the amount required for injection from the tank flushing >>the rail(s). The fuel tank is the cooling environment for the fuel. >> >>Pressure regulation also happens at the rail(s), whereas in >>"dead-end" systems it's at the fuel pump, perhaps a several metres >>from the rail and therefore the injectors. That increases the >>difficulty in controlling the pressure (time delays that depend on >>fuel pressure and temperature); especially if it's to vary >>dynamically wrt manifold pressure. >> >>The ability to vary the fuel rail pressure is at least desirable to >>get consistent injected quantities due to a fairly constant pressure >>difference across the injector; between the fuel rail and the >>manifold where it's injecting. Makes for simpler calculations on >>injected quantity. >> >>If you're stuck with a "dead-end" fuel delivery system, then you >>need to add a return line and a valve that vents the rail(s) back to >>the tank in the interval between the fuel pump running and the >>engine actually being started. The time delay will depend largely on >>the free-delivery rate of the fuel pump and the volume of the fuel >>rail(s). That ensures that there's "cold" fuel in the rail(s) before >>you start injecting it. >> >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >Diy_efi mailing list >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > From donegan at donegan.org Thu Jan 4 19:51:26 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 17:51:26 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <459DAA19.4060100@commspeed.net> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <1167935974.16410.14.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <459D4D3E.3030603@commspeed.net> <1167941025.16410.36.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <459DA26B.9080207@f2s.com> <459DAA19.4060100@commspeed.net> Message-ID: <1167961886.16410.50.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Well, I added welded in subframe, Eibach 1.5 lowering springs, Flowmaster 3" exhaust and a ton of other things - gets 22+ MPG round town, 36+ on the highway - 6 speed manual tranny and 3.42 gears etc. Dead stock these were 12.7 second quarter mile cars... On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 18:30 -0700, Tom Visel wrote: > It's a full-option Chevrolet Camaro. All the kit except the stiffest > suspension bits. Corvette engine. > > Ian Molton wrote: > > > Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > > >> I have not yet added OBDII to my project - it appears that I have to if > >> it is going to be plug compatable for my Z28 so that will likely > >> happen. > > > > > > Z28... > > > > Datsun Z28? > > > > aka 280zx? > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 Thu Jan 4 21:52:09 2007 From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike) Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 11:52:09 +0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <001d01c73061$2d6c1f10$6501a8c0@IBMm> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <7.0.1.0.0.20070104145324.02739840@iinet.net.au> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <200701050800.56422@death.2.spammers> <001d01c73061$2d6c1f10$6501a8c0@IBMm> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20070105114728.02a89cc0@iinet.net.au>> At 08:33 AM 1/5/07, you wrote: >Related to this, is it okay to have the return line squirtin >the fuel in from the top of the tank, or should it be submerged >in the fuel? I have a 1941 gas tank that I need to plumb a return lin into. >Cheers, >MV On my vehicle there is a "swirl pot" on the exit of the fuel return inside the bottom of the tank, this produces a nice vortex around the low pressure fuel pump so its strainer is constantly agitated and therefore cleaned of any debris, quite a nice and elegant aside :) In any case, to avoid the embarrassment of explaining those odd gurgling noises to the nice cute female passengers, I would suggest not having a top return but the swirl return as low as possible, far less chance of gurgling burping type noises at inconvenient moments ;) Rgds Mike ps: Dont go to bed on an empty stomach, take her to dinner first... >----- Original Message ----- From: "Bernd Felsche" >To: >Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 6:00 PM >Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > > >>On Friday 05 January 2007 00:57, Steven P. Donegan wrote: >>>I had not thought of fuel temp at all - every vehicle I drive >>>would consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) >>>However this does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer >>>needs a way to open a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in >>>the rails? Any ideas on how useful that would be in the 'real >>>world' anyone? >> >>Superflous if you're running in closed-loop; which you would be if >>the fuel rail was warm enough to make a difference. >> >>If the temperature in the fuel rail is a problem, then a >>recirculating fuel pressure control system is IMNHSO a better >>solution. In such a system, there's always "fresh" fuel that's in >>excess to the amount required for injection from the tank flushing >>the rail(s). The fuel tank is the cooling environment for the fuel. >> >>Pressure regulation also happens at the rail(s), whereas in >>"dead-end" systems it's at the fuel pump, perhaps a several metres >>from the rail and therefore the injectors. That increases the >>difficulty in controlling the pressure (time delays that depend on >>fuel pressure and temperature); especially if it's to vary >>dynamically wrt manifold pressure. >> >>The ability to vary the fuel rail pressure is at least desirable to >>get consistent injected quantities due to a fairly constant pressure >>difference across the injector; between the fuel rail and the >>manifold where it's injecting. Makes for simpler calculations on >>injected quantity. >> >>If you're stuck with a "dead-end" fuel delivery system, then you >>need to add a return line and a valve that vents the rail(s) back to >>the tank in the interval between the fuel pump running and the >>engine actually being started. The time delay will depend largely on >>the free-delivery rate of the fuel pump and the volume of the fuel >>rail(s). That ensures that there's "cold" fuel in the rail(s) before >>you start injecting it. >> >>-- >>/"\ 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 >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > >_______________________________________________ >Diy_efi mailing list >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From A6intruder at myo-p.com Thu Jan 4 21:12:49 2007 From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 22:12:49 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1167958151.16410.45.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: I would vote to "keep it simple Sam". The "normal" return type fuel system with a mechanical/pneumatic regulator works great, why add complexity? Remember, you won't b e tuning the car. It will be some other bonehead that doesn't fully understand your system. When he mucks it up, your system gets blamed. Keep it only as complicated as it needs to be. Ford uses the return-less fuel systems and modulates fuel pressure on the newer Mustangs; and I'll bet most of their other cars. I think it is to get emissions that much cleaner, not having warm fuel vaporize... I have "heard" that some of the 2003 Cobras have problems on shifts with the pressure spiking and then being too low after the shift. I don't know how prevalent this problem really is. I know there are tuning parameters in the program code that can be adjusted. I would suggest that fuel pressure control by PWM of the pump motor would be too slow except to make up for longer duration events (longer than 2 seconds). Compared to changing injector PW, motor control is much slower. My vote, keep it simple. 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 Steven P. Donegan Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:49 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU I can't quite read this as a yes or a no to fuel pump pressure control - can you give me a binary response :-) I.E. does fuel pressure sensing/fuel pump control make sense for an EFI system or not. Thanks! On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 08:00 +0900, Bernd Felsche wrote: > On Friday 05 January 2007 00:57, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > I had not thought of fuel temp at all - every vehicle I drive > > would consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) > > However this does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer > > needs a way to open a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in > > the rails? Any ideas on how useful that would be in the 'real > > world' anyone? > > Superflous if you're running in closed-loop; which you would be if > the fuel rail was warm enough to make a difference. > > If the temperature in the fuel rail is a problem, then a > recirculating fuel pressure control system is IMNHSO a better > solution. In such a system, there's always "fresh" fuel that's in > excess to the amount required for injection from the tank flushing > the rail(s). The fuel tank is the cooling environment for the fuel. > > Pressure regulation also happens at the rail(s), whereas in > "dead-end" systems it's at the fuel pump, perhaps a several metres > from the rail and therefore the injectors. That increases the > difficulty in controlling the pressure (time delays that depend on > fuel pressure and temperature); especially if it's to vary > dynamically wrt manifold pressure. > > The ability to vary the fuel rail pressure is at least desirable to > get consistent injected quantities due to a fairly constant pressure > difference across the injector; between the fuel rail and the > manifold where it's injecting. Makes for simpler calculations on > injected quantity. > > If you're stuck with a "dead-end" fuel delivery system, then you > need to add a return line and a valve that vents the rail(s) back to > the tank in the interval between the fuel pump running and the > engine actually being started. The time delay will depend largely on > the free-delivery rate of the fuel pump and the volume of the fuel > rail(s). That ensures that there's "cold" fuel in the rail(s) before > you start injecting it. > _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Thu Jan 4 21:26:56 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 19:26:56 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <459DABDA.3070608@commspeed.net> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <7.0.1.0.0.20070104145324.02739840@iinet.net.au> > <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <200701050800.56422@death.2.spammers> <1167958151.16410.45.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <459DABDA.3070608@commspeed.net> Message-ID: <1167967616.16410.55.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Well, since I am asking for feedback you can call it ugly if you wish :-) For me doing just about anything in electronics and software is far easier than doing it in metal (and I am a fully qualified machinist as well as an electronics/software dude). Given this will require one more mostly passive input conditioning circuit and one PWM output circuit I may add it on general principles. And thank you for the feedback! On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 18:37 -0700, Tom Visel wrote: > It's trading mechanical complication for electronic complication. > Mechanical fuel pressure regulators are a mature technology, and the > math for injectors that have manifold-referenced fuel pressure is > simpler than that for injectors with static pressure, or for > computer-controlled feedback-requiring variable pressure systems. Also, > anything with the pressure control at/near the tank is going to have > hysteresis problems which will tend to minimize the gains that might > have been found by the increased complexity. > > My vote is no, but it's not my baby to call ugly or not. > > TomV > > > Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > >I can't quite read this as a yes or a no to fuel pump pressure control - > >can you give me a binary response :-) > > > >I.E. does fuel pressure sensing/fuel pump control make sense for an EFI > >system or not. > > > >Thanks! > > > >On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 08:00 +0900, Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > > > >>On Friday 05 January 2007 00:57, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > >> > >> > >>>I had not thought of fuel temp at all - every vehicle I drive > >>>would consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) > >>>However this does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer > >>>needs a way to open a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in > >>>the rails? Any ideas on how useful that would be in the 'real > >>>world' anyone? > >>> > >>> > >>Superflous if you're running in closed-loop; which you would be if > >>the fuel rail was warm enough to make a difference. > >> > >>If the temperature in the fuel rail is a problem, then a > >>recirculating fuel pressure control system is IMNHSO a better > >>solution. In such a system, there's always "fresh" fuel that's in > >>excess to the amount required for injection from the tank flushing > >>the rail(s). The fuel tank is the cooling environment for the fuel. > >> > >>Pressure regulation also happens at the rail(s), whereas in > >>"dead-end" systems it's at the fuel pump, perhaps a several metres > >>from the rail and therefore the injectors. That increases the > >>difficulty in controlling the pressure (time delays that depend on > >>fuel pressure and temperature); especially if it's to vary > >>dynamically wrt manifold pressure. > >> > >>The ability to vary the fuel rail pressure is at least desirable to > >>get consistent injected quantities due to a fairly constant pressure > >>difference across the injector; between the fuel rail and the > >>manifold where it's injecting. Makes for simpler calculations on > >>injected quantity. > >> > >>If you're stuck with a "dead-end" fuel delivery system, then you > >>need to add a return line and a valve that vents the rail(s) back to > >>the tank in the interval between the fuel pump running and the > >>engine actually being started. The time delay will depend largely on > >>the free-delivery rate of the fuel pump and the volume of the fuel > >>rail(s). That ensures that there's "cold" fuel in the rail(s) before > >>you start injecting it. > >> > >> > >> > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Diy_efi mailing list > >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From efi at dyakron.com Thu Jan 4 21:31:30 2007 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 22:31:30 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] fuel return location References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <7.0.1.0.0.20070104145324.02739840@iinet.net.au>> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <200701050800.56422@death.2.spammers> <001d01c73061$2d6c1f10$6501a8c0@IBMm><1167958002.16410.42.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <459DA57D.9030106@softhome.net> Message-ID: <006501c73079$fdd32dc0$6501a8c0@IBMm> Thanks Oolan & Mike. Mike got me thinking about the top mounted return line making a sound like someone is peeing in a puddle. I will make the return line enter the tank throught the (top) sender / pick-up aseembly, but run the line to the bottom of the tank, where the fuel will exit the return tube. - Thanks again. MikeV > 2. If you have a baffled tank or a "tank within a tank", you want to > deposit fuel as close to the pickup as possible to keep the area near > the pump full of fuel, even under high acceleration. If you deposit the > fuel on the wrong side of the baffles, it might take the fuel a while to > get to the pickup. This is more of a concern with road course and > circle track cars that experience high lateral acceleration. Dedicated > dragsters with the pickup at the back of the tank usually don't have to > worry about this one. > > Oolan Zimmer > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Thu Jan 4 21:33:40 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 19:33:40 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <1167935974.16410.14.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <459D4D3E.3030603@commspeed.net> <1167941025.16410.36.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <1167968020.16410.59.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Well, the electronics are actually fairly easy - the 4 O2 sensor inputs I put in the current design will handle narrow or wide band injectors. Outputs to control tranny/other stuff - interesting and perhaps if a 'real' application arises (ie explain exactly what you want/need) I'll add it. Not hard to add things to my design in hardware and software is C so I expect folks will pitch in when the time comes. And thank you very much for the feedback! On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 20:29 -0500, Jay Rabe wrote: > On 1/4/07, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > > > I have not yet added OBDII to my project - it appears that I have to if > > it is going to be plug compatable for my Z28 so that will likely > > happen. > > My intent for this project is a universal EFI/ECM/PCM/MSD box - > > something useful on any engine up to 8 cylinders. If it lacks any inputs > > or outputs tell me and I'll add them :-) > > > A few things... > > If you build this ecu only for a returnless fuel system, this limits what > fuel pumps you can use. http://fuel-pumps.net/fuelpumpsfaq7.html#9 > When writing the software i assume you'd give the option of a normal relay > powered style fuel pump. > > So all this below would be in my dream standalone computer. This is mostly > way over the top. > > One thing i've always wanted to see implimented is something to make fueling > a variable vane (variable ar) turbo engine "easy" to control fuel. I would > think an extra pressure transducer to monitor exhaust pressure before it > goes into the turbo would be very helpful to give a new compensation for MAP > systems. Even MAF systems could probably benefit from this on the ignition > side of things. Yeah these are not common, but i think having the ability > to fuel them properly will help their popularity and they are being used by > a few automakers. This should help them become more common soon. Also > some kind of circuitry to control the variable actuator. Maybe a > potentiometer to monitor this? Or, maybe just the actuator potentiometer is > enough for the fuel/ign compensation? > > Another thing would be variable cam(s) control. I've been dreaming of a > worm gear "solenoid" controled cam timing adjuster for timing belt engines. > It would probably need a potentiometer in it to know where it is. This > could be very beneficial if done properly. I know, it would be tough to make > an adjuster blah, blah, it would be cool tho... I know you can tell where > the timing is from the crank signal vs. the cam signal, but i like > potentiometers. Grab a meter and see what position its by its voltage > instead of an oscilloscope and all that fun. > > If you could make it OBD-II capable, you just might be building the next > step in standalone computers. 96 and newer cars who have to pass OBD port > only emissions could actually pass emissions. It would probably never get > EPA certified if they knew it was going to be tunable. OBD II port > replicators are illegal... Maybe leak some software after the release??? > > A self learn circuit for fuel/ignition would be cool. Id imagine it would > be mostly coding tho... > > Wideband capability? Not easy, but makes tuning very nice... > > Boost control? ...gear variable? > > Traction control input or traction control? Maybe like a rev limiter... > Maybe an adjustable slip allowance... > > Launch control? > > Full throttle shift? > > Software/hardware to allow a secondary set of injectors? > > Anti lag? there is misfire and "jet engine" style > > I wish i knew more about coding and electronics... > > Jay > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Thu Jan 4 21:52:01 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 19:52:01 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] RE: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1167969121.16410.64.camel@wopr.donegan.org> KISS is always my principle :-) Given that most of the inputs and outputs are a grand total of like 1 square inch or less of real estate (and that is only cause I'm doing this with old school stuff, not surface mount) having things on-board and unused is OK. On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 22:12 -0500, Daniel Nicoson wrote: > I would vote to "keep it simple Sam". The "normal" return type fuel system > with a mechanical/pneumatic regulator works great, why add complexity? > Remember, you won't b e tuning the car. It will be some other bonehead that > doesn't fully understand your system. When he mucks it up, your system gets > blamed. Keep it only as complicated as it needs to be. > > Ford uses the return-less fuel systems and modulates fuel pressure on the > newer Mustangs; and I'll bet most of their other cars. I think it is to get > emissions that much cleaner, not having warm fuel vaporize... > > I have "heard" that some of the 2003 Cobras have problems on shifts with the > pressure spiking and then being too low after the shift. I don't know how > prevalent this problem really is. I know there are tuning parameters in the > program code that can be adjusted. > > I would suggest that fuel pressure control by PWM of the pump motor would be > too slow except to make up for longer duration events (longer than 2 > seconds). Compared to changing injector PW, motor control is much slower. > > My vote, keep it simple. > > 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 Steven P. Donegan > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:49 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > > I can't quite read this as a yes or a no to fuel pump pressure control - > can you give me a binary response :-) > > I.E. does fuel pressure sensing/fuel pump control make sense for an EFI > system or not. > > Thanks! > > On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 08:00 +0900, Bernd Felsche wrote: > > On Friday 05 January 2007 00:57, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > > I had not thought of fuel temp at all - every vehicle I drive > > > would consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) > > > However this does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer > > > needs a way to open a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in > > > the rails? Any ideas on how useful that would be in the 'real > > > world' anyone? > > > > Superflous if you're running in closed-loop; which you would be if > > the fuel rail was warm enough to make a difference. > > > > If the temperature in the fuel rail is a problem, then a > > recirculating fuel pressure control system is IMNHSO a better > > solution. In such a system, there's always "fresh" fuel that's in > > excess to the amount required for injection from the tank flushing > > the rail(s). The fuel tank is the cooling environment for the fuel. > > > > Pressure regulation also happens at the rail(s), whereas in > > "dead-end" systems it's at the fuel pump, perhaps a several metres > > from the rail and therefore the injectors. That increases the > > difficulty in controlling the pressure (time delays that depend on > > fuel pressure and temperature); especially if it's to vary > > dynamically wrt manifold pressure. > > > > The ability to vary the fuel rail pressure is at least desirable to > > get consistent injected quantities due to a fairly constant pressure > > difference across the injector; between the fuel rail and the > > manifold where it's injecting. Makes for simpler calculations on > > injected quantity. > > > > If you're stuck with a "dead-end" fuel delivery system, then you > > need to add a return line and a valve that vents the rail(s) back to > > the tank in the interval between the fuel pump running and the > > engine actually being started. The time delay will depend largely on > > the free-delivery rate of the fuel pump and the volume of the fuel > > rail(s). That ensures that there's "cold" fuel in the rail(s) before > > you start injecting it. > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net Thu Jan 4 21:55:51 2007 From: galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net (Jason M.) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 22:55:51 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au><7.0.1.0.0.20070104145324.02739840@iinet.net.au>><1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org><200701050800.56422@death.2.spammers> <001d01c73061$2d6c1f10$6501a8c0@IBMm> Message-ID: <003b01c7307d$b4648400$6a01a8c0@BILLYBOB> I've seen them both ways on O.E. applications. 1992 caprice, runs the return all the way down and dumps out right on top of the strainer for the fuel pump... sits maybe 1/8th of an inch away from the intank fuel pump. The other, technically it'd would be dropping fuel out halfway up the tank is a 1982 caprice diesel (now has a '73 350 oldsmobile, for the last 230000 or so miles) Really the return doesn't have much flow (mechanical pump). I would guess best thing would be to return right on top of the fuel pickup, possibly helps flush debris in the tank away from the pickup. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike V" To: Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:33 PM Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > Related to this, is it okay to have the return line squirtin > the fuel in from the top of the tank, or should it be submerged > in the fuel? I have a 1941 gas tank that I need to plumb a return lin > into. > Cheers, > MV > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bernd Felsche" > To: > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 6:00 PM > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > > >> On Friday 05 January 2007 00:57, Steven P. Donegan wrote: >>> I had not thought of fuel temp at all - every vehicle I drive >>> would consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) >>> However this does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer >>> needs a way to open a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in >>> the rails? Any ideas on how useful that would be in the 'real >>> world' anyone? >> >> Superflous if you're running in closed-loop; which you would be if >> the fuel rail was warm enough to make a difference. >> >> If the temperature in the fuel rail is a problem, then a >> recirculating fuel pressure control system is IMNHSO a better >> solution. In such a system, there's always "fresh" fuel that's in >> excess to the amount required for injection from the tank flushing >> the rail(s). The fuel tank is the cooling environment for the fuel. >> >> Pressure regulation also happens at the rail(s), whereas in >> "dead-end" systems it's at the fuel pump, perhaps a several metres >> from the rail and therefore the injectors. That increases the >> difficulty in controlling the pressure (time delays that depend on >> fuel pressure and temperature); especially if it's to vary >> dynamically wrt manifold pressure. >> >> The ability to vary the fuel rail pressure is at least desirable to >> get consistent injected quantities due to a fairly constant pressure >> difference across the injector; between the fuel rail and the >> manifold where it's injecting. Makes for simpler calculations on >> injected quantity. >> >> If you're stuck with a "dead-end" fuel delivery system, then you >> need to add a return line and a valve that vents the rail(s) back to >> the tank in the interval between the fuel pump running and the >> engine actually being started. The time delay will depend largely on >> the free-delivery rate of the fuel pump and the volume of the fuel >> rail(s). That ensures that there's "cold" fuel in the rail(s) before >> you start injecting it. >> >> -- >> /"\ 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 >> 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 Thu Jan 4 23:17:46 2007 From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike) Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 13:17:46 +0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU, subject of fuel returns and failures In-Reply-To: <1167967616.16410.55.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <7.0.1.0.0.20070104145324.02739840@iinet.net.au> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <200701050800.56422@death.2.spammers> <1167958151.16410.45.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <459DABDA.3070608@commspeed.net> <1167967616.16410.55.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20070105123012.02a8baa0@iinet.net.au>> FWIW, Some 15 years feedback on the return fuel system of the VL Commodore with the low pressure in tank pump and the high pressure external pump which feeds into a pulsation absorber (some people confuse this with a regulator). This has a simple fuel pressure regulator on the exit of the fuel rail and the pressure regulator reference is off the inlet manifold so the injectors get fixed pressure across them regardless of boost, on mine that goes to 10.5psi and others have seen it at 13psi) For hot starts there is a small cannister than holds the last highest manifold pressure (ostensibly from boost) and it holds it for well over an hour without any problem. The ECU switches a solenoid to apply this pressure to the sense for the pressure regulator instead of manifold for the first few seconds of cranking and the whole system works really well and has done for over 20 years... However, many people who have the T3 turbo setup and go one better with higher boost occasionally complain of leaning out or erratic performance and the first item to blame has almost always been the fuel pressure regulator. Also after a few years of inadequate service the n/a guys complain of lagging performance and occasional engine damage from running too lean... However, on 95% of the times I have followed through the service rationale it turns out to be in order of decreasing frequency of problems:- !!!!! Fuel filter blocked with carbon granules/fibre glass threads/resin/gluey goo/silastic !!! Broken(Squashed)/Blocked strainer at intank fuel pump inlet. !!! Seized low pressure intank fuel pump. !! Internally leaky high pressure fuel pump (where the recirculating ball mechanism is badly worn) ! Cracked fuel pressure sense line hose ! Pinhole in fuel pressure sense line (presumably acting as one way valve) In the remaining 5% of times the fuel pressure regulator has been replaced but, has been found to make little if any difference, suffice it to say the regulator is the non adjustable type. In my experience with trying some 4 such regulators on my car over the last 10 years I have noticed negligible difference in fuel pressure and performance, the most common failure has been fuel filter and low pressure pump by far with occasional high pressure pump leaks. Interestingly when people first got onto forums discussing these issues some 10 years ago, people used to mouth off the value of "rising rate regulators" of course they were not aware of the issue of differential pressure and it was quite amusing watching the debates get ever more heated over this simple point, especially when people starting to push 25psi boost remonstrating the regulators fault also cracking the plastic housings of the injectors etc... Having been through electronic engineering some 24 years ago and laboured with control systems theory, I dont like the chance of making a PWM (PID) type control run effectively if the pump is some way from the fuel rail, in any case you would need a smart filter to remove the pump pulsations and reflections from the injector closings. Kalman filters come to mind as you are doing a sampled data system, I wish you a lot of luck - though being a qualified machinist would (I thought) have put you in better stead making good fuel delivery and return lines along with a pulsation absorber allowing your intellect to attend to more useful issues... Rgds Mike ps Yes Bernd, I trimmed things a bit ;) At 11:26 AM 1/5/07, "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: >Well, since I am asking for feedback you can call it ugly if you >wish :-) For me doing just about anything in electronics and software is >far easier than doing it in metal (and I am a fully qualified machinist >as well as an electronics/software dude). Given this will require one >more mostly passive input conditioning circuit and one PWM output >circuit I may add it on general principles. And thank you for the >feedback! 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 Fri Jan 5 00:14:12 2007 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 00:14:12 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Steven P. Donegan > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 6:49 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > > I can't quite read this as a yes or a no to fuel pump > pressure control - can you give me a binary response :-) > > I.E. does fuel pressure sensing/fuel pump control make sense > for an EFI system or not. > > Thanks! For big engines maybe, as it would increase the dynamic range of the injector for engines that need it. ie a big injector sized to be at 80% duty cycle at max HP may flow too much fuel at it's minimum pulse width at idle, so you could lower the fuel pressure to reduce the fuel delivered. But how many engines need that? I don't think the delay from back to front of the car is anything to worry about, assuming no leaks or bubbles the increase in pressure will propagate from the pump to the injectors at the speed of sound. Maybe the inertia of fuel in the line ahead of the pump will reduce delivery slightly during acceleration but that doesn't seem like much of a problem either. Does the vapor problem just mean extended cranking while the vapor works it's way out of the lines through the injectors, or is it a bigger problem than that? --steve From tcsibor at valrox.com Fri Jan 5 00:34:27 2007 From: tcsibor at valrox.com (TomC) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 22:34:27 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1167968020.16410.59.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: Let me know when some programming is required. I've programmed in C for the last 20 years. Tom -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Steven P. Donegan Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:34 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Well, the electronics are actually fairly easy - the 4 O2 sensor inputs I put in the current design will handle narrow or wide band injectors. Outputs to control tranny/other stuff - interesting and perhaps if a 'real' application arises (ie explain exactly what you want/need) I'll add it. Not hard to add things to my design in hardware and software is C so I expect folks will pitch in when the time comes. And thank you very much for the feedback! On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 20:29 -0500, Jay Rabe wrote: > On 1/4/07, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > > > I have not yet added OBDII to my project - it appears that I have to if > > it is going to be plug compatable for my Z28 so that will likely > > happen. > > My intent for this project is a universal EFI/ECM/PCM/MSD box - > > something useful on any engine up to 8 cylinders. If it lacks any inputs > > or outputs tell me and I'll add them :-) > > > A few things... > > If you build this ecu only for a returnless fuel system, this limits what > fuel pumps you can use. http://fuel-pumps.net/fuelpumpsfaq7.html#9 > When writing the software i assume you'd give the option of a normal relay > powered style fuel pump. > > So all this below would be in my dream standalone computer. This is mostly > way over the top. > > One thing i've always wanted to see implimented is something to make fueling > a variable vane (variable ar) turbo engine "easy" to control fuel. I would > think an extra pressure transducer to monitor exhaust pressure before it > goes into the turbo would be very helpful to give a new compensation for MAP > systems. Even MAF systems could probably benefit from this on the ignition > side of things. Yeah these are not common, but i think having the ability > to fuel them properly will help their popularity and they are being used by > a few automakers. This should help them become more common soon. Also > some kind of circuitry to control the variable actuator. Maybe a > potentiometer to monitor this? Or, maybe just the actuator potentiometer is > enough for the fuel/ign compensation? > > Another thing would be variable cam(s) control. I've been dreaming of a > worm gear "solenoid" controled cam timing adjuster for timing belt engines. > It would probably need a potentiometer in it to know where it is. This > could be very beneficial if done properly. I know, it would be tough to make > an adjuster blah, blah, it would be cool tho... I know you can tell where > the timing is from the crank signal vs. the cam signal, but i like > potentiometers. Grab a meter and see what position its by its voltage > instead of an oscilloscope and all that fun. > > If you could make it OBD-II capable, you just might be building the next > step in standalone computers. 96 and newer cars who have to pass OBD port > only emissions could actually pass emissions. It would probably never get > EPA certified if they knew it was going to be tunable. OBD II port > replicators are illegal... Maybe leak some software after the release??? > > A self learn circuit for fuel/ignition would be cool. Id imagine it would > be mostly coding tho... > > Wideband capability? Not easy, but makes tuning very nice... > > Boost control? ...gear variable? > > Traction control input or traction control? Maybe like a rev limiter... > Maybe an adjustable slip allowance... > > Launch control? > > Full throttle shift? > > Software/hardware to allow a secondary set of injectors? > > Anti lag? there is misfire and "jet engine" style > > I wish i knew more about coding and electronics... > > Jay > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From ebuckler at icehouse.net Fri Jan 5 01:22:34 2007 From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 23:22:34 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Steve Ravat, CX 500 EFI? Message-ID: <024701c7309a$4512df30$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Steve, Lost your direct email, so a question here: Any further work being done that you might know of for replacement EFI for the CX turbos? Have several, am getting bored with not being able to tune for different intakes and exhausts, or even see what's happening. Don't tell me we shouldn't, I have a few mint OEMs set aside, want to play with some of the parts-bike machines that get lots more mile put on them. Ernie Buckler Spokane From bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au Fri Jan 5 04:18:02 2007 From: bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au (Bernd Felsche) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 19:18:02 +0900 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <001d01c73061$2d6c1f10$6501a8c0@IBMm> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <200701050800.56422@death.2.spammers> <001d01c73061$2d6c1f10$6501a8c0@IBMm> Message-ID: <200701051918.02039@death.2.spammers> On Friday 05 January 2007 09:33, Mike V wrote: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > On Friday 05 January 2007 00:57, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > If the temperature in the fuel rail is a problem, then a > > recirculating fuel pressure control system is IMNHSO a better > > solution. In such a system, there's always "fresh" fuel that's in > > excess to the amount required for injection from the tank flushing > > the rail(s). The fuel tank is the cooling environment for the fuel. > Related to this, is it okay to have the return line squirtin the > fuel in from the top of the tank, or should it be submerged in the > fuel? I have a 1941 gas tank that I need to plumb a return lin > into. Note the last statement: "The fuel tank is the cooling environment for the fuel." Fuel that returns should mix well with whatever fuel is in the tank to try to provide a "constant" temperature and hence density so that the amount to inject (injector opening time) is easier to calculate. Also, the cooler fuel is more dense and provides more energy per unit volume. -- /"\ 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 bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au Fri Jan 5 04:36:28 2007 From: bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au (Bernd Felsche) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 19:36:28 +0900 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1167967616.16410.55.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <459DABDA.3070608@commspeed.net> <1167967616.16410.55.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <200701051936.28335@death.2.spammers> On Friday 05 January 2007 12:26, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 18:37 -0700, Tom Visel wrote: > > It's trading mechanical complication for electronic complication. > > Mechanical fuel pressure regulators are a mature technology, and the > > math for injectors that have manifold-referenced fuel pressure is > > simpler than that for injectors with static pressure, or for > > computer-controlled feedback-requiring variable pressure systems. > > Also, anything with the pressure control at/near the tank is going to > > have hysteresis problems which will tend to minimize the gains that > > might have been found by the increased complexity. > For me doing just about anything in electronics and software is > far easier than doing it in metal (and I am a fully qualified machinist > as well as an electronics/software dude). Given this will require one > more mostly passive input conditioning circuit and one PWM output > circuit I may add it on general principles. The control system aspects of the long delay via a fluid connection between the pump and the injector is very complex. This is especially so because the delay isn't a constant. The pressure signal will pass in either direction at the speed of sound in the medium, taking into account the present speed of flow in the pipe, the speed of sound varying with pressure and temperature. It takes an enormous amount of code and auxiliary hardware to "replace" a very simple and cheap mechanical regulator in this application. It would be _possible_ to build and integrate the necessary sensors as well as implement the necessary fluid-dynamic and control system (differential) equations in a sophisticated microcontroller. One would also have to take into account the opening and closing injectors, where pressure pulses are returned, requiring filtering, again depending on the conditions of the fluid, and the time that the injectors are open. You are of course aware that all control algorithms have to be inherently safe; i.e. failure of one or more components cannot cause catastrophic events such as leaving injectors open indefinitely to hydraulically lock an engine, etc. Plausibility of all inputs has not only to be determined, but also determined very quickly. -- /"\ 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 bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au Fri Jan 5 04:46:47 2007 From: bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au (Bernd Felsche) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 19:46:47 +0900 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1167958151.16410.45.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <200701050800.56422@death.2.spammers> <1167958151.16410.45.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <200701051946.47640@death.2.spammers> On Friday 05 January 2007 09:49, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 08:00 +0900, Bernd Felsche wrote: > > On Friday 05 January 2007 00:57, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > > I had not thought of fuel temp at all - every vehicle I drive > > > would consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) > > > However this does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI > > > computer needs a way to open a fuel return line and to sense > > > fuel temp in the rails? Any ideas on how useful that would be > > > in the 'real world' anyone? > > Superflous if you're running in closed-loop; which you would be > > if the fuel rail was warm enough to make a difference. > > If the temperature in the fuel rail is a problem, then a > > recirculating fuel pressure control system is IMNHSO a better > > solution. In such a system, there's always "fresh" fuel that's > > in excess to the amount required for injection from the tank > > flushing the rail(s). The fuel tank is the cooling environment > > for the fuel. > > Pressure regulation also happens at the rail(s), whereas in > > "dead-end" systems it's at the fuel pump, perhaps a several > > metres from the rail and therefore the injectors. That increases > > the difficulty in controlling the pressure (time delays that > > depend on fuel pressure and temperature); especially if it's to > > vary dynamically wrt manifold pressure. > > The ability to vary the fuel rail pressure is at least desirable > > to get consistent injected quantities due to a fairly constant > > pressure difference across the injector; between the fuel rail > > and the manifold where it's injecting. Makes for simpler > > calculations on injected quantity. > > If you're stuck with a "dead-end" fuel delivery system, then you > > need to add a return line and a valve that vents the rail(s) > > back to the tank in the interval between the fuel pump running > > and the engine actually being started. The time delay will > > depend largely on the free-delivery rate of the fuel pump and > > the volume of the fuel rail(s). That ensures that there's "cold" > > fuel in the rail(s) before you start injecting it. > I can't quite read this as a yes or a no to fuel pump pressure control - > can you give me a binary response :-) No. There isn't one. That should be obvious. > I.E. does fuel pressure sensing/fuel pump control make sense for > an EFI system or not. It depends on the amount of time and money that you have to spend; and the quality of control that you want out of the system. It is very much more expensive (in time and money) to out-perform the delivery control of a simple fuel pressure control referenced to the inlet manifold at the fuel rail. The response of the mechanical stuff at the rail is sharper than changing the fuel pump's speed; and a bleed-back at the pump will always have to be against the dominating flow of fuel. The result is that the injectors will deliver a different quantity of fuel to that intended and the closed-loop feedback at the exhaust will tend to make your control system unstable as it attempts to respond "statically" to a dynamic effect. -- /"\ 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 tsokorai at minimania.org Fri Jan 5 05:47:57 2007 From: tsokorai at minimania.org (Tomas Sokorai) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 8:47:57 -0300 Subject: =?UTF-8?B?W0RpeV9lZmldIGZ1ZWwgcmV0dXJuIGxvY2F0aW9u?= In-Reply-To: <006501c73079$fdd32dc0$6501a8c0@IBMm> References: <006501c73079$fdd32dc0$6501a8c0@IBMm> Message-ID: On Thu, 4 Jan 2007 22:31:30 -0500, "Mike V" wrote: > Thanks Oolan & Mike. > Mike got me thinking about the top mounted return line making a > sound like someone is peeing in a puddle. I will make the return > line enter the tank throught the (top) sender / pick-up aseembly, > but run the line to the bottom of the tank, where the fuel will > exit the return tube. - Thanks again. MikeV Mike, the fuel pickup/sender assembly I adapted to my F100's fuel tank had a return tube that placed the fuel return near the pickup. It was from some Hyundai vehicle, a H100 IIRC -- Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. From efi at dyakron.com Fri Jan 5 07:40:39 2007 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 08:40:39 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] fuel return location References: <006501c73079$fdd32dc0$6501a8c0@IBMm> Message-ID: <006501c730cf$18d00d00$6501a8c0@IBMm> > On Thu, 4 Jan 2007 22:31:30 -0500, "Mike V" wrote: >> Thanks Oolan & Mike. >> Mike got me thinking about the top mounted return line making a >> sound like someone is peeing in a puddle. I will make the return >> line enter the tank throught the (top) sender / pick-up aseembly, >> but run the line to the bottom of the tank, where the fuel will >> exit the return tube. - Thanks again. MikeV > > Mike, the fuel pickup/sender assembly I adapted to my F100's fuel tank had > a return tube that placed the fuel return near the pickup. It was from > some Hyundai vehicle, a H100 IIRC > Thanks Tomas, did you adapt the Hyundai sender for your gas gauge? Mike V From tsokorai at minimania.org Fri Jan 5 07:51:50 2007 From: tsokorai at minimania.org (Tomas Sokorai) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 10:51:50 -0300 Subject: =?UTF-8?B?W0RpeV9lZmldIGZ1ZWwgcmV0dXJuIGxvY2F0aW9u?= In-Reply-To: <006501c730cf$18d00d00$6501a8c0@IBMm> References: <006501c730cf$18d00d00$6501a8c0@IBMm> Message-ID: On Fri, 5 Jan 2007 08:40:39 -0500, "Mike V" wrote: > Thanks Tomas, > did you adapt the Hyundai sender for your gas gauge? The big luck is that it had almost the exact required resistance for the original fuel gauge, so I didn't find it necessary to make a conversion circuit. My only selection criteria was because it seemed physically adaptable with some bending and cutting, but by some inexplicable cosmic alignment, I got lucky on the electrical side too :) I was already designing a PIC microcontroller PWM-ing the original gauge, but when I tested it, was close enough to allow me just install and wire it directly. -- Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. From donegan at donegan.org Fri Jan 5 09:18:49 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 07:18:49 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1168010329.16410.68.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Get familiar with FreeRTOS then - it's the 'OS' the system will be running. I already have that part alive on a LPC2106 board, the 2138 board should be here soon. On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 22:34 -0800, TomC wrote: > Let me know when some programming is required. I've programmed in C for the > last 20 years. > > Tom > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Steven P. Donegan > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:34 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > > > Well, the electronics are actually fairly easy - the 4 O2 sensor inputs > I put in the current design will handle narrow or wide band injectors. > Outputs to control tranny/other stuff - interesting and perhaps if a > 'real' application arises (ie explain exactly what you want/need) I'll > add it. Not hard to add things to my design in hardware and software is > C so I expect folks will pitch in when the time comes. > > And thank you very much for the feedback! > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 20:29 -0500, Jay Rabe wrote: > > On 1/4/07, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > > > > > I have not yet added OBDII to my project - it appears that I have to if > > > it is going to be plug compatable for my Z28 so that will likely > > > happen. > > > My intent for this project is a universal EFI/ECM/PCM/MSD box - > > > something useful on any engine up to 8 cylinders. If it lacks any inputs > > > or outputs tell me and I'll add them :-) > > > > > > A few things... > > > > If you build this ecu only for a returnless fuel system, this limits what > > fuel pumps you can use. http://fuel-pumps.net/fuelpumpsfaq7.html#9 > > When writing the software i assume you'd give the option of a normal relay > > powered style fuel pump. > > > > So all this below would be in my dream standalone computer. This is > mostly > > way over the top. > > > > One thing i've always wanted to see implimented is something to make > fueling > > a variable vane (variable ar) turbo engine "easy" to control fuel. I > would > > think an extra pressure transducer to monitor exhaust pressure before it > > goes into the turbo would be very helpful to give a new compensation for > MAP > > systems. Even MAF systems could probably benefit from this on the > ignition > > side of things. Yeah these are not common, but i think having the ability > > to fuel them properly will help their popularity and they are being used > by > > a few automakers. This should help them become more common soon. Also > > some kind of circuitry to control the variable actuator. Maybe a > > potentiometer to monitor this? Or, maybe just the actuator potentiometer > is > > enough for the fuel/ign compensation? > > > > Another thing would be variable cam(s) control. I've been dreaming of a > > worm gear "solenoid" controled cam timing adjuster for timing belt > engines. > > It would probably need a potentiometer in it to know where it is. This > > could be very beneficial if done properly. I know, it would be tough to > make > > an adjuster blah, blah, it would be cool tho... I know you can tell where > > the timing is from the crank signal vs. the cam signal, but i like > > potentiometers. Grab a meter and see what position its by its voltage > > instead of an oscilloscope and all that fun. > > > > If you could make it OBD-II capable, you just might be building the next > > step in standalone computers. 96 and newer cars who have to pass OBD port > > only emissions could actually pass emissions. It would probably never get > > EPA certified if they knew it was going to be tunable. OBD II port > > replicators are illegal... Maybe leak some software after the release??? > > > > A self learn circuit for fuel/ignition would be cool. Id imagine it would > > be mostly coding tho... > > > > Wideband capability? Not easy, but makes tuning very nice... > > > > Boost control? ...gear variable? > > > > Traction control input or traction control? Maybe like a rev limiter... > > Maybe an adjustable slip allowance... > > > > Launch control? > > > > Full throttle shift? > > > > Software/hardware to allow a secondary set of injectors? > > > > Anti lag? there is misfire and "jet engine" style > > > > I wish i knew more about coding and electronics... > > > > Jay > > _______________________________________________ > > Diy_efi mailing list > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Fri Jan 5 09:22:31 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 07:22:31 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] [Diy_efi] Steve Ravat, CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <024701c7309a$4512df30$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> References: <024701c7309a$4512df30$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Message-ID: <1168010551.16410.72.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Although what I'm designing is intended to be 'universal' it may be a tad large (physical size) for a bike. I do intend to play with it on my Harley at some point but it is primarily intended for V8 applications. If size does become an issue I could shift some or all of it to surface mount - the down side is that would effectively take it out of hobby land as most folks are not going to have the tools to do surface mount stuff at home... On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 23:22 -0800, Ernest Buckler wrote: > Steve, > Lost your direct email, so a question here: Any further work being done that you might know of for replacement EFI for the CX turbos? Have several, am getting bored with not being able to tune for different intakes and exhausts, or even see what's happening. Don't tell me we shouldn't, I have a few mint OEMs set aside, want to play with some of the parts-bike machines that get lots more mile put on them. > Ernie Buckler > Spokane > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From ebuckler at icehouse.net Fri Jan 5 09:27:20 2007 From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 07:27:20 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] [Diy_efi] Steve Ravat, CX 500 EFI? References: <024701c7309a$4512df30$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> <1168010551.16410.72.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <004501c730dd$fdec3590$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Steve, Any estimate for overall dims of the final package? OEM box on these machines is not tiny, and there's more room under the tailpiece. Ernest > Although what I'm designing is intended to be 'universal' it may be a > tad large (physical size) for a bike. I do intend to play with it on my > Harley at some point but it is primarily intended for V8 applications. > If size does become an issue I could shift some or all of it to surface > mount - the down side is that would effectively take it out of hobby > land as most folks are not going to have the tools to do surface mount > stuff at home... > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 23:22 -0800, Ernest Buckler wrote: >> Steve, >> Lost your direct email, so a question here: Any further work being done >> that you might know of for replacement EFI for the CX turbos? From donegan at donegan.org Fri Jan 5 11:00:11 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 09:00:11 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] [Diy_efi] Steve Ravat, CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <004501c730dd$fdec3590$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> References: <024701c7309a$4512df30$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> <1168010551.16410.72.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <004501c730dd$fdec3590$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Message-ID: <1168016411.16410.82.camel@wopr.donegan.org> At the moment all I've done is the input board - which ends up being about 2.9x2.3 inches the CPU board is about that size - so total real estate at the moment is roughly 2.5x6 inches - I expect the output driver boards to be like 1x6 each - so a rough guess right now would make the overall dimensions in the 5x6 or perhaps 6x6 range - and other than case/heat sinks etc I would expect no more than 1 inch deep - so worts case figure 2 inches deep by 6 inches square, not huge but not tiny either. For space constrained applications I could do the design in surface mount but that would mean it gets fabbed 100% by a vendor and that probably means cost... If I do a version of this just for motorcycles I can goal seek for small size - my current goal is to fit my Z28 Camaro (1998) and my 1985 Mustang (B&M supercharged carb'd engine at the moment - and carb is really crummy for that application). If I do a bike version it will be with the goal to fit exactly where my EFI computer fits now on my 2004 Dyna... Is the CX 500 the Honda V-Twin of old? On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 07:27 -0800, Ernest Buckler wrote: > Steve, > Any estimate for overall dims of the final package? OEM box on these > machines is not tiny, and there's more room under the tailpiece. > Ernest > > > > Although what I'm designing is intended to be 'universal' it may be a > > tad large (physical size) for a bike. I do intend to play with it on my > > Harley at some point but it is primarily intended for V8 applications. > > If size does become an issue I could shift some or all of it to surface > > mount - the down side is that would effectively take it out of hobby > > land as most folks are not going to have the tools to do surface mount > > stuff at home... > > > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 23:22 -0800, Ernest Buckler wrote: > >> Steve, > >> Lost your direct email, so a question here: Any further work being done > >> that you might know of for replacement EFI for the CX turbos? > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From ebuckler at icehouse.net Fri Jan 5 11:29:53 2007 From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 09:29:53 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] [Diy_efi] Steve Ravat, CX 500 EFI? References: <024701c7309a$4512df30$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8><1168010551.16410.72.camel@wopr.donegan.org><004501c730dd$fdec3590$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> <1168016411.16410.82.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <00a001c730ef$1ccaacb0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Steve, 6x6x2 is very similar to OEM case on the CX 500 Turbo. Yup, same 80? V-twin with two ign. triggers. Way oversquare, 4-valve heads, pushrods, but very short, so redline is still 10K. CR for carb versions is 10:1, turbos are 8:1. Very strong engines - with one weak link, the alternators are buried in the rear case thus overheat and fail about 30K miles, require total engine removal for access (ign. triggers are also in there). I don't like the OEM wastegate, either, as extended sitting can cause a non-serviceable flapper shaft to seize. It's a common style, with overpressure causing a flap at the header ex. flange to open. I'm interested in a small "tower" (?) type if you know of such a thing. Honda no longer supports these, so we owners are on our own. Plus factory sensors run $200-$300 and up - and there are 7 of them. Ernie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven P. Donegan" To: Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 9:00 AM Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] [Diy_efi] Steve Ravat, CX 500 EFI? > At the moment all I've done is the input board - which ends up being > about 2.9x2.3 inches the CPU board is about that size - so total real > estate at the moment is roughly 2.5x6 inches - I expect the output > driver boards to be like 1x6 each - so a rough guess right now would > make the overall dimensions in the 5x6 or perhaps 6x6 range - and other > than case/heat sinks etc I would expect no more than 1 inch deep - so > worts case figure 2 inches deep by 6 inches square, not huge but not > tiny either. For space constrained applications I could do the design in > surface mount but that would mean it gets fabbed 100% by a vendor and > that probably means cost... > > If I do a version of this just for motorcycles I can goal seek for small > size - my current goal is to fit my Z28 Camaro (1998) and my 1985 > Mustang (B&M supercharged carb'd engine at the moment - and carb is > really crummy for that application). If I do a bike version it will be > with the goal to fit exactly where my EFI computer fits now on my 2004 > Dyna... > > Is the CX 500 the Honda V-Twin of old? > > On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 07:27 -0800, Ernest Buckler wrote: >> Steve, >> Any estimate for overall dims of the final package? OEM box on these >> machines is not tiny, and there's more room under the tailpiece. >> Ernest >> >> >> > Although what I'm designing is intended to be 'universal' it may be a >> > tad large (physical size) for a bike. I do intend to play with it on my >> > Harley at some point but it is primarily intended for V8 applications. >> > If size does become an issue I could shift some or all of it to surface >> > mount - the down side is that would effectively take it out of hobby >> > land as most folks are not going to have the tools to do surface mount >> > stuff at home... >> > >> > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 23:22 -0800, Ernest Buckler wrote: >> >> Steve, >> >> Lost your direct email, so a question here: Any further work being >> >> done >> >> that you might know of for replacement EFI for the CX turbos? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 cobraman at insightbb.com Fri Jan 5 12:26:43 2007 From: cobraman at insightbb.com (cobraman at insightbb.com) Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 12:26:43 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1167935974.16410.14.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <1167935974.16410.14.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: I would like to see a PWM controller with a different purpose - say a 2 speed version - then you could use a 1000 HP pump on the street w/o beating the fuel until it boils. Run the pump, with a regulator, at say 50 lph until full throttle or boost starts, then kick it into high...... just food for thought. TomS ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven P. Donegan" Date: Thursday, January 4, 2007 12:41 Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Well - for track days I simply put dry ice in my fuel cold-can > thing - > that solves most vapor-lock style problems and lasts for a > couple of > hours. Simple low-tech solution to that problem. Given the lack of > response to my original posting I believe providing PWM fuel pump > control and support for a fuel pressure sensor is useful. > > Given that I normally run at Willow Springs or Buttonwillow > during the > winter months temps are not normally a factor anyway. > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 12:23 -0600, cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: > > My "Edelbrick" ProFlow has fuel pressure controlled with > engine vacuum. On track sessions on very hot days, the fuel in > the rails will boil under hard braking - accelerator closed (low > fuel pressure). When you finally step on it (52 psi), nothing > happens until the vapor "recirculates" or is expelled. > Usually takes a second or so. I don't think dead heading > would do any better - probably just need to keep a constant fuel > pressure. > > IMHO, hot fuel should give better economy - easier to vaporize > - for those green members. TomS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ld > > > consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) > However this > > > does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer needs a > way > > > to open > > > a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in the rails? Any > > > ideas on how > > > useful that would be in the 'real world' anyone? > > > > > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 14:56 +0800, Mike wrote: > > > > Isnt one of the main needs for fuel return the fact the > fuel > > > is heated quite a > > > > bit in the fuel rail whilst its waiting for injection ? > > > > > > > > Of course there is a commercial factor as fuel returns > used to > > > be so > > > > much cheaper than any electronics but getting around the > fuel > > > heating etc > > > > > > > > Also the issue of control feedback is an issue to avoid > > > vapourisation> during hot start, the good thing about return > is > > > this can be flushed out, > > > > and esp for a turbo as a pressure hold tank can "remember" > the last > > > > max pressure and temporarily raise the fuel rail pressure > to > > > this during > > > > start to avoid vapour issues... etc > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 07:23 AM 1/4/07, you wrote: > > > > > > > > >This sounds cool...is closed loop control of fuel > pressure an > > > oem feature for any new vehicles? Or just something you are > > > trying out? Are you going to use a PI controller? I am > guessing > > > when you snap the throttle open the PI controller should > know > > > about this quite quickly...not wait to see a drop in fuel > > > pressure? > > > > > > > > > >> To add something somewhat useful to the list in this > reply > > > I'll say the > > > > >> Donegan ECM is coming along nicely :-) The input board > is > > > going to fab > > > > >> out at about 3.0 inches by 2.2 inches (exactly matching > the > > > CPU board - > > > > >> ARM based Steve). Inputs designed in are MAP, MAT, > > > Barometric, Coolant, > > > > >> Throttle, Oil pressure/temp, 4 ea O2 sensors, Crank and > Cam > > > position, 2 > > > > >> ea EGT sensors - well pretty much everything everyone > told > > > me should be > > > > >> sensor inputs. Fuel pressure input I'll put on the > 'relay' > > > control board > > > > >> - that will do PWM control of the fuel pump eliminating > the > > > need for a > > > > >> regulator or return line. > > > > >> > > > > >> Happy New Year :-) > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > > >Diy_efi mailing list > > > > >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Diy_efi mailing list > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > From donegan at donegan.org Fri Jan 5 12:31:44 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 10:31:44 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] [Diy_efi] Steve Ravat, CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <00a001c730ef$1ccaacb0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> References: <024701c7309a$4512df30$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> <1168010551.16410.72.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <004501c730dd$fdec3590$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> <1168016411.16410.82.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <00a001c730ef$1ccaacb0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Message-ID: <1168021905.16410.89.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Well, send me a list of stock inputs and outputs and perhaps I can design something to fit 'exactly' for your application. It will likely just be a subset of what I'm already doing for my V8's... What I need to know is the input type - voltage/frequency etc and the outputs - the rest is pretty darn simple :-) On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 09:29 -0800, Ernest Buckler wrote: > Steve, > 6x6x2 is very similar to OEM case on the CX 500 Turbo. Yup, same 80? V-twin > with two ign. triggers. Way oversquare, 4-valve heads, pushrods, but very > short, so redline is still 10K. CR for carb versions is 10:1, turbos are > 8:1. Very strong engines - with one weak link, the alternators are buried > in the rear case thus overheat and fail about 30K miles, require total > engine removal for access (ign. triggers are also in there). I don't like > the OEM wastegate, either, as extended sitting can cause a non-serviceable > flapper shaft to seize. It's a common style, with overpressure causing a > flap at the header ex. flange to open. I'm interested in a small "tower" > (?) type if you know of such a thing. Honda no longer supports these, so we > owners are on our own. Plus factory sensors run $200-$300 and up - and there > are 7 of them. > Ernie > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steven P. Donegan" > To: > Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 9:00 AM > Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] [Diy_efi] Steve Ravat, CX 500 EFI? > > > > At the moment all I've done is the input board - which ends up being > > about 2.9x2.3 inches the CPU board is about that size - so total real > > estate at the moment is roughly 2.5x6 inches - I expect the output > > driver boards to be like 1x6 each - so a rough guess right now would > > make the overall dimensions in the 5x6 or perhaps 6x6 range - and other > > than case/heat sinks etc I would expect no more than 1 inch deep - so > > worts case figure 2 inches deep by 6 inches square, not huge but not > > tiny either. For space constrained applications I could do the design in > > surface mount but that would mean it gets fabbed 100% by a vendor and > > that probably means cost... > > > > If I do a version of this just for motorcycles I can goal seek for small > > size - my current goal is to fit my Z28 Camaro (1998) and my 1985 > > Mustang (B&M supercharged carb'd engine at the moment - and carb is > > really crummy for that application). If I do a bike version it will be > > with the goal to fit exactly where my EFI computer fits now on my 2004 > > Dyna... > > > > Is the CX 500 the Honda V-Twin of old? > > > > On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 07:27 -0800, Ernest Buckler wrote: > >> Steve, > >> Any estimate for overall dims of the final package? OEM box on these > >> machines is not tiny, and there's more room under the tailpiece. > >> Ernest > >> > >> > >> > Although what I'm designing is intended to be 'universal' it may be a > >> > tad large (physical size) for a bike. I do intend to play with it on my > >> > Harley at some point but it is primarily intended for V8 applications. > >> > If size does become an issue I could shift some or all of it to surface > >> > mount - the down side is that would effectively take it out of hobby > >> > land as most folks are not going to have the tools to do surface mount > >> > stuff at home... > >> > > >> > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 23:22 -0800, Ernest Buckler wrote: > >> >> Steve, > >> >> Lost your direct email, so a question here: Any further work being > >> >> done > >> >> that you might know of for replacement EFI for the CX turbos? > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Diy_efi mailing list > >> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Diy_efi mailing list > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Fri Jan 5 12:40:53 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 10:40:53 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <1167935974.16410.14.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <1168022453.16410.92.camel@wopr.donegan.org> By it's very nature a PWM based controller is already N speed - ie whatever you want. And the MOSFET's I have chosen for my design do like 70 amps worth of switching so should be able to sleep (ie pretty much not need heat sinks) through injector or fuel pump control chores... On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 12:26 -0600, cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: > I would like to see a PWM controller with a different purpose - say a 2 speed version - then you could use a 1000 HP pump on the street w/o beating the fuel until it boils. Run the pump, with a regulator, at say 50 lph until full throttle or boost starts, then kick it into high...... just food for thought. TomS > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steven P. Donegan" > Date: Thursday, January 4, 2007 12:41 > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > Well - for track days I simply put dry ice in my fuel cold-can > > thing - > > that solves most vapor-lock style problems and lasts for a > > couple of > > hours. Simple low-tech solution to that problem. Given the lack of > > response to my original posting I believe providing PWM fuel pump > > control and support for a fuel pressure sensor is useful. > > > > Given that I normally run at Willow Springs or Buttonwillow > > during the > > winter months temps are not normally a factor anyway. > > > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 12:23 -0600, cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: > > > My "Edelbrick" ProFlow has fuel pressure controlled with > > engine vacuum. On track sessions on very hot days, the fuel in > > the rails will boil under hard braking - accelerator closed (low > > fuel pressure). When you finally step on it (52 psi), nothing > > happens until the vapor "recirculates" or is expelled. > > Usually takes a second or so. I don't think dead heading > > would do any better - probably just need to keep a constant fuel > > pressure. > > > IMHO, hot fuel should give better economy - easier to vaporize > > - for those green members. TomS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ld > > > > consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) > > However this > > > > does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer needs a > > way > > > > to open > > > > a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in the rails? Any > > > > ideas on how > > > > useful that would be in the 'real world' anyone? > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 14:56 +0800, Mike wrote: > > > > > Isnt one of the main needs for fuel return the fact the > > fuel > > > > is heated quite a > > > > > bit in the fuel rail whilst its waiting for injection ? > > > > > > > > > > Of course there is a commercial factor as fuel returns > > used to > > > > be so > > > > > much cheaper than any electronics but getting around the > > fuel > > > > heating etc > > > > > > > > > > Also the issue of control feedback is an issue to avoid > > > > vapourisation> during hot start, the good thing about return > > is > > > > this can be flushed out, > > > > > and esp for a turbo as a pressure hold tank can "remember" > > the last > > > > > max pressure and temporarily raise the fuel rail pressure > > to > > > > this during > > > > > start to avoid vapour issues... etc > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 07:23 AM 1/4/07, you wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >This sounds cool...is closed loop control of fuel > > pressure an > > > > oem feature for any new vehicles? Or just something you are > > > > trying out? Are you going to use a PI controller? I am > > guessing > > > > when you snap the throttle open the PI controller should > > know > > > > about this quite quickly...not wait to see a drop in fuel > > > > pressure? > > > > > > > > > > > >> To add something somewhat useful to the list in this > > reply > > > > I'll say the > > > > > >> Donegan ECM is coming along nicely :-) The input board > > is > > > > going to fab > > > > > >> out at about 3.0 inches by 2.2 inches (exactly matching > > the > > > > CPU board - > > > > > >> ARM based Steve). Inputs designed in are MAP, MAT, > > > > Barometric, Coolant, > > > > > >> Throttle, Oil pressure/temp, 4 ea O2 sensors, Crank and > > Cam > > > > position, 2 > > > > > >> ea EGT sensors - well pretty much everything everyone > > told > > > > me should be > > > > > >> sensor inputs. Fuel pressure input I'll put on the > > 'relay' > > > > control board > > > > > >> - that will do PWM control of the fuel pump eliminating > > the > > > > need for a > > > > > >> regulator or return line. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Happy New Year :-) > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > > > >Diy_efi mailing list > > > > > >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > > >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Diy_efi mailing list > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Fri Jan 5 12:45:26 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 10:45:26 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <1167935974.16410.14.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <1168022726.16410.97.camel@wopr.donegan.org> And BTW my Mustang has a ~300 lph pump in it now (Holley Black professional model) :-) A4 4 bolt mains block at 4.0 bore, 342 cubic inches with a nascar stroker crank, 8:1 CR and 15lbs of B&M Roots style blower - and of course it's not street legal here in the peoples republic of CA... Will likely yank the engine and put it in something pre-1972 so I can daily drive it again... On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 12:26 -0600, cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: > I would like to see a PWM controller with a different purpose - say a 2 speed version - then you could use a 1000 HP pump on the street w/o beating the fuel until it boils. Run the pump, with a regulator, at say 50 lph until full throttle or boost starts, then kick it into high...... just food for thought. TomS > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steven P. Donegan" > Date: Thursday, January 4, 2007 12:41 > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > Well - for track days I simply put dry ice in my fuel cold-can > > thing - > > that solves most vapor-lock style problems and lasts for a > > couple of > > hours. Simple low-tech solution to that problem. Given the lack of > > response to my original posting I believe providing PWM fuel pump > > control and support for a fuel pressure sensor is useful. > > > > Given that I normally run at Willow Springs or Buttonwillow > > during the > > winter months temps are not normally a factor anyway. > > > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 12:23 -0600, cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: > > > My "Edelbrick" ProFlow has fuel pressure controlled with > > engine vacuum. On track sessions on very hot days, the fuel in > > the rails will boil under hard braking - accelerator closed (low > > fuel pressure). When you finally step on it (52 psi), nothing > > happens until the vapor "recirculates" or is expelled. > > Usually takes a second or so. I don't think dead heading > > would do any better - probably just need to keep a constant fuel > > pressure. > > > IMHO, hot fuel should give better economy - easier to vaporize > > - for those green members. TomS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ld > > > > consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) > > However this > > > > does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer needs a > > way > > > > to open > > > > a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in the rails? Any > > > > ideas on how > > > > useful that would be in the 'real world' anyone? > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 14:56 +0800, Mike wrote: > > > > > Isnt one of the main needs for fuel return the fact the > > fuel > > > > is heated quite a > > > > > bit in the fuel rail whilst its waiting for injection ? > > > > > > > > > > Of course there is a commercial factor as fuel returns > > used to > > > > be so > > > > > much cheaper than any electronics but getting around the > > fuel > > > > heating etc > > > > > > > > > > Also the issue of control feedback is an issue to avoid > > > > vapourisation> during hot start, the good thing about return > > is > > > > this can be flushed out, > > > > > and esp for a turbo as a pressure hold tank can "remember" > > the last > > > > > max pressure and temporarily raise the fuel rail pressure > > to > > > > this during > > > > > start to avoid vapour issues... etc > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 07:23 AM 1/4/07, you wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >This sounds cool...is closed loop control of fuel > > pressure an > > > > oem feature for any new vehicles? Or just something you are > > > > trying out? Are you going to use a PI controller? I am > > guessing > > > > when you snap the throttle open the PI controller should > > know > > > > about this quite quickly...not wait to see a drop in fuel > > > > pressure? > > > > > > > > > > > >> To add something somewhat useful to the list in this > > reply > > > > I'll say the > > > > > >> Donegan ECM is coming along nicely :-) The input board > > is > > > > going to fab > > > > > >> out at about 3.0 inches by 2.2 inches (exactly matching > > the > > > > CPU board - > > > > > >> ARM based Steve). Inputs designed in are MAP, MAT, > > > > Barometric, Coolant, > > > > > >> Throttle, Oil pressure/temp, 4 ea O2 sensors, Crank and > > Cam > > > > position, 2 > > > > > >> ea EGT sensors - well pretty much everything everyone > > told > > > > me should be > > > > > >> sensor inputs. Fuel pressure input I'll put on the > > 'relay' > > > > control board > > > > > >> - that will do PWM control of the fuel pump eliminating > > the > > > > need for a > > > > > >> regulator or return line. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Happy New Year :-) > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > > > >Diy_efi mailing list > > > > > >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > > >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Diy_efi mailing list > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 jogross3 at hotmail.com Fri Jan 5 12:58:01 2007 From: jogross3 at hotmail.com (John Gross) Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 18:58:01 +0000 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1168022726.16410.97.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: I would say that if you're talking about doing PWM control of the fuel pump, and controlling it based on fuel demand from the engine, you need to make sure that the software side of the ECU will allow for quite of bit of adjustability in the acceleration enrichment. If you wait for either a specific TPS or a dTPS in order to speed up the pump, if you don't have enough adjustability in the accel enrichment, you'll find the engine flat on it's face during tip in. Remember that from the time the TPS registers a certain delta and the pump begins to speed up, the entire fuel system has to catch up. You might be surprised by how quickly you'll drop pressure at the injectors if the pump flow is insufficient. John former Rolex DP Engine Tuner >From: "Steven P. Donegan" >Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU >Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 10:45:26 -0800 > >And BTW my Mustang has a ~300 lph pump in it now (Holley Black >professional model) :-) A4 4 bolt mains block at 4.0 bore, 342 cubic >inches with a nascar stroker crank, 8:1 CR and 15lbs of B&M Roots style >blower - and of course it's not street legal here in the peoples >republic of CA... Will likely yank the engine and put it in something >pre-1972 so I can daily drive it again... > >On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 12:26 -0600, cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: > > I would like to see a PWM controller with a different purpose - say a 2 >speed version - then you could use a 1000 HP pump on the street w/o beating >the fuel until it boils. Run the pump, with a regulator, at say 50 lph >until full throttle or boost starts, then kick it into high...... just >food for thought. TomS > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Steven P. Donegan" > > Date: Thursday, January 4, 2007 12:41 > > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > Well - for track days I simply put dry ice in my fuel cold-can > > > thing - > > > that solves most vapor-lock style problems and lasts for a > > > couple of > > > hours. Simple low-tech solution to that problem. Given the lack of > > > response to my original posting I believe providing PWM fuel pump > > > control and support for a fuel pressure sensor is useful. > > > > > > Given that I normally run at Willow Springs or Buttonwillow > > > during the > > > winter months temps are not normally a factor anyway. > > > > > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 12:23 -0600, cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: > > > > My "Edelbrick" ProFlow has fuel pressure controlled with > > > engine vacuum. On track sessions on very hot days, the fuel in > > > the rails will boil under hard braking - accelerator closed (low > > > fuel pressure). When you finally step on it (52 psi), nothing > > > happens until the vapor "recirculates" or is expelled. > > > Usually takes a second or so. I don't think dead heading > > > would do any better - probably just need to keep a constant fuel > > > pressure. > > > > IMHO, hot fuel should give better economy - easier to vaporize > > > - for those green members. TomS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ld > > > > > consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) > > > However this > > > > > does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer needs a > > > way > > > > > to open > > > > > a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in the rails? Any > > > > > ideas on how > > > > > useful that would be in the 'real world' anyone? > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 14:56 +0800, Mike wrote: > > > > > > Isnt one of the main needs for fuel return the fact the > > > fuel > > > > > is heated quite a > > > > > > bit in the fuel rail whilst its waiting for injection ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course there is a commercial factor as fuel returns > > > used to > > > > > be so > > > > > > much cheaper than any electronics but getting around the > > > fuel > > > > > heating etc > > > > > > > > > > > > Also the issue of control feedback is an issue to avoid > > > > > vapourisation> during hot start, the good thing about return > > > is > > > > > this can be flushed out, > > > > > > and esp for a turbo as a pressure hold tank can "remember" > > > the last > > > > > > max pressure and temporarily raise the fuel rail pressure > > > to > > > > > this during > > > > > > start to avoid vapour issues... etc > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 07:23 AM 1/4/07, you wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >This sounds cool...is closed loop control of fuel > > > pressure an > > > > > oem feature for any new vehicles? Or just something you are > > > > > trying out? Are you going to use a PI controller? I am > > > guessing > > > > > when you snap the throttle open the PI controller should > > > know > > > > > about this quite quickly...not wait to see a drop in fuel > > > > > pressure? > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> To add something somewhat useful to the list in this > > > reply > > > > > I'll say the > > > > > > >> Donegan ECM is coming along nicely :-) The input board > > > is > > > > > going to fab > > > > > > >> out at about 3.0 inches by 2.2 inches (exactly matching > > > the > > > > > CPU board - > > > > > > >> ARM based Steve). Inputs designed in are MAP, MAT, > > > > > Barometric, Coolant, > > > > > > >> Throttle, Oil pressure/temp, 4 ea O2 sensors, Crank and > > > Cam > > > > > position, 2 > > > > > > >> ea EGT sensors - well pretty much everything everyone > > > told > > > > > me should be > > > > > > >> sensor inputs. Fuel pressure input I'll put on the > > > 'relay' > > > > > control board > > > > > > >> - that will do PWM control of the fuel pump eliminating > > > the > > > > > need for a > > > > > > >> regulator or return line. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Happy New Year :-) > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > > > > >Diy_efi mailing list > > > > > > >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > > >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > > > >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Diy_efi mailing list > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > >_______________________________________________ >Diy_efi mailing list >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Fri Jan 5 13:12:22 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 11:12:22 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1168024342.16410.101.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Well - I was thinking 'simpler' - ie with injectors of X capacity subtracting 5-10% of pressure or adding that same would provide a bit of tuning capacity. A CPU and pressure sensor and PWM pump control can likely beat the pants off a mechanical regulator - but that is my thesis and I can certainly be persuaded :-) On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 18:58 +0000, John Gross wrote: > I would say that if you're talking about doing PWM control of the fuel pump, > and controlling it based on fuel demand from the engine, you need to make > sure that the software side of the ECU will allow for quite of bit of > adjustability in the acceleration enrichment. If you wait for either a > specific TPS or a dTPS in order to speed up the pump, if you don't have > enough adjustability in the accel enrichment, you'll find the engine flat on > it's face during tip in. Remember that from the time the TPS registers a > certain delta and the pump begins to speed up, the entire fuel system has to > catch up. You might be surprised by how quickly you'll drop pressure at the > injectors if the pump flow is insufficient. > > John > former Rolex DP Engine Tuner > > > >From: "Steven P. Donegan" > >Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > >Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > >Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 10:45:26 -0800 > > > >And BTW my Mustang has a ~300 lph pump in it now (Holley Black > >professional model) :-) A4 4 bolt mains block at 4.0 bore, 342 cubic > >inches with a nascar stroker crank, 8:1 CR and 15lbs of B&M Roots style > >blower - and of course it's not street legal here in the peoples > >republic of CA... Will likely yank the engine and put it in something > >pre-1972 so I can daily drive it again... > > > >On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 12:26 -0600, cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: > > > I would like to see a PWM controller with a different purpose - say a 2 > >speed version - then you could use a 1000 HP pump on the street w/o beating > >the fuel until it boils. Run the pump, with a regulator, at say 50 lph > >until full throttle or boost starts, then kick it into high...... just > >food for thought. TomS > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Steven P. Donegan" > > > Date: Thursday, January 4, 2007 12:41 > > > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > > > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > > > Well - for track days I simply put dry ice in my fuel cold-can > > > > thing - > > > > that solves most vapor-lock style problems and lasts for a > > > > couple of > > > > hours. Simple low-tech solution to that problem. Given the lack of > > > > response to my original posting I believe providing PWM fuel pump > > > > control and support for a fuel pressure sensor is useful. > > > > > > > > Given that I normally run at Willow Springs or Buttonwillow > > > > during the > > > > winter months temps are not normally a factor anyway. > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 12:23 -0600, cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: > > > > > My "Edelbrick" ProFlow has fuel pressure controlled with > > > > engine vacuum. On track sessions on very hot days, the fuel in > > > > the rails will boil under hard braking - accelerator closed (low > > > > fuel pressure). When you finally step on it (52 psi), nothing > > > > happens until the vapor "recirculates" or is expelled. > > > > Usually takes a second or so. I don't think dead heading > > > > would do any better - probably just need to keep a constant fuel > > > > pressure. > > > > > IMHO, hot fuel should give better economy - easier to vaporize > > > > - for those green members. TomS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ld > > > > > > consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) > > > > However this > > > > > > does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer needs a > > > > way > > > > > > to open > > > > > > a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in the rails? Any > > > > > > ideas on how > > > > > > useful that would be in the 'real world' anyone? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 14:56 +0800, Mike wrote: > > > > > > > Isnt one of the main needs for fuel return the fact the > > > > fuel > > > > > > is heated quite a > > > > > > > bit in the fuel rail whilst its waiting for injection ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course there is a commercial factor as fuel returns > > > > used to > > > > > > be so > > > > > > > much cheaper than any electronics but getting around the > > > > fuel > > > > > > heating etc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also the issue of control feedback is an issue to avoid > > > > > > vapourisation> during hot start, the good thing about return > > > > is > > > > > > this can be flushed out, > > > > > > > and esp for a turbo as a pressure hold tank can "remember" > > > > the last > > > > > > > max pressure and temporarily raise the fuel rail pressure > > > > to > > > > > > this during > > > > > > > start to avoid vapour issues... etc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 07:23 AM 1/4/07, you wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >This sounds cool...is closed loop control of fuel > > > > pressure an > > > > > > oem feature for any new vehicles? Or just something you are > > > > > > trying out? Are you going to use a PI controller? I am > > > > guessing > > > > > > when you snap the throttle open the PI controller should > > > > know > > > > > > about this quite quickly...not wait to see a drop in fuel > > > > > > pressure? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> To add something somewhat useful to the list in this > > > > reply > > > > > > I'll say the > > > > > > > >> Donegan ECM is coming along nicely :-) The input board > > > > is > > > > > > going to fab > > > > > > > >> out at about 3.0 inches by 2.2 inches (exactly matching > > > > the > > > > > > CPU board - > > > > > > > >> ARM based Steve). Inputs designed in are MAP, MAT, > > > > > > Barometric, Coolant, > > > > > > > >> Throttle, Oil pressure/temp, 4 ea O2 sensors, Crank and > > > > Cam > > > > > > position, 2 > > > > > > > >> ea EGT sensors - well pretty much everything everyone > > > > told > > > > > > me should be > > > > > > > >> sensor inputs. Fuel pressure input I'll put on the > > > > 'relay' > > > > > > control board > > > > > > > >> - that will do PWM control of the fuel pump eliminating > > > > the > > > > > > need for a > > > > > > > >> regulator or return line. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Happy New Year :-) > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > > > > > >Diy_efi mailing list > > > > > > > >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > > > >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > > > > >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 jogross3 at hotmail.com Fri Jan 5 14:51:02 2007 From: jogross3 at hotmail.com (John Gross) Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 20:51:02 +0000 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1168024342.16410.101.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: Well we need to make sure that we don't confuse pressure with flow. My understanding through the little bit of the thread I've read so far is that the intent of the PWM fuel pump control was to reduce the flow into the rails, not the pressure. Remember that the fuel delivery through the injector is a square root function of the fuel pressure. If you increase the fuel pressure by a factor of 2, you will only increase the flow by the square root of 2. To double your flow, you need to quadruple your pressure (roughly). Now, if you intend on including a fuel pressure correction factor in your programming, this is not so much of a problem, though the engine would likely shut off if the fuel pressure sensor failed. If you are trying to regulate FLOW with the PWM controller, then you would still want a mechanical regulator on the system. There are tried and true mechanical regulators on the market that can and will hold stable fuel pressure to within about 0.5 psi without breaking a sweat. This type of setup would give you several benefits to using PWM control for pressure. 1 is that you don't have to worry about including a fuel pressure correction factor into the main fuel table. 2 is that your programming is no longer dependent on a sensor that does not go through the same rigorous QA testing and certification that TPS sensors go through. Think about the relative frequency of pressure sensor failures compared to TPS sensor failures. If your PWM idea is designed around saving the pump over time to make it last longer, what you can do if you so choose is to use the mechanical regulator to help you set your operating fuel pressure. At different load conditions, you can adjust the PWM control on the fuel pump and back the pump down until your pressure starts to drop. Remember that most pumps will have a flow rating at free flow and a flow rating at a given psi. You can back your pump speed down until your bypass through the regulator is minimal, which can easily by identified by slowing the pump down until the pressure drops. At part throttle conditions, you will be able to slow the pump down quite a bit before the pressure starts to drop. Once the pressure begins to drop, you no longer have fuel bypassing through the regulator, and you are now at your minimum pump flow to supply the engine at that programmed injector pulse width. If this is the methodology that you choose, you must remember that the pump must speed up quickly in response to throttle tip-in in order to maintain the new minimum flow. You can do this by either allowing large values for your accel enrichment, or by giving yourself a larger safety factor for your minimum flow pump speed (allow more bypass through the regulator), which may make the additional accel enrichment unneccesary (additional in relation to a conventional constant net-flow fuel system). Either way it would be a good idea to have some sort of dV TPS logic built into the PWM control that looks specifically at your rate of throttle change to control your pump speed. My 2 cents John >From: "Steven P. Donegan" >Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU >Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 11:12:22 -0800 > >Well - I was thinking 'simpler' - ie with injectors of X capacity >subtracting 5-10% of pressure or adding that same would provide a bit of >tuning capacity. A CPU and pressure sensor and PWM pump control can >likely beat the pants off a mechanical regulator - but that is my thesis >and I can certainly be persuaded :-) > >On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 18:58 +0000, John Gross wrote: > > I would say that if you're talking about doing PWM control of the fuel >pump, > > and controlling it based on fuel demand from the engine, you need to >make > > sure that the software side of the ECU will allow for quite of bit of > > adjustability in the acceleration enrichment. If you wait for either a > > specific TPS or a dTPS in order to speed up the pump, if you don't have > > enough adjustability in the accel enrichment, you'll find the engine >flat on > > it's face during tip in. Remember that from the time the TPS registers >a > > certain delta and the pump begins to speed up, the entire fuel system >has to > > catch up. You might be surprised by how quickly you'll drop pressure at >the > > injectors if the pump flow is insufficient. > > > > John > > former Rolex DP Engine Tuner > > > > > > >From: "Steven P. Donegan" > > >Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > >Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > > >Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 10:45:26 -0800 > > > > > >And BTW my Mustang has a ~300 lph pump in it now (Holley Black > > >professional model) :-) A4 4 bolt mains block at 4.0 bore, 342 cubic > > >inches with a nascar stroker crank, 8:1 CR and 15lbs of B&M Roots style > > >blower - and of course it's not street legal here in the peoples > > >republic of CA... Will likely yank the engine and put it in something > > >pre-1972 so I can daily drive it again... > > > > > >On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 12:26 -0600, cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: > > > > I would like to see a PWM controller with a different purpose - say >a 2 > > >speed version - then you could use a 1000 HP pump on the street w/o >beating > > >the fuel until it boils. Run the pump, with a regulator, at say 50 lph > > >until full throttle or boost starts, then kick it into high...... just > > >food for thought. TomS > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Steven P. Donegan" > > > > Date: Thursday, January 4, 2007 12:41 > > > > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > > > > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > > Well - for track days I simply put dry ice in my fuel cold-can > > > > > thing - > > > > > that solves most vapor-lock style problems and lasts for a > > > > > couple of > > > > > hours. Simple low-tech solution to that problem. Given the lack of > > > > > response to my original posting I believe providing PWM fuel pump > > > > > control and support for a fuel pressure sensor is useful. > > > > > > > > > > Given that I normally run at Willow Springs or Buttonwillow > > > > > during the > > > > > winter months temps are not normally a factor anyway. > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 12:23 -0600, cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: > > > > > > My "Edelbrick" ProFlow has fuel pressure controlled with > > > > > engine vacuum. On track sessions on very hot days, the fuel in > > > > > the rails will boil under hard braking - accelerator closed (low > > > > > fuel pressure). When you finally step on it (52 psi), nothing > > > > > happens until the vapor "recirculates" or is expelled. > > > > > Usually takes a second or so. I don't think dead heading > > > > > would do any better - probably just need to keep a constant fuel > > > > > pressure. > > > > > > IMHO, hot fuel should give better economy - easier to vaporize > > > > > - for those green members. TomS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ld > > > > > > > consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) > > > > > However this > > > > > > > does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer needs a > > > > > way > > > > > > > to open > > > > > > > a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in the rails? Any > > > > > > > ideas on how > > > > > > > useful that would be in the 'real world' anyone? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 14:56 +0800, Mike wrote: > > > > > > > > Isnt one of the main needs for fuel return the fact the > > > > > fuel > > > > > > > is heated quite a > > > > > > > > bit in the fuel rail whilst its waiting for injection ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course there is a commercial factor as fuel returns > > > > > used to > > > > > > > be so > > > > > > > > much cheaper than any electronics but getting around the > > > > > fuel > > > > > > > heating etc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also the issue of control feedback is an issue to avoid > > > > > > > vapourisation> during hot start, the good thing about return > > > > > is > > > > > > > this can be flushed out, > > > > > > > > and esp for a turbo as a pressure hold tank can "remember" > > > > > the last > > > > > > > > max pressure and temporarily raise the fuel rail pressure > > > > > to > > > > > > > this during > > > > > > > > start to avoid vapour issues... etc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 07:23 AM 1/4/07, you wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >This sounds cool...is closed loop control of fuel > > > > > pressure an > > > > > > > oem feature for any new vehicles? Or just something you are > > > > > > > trying out? Are you going to use a PI controller? I am > > > > > guessing > > > > > > > when you snap the throttle open the PI controller should > > > > > know > > > > > > > about this quite quickly...not wait to see a drop in fuel > > > > > > > pressure? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> To add something somewhat useful to the list in this > > > > > reply > > > > > > > I'll say the > > > > > > > > >> Donegan ECM is coming along nicely :-) The input board > > > > > is > > > > > > > going to fab > > > > > > > > >> out at about 3.0 inches by 2.2 inches (exactly matching > > > > > the > > > > > > > CPU board - > > > > > > > > >> ARM based Steve). Inputs designed in are MAP, MAT, > > > > > > > Barometric, Coolant, > > > > > > > > >> Throttle, Oil pressure/temp, 4 ea O2 sensors, Crank and > > > > > Cam > > > > > > > position, 2 > > > > > > > > >> ea EGT sensors - well pretty much everything everyone > > > > > told > > > > > > > me should be > > > > > > > > >> sensor inputs. Fuel pressure input I'll put on the > > > > > 'relay' > > > > > > > control board > > > > > > > > >> - that will do PWM control of the fuel pump eliminating > > > > > the > > > > > > > need for a > > > > > > > > >> regulator or return line. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Happy New Year :-) > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > >Diy_efi mailing list > > > > > > > > >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > >Subscribe: >http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > > > > > >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > > > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > > > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Diy_efi mailing list > > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > > > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > 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 clshore at yahoo.com Sat Jan 6 13:19:36 2007 From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 11:19:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <731293.2699.qm@web35706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I think the most important justification for ECU control of the fuel pressure is to extend the dynamic range of the injectors on the low side, not the high side. The time required to open and close elctromagnetic injectors is determined mainly by the injector design, and the supply voltage. At very low duty cycles, even P&H injectors have difficulty delivering a consistent amount of fuel. But if you lower the pressure, then you can use a longer pulsewidth to deliver the required amount of fuel, mitigating the issue. The same square-root relationship between pressure and flow that makes it harder to increase the flow by increasing the pressure, works to our advantage when reducing the pressure to deliver accurate fuel on the low end. Of course, there are limits to how far the pressure should be reduced, that depend on the specific injector. But reducing the pressure by just 10% yields nearly 20% reduction in flow, corresponding to a 20% increase in injector 'open-time', ie a longer pulsewidth. This isn't that much of an issue for racecars, but streetcars must idle, and pass emissions tests. Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From efi at dyakron.com Sat Jan 6 14:26:15 2007 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 15:26:15 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU References: <731293.2699.qm@web35706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003b01c731d0$ea488bd0$6501a8c0@IBMm> If that's true, wouldn't the opposite also be true? Is there a formula that one can use to examine this? mv > But reducing the pressure by just 10% yields nearly > 20% reduction in flow, corresponding to a 20% increase > in injector 'open-time', ie a longer pulsewidth. > > This isn't that much of an issue for racecars, but > streetcars must idle, and pass emissions tests. > > Carter Shore > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From clshore at yahoo.com Sat Jan 6 15:12:00 2007 From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 13:12:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <003b01c731d0$ea488bd0$6501a8c0@IBMm> Message-ID: <889066.4800.qm@web35701.mail.mud.yahoo.com> On 2007-01-06 Mike V wrote: > If that's true, wouldn't the opposite also be true? > Is there a formula that one can use to examine this? Mike, here's an article that references the formula: http://www.autospeed.com/cms/article.html?&A=0349 The formula is: new Flow = sqrt(new Pressure/oldPressure) * old Flow It also shows that I'm full of beans; Reduce the pressure by 10%, you get only 5.5% flow reduction: sqrt(0.9) = 0.9486 I still feel that ECU control of the fuel pressure is a useful way to extend the dynamic range of the injectors, but the formula shows that it's not as effective as my first post claimed. Carter __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From five10man at commspeed.net Sat Jan 6 15:57:45 2007 From: five10man at commspeed.net (Tom Visel) Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2007 14:57:45 -0700 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: References: <200701032323.l03NNYd8031285@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au> <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <1167935974.16410.14.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <45A01B59.6080105@commspeed.net> Or set it up for two fully separate fueling strategies: one with a huge honkin' pump running full-bore to feed your monster injectors, and one with the same pump PWM'd or switched through a resistor (a la Taurus SHO and others.) Two mechanical regulators could handle fuel pressure duties. The regulators - set to two different pressures - could have their reference lines individually blocked or switched to the manifold by vacuum solenoids, coincident with the control of fuel pump current. This way, the instantaneous, smooth, and linear nature of mechanical regulation can be preserved, pump life can be maintained without compromising ultimate output, and more precise fuel delivery can be achieved at low loads, especially if the low-load regulator is set to as low a pressure as the injectors can reliably use. TomV cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: >I would like to see a PWM controller with a different purpose - say a 2 speed version - then you could use a 1000 HP pump on the street w/o beating the fuel until it boils. Run the pump, with a regulator, at say 50 lph until full throttle or boost starts, then kick it into high...... just food for thought. TomS > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Steven P. Donegan" >Date: Thursday, January 4, 2007 12:41 >Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > >>Well - for track days I simply put dry ice in my fuel cold-can >>thing - >>that solves most vapor-lock style problems and lasts for a >>couple of >>hours. Simple low-tech solution to that problem. Given the lack of >>response to my original posting I believe providing PWM fuel pump >>control and support for a fuel pressure sensor is useful. >> >>Given that I normally run at Willow Springs or Buttonwillow >>during the >>winter months temps are not normally a factor anyway. >> >>On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 12:23 -0600, cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: >> >> >>>My "Edelbrick" ProFlow has fuel pressure controlled with >>> >>> >>engine vacuum. On track sessions on very hot days, the fuel in >>the rails will boil under hard braking - accelerator closed (low >>fuel pressure). When you finally step on it (52 psi), nothing >>happens until the vapor "recirculates" or is expelled. >>Usually takes a second or so. I don't think dead heading >>would do any better - probably just need to keep a constant fuel >>pressure. >> >> >>>IMHO, hot fuel should give better economy - easier to vaporize >>> >>> >>- for those green members. TomS >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>ld >>> >>> >>>>consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) >>>> >>>> >>However this >> >> >>>>does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer needs a >>>> >>>> >>way >> >> >>>>to open >>>>a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in the rails? Any >>>>ideas on how >>>>useful that would be in the 'real world' anyone? >>>> >>>>On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 14:56 +0800, Mike wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>Isnt one of the main needs for fuel return the fact the >>>>> >>>>> >>fuel >> >> >>>>is heated quite a >>>> >>>> >>>>>bit in the fuel rail whilst its waiting for injection ? >>>>> >>>>>Of course there is a commercial factor as fuel returns >>>>> >>>>> >>used to >> >> >>>>be so >>>> >>>> >>>>>much cheaper than any electronics but getting around the >>>>> >>>>> >>fuel >> >> >>>>heating etc >>>> >>>> >>>>>Also the issue of control feedback is an issue to avoid >>>>> >>>>> >>>>vapourisation> during hot start, the good thing about return >>>> >>>> >>is >> >> >>>>this can be flushed out, >>>> >>>> >>>>>and esp for a turbo as a pressure hold tank can "remember" >>>>> >>>>> >>the last >> >> >>>>>max pressure and temporarily raise the fuel rail pressure >>>>> >>>>> >>to >> >> >>>>this during >>>> >>>> >>>>>start to avoid vapour issues... etc >>>>> >>>>>Regards >>>>> >>>>>Mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>At 07:23 AM 1/4/07, you wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>This sounds cool...is closed loop control of fuel >>>>>> >>>>>> >>pressure an >> >> >>>>oem feature for any new vehicles? Or just something you are >>>>trying out? Are you going to use a PI controller? I am >>>> >>>> >>guessing >> >> >>>>when you snap the throttle open the PI controller should >>>> >>>> >>know >> >> >>>>about this quite quickly...not wait to see a drop in fuel >>>>pressure? >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>To add something somewhat useful to the list in this >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>reply >> >> >>>>I'll say the >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>Donegan ECM is coming along nicely :-) The input board >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>is >> >> >>>>going to fab >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>out at about 3.0 inches by 2.2 inches (exactly matching >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>the >> >> >>>>CPU board - >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>ARM based Steve). Inputs designed in are MAP, MAT, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>Barometric, Coolant, >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>Throttle, Oil pressure/temp, 4 ea O2 sensors, Crank and >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>Cam >> >> >>>>position, 2 >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>ea EGT sensors - well pretty much everything everyone >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>told >> >> >>>>me should be >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>sensor inputs. Fuel pressure input I'll put on the >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>'relay' >> >> >>>>control board >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>- that will do PWM control of the fuel pump eliminating >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>the >> >> >>>>need for a >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>regulator or return line. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Happy New Year :-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>_______________________________________________ >>>>>>Diy_efi mailing list >>>>>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >>>>>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >>>>>>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>_______________________________________________ >>>>>Diy_efi mailing list >>>>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >>>>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >>>>>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi >>>>> >>>>> >>>>_______________________________________________ >>>>Diy_efi mailing list >>>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >>>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >>>>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>Diy_efi mailing list >>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >>>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi >>> >>> >>_______________________________________________ >>Diy_efi mailing list >>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi >> >> >> >_______________________________________________ >Diy_efi mailing list >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > > From efi at dyakron.com Sat Jan 6 17:31:32 2007 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 18:31:32 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU References: <889066.4800.qm@web35701.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000e01c731ea$cc80f460$6501a8c0@IBMm> Great, thanks Carter! That's goo info. Before electronic spreadsheets, that was just another boring formula. Anyone remember Visicalc? - mv > Mike, here's an article that references the formula: > > http://www.autospeed.com/cms/article.html?&A=0349 > > The formula is: > > new Flow = sqrt(new Pressure/oldPressure) * old Flow > From jogross3 at hotmail.com Sat Jan 6 18:03:52 2007 From: jogross3 at hotmail.com (John Gross) Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2007 00:03:52 +0000 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <731293.2699.qm@web35706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Carter, Your points are well taken, and I admit I was thinking more along the lines of a race car than a street car. However, you touched on an issue which could cause potential problems under idle, when you desire precise, repeatable control of your total injector flow, and that is that you can lower the pressure too much for that level of control of fuel for a given injector. This is one of the main reasons why some of the higher horsepower injected engines out there have a tendency to use multilple injectors per cylinder. Sometimes those injectors are of the same size and sometimes there is one that is significantly smaller for low rpm, light load operation. I have seen and dealt with both. IMHO, if you want to run a single injector per cylinder, and want to control the fuel pressure as a function of load, I think you will find better reliability and overall control of the system if you maintain a minimum pressure in the range of 40-45 psi, and increase the pressure under load from that point. However, even in such a situation, if you start with a set of 36 lb-hr injectors at 45 psi, if you are able to increase the pressure under load to 90 psi (which would mean a large amount of fuel bypass at idle, both due to the low flow requirements at or near idle, and because of the reduced pressure, your max effective flow rate will be 51 lb-hr. While this provides much better dynamic range of the injector, there are two things to consider. One is that this strategy, while allowing good precise delivery at or near idle, doesn't do anything to help out the life of your fuel pump, which I've inferred is one reason behind looking into this control method. The second is that you mentioned that the main variables which affect the opening and closing rate of the injector is the design of the injector itself. While this is true, if you are dealing with an injector that is designed to run at 45 psi, and you then subject it to 90 psi rail pressures, your opening and closing events will be much different than at the design pressure. This will obviously effect the total fuel delivery at a given "design" pulse width for the injector. The strategy of increasing the fuel pressure above the design pressure as a function of load for street cars is far from a new one, however. This was the strategy used by Ford on the Mustang SVOs and T-bird Turbo Coupes. They ran a line from the intake manifold to the spring side of the mechanical regulator. The most difficult part of the whole strategy of lowering your pressure at light load and idle conditions is finding that minimum allowable fuel pressure that still gives good, repeatable fuel flows while still maintaining a good enough spray pattern for a high quality combustion event. John >From: Carter Shore >Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU >Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 11:19:36 -0800 (PST) > >I think the most important justification for ECU >control of the fuel pressure is to extend the dynamic >range of the injectors on the low side, not the high >side. >The time required to open and close elctromagnetic >injectors is determined mainly by the injector design, >and the supply voltage. >At very low duty cycles, even P&H injectors have >difficulty delivering a consistent amount of fuel. >But if you lower the pressure, then you can use a >longer pulsewidth to deliver the required amount of >fuel, mitigating the issue. >The same square-root relationship between pressure and >flow that makes it harder to increase the flow by >increasing the pressure, works to our advantage when >reducing the pressure to deliver accurate fuel on the >low end. >Of course, there are limits to how far the pressure >should be reduced, that depend on the specific >injector. >But reducing the pressure by just 10% yields nearly >20% reduction in flow, corresponding to a 20% increase >in injector 'open-time', ie a longer pulsewidth. > >This isn't that much of an issue for racecars, but >streetcars must idle, and pass emissions tests. > >Carter Shore > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Diy_efi mailing list >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From dan at w3eax.umd.edu Sat Jan 6 18:53:17 2007 From: dan at w3eax.umd.edu (dan at w3eax.umd.edu) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 19:53:17 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Diy_efi] air flow meters Message-ID: Hi Guys (and/or Gals), This isn't quite DIY_EFI but I'm sure someone here must know the answer to my question. I have an 85 MR2 (which I'm sure will eventually get some DIY EFI) but for now it has Nippondenso injection which is a licensed copy of Bosch L-Jetronic featuring the standard vane/volumetric airflow meter. Besides the fuel pump control and the air intake temp thermistor, there are four pins: Vb, Vc, Vs, and E2 (ground). The Toyota manual has a schematic that shows something along the lines of: Vb -\/\/\/- Vc -\/\/\/-Vs-/\/\/\/- E2 (where Vs is a wiper of a pot) Toyota claims the resistance between Vs and E2 will "fluctuate" between 20 and 3000 ohms as the flap is openned. Bentley's BMW service manual claimed the resistance should increase "steadily without any flat spots as the sensor flap is moved to the full open position." Bosch's "Automotive Electric/Electronic Systems" claims that "The angular position of the sensor flap is transformed by a potentiometer into a voltage." However... Toyota also claims the resistance between Vc and E2 should be 100-300 ohms, and the resistance between Vb and E2 should be 200-400 ohms. My resistance is 180 and 280 ohms respectively, I don't see how this jives with the 20-3000 ohms claimed earlier. But it gets weirder. I tried pushing the flap in and measuring the resistance between Vs and E2 and it seems to start at about 120 ohms and then increases, but at about 3-400 ohms it starts dropping again, then increasing, then dropping, etc. The most I've ever seen is about 900 ohms and often its only 600 ohms. I opened the meter up, and the inside looked clean and in excellent condition. The potentiometer was a dark material laminated onto a PCB which appeared to be "toothed." It was almost as if there were a bunch of potentiometers in parallel with the wiper moving from one to the next. Its hard to describe. Can anyone explain whats going on with this and what it SHOULD be doing? Is it right, is it wrong and fixable or do I need a different AFM? dan From clshore at yahoo.com Sat Jan 6 19:48:54 2007 From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 17:48:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <889459.80315.qm@web35709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> On 2007-01-06 John Gross wrote: > ... However, you > touched on an issue > which could cause potential problems under idle, > when you desire precise, > repeatable control of your total injector flow, and > that is that you can > lower the pressure too much for that level of > control of fuel for a given > injector. ... > ... if you are dealing with an injector > that is designed to run at > 45 psi, and you then subject it to 90 psi rail > pressures, your opening and > closing events will be much different than at the > design pressure. This > will obviously effect the total fuel delivery at a > given "design" pulse > width for the injector. .... > The most difficult part of the whole strategy of > lowering your pressure at > light load and idle conditions is finding that > minimum allowable fuel > pressure that still gives good, repeatable fuel > flows while still > maintaining a good enough spray pattern for a high > quality combustion event. There is some info out there on injector behavior vs pressure. The 'pressure' is the difference between the fuel supply and the manifold. That's why mechanical fuel regulators are referenced to the manifold, and why fuel pumps on boosted motors must be capable delivering required volume of fuel at fuel supply pressure *plus* max boost. Contemporary automotive injectors have to be operable under a wide range of conditions, from low voltage during cranking, to extremes of temperature, and of fuel pressure. So tweaking pressure by 10%, or even 20%, is not pushing too far. There are lots of folks running in that band without any issues. I cannot think of any reason why an injector would not open at very low pressures, although as you state, atomization could suffer. But many injectors do have a max pressure, above which they *will not* open at all. The extra cost of multiple injectors (and control electronics) is not the big deal to specialist and hobbyist folks like us, it's the performance that we want. So I believe that multiple injectors, either staged, or of different flow rates, are a more straightforward method than fuel pressure control via ECU. Carter __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From ScottyGrover at aol.com Sat Jan 6 19:49:10 2007 From: ScottyGrover at aol.com (ScottyGrover at aol.com) Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 20:49:10 EST Subject: [Diy_efi] air flow meters Message-ID: In a message dated 1/6/2007 4:54:13 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, dan at w3eax.umd.edu writes: Hi Guys (and/or Gals), This isn't quite DIY_EFI but I'm sure someone here must know the answer to my question. I have an 85 MR2 (which I'm sure will eventually get some DIY EFI) but for now it has Nippondenso injection which is a licensed copy of Bosch L-Jetronic featuring the standard vane/volumetric airflow meter. Besides the fuel pump control and the air intake temp thermistor, there are four pins: Vb, Vc, Vs, and E2 (ground). The Toyota manual has a schematic that shows something along the lines of: Vb -\/\/\/- Vc -\/\/\/-Vs-/\/\/\/- E2 (where Vs is a wiper of a pot) Toyota claims the resistance between Vs and E2 will "fluctuate" between 20 and 3000 ohms as the flap is openned. Bentley's BMW service manual claimed the resistance should increase "steadily without any flat spots as the sensor flap is moved to the full open position." Bosch's "Automotive Electric/Electronic Systems" claims that "The angular position of the sensor flap is transformed by a potentiometer into a voltage." However... Toyota also claims the resistance between Vc and E2 should be 100-300 ohms, and the resistance between Vb and E2 should be 200-400 ohms. My resistance is 180 and 280 ohms respectively, I don't see how this jives with the 20-3000 ohms claimed earlier. But it gets weirder. I tried pushing the flap in and measuring the resistance between Vs and E2 and it seems to start at about 120 ohms and then increases, but at about 3-400 ohms it starts dropping again, then increasing, then dropping, etc. The most I've ever seen is about 900 ohms and often its only 600 ohms. I opened the meter up, and the inside looked clean and in excellent condition. The potentiometer was a dark material laminated onto a PCB which appeared to be "toothed." It was almost as if there were a bunch of potentiometers in parallel with the wiper moving from one to the next. Its hard to describe. Can anyone explain whats going on with this and what it SHOULD be doing? Is it right, is it wrong and fixable or do I need a different AFM? dan Dan, You've got it exactly right, the voltage vs. CFM is a sawtooth; if you can find a repair manual for the Toyota EFI--in your public library maybe--you can find a one-line diagram of the thing; oddly, if you supply 12VDC and ground to the thing and use a ruler or some other graduated device to push back the flap, the sawtooth goes away and you get something like a logarithmic voltage curve rather like a RC voltage curve--which you may be able to compensate for. I'm using this type of measuring device in my own DIY-EFI system; but I'm kinda old-fashioned--no computer chip, I'm doing it with integrated circuits--and it works on the breadboard but uses about 25 or 30 IC's to get the job done; and doesn't use any ROM of RAM, just counter circuits to transform digital words to elapsed-time to feed the injectors. Believe me, if I knew how to translate my circuit diagram into a microcontroller program, I would; would use fewer IC's. Scotty From donegan at donegan.org Sat Jan 6 19:57:28 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2007 17:57:28 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <889459.80315.qm@web35709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <889459.80315.qm@web35709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1168135048.3518.4.camel@wopr.donegan.org> While I agree that multiple injectors (2 per cylinder) is absolutely the correct way to go. However 3 of the vehicles I intend to put this system on do not have the physical real estate (supercharged ford and harley) to fit 2 injectors or on the camaro - 2 injectors will be an instant tip off to the California smog police :-( In any case it is only one driver FET and some source code to support PWM so I'll make it available. On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 17:48 -0800, Carter Shore wrote: > On 2007-01-06 John Gross wrote: > > > ... However, you > > touched on an issue > > which could cause potential problems under idle, > > when you desire precise, > > repeatable control of your total injector flow, and > > that is that you can > > lower the pressure too much for that level of > > control of fuel for a given > > injector. ... > > > ... if you are dealing with an injector > > that is designed to run at > > 45 psi, and you then subject it to 90 psi rail > > pressures, your opening and > > closing events will be much different than at the > > design pressure. This > > will obviously effect the total fuel delivery at a > > given "design" pulse > > width for the injector. > .... > > The most difficult part of the whole strategy of > > lowering your pressure at > > light load and idle conditions is finding that > > minimum allowable fuel > > pressure that still gives good, repeatable fuel > > flows while still > > maintaining a good enough spray pattern for a high > > quality combustion event. > > There is some info out there on injector behavior vs > pressure. The 'pressure' is the difference between the > fuel supply and the manifold. That's why mechanical > fuel regulators are referenced to the manifold, and > why fuel pumps on boosted motors must be capable > delivering required volume of fuel at fuel supply > pressure *plus* max boost. > > Contemporary automotive injectors have to be operable > under a wide range of conditions, from low voltage > during cranking, to extremes of temperature, and of > fuel pressure. > > So tweaking pressure by 10%, or even 20%, is not > pushing too far. There are lots of folks running in > that band without any issues. > > I cannot think of any reason why an injector would not > open at very low pressures, although as you state, > atomization could suffer. > > But many injectors do have a max pressure, above which > they *will not* open at all. > > The extra cost of multiple injectors (and control > electronics) is not the big deal to specialist and > hobbyist folks like us, it's the performance that we > want. > So I believe that multiple injectors, either staged, > or of different flow rates, are a more straightforward > method than fuel pressure control via ECU. > > Carter > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From bearbvd at mindspring.com Sat Jan 6 23:06:30 2007 From: bearbvd at mindspring.com (bearbvd at mindspring.com) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 00:06:30 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Message-ID: <380-220071075630844@M2W016.mail2web.com> Original Message: ----------------- From: John Gross jogross3 at hotmail.com Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2007 00:03:52 +0000 To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU All of which changes if you use air atomization--- :-) Greg Carter, Your points are well taken, and I admit I was thinking more along the lines of a race car than a street car. However, you touched on an issue which could cause potential problems under idle, when you desire precise, repeatable control of your total injector flow, and that is that you can lower the pressure too much for that level of control of fuel for a given injector. This is one of the main reasons why some of the higher horsepower injected engines out there have a tendency to use multilple injectors per cylinder. Sometimes those injectors are of the same size and sometimes there is one that is significantly smaller for low rpm, light load operation. I have seen and dealt with both. IMHO, if you want to run a single injector per cylinder, and want to control the fuel pressure as a function of load, I think you will find better reliability and overall control of the system if you maintain a minimum pressure in the range of 40-45 psi, and increase the pressure under load from that point. However, even in such a situation, if you start with a set of 36 lb-hr injectors at 45 psi, if you are able to increase the pressure under load to 90 psi (which would mean a large amount of fuel bypass at idle, both due to the low flow requirements at or near idle, and because of the reduced pressure, your max effective flow rate will be 51 lb-hr. While this provides much better dynamic range of the injector, there are two things to consider. One is that this strategy, while allowing good precise delivery at or near idle, doesn't do anything to help out the life of your fuel pump, which I've inferred is one reason behind looking into this control method. The second is that you mentioned that the main variables which affect the opening and closing rate of the injector is the design of the injector itself. While this is true, if you are dealing with an injector that is designed to run at 45 psi, and you then subject it to 90 psi rail pressures, your opening and closing events will be much different than at the design pressure. This will obviously effect the total fuel delivery at a given "design" pulse width for the injector. The strategy of increasing the fuel pressure above the design pressure as a function of load for street cars is far from a new one, however. This was the strategy used by Ford on the Mustang SVOs and T-bird Turbo Coupes. They ran a line from the intake manifold to the spring side of the mechanical regulator. The most difficult part of the whole strategy of lowering your pressure at light load and idle conditions is finding that minimum allowable fuel pressure that still gives good, repeatable fuel flows while still maintaining a good enough spray pattern for a high quality combustion event. John >From: Carter Shore >Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU >Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 11:19:36 -0800 (PST) > >I think the most important justification for ECU >control of the fuel pressure is to extend the dynamic >range of the injectors on the low side, not the high >side. >The time required to open and close elctromagnetic >injectors is determined mainly by the injector design, >and the supply voltage. >At very low duty cycles, even P&H injectors have >difficulty delivering a consistent amount of fuel. >But if you lower the pressure, then you can use a >longer pulsewidth to deliver the required amount of >fuel, mitigating the issue. >The same square-root relationship between pressure and >flow that makes it harder to increase the flow by >increasing the pressure, works to our advantage when >reducing the pressure to deliver accurate fuel on the >low end. >Of course, there are limits to how far the pressure >should be reduced, that depend on the specific >injector. >But reducing the pressure by just 10% yields nearly >20% reduction in flow, corresponding to a 20% increase >in injector 'open-time', ie a longer pulsewidth. > >This isn't that much of an issue for racecars, but >streetcars must idle, and pass emissions tests. > >Carter Shore > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Diy_efi mailing list >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From bearbvd at mindspring.com Sat Jan 6 23:11:10 2007 From: bearbvd at mindspring.com (bearbvd at mindspring.com) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 00:11:10 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Message-ID: <380-2200710751110378@M2W037.mail2web.com> Original Message: ----------------- From: Carter Shore clshore at yahoo.com Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 17:48:54 -0800 (PST) To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU s you state, atomization could suffer. But many injectors do have a max pressure, above which they *will not* open at all. The extra cost of multiple injectors (and control electronics) is not the big deal to specialist and hobbyist folks like us, it's the performance that we want. So I believe that multiple injectors, either staged, or of different flow rates, are a more straightforward method than fuel pressure control via ECU. Carter Do I hear 'BOTH' ??? (staged + variable rail pressure) :-) Greg (dynamic range is a wonderful thing, as are mechanically driven high pressure fuel pumps, since the pump's volume output at least varies with engine speed !!) -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From bearbvd at mindspring.com Sat Jan 6 23:49:37 2007 From: bearbvd at mindspring.com (bearbvd at mindspring.com) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 00:49:37 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Message-ID: <380-2200710754937381@M2W031.mail2web.com> Original Message: ----------------- From: Steven P. Donegan donegan at donegan.org Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 10:40:53 -0800 To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 12:23 -0600, cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: > > > My "Edelbrick" ProFlow has fuel pressure controlled with > > engine vacuum. On track sessions on very hot days, the fuel in > > the rails will boil under hard braking - accelerator closed (low > > fuel pressure). When you finally step on it (52 psi), nothing > > happens until the vapor "recirculates" or is expelled. > > Usually takes a second or so. I don't think dead heading > > would do any better - probably just need to keep a constant fuel > > pressure. > > > IMHO, hot fuel should give better economy - easier to vaporize > > - for those green members. TomS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ld > > > > consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) > > However this > > > > does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer needs a > > way > > > > to open > > > > a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in the rails? Any > > > > ideas on how > > > > useful that would be in the 'real world' anyone? > > > > First-- plumb the rails as with any 'two phase' (gas/liquid) piping system. Industrial refrigeration piping practice is a good example. Injectors pointed downward--where you want liquid. Uniform slope to one high point, so that no vapor is 'trapped' anywhere but at the high point. Finally--put a fixed size bypass/return orifice--about a .045" Holley jet will do FINE--at the HIGH point. It's utterly astounding how FAST a LOT of vapor will go through an orifice that size !! Greg -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From clshore at yahoo.com Sun Jan 7 11:18:28 2007 From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 09:18:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <380-2200710751110378@M2W037.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <151712.39385.qm@web35703.mail.mud.yahoo.com> On 2007-01-07 "bearbvd at mindspring.com" wrote: > Do I hear 'BOTH' ??? (staged + variable rail > pressure) :-) > > Greg (dynamic range is a wonderful thing, as are > mechanically driven high > pressure fuel pumps, since the pump's volume output > at least varies with > engine speed !!) > I wasn't suggesting both, but it certainly could be done. Whether it should be done .....? And despite my preference for multi-injectors, PWM for fuel pressure control is still a good solution to overcome the packaging and regulatory issues mentioned. Carter __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From niche at iinet.net.au Sun Jan 7 13:57:38 2007 From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 03:57:38 +0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <151712.39385.qm@web35703.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <380-2200710751110378@M2W037.mail2web.com> <151712.39385.qm@web35703.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20070108035320.026ea490@iinet.net.au>> At 01:18 AM 1/8/07, Carter wrote: >And despite my preference for multi-injectors, PWM for >fuel pressure control is still a good solution to >overcome the packaging and regulatory issues >mentioned. mmmm, Think I'd prefer (from a control systems perspective) a fuel pump controller geared to engine speed (say 8 speeds) with a PWM fuel pressure regulator (proportional valve type) close to the fuel rail in a classical return system - my educated gut feeling is that this would be rather more stable than a PWM driven fuel pump and dead end piping... 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 Special, 60KVA UPS From clshore at yahoo.com Sun Jan 7 13:34:40 2007 From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 11:34:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20070108035320.026ea490@iinet.net.au>> Message-ID: <702589.25201.qm@web35707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> On 207-01-08 Mike wrote: > mmmm, Think I'd prefer (from a control systems > perspective) a fuel pump controller geared to engine > speed (say 8 speeds) with a PWM fuel pressure > regulator > (proportional valve type) close to the fuel rail in > a classical > return system - my educated gut feeling is that this > would > be rather more stable than a PWM driven fuel pump > and > dead end piping... When you say 'geared to', do you mean mechanically coupled? No rules that say the pressure pump can't be close to, or right next to, the fuel rail. In fact, for retrofitting, that can make things easier. That eliminates the 'dead end piping' issue. Carter __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From jimbutterfield at yahoo.com Sun Jan 7 17:28:26 2007 From: jimbutterfield at yahoo.com (Jim Butterfield) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 15:28:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] test, please read In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <273119.92451.qm@web36706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> came thru for me... Steve Ravet wrote: It seems that the guy that hosts diy-efi.org let the domain expire and someone else has taken it. Not sure what the implications are but I think the lists should still be working. If you don't get this email, then that means they aren't working. --steve ------------------- Steve Ravet ARM steve.ravet at arm.com _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au Sun Jan 7 18:25:17 2007 From: bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au (Bernd Felsche) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 09:25:17 +0900 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <702589.25201.qm@web35707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <702589.25201.qm@web35707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200701080925.17630@death.2.spammers> On Monday 08 January 2007 04:34, Carter Shore wrote: > On 207-01-08 Mike wrote: > > mmmm, Think I'd prefer (from a control systems perspective) a > > fuel pump controller geared to engine speed (say 8 speeds) with > > a PWM fuel pressure regulator (proportional valve type) close to > > the fuel rail in a classical return system - my educated gut > > feeling is that this would be rather more stable than a PWM > > driven fuel pump and dead end piping... > When you say 'geared to', do you mean mechanically > coupled? Probably not... > No rules that say the pressure pump can't be close to, Try the rule of not operating the pump in an environment hotter than allowed by its specifications. :-) It is possible to build pumps that'll tolerate under-bonnet temperatures but off-the-shelf ones, designed for under-tank or under-body mounting, typically don't. > or right next to, the fuel rail. In fact, for Or "in" the fuel rail. > retrofitting, that can make things easier. That > eliminates the 'dead end piping' issue. Diesel engines have worked like that for ages... especially the ones with unit injector pumps. Heat is more of a problem with gasoline than diesel; especially heat-soak. However, the feed pump from the fuel tank can be set up to flush the high-pressure pump and rail before starting. There are half a dozen ways that I can immediately think of doing that. There are a few niggly problems about there being enough of a fluid pressure damper in the system so that pulsations of fuel pressure from the pump and the injectors don't wreak havoc with the fuel pressure control system and to ensure a consistent (intended) fuel pressure at the injectors. There is sometimes a pressure accummulator between the high pressure pump and the injectors, and in some systems a separate damper to handly dynamic fluctuations (typically when the fuel rail volume isn't "huge" wrt injected quantity). -- /"\ 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 Jan 8 02:38:26 2007 From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 16:38:26 +0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <702589.25201.qm@web35707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <7.0.1.0.0.20070108035320.026ea490@iinet.net.au> <702589.25201.qm@web35707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20070108162038.02a99bd0@iinet.net.au>> At 03:34 AM 1/8/07, you wrote: >When you say 'geared to', do you mean mechanically >coupled? no :) I was being figurative, I generally like PWM approaches and "connecting" the PWM drive to a engine speed coefficient derived factor might result in less pump wear and reduce heating etc. I have a fairly large new pump thats almost 5 times the rating of my present unit but has no built-in one way valve and uses about twice as much current, so I was musing on that with some PWM drive as pre-emptive flow control etc and my email might have been me thinking 'out loud' ;) >No rules that say the pressure pump can't be close to, >or right next to, the fuel rail. In fact, for >retrofitting, that can make things easier. That >eliminates the 'dead end piping' issue. Um, having it closer might make matters so much worse, I can visualise all sorts of sampled data system oscillations getting second and third order effects, which would not be trivial to handle, but then again fluid is mostly incompressible, the length of piping in conventional setup might be assisting damping of fuel/injector pulses. As Bernd has suggested in reply to your post and earlier - it just seems a heck of a hard way to do it with all sorts of added complications for something that already works ! The dead piping elimination you suggest becomes a nonsequeter ie. Why not just leave it as return type feed, ie There is a logical discontinuity in approach if you want to move the pump to get around control issues but then make it (local) return anyway (?), and in any case wouldnt that heat the fuel more as it cant 'sink' heat through the main tank. ie. It doesnt follow Donegan's intention just shifts the mechanics around and adds another potential problem, you'd still need some pump to get it from the tank to the engine bay esp to avvoid cavitation issues or even Priming ( !) Maybe I missed the point of your comment but I cant see at moment what else you could have been driving at ? The good thing about a return type with PWMing the pump and having a proportional valve type fuel pressure regulator (controlled or trimmed by the same controller as for the pump) is it can extend and add some intelligence to the existing return system which already works quite well but adds option of less wear and tear on pump and better control of fuel vapourisation and no need for any canister to hold last pressure and its associated valve/solenoid, In effect adding an electronic/processing "trim" to an existing reliable and effective system... ps: Have updated my web page, starting to gear my fuserail product to any other earlier car renovations and street car models as well as more Holden models where the existing fuse rail is relocated in cabin, when the nice looking new parts turn up this week, see head of web page from link below :) 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 niche at iinet.net.au Mon Jan 8 02:39:37 2007 From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 16:39:37 +0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] test, please read In-Reply-To: <273119.92451.qm@web36706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <273119.92451.qm@web36706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20070108163902.02aaaeb0@iinet.net.au>> Yes works for me too, all the way from australia, those pesky electrons seem to just *want* to get through :o) cheers At 07:28 AM 1/8/07, you wrote: >came thru for me... > >Steve Ravet wrote: It seems that the guy that hosts diy-efi.org let the domain expire and >someone else has taken it. Not sure what the implications are but I >think the lists should still be working. If you don't get this email, >then that means they aren't working. > >--steve > >------------------- >Steve Ravet >ARM >steve.ravet at arm.com >_______________________________________________ >Diy_efi mailing list >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > __________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Diy_efi mailing list >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi 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 bearbvd at mindspring.com Mon Jan 8 02:04:24 2007 From: bearbvd at mindspring.com (bearbvd at mindspring.com) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 03:04:24 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Message-ID: <380-220071188424495@M2W003.mail2web.com> Original Message: ----------------- From: Bernd Felsche bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au > When you say 'geared to', do you mean mechanically > coupled? Probably not... > No rules that say the pressure pump can't be close to, Try the rule of not operating the pump in an environment hotter than allowed by its specifications. :-) It is possible to build pumps that'll tolerate under-bonnet temperatures but off-the-shelf ones, designed for under-tank or under-body mounting, typically don't. > or right next to, the fuel rail. In fact, for Or "in" the fuel rail. > retrofitting, that can make things easier. That > eliminates the 'dead end piping' issue. Diesel engines have worked like that for ages... especially the ones with unit injector pumps. Heat is more of a problem with gasoline than diesel; especially heat-soak. However, the feed pump from the fuel tank can be set up to flush the high-pressure pump and rail before starting. There are half a dozen ways that I can immediately think of doing that. There are a few niggly problems about there being enough of a fluid pressure damper in the system so that pulsations of fuel pressure from the pump and the injectors don't wreak havoc with the fuel pressure control system and to ensure a consistent (intended) fuel pressure at the injectors. There is sometimes a pressure accummulator between the high pressure pump and the injectors, and in some systems a separate damper to handly dynamic fluctuations (typically when the fuel rail volume isn't "huge" wrt injected quantity). The potential problems from fuel piping (and rail) dynamics are HARDLY 'niggling'!! NOR are the needs to pay attention to keeping vapor OUT of the piping and rails and for providing adequate NPSH to the high pressure pump under ALL possible operating conditions. Those who do not know the words behind the above 'NPSH' acronym, AND _FULLY_ understand their meaning, but who PLAY with the design of such systems anyway, quite likely are fully deserving of ALL of the negative consequences of doing so --after all, there are even reputable vehicle MANUFACTURERS who reaped serious negative consequences from such ignorance in the past!!! (Volvo's application of D-jetronic, for instance !!) Greg -- /"\ 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 Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From niche at iinet.net.au Mon Jan 8 03:42:30 2007 From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 17:42:30 +0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <380-220071188424495@M2W003.mail2web.com> References: <380-220071188424495@M2W003.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20070108174135.02733610@iinet.net.au>> Mate, your posts are quite difficult to read as it seems to be missing the quote prefix and cant easily tell where your comments start and previous posters finish... Any chance you can amend your email client ? regards mike At 04:04 PM 1/8/07, you wrote: >Original Message: >----------------- >From: Bernd Felsche bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au > >> When you say 'geared to', do you mean mechanically >> coupled? > >Probably not... > >> No rules that say the pressure pump can't be close to, > >Try the rule of not operating the pump in an environment hotter than >allowed by its specifications. :-) > >It is possible to build pumps that'll tolerate under-bonnet >temperatures but off-the-shelf ones, designed for under-tank or >under-body mounting, typically don't. > >> or right next to, the fuel rail. In fact, for > >Or "in" the fuel rail. > >> retrofitting, that can make things easier. That >> eliminates the 'dead end piping' issue. > >Diesel engines have worked like that for ages... especially the ones >with unit injector pumps. > >Heat is more of a problem with gasoline than diesel; especially >heat-soak. However, the feed pump from the fuel tank can be set up >to flush the high-pressure pump and rail before starting. There are >half a dozen ways that I can immediately think of doing that. > >There are a few niggly problems about there being enough of a fluid >pressure damper in the system so that pulsations of fuel pressure >from the pump and the injectors don't wreak havoc with the fuel >pressure control system and to ensure a consistent (intended) fuel >pressure at the injectors. There is sometimes a pressure >accummulator between the high pressure pump and the injectors, and >in some systems a separate damper to handly dynamic fluctuations >(typically when the fuel rail volume isn't "huge" wrt injected >quantity). > >The potential problems from fuel piping (and rail) dynamics are HARDLY >'niggling'!! > >NOR are the needs to pay attention to keeping vapor OUT of the piping and >rails and for providing adequate NPSH to the high pressure pump under ALL >possible operating conditions. > >Those who do not know the words behind the above 'NPSH' acronym, AND >_FULLY_ understand their meaning, but who PLAY with the design of such >systems anyway, quite likely are fully deserving of ALL of the negative >consequences of doing so --after all, there are even reputable vehicle >MANUFACTURERS who reaped serious negative consequences from such ignorance >in the past!!! (Volvo's application of D-jetronic, for instance !!) > >Greg > >-- >/"\ 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 >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >mail2web - Check your email from the web at >http://mail2web.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 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 hoptona at gmail.com Mon Jan 8 08:03:20 2007 From: hoptona at gmail.com (Andrew Hopton) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 00:33:20 +1030 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000501c7332d$c568c0b0$0201010a@TOSHIBAM500> Hi, I can also help with programming in C. Happy to pitch in if needed. Andrew. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of TomC Sent: Friday, 5 January 2007 5:04 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Let me know when some programming is required. I've programmed in C for the last 20 years. Tom -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Steven P. Donegan Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:34 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Well, the electronics are actually fairly easy - the 4 O2 sensor inputs I put in the current design will handle narrow or wide band injectors. Outputs to control tranny/other stuff - interesting and perhaps if a 'real' application arises (ie explain exactly what you want/need) I'll add it. Not hard to add things to my design in hardware and software is C so I expect folks will pitch in when the time comes. And thank you very much for the feedback! On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 20:29 -0500, Jay Rabe wrote: > On 1/4/07, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > > > I have not yet added OBDII to my project - it appears that I have to > > if it is going to be plug compatable for my Z28 so that will likely > > happen. My intent for this project is a universal EFI/ECM/PCM/MSD > > box - something useful on any engine up to 8 cylinders. If it lacks > > any inputs or outputs tell me and I'll add them :-) > > > A few things... > > If you build this ecu only for a returnless fuel system, this limits what > fuel pumps you can use. http://fuel-pumps.net/fuelpumpsfaq7.html#9 > When writing the software i assume you'd give the option of a normal > relay powered style fuel pump. > > So all this below would be in my dream standalone computer. This is mostly > way over the top. > > One thing i've always wanted to see implimented is something to make fueling > a variable vane (variable ar) turbo engine "easy" to control fuel. I would > think an extra pressure transducer to monitor exhaust pressure before > it goes into the turbo would be very helpful to give a new > compensation for MAP > systems. Even MAF systems could probably benefit from this on the ignition > side of things. Yeah these are not common, but i think having the > ability to fuel them properly will help their popularity and they are > being used by > a few automakers. This should help them become more common soon. Also > some kind of circuitry to control the variable actuator. Maybe a > potentiometer to monitor this? Or, maybe just the actuator > potentiometer is > enough for the fuel/ign compensation? > > Another thing would be variable cam(s) control. I've been dreaming of > a worm gear "solenoid" controled cam timing adjuster for timing belt engines. > It would probably need a potentiometer in it to know where it is. > This could be very beneficial if done properly. I know, it would be > tough to make > an adjuster blah, blah, it would be cool tho... I know you can tell > where the timing is from the crank signal vs. the cam signal, but i like > potentiometers. Grab a meter and see what position its by its voltage > instead of an oscilloscope and all that fun. > > If you could make it OBD-II capable, you just might be building the > next step in standalone computers. 96 and newer cars who have to pass > OBD port only emissions could actually pass emissions. It would probably never get > EPA certified if they knew it was going to be tunable. OBD II port > replicators are illegal... Maybe leak some software after the > release??? > > A self learn circuit for fuel/ignition would be cool. Id imagine it > would be mostly coding tho... > > Wideband capability? Not easy, but makes tuning very nice... > > Boost control? ...gear variable? > > Traction control input or traction control? Maybe like a rev > limiter... Maybe an adjustable slip allowance... > > Launch control? > > Full throttle shift? > > Software/hardware to allow a secondary set of injectors? > > Anti lag? there is misfire and "jet engine" style > > I wish i knew more about coding and electronics... > > Jay > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Mon Jan 8 09:01:18 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven Donegan) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 07:01:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <000501c7332d$c568c0b0$0201010a@TOSHIBAM500> Message-ID: <20070108150118.71013.qmail@web805.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I'm working on the basic circuit(s) right now although I have the FreeRTOS real time OS already running on an LPC2106 - need to do minor things to that port to make it run on the LPC2138 but I'll handle that to start off with. Anyone interested in assisting will be heartily welcomed :-) Working on an 8 channel Ion sensing board right now... Andrew Hopton wrote: Hi, I can also help with programming in C. Happy to pitch in if needed. Andrew. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of TomC Sent: Friday, 5 January 2007 5:04 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Let me know when some programming is required. I've programmed in C for the last 20 years. Tom -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Steven P. Donegan Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:34 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Well, the electronics are actually fairly easy - the 4 O2 sensor inputs I put in the current design will handle narrow or wide band injectors. Outputs to control tranny/other stuff - interesting and perhaps if a 'real' application arises (ie explain exactly what you want/need) I'll add it. Not hard to add things to my design in hardware and software is C so I expect folks will pitch in when the time comes. And thank you very much for the feedback! On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 20:29 -0500, Jay Rabe wrote: > On 1/4/07, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > > > I have not yet added OBDII to my project - it appears that I have to > > if it is going to be plug compatable for my Z28 so that will likely > > happen. My intent for this project is a universal EFI/ECM/PCM/MSD > > box - something useful on any engine up to 8 cylinders. If it lacks > > any inputs or outputs tell me and I'll add them :-) > > > A few things... > > If you build this ecu only for a returnless fuel system, this limits what > fuel pumps you can use. http://fuel-pumps.net/fuelpumpsfaq7.html#9 > When writing the software i assume you'd give the option of a normal > relay powered style fuel pump. > > So all this below would be in my dream standalone computer. This is mostly > way over the top. > > One thing i've always wanted to see implimented is something to make fueling > a variable vane (variable ar) turbo engine "easy" to control fuel. I would > think an extra pressure transducer to monitor exhaust pressure before > it goes into the turbo would be very helpful to give a new > compensation for MAP > systems. Even MAF systems could probably benefit from this on the ignition > side of things. Yeah these are not common, but i think having the > ability to fuel them properly will help their popularity and they are > being used by > a few automakers. This should help them become more common soon. Also > some kind of circuitry to control the variable actuator. Maybe a > potentiometer to monitor this? Or, maybe just the actuator > potentiometer is > enough for the fuel/ign compensation? > > Another thing would be variable cam(s) control. I've been dreaming of > a worm gear "solenoid" controled cam timing adjuster for timing belt engines. > It would probably need a potentiometer in it to know where it is. > This could be very beneficial if done properly. I know, it would be > tough to make > an adjuster blah, blah, it would be cool tho... I know you can tell > where the timing is from the crank signal vs. the cam signal, but i like > potentiometers. Grab a meter and see what position its by its voltage > instead of an oscilloscope and all that fun. > > If you could make it OBD-II capable, you just might be building the > next step in standalone computers. 96 and newer cars who have to pass > OBD port only emissions could actually pass emissions. It would probably never get > EPA certified if they knew it was going to be tunable. OBD II port > replicators are illegal... Maybe leak some software after the > release??? > > A self learn circuit for fuel/ignition would be cool. Id imagine it > would be mostly coding tho... > > Wideband capability? Not easy, but makes tuning very nice... > > Boost control? ...gear variable? > > Traction control input or traction control? Maybe like a rev > limiter... Maybe an adjustable slip allowance... > > Launch control? > > Full throttle shift? > > Software/hardware to allow a secondary set of injectors? > > Anti lag? there is misfire and "jet engine" style > > I wish i knew more about coding and electronics... > > Jay > _______________________________________________ > 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 A6intruder at myo-p.com Mon Jan 8 09:40:33 2007 From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 10:40:33 -0500 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <20070108150118.71013.qmail@web805.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Please tell us more about your ion sensing system... Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Steven Donegan Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:01 AM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU I'm working on the basic circuit(s) right now although I have the FreeRTOS real time OS already running on an LPC2106 - need to do minor things to that port to make it run on the LPC2138 but I'll handle that to start off with. Anyone interested in assisting will be heartily welcomed :-) Working on an 8 channel Ion sensing board right now... Andrew Hopton wrote: Hi, I can also help with programming in C. Happy to pitch in if needed. Andrew. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of TomC Sent: Friday, 5 January 2007 5:04 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Let me know when some programming is required. I've programmed in C for the last 20 years. Tom -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Steven P. Donegan Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:34 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Well, the electronics are actually fairly easy - the 4 O2 sensor inputs I put in the current design will handle narrow or wide band injectors. Outputs to control tranny/other stuff - interesting and perhaps if a 'real' application arises (ie explain exactly what you want/need) I'll add it. Not hard to add things to my design in hardware and software is C so I expect folks will pitch in when the time comes. And thank you very much for the feedback! On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 20:29 -0500, Jay Rabe wrote: > On 1/4/07, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > > > I have not yet added OBDII to my project - it appears that I have to > > if it is going to be plug compatable for my Z28 so that will likely > > happen. My intent for this project is a universal EFI/ECM/PCM/MSD > > box - something useful on any engine up to 8 cylinders. If it lacks > > any inputs or outputs tell me and I'll add them :-) > > > A few things... > > If you build this ecu only for a returnless fuel system, this limits what > fuel pumps you can use. http://fuel-pumps.net/fuelpumpsfaq7.html#9 > When writing the software i assume you'd give the option of a normal > relay powered style fuel pump. > > So all this below would be in my dream standalone computer. This is mostly > way over the top. > > One thing i've always wanted to see implimented is something to make fueling > a variable vane (variable ar) turbo engine "easy" to control fuel. I would > think an extra pressure transducer to monitor exhaust pressure before > it goes into the turbo would be very helpful to give a new > compensation for MAP > systems. Even MAF systems could probably benefit from this on the ignition > side of things. Yeah these are not common, but i think having the > ability to fuel them properly will help their popularity and they are > being used by > a few automakers. This should help them become more common soon. Also > some kind of circuitry to control the variable actuator. Maybe a > potentiometer to monitor this? Or, maybe just the actuator > potentiometer is > enough for the fuel/ign compensation? > > Another thing would be variable cam(s) control. I've been dreaming of > a worm gear "solenoid" controled cam timing adjuster for timing belt engines. > It would probably need a potentiometer in it to know where it is. > This could be very beneficial if done properly. I know, it would be > tough to make > an adjuster blah, blah, it would be cool tho... I know you can tell > where the timing is from the crank signal vs. the cam signal, but i like > potentiometers. Grab a meter and see what position its by its voltage > instead of an oscilloscope and all that fun. > > If you could make it OBD-II capable, you just might be building the > next step in standalone computers. 96 and newer cars who have to pass > OBD port only emissions could actually pass emissions. It would probably never get > EPA certified if they knew it was going to be tunable. OBD II port > replicators are illegal... Maybe leak some software after the > release??? > > A self learn circuit for fuel/ignition would be cool. Id imagine it > would be mostly coding tho... > > Wideband capability? Not easy, but makes tuning very nice... > > Boost control? ...gear variable? > > Traction control input or traction control? Maybe like a rev > limiter... Maybe an adjustable slip allowance... > > Launch control? > > Full throttle shift? > > Software/hardware to allow a secondary set of injectors? > > Anti lag? there is misfire and "jet engine" style > > I wish i knew more about coding and electronics... > > Jay > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Mon Jan 8 09:53:40 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven Donegan) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 07:53:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20070108155340.32250.qmail@web810.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com> The hardware portion is simple - a current mirror and high voltage supply. The software may have to be done by individuals for their own non-profit use as ion sensing for the purpose of engine optimization appears to be a patented idea. Anyone want to ask the patent holders how they would feel about hobbyist use of their patented ideas? Daniel Nicoson wrote: Please tell us more about your ion sensing system... Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Steven Donegan Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:01 AM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU I'm working on the basic circuit(s) right now although I have the FreeRTOS real time OS already running on an LPC2106 - need to do minor things to that port to make it run on the LPC2138 but I'll handle that to start off with. Anyone interested in assisting will be heartily welcomed :-) Working on an 8 channel Ion sensing board right now... Andrew Hopton wrote: Hi, I can also help with programming in C. Happy to pitch in if needed. Andrew. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of TomC Sent: Friday, 5 January 2007 5:04 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Let me know when some programming is required. I've programmed in C for the last 20 years. Tom -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Steven P. Donegan Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:34 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Well, the electronics are actually fairly easy - the 4 O2 sensor inputs I put in the current design will handle narrow or wide band injectors. Outputs to control tranny/other stuff - interesting and perhaps if a 'real' application arises (ie explain exactly what you want/need) I'll add it. Not hard to add things to my design in hardware and software is C so I expect folks will pitch in when the time comes. And thank you very much for the feedback! On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 20:29 -0500, Jay Rabe wrote: > On 1/4/07, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > > > I have not yet added OBDII to my project - it appears that I have to > > if it is going to be plug compatable for my Z28 so that will likely > > happen. My intent for this project is a universal EFI/ECM/PCM/MSD > > box - something useful on any engine up to 8 cylinders. If it lacks > > any inputs or outputs tell me and I'll add them :-) > > > A few things... > > If you build this ecu only for a returnless fuel system, this limits what > fuel pumps you can use. http://fuel-pumps.net/fuelpumpsfaq7.html#9 > When writing the software i assume you'd give the option of a normal > relay powered style fuel pump. > > So all this below would be in my dream standalone computer. This is mostly > way over the top. > > One thing i've always wanted to see implimented is something to make fueling > a variable vane (variable ar) turbo engine "easy" to control fuel. I would > think an extra pressure transducer to monitor exhaust pressure before > it goes into the turbo would be very helpful to give a new > compensation for MAP > systems. Even MAF systems could probably benefit from this on the ignition > side of things. Yeah these are not common, but i think having the > ability to fuel them properly will help their popularity and they are > being used by > a few automakers. This should help them become more common soon. Also > some kind of circuitry to control the variable actuator. Maybe a > potentiometer to monitor this? Or, maybe just the actuator > potentiometer is > enough for the fuel/ign compensation? > > Another thing would be variable cam(s) control. I've been dreaming of > a worm gear "solenoid" controled cam timing adjuster for timing belt engines. > It would probably need a potentiometer in it to know where it is. > This could be very beneficial if done properly. I know, it would be > tough to make > an adjuster blah, blah, it would be cool tho... I know you can tell > where the timing is from the crank signal vs. the cam signal, but i like > potentiometers. Grab a meter and see what position its by its voltage > instead of an oscilloscope and all that fun. > > If you could make it OBD-II capable, you just might be building the > next step in standalone computers. 96 and newer cars who have to pass > OBD port only emissions could actually pass emissions. It would probably never get > EPA certified if they knew it was going to be tunable. OBD II port > replicators are illegal... Maybe leak some software after the > release??? > > A self learn circuit for fuel/ignition would be cool. Id imagine it > would be mostly coding tho... > > Wideband capability? Not easy, but makes tuning very nice... > > Boost control? ...gear variable? > > Traction control input or traction control? Maybe like a rev > limiter... Maybe an adjustable slip allowance... > > Launch control? > > Full throttle shift? > > Software/hardware to allow a secondary set of injectors? > > Anti lag? there is misfire and "jet engine" style > > I wish i knew more about coding and electronics... > > Jay > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ 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 cobraman at insightbb.com Mon Jan 8 14:30:53 2007 From: cobraman at insightbb.com (cobraman at insightbb.com) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 14:30:53 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <380-2200710754937381@M2W031.mail2web.com> References: <380-2200710754937381@M2W031.mail2web.com> Message-ID: Greg, How much fuel @ 45psi will flow through the .045? Do I need more pump? What is the expected pressure drop? Thanks TomS ----- Original Message ----- From: "bearbvd at mindspring.com" Date: Saturday, January 6, 2007 23:50 Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > > Original Message: > ----------------- > From: Steven P. Donegan donegan at donegan.org > Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 10:40:53 -0800 > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > > > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 12:23 -0600, > cobraman at insightbb.com wrote: > > > > My "Edelbrick" ProFlow has fuel pressure controlled with > > > engine vacuum. On track sessions on very hot days, the fuel > in > > > the rails will boil under hard braking - accelerator closed > (low > > > fuel pressure). When you finally step on it (52 psi), > nothing > > > happens until the vapor "recirculates" or is expelled. > > > Usually takes a second or so. I don't think dead > heading > > > would do any better - probably just need to keep a constant > fuel > > > pressure. > > > > IMHO, hot fuel should give better economy - easier to > vaporize > > > - for those green members. TomS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ld > > > > > consume the gas in the rails well before it got warm :-) > > > However this > > > > > does raise a point - perhaps my ECM/PCM/EFI computer > needs a > > > way > > > > > to open > > > > > a fuel return line and to sense fuel temp in the rails? > Any > > > > > ideas on how > > > > > useful that would be in the 'real world' anyone? > > > > > > First-- plumb the rails as with any 'two phase' (gas/liquid) > piping system. > Industrial refrigeration piping practice is a good example. Injectors > pointed downward--where you want liquid. Uniform slope to one > high point, > so that no vapor is 'trapped' anywhere but at the high point. > Finally--put > a fixed size bypass/return orifice--about a .045" Holley jet > will do > FINE--at the HIGH point. It's utterly astounding how FAST a LOT > of vapor > will go through an orifice that size !! > > Greg > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > --- > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.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 spyro at f2s.com Mon Jan 8 18:11:00 2007 From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton) Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:11:00 +0000 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <20070108155340.32250.qmail@web810.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20070108155340.32250.qmail@web810.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <45A2DD94.3090403@f2s.com> Steven Donegan wrote: > The hardware portion is simple - a current mirror and high voltage supply. The software may have to be done by individuals for their own non-profit use as ion sensing for the purpose of engine optimization appears to be a patented idea. Anyone want to ask the patent holders how they would feel about hobbyist use of their patented ideas? > > Daniel Nicoson wrote: Please tell us more about your ion sensing system... Im not sure hobby usage would violate a patent - its not like you'd be in competition or making money off it. your ECU is very appealing to me on the grounds that I like ARMs. got any idea on fab prices? also I'd prefer mine to be non-modular for reliability reasons - I want to do it surface mount and lacquer the board after assembly, once its tuned and ready. got schematics in a format tht can be edited with open source tools ? From donegan at donegan.org Mon Jan 8 19:11:31 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 17:11:31 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <45A2DD94.3090403@f2s.com> References: <20070108155340.32250.qmail@web810.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <45A2DD94.3090403@f2s.com> Message-ID: <1168305091.12405.17.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Well - I'm doing it modular (using double row headers for board interconnects) because it is far easier for me to develop it this way - board fab prices of a 1$ or so for dinky boards - easily thrown away during dev bug-fix -vs- big $$ boards where one little oops means the board is junk$$. The software I'm using is WinQcad - none of the free packages I found to be worth the effort. WinQcad is cheap if you get above the free point of 400 connection points (which I have already done on the small boards). Another advantage to doing small subsystem boards is that some of us can use just a subset of things and fit say the stock position on a Harley or CX500 :-) The schematic for the CPU is available (PDF) from www.olimex.com or www.sparkfun.com - it's the LPCH2138 model. The individual boards I'm doing I'll share as they get done enough so I don't expect complete ridicule :-) Anyone wanting to take the sub-pieces and turn them all into one board is welcome to do so. And BTW I don't 'do' surface mount (yet) no desire to have a reflow setup at home or go blind trying to place parts with my old unsteady hands - and yes I'm a dinosaur - I did tubes long before any of this new stuff was available :-) Until I can find some way to ensure I have no likelyhood of getting sued I will likely keep the Ion stuff to circuit design only... And, BTW, I had a custom inverter built for that part - that one part is ~115$ so the the Ion board sub-assembly would likely be a parts cost of ~150$ for 8 channels. Each coil/spark plug attachment requires a high voltage diode (40K is a nice safe voltage) to block the spark from entering the Ion board - that diode isn't cheap either... On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 00:11 +0000, Ian Molton wrote: > Steven Donegan wrote: > > The hardware portion is simple - a current mirror and high voltage supply. The software may have to be done by individuals for their own non-profit use as ion sensing for the purpose of engine optimization appears to be a patented idea. Anyone want to ask the patent holders how they would feel about hobbyist use of their patented ideas? > > > > Daniel Nicoson wrote: Please tell us more about your ion sensing system... > > Im not sure hobby usage would violate a patent - its not like you'd be > in competition or making money off it. > > your ECU is very appealing to me on the grounds that I like ARMs. > > got any idea on fab prices? > > also I'd prefer mine to be non-modular for reliability reasons - I want > to do it surface mount and lacquer the board after assembly, once its > tuned and ready. > > got schematics in a format tht can be edited with open source tools ? > > _______________________________________________ > 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 bearbvd at mindspring.com Mon Jan 8 20:02:46 2007 From: bearbvd at mindspring.com (bearbvd at mindspring.com) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 21:02:46 -0500 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Message-ID: <380-220071292246984@M2W037.mail2web.com> Original Message: ----------------- From: Steven Donegan donegan at donegan.org Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 07:53:40 -0800 (PST) To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU The hardware portion is simple - a current mirror and high voltage supply. The software may have to be done by individuals for their own non-profit use as ion sensing for the purpose of engine optimization appears to be a patented idea. Anyone want to ask the patent holders how they would feel about hobbyist use of their patented ideas? I, for one, don't give much of a pharke how patent holders feel about hobby use of patented ideas. A patent only protects against COMMERCIAL use by others, not private usage. Greg Daniel Nicoson wrote: Please tell us more about your ion sensing system... Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Steven Donegan Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:01 AM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU I'm working on the basic circuit(s) right now although I have the FreeRTOS real time OS already running on an LPC2106 - need to do minor things to that port to make it run on the LPC2138 but I'll handle that to start off with. Anyone interested in assisting will be heartily welcomed :-) Working on an 8 channel Ion sensing board right now... Andrew Hopton wrote: Hi, I can also help with programming in C. Happy to pitch in if needed. Andrew. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of TomC Sent: Friday, 5 January 2007 5:04 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Let me know when some programming is required. I've programmed in C for the last 20 years. Tom -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Steven P. Donegan Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:34 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Well, the electronics are actually fairly easy - the 4 O2 sensor inputs I put in the current design will handle narrow or wide band injectors. Outputs to control tranny/other stuff - interesting and perhaps if a 'real' application arises (ie explain exactly what you want/need) I'll add it. Not hard to add things to my design in hardware and software is C so I expect folks will pitch in when the time comes. And thank you very much for the feedback! On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 20:29 -0500, Jay Rabe wrote: > On 1/4/07, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > > > I have not yet added OBDII to my project - it appears that I have to > > if it is going to be plug compatable for my Z28 so that will likely > > happen. My intent for this project is a universal EFI/ECM/PCM/MSD > > box - something useful on any engine up to 8 cylinders. If it lacks > > any inputs or outputs tell me and I'll add them :-) > > > A few things... > > If you build this ecu only for a returnless fuel system, this limits what > fuel pumps you can use. http://fuel-pumps.net/fuelpumpsfaq7.html#9 > When writing the software i assume you'd give the option of a normal > relay powered style fuel pump. > > So all this below would be in my dream standalone computer. This is mostly > way over the top. > > One thing i've always wanted to see implimented is something to make fueling > a variable vane (variable ar) turbo engine "easy" to control fuel. I would > think an extra pressure transducer to monitor exhaust pressure before > it goes into the turbo would be very helpful to give a new > compensation for MAP > systems. Even MAF systems could probably benefit from this on the ignition > side of things. Yeah these are not common, but i think having the > ability to fuel them properly will help their popularity and they are > being used by > a few automakers. This should help them become more common soon. Also > some kind of circuitry to control the variable actuator. Maybe a > potentiometer to monitor this? Or, maybe just the actuator > potentiometer is > enough for the fuel/ign compensation? > > Another thing would be variable cam(s) control. I've been dreaming of > a worm gear "solenoid" controled cam timing adjuster for timing belt engines. > It would probably need a potentiometer in it to know where it is. > This could be very beneficial if done properly. I know, it would be > tough to make > an adjuster blah, blah, it would be cool tho... I know you can tell > where the timing is from the crank signal vs. the cam signal, but i like > potentiometers. Grab a meter and see what position its by its voltage > instead of an oscilloscope and all that fun. > > If you could make it OBD-II capable, you just might be building the > next step in standalone computers. 96 and newer cars who have to pass > OBD port only emissions could actually pass emissions. It would probably never get > EPA certified if they knew it was going to be tunable. OBD II port > replicators are illegal... Maybe leak some software after the > release??? > > A self learn circuit for fuel/ignition would be cool. Id imagine it > would be mostly coding tho... > > Wideband capability? Not easy, but makes tuning very nice... > > Boost control? ...gear variable? > > Traction control input or traction control? Maybe like a rev > limiter... Maybe an adjustable slip allowance... > > Launch control? > > Full throttle shift? > > Software/hardware to allow a secondary set of injectors? > > Anti lag? there is misfire and "jet engine" style > > I wish i knew more about coding and electronics... > > Jay > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From A6intruder at myo-p.com Mon Jan 8 20:58:28 2007 From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 21:58:28 -0500 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <380-220071292246984@M2W037.mail2web.com> Message-ID: Your only threat to the patent holders is if you start up a commercial venture using their ideas. The actual concepts are in their patent and well know by others, the hard part as you must know by now is making those concepts into reality. What is the patent number? I'd like to look it up. I'm curious if all the commercial users are actually operating under "this" patent? Its amazing how many ways you can engineer around a patent for commercial purposes. Also, its amazing how many patents cover the same general area. I think Harley already uses ion sensing ignition on their newer bikes. I think BMW on their cars at least. Who else has it in production? There was another home-brew effort out there a while back but I haven't seen any final DIY version yet. A few links: http://www.fs.isy.liu.se/~larer/ISIS/Doc/NieEri_1998_CSM.pdf http://www.fs.isy.liu.se/~larer/ISIS/ http://www.fs.isy.liu.se/~larer/Projects/main.html Of course the Megasquirt guys were working on this too, don't think they've finished anything either. Wish I was smart enough and had enough time... I can solder ! Later, Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of bearbvd at mindspring.com Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 9:03 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Original Message: ----------------- From: Steven Donegan donegan at donegan.org Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 07:53:40 -0800 (PST) To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU The hardware portion is simple - a current mirror and high voltage supply. The software may have to be done by individuals for their own non-profit use as ion sensing for the purpose of engine optimization appears to be a patented idea. Anyone want to ask the patent holders how they would feel about hobbyist use of their patented ideas? I, for one, don't give much of a pharke how patent holders feel about hobby use of patented ideas. A patent only protects against COMMERCIAL use by others, not private usage. Greg Daniel Nicoson wrote: Please tell us more about your ion sensing system... Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Steven Donegan Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:01 AM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU I'm working on the basic circuit(s) right now although I have the FreeRTOS real time OS already running on an LPC2106 - need to do minor things to that port to make it run on the LPC2138 but I'll handle that to start off with. Anyone interested in assisting will be heartily welcomed :-) Working on an 8 channel Ion sensing board right now... Andrew Hopton wrote: Hi, I can also help with programming in C. Happy to pitch in if needed. Andrew. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of TomC Sent: Friday, 5 January 2007 5:04 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Let me know when some programming is required. I've programmed in C for the last 20 years. Tom -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Steven P. Donegan Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:34 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Well, the electronics are actually fairly easy - the 4 O2 sensor inputs I put in the current design will handle narrow or wide band injectors. Outputs to control tranny/other stuff - interesting and perhaps if a 'real' application arises (ie explain exactly what you want/need) I'll add it. Not hard to add things to my design in hardware and software is C so I expect folks will pitch in when the time comes. And thank you very much for the feedback! On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 20:29 -0500, Jay Rabe wrote: > On 1/4/07, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > > > I have not yet added OBDII to my project - it appears that I have to > > if it is going to be plug compatable for my Z28 so that will likely > > happen. My intent for this project is a universal EFI/ECM/PCM/MSD > > box - something useful on any engine up to 8 cylinders. If it lacks > > any inputs or outputs tell me and I'll add them :-) > > > A few things... > > If you build this ecu only for a returnless fuel system, this limits what > fuel pumps you can use. http://fuel-pumps.net/fuelpumpsfaq7.html#9 > When writing the software i assume you'd give the option of a normal > relay powered style fuel pump. > > So all this below would be in my dream standalone computer. This is mostly > way over the top. > > One thing i've always wanted to see implimented is something to make fueling > a variable vane (variable ar) turbo engine "easy" to control fuel. I would > think an extra pressure transducer to monitor exhaust pressure before > it goes into the turbo would be very helpful to give a new > compensation for MAP > systems. Even MAF systems could probably benefit from this on the ignition > side of things. Yeah these are not common, but i think having the > ability to fuel them properly will help their popularity and they are > being used by > a few automakers. This should help them become more common soon. Also > some kind of circuitry to control the variable actuator. Maybe a > potentiometer to monitor this? Or, maybe just the actuator > potentiometer is > enough for the fuel/ign compensation? > > Another thing would be variable cam(s) control. I've been dreaming of > a worm gear "solenoid" controled cam timing adjuster for timing belt engines. > It would probably need a potentiometer in it to know where it is. > This could be very beneficial if done properly. I know, it would be > tough to make > an adjuster blah, blah, it would be cool tho... I know you can tell > where the timing is from the crank signal vs. the cam signal, but i like > potentiometers. Grab a meter and see what position its by its voltage > instead of an oscilloscope and all that fun. > > If you could make it OBD-II capable, you just might be building the > next step in standalone computers. 96 and newer cars who have to pass > OBD port only emissions could actually pass emissions. It would probably never get > EPA certified if they knew it was going to be tunable. OBD II port > replicators are illegal... Maybe leak some software after the > release??? > > A self learn circuit for fuel/ignition would be cool. Id imagine it > would be mostly coding tho... > > Wideband capability? Not easy, but makes tuning very nice... > > Boost control? ...gear variable? > > Traction control input or traction control? Maybe like a rev > limiter... Maybe an adjustable slip allowance... > > Launch control? > > Full throttle shift? > > Software/hardware to allow a secondary set of injectors? > > Anti lag? there is misfire and "jet engine" style > > I wish i knew more about coding and electronics... > > Jay > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.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 efi at dyakron.com Mon Jan 8 21:50:14 2007 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 22:50:14 -0500 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU References: Message-ID: <002901c733a1$45705750$6501a8c0@IBMm> Hi Dan! Just curious if you are using http://www.google.com/patents for searching. It is pretty nice. Mike V From sonoma at shaw.ca Tue Jan 9 03:38:44 2007 From: sonoma at shaw.ca (Mike) Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 01:38:44 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Installing the knock sensor GM TBI Message-ID: <006801c733d1$f801fdd0$6401a8c0@duron4569bdb85> Hi I'm installing TBI with a 1227747 ecm on my 83 Chev 350, Can I mount the knock sensor in the block just above oil pan on the right hand side. there is a plug that goes into the water jacket. This is the location I think it was at on the 91 TBI engine, I don't have the 91 engine from the donor van to look at. I've also seen the knock sensor mounted in the plate there the mech fuel pump was. Has anyone mounted a knock sensor on a older block, Thanks Mike... From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com Tue Jan 9 03:41:15 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 01:41:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1167926260.16410.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <180390.46551.qm@web32203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: > needs a way to ... sense fuel temp in the rails? Assuming a car with a remote tank, I would think this would be not much of an issue. If you were always using the same fuel, and you were operating in cold temps, you could better tailor fueling based on the fuel's ability to vaporize with a given fuel and air temp. Other than that, I don't see any advantage for cars. For motorcycles, however... The fuel tank lives directly over and/or behind the engine in most cases, and a lot of hot air from the radiator can warm the tank (not in all bikes; still an issue in some); further, the fuel lines are extremely short, and the tank is of low capacity, meaning the cooling effect of a large reservoir of fuel mounted remotely with long lines is taken away for motorcycle use. In any cause, I would think that knowing the vapor pressure of the components of the fuel would be required to make the most of this (or simply always using the same fuel); I would guess that it would probably make most sense to make a 2D map with IAT on one axis and fuel temp on the other, since the compensation for rate of vaporization will be strongly affected by both fuel temp and intake temp. Doing the testing to develop such a map would definitely take some doing; that said, it would be an interesting option for folks to play around with if they were so inclined. I wouldn't go out of my way to include it, however. | Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne) Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)| | "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it | | didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to. | | They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. | | The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun | | had come up again." -Kurt Vonnegut | | M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com - http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze | __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com Tue Jan 9 03:51:15 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 01:51:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <459D4D3E.3030603@commspeed.net> Message-ID: <849120.58568.qm@web32215.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Tom Visel wrote: > If the "Donegan ECU" isn't going to be OBD-II > compliant I should note that we are only a year or two away from mandatory OBD-III compliance for automakers AND motorcycle manufacturers, and the OBD-III standard uses a CAN bus as its I/O. Anyone building an ECU designed to work on cars from the near future might want to consider using CAN instead of an OBD-II port, unless it is specifically for retrofitting to older cars, or is designed to make life easier for those already owning current generation tuning/flashing tools. | Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne) Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)| | "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it | | didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to. | | They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. | | The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun | | had come up again." -Kurt Vonnegut | | M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com - http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze | __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com Tue Jan 9 04:48:07 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 02:48:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20070109104808.76490.qmail@web32215.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Daniel Nicoson wrote: > I think Harley already uses ion sensing ignition on > their newer bikes. It's a very limited form, used for checking for misfires (as required by the upcoming OBD-III regs -- Harley really looked ahead when designing the Delphi ECU), but yes, they do use ion sensing (first motorcycle OE to do so). However, it would require a lot more signal processing to, say, run closed-loop spark timing, or determine combustion efficiency, via ion sensing. | Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne) Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)| | "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it | | didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to. | | They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. | | The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun | | had come up again." -Kurt Vonnegut | | M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com - http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze | __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From donegan at donegan.org Tue Jan 9 07:51:03 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 05:51:03 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <002901c733a1$45705750$6501a8c0@IBMm> References: <002901c733a1$45705750$6501a8c0@IBMm> Message-ID: <1168350663.16070.3.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Just google itself so far. Thanks for the URL. On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 22:50 -0500, Mike V wrote: > Hi Dan! > Just curious if you are using > http://www.google.com/patents > for searching. It is pretty nice. > Mike V > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Tue Jan 9 07:52:42 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 05:52:42 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1168350762.16070.6.camel@wopr.donegan.org> OK, I'll proceed with the idea that tentatively I can make stand-alone sensor boards likely without patent infringement. The software I'll have to really think about... On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 21:58 -0500, Daniel Nicoson wrote: > Your only threat to the patent holders is if you start up a commercial > venture using their ideas. The actual concepts are in their patent and well > know by others, the hard part as you must know by now is making those > concepts into reality. > > What is the patent number? I'd like to look it up. > > I'm curious if all the commercial users are actually operating under "this" > patent? Its amazing how many ways you can engineer around a patent for > commercial purposes. Also, its amazing how many patents cover the same > general area. > > I think Harley already uses ion sensing ignition on their newer bikes. I > think BMW on their cars at least. Who else has it in production? > > There was another home-brew effort out there a while back but I haven't seen > any final DIY version yet. > > A few links: > http://www.fs.isy.liu.se/~larer/ISIS/Doc/NieEri_1998_CSM.pdf > http://www.fs.isy.liu.se/~larer/ISIS/ > http://www.fs.isy.liu.se/~larer/Projects/main.html > > Of course the Megasquirt guys were working on this too, don't think they've > finished anything either. > > Wish I was smart enough and had enough time... > > I can solder ! > > Later, > > Dan Nicoson > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of bearbvd at mindspring.com > Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 9:03 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > > > Original Message: > ----------------- > From: Steven Donegan donegan at donegan.org > Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 07:53:40 -0800 (PST) > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > > > The hardware portion is simple - a current mirror and high voltage supply. > The software may have to be done by individuals for their own non-profit > use as ion sensing for the purpose of engine optimization appears to be a > patented idea. Anyone want to ask the patent holders how they would feel > about hobbyist use of their patented ideas? > > I, for one, don't give much of a pharke how patent holders feel about hobby > use of patented ideas. A patent only protects against COMMERCIAL use by > others, not private usage. > > Greg > > Daniel Nicoson wrote: Please tell us more about your > ion sensing system... > > Dan Nicoson > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Steven Donegan > Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:01 AM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > > I'm working on the basic circuit(s) right now although I have the FreeRTOS > real time OS already running on an LPC2106 - need to do minor things to that > port to make it run on the LPC2138 but I'll handle that to start off with. > Anyone interested in assisting will be heartily welcomed :-) Working on an 8 > channel Ion sensing board right now... > > Andrew Hopton wrote: Hi, > > I can also help with programming in C. Happy to pitch in if needed. > > Andrew. > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] > On Behalf Of TomC > Sent: Friday, 5 January 2007 5:04 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > > > Let me know when some programming is required. I've programmed in C for > the last 20 years. > > Tom > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Steven P. Donegan > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:34 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > > > Well, the electronics are actually fairly easy - the 4 O2 sensor inputs > I put in the current design will handle narrow or wide band injectors. > Outputs to control tranny/other stuff - interesting and perhaps if a > 'real' application arises (ie explain exactly what you want/need) I'll > add it. Not hard to add things to my design in hardware and software is > C so I expect folks will pitch in when the time comes. > > And thank you very much for the feedback! > > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 20:29 -0500, Jay Rabe wrote: > > On 1/4/07, Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > > > > > I have not yet added OBDII to my project - it appears that I have to > > > > if it is going to be plug compatable for my Z28 so that will likely > > > happen. My intent for this project is a universal EFI/ECM/PCM/MSD > > > box - something useful on any engine up to 8 cylinders. If it lacks > > > any inputs or outputs tell me and I'll add them :-) > > > > > > A few things... > > > > If you build this ecu only for a returnless fuel system, this limits > what > > fuel pumps you can use. http://fuel-pumps.net/fuelpumpsfaq7.html#9 > > When writing the software i assume you'd give the option of a normal > > relay powered style fuel pump. > > > > So all this below would be in my dream standalone computer. This is > mostly > > way over the top. > > > > One thing i've always wanted to see implimented is something to make > fueling > > a variable vane (variable ar) turbo engine "easy" to control fuel. I > would > > think an extra pressure transducer to monitor exhaust pressure before > > it goes into the turbo would be very helpful to give a new > > compensation for > MAP > > systems. Even MAF systems could probably benefit from this on the > ignition > > side of things. Yeah these are not common, but i think having the > > ability to fuel them properly will help their popularity and they are > > being used > by > > a few automakers. This should help them become more common soon. > Also > > some kind of circuitry to control the variable actuator. Maybe a > > potentiometer to monitor this? Or, maybe just the actuator > > potentiometer > is > > enough for the fuel/ign compensation? > > > > Another thing would be variable cam(s) control. I've been dreaming of > > > a worm gear "solenoid" controled cam timing adjuster for timing belt > engines. > > It would probably need a potentiometer in it to know where it is. > > This could be very beneficial if done properly. I know, it would be > > tough to > make > > an adjuster blah, blah, it would be cool tho... I know you can tell > > where the timing is from the crank signal vs. the cam signal, but i > like > > potentiometers. Grab a meter and see what position its by its > voltage > > instead of an oscilloscope and all that fun. > > > > If you could make it OBD-II capable, you just might be building the > > next step in standalone computers. 96 and newer cars who have to pass > > > OBD port only emissions could actually pass emissions. It would > probably never get > > EPA certified if they knew it was going to be tunable. OBD II port > > replicators are illegal... Maybe leak some software after the > > release??? > > > > A self learn circuit for fuel/ignition would be cool. Id imagine it > > would be mostly coding tho... > > > > Wideband capability? Not easy, but makes tuning very nice... > > > > Boost control? ...gear variable? > > > > Traction control input or traction control? Maybe like a rev > > limiter... Maybe an adjustable slip allowance... > > > > Launch control? > > > > Full throttle shift? > > > > Software/hardware to allow a secondary set of injectors? > > > > Anti lag? there is misfire and "jet engine" style > > > > I wish i knew more about coding and electronics... > > > > Jay > > _______________________________________________ > > Diy_efi mailing list > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.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 donegan at donegan.org Tue Jan 9 07:54:04 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 05:54:04 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <20070109104808.76490.qmail@web32215.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20070109104808.76490.qmail@web32215.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1168350844.16070.7.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Closed loop, per cylinder timing and combustion efficiency as well as knock detect are all goals of my Ion subsystem... On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 02:48 -0800, Adam Wade wrote: > --- Daniel Nicoson wrote: > > > I think Harley already uses ion sensing ignition on > > their newer bikes. > > It's a very limited form, used for checking for > misfires (as required by the upcoming OBD-III regs -- > Harley really looked ahead when designing the Delphi > ECU), but yes, they do use ion sensing (first > motorcycle OE to do so). However, it would require a > lot more signal processing to, say, run closed-loop > spark timing, or determine combustion efficiency, via > ion sensing. > > | Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne) Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)| > | "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it | > | didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to. | > | They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. | > | The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun | > | had come up again." -Kurt Vonnegut | > | M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com - http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze | > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From A6intruder at myo-p.com Tue Jan 9 08:34:16 2007 From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 09:34:16 -0500 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <002901c733a1$45705750$6501a8c0@IBMm> Message-ID: Mike, how's it going? The last time I did any real patent searches was last March. I think I Googled until I found some free patent service. I'll take a look at your link. Take care, Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Mike V Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:50 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Hi Dan! Just curious if you are using http://www.google.com/patents for searching. It is pretty nice. Mike V _______________________________________________ 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 Jan 9 08:41:46 2007 From: don.broadus at exeloncorp.com (don.broadus at exeloncorp.com) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 08:41:46 -0600 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Message-ID: Thanks for the patent search info !! Your right makes searching very easy. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Steven P. Donegan Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 7:51 AM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Just google itself so far. Thanks for the URL. On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 22:50 -0500, Mike V wrote: > Hi Dan! > Just curious if you are using > http://www.google.com/patents > for searching. It is pretty nice. > Mike V > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi ----------------------------------------- ************************************************** This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon Corporation family of Companies. This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. Thank You. ************************************************** From A6intruder at myo-p.com Tue Jan 9 08:50:41 2007 From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 09:50:41 -0500 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I just searched "ion sensing ignition" on that link. It came back with 650 hits. Not sure how many are the same patent, but like anything, I'll bet all the GOOD ideas and even the crummy ideas relating to ion sensing have already been patented. I have to earn a living today so maybe tonight I'll search through and find some interesting info. Take Care, Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Daniel Nicoson Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 9:34 AM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Mike, how's it going? The last time I did any real patent searches was last March. I think I Googled until I found some free patent service. I'll take a look at your link. Take care, Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Mike V Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:50 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Hi Dan! Just curious if you are using http://www.google.com/patents for searching. It is pretty nice. Mike V _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From efi at dyakron.com Tue Jan 9 10:03:02 2007 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 11:03:02 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Installing the knock sensor GM TBI References: <006801c733d1$f801fdd0$6401a8c0@duron4569bdb85> Message-ID: <008301c73407$a4306940$6501a8c0@IBMm> Hi Mike, I think many Chev V engines place the knock sensor a rear/top of the block in the early days. Just going by what I've seen on 4.3 V6, but V8 may have been different. Mounting it on one side will reduce the likelyhood that detonation on the opposite bank will be picked up. Cheers, mv ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 4:38 AM Subject: [Diy_efi] Installing the knock sensor GM TBI Hi I'm installing TBI with a 1227747 ecm on my 83 Chev 350, Can I mount the knock sensor in the block just above oil pan on the right hand side. there is a plug that goes into the water jacket. This is the location I think it was at on the 91 TBI engine, I don't have the 91 engine from the donor van to look at. I've also seen the knock sensor mounted in the plate there the mech fuel pump was. Has anyone mounted a knock sensor on a older block, Thanks Mike... _______________________________________________ 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 Jan 9 10:23:57 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 08:23:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1168350844.16070.7.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <588853.26428.qm@web32202.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: > Closed loop, per cylinder timing and combustion > efficiency as well as knock detect are all goals > of my Ion subsystem... VERY nice. You going to use a DSP chip on the daughterboard? I understand that FFT is the best way to get useful data from the signal... | Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne) Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)| | "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it | | didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to. | | They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. | | The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun | | had come up again." -Kurt Vonnegut | | M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com - http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze | __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From donegan at donegan.org Tue Jan 9 11:38:49 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven Donegan) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 09:38:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <588853.26428.qm@web32202.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <95597.9246.qm@web806.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com> At the moment the daughter board is just the HV power supply and the current mirrors - ie the signal aquisition part of things. Many folks out there in engineering space have used relatively low speed microcontrollers and PC's to do the actual signal reduction - I will start as they have and work my way up to the required processor - which may very well be a DSP. Adam Wade wrote: --- "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: > Closed loop, per cylinder timing and combustion > efficiency as well as knock detect are all goals > of my Ion subsystem... VERY nice. You going to use a DSP chip on the daughterboard? I understand that FFT is the best way to get useful data from the signal... | Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne) Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)| | "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it | | didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to. | | They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. | | The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun | | had come up again." -Kurt Vonnegut | | M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com - http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze | __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From byrdhouse9 at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 9 20:31:47 2007 From: byrdhouse9 at sbcglobal.net (Jim) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 21:31:47 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] New to this site, enjoy the discussion Message-ID: <000001c7345f$7a000e70$4001a8c0@JBCELERON> Hello to the DIY EFI'ers, I am new to this site. I have been tinkering with EFI for a couple of years and find the discussions interesting, especially when I see someone solve a problem I had or one I haven't yet discovered. I started out transplanting an '87 Ford 5.0 into my '79 Ford pickup. I then converted it to a mass air system from a '92 Mustang to eliminate some idle and hesitation problems that apparently came from using different intake and exhaust systems with the speed-density system. The '92 mass air system adapts the mixture automatically and runs great, even though it is on a truck engine. In fact, I was so pleased with the way it ran that I put a similar system on my '71 MGB. It turns out the system from a '92 Escort (I notice some of you are from UK or Australia, I am talking about the American 1.9 liter variety) runs ok on an MGB 1.8 engine. The MG is a 4 cylinder - 5 port engine, like the ones discussed on this forum a week or two ago. I originally built the manifold with two injectors at each of the two intake ports, but the idle was rough and it had hesitation, so I built another manifold with all 4 injectors in the center, sharing flow with all 4 cylinders. It was a sequential injection system in the Escort, but it is now working as if it was throttle body system. It still has a hesitation during throttle transients, but runs great at constant throttle. I still have some theories on what might be causing this. (have monitored TPS, ECT, EGO, etc, signals and can find no obvious reason why it goes lean during transients) I am hoping to find a setup that works without changing the program in the ECU, but may have to eventually get to that. My question is: has anyone reverse-engineered the software in the Ford EEC-IV? This seems to be a very capable and robust ECU, and they are available for CHEAP at salvage yards around here, so I am looking at how I could change the program it if necessary. I think there is a real need for an affordable EFI conversion for these old cars. Jim from Ohio From clshore at yahoo.com Tue Jan 9 21:53:02 2007 From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 19:53:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] New to this site, enjoy the discussion In-Reply-To: <000001c7345f$7a000e70$4001a8c0@JBCELERON> Message-ID: <737766.16376.qm@web35710.mail.mud.yahoo.com> On 2007-01-09 Jim wrote: > Hello to the DIY EFI'ers, I am new to this site. I > have been tinkering > with EFI for a couple of years and find the > discussions interesting, > ... The '92 mass air system > adapts the mixture > automatically and runs great, even though it is on a > truck engine. In > fact, I was so pleased with the way it ran that I > put a similar system > on my '71 MGB. It turns out the system from a '92 > Escort (I notice some > of you are from UK or Australia, I am talking about > the American 1.9 > liter variety) runs ok on an MGB 1.8 engine. Yah, I'm adapting an Escort EEC-IV SEFI system to my Spitfire project. As you said, it's a powerful, flexible, inexpensive, readily available system. The MAF makes it easy to get a basic system up and running on avariety of engines. There is an active EEC community out there, here's info one list: To subscribe to the list, send a message to: To remove your address from the list, send a message to: Send mail to the following for info and FAQ for this list: There is hardware and software support for hacking the EEC, TwEEcer, Moates, etc. The internals are available via the J3 adaptor: http://www.moates.net/index.php?cPath=25_35 The EEC-IV processor is a variant of the Intel 80*86 family, with added I/O for engine control duty. Many of the program variants have been cracked, but AFAIK, not the Escort (yet). Anyway, good luck Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From A6intruder at myo-p.com Tue Jan 9 21:56:08 2007 From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 22:56:08 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] New to this site, enjoy the discussion In-Reply-To: <000001c7345f$7a000e70$4001a8c0@JBCELERON> Message-ID: Jim, I tune my 1994 Mustang with a TwEECer (www.tweecer.com) I used to use an EEC Tuner (www.shiftmaster.com) Moates,net has hardware for Ford and GM. Look for the Paul Booth software to run the Moates hardware on a Ford (www.moates.net) SCT has tuners & software, mostly for the newer stuff EEC V Who else? Yahoo Groups for the EEC Tuner, TwEECer and EEC Editor for the Moates stuff. Have fun, Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Jim Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 9:32 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: [Diy_efi] New to this site, enjoy the discussion Hello to the DIY EFI'ers, I am new to this site. I have been tinkering with EFI for a couple of years and find the discussions interesting, especially when I see someone solve a problem I had or one I haven't yet discovered. I started out transplanting an '87 Ford 5.0 into my '79 Ford pickup. I then converted it to a mass air system from a '92 Mustang to eliminate some idle and hesitation problems that apparently came from using different intake and exhaust systems with the speed-density system. The '92 mass air system adapts the mixture automatically and runs great, even though it is on a truck engine. In fact, I was so pleased with the way it ran that I put a similar system on my '71 MGB. It turns out the system from a '92 Escort (I notice some of you are from UK or Australia, I am talking about the American 1.9 liter variety) runs ok on an MGB 1.8 engine. The MG is a 4 cylinder - 5 port engine, like the ones discussed on this forum a week or two ago. I originally built the manifold with two injectors at each of the two intake ports, but the idle was rough and it had hesitation, so I built another manifold with all 4 injectors in the center, sharing flow with all 4 cylinders. It was a sequential injection system in the Escort, but it is now working as if it was throttle body system. It still has a hesitation during throttle transients, but runs great at constant throttle. I still have some theories on what might be causing this. (have monitored TPS, ECT, EGO, etc, signals and can find no obvious reason why it goes lean during transients) I am hoping to find a setup that works without changing the program in the ECU, but may have to eventually get to that. My question is: has anyone reverse-engineered the software in the Ford EEC-IV? This seems to be a very capable and robust ECU, and they are available for CHEAP at salvage yards around here, so I am looking at how I could change the program it if necessary. I think there is a real need for an affordable EFI conversion for these old cars. Jim from Ohio _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Tue Jan 9 22:13:52 2007 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 22:13:52 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] Installing the knock sensor GM TBI Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Mike > Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 3:39 AM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Diy_efi] Installing the knock sensor GM TBI > > Hi > I'm installing TBI with a 1227747 ecm on my 83 Chev 350, Can > I mount the knock sensor in the block just above oil pan on > the right hand side. there is a plug that goes into the water jacket. > This is the location I think it was at on the 91 TBI engine, > I don't have the 91 engine from the donor van to look at. > I've also seen the knock sensor mounted in the plate there > the mech fuel pump was. > Has anyone mounted a knock sensor on a older block, Thanks > Mike... The standard V8 location is the water jacket hole above the pan as you noted. Anyplace on the engine that has a good metal to metal contact with the block should be fine. My S-10 V8 conversion moved the sensor to the motor mounts (custom, made from 1/4" steel plate) and it works fine. If the block off plate uses a gasket then I don't think that would be a good spot. --steve -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. From mdacmail at optusnet.com.au Wed Jan 10 14:42:14 2007 From: mdacmail at optusnet.com.au (mdacmail at optusnet.com.au) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 07:42:14 +1100 Subject: [Diy_efi] escort sequential injection for tbi Message-ID: <200701102042.l0AKgEEH026619@mail06.syd.optusnet.com.au> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.diy-efi.org/pipermail/diy_efi/attachments/20070111/ccc85d4a/attachment.pl From tmc_mike_yates at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 10 16:00:46 2007 From: tmc_mike_yates at sbcglobal.net (Mike Yates) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 14:00:46 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] escort sequential injection for tbi In-Reply-To: <200701102042.l0AKgEEH026619@mail06.syd.optusnet.com.au> References: <200701102042.l0AKgEEH026619@mail06.syd.optusnet.com.au> Message-ID: <98oaq2pu5120p0apc4n8c153l8rri65g92@4ax.com> You said you built the I/M what's the finish on the ID of the runners look like? Would polishing the runners help this situation drastically? That might be the easiest way, and you could gain some hp if you clean it up im sure. Mike On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 07:42:14 +1100, you wrote: > >Jim I am guessing it goes lean because the sequential ecu does not compensate for the effects that you are getting by having a 'wet' manifold. As you get on the gas, the thickness of the fuel film on the walls of your manifold increases. The increase in mass of the fuel film means some fuel was 'stolen' from the inlet air/fuel flow during the throttle transient. I would imagine EEC IV can compensate for this...EEC IV must be used on tbi applications. Look for a manifold wetting coefficient or the like. > >> Hello to the DIY EFI'ers, I am new to this site. I have been tinkering >> with EFI for a couple of years and find the discussions interesting, >> especially when I see someone solve a problem I had or one I haven't yet >> discovered. I started out transplanting an '87 Ford 5.0 into my '79 >> Ford pickup. I then converted it to a mass air system from a '92 >> Mustang to eliminate some idle and hesitation problems that apparently >> came from using different intake and exhaust systems with the >> speed-density system. The '92 mass air system adapts the mixture >> automatically and runs great, even though it is on a truck engine. In >> fact, I was so pleased with the way it ran that I put a similar system >> on my '71 MGB. It turns out the system from a '92 Escort (I notice some >> of you are from UK or Australia, I am talking about the American 1.9 >> liter variety) runs ok on an MGB 1.8 engine. The MG is a 4 cylinder - 5 >> port engine, like the ones discussed on this forum a week or two ago. I >> originally built the manifold with two injectors at each of the two >> intake ports, but the idle was rough and it had hesitation, so I built >> another manifold with all 4 injectors in the center, sharing flow with >> all 4 cylinders. It was a sequential injection system in the Escort, >> but it is now working as if it was throttle body system. It still has a >> hesitation during throttle transients, but runs great at constant >> throttle. I still have some theories on what might be causing this. >> (have monitored TPS, ECT, EGO, etc, signals and can find no obvious >> reason why it goes lean during transients) I am hoping to find a setup >> that works without changing the program in the ECU, but may have to >> eventually get to that. My question is: has anyone reverse-engineered >> the software in the Ford EEC-IV? This seems to be a very capable and >> robust ECU, and they are available for CHEAP at salvage yards around >> here, so I am looking at how I could change the program it if necessary. >> I think there is a real need for an affordable EFI conversion for these >> old cars. Jim from Ohio >_______________________________________________ >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 Wed Jan 10 16:35:39 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 14:35:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Bulk] [Diy_efi] Steve Ravat, CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <1168010551.16410.72.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <20278.58202.qm@web32203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: > Although what I'm designing is intended to be > 'universal' it may be a tad large (physical size) > for a bike. The CX500/650 Turbo bikes had a full-size NipponDenso box on board -- roughly 5" x 5" x 1.5", with a huge AMP connector taking up mods of one edge. Size is not really an issue on this particular application. ;) If you want to work on adaptation for this particular application, let me know. I have sop manuals and electrical diagrams, as well as a high-level description of the operations of the original ECUs. The 500 ran fuel only, the 650 ran ignition as well, and they each had a pair of cam sensors for timing spark and fueling on a per-cylinder basis, not waste fire. | 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 donegan at donegan.org Wed Jan 10 17:21:29 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 15:21:29 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] [Diy_efi] Steve Ravat, CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <20278.58202.qm@web32203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20278.58202.qm@web32203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1168471289.30357.12.camel@wopr.donegan.org> I will get around to it :-) I want to do the universal unit first. Once it's parts all function cutting it down to size should be easy... On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 14:35 -0800, Adam Wade wrote: > --- "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: > > > Although what I'm designing is intended to be > > 'universal' it may be a tad large (physical size) > > for a bike. > > The CX500/650 Turbo bikes had a full-size NipponDenso > box on board -- roughly 5" x 5" x 1.5", with a huge > AMP connector taking up mods of one edge. Size is not > really an issue on this particular application. ;) > > If you want to work on adaptation for this particular > application, let me know. I have sop manuals and > electrical diagrams, as well as a high-level > description of the operations of the original ECUs. > The 500 ran fuel only, the 650 ran ignition as well, > and they each had a pair of cam sensors for timing > spark and fueling on a per-cylinder basis, not waste fire. > > | 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 > _______________________________________________ > 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 Wed Jan 10 17:25:00 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 15:25:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] [Diy_efi] Steve Ravat, CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <1168016411.16410.82.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <756495.45471.qm@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: > Is the CX 500 the Honda V-Twin of old? CX500 Deluxe - CX500 Custom - CX500 Turbo - The Turbo had a different frame (much stiffer), euro-style anodized aluminum wheels (stronger than cast Comstar rims), and the engine internals were all different -- stronger crankcase, forged pistons, 3-piece camshaft, etc. It had the first "modern" sport/touring fairing as well. Basically a totally different animal from the NA CX500 models. | 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 From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com Wed Jan 10 17:54:51 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 15:54:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <146607.63673.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- John Gross wrote: > If your PWM idea is designed around saving the pump > over time to make it last longer, what you can do > if you so choose is to use the mechanical regulator > to help you set your operating fuel pressure. At > different load conditions, you can adjust the PWM > control on the fuel pump and back the pump down > until your pressure starts to drop. It strikes me that there is a great way of combining all these ideas in a vehicle that does not require use of leg-room for a passenger (i.e., a dedicated race vehicle). If you were to use a low-pressure, high-flow pump inside the main fuel tank that fed a large surge tank in the passenger footwell, perhaps 4-5 L or so, and a higher-flow pump feeding a very short line to the fuel rail, this one PWM controlled via the ECU. This would make for an especially rapid feedback loop, and would keep the majority of the fuel in the main tank in the rear. The fuel in the "surge tank" could be constantly cycled by the low-pressure pump in the tank, and as an added extra, you could quickly rule out failuers caused by running out of fuel or the low-pressure pump or lines failing, merely by observing the level of the "surge" tank from the driver's seat. Just a thought, but one that might make such a system much more viable in a practical sense, especially in terms of the ECU making changes to fuel volume delivery quickly enough to prevent the need for special compensations in "accelerator pump shot" calculations. | 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 | ____________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com Wed Jan 10 18:10:17 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 16:10:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Bulk] [Diy_efi] Steve Ravat, CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <1168471289.30357.12.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <73444.67665.qm@web32204.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: > I will get around to it :-) I want to do the > universal unit first. Once it's parts all function > cutting it down to size should be easy... In conversing with you, here and elsewhere, I must say I'm extremely intrigued by what you're developing here. It sounds like an incredible framework from which to develop, and allows modularity in an open-source format that will spawn future development, by others as well as yourself. It'll be interesting to look back on this point in perhaps 5 years or so, before we've completely gone over to stratified-charge engines or some other fuel source, and see how it grew out from this point. | 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 | ____________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited From ebuckler at icehouse.net Wed Jan 10 18:33:45 2007 From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 16:33:45 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] CX 500 EFI? References: <756495.45471.qm@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <015a01c73518$275c8310$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> > The Turbo had a different frame (much stiffer), > euro-style anodized aluminum wheels (stronger than > cast Comstar rims), and the engine internals were all > different -- stronger crankcase, forged pistons, > 3-piece camshaft, etc. It had the first "modern" > sport/touring fairing as well. Basically a totally > different animal from the NA CX500 models. Adam, Tanks a BUNCH for clearing this up for me, had not really compared the details (obviously [:oj) Will be talking with you more about better EFI possibilities for these 80 degree V-twins??? Megasquirt? Any reason it wouldn't work? Ernest From donegan at donegan.org Wed Jan 10 18:38:34 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 16:38:34 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] [Diy_efi] Steve Ravat, CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <73444.67665.qm@web32204.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <73444.67665.qm@web32204.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1168475914.3554.10.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Converse to your hearts content - I learn more to influence my project from this group every day - I find it quite a nice stimulating change from my daily job (which lucky for me I love too) :-) On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 16:10 -0800, Adam Wade wrote: > --- "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: > > > I will get around to it :-) I want to do the > > universal unit first. Once it's parts all function > > cutting it down to size should be easy... > > In conversing with you, here and elsewhere, I must say > I'm extremely intrigued by what you're developing > here. It sounds like an incredible framework from > which to develop, and allows modularity in an > open-source format that will spawn future development, > by others as well as yourself. It'll be interesting > to look back on this point in perhaps 5 years or so, > before we've completely gone over to stratified-charge > engines or some other fuel source, and see how it grew > out from this point. > > | 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 | > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > 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 ebuckler at icehouse.net Wed Jan 10 18:39:47 2007 From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 16:39:47 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] [Diy_efi] Steve Ravat, CX 500 EFI? References: <20278.58202.qm@web32203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1168471289.30357.12.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <016201c73518$ff5a8c80$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Steven P.D.; If you have started a contact list, please add my name to it, thanks! Ernest Buckler, ebuckler at icehouse.net Spokane, WA A bunch of CX 500 TCs and several CX 650 TCs. EB ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven P. Donegan" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:21 PM Subject: Re: [Bulk] [Diy_efi] Steve Ravat, CX 500 EFI? >I will get around to it :-) I want to do the universal unit first. Once > it's parts all function cutting it down to size should be easy... > > On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 14:35 -0800, Adam Wade wrote: >> --- "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: >> >> > Although what I'm designing is intended to be >> > 'universal' it may be a tad large (physical size) >> > for a bike. >> >> The CX500/650 Turbo bikes had a full-size NipponDenso >> box on board -- roughly 5" x 5" x 1.5", with a huge >> AMP connector taking up mods of one edge. Size is not >> really an issue on this particular application. ;) >> >> If you want to work on adaptation for this particular >> application, let me know. I have sop manuals and >> electrical diagrams, as well as a high-level >> description of the operations of the original ECUs. >> The 500 ran fuel only, the 650 ran ignition as well, >> and they each had a pair of cam sensors for timing >> spark and fueling on a per-cylinder basis, not waste fire. >> >> | 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 >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 Wed Jan 10 18:52:52 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 16:52:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <015a01c73518$275c8310$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Message-ID: <122529.13732.qm@web32203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Ernest Buckler wrote: > Tanks a BUNCH for clearing this up for me, had not > really compared the details (obviously [:oj) Most of the details between the bikes were never of interest to most folks; the NA models are basic transport on a budget, and the turbos were high-tech sportbike marvels of the day. With so little crossover, not many CARED about what the differences might be. For reference, the frame of the turbo bikes seems to be very close to that used on the Silverwing models, if not completely identical. They have the same wheelbase if memory serves, longer than a "naked" NA CX500, and they were both available only in monoshock format (all the nake NA CX500s had twin shocks). It should in theory be possible to build a CX500T or CX650T on a Silverwing frame without any major mods, and I think you could manage to keep the lockable, detachable hard bags from the Silverwing as well. A modern sport tourer, circa 1982! Something I'll be thinking about when I have time and money for another project, especially of a CX500T swingarm and real wheel plus a CX650 front end (suspension, wheel, brakes) and a CX650 motor and electronics fall into my lap... ;) Finding a basketcase Silverwing shouldn't be a problem, although I'm not sure what to do for a fairing (the Silverwing got that God-awful Goldwing Vetter copy that sucks so much I'd rather ride a naken bike on a long trip than be behind that fairing!). > Will be talking with you more about better EFI > possibilities for these 80 degree V-twins??? > Megasquirt? Any reason it wouldn't work? You could make the MS to work for the 500; I am not certain whether you could make the "& spark" version to fire both plugs at the right time, but have not really explored the possibility. The MS is a batch-fire system, although the newer units can handle bank-fire for two "banks"; since the turbos only have two cylinders, you should be able to set up what amounts to a crank angle delay for the second "bank", and just use a single injector on each "bank" output. I'd have to look into it a bit further to know for certain what it could and could not do easily, or perhaps someone will step in and clarify a bit for me. I wouldn't really recommend batch-fire (all injectors fired at once, probably once per crank revolution), as I believe some form of sequential injection would result in notably improved throttle response, and probably a bit of improvement in fuel economy as well, espoecially for a street-operated bike that sees a significant amount of low-speed and stop-and-go operation. It should be reasonably easy to set up for decent performance, especially if you let the transistorized spark hardware of the stock CX500T keep on in its duties of handling spark; with a turbo bike like the CX500T, you can get fairly involved into building a useful 2D or 3D ignition map, and often it will take significant trial-and error unless you have access to a dyno and a variable wastegate so you can test for a given engine load, engine speed, AND boost pressure as a 3D matrix. And errors in spark timing can be very hard on the turbo, or even hole a piston quite easily. You can make a conservative spark map and run with it, although I wouldn't consider that optimal, and it would almost certainly not be as good as the stock spark implementation, on the 500 or the 650. Two areas that open up with the use of the Donegan hardware, once fully developed, is EGT feedback (altering spark and fuel parameters based on exhaust gas temps, good for insuring long life of the turbo as well as detecting certain fuel, spark and engine problems before you require a whole new engine), and ion sensing feedback for spark timing and as a good "window" into the combustion process for tuning purposes. If they can be implemented with a user-friendly tuning approach and for not too terribly much money, they would stand as major advantages of such a system over pretty much anything else in the hobbyist market today, and would rank high in (and often beat some members of!) the hierarchy of commercial aftermarket systems available today. | 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 spyro at f2s.com Wed Jan 10 19:10:20 2007 From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 01:10:20 +0000 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <146607.63673.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <146607.63673.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <45A58E7C.9060601@f2s.com> Adam Wade wrote: > It strikes me that there is a great way of combining > all these ideas in a vehicle that does not require use > of leg-room for a passenger (i.e., a dedicated race > vehicle). Having a failure mode where a fuel pump could be pumping large volumes of fuel into a burning cockpit in a crash sounds like a really bad idea to me... From spyro at f2s.com Wed Jan 10 20:22:43 2007 From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 02:22:43 +0000 Subject: [Diy_efi] CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <122529.13732.qm@web32203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <122529.13732.qm@web32203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <45A59F73.6000409@f2s.com> Adam Wade wrote: > you can get fairly involved into > building a useful 2D or 3D ignition map, and often it > will take significant trial-and error unless you have > access to a dyno and a variable wastegate so you can > test for a given engine load, engine speed, AND boost > pressure as a 3D matrix. Questions: Firslty, do you have any references on how to map an engine both on road or on dyno, both 2d and 3d maps Secondly, is 3D mapping worth the effort on a supercharged motor, where boot pressure is directly related (I imagine) to engine RPM? From donegan at donegan.org Wed Jan 10 20:28:41 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 18:28:41 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <45A59F73.6000409@f2s.com> References: <122529.13732.qm@web32203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <45A59F73.6000409@f2s.com> Message-ID: <1168482521.4564.3.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Boost pressure is not directly related to engine RPM on a belt-driven supercharger setup. i.e. My Mustang can get serious boost at 700 RPM simply by hitting the gas :-) Similarly it can have zero boost or even some manifold vacuum at cruise - it's more a throttle position/load thing... On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 02:22 +0000, Ian Molton wrote: > Adam Wade wrote: > > you can get fairly involved into > > building a useful 2D or 3D ignition map, and often it > > will take significant trial-and error unless you have > > access to a dyno and a variable wastegate so you can > > test for a given engine load, engine speed, AND boost > > pressure as a 3D matrix. > > Questions: > > Firslty, do you have any references on how to map an engine both on road > or on dyno, both 2d and 3d maps > > Secondly, is 3D mapping worth the effort on a supercharged motor, where > boot pressure is directly related (I imagine) to engine RPM? > _______________________________________________ > 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 Wed Jan 10 20:48:55 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 18:48:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <1168482521.4564.3.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <560431.19377.qm@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: > Boost pressure is not directly related to engine RPM > on a belt-driven supercharger setup. i.e. My Mustang > can get serious boost at 700 RPM simply by hitting > the gas :-) Similarly it can have zero boost or even > some manifold vacuum at cruise - it's more a > throttle position/load thing... Does that mean the throttle plates are placed between the atmosphere and the blower? That would definitely account for a lot. And of course, it's even more complicated with a turbo; while a given steady-state throttle position and engine speed would produce a particular amount of boost, that's not the case with a turbo. I can see where it might make best sense to use a TPS vs. engine speed map as a "base" for timing your Camaro, and then modify it based either on the last x throttle position readings (looking for delta alpha, or at least accounting for trending in the "older" measurements), whereas I would think it would be far easier to look at surge tank pressure vs. alpha vs. engine speed when dealing with an exhaust-driven turbo. You could certainly get a LOT more complicated with the model and measurements if you wanted to, but I think that would be the bare minimum to properly fuel and spark an exhaust-driven turbo on a four-stroke ICE (or most other fossil fuel-powered engines too). I believe the CX500T uses a straight "mechanical advance" (no alpha used, just engine speed) with a retard based on surge tank pressure. The 650, since it integrates ignition with the rest of the ECU, most likely uses the "bare minimum" strategy I noted above. It would certainly be POSSIBLE to make a simpler system for spark timing than my "bare minimum", but I can almost insure that the results would be inferior when compared to the stock systems in both bikes, thus being a big negative when considering use as a stock replacement ECU on these bikes in particular. | 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 Wed Jan 10 21:01:01 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 19:01:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <45A58E7C.9060601@f2s.com> Message-ID: <457752.15546.qm@web32208.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Ian Molton wrote: > Having a failure mode where a fuel pump could be > pumping large volumes of fuel into a burning cockpit > in a crash sounds like a really bad idea to me... I'm assuming that under racing rules, the "surge tank" would be required to be a regulation fuel cell of some variety to prevent such an occurrence. I'm also assuming that any emergency shut-off for the vehicle would kill power to the in-tank pump as well. If there's room, and you can insulate it properly against engine compartment heat, there's no reason you couldn't put the "surge tank" in front of the firewall (assuming front-engine here, as a rear- or mid-mounted engine would be fine with plumbing directly to the fuel rail to obtain a physically short fuel delivery path). | 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 From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com Wed Jan 10 21:08:02 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 19:08:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <45A59F73.6000409@f2s.com> Message-ID: <899694.213.qm@web32210.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Ian Molton wrote: > Firslty, do you have any references on how to map an > engine both on road or on dyno, both 2d and 3d maps What do you mean by "references"? Descriptions from others? Written instructions? Personal experience? I've got a lot of #1, can probably dig up plenty of #2, and have a pretty fair amount of #3. What is the question in reference to? > Secondly, is 3D mapping worth the effort on a > supercharged motor, where boost pressure is directly > related (I imagine) to engine RPM? None of the turbo bikes (manufactured by OEs) uses anything but an exhaust-driven turbocharger, so discussion of a belt-driven supercharger is a bit moot in this particular thread. Unless you have some very sophisticated models of engine dynamics with a turbocharger, I would tend to think that to get the best results with the least complexity and expenditure, you'd want to make a 3D map for ignition timing that had alpha on one axis , rpm on another, and boost pressure as the third. With a variable wastegate and a pressure sensor in the (air) surge tank, this should be fairly easy to both map and utilize. | 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 From niche at iinet.net.au Wed Jan 10 23:22:21 2007 From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 13:22:21 +0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <146607.63673.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <146607.63673.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20070111132133.02738400@iinet.net.au>> Safety would be a huge issue, fuel return is safer and works well - other than a trim on the fuel pressure regulator why mess with it ? Mike At 07:54 AM 1/11/07, you wrote: >--- John Gross wrote: > >> If your PWM idea is designed around saving the pump >> over time to make it last longer, what you can do >> if you so choose is to use the mechanical regulator >> to help you set your operating fuel pressure. At >> different load conditions, you can adjust the PWM >> control on the fuel pump and back the pump down >> until your pressure starts to drop. > >It strikes me that there is a great way of combining >all these ideas in a vehicle that does not require use >of leg-room for a passenger (i.e., a dedicated race >vehicle). > >If you were to use a low-pressure, high-flow pump >inside the main fuel tank that fed a large surge tank >in the passenger footwell, perhaps 4-5 L or so, and a >higher-flow pump feeding a very short line to the fuel >rail, this one PWM controlled via the ECU. This would >make for an especially rapid feedback loop, and would >keep the majority of the fuel in the main tank in the >rear. The fuel in the "surge tank" could be >constantly cycled by the low-pressure pump in the >tank, and as an added extra, you could quickly rule >out failuers caused by running out of fuel or the >low-pressure pump or lines failing, merely by >observing the level of the "surge" tank from the >driver's seat. > >Just a thought, but one that might make such a system >much more viable in a practical sense, especially in >terms of the ECU making changes to fuel volume >delivery quickly enough to prevent the need for >special compensations in "accelerator pump shot" calculations. > >| 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 | > > > >____________________________________________________________________________________ >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 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 ebuckler at icehouse.net Wed Jan 10 23:03:28 2007 From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 21:03:28 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] CX 500 EFI? References: <560431.19377.qm@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <022101c7353d$d91c82b0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> I'm following this very closely, thanks for all the input. Just a reminder as to the reason for doing this at all: Factory no longer supports these bikes, ECU and sensors remaining in stock are hugely expensive, and last I heard the ECU was not programmable or even "knowable" since Honda refuses to release the code. Ernest whereas I would think it would > be far easier to look at surge tank pressure vs. alpha > vs. engine speed when dealing with an exhaust-driven > turbo. You could certainly get a LOT more complicated > with the model and measurements if you wanted to, but > I think that would be the bare minimum to properly > fuel and spark an exhaust-driven turbo on a > four-stroke ICE (or most other fossil fuel-powered > engines too). I believe the CX500T uses a straight > "mechanical advance" (no alpha used, just engine > speed) with a retard based on surge tank pressure. > The 650, since it integrates ignition with the rest of > the ECU, most likely uses the "bare minimum" strategy > I noted above. It would certainly be POSSIBLE to make > a simpler system for spark timing than my "bare > minimum", but I can almost insure that the results > would be inferior when compared to the stock systems > in both bikes, thus being a big negative when > considering use as a stock replacement ECU on these > bikes in particular. > > | 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 > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > From donegan at donegan.org Thu Jan 11 07:25:12 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 05:25:12 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <560431.19377.qm@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <560431.19377.qm@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1168521912.4564.9.camel@wopr.donegan.org> 'real' superchargers - ie Roots style ones are used in throttle, blower, intake engine sequence. Paxton/Vortech/etc and many if not all turbocharger setups are normally blow-through - ie supercharger, throttle, intake sequence. There are weird exceptions :-) In some systems, typically airplanes, turbochargers are not necessarily there for boost - but for turbo-normalized purposes - ie maintain 1 bar from sealevel to whatever the operating ceiling is... On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 18:48 -0800, Adam Wade wrote: > --- "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: > > > Boost pressure is not directly related to engine RPM > > on a belt-driven supercharger setup. i.e. My Mustang > > can get serious boost at 700 RPM simply by hitting > > the gas :-) Similarly it can have zero boost or even > > some manifold vacuum at cruise - it's more a > > throttle position/load thing... > > Does that mean the throttle plates are placed between > the atmosphere and the blower? That would definitely > account for a lot. And of course, it's even more > complicated with a turbo; while a given steady-state > throttle position and engine speed would produce a > particular amount of boost, that's not the case with a > turbo. I can see where it might make best sense to > use a TPS vs. engine speed map as a "base" for timing > your Camaro, and then modify it based either on the > last x throttle position readings (looking for delta > alpha, or at least accounting for trending in the > "older" measurements), whereas I would think it would > be far easier to look at surge tank pressure vs. alpha > vs. engine speed when dealing with an exhaust-driven > turbo. You could certainly get a LOT more complicated > with the model and measurements if you wanted to, but > I think that would be the bare minimum to properly > fuel and spark an exhaust-driven turbo on a > four-stroke ICE (or most other fossil fuel-powered > engines too). I believe the CX500T uses a straight > "mechanical advance" (no alpha used, just engine > speed) with a retard based on surge tank pressure. > The 650, since it integrates ignition with the rest of > the ECU, most likely uses the "bare minimum" strategy > I noted above. It would certainly be POSSIBLE to make > a simpler system for spark timing than my "bare > minimum", but I can almost insure that the results > would be inferior when compared to the stock systems > in both bikes, thus being a big negative when > considering use as a stock replacement ECU on these > bikes in particular. > > | 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 > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Thu Jan 11 07:29:17 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 05:29:17 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <022101c7353d$d91c82b0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> References: <560431.19377.qm@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <022101c7353d$d91c82b0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Message-ID: <1168522157.4564.14.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Whoever it was out there who has the external wiring diagrams for this application - see if you can PDF them end email them to me and I'll see if I can't shift gears for a while for you. I would also like someone who loves these antiques (grin intended) to take a survey and build a mailing list of the persons name, email address, and quantity of these bikes - if we're talking 10 or more total systems I may be able to just get them done... Since I tend to read email from a variety of devices accumulating the list myself would be a pain. Thanks! On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 21:03 -0800, Ernest Buckler wrote: > I'm following this very closely, thanks for all the input. Just a reminder > as to the reason for doing this at all: Factory no longer supports these > bikes, ECU and sensors remaining in stock are hugely expensive, and last I > heard the ECU was not programmable or even "knowable" since Honda refuses to > release the code. > Ernest > > > whereas I would think it would > > be far easier to look at surge tank pressure vs. alpha > > vs. engine speed when dealing with an exhaust-driven > > turbo. You could certainly get a LOT more complicated > > with the model and measurements if you wanted to, but > > I think that would be the bare minimum to properly > > fuel and spark an exhaust-driven turbo on a > > four-stroke ICE (or most other fossil fuel-powered > > engines too). I believe the CX500T uses a straight > > "mechanical advance" (no alpha used, just engine > > speed) with a retard based on surge tank pressure. > > The 650, since it integrates ignition with the rest of > > the ECU, most likely uses the "bare minimum" strategy > > I noted above. It would certainly be POSSIBLE to make > > a simpler system for spark timing than my "bare > > minimum", but I can almost insure that the results > > would be inferior when compared to the stock systems > > in both bikes, thus being a big negative when > > considering use as a stock replacement ECU on these > > bikes in particular. > > > > | 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 > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 spyro at f2s.com Thu Jan 11 09:32:41 2007 From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 15:32:41 +0000 Subject: [Diy_efi] CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <1168521912.4564.9.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <560431.19377.qm@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1168521912.4564.9.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <45A65899.8040000@f2s.com> Steven P. Donegan wrote: > 'real' superchargers - ie Roots style ones are used in throttle, blower, > intake engine sequence. Paxton/Vortech/etc and many if not all > turbocharger setups are normally blow-through - ie supercharger, > throttle, intake sequence. There are weird exceptions :-) In some > systems, typically airplanes, turbochargers are not necessarily there > for boost - but for turbo-normalized purposes - ie maintain 1 bar from > sealevel to whatever the operating ceiling is... whats the downside of putting the throttle after the blower? worse airflow ? From donegan at donegan.org Thu Jan 11 09:40:05 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven Donegan) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 07:40:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <45A65899.8040000@f2s.com> Message-ID: <20070111154005.61398.qmail@web802.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com> With injected systems - I don't think it matters. With old school carb'd engines you had issues with keeping the carb itself pressurized (look at early Paxton kits to see what fun stuff they tried). Ian Molton wrote: Steven P. Donegan wrote: > 'real' superchargers - ie Roots style ones are used in throttle, blower, > intake engine sequence. Paxton/Vortech/etc and many if not all > turbocharger setups are normally blow-through - ie supercharger, > throttle, intake sequence. There are weird exceptions :-) In some > systems, typically airplanes, turbochargers are not necessarily there > for boost - but for turbo-normalized purposes - ie maintain 1 bar from > sealevel to whatever the operating ceiling is... whats the downside of putting the throttle after the blower? worse airflow ? _______________________________________________ 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 Thu Jan 11 10:41:01 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 08:41:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] CX 500 EFI? In-Reply-To: <1168522157.4564.14.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <766017.24607.qm@web32201.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: > Whoever it was out there who has the external wiring > diagrams for this application - see if you can PDF > them end email them to me and I'll see if I can't > shift gears for a while for you. Done. :D | 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 A6intruder at myo-p.com Thu Jan 11 21:24:03 2007 From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 22:24:03 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce Message-ID: I hope you guys don't mind this totally Off Topic, but you are one of my more scientific group of friends. I need somebody to review my physics/methodology below: Helping my daughter (16 yr old) with a science project. She is testing two types of fertilizer by growing three equal size patches of grass, fertilizer A, fertilizer B, Control. Here's the real problem: We need to measure VERY small amounts of granular fertilizer. The grass patches are only .38 ft^2, one fertilizer amount comes out to .0213 ounces, the second comes out to .24 ounces. I don't know about you but I don't have that kind of scale around here. Here's my idea, please scrutinize, simplify, accurize... I am going to weigh 300 pennies tomorrow at work on an electronic postal scale, I think it reads out in 10ths of ounces. If they read greater than 1 ounce I should get 2 significant digits, possibly they will weigh more than 10 ounces and we can work with 3 significant digits. The assumption is that the pennies all weigh the same. This will give me an accurate weight of one penny. Back home this weekend we will make a simple balance beam. Since I don't have jeweled bearings, I'm thinking a simple string at the fulcrum will give as consistent results as anything. At the short end, say 10-to-1 ratio of lengths, I will have a hanging container with pennies. At the other end I will have a plastic medicine bottle to hold the fertilizer. To zero the balance scale out I will add coins (any size) until the coins balance out the whole apparatus. Next, I will have to do the math as to how many pennies equal 10 times the weight of the desired fertilizer weight. Place this measured amount of weight in pennies on the short end of the balance. Next, fill the medicine bottle with fertilizer until it balances. Done, measured, accurate weight of fertilizer. Does all of that make sense? It does to me. The hardest part will be helping her learn what we just did so she can defend her process on the project. Suggestions are appreciated. Dan Nicoson From saltracer at hotmail.com Thu Jan 11 21:39:13 2007 From: saltracer at hotmail.com (Phil Landry) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 21:39:13 -0600 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Message-ID: Steven, I just entered into the world of homemade EFI, and was reading all about the Donegan ECU. I'll cut to the chase, I'm building a '32 ford roadster to run at Bonneville in a class that requires a 260 cubic inch engine. I'm looking hard a the engine made for the Thunderbird Super Coupe. This could be modified to run carb and regular MSD type distributor. But, I would like to maintain the fuel injection and electronic ignition. This combination in theory should run 200 mph, with a strong enough motor to hold together with lots of boost. Anyway I've just started to try and figure out the fuel injection and very interested in your project. Thanks for your time . Phil Landry From efi at dyakron.com Thu Jan 11 21:57:23 2007 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 22:57:23 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce References: Message-ID: <000a01c735fd$c60569b0$6501a8c0@IBMm> > Here's the real problem: We need to measure VERY small amounts of > granular > fertilizer. The grass patches are only .38 ft^2, one fertilizer amount > comes out to .0213 ounces, the second comes out to .24 ounces. Just a WAG, but have you checked postal envelop scales? Not packace scale, but envelope scale. Not sure if an enveloped weighs .02 ounch however. mv From jimster1 at earthlink.net Thu Jan 11 22:10:56 2007 From: jimster1 at earthlink.net (Jim Bannister) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 20:10:56 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce In-Reply-To: <000a01c735fd$c60569b0$6501a8c0@IBMm> References: <000a01c735fd$c60569b0$6501a8c0@IBMm> Message-ID: <002d01c735ff$a9419a90$6500a8c0@daddy> How about checking a sport shop that caters to the ammunition reloading crowd. They measure gun powder vvverry accurately. Jim B. > Here's the real problem: We need to measure VERY small amounts of > granular > fertilizer. The grass patches are only .38 ft^2, one fertilizer amount > comes out to .0213 ounces, the second comes out to .24 ounces. From ebuckler at icehouse.net Thu Jan 11 22:58:01 2007 From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 20:58:01 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce References: Message-ID: <001c01c73606$3d2e59e0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Dan, For starters, I'd suggest doing a similar exercise with 16 oz cans of soup or veggies at 1:1, then 2:1 length, then gradually stepping back, making the occasional suggestion ("maybe we could use pennies...?" & "what happens if we...?"). Also, you don't really need wt in ounces, as long as pennies and uniquely-named (funny?) fractions thereof remain her standard throughout her experiment. She will probably conclude that herself somewhere along the way, as long as you don't give her too many of our mainstream limits. Or maybe softly offer a tiny example, etc. She's basically duplicating early measuring methods of early civilization, with some natural (and visible) math thrown in (the ratio stuff). I would also bet that somewhere along the line she will see ways to improve the instrument itself, to make it easier to use and more consistent... If you just hang out with her and go "hmmm.." a lot, and occasionally ask "how can we do this next thing , based on what we already know?", let it sink in over several days, I'll bet she will get it figured out herself. And that WILL stick with her. I'm presuming that as YOUR child, she's already pretty doggone smart; she might just surprise you with how much of this she can and will do on her own, given space AND impetus ("well, this HAS to get figuered out, you know. Hmmm. What do you think here?") Your challenge will be to back off and steer with tiny nudges, of course. Plus checking the logic and ensuring accuracy, most gently. As it was mine, but having a psychologist wife who had also studied Montessori, helped. Sorry, but you did ask. Ernest B. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Nicoson" To: "DIY_ EFI" Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 7:24 PM Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce >I hope you guys don't mind this totally Off Topic, but you are one of my > more scientific group of friends. > > I need somebody to review my physics/methodology below: > > Helping my daughter (16 yr old) with a science project. She is testing > two > types of fertilizer by growing three equal size patches of grass, > fertilizer > A, fertilizer B, Control. > > Here's the real problem: We need to measure VERY small amounts of > granular > fertilizer. The grass patches are only .38 ft^2, one fertilizer amount > comes out to .0213 ounces, the second comes out to .24 ounces. > > I don't know about you but I don't have that kind of scale around here. > > Here's my idea, please scrutinize, simplify, accurize... > > I am going to weigh 300 pennies tomorrow at work on an electronic postal > scale, I think it reads out in 10ths of ounces. If they read greater than > 1 > ounce I should get 2 significant digits, possibly they will weigh more > than > 10 ounces and we can work with 3 significant digits. The assumption is > that > the pennies all weigh the same. This will give me an accurate weight of > one > penny. > > Back home this weekend we will make a simple balance beam. Since I don't > have jeweled bearings, I'm thinking a simple string at the fulcrum will > give > as consistent results as anything. > > At the short end, say 10-to-1 ratio of lengths, I will have a hanging > container with pennies. At the other end I will have a plastic medicine > bottle to hold the fertilizer. > > To zero the balance scale out I will add coins (any size) until the coins > balance out the whole apparatus. > > Next, I will have to do the math as to how many pennies equal 10 times the > weight of the desired fertilizer weight. Place this measured amount of > weight in pennies on the short end of the balance. Next, fill the > medicine > bottle with fertilizer until it balances. > > Done, measured, accurate weight of fertilizer. > > Does all of that make sense? It does to me. > > The hardest part will be helping her learn what we just did so she can > defend her process on the project. > > Suggestions are appreciated. > > Dan Nicoson > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Fri Jan 12 03:39:19 2007 From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 17:39:19 +0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce In-Reply-To: <001c01c73606$3d2e59e0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> References: <001c01c73606$3d2e59e0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20070112173706.0273cd70@iinet.net.au>> Gorsh, and I resisted the temptation for parenting advice and the temptation to boast about my two boys 11 and 14 exploits in the lab, though yeah Dan is right, it *is* very good to back off and it *is* a bit hard to not fill in the blanks, mothering/fathering instinct and ego/(I know I know I know) control paramount, Mike At 12:58 PM 1/12/07, you wrote: >Dan, >For starters, I'd suggest doing a similar exercise with 16 oz cans of soup or veggies at 1:1, then 2:1 length, then gradually stepping back, making the occasional suggestion ("maybe we could use pennies...?" & "what happens if we...?"). Also, you don't really need wt in ounces, as long as pennies and uniquely-named (funny?) fractions thereof remain her standard throughout her experiment. She will probably conclude that herself somewhere along the way, as long as you don't give her too many of our mainstream limits. Or maybe softly offer a tiny example, etc. She's basically duplicating early measuring methods of early civilization, with some natural (and visible) math thrown in (the ratio stuff). I would also bet that somewhere along the line she will see ways to improve the instrument itself, to make it easier to use and more consistent... If you just hang out with her and go "hmmm.." a lot, and occasionally ask "how can we do this next thing , based on what we already know?", let it sink in over several days, I'll bet she will get it figured out herself. And that WILL stick with her. I'm presuming that as YOUR child, she's already pretty doggone smart; she might just surprise you with how much of this she can and will do on her own, given space AND impetus ("well, this HAS to get figuered out, you know. Hmmm. What do you think here?") Your challenge will be to back off and steer with tiny nudges, of course. Plus checking the logic and ensuring accuracy, most gently. As it was mine, but having a psychologist wife who had also studied Montessori, helped. > >Sorry, but you did ask. > >Ernest B. > > > >----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Nicoson" >To: "DIY_ EFI" >Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 7:24 PM >Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce > > >>I hope you guys don't mind this totally Off Topic, but you are one of my >>more scientific group of friends. >> >>I need somebody to review my physics/methodology below: >> >>Helping my daughter (16 yr old) with a science project. She is testing two >>types of fertilizer by growing three equal size patches of grass, fertilizer >>A, fertilizer B, Control. >> >>Here's the real problem: We need to measure VERY small amounts of granular >>fertilizer. The grass patches are only .38 ft^2, one fertilizer amount >>comes out to .0213 ounces, the second comes out to .24 ounces. >> >>I don't know about you but I don't have that kind of scale around here. >> >>Here's my idea, please scrutinize, simplify, accurize... >> >>I am going to weigh 300 pennies tomorrow at work on an electronic postal >>scale, I think it reads out in 10ths of ounces. If they read greater than 1 >>ounce I should get 2 significant digits, possibly they will weigh more than >>10 ounces and we can work with 3 significant digits. The assumption is that >>the pennies all weigh the same. This will give me an accurate weight of one >>penny. >> >>Back home this weekend we will make a simple balance beam. Since I don't >>have jeweled bearings, I'm thinking a simple string at the fulcrum will give >>as consistent results as anything. >> >>At the short end, say 10-to-1 ratio of lengths, I will have a hanging >>container with pennies. At the other end I will have a plastic medicine >>bottle to hold the fertilizer. >> >>To zero the balance scale out I will add coins (any size) until the coins >>balance out the whole apparatus. >> >>Next, I will have to do the math as to how many pennies equal 10 times the >>weight of the desired fertilizer weight. Place this measured amount of >>weight in pennies on the short end of the balance. Next, fill the medicine >>bottle with fertilizer until it balances. >> >>Done, measured, accurate weight of fertilizer. >> >>Does all of that make sense? It does to me. >> >>The hardest part will be helping her learn what we just did so she can >>defend her process on the project. >> >>Suggestions are appreciated. >> >>Dan Nicoson >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Diy_efi mailing list >>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > >_______________________________________________ >Diy_efi mailing list >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Fri Jan 12 07:17:00 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 05:17:00 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1168607820.20219.9.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Get a Ford A4 block or the World Products aluminum equivalent (4 bolt mains smallblock ford) stroke to 2.9 something or so (destroked 302 basically - just find whatever the original 260 used for stroke and keep the 'stock' 3.0 bore) and you will have a bulletproof 260 rev monster... If they allow any head choice then there are many aluminum jewels to choose from. Don't use a distributor at all - or simply use it as a cam position sensor and go crank triggered. Gear this with 2.something gears and a T5 or T56 tranny (T56 preferred - 2 overdrives) and 200 MPH should be 'easy'... If you do the work yourself this is likely <10k worth of motor... If more of a budget is required let me know off list and I'll try and fit something from pure junkyard rebuilts up - note though that the block really should be something bulletproof for a run like this... blowing a motor at >150 could seriously ruin your day and/or kill you.. And I will be happy to work with you on the EFI portion as well :-) On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 21:39 -0600, Phil Landry wrote: > Steven, I just entered into the world of homemade EFI, and was reading all about the Donegan ECU. I'll cut to the chase, I'm building a '32 ford roadster to run at Bonneville in a class that requires a 260 cubic inch engine. I'm looking hard a the engine made for the Thunderbird Super Coupe. This could be modified to run carb and regular MSD type distributor. But, I would like to maintain the fuel injection and electronic ignition. This combination in theory should run 200 mph, with a strong enough motor to hold together with lots of boost. Anyway I've just started to try and figure out the fuel injection and very interested in your project. Thanks for your time . Phil Landry > _______________________________________________ > 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 saltracer at hotmail.com Fri Jan 12 07:34:05 2007 From: saltracer at hotmail.com (Phillip Landry) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 07:34:05 -0600 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Message-ID: The short stroke SBF was my first choice, but the crank from Crower was $2500. I have more money than I used to, but that was an expensive start to the project as custom pistons were going to be next. The Super Coupe motor was starting to look like a good alternative. The class we want to run is E/BSTR. The B stands for blown. I was also looking at the Buick Grand National motor and trans. The turbo packaging seems to take up much more room and these also seem to get a little pricey. Have you heard of Megasuirt? thanks Phil >From: "Steven P. Donegan" >Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU >Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 05:17:00 -0800 > >Get a Ford A4 block or the World Products aluminum equivalent (4 bolt >mains smallblock ford) stroke to 2.9 something or so (destroked 302 >basically - just find whatever the original 260 used for stroke and keep >the 'stock' 3.0 bore) and you will have a bulletproof 260 rev monster... >If they allow any head choice then there are many aluminum jewels to >choose from. Don't use a distributor at all - or simply use it as a cam >position sensor and go crank triggered. Gear this with 2.something gears >and a T5 or T56 tranny (T56 preferred - 2 overdrives) and 200 MPH should >be 'easy'... If you do the work yourself this is likely <10k worth of >motor... > >If more of a budget is required let me know off list and I'll try and >fit something from pure junkyard rebuilts up - note though that the >block really should be something bulletproof for a run like this... >blowing a motor at >150 could seriously ruin your day and/or kill you.. > >And I will be happy to work with you on the EFI portion as well :-) > >On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 21:39 -0600, Phil Landry wrote: > > Steven, I just entered into the world of homemade EFI, and was reading >all about the Donegan ECU. I'll cut to the chase, I'm building a '32 ford >roadster to run at Bonneville in a class that requires a 260 cubic inch >engine. I'm looking hard a the engine made for the Thunderbird Super >Coupe. This could be modified to run carb and regular MSD type distributor. >But, I would like to maintain the fuel injection and electronic ignition. >This combination in theory should run 200 mph, with a strong enough motor >to hold together with lots of boost. Anyway I've just started to try and >figure out the fuel injection and very interested in your project. Thanks >for your time . Phil Landry > > _______________________________________________ > > Diy_efi mailing list > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > >_______________________________________________ >Diy_efi mailing list >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From A6intruder at myo-p.com Fri Jan 12 07:56:18 2007 From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 08:56:18 -0500 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Phil, Why not just tune the Ford computer? A TwEECer could handle that engine combination just fine. www.tweecer.com In fact we have a guy running a Sunbeam with a 5.0 V-8 on the salt flats over on the Yahoo Groups TwEECer list. He'd be a good resource for you. Neat project! Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Phil Landry Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:39 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Steven, I just entered into the world of homemade EFI, and was reading all about the Donegan ECU. I'll cut to the chase, I'm building a '32 ford roadster to run at Bonneville in a class that requires a 260 cubic inch engine. I'm looking hard a the engine made for the Thunderbird Super Coupe. This could be modified to run carb and regular MSD type distributor. But, I would like to maintain the fuel injection and electronic ignition. This combination in theory should run 200 mph, with a strong enough motor to hold together with lots of boost. Anyway I've just started to try and figure out the fuel injection and very interested in your project. Thanks for your time . Phil Landry _______________________________________________ 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 Fri Jan 12 08:01:30 2007 From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 09:01:30 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce In-Reply-To: <001c01c73606$3d2e59e0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Message-ID: Actually, you brought up the most important part. SHE has to figure this out. I'm comfortable after working the problem on paper and in my head, this is a simple statics problem from my college days 22 years ago. So I will spend the day figuring out how to let her work this out. Thanks! Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Ernest Buckler Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 11:58 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce Dan, For starters, I'd suggest doing a similar exercise with 16 oz cans of soup or veggies at 1:1, then 2:1 length, then gradually stepping back, making the occasional suggestion ("maybe we could use pennies...?" & "what happens if we...?"). Also, you don't really need wt in ounces, as long as pennies and uniquely-named (funny?) fractions thereof remain her standard throughout her experiment. She will probably conclude that herself somewhere along the way, as long as you don't give her too many of our mainstream limits. Or maybe softly offer a tiny example, etc. She's basically duplicating early measuring methods of early civilization, with some natural (and visible) math thrown in (the ratio stuff). I would also bet that somewhere along the line she will see ways to improve the instrument itself, to make it easier to use and more consistent... If you just hang out with her and go "hmmm.." a lot, and occasionally ask "how can we do this next thing , based on what we already know?", let it sink in over several days, I'll bet she will get it figured out herself. And that WILL stick with her. I'm presuming that as YOUR child, she's already pretty doggone smart; she might just surprise you with how much of this she can and will do on her own, given space AND impetus ("well, this HAS to get figuered out, you know. Hmmm. What do you think here?") Your challenge will be to back off and steer with tiny nudges, of course. Plus checking the logic and ensuring accuracy, most gently. As it was mine, but having a psychologist wife who had also studied Montessori, helped. Sorry, but you did ask. Ernest B. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Nicoson" To: "DIY_ EFI" Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 7:24 PM Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce >I hope you guys don't mind this totally Off Topic, but you are one of my > more scientific group of friends. > > I need somebody to review my physics/methodology below: > > Helping my daughter (16 yr old) with a science project. She is testing > two > types of fertilizer by growing three equal size patches of grass, > fertilizer > A, fertilizer B, Control. > > Here's the real problem: We need to measure VERY small amounts of > granular > fertilizer. The grass patches are only .38 ft^2, one fertilizer amount > comes out to .0213 ounces, the second comes out to .24 ounces. > > I don't know about you but I don't have that kind of scale around here. > > Here's my idea, please scrutinize, simplify, accurize... > > I am going to weigh 300 pennies tomorrow at work on an electronic postal > scale, I think it reads out in 10ths of ounces. If they read greater than > 1 > ounce I should get 2 significant digits, possibly they will weigh more > than > 10 ounces and we can work with 3 significant digits. The assumption is > that > the pennies all weigh the same. This will give me an accurate weight of > one > penny. > > Back home this weekend we will make a simple balance beam. Since I don't > have jeweled bearings, I'm thinking a simple string at the fulcrum will > give > as consistent results as anything. > > At the short end, say 10-to-1 ratio of lengths, I will have a hanging > container with pennies. At the other end I will have a plastic medicine > bottle to hold the fertilizer. > > To zero the balance scale out I will add coins (any size) until the coins > balance out the whole apparatus. > > Next, I will have to do the math as to how many pennies equal 10 times the > weight of the desired fertilizer weight. Place this measured amount of > weight in pennies on the short end of the balance. Next, fill the > medicine > bottle with fertilizer until it balances. > > Done, measured, accurate weight of fertilizer. > > Does all of that make sense? It does to me. > > The hardest part will be helping her learn what we just did so she can > defend her process on the project. > > Suggestions are appreciated. > > Dan Nicoson > > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Fri Jan 12 08:34:58 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven Donegan) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 06:34:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <1168607820.20219.9.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <20070112143458.91841.qmail@web802.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com> OOOPS, sorry, stock 3.8 bore for a 260 - which BTW would require you to sleeve and underbore the 'normal' 302 blocks available. You would also need to find a 289/260 crank as they are 2.87 stroke and stock 302 is 3.0... "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: Get a Ford A4 block or the World Products aluminum equivalent (4 bolt mains smallblock ford) stroke to 2.9 something or so (destroked 302 basically - just find whatever the original 260 used for stroke and keep the 'stock' 3.0 bore) and you will have a bulletproof 260 rev monster... If they allow any head choice then there are many aluminum jewels to choose from. Don't use a distributor at all - or simply use it as a cam position sensor and go crank triggered. Gear this with 2.something gears and a T5 or T56 tranny (T56 preferred - 2 overdrives) and 200 MPH should be 'easy'... If you do the work yourself this is likely <10k worth of motor... If more of a budget is required let me know off list and I'll try and fit something from pure junkyard rebuilts up - note though that the block really should be something bulletproof for a run like this... blowing a motor at >150 could seriously ruin your day and/or kill you.. And I will be happy to work with you on the EFI portion as well :-) On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 21:39 -0600, Phil Landry wrote: > Steven, I just entered into the world of homemade EFI, and was reading all about the Donegan ECU. I'll cut to the chase, I'm building a '32 ford roadster to run at Bonneville in a class that requires a 260 cubic inch engine. I'm looking hard a the engine made for the Thunderbird Super Coupe. This could be modified to run carb and regular MSD type distributor. But, I would like to maintain the fuel injection and electronic ignition. This combination in theory should run 200 mph, with a strong enough motor to hold together with lots of boost. Anyway I've just started to try and figure out the fuel injection and very interested in your project. Thanks for your time . Phil Landry > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Fri Jan 12 09:06:56 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven Donegan) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 07:06:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20070112150656.90577.qmail@web805.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Of course I have heard of Megasquirt :-) It is THE original useful DIY-EFI box and has been used by many on just about every kind of vehicle. If you can find one an old early 60's aluminum block Buick 215 V8 may work for you - they were darn popular engines for swaps. What are the engine limits for the class - Blown OK, engine cylinders? maximum displacement? etc. I may be able to assist. Phillip Landry wrote: The short stroke SBF was my first choice, but the crank from Crower was $2500. I have more money than I used to, but that was an expensive start to the project as custom pistons were going to be next. The Super Coupe motor was starting to look like a good alternative. The class we want to run is E/BSTR. The B stands for blown. I was also looking at the Buick Grand National motor and trans. The turbo packaging seems to take up much more room and these also seem to get a little pricey. Have you heard of Megasuirt? thanks Phil >From: "Steven P. Donegan" >Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU >Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 05:17:00 -0800 > >Get a Ford A4 block or the World Products aluminum equivalent (4 bolt >mains smallblock ford) stroke to 2.9 something or so (destroked 302 >basically - just find whatever the original 260 used for stroke and keep >the 'stock' 3.0 bore) and you will have a bulletproof 260 rev monster... >If they allow any head choice then there are many aluminum jewels to >choose from. Don't use a distributor at all - or simply use it as a cam >position sensor and go crank triggered. Gear this with 2.something gears >and a T5 or T56 tranny (T56 preferred - 2 overdrives) and 200 MPH should >be 'easy'... If you do the work yourself this is likely <10k worth of >motor... > >If more of a budget is required let me know off list and I'll try and >fit something from pure junkyard rebuilts up - note though that the >block really should be something bulletproof for a run like this... >blowing a motor at >150 could seriously ruin your day and/or kill you.. > >And I will be happy to work with you on the EFI portion as well :-) > >On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 21:39 -0600, Phil Landry wrote: > > Steven, I just entered into the world of homemade EFI, and was reading >all about the Donegan ECU. I'll cut to the chase, I'm building a '32 ford >roadster to run at Bonneville in a class that requires a 260 cubic inch >engine. I'm looking hard a the engine made for the Thunderbird Super >Coupe. This could be modified to run carb and regular MSD type distributor. >But, I would like to maintain the fuel injection and electronic ignition. >This combination in theory should run 200 mph, with a strong enough motor >to hold together with lots of boost. Anyway I've just started to try and >figure out the fuel injection and very interested in your project. Thanks >for your time . Phil Landry > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 ScottyGrover at aol.com Fri Jan 12 09:36:02 2007 From: ScottyGrover at aol.com (ScottyGrover at aol.com) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 10:36:02 EST Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Message-ID: <407.3b773f.32d904e2@aol.com> In a message dated 1/12/2007 7:09:22 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, donegan at donegan.org writes: If you can find one an old early 60's aluminum block Buick 215 V8 may work for you - they were darn popular engines for swaps. Check with your import dealer- the Olds/Buick aluminum-block V8 was sold by GM to Rover and may have been bored or stroked by them for Land Rovers, etc. Parts are still available from Buick. Scotty From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net Fri Jan 12 11:00:02 2007 From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 09:00:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce Message-ID: <20070112170002.72277.qmail@web80514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> word of caution, don't boil the ocean! sometimes taking for granted a result of a tool and focusing on the original project is the better approach, rather than to understand and explain every aspect of the project. too carry this to an extreme, do you need to defend how the pen gets ink onto the paper that documents the project, or just document the project. if the objective of the project is to compare fertilizer, then don't try to over complicate it w/ defending the analysis of a scale, simply state that the scale was tested and proved accurate, and keep the student focused on the original project. Then, as a side project, go back and for 'extra credit' at home, focus on the tool (scale) and reward somehow for being able to compare and defend analysis of different scale techniques. KISS, in this case, Keep It Simple for Students will go along way toward success, because yes you really can boil the ocean, one cup at a time! As has been proved, ants can move mountains, teamwork and modularity reign supreme! cheers, and good luck, from a parent and teacher ----- Original Message ---- From: Daniel Nicoson To: DIY_ EFI Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:24:03 PM Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce I hope you guys don't mind this totally Off Topic, but you are one of my more scientific group of friends. I need somebody to review my physics/methodology below: Helping my daughter (16 yr old) with a science project. She is testing two types of fertilizer by growing three equal size patches of grass, fertilizer A, fertilizer B, Control. Here's the real problem: We need to measure VERY small amounts of granular fertilizer. The grass patches are only .38 ft^2, one fertilizer amount comes out to .0213 ounces, the second comes out to .24 ounces. I don't know about you but I don't have that kind of scale around here. Here's my idea, please scrutinize, simplify, accurize... I am going to weigh 300 pennies tomorrow at work on an electronic postal scale, I think it reads out in 10ths of ounces. If they read greater than 1 ounce I should get 2 significant digits, possibly they will weigh more than 10 ounces and we can work with 3 significant digits. The assumption is that the pennies all weigh the same. This will give me an accurate weight of one penny. Back home this weekend we will make a simple balance beam. Since I don't have jeweled bearings, I'm thinking a simple string at the fulcrum will give as consistent results as anything. At the short end, say 10-to-1 ratio of lengths, I will have a hanging container with pennies. At the other end I will have a plastic medicine bottle to hold the fertilizer. To zero the balance scale out I will add coins (any size) until the coins balance out the whole apparatus. Next, I will have to do the math as to how many pennies equal 10 times the weight of the desired fertilizer weight. Place this measured amount of weight in pennies on the short end of the balance. Next, fill the medicine bottle with fertilizer until it balances. Done, measured, accurate weight of fertilizer. Does all of that make sense? It does to me. The hardest part will be helping her learn what we just did so she can defend her process on the project. Suggestions are appreciated. Dan Nicoson _______________________________________________ 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 ScottyGrover at aol.com Fri Jan 12 14:23:03 2007 From: ScottyGrover at aol.com (ScottyGrover at aol.com) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 15:23:03 EST Subject: [Diy_efi] Flap-type Airflow Meters Message-ID: Dan was asking about these Bosch/Nippon meters and how they were calibrated. I put 12VDC between pins 6 and 9 and hooked a voltmeter between pins 6 and 7. I then rotated the toothed wheel on the end of the rotating shaft and this is what I read: Base 1.29V 1 tooth 1.75V 2 teeth 2.7V 3 " 4.3V 4 " 5.3V 5 " 5.9V 6 " 6.5V 7 " 6.8V 8 " 7.3V 9 " 7.6V 10 " 7.95V 11 " 8.05V 12 " 8.2V max 8.21V I hope this helps. Scotty 2 " From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com Fri Jan 12 19:23:49 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 17:23:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head In-Reply-To: <00b201c72938$10f83d80$6401a8c0@intel253> Message-ID: <982554.36652.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Jean Belanger wrote: > I was not forgetting that, I was just simplifying > things for a general explanation. It seems you "simplified out" the main problem, unless I missed something. > As for making it easier with multiple injectors, > Rover did not seem to think so when they made the > MPi Mini. Unless you have at your disposal an engine dyno with at least 4-gas analysis and full engineering access to your ECU, and some long-term professional injection system designers and programmers, I doubt that Rover's solution would be "easier" to develop. I was looking for the simplest way that could be managed with a fairly low-tech solution that would be reasonably cost-effective for a hobbyist, and I think the solution I offered is one of the easier/cheaper approaches for a hobbyist with limited funds and tuning tools. > You should have a look at the Rover patent because > they describe 2 modes of operation. One mode is the > obvious pulse on an open valve and the second is > a single pulse which starts when the number 2 (or 3) > cylinder valve is open and finishes when the number > 1 (or 4) cylinder valve is open covering the > overlap region. I don't know if the MPi engine uses > them both but it seems the best way to go to high > RPM and still have a reasonable size injector > without worrying about the time needed to open and > close the injector during the intake overlap. That's a reasonable assessment. However, I'd wager that one could produce more power using a more "discerning" setup, even at high rpm; unless I'm not clear on something, it would seem that there would still be mixture distribution issues with that technology, albeit of a much lesser nature than at lower engine speeds. > I assume that this mode also requires a cam which > does not have an excessive amount of overlap between > intake and exhaust otherwise you'd be injecting fuel > out the exhaust. I suppose it would depend on what sort of fuel economy and emissions profile were required by the designer; if you're not running a cat, unless you're concerned about emissions or fuel economy, there's no reason to worry much about unburned fuel passing into the exhaust. >> In particular, as I understand it, you cannot >> inject fuel prior to the closing of the "inside" >> cylinder's intake valve and have any of that fuel >> end up in the "outside" cylinder -- for cylinders 2 >> and 3, you are limited to the time between the >> closing of the #2/3 intake valve and the closing >> of the #1/4 intake valve, which is a pretty short >> period, especially at higher rpms. > This is true for discrete injection pulse per > cylinder but with the mode described above it is > no longer true if you time the pulse correctly > (which has to be done anyway). I'd assume that the dynamics of intake flow, and where it goes when, at what velocity, is a very complicated thing indeed in siamesed-port intakes like the one described, and would probably vary radically with changes in throttle and engine speed. This is one of the reasons why I lean toward a solution that pretty much confines a certain injetor's contribution to a particular cylinder; it would be far easier to tune without needing CFD or experimental flow rate and direction data to insure reasonable mixture distribution, IMO. > During the intake overlap, some fuel will go to both > cylinders but the amount to each should be similar > from cycle to cycle. In a steady-state condition, I'd say "more or less". In a dynamic condition, I'd be willing to bet the numbers fluctuate pretty heavily, and if someone were to try that, I'd suspect their four-gas exhaust data would support that theory. I don't have access to anything like that, but if anyone on list does, I'd be VERY interested in seeing it. > So you just need to time the injection pulse to get > a constant AFR between the cylinder pair. Which, as I noted, is likely a lot tricker than it sounds when looking at the entire operating range of the engine, and which would be either very time-consuming or very difficult (or both!) to achieve without pretty solid knowledge of the true dynamics within the manifold, under a given set of operating conditions. >> I think a staged injector system might be in order >> here; in fact, it's possible that the optimal >> combination would be a single sat. drive injector >> for cylinders 2 and 3, and staged dual injectors >> for cylinders 1 and 4, which would allow a honkin' >> big injector for higher-load running and a small >> injector to handle idle control. > And this is simpler than one injector per port? In terms of achieving even and correct fueling for each cylinder individually? Yes, much simpler indeed. With that setup, you can deliver fuel for #2/3 in much of the before the cylinder's intake valve opens (and before the #1/4 intake valve opens), and can deliver enough fuel for cylinder #1/4 ONLY during the time period where its intake valve is open and #2/3 intake valve is closed. Once you have the code set up so that for a given value in a map cell each of the two different styles of injector setup deliver the same amount of fuel, it then becomes very easy to test and tune for best possible power without having to do any fancy trickery or computations (or measurement while on the dyno) to keep fueling consistent between all cylinders. > It seems quite complex for both hardware and > software. I wouldn't think it would be terribly difficult for software. You'd be running 2 cylinders staged and 2 cylinders not staged. If you were concerned about the code, you could use 8 staged injectors and not have to worry about code balancing the two different types of injection; this would cost a little more in hardware, but would make programming a no-brainer using any system that can handle staged injection, as long as there is real estate available for mounting all 8 injectors. > But for this staging you only need 2 injectors per > port not the 3 you're suggesting It sounds like you're relying on your claim above that it is easily "do-able" to use either a single injector or a single pair of staged injectors to fuel the adjacent cylinders through the single port, and I don't think that is within the abilities and means of most people on this list. I suppose it would be possible with proper resources, but even if it were, it would likely be a much simpler and quicker implementation to just insure that there is one injection event per cylinder delivered by a dedicated injector (or staged pair), since you don't have to computer intake flow throughout the operating range, or test via trial and error and four-gas data to tweak the injection timing throughout the full operating range (and then you have to do the computation as well to determine if the optimal injector opening times have changed, and to insure they are triggered on schedule). > (or is it 5 total?). 6. I'm not sure how 5 would be workable in any meaningful sense. >> Timing the injection on the >> center pair of cylinders will be critical. > I agree that timing is critical but it's for the > outside cylinders. Sorry about that. I wrote the reply and had everything backwards regarding the cylinder pairs, then went through and corrected them all. Looks like I missed that one in my editing. | 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 From donegan at donegan.org Fri Jan 12 20:57:28 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 18:57:28 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Flap-type Airflow Meters In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1168657048.23324.18.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Now - if someone can just map those steps to airflow numbers I can make a GM frequency MAF to flapper MAF voltage translation table. Which will allow those of you out there who want to run 80mm MAF's on your (pick engine) car :-) That circuit board is already built - that's my little MAF interceptor project... On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 15:23 -0500, ScottyGrover at aol.com wrote: > Dan was asking about these Bosch/Nippon meters and how they were > calibrated. > I put 12VDC between pins 6 and 9 and hooked a voltmeter between pins > 6 and > 7. I then rotated the toothed wheel on the end of the rotating shaft > and this > is what I read: > Base 1.29V > 1 tooth 1.75V > 2 teeth 2.7V > 3 " 4.3V > 4 " 5.3V > 5 " 5.9V > 6 " 6.5V > 7 " 6.8V > 8 " 7.3V > 9 " 7.6V > 10 " 7.95V > 11 " 8.05V > 12 " 8.2V > max 8.21V > > I hope this helps. > > Scotty From saltracer at hotmail.com Fri Jan 12 21:06:54 2007 From: saltracer at hotmail.com (Phillip Landry) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 21:06:54 -0600 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: <20070112150656.90577.qmail@web805.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: The class we want to run is for 184 to 260 cubic inch, any number of cylinders we like. I even heard of some guys running a seven cylinder chevy. The particular record we are going after is 160 mph and this class if for cars with supercharger or turbocharger. We have to run the car on gas (no fuel, such as nitromethane or alcohol). We have only raced flathead fords before and in that engine category electronic fuel injection is not allowed. So this part is all new. Today I'm still interested in the Super Coupe or clone there of. Maybe a bigger blower, but still use the injection. thanks Phil >From: Steven Donegan >Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU >Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 07:06:56 -0800 (PST) > >Of course I have heard of Megasquirt :-) It is THE original useful DIY-EFI >box and has been used by many on just about every kind of vehicle. > >If you can find one an old early 60's aluminum block Buick 215 V8 may work >for you - they were darn popular engines for swaps. > >What are the engine limits for the class - Blown OK, engine cylinders? >maximum displacement? etc. I may be able to assist. > >Phillip Landry wrote: The short stroke SBF was my >first choice, but the crank from Crower was >$2500. I have more money than I used to, but that was an expensive start >to the project as custom pistons were going to be next. The Super Coupe >motor was starting to look like a good alternative. The class we want to >run >is E/BSTR. The B stands for blown. I was also looking at the Buick Grand >National motor and trans. The turbo packaging seems to take up much more >room and these also seem to get a little pricey. Have you heard of >Megasuirt? >thanks Phil > > >From: "Steven P. Donegan" > >Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > >Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > >Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 05:17:00 -0800 > > > >Get a Ford A4 block or the World Products aluminum equivalent (4 bolt > >mains smallblock ford) stroke to 2.9 something or so (destroked 302 > >basically - just find whatever the original 260 used for stroke and keep > >the 'stock' 3.0 bore) and you will have a bulletproof 260 rev monster... > >If they allow any head choice then there are many aluminum jewels to > >choose from. Don't use a distributor at all - or simply use it as a cam > >position sensor and go crank triggered. Gear this with 2.something gears > >and a T5 or T56 tranny (T56 preferred - 2 overdrives) and 200 MPH should > >be 'easy'... If you do the work yourself this is likely <10k worth of > >motor... > > > >If more of a budget is required let me know off list and I'll try and > >fit something from pure junkyard rebuilts up - note though that the > >block really should be something bulletproof for a run like this... > >blowing a motor at >150 could seriously ruin your day and/or kill you.. > > > >And I will be happy to work with you on the EFI portion as well :-) > > > >On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 21:39 -0600, Phil Landry wrote: > > > Steven, I just entered into the world of homemade EFI, and was reading > >all about the Donegan ECU. I'll cut to the chase, I'm building a '32 ford > >roadster to run at Bonneville in a class that requires a 260 cubic inch > >engine. I'm looking hard a the engine made for the Thunderbird Super > >Coupe. This could be modified to run carb and regular MSD type >distributor. > >But, I would like to maintain the fuel injection and electronic ignition. > >This combination in theory should run 200 mph, with a strong enough >motor > >to hold together with lots of boost. Anyway I've just started to try and > >figure out the fuel injection and very interested in your project. Thanks > >for your time . Phil Landry > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 saltracer at hotmail.com Fri Jan 12 21:51:09 2007 From: saltracer at hotmail.com (Phillip Landry) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 21:51:09 -0600 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Talk about a small world, that must be drmayf, I believe he owns the Sunbeam. I'm on a land speed racing chat group with him. I didn't know he was running the Tweecer controller. I at the very bottom of the learning curve about electronic fuel injection. thanks Phil >From: "Daniel Nicoson" >Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >To: >Subject: RE: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU >Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 08:56:18 -0500 > >Phil, > >Why not just tune the Ford computer? A TwEECer could handle that engine >combination just fine. > >www.tweecer.com > >In fact we have a guy running a Sunbeam with a 5.0 V-8 on the salt flats >over on the Yahoo Groups TwEECer list. He'd be a good resource for you. > >Neat project! > >Dan Nicoson > >-----Original Message----- >From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On >Behalf Of Phil Landry >Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:39 PM >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU > >Steven, I just entered into the world of homemade EFI, and was reading all >about the Donegan ECU. I'll cut to the chase, I'm building a '32 ford >roadster to run at Bonneville in a class that requires a 260 cubic inch >engine. I'm looking hard a the engine made for the Thunderbird Super >Coupe. >This could be modified to run carb and regular MSD type distributor. But, I >would like to maintain the fuel injection and electronic ignition. This >combination in theory should run 200 mph, with a strong enough motor to >hold together with lots of boost. Anyway I've just started to try and >figure >out the fuel injection and very interested in your project. Thanks for your >time . Phil Landry >_______________________________________________ >Diy_efi mailing list >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > >_______________________________________________ >Diy_efi mailing list >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Fri Jan 12 21:56:01 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 19:56:01 -0800 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1168660561.23324.55.camel@wopr.donegan.org> A modern and very durable version of the V6 you are looking at is in the 1990-2001 Rangers/Explorers. High strength/hot rod parts are available here: http://www.moranav6racing.com/ You could not quite go to the 4.5 stroker (274 CID), but 4.0 is nicely under the 260 CID limit. As they are truck engines they were built to be darn durable - and I believe forged everything is readily available. With 4.0 liters, and <2 bar of manifold pressure you should have plenty of oomph for 160 MPH. Hell my 2 liter Opel GT did 130 with no mods at all :-) These engines are already injected/and I believe fully distributorless - so all crank/cam sensors etc should be there. That leaves just custom tuning for the efi/ignition maps on a 'stock' computer... Hope this helps a bit... From bearbvd at mindspring.com Fri Jan 12 22:13:35 2007 From: bearbvd at mindspring.com (bearbvd at mindspring.com) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 23:13:35 -0500 Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU Message-ID: <380-22007161341335590@M2W030.mail2web.com> Original Message: ----------------- From: Steven P. Donegan donegan at donegan.org Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 19:56:01 -0800 To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [Diy_efi] Donegan ECU A modern and very durable version of the V6 you are looking at is in the 1990-2001 Rangers/Explorers. High strength/hot rod parts are available here: http://www.moranav6racing.com/ You could not quite go to the 4.5 stroker (274 CID), but 4.0 is nicely under the 260 CID limit. As they are truck engines they were built to be darn durable - and I believe forged everything is readily available. With 4.0 liters, and <2 bar of manifold pressure you should have plenty of oomph for 160 MPH. Hell my 2 liter Opel GT did 130 with no mods at all :-) These engines are already injected/and I believe fully distributorless - so all crank/cam sensors etc should be there. That leaves just custom tuning for the efi/ignition maps on a 'stock' computer... Hope this helps a bit... Dare to be different. Try an early '50's Ford flathead _I-6_ TRUCK engine. Stout as you could want block, seven mains, forged crank, LONG rods, mushroom tappets IIRC, not that heavy, right displacement range, and flattys done RIGHT _LOVE_ lots of boost. Google around on 'meangringobob' and try to contact him for more info. Charlie at Camcraft can help with 'boost friendly' grinds for mushroom tappets. Greg Greg -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From five10man at commspeed.net Sat Jan 13 12:28:55 2007 From: five10man at commspeed.net (Tom Visel) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 11:28:55 -0700 Subject: [Diy_efi] injecting 5 port head In-Reply-To: <982554.36652.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <982554.36652.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <45A924E7.9000309@commspeed.net> Has anyone considered poppet-type injectors like GM's 5.7l Vortec truck engine? With their relatively small diameter at the nozzle end, they could be placed right near the valve, perhaps eliminating shared fuel problems. It might be simply a matter of making a sheet metal bracket that sandwiches in between the manifold and head like the gasket, and extends into the port to hold/aim the nozzles. The pipes for the nozzles run to some convenient place in the manifold where the actual injector bodies sit with their electrical and fuel connections. TomV Adam Wade wrote: >--- Jean Belanger wrote: > > > >>I was not forgetting that, I was just simplifying >>things for a general explanation. >> >> > >It seems you "simplified out" the main problem, unless >I missed something. > > > >>As for making it easier with multiple injectors, >>Rover did not seem to think so when they made the >>MPi Mini. >> >> > >Unless you have at your disposal an engine dyno with >at least 4-gas analysis and full engineering access to >your ECU, and some long-term professional injection >system designers and programmers, I doubt that Rover's >solution would be "easier" to develop. I was looking >for the simplest way that could be managed with a >fairly low-tech solution that would be reasonably >cost-effective for a hobbyist, and I think the >solution I offered is one of the easier/cheaper >approaches for a hobbyist with limited funds and >tuning tools. > > > >>You should have a look at the Rover patent because >>they describe 2 modes of operation. One mode is the >>obvious pulse on an open valve and the second is >>a single pulse which starts when the number 2 (or 3) >>cylinder valve is open and finishes when the number >>1 (or 4) cylinder valve is open covering the >>overlap region. I don't know if the MPi engine uses >>them both but it seems the best way to go to high >>RPM and still have a reasonable size injector >>without worrying about the time needed to open and >>close the injector during the intake overlap. >> >> > >That's a reasonable assessment. However, I'd wager >that one could produce more power using a more >"discerning" setup, even at high rpm; unless I'm not >clear on something, it would seem that there would >still be mixture distribution issues with that >technology, albeit of a much lesser nature than at >lower engine speeds. > > > >>I assume that this mode also requires a cam which >>does not have an excessive amount of overlap between >>intake and exhaust otherwise you'd be injecting fuel >>out the exhaust. >> >> > >I suppose it would depend on what sort of fuel economy >and emissions profile were required by the designer; >if you're not running a cat, unless you're concerned >about emissions or fuel economy, there's no reason to >worry much about unburned fuel passing into the >exhaust. > > > >>>In particular, as I understand it, you cannot >>>inject fuel prior to the closing of the "inside" >>>cylinder's intake valve and have any of that fuel >>>end up in the "outside" cylinder -- for cylinders 2 >>>and 3, you are limited to the time between the >>>closing of the #2/3 intake valve and the closing >>>of the #1/4 intake valve, which is a pretty short >>>period, especially at higher rpms. >>> >>> > > > >>This is true for discrete injection pulse per >>cylinder but with the mode described above it is >>no longer true if you time the pulse correctly >>(which has to be done anyway). >> >> > >I'd assume that the dynamics of intake flow, and where >it goes when, at what velocity, is a very complicated >thing indeed in siamesed-port intakes like the one >described, and would probably vary radically with >changes in throttle and engine speed. This is one of >the reasons why I lean toward a solution that pretty >much confines a certain injetor's contribution to a >particular cylinder; it would be far easier to tune >without needing CFD or experimental flow rate and >direction data to insure reasonable mixture >distribution, IMO. > > > >>During the intake overlap, some fuel will go to both >>cylinders but the amount to each should be similar >>from cycle to cycle. >> >> > >In a steady-state condition, I'd say "more or less". >In a dynamic condition, I'd be willing to bet the >numbers fluctuate pretty heavily, and if someone were >to try that, I'd suspect their four-gas exhaust data >would support that theory. I don't have access to >anything like that, but if anyone on list does, I'd be >VERY interested in seeing it. > > > >>So you just need to time the injection pulse to get >>a constant AFR between the cylinder pair. >> >> > >Which, as I noted, is likely a lot tricker than it >sounds when looking at the entire operating range of >the engine, and which would be either very >time-consuming or very difficult (or both!) to achieve >without pretty solid knowledge of the true dynamics >within the manifold, under a given set of operating >conditions. > > > >>>I think a staged injector system might be in order >>>here; in fact, it's possible that the optimal >>>combination would be a single sat. drive injector >>>for cylinders 2 and 3, and staged dual injectors >>>for cylinders 1 and 4, which would allow a honkin' >>>big injector for higher-load running and a small >>>injector to handle idle control. >>> >>> > > > >>And this is simpler than one injector per port? >> >> > >In terms of achieving even and correct fueling for >each cylinder individually? Yes, much simpler indeed. > With that setup, you can deliver fuel for #2/3 in >much of the before the cylinder's intake valve opens >(and before the #1/4 intake valve opens), and can >deliver enough fuel for cylinder #1/4 ONLY during the >time period where its intake valve is open and #2/3 >intake valve is closed. Once you have the code set up >so that for a given value in a map cell each of the >two different styles of injector setup deliver the >same amount of fuel, it then becomes very easy to test >and tune for best possible power without having to do >any fancy trickery or computations (or measurement >while on the dyno) to keep fueling consistent between >all cylinders. > > > >>It seems quite complex for both hardware and >>software. >> >> > >I wouldn't think it would be terribly difficult for >software. You'd be running 2 cylinders staged and 2 >cylinders not staged. If you were concerned about the >code, you could use 8 staged injectors and not have to >worry about code balancing the two different types of >injection; this would cost a little more in hardware, >but would make programming a no-brainer using any >system that can handle staged injection, as long as >there is real estate available for mounting all 8 >injectors. > > > >>But for this staging you only need 2 injectors per >>port not the 3 you're suggesting >> >> > >It sounds like you're relying on your claim above that >it is easily "do-able" to use either a single injector >or a single pair of staged injectors to fuel the >adjacent cylinders through the single port, and I >don't think that is within the abilities and means of >most people on this list. I suppose it would be >possible with proper resources, but even if it were, >it would likely be a much simpler and quicker >implementation to just insure that there is one >injection event per cylinder delivered by a dedicated >injector (or staged pair), since you don't have to >computer intake flow throughout the operating range, >or test via trial and error and four-gas data to tweak >the injection timing throughout the full operating >range (and then you have to do the computation as well >to determine if the optimal injector opening times >have changed, and to insure they are triggered on >schedule). > > > >>(or is it 5 total?). >> >> > >6. I'm not sure how 5 would be workable in any >meaningful sense. > > > >>>Timing the injection on the >>>center pair of cylinders will be critical. >>> >>> > > > >>I agree that timing is critical but it's for the >>outside cylinders. >> >> > >Sorry about that. I wrote the reply and had >everything backwards regarding the cylinder pairs, >then went through and corrected them all. Looks like >I missed that one in my editing. > >| 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 >_______________________________________________ >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 jonnbell at gmail.com Sat Jan 13 15:37:34 2007 From: jonnbell at gmail.com (jb) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 14:37:34 -0700 Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce In-Reply-To: <20070112170002.72277.qmail@web80514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20070112170002.72277.qmail@web80514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <40407c390701131337i29d907d1o6493c6fa9b19d98a@mail.gmail.com> you might be able to use a local body shop's paint scale From buckwill33 at hotmail.com Sat Jan 13 16:14:23 2007 From: buckwill33 at hotmail.com (Buck Williams) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 15:14:23 -0700 Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce Message-ID: iff you takeee a known amount of dry fertt,, sayyy example perfectly equalll tothe weight of 3 pennies worth,,,, mix thattt into fifty or hundred ccsss of hot water,,, as measured in graduated burette,, if u ran out ten ccs of fthat liquidddd, and then 30 or 40 ccs of liquid into anaother measure, you could be assured of three or four times the amoaunt of liquid fert mix as in the 10 cc amoaunt first decanted,,, ,, it is very precise way of dividianggg water soluble chemicall,,,, buck > Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 14:37:34 -0700> From: jonnbell at gmail.com> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce> > you might be able to use a local body shop's paint scale> _______________________________________________> 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 Sat Jan 13 19:00:11 2007 From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 17:00:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <151412.77470.qm@web35701.mail.mud.yahoo.com> On Topic, I bought a digital scale on eBay, to use for balancing pistons, rods, etc. I had a hard time finding one with the capacity (>800g) and resolution (<0.1g) I wanted, but located one for about $40 USD. I've been very happy with it. Anyway, to your issue, 30 seconds work on eBay found some very inexpensive solutions to your problem on eBay: http://cgi.ebay.com/Super-Accurate-Scales-100g-0-01g-Digital-Pocket-Scale_W0QQitemZ120074344286QQihZ002QQcategoryZ105825QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-DIGITAL-0-1-GRAM-SMALL-ELECTRONIC-SCALE-MINI-SCALES_W0QQitemZ200065669553QQihZ010QQcategoryZ11814QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem http://cgi.ebay.com/150x0-1-Pro-GRAM-PRECISION-Digital-POCKET-SCALE-Silvr_W0QQitemZ110078148582QQihZ001QQcategoryZ34088QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem http://cgi.ebay.com/120x0-1g-GRAM-Coin-SCALE-DIGITAL-POCKET-SCALES-4-MODES_W0QQitemZ110078558718QQihZ001QQcategoryZ34088QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem etc., etc. Carter Shore ____________________________________________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. http://new.mail.yahoo.com From dpaauw at netwiz.net Sun Jan 14 00:00:51 2007 From: dpaauw at netwiz.net (Don Paauw) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 01:00:51 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] mailto:diy_efi@diy-efi.org Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20070114010051.008dc920@216.251.43.97> Go to http://www.allelectronics.com and search on dw-250. It's a pocket scale with precision to .01 oz. and repeatability to .01 oz. Max is 8.82 oz. Their shipping is a flat $7.00 so load up on anything else you might need. From dpaauw at netwiz.net Sun Jan 14 00:06:34 2007 From: dpaauw at netwiz.net (Don Paauw) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 01:06:34 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] RE: measuring less than an ounce Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20070114010634.008d8530@216.251.43.97> Previous post had the wrong subject. Go to http://www.allelectronics.com and search on dw-250. It's a pocket scale with precision to .01 oz. and repeatability to .01 oz. Max is 8.82 oz. Their shipping is a flat $7.00 so load up on anything else you might need. _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From donegan at donegan.org Sun Jan 14 09:52:44 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 07:52:44 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] GCC/ARM LPC21xx assist needed for Donegan ECM/EFI :-) Message-ID: <1168789964.28960.34.camel@wopr.donegan.org> I need a fragment of code (or a completely usable piece of code) for the following scenario: Using the Capture/Compare and Timer functions, setup (CCP_Setup()) a CCP register/pin with a timer such that future interrupts on that CCP will support capturing the frequency in Hz on that CCP pin. The waveform is expected to be 50% duty cycle. My poor beginning on the interrupt handler follows: /* The short fragment of code below can be used to measure frequency on a capture pin. Initialize FIQ_R8 to the timer address and FIQ_R9 to -1 and enable the fast interrupt. The frequency can be calculated with: (float)(PCLK * FIQ_R9) / (float)(FIQ_R11 - FIQ_R10) */ void FastInterrupt(void) __attribute__((interrupt("FIQ"), naked)); void FastInterrupt(void) { asm volatile("ldr r12, [r8,0]\r\n" "ldr r13, [r8,40]\r\n" "str r12, [r8,0]\r\n" "adds r9, r9, #1\r\n" "moveq r10, r13\r\n" "mov r11, r13\r\n" "subs pc, lr, #4\r\n"); } I know there are some ARM and C people out there - this is the first fragment I need for the ECU - it is for reading a GM MAF. TIA! From j_holland at btopenworld.com Sun Jan 14 15:59:10 2007 From: j_holland at btopenworld.com (James Holland) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 21:59:10 -0000 Subject: [Diy_efi] DHC11 help needed Message-ID: Hi I am trying to disassemble an EEPROM from a DSM ECU. The processor uses a superset of the HC11 instructions. I am sure some of you have used DHC11 before so hopefully someone can help here. I cannot get the 'bytes' command to work. I need this to skip the DSM proprietary instructions. The control file I am trying is this: ; This control file is called mitsu.txt ; input mitsu.bin ;this is the binary input file output mitsu.dis ;this is the disassembly source/listing file addresses opcodes ;87 instructions bytes c083 4 entry c000 DHC11 enters at c000 OK but throws a decode error at C083. There isn't an example of the 'bytes' instruction on the Techedge website Thanks James From spyro at f2s.com Sun Jan 14 16:26:48 2007 From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 22:26:48 +0000 Subject: [Diy_efi] GCC/ARM LPC21xx assist needed for Donegan ECM/EFI :-) In-Reply-To: <1168789964.28960.34.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <1168789964.28960.34.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <45AAAE28.7040007@f2s.com> Steven P. Donegan wrote: > I know there are some ARM and C people out there - this is the first > fragment I need for the ECU - it is for reading a GM MAF. How many FIQ sources are available on this chip? surely you want your FIQs to be used to the really critical timings, like CAS etc. ? From donegan at donegan.org Sun Jan 14 16:29:33 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 14:29:33 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] GCC/ARM LPC21xx assist needed for Donegan ECM/EFI :-) In-Reply-To: <45AAAE28.7040007@f2s.com> References: <1168789964.28960.34.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <45AAAE28.7040007@f2s.com> Message-ID: <1168813773.3706.2.camel@wopr.donegan.org> I didn't even really understand what FIQ was, now I do, since I will only need 1 low speed frequency source for the current project (max Hz is <20k) I likely just need a more standard IRQ setup on the CCP/TMR setup. Any further suggestions gratefully accepted :-) On Sun, 2007-01-14 at 22:26 +0000, Ian Molton wrote: > Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > > I know there are some ARM and C people out there - this is the first > > fragment I need for the ECU - it is for reading a GM MAF. > > How many FIQ sources are available on this chip? > > surely you want your FIQs to be used to the really critical timings, > like CAS etc. ? > _______________________________________________ > 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 spyro at f2s.com Sun Jan 14 17:54:25 2007 From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 23:54:25 +0000 Subject: [Diy_efi] GCC/ARM LPC21xx assist needed for Donegan ECM/EFI :-) In-Reply-To: <1168813773.3706.2.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <1168789964.28960.34.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <45AAAE28.7040007@f2s.com> <1168813773.3706.2.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <45AAC2B1.2090609@f2s.com> Steven P. Donegan wrote: > I didn't even really understand what FIQ was, now I do, since I will > only need 1 low speed frequency source for the current project (max Hz > is <20k) I likely just need a more standard IRQ setup on the CCP/TMR > setup. > > Any further suggestions gratefully accepted :-) Its possibly worth characterising the latency of the chips I/O lines. on some ARMs (notably intels hacked up POS the 'XScale') the turnaround from a state change on an input, to actually setting an output had a quite alarming delay... (A signal generator and a 2 trace 'scope would be useful here...) if all you're after is a frequency source then yes, the chips internal clock registers should be more than capable - in fact I'd have thought any half decent RTOS could provide a garaunteed programmable timer ? If you get some hardware to me, I'd love to help you hack on this one. My development environment is all GNU/linux/GCC here. You can see some of my stuff over on http://www.mnementh.co.uk/eseries/ Have fun :) From donegan at donegan.org Sun Jan 14 18:22:10 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 16:22:10 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] GCC/ARM LPC21xx assist needed for Donegan ECM/EFI :-) In-Reply-To: <45AAC2B1.2090609@f2s.com> References: <1168789964.28960.34.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <45AAAE28.7040007@f2s.com> <1168813773.3706.2.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <45AAC2B1.2090609@f2s.com> Message-ID: <1168820530.3706.15.camel@wopr.donegan.org> The hardware in question are the Olimex boards LPC2106 and LPCH2138 - both using Phillips ARM chips. The OS I intend to use is FreeRTOS. Both chips (2106 and 2138) have Capture/Compare registers and there are 'plenty' of available timers. What I want to do is the usual start timer/enable interrupt, catch interrupt #1, save timer, capture interrupt #2, save timer, subtract T1 from T2 and I have half the frequency period (I think). My problem is that although quite saavy in C and other assembly languages this is my first ARM project. My toolchain is also Linux/GCC-ARM - FreeRTOS already compiles/loads/tests out fine on the 2106 board. Board info for both are at www.olimex.com After I have the frequency capture part working I'll need to do some D to A work (for those who want to use a GM MAF with ECU's expecting flapper or other voltage type MAF's) and frequency generator out for those that will use the first part of this project as an 'interceptor' on GM vehicles (ie MAF frequency X in, adjust based on goal and output Y frequency to spoof the ECU). I will also need to read the ADC inputs as the project moves on and fire on/off bits and PWM outputs (relay drivers, injector drivers etc). TIA On Sun, 2007-01-14 at 23:54 +0000, Ian Molton wrote: > Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > I didn't even really understand what FIQ was, now I do, since I will > > only need 1 low speed frequency source for the current project (max Hz > > is <20k) I likely just need a more standard IRQ setup on the CCP/TMR > > setup. > > > > Any further suggestions gratefully accepted :-) > > Its possibly worth characterising the latency of the chips I/O lines. on > some ARMs (notably intels hacked up POS the 'XScale') the turnaround > from a state change on an input, to actually setting an output had a > quite alarming delay... > > (A signal generator and a 2 trace 'scope would be useful here...) > > if all you're after is a frequency source then yes, the chips internal > clock registers should be more than capable - in fact I'd have thought > any half decent RTOS could provide a garaunteed programmable timer ? > > If you get some hardware to me, I'd love to help you hack on this one. > My development environment is all GNU/linux/GCC here. You can see some > of my stuff over on http://www.mnementh.co.uk/eseries/ > > Have fun :) > _______________________________________________ > 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 spyro at f2s.com Sun Jan 14 20:06:24 2007 From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 02:06:24 +0000 Subject: [Diy_efi] GCC/ARM LPC21xx assist needed for Donegan ECM/EFI :-) In-Reply-To: <1168820530.3706.15.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <1168789964.28960.34.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <45AAAE28.7040007@f2s.com> <1168813773.3706.2.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <45AAC2B1.2090609@f2s.com> <1168820530.3706.15.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <45AAE1A0.2080607@f2s.com> Steven P. Donegan wrote: > The hardware in question are the Olimex boards LPC2106 Oh wow. I'd assumed those were actual ARM CPUs and you'd built the board. those are sweet. how much are they ? From donegan at donegan.org Sun Jan 14 20:16:38 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 18:16:38 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] GCC/ARM LPC21xx assist needed for Donegan ECM/EFI :-) In-Reply-To: <45AAE1A0.2080607@f2s.com> References: <1168789964.28960.34.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <45AAAE28.7040007@f2s.com> <1168813773.3706.2.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <45AAC2B1.2090609@f2s.com> <1168820530.3706.15.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <45AAE1A0.2080607@f2s.com> Message-ID: <1168827398.3613.3.camel@wopr.donegan.org> check www.sparkfun.com for US prices - if I recall correctly I paid <50$ for the 2106 board and ~70$ for the 2138 board. At some point I'll likely put all of the mother/daughter boards into a single, surface mount, design - but until I have all the 'bugs' worked out on the hardware I'll stay with the cheaper route of small easily testable/modifiable boards (small prototypes are cheaper to make) :-) On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 02:06 +0000, Ian Molton wrote: > Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > The hardware in question are the Olimex boards LPC2106 > > Oh wow. I'd assumed those were actual ARM CPUs and you'd built the board. > > those are sweet. how much are they ? > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Sun Jan 14 23:40:28 2007 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 23:40:28 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] GCC/ARM LPC21xx assist needed for Donegan ECM/EFI :-) Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Steven P. Donegan > Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2007 6:22 PM > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] GCC/ARM LPC21xx assist needed for > Donegan ECM/EFI :-) > > The hardware in question are the Olimex boards LPC2106 and > LPCH2138 - both using Phillips ARM chips. The OS I intend to > use is FreeRTOS. Both chips (2106 and 2138) have > Capture/Compare registers and there are 'plenty' of available > timers. What I want to do is the usual start timer/enable > interrupt, catch interrupt #1, save timer, capture interrupt > #2, save timer, subtract T1 from T2 and I have half the > frequency period (I think). My problem is that although quite > saavy in C and other assembly languages this is my first ARM project. Do those controllers have pulse width measurement hardware? I thought that was pretty standard stuff on microprocessors. If so that's a much better way than interrupt based. Maybe somewhere in the Donegan ECM you could find a place for a 926 based microcontroller -- I worked on that one! > > My toolchain is also Linux/GCC-ARM - FreeRTOS already > compiles/loads/tests out fine on the 2106 board. Do you have a debugger? --steve From donegan at donegan.org Mon Jan 15 07:16:25 2007 From: donegan at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 05:16:25 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] GCC/ARM LPC21xx assist needed for Donegan ECM/EFI :-) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1168866985.8810.3.camel@wopr.donegan.org> I have whatever came with the gnu toolchain - will have to check if gdb came in that set. Other than that I have already committed lots of resources towards the LPC2000 series - if there is a really good reason to change I'll consider it. And yes the 2106 and 2138 have CCP pins - I just have no clue as to how to program them to do the deed in ARM/GCC land. I have done this on PIC based devices but no PIC has what I need for this project :-) Isn't there any kind of examples library for the LPC's? The amount of LPC related application notes is pretty slim... On Sun, 2007-01-14 at 23:40 -0600, Steve Ravet wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org > > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Steven P. Donegan > > Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2007 6:22 PM > > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org > > Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] GCC/ARM LPC21xx assist needed for > > Donegan ECM/EFI :-) > > > > The hardware in question are the Olimex boards LPC2106 and > > LPCH2138 - both using Phillips ARM chips. The OS I intend to > > use is FreeRTOS. Both chips (2106 and 2138) have > > Capture/Compare registers and there are 'plenty' of available > > timers. What I want to do is the usual start timer/enable > > interrupt, catch interrupt #1, save timer, capture interrupt > > #2, save timer, subtract T1 from T2 and I have half the > > frequency period (I think). My problem is that although quite > > saavy in C and other assembly languages this is my first ARM project. > > Do those controllers have pulse width measurement hardware? I thought > that was pretty standard stuff on microprocessors. If so that's a much > better way than interrupt based. > > Maybe somewhere in the Donegan ECM you could find a place for a 926 > based microcontroller -- I worked on that one! > > > > > My toolchain is also Linux/GCC-ARM - FreeRTOS already > > compiles/loads/tests out fine on the 2106 board. > > Do you have a debugger? > > --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 hoptona at gmail.com Mon Jan 15 12:35:30 2007 From: hoptona at gmail.com (Andrew Hopton) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 05:05:30 +1030 Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c738d3$f3ef4e30$0301010a@TOSHIBAM500> I know this is bit belated, and I see you've already had some good advice - here's my 5c worth - Try talking to her science teacher - he/she should have already had/solved this issue. At the very least, the school should have a Metzler balance (or similar) in the Chem lab which should be accurate to .01 gram (maybe better) (1 ounce = 28.35 grams IIRC, so .0213 oz = .604g) Cheers. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Nicoson Sent: Friday, 12 January 2007 1:54 PM To: DIY_ EFI Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce I hope you guys don't mind this totally Off Topic, but you are one of my more scientific group of friends. I need somebody to review my physics/methodology below: Helping my daughter (16 yr old) with a science project. She is testing two types of fertilizer by growing three equal size patches of grass, fertilizer A, fertilizer B, Control. Here's the real problem: We need to measure VERY small amounts of granular fertilizer. The grass patches are only .38 ft^2, one fertilizer amount comes out to .0213 ounces, the second comes out to .24 ounces. I don't know about you but I don't have that kind of scale around here. Here's my idea, please scrutinize, simplify, accurize... I am going to weigh 300 pennies tomorrow at work on an electronic postal scale, I think it reads out in 10ths of ounces. If they read greater than 1 ounce I should get 2 significant digits, possibly they will weigh more than 10 ounces and we can work with 3 significant digits. The assumption is that the pennies all weigh the same. This will give me an accurate weight of one penny. Back home this weekend we will make a simple balance beam. Since I don't have jeweled bearings, I'm thinking a simple string at the fulcrum will give as consistent results as anything. At the short end, say 10-to-1 ratio of lengths, I will have a hanging container with pennies. At the other end I will have a plastic medicine bottle to hold the fertilizer. To zero the balance scale out I will add coins (any size) until the coins balance out the whole apparatus. Next, I will have to do the math as to how many pennies equal 10 times the weight of the desired fertilizer weight. Place this measured amount of weight in pennies on the short end of the balance. Next, fill the medicine bottle with fertilizer until it balances. Done, measured, accurate weight of fertilizer. Does all of that make sense? It does to me. The hardest part will be helping her learn what we just did so she can defend her process on the project. Suggestions are appreciated. Dan Nicoson _______________________________________________ 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 Jan 15 14:09:42 2007 From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 15:09:42 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce In-Reply-To: <000001c738d3$f3ef4e30$0301010a@TOSHIBAM500> Message-ID: Everyone, thank you for all the suggestions. Sunday we did the balance method in our basement with a home brewed balance beam. My daughter was a little pissy at first but once we started "making stuff" she 'got it' and made some good suggestions actually saving us some time. The resulting small quantity was VERY few grains of this fertilizer. Should be interesting. Thanks, Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Andrew Hopton Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 1:36 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce I know this is bit belated, and I see you've already had some good advice - here's my 5c worth - Try talking to her science teacher - he/she should have already had/solved this issue. At the very least, the school should have a Metzler balance (or similar) in the Chem lab which should be accurate to .01 gram (maybe better) (1 ounce = 28.35 grams IIRC, so .0213 oz = .604g) Cheers. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Nicoson Sent: Friday, 12 January 2007 1:54 PM To: DIY_ EFI Subject: [Diy_efi] OT - Measuring less than an ounce I hope you guys don't mind this totally Off Topic, but you are one of my more scientific group of friends. I need somebody to review my physics/methodology below: Helping my daughter (16 yr old) with a science project. She is testing two types of fertilizer by growing three equal size patches of grass, fertilizer A, fertilizer B, Control. Here's the real problem: We need to measure VERY small amounts of granular fertilizer. The grass patches are only .38 ft^2, one fertilizer amount comes out to .0213 ounces, the second comes out to .24 ounces. I don't know about you but I don't have that kind of scale around here. Here's my idea, please scrutinize, simplify, accurize... I am going to weigh 300 pennies tomorrow at work on an electronic postal scale, I think it reads out in 10ths of ounces. If they read greater than 1 ounce I should get 2 significant digits, possibly they will weigh more than 10 ounces and we can work with 3 significant digits. The assumption is that the pennies all weigh the same. This will give me an accurate weight of one penny. Back home this weekend we will make a simple balance beam. Since I don't have jeweled bearings, I'm thinking a simple string at the fulcrum will give as consistent results as anything. At the short end, say 10-to-1 ratio of lengths, I will have a hanging container with pennies. At the other end I will have a plastic medicine bottle to hold the fertilizer. To zero the balance scale out I will add coins (any size) until the coins balance out the whole apparatus. Next, I will have to do the math as to how many pennies equal 10 times the weight of the desired fertilizer weight. Place this measured amount of weight in pennies on the short end of the balance. Next, fill the medicine bottle with fertilizer until it balances. Done, measured, accurate weight of fertilizer. Does all of that make sense? It does to me. The hardest part will be helping her learn what we just did so she can defend her process on the project. Suggestions are appreciated. Dan Nicoson _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From A6intruder at myo-p.com Tue Jan 16 09:35:37 2007 From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 10:35:37 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] OEM Air Temp Sensors - Quality Message-ID: David Allen, Do you have any comments on typical air temp sensors used by Ford? I am contemplating adding some temp sensors before and after my turbo. I was thinking of the standard Ford sensor as already used by my Mustang. Any experience with these? You were very helpful on the pressure sensors a week or so back. Thanks, Dan Nicoson From joevitek at cfl.rr.com Tue Jan 16 10:34:18 2007 From: joevitek at cfl.rr.com (Joe Vitek) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 11:34:18 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] Has anyone used the PLX Devices WBO2 products? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200701161634.l0GGYJoJ012781@ms-smtp-02.tampabay.rr.com> If so, how is the quality? How is the customer service? Ease of use? Reliability? I want to get something over the next coupla weeks and I am doing my research now. Price seems great, but I know no one who has one. I have the diy wb02 setup (two of them), but I am thinking of selling them cheap to get one that uses the Bosch sensor. Any other suggestions? thanks all, -- joe From brian.j.geddes at intel.com Tue Jan 16 12:08:44 2007 From: brian.j.geddes at intel.com (Geddes, Brian J) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 10:08:44 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Has anyone used the PLX Devices WBO2 products? In-Reply-To: <200701161634.l0GGYJoJ012781@ms-smtp-02.tampabay.rr.com> Message-ID: <25E9841AB6E6D742B7388832BBACDE9501D22464@fmsmsx417.amr.corp.intel.com> I've been using one of their M-300 boxes for a while now. I don't have anything to verify its accuracy with, but it seems to be working well. The small control box is easy to tuck away if you don't want/need the display. -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Joe Vitek Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 8:34 AM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: [Diy_efi] Has anyone used the PLX Devices WBO2 products? If so, how is the quality? How is the customer service? Ease of use? Reliability? I want to get something over the next coupla weeks and I am doing my research now. Price seems great, but I know no one who has one. I have the diy wb02 setup (two of them), but I am thinking of selling them cheap to get one that uses the Bosch sensor. Any other suggestions? thanks all, -- joe _______________________________________________ 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 Jan 16 20:27:35 2007 From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 18:27:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] OEM Air Temp Sensors - Quality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <880619.97690.qm@web35711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Daniel Nicoson wrote: > David Allen, > > Do you have any comments on typical air temp sensors > used by Ford? I am > contemplating adding some temp sensors before and > after my turbo. I was > thinking of the standard Ford sensor as already used > by my Mustang. > > Any experience with these? > Apologies for jumping in, I'm sure David will have some better practical advice and information to add. The Ford sensor is a thermistor RTD. It's quite robust, and simple to interface. There is a published Resistance vs Temp graph, and you can easily calibrate an individual unit to greater accuracy. AFAIK, the same basic unit is used for both air and coolant, the wet one has the RTD sealed for protection. Carter Shore ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ From A6intruder at myo-p.com Tue Jan 16 20:36:17 2007 From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 21:36:17 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] OEM Air Temp Sensors - Quality In-Reply-To: <880619.97690.qm@web35711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Thanks Carter. I'll hit Google and see what I can learn. Not an immediate project but I had the thoughts (I work in the back of my head a lot as my day goes on...) and figured I'd get pointed in the right direction. This list is always good for these kinds of things. Take care, 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, January 16, 2007 9:28 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] OEM Air Temp Sensors - Quality Daniel Nicoson wrote: > David Allen, > > Do you have any comments on typical air temp sensors > used by Ford? I am > contemplating adding some temp sensors before and > after my turbo. I was > thinking of the standard Ford sensor as already used > by my Mustang. > > Any experience with these? > Apologies for jumping in, I'm sure David will have some better practical advice and information to add. The Ford sensor is a thermistor RTD. It's quite robust, and simple to interface. There is a published Resistance vs Temp graph, and you can easily calibrate an individual unit to greater accuracy. AFAIK, the same basic unit is used for both air and coolant, the wet one has the RTD sealed for protection. Carter Shore ____________________________________________________________________________ ________ Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ _______________________________________________ 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 Sun Jan 21 07:21:50 2007 From: torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Torbj=F6rn_Forsman?=) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 14:21:50 +0100 Subject: [Diy_efi] Flap-type Airflow Meters In-Reply-To: <1168657048.23324.18.camel@wopr.donegan.org> References: <1168657048.23324.18.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <45B368EE.5000306@gengas.nu> Hi! Beware that there are no two types of flapper AFMs that have the same calibration. Typically, those intended for microcontroller based ECUs (for example, Bosch Motronic systems, Toyota TCCS, Ford EEC-IV on european cars) have a relatively linear angle - to - voltage characteristic, while those intended for analog ECUs (Bosch L-jetronic, LE- and LU-jetronic, Lucas and various japanese L-jetronic clones) rather have a logarithmic characteristic. The potentiometer on the PCB is divided into 10 or 12 sections with a laser trimmed parallel resistor for each section. Usually, there are also series resistors at both ends of the potentiometer. On AFMs for L-, LE- and LU-jetronic, there is a connection to the ECU from a tap at the "hot end" series resistor, on LE and LU the air temperature sensor is connected in parallel to a part of this resistor. All other AFMs have the temperature sensor connected from ground to a dedicated pin in the connector. When discussing different AFMs, it is best to mention the part number (Bosch number) of the complete AFM (0 280 20x xxx), the part number of the hybrid PCB (1 288 31x xxx) and the number of the return spring (only the three last digits are stamped on the plastic spring holder wheel, very old AFMs may lack this number). It might also be interesting to note if there is an auxiliary spring that balances part of the main spring's force at idling position of the flapper. Best regards Torbj?rn Forsman Steven P. Donegan wrote: > Now - if someone can just map those steps to airflow numbers I can make > a GM frequency MAF to flapper MAF voltage translation table. Which will > allow those of you out there who want to run 80mm MAF's on your (pick > engine) car :-) That circuit board is already built - that's my little > MAF interceptor project... > > On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 15:23 -0500, ScottyGrover at aol.com wrote: > >>Dan was asking about these Bosch/Nippon meters and how they were >>calibrated. >>I put 12VDC between pins 6 and 9 and hooked a voltmeter between pins >>6 and >>7. I then rotated the toothed wheel on the end of the rotating shaft >>and this >>is what I read: >>Base 1.29V >>1 tooth 1.75V >>2 teeth 2.7V >>3 " 4.3V >>4 " 5.3V >>5 " 5.9V >>6 " 6.5V >>7 " 6.8V >>8 " 7.3V >>9 " 7.6V >>10 " 7.95V >>11 " 8.05V >>12 " 8.2V >>max 8.21V >> >>I hope this helps. >> >>Scotty > > > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > From steve at donegan.org Sun Jan 21 08:32:58 2007 From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 06:32:58 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Flap-type Airflow Meters In-Reply-To: <45B368EE.5000306@gengas.nu> References: <1168657048.23324.18.camel@wopr.donegan.org> <45B368EE.5000306@gengas.nu> Message-ID: <1169389978.17842.22.camel@wopr.donegan.org> I am adding an RS-232 port to the MAF interceptor so folks can customize this mapping any way they wish. The incoming GM MAF frequency will be linearly mapped to 256 table locations (in flash) what you put in those table locations (desired voltage output) is up to you... i.e. I have neither the resources or the desire to pick up and MAP frequency to volts for this. The MAF interceptor itself can be used to assist in the mapping - build a poor-mans flow bench with a fan suitable for pushing say 1000 CFM, duct that through your flapper MAF and then through the GM MAF. The interceptor reads out voltage from the flapper and frequency from the GM - use a variable speed control on the 'flowbench' fan and voila you should be able to map voltage to frequency across a broad range... The GM MAF I already have a decent map of frequency to gm's/second... Hz Grams/Second 4500 25 6000 50 7500 100 8500 150 9500 200 10000 250 10750 300 11250 350 11750 400 12000 450 On Sun, 2007-01-21 at 14:21 +0100, Torbj?rn Forsman wrote: > Hi! > > Beware that there are no two types of flapper AFMs that have the same > calibration. Typically, those intended for microcontroller based ECUs > (for example, Bosch Motronic systems, Toyota TCCS, Ford EEC-IV on > european cars) have a relatively linear angle - to - voltage > characteristic, while those intended for analog ECUs (Bosch L-jetronic, > LE- and LU-jetronic, Lucas and various japanese L-jetronic clones) > rather have a logarithmic characteristic. > > The potentiometer on the PCB is divided into 10 or 12 sections with a > laser trimmed parallel resistor for each section. Usually, there are > also series resistors at both ends of the potentiometer. > > On AFMs for L-, LE- and LU-jetronic, there is a connection to the ECU > from a tap at the "hot end" series resistor, on LE and LU the air > temperature sensor is connected in parallel to a part of this resistor. > > All other AFMs have the temperature sensor connected from ground to a > dedicated pin in the connector. > > When discussing different AFMs, it is best to mention the part number > (Bosch number) of the complete AFM (0 280 20x xxx), the part number of > the hybrid PCB (1 288 31x xxx) and the number of the return spring (only > the three last digits are stamped on the plastic spring holder wheel, > very old AFMs may lack this number). It might also be interesting to > note if there is an auxiliary spring that balances part of the main > spring's force at idling position of the flapper. > > Best regards > > Torbj?rn Forsman > > Steven P. Donegan wrote: > > Now - if someone can just map those steps to airflow numbers I can make > > a GM frequency MAF to flapper MAF voltage translation table. Which will > > allow those of you out there who want to run 80mm MAF's on your (pick > > engine) car :-) That circuit board is already built - that's my little > > MAF interceptor project... > > > > On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 15:23 -0500, ScottyGrover at aol.com wrote: > > > >>Dan was asking about these Bosch/Nippon meters and how they were > >>calibrated. > >>I put 12VDC between pins 6 and 9 and hooked a voltmeter between pins > >>6 and > >>7. I then rotated the toothed wheel on the end of the rotating shaft > >>and this > >>is what I read: > >>Base 1.29V > >>1 tooth 1.75V > >>2 teeth 2.7V > >>3 " 4.3V > >>4 " 5.3V > >>5 " 5.9V > >>6 " 6.5V > >>7 " 6.8V > >>8 " 7.3V > >>9 " 7.6V > >>10 " 7.95V > >>11 " 8.05V > >>12 " 8.2V > >>max 8.21V > >> > >>I hope this helps. > >> > >>Scotty > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 bill.washington at nec.com.au Mon Jan 22 02:02:52 2007 From: bill.washington at nec.com.au (Bill Washington) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 19:02:52 +1100 Subject: [Diy_efi] Re: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 23, Issue 4 In-Reply-To: <20070105013344.6541E37746@ns1.nec.com.au> References: <20070105013344.6541E37746@ns1.nec.com.au> Message-ID: <45B46FAC.4010909@nec.com.au> The fuel pressure regulators/ which return excess fuel to the tank have a reference/control line to the manifold to maintain a constant pressure differential accross the injectors. If you trust the pressure regulator, you have no need to monitor the fuel pressure in the distribution manifold, unless you intend to vary the pressure. NOTE If you choose to measure the fuel pressure in the distribution manifold, your measurement will be absolute, or relative to atmospheric pressure depending on your sensor, however the fuel pressure will vary with the fluctuating air pressure in the intake manifold ......... If you choose to vary the fuel pressure to increase the fuel flow range available through a particular injector, be careful! - 1. the injector spray pattern is set at a defined differential pressure across the injector - some injectors may give you a range of differential fuel pressures - it is wise to stay within the manufacturer's spec to maintain a good spray pattern. 2. If you choose to vary the fuel pressure use a variable regulator so that you still retain the intake manifold pressure reference Bill > >I can't quite read this as a yes or a no to fuel pump pressure control - >can you give me a binary response :-) > >I.E. does fuel pressure sensing/fuel pump control make sense for an EFI >system or not. > >Thanks! > >On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 08:00 +0900, Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > From tmc_mike_yates at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 22 18:52:26 2007 From: tmc_mike_yates at sbcglobal.net (Mike Yates) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 16:52:26 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic In-Reply-To: <001c01c73606$3d2e59e0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> References: <001c01c73606$3d2e59e0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Message-ID: alright im working on a project at work (not for work lol) and a need has arisen for a membrane that has the properties of being impermeable to water (liquid or vapor) but permeable and preferally non restrictive to Air or atleast one component there of (preferably nitrogen). If anyone has any ideas they would be greatly appreciated. M From A6intruder at myo-p.com Mon Jan 22 20:05:11 2007 From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 21:05:11 -0500 Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Mike, Check packaging suppliers for the food industry. Many foods are packaged with various films designed to let either oxygen, nitrogen or nothing at all through. The leader in the field is a company called Cryovac - Sealed Air North America is their parent company. http://www.sealedair.com/products/shrink/films/cryovac_films.html Lots of other companies out there that compete with them. Good luck with your project. Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Mike Yates Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 7:52 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic alright im working on a project at work (not for work lol) and a need has arisen for a membrane that has the properties of being impermeable to water (liquid or vapor) but permeable and preferally non restrictive to Air or atleast one component there of (preferably nitrogen). If anyone has any ideas they would be greatly appreciated. M _______________________________________________ Diy_efi mailing list Diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi From ebuckler at icehouse.net Mon Jan 22 20:18:21 2007 From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 18:18:21 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic References: <001c01c73606$3d2e59e0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Message-ID: <01f101c73e94$c14624b0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Start with GoreTex... /:oj Ernie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Yates" To: Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 4:52 PM Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic alright im working on a project at work (not for work lol) and a need has arisen for a membrane that has the properties of being impermeable to water (liquid or vapor) but permeable and preferally non restrictive to Air or atleast one component there of (preferably nitrogen). If anyone has any ideas they would be greatly appreciated. M _______________________________________________ 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 Jan 23 09:23:28 2007 From: don.broadus at exeloncorp.com (don.broadus at exeloncorp.com) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 09:23:28 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic Message-ID: Sounds like the membrane they use in fuel cells -----Original Message----- From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Mike Yates Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 6:52 PM To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic alright im working on a project at work (not for work lol) and a need has arisen for a membrane that has the properties of being impermeable to water (liquid or vapor) but permeable and preferally non restrictive to Air or atleast one component there of (preferably nitrogen). If anyone has any ideas they would be greatly appreciated. M _______________________________________________ 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 espresso_doppio at yahoo.com Tue Jan 23 23:06:46 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 21:06:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic In-Reply-To: <01f101c73e94$c14624b0$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Message-ID: <70114.91691.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Ernest Buckler wrote: > Start with GoreTex... > /:oj Doesn't pass air. DOES pass water vapor. Two failures to meet the requirements listed. I'm interested to see what they come up with. I don't know of any material with the required properties. | 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 | ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com Tue Jan 23 23:21:38 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 21:21:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] Flap-type Airflow Meters In-Reply-To: <1169389978.17842.22.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Message-ID: <703893.64816.qm@web32203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: > I am adding an RS-232 port to the MAF interceptor so > folks can customize this mapping any way they wish. I was actually hoping for separate tables, one for the actual conversion numbers and one for "trimming"; that way you can set the device back to "zero" (same response as the stock flapper) without needing to re-load the calibration. FWIW, I intend to write software for your box that'll let you wire both the MAF and the flapper at the same time, so you can put the MAF before the flapper and then just data-log and build a conversion table for your particular flapper from that. Should be relatively simple to do, and I could even have it automagically make the finished table for use in the working converter device, saving a lot of muss and fuss. | 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 | ____________________________________________________________________________________ Get your own web address. Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL From atomic at extendwireless.net Tue Jan 23 23:27:37 2007 From: atomic at extendwireless.net (Charles Woock) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 23:27:37 -0600 Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic References: <70114.91691.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002701c73f78$5c795770$02dea8c0@AIRBRIDGE> Tyvek house wrap. You put this stuff (comes in 10 foot rolls) between the sheeting or insulation and the siding. Not sure of exact qualities but it is suppose to pass air and help keep moisture out. Check with your local building supply store for other brands. Charles ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adam Wade" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 11:06 PM Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] way off topic > --- Ernest Buckler wrote: > >> Start with GoreTex... >> /:oj > > Doesn't pass air. DOES pass water vapor. Two > failures to meet the requirements listed. > > I'm interested to see what they come up with. I don't > know of any material with the required properties. > > | 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 | > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > Looking for earth-friendly autos? > Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. > http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ > _______________________________________________ > Diy_efi mailing list > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi > From ebuckler at icehouse.net Wed Jan 24 02:13:17 2007 From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 00:13:17 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic References: <70114.91691.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <034d01c73f8f$80a35710$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> > >> Start with GoreTex... >> /:oj > > Doesn't pass air. DOES pass water vapor. Two > failures to meet the requirements listed. Wait a minnit...! I thought GoreTex was a rainsuit material? Supposed to keep big molecules, i.e.RAIN, i.e. water, OUT, and let little molecules, i.e.air, pass through. Am I wrong? Guess I better not buy that GoreTex riding jacket I've had my eye on, eh. Tyvek sounds promising. But they probably want something hi-tech for $500/yd as a fuel cell membrane. Duh. Ernie [:oj From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com Wed Jan 24 02:59:49 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 00:59:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic - waterproof technology In-Reply-To: <034d01c73f8f$80a35710$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Message-ID: <110816.68606.qm@web32214.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Ernest Buckler wrote: >> Doesn't pass air. DOES pass water vapor. Two >> failures to meet the requirements listed. > Wait a minnit...! I thought GoreTex was a rainsuit > material? Yes, it is (although it does a spectacularly lousy job of "breathing"). It is designed to be permeable to water vapor and wind-resistant, as I mentioned above, both things you want from rain gear. > Supposed to keep big molecules, i.e.RAIN, i.e. water H2O is a pretty small molecule. It's basically Teflon, which increases the surface tension on water droplets so that a droplet can't break up into individual water molecules which then "wet" the outer fabric, as well as plugging the perforations in the Gore-Tex. > and let little molecules, i.e.air, pass through. "Air" is a large collection of various compounds, and many of them are larger than an H20 molecule; further, if H2O wouldn't come through at all, it wouldn't be breathable. Further, to keep oil contamination from killing the waterproofness and breathability of Gore-Tex, they add a polyurethane layer, which can only be penetrated via osmosis (thus the lack of useful breathability). This is completely wind-proof. In fact, there are versions of Gore-Tex sold specifically to be used as a wind break layer on hiking outer shells and such. > Guess I better not buy that GoreTex riding jacket > I've had my eye on, eh. I just wrote a 5k word technical article on waterproof technologies for a motorcycle magazine. Short story -- Gore-Tex is overpriced and does not do a decent job at venting water vapor. You'd do as well using a plain polyurethane-coated nylon rain suit. If you want what Gore-Tex promises, you'll need something made with eVent. Unfortunately, there is not currently any street gear using eVent, only two off-road riding suits (one from Moose Industries and one from Fox). The transition might happen more quickly if people bug the companies that make all-weather street riding gear to use it. Also, get yourself appropriate products for washing and treating the outer fabric from NikWax. Non-toxic, water-based delivery system, no aerosols, no environmental or health issues like ScotchGard has, and using their special washing products can often be enough to revitalized waterproof garments without further treatment. Email me off-list and I will send you the article if you like. There's also a sidebar on the significant health and environmental issues regarding the production and disposal of Gore-Tex and eVent, and the very immediate health hazard of ScotchGard, and another on the physics behind waterproofing. | 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 From spyro at f2s.com Wed Jan 24 03:38:50 2007 From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 09:38:50 +0000 Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic In-Reply-To: <034d01c73f8f$80a35710$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> References: <70114.91691.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <034d01c73f8f$80a35710$0400a8c0@ernie1iu4ps6r8> Message-ID: <45B7292A.3020300@f2s.com> Ernest Buckler wrote: > >> >>> Start with GoreTex... >>> /:oj >> >> Doesn't pass air. DOES pass water vapor. Two >> failures to meet the requirements listed. > > Wait a minnit...! I thought GoreTex was a rainsuit material? Supposed > to keep big molecules, i.e.RAIN, i.e. water, OUT, and let little > molecules, i.e.air, pass through. Am I wrong? Guess I better not buy > that GoreTex riding jacket I've had my eye on, eh. goretex is a nanofibre based thing. and its supposed to be breathable, so you dont get uber sweaty... From MANAA6381 at aol.com Wed Jan 24 05:20:29 2007 From: MANAA6381 at aol.com (MANAA6381 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 06:20:29 EST Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic Message-ID: PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM YOUR EMAIL LIST From MANAA6381 at aol.com Wed Jan 24 05:21:43 2007 From: MANAA6381 at aol.com (MANAA6381 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 06:21:43 EST Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic - waterproof technology Message-ID: PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM YOUR EMAIL LIST From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com Wed Jan 24 05:32:38 2007 From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 03:32:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic - waterproof technology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <504175.23255.qm@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- MANAA6381 at aol.com wrote: > PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM YOUR EMAIL LIST One on-list request for something you should do yourself is par for the course with "teh intarweb" being popular these days with folks of all mental capacities. TWO requests in a ROW make me want to bitchslap someone. YOU signed up for the list, YOU got a message from the list server explaining how to change or delete your subscription. Don't send a message to the entire frackin' list for something they don't want to know about and most of whom can't do anything about anyway. Geeezus, I wish I had enough money to buy everyone a clue of their very own... | 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 | ____________________________________________________________________________________ We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love (and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list. http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/265 From MANAA6381 at aol.com Wed Jan 24 06:20:39 2007 From: MANAA6381 at aol.com (MANAA6381 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 07:20:39 EST Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic - waterproof technology Message-ID: NO I DID NOT SIGN UP From bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au Wed Jan 24 06:35:14 2007 From: bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au (Bernd Felsche) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 21:35:14 +0900 Subject: [Diy_efi] Flap-type Airflow Meters In-Reply-To: <703893.64816.qm@web32203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <703893.64816.qm@web32203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200701242135.14131@death.2.spammers> On Wednesday 24 January 2007 14:21, Adam Wade wrote: > --- "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: > > I am adding an RS-232 port to the MAF interceptor so > > folks can customize this mapping any way they wish. > I was actually hoping for separate tables, one for the > actual conversion numbers and one for "trimming"; that > way you can set the device back to "zero" (same > response as the stock flapper) without needing to > re-load the calibration. With the flap-type sensor, and to a lesser extent with others, the dynamic response to a rapid change in airflow needs to be compensated. The flap-type sensor is "supported" against the airflow by a single spring; and the flap has mass. The air in the system, as well as the deliberate damping volume typically on the opposite side of the pivot make for an "interesting" mass-spring-damper system. The air flow itself, especially by being compressible, add other dynamic components that have to be allowed for in a full model of the device. Some of the contribution may be small enough not to warrant being coded in the engine management system. The flap dynamics of inertia and the spring response are definitely not insignificant. If a sample device is handy and you can do a rapid data capture, then hooking up either suction at the outlet, or a pressure source at the inlet and "bursting" the airflow through the meter can be used to ascertain the dynamic response curve, and therefore the characteristic mass and spring constants of the flap as well as a measure of the damping. -- /"\ 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 steve at donegan.org Wed Jan 24 07:37:40 2007 From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 05:37:40 -0800 Subject: [Diy_efi] Flap-type Airflow Meters/Data logger In-Reply-To: <703893.64816.qm@web32203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <703893.64816.qm@web32203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1169645860.13665.15.camel@wopr.donegan.org> Funny how great minds think alike :-) Take your typical shop vac - use the 'blow' side of it as input to a throttle body, followed by MAF#1, followed by MAF#2 - log both... Given a known table for MAF #1 (the GM one) you can build a reasonably accurate starting point set of tables. The re-design (circuitry) of the MAF translator to serve as a really cheap data logger is 95% complete. C (I finally settled on the CCS C compiler - 145$ for those that want to work on this hands-on) code for 5(ea) A/D channels, 2(ea) frequency/period channels (one for MAF frequency, one for capture of injector pulse duty cycle) is ready to test on my proto board this AM. The final data input for this board which is 'wired' so to speak but not C coded is the interrupt which will capture RPM/Crank TDC events. This is all based on my original PIC 16F876A microcontroller. I may just use it as a front-end to my bigger EFI project - but for now it can just be a data logger. One more thing - it has the outputs wired for RS-232 (for data logging) and LCD (for in-car real-time display). The RS-232 is coded, the LCD output is not. Initial board layout had the whole thing at 1.4 by 2.3 inches. I will check my Jameco catalog for a good board size to fit an all-metal enclosure and then use that board size... Adam - this logger should be of equal use on the Bike project - ie go ride the heck out of the bike and you capture all sensors/all outputs and build a 'stock' set of maps... On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 21:21 -0800, Adam Wade wrote: > --- "Steven P. Donegan" wrote: > > > I am adding an RS-232 port to the MAF interceptor so > > folks can customize this mapping any way they wish. > > I was actually hoping for separate tables, one for the > actual conversion numbers and one for "trimming"; that > way you can set the device back to "zero" (same > response as the stock flapper) without needing to > re-load the calibration. > > FWIW, I intend to write software for your box that'll > let you wire both the MAF and the flapper at the same > time, so you can put the MAF before the flapper and > then just data-log and build a conversion table for > your particular flapper from that. Should be > relatively simple to do, and I could even have it > automagically make the finished table for use in the > working converter device, saving a lot of muss and fuss. > > | 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 | > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > Get your own web address. > Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business. > http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL > _______________________________________________ > 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 spyro at f2s.com Wed Jan 24 07:53:44 2007 From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 13:53:44 +0000 Subject: [Diy_efi] way off topic - waterproof technology In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45B764E8.2070604@f2s.com> MANAA6381 at aol.com wrote: > NO I DID NOT SIGN UP bollocks. From five10man at commspeed.net Wed Jan 24 08:21:21 2007 From: fiv