DIY_EFI Digest V5 #373

Christian Hack christianh at pdd.edmi.com.au
Wed Nov 8 01:42:37 GMT 2000


On Tuesday, November 07, 2000 11:00 PM, DIY_EFI Digest 
[SMTP:DIY_EFI-Digest-Owner at diy-efi.org] wrote:
>
> DIY_EFI Digest        Tuesday, November 7 2000        Volume 05 : Number 
373
>
>
>
> In this issue:
>
> 	RE: General theory on EFI
> 	Re: General theory on EFI
> 	Re: General theory on EFI
> 	Re: General theory on EFI
> 	Re: Info on gauge-like enclosures?
> 	RE: Anyone with specs for old Hitachi components?
> 	NOT RE: Info on gauge-like enclosures?
> 	Re: Info on gauge-like enclosures?
> 	Re: Ignition Only
> 	Re: Anyone with specs for old Hitachi components?
> 	Re:  MAP-Sensors
> 	Re: Ignition Only
> 	Re: Ignition Only
> 	Re: Ignition Only
> 	Re: Ignition Only
> 	Re: General theory on EFI
> 	Re: General theory on EFI
>
> See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the
> DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 15:33:50 -0500
> From: Eric Bryant <BRYANTE at ghsp.com>
> Subject: RE: General theory on EFI
>
> > From: Jeff Webb [mailto:mustang at ufl.edu]
> > Subject: Re: General theory on EFI
> >
> > Two things to consider:
> >
> > 1) Most PC's are not suitable for automotive use, due to temperature,
> > vibration, and reliability concerns.  I would imagine that laptops
> > should be better than desktops, and PC/104 boards may be the
> > best bet.
> > If you're just playing around, then you can probably make
> > things work.
> > If you want a dependable driver, then you should research this
> > carefully.  Just something to think about.
> >
>
> This is the understatement of the year.  Most PC's aren't validated at 
all.
> OK, I'm exaggerating a bit - they do fire up the prototypes and ensure 
that
> they can run Windows and the game of the moment.  That's it.  No
> environmental, EMC, or mechanical durability testing to speak of. 
 Laptops
> aren't better than desktops unless they're one of the "hardened" 
industrial
> ones, and most of us can't afford those.
>
> I'm not familar enough with most vendors of PC-104 hardware, but there's 
a
> chance they'd be a bit better.  Since that market isn't moving along at
> quite the rocket pace of the PC industry, there's a possibility that some
> validation is being done.  Anything shy of aerospace-quality components 
are
> going to fall short of automotive standards, in my opinion.
>
> The likelihood of running into environmental problems may not be all that
> bad, but I'd be concerned about EMC problems.  It's pretty easy to figure
> out if you're going to run into temperature problems, but EMC problems 
can
> be significantly more difficult to figure out.  Maybe I'm being a bit too
> cautious.
>
> > 2) Linux is not a real-time operating system.  Look at www.rtlinux.org
> > if you want to use linux for controlling an EFI system.
>
> Seems less costly than investing in a bunch of OSEK tools:)
>
> Eric Bryant
> mailto:bryante at ghsp.com
> http://www.novagate.com/~bryante
> - 
------------------------------------------------------------------------  
----
> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the 
quotes)
> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo at lists.diy-efi.org
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 15:28:36 -0500 (EST)
> From: Pat Ford <pford at qnx.com>
> Subject: Re: General theory on EFI
>
> I got it running my landrover, worked great when the truck was working 
(plowing snow, offorading) it didn't do too well on the road. It seemed to 
not like transitions from full power to anything or vice-versa
>
> Previously, you (Bruce Plecan) wrote:
> {
> {
> { From: "Jeff Webb" <mustang at ufl.edu>
> { > Andy Laurence wrote:
> { > > around (friend in the passenger seat at the keyboard).  Has anyone 
else
> { used
> { > > the system on the site with a PC as the ECU, as I cannot download 
the
> { zip
> { > > file with the schematic.  It seems like a really good system, 
especially
> { > > with all those in/outputs, although I will probably run it via 
Linux.
> { > Two things to consider:
> { > 1) Most PC's are not suitable for automotive use, due to temperature,
> { > vibration, and reliability concerns.  I would imagine that laptops
> { > should be better than desktops, and PC/104 boards may be the best 
bet.
> { > If you're just playing around, then you can probably make things 
work.
> { > If you want a dependable driver, then you should research this
> { > carefully.  Just something to think about.
> { > 2) Linux is not a real-time operating system.  Look at 
www.rtlinux.org
> { > if you want to use linux for controlling an EFI system.
> { > Good luck, and have fun.
> { > Jeff Webb
> {
> { There is a bunch of info., on this in the archives, couple years ago it 
was
> { life the tread was taking a life of it's own.  I've heard of one that
> { someone had started an engine with, but that's about it.
> { Bruce
> {
> {
> {
> {
> { 
------------------------------------------------------------------------  
----
> { To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the 
quotes)
> { in the body of a message (not the subject) to 
majordomo at lists.diy-efi.org
> {
>
> - --
> Pat Ford                           email: pford at qnx.com
> QNX Software Systems, Ltd.           WWW: http://www.qnx.com
> (613) 591-0931      (voice)         mail: 175 Terence Matthews
> (613) 591-3579      (fax)                 Kanata, Ontario, Canada K2M 1W8
>
> - 
------------------------------------------------------------------------  
----
> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the 
quotes)
> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo at lists.diy-efi.org
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 20:30:46 -0000
> From: "Gavin" <Gavin at sprockets.freeserve.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: General theory on EFI
>
> It was me who started off a very long thread, but interesting, on the use 
of
> a PC for an ECU.  I found out that it was a good idea in theory, but it
> doesn't work to well in the real world.  Just build a dedicated piece of
> electronics.
>
> Just my opinion.
>
> - -gavin
>
> - 
------------------------------------------------------------------------  
----
> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the 
quotes)
> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo at lists.diy-efi.org
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 23:39:30 -0000
> From: "Jani Laatikainen" <jani.laatikainen at luukku.com>
> Subject: Re: General theory on EFI
>
> Hi!
>
> I have run PC-based EFI couple of months, two last summers, without any 
problems. System has been stable. I used standard PC-motherboard, but now I 
have bought PC/104 board, which I am going to use next summer. I have 
designed one card myself, which is connected to PC-motherboard.
> Ok, I dont use it on wheather conditions similar to normal usage of 
normal car, I keep it on carage always, when I don't drive it etc..
> PC/104 boards should be ok for cars. I have installed PC/104 boards on 
railway trains, which have been in daily usage several years, without any 
problems.
>
> - -
> Jani Laatikainen
>
>
>
> - 
------------------------------------------------------------------------  
----
> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the 
quotes)
> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo at lists.diy-efi.org
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 15:46:55 -0800
> From: "Chris P." <cp914 at lvcm.com>
> Subject: Re: Info on gauge-like enclosures?
>
> >Ludis Langens
>
> >Gosh, you ask for detailed information about an obscure brand of ECU
> >(Nissan) that nobody here has worked with, don't do your own homework
> >ahead of time*, don't start reading the archives, wait just a few days
> >for answers, and now your leaving?
>
> >From the first message:  2. Is there a "basics" page I can read through 
on
> ECU internals?
> ***Isn't that asking for homework???
>
> Per the web page: "The archive search engine is not yet working on the 
new
> server. For the time being you can read an edited and compressed version
> here. "  <--- 11.7 MB zipped. How about you download it and send me the
> pertinent parts.  ;o)
>
> >* If you had opened up your ECU and posted a list of the chip numbers,
> >someone might have been able to give some advice about how to procede
> >with that ECU.
>
> >From first message:  4. What do I need to know about my particular ECU
> before I ask more
> questions?
> ***THAT DOESN'T QUALIFY!!!!????
>
> Sounds like you stopped at the word Nissan.... and now your upset because
> you know useful info is being withheld.
> Welcome to my world! I don't need this kind of bullshit.
>
>
>
> - 
------------------------------------------------------------------------  
----
> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the 
quotes)
> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo at lists.diy-efi.org
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 16:05:08 -0800
> From: "Buchholz, Steven" <Steven.Buchholz at kla-tencor.com>
> Subject: RE: Anyone with specs for old Hitachi components?
>
> Thanks for the reply Christian!
>
> Unlike the apparent expectations of others, I realize this is a bit of a
> fishing expedition, and truly appreciate the fact you took the time to 
reply
> on my request.  The one thing that I do not want to do is post 
information
> to the list that is felt to be inappropriate.  I am posting this reply 
with
> the details that I am aware of ... if there are any who feel this 
discussion
> should be taken off line, please don't hesitate to let me know!
>

Don't worry. This is DIY EFI. As far as I am concerned and I'm sure
most will agree, this list is for discussing anything to do with building/
modifying engine management systems, whether it's from scratch or
from the OEM system that came with the car.

If it's GM specific you're probably better off on GMECM.
If it's a Ford try the EEC list.
If you building from scratch or modifying a 68332 based system try EFI332.

Even then the above 3 lists probably could still sorta fall under the 
general
DIYEFI list.

As for others who don't seem to appreciate the list, forget 'em.

> So far I haven't gotten any info on the 46506 ... and yes, it wouldn't
> surprise me to hear that the 46510 was a close cousin.  On the boxes I've
> opened up I have yet to find any large chips with odd packages ... unless
> that ASIC was in some sort of a PQFP package ... I have one of these 
mounted
> on that ceramic substrate I mentioned in the earlier note. ... and no, I
> don't recall ever seeing a label "JECS" anywhere on the box ... perhaps 
that
> is a Nissan specific label ...

I think JECS stands for Japan(ese) Engine Control Systems or something
like that. Also seems to be affiliated with Unisia - an ECU / sensor 
manufacturer.
JECS seems to appear on all Nissan ECUs I have heard about. Mine also
has a Bosch part number and a magazine article I have on it suggests it's
based on the Motronic system, although I am yet to find any similarities
between the two. The article did have a few other technical inaccuracies 
so...

The package isn't a PQFP. It's just like a 64 pin DIP except the pins are
smaller and spaced closer.

>
> You have an interesting point about the different part available only on 
the
> ECU with the knock sensing capability.  That is something I had not
> considered ... perhaps the knock sensing is done on a completely 
different
> processor like a microcontroller that serves as a peripheral to the main
> microprocessor in the ECU.  I am looking at several different versions of 
a
> similar control system (in a way they are subsequent generations of the
> original) ... the first has no knock sensing, while the follow-on units 
have
> an initial followed by a more refined version of knock control.

I'm fairly certain in my case it's just a lookup table of sorts with a fair
bit of analogue filtering etc. The main processor still does the work (I 
think)

> It is interesting to hear that Hitachi used a uC with external RAM in 
your
> app.  In the Audi boxes they seemed to go to the Hitachi proprietary 
HD6303
> processors that have a small amount of internal RAM (which does have
> provisions for external batery back up) and a built in multiplier.

I'm fairly sure it's RAM. It keeps power via battery feed after the ECU is
turned off so.... The 6802 has internal RAM (128 bytes) with battery backup
capability but maybe they need a fair bit more. Remember you need stack
and also space for fuel/spark trim tables etc. Perhaps my ECU was designed
a little bit before the Hitachi 6303 / Moto 6803 came out.

>
> While just checking the old spec book I have for the 46510, I actually 
found
> the best clue yet as to the origin of the chips we're looking for.  I 
found
> a cross reference chart that gives the 46503, 46504 and 46505 as the "old
> type numbers" for Hitachi's versions of the rotoMola stock 6800 
peripheral
> chips: 6843 FDC, 6844 DMAC and 6845 CRTC ... using that model, my chip 
would
> be a 6846 (ROM, I/O, Timer) ... and yours would be a 6850 (ACIA) ???  I
> don't have a Moto catalog here, but the cross ref I have says that the 
46846
> and 46850 fill those slots ... and at least in my ECU, the processor has
> integral I/O, timer and serial interface functions.  If anyone happened 
to
> find a HD46508, it is a 16-channel, 10-bit A=>D module ... perhaps it got
> into an ECU somewhere ...
>

I doubt very much my chip is a 6850 ACIA, but I'll have a look and see
if it matches to any of my disassembled code. From memory the 6850 is
basically just a UART. ACIA is motospeak for a UART, right? Also there
aren't are serial type ports on the thing further negating that idea.

If you have an old spec book for the 46510, please, please, please could
I get a scanned copy or something? I have enough info on the main 
processor.
It's the peripherals that are killing me at the moment.

> I do have the databook that covers a lot of the old Hitachi parts 
(HD6803,
> 6303, 6809, 6309, HD68000, some peripheral parts) in Hitachi catalog #U70
> ... if anyone needs datasheets for any of these old processors, don't
> hesitate to contact me and I'll do what I can to get the info to you ...
>

Phew, I'll stop talking now...


Christian Hack
DESIGN ENGINEER
christianh at pdd.edmi.com.au
EDMI Product Development Division
Ph : +61 7 3881 6444
FAX : +61 7 3881 6420


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes)
in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo at lists.diy-efi.org




More information about the Diy_efi mailing list