[Diy_efi] Re: Diy_efi digest, Vol 1 #176 - 12 msgs

Frank Larson zot241 at netzero.net
Sat Jul 20 13:41:49 GMT 2002


unsubscribe
----- Original Message -----
From: <diy_efi-request at diy-efi.org>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 8:26 PM
Subject: Diy_efi digest, Vol 1 #176 - 12 msgs


> Send Diy_efi mailing list submissions to
> diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> diy_efi-request at diy-efi.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> diy_efi-admin at diy-efi.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Diy_efi digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: DIY-WB construction & testing... help (Gregory A. Parmer)
>    2. Re: v6 4.3 ecms. Got Code ?? (Jeremy Gonyou)
>    3. Re: DIY-WB construction & testing... help (rr)
>    4. Re: DIY-WB construction & testing... help (rr)
>    5. Re: DIY-WB construction & testing... help (Andrew Brownsword)
>    6. Re: DIY-WB construction & testing... help (Andrew Brownsword)
>    7. Re: v6 4.3 ecms. Got Code ?? (Djfreggens at aol.com)
>    8. Re: DIY-WB construction & testing... help (Bruce)
>    9. Re: DIY-WB construction & testing... help (Robert A. Ward Sr.)
>   10. coolant temperature sensor extension (?!) (95_HCMS)
>   11. Re: coolant temperature sensor extension (?!) (Bruce)
>   12. Re: DIY-WB construction & testing... help (Shannen Durphey)
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 14:31:40 -0500 (CDT)
> From: "Gregory A. Parmer" <gparmer at acesag.auburn.edu>
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] DIY-WB construction & testing... help
> Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
>
> Absodamnlutely. I wrote that and it's been reviewed, even. Ouch.
> I'll gladly make the update as soon as I can figure out exactly
> how to reword it. Thank goodness there's only a single LED.
>
> -greg   the #1 Dummy
>
> > Who's website is that anyhow?  Perhaps an update is in order...
> >
> > Thanks for the info guys,
> >   Andrew
> >
> >
> > on 7/19/02 10:41 AM, Scott Campbell at oneslowalltrac at yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> > > Oops I spoke too soon.
> > >
> > > The length of the lead, and the position of the flat
> > > spot varies between LED manufacturers.  However the
> > > Cathode can be identified by holding the LED up to the
> > > light.  The larger of terminal inside is the Cathode.
> > >
> > > Scott.
> > >
> > > --- Scott Campbell <oneslowalltrac at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >> Hi Andrew,
> > >>
> > >> As you now know, that description of Anode/Cathode
> > >> identification is backward.
> > >>
> > >> On an LED, the Anode(+) is identified by the longer
> > >> lead and/or a flat on the side of the LED.  The
> > >> Cathode(-) is the shorter lead.
> > >>
> > >> (pin 2) Cathode ----|<|---- Anode (pin 1)
> > >>
> > >> Scott.
> > >>
> > >> --- Andrew Brownsword <asword at telus.net> wrote:
> > >>>>> on 7/18/02 2:27 PM, rr at RRauscher at nni.com
> > >> wrote:
> > >>> I reversed it and now it works fine.  I had it
> > >>> backward because this page
> > >>>
> > >> http://www.aces.edu/~gparmer/efi/temp/wb/guide.html
> > >>> says:
> > >>>
> > >>> "The cathode (+) is identified by end having the
> > >>> stripe , a "+" marking, or
> > >>> a longer lead. Also notable is that the LED has a
> > >>> flat spot machined on side
> > >>> of the lens corresponding to the anode (-). On the
> > >>> schematic, the cathode is
> > >>> the base of the triangle and the anode is the
> > >>> straight bar with the triangle
> > >>> pointing at it. Notice that the cathode (+) being
> > >>> identified by a stripe is
> > >>> a theme repeated on the circuit board (even for
> > >>> diodes like the LED which
> > >>> are not identified this way). If the leads have
> > >>> already been cut on your
> > >>> LED, look inside the diode. You'll notice two
> > >> hunks
> > >>> of metal. The larger is
> > >>> the anode."
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Diy_efi mailing list
> > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > http://www.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> >
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:51:34 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Jeremy Gonyou <jeremygonyou at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] v6 4.3 ecms. Got Code ??
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
>
> Yes and yes.  That is, if you're talking about Vortec.
>  Otherwise, I don't think so and I don't think so.
>
> > i am wndering if anyone has disassembled the gm 4.3
> > v6 ecms?? or does someone
> > have a ecu file ??anyhelp is appreciated.
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
> http://autos.yahoo.com
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 16:33:55 -0400
> From: rr <RRauscher at nni.com>
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] DIY-WB construction & testing... help
> Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
> Andrew Brownsword wrote:
> >
> > >>on 7/18/02 2:27 PM, rr at RRauscher at nni.com wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for responding in my time of need.   :)
> >
> > >> The UEGO circuit fails two tests:  pin 5 of U3 measures 7.2v instead
of 7.8
> > >> - 8.0, and J5 measures 1.8v instead of 1.9 - 2.1.
> > >
> > > For U3 pin 5 lift one leg of the cap C12 and re-measure. IF the
voltage
> > > goes up that cap is leaky.
> >
> > The voltage didn't change, so the capacitor would seem to not be the
> > culprit.  Any other suggestions?  Is it related to the J5 voltage
problem?
>
> Have you cleaned the flux off the board yet?
>
> >
> > > J5 should really be closer to 2 volts. Is the +4 volt (VGnd)
measurement
> > > on the low side? This would contribute to a low J5 reading. If not
then
> > > double check the resistors R31, R32 & R35; as to being 1% to and 10K &
> > > 100K.
> >
> > The VGnd voltage is about 3.95v -- so it is on the low side.  Could this
be
> > a result of my power supply being on the 12.5v?  Does it matter?  Those
3
> > resistors are all very close to their target values (<0.5% error).
>
> 3.95v is at 1.25%, darn good. Lets see, 1.8v/2.0v = 10%. That is why I
> believe it should be higher. Maybe check the specs on the DVM you are
> using. It may be loading the circuit.
>
> >
> > >> When I power on the heater circuit the LED doesn't come on.  The site
says I
> > >> need 13-16 volts and the (R/C model) battery I'm using is only
12.5v -- is
> > >> this likely the reason?  When I measure the voltage across the LED it
seems
> > >> to read -11.5v which makes me wonder if I put the LED on backwards,
but I've
> > >> got the flat spot opposite the stripe on the PCB which is how the
> > >> construction guide indicates it should be.
> > >
> > > If this is w/o the sensor or any load connected then the 12 V is
enough
> > > to light the LED. Hmm, I thought that the flat went w/the stripe.
Let'me
> > > check. . . Yes, the board I looked at has the LED flat on the same
side
> > > as the footprint stripe end.
> >
> > I reversed it and now it works fine.  I had it backward because this
page
> > http://www.aces.edu/~gparmer/efi/temp/wb/guide.html says:
> >
> > "The cathode (+) is identified by end having the stripe , a "+" marking,
or
> > a longer lead. Also notable is that the LED has a flat spot machined on
side
> > of the lens corresponding to the anode (-). On the schematic, the
cathode is
> > the base of the triangle and the anode is the straight bar with the
triangle
> > pointing at it. Notice that the cathode (+) being identified by a stripe
is
> > a theme repeated on the circuit board (even for diodes like the LED
which
> > are not identified this way). If the leads have already been cut on your
> > LED, look inside the diode. You'll notice two hunks of metal. The larger
is
> > the anode."
> >
> > Which, as I read it anyhow, implies that the flat spot is anode and the
> > stripe is cathode... meaning that the flat spot is away from the stripe.
> > What am I missing?
> >
> >
> > > P.S. note that the checks #34+ are not entirely valid. If they work
OK,
> > > If not then do not worry about it.
> >
> > I'm following this:  http://www.diy-wb.com/diywbchk.htm  and my browser
> > doesn't show any sensible test numbers... which one is #34, and should I
> > even bother trying them if they aren't entirely valid?  Hooking up the
> > switch sounds like a bit of a pain.
> >
>
> You can try the tests, if they wwork good. If not, then do not worry
> about it. Step 34 starts with:
>
>      Keeping the DVM on U2 pin 8 close the switch. The voltage will
>      slowly drop. It will take ~ 2 minutes with the voltage
>      reaching ~ -3.4 v.
>            If not check C10, R18, R34 and U2.
>
>
> BobR.
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 16:38:53 -0400
> From: rr <RRauscher at nni.com>
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] DIY-WB construction & testing... help
> Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
>
> Greg, we are happy that someone took the effort to
> build a site to help with the construction.
>
> Thank you,
>
> BobR.
>
> "Gregory A. Parmer" wrote:
> >
> > Absodamnlutely. I wrote that and it's been reviewed, even. Ouch.
> > I'll gladly make the update as soon as I can figure out exactly
> > how to reword it. Thank goodness there's only a single LED.
> >
> > -greg   the #1 Dummy
> >
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 16:26:55 -0700
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] DIY-WB construction & testing... help
> From: Andrew Brownsword <asword at telus.net>
> To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
> Absofrippenlutely!  I wouldn't have even attempted the project if it
weren't
> for this friendly and informative page.
>
> on 7/19/02 1:38 PM, rr at RRauscher at nni.com wrote:
> >
> > Greg, we are happy that someone took the effort to
> > build a site to help with the construction.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > BobR.
> >
> > "Gregory A. Parmer" wrote:
> >>
> >> Absodamnlutely. I wrote that and it's been reviewed, even. Ouch.
> >> I'll gladly make the update as soon as I can figure out exactly
> >> how to reword it. Thank goodness there's only a single LED.
> >>
> >> -greg   the #1 Dummy
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Diy_efi mailing list
> > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > http://www.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 16:32:01 -0700
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] DIY-WB construction & testing... help
> From: Andrew Brownsword <asword at telus.net>
> To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
>
> >>>> The UEGO circuit fails two tests:  pin 5 of U3 measures 7.2v instead
of 7.8
> >>>> - 8.0, and J5 measures 1.8v instead of 1.9 - 2.1.
> >>>
> >>> For U3 pin 5 lift one leg of the cap C12 and re-measure. IF the
voltage
> >>> goes up that cap is leaky.
> >>
> >> The voltage didn't change, so the capacitor would seem to not be the
> >> culprit.  Any other suggestions?  Is it related to the J5 voltage
problem?
> >
> > Have you cleaned the flux off the board yet?
>
> I cleaned off one particularly bad area using a chemical "pen".  Should I
do
> a more extensive pass?  Can flux cause shorts?
>
>
> >>> J5 should really be closer to 2 volts. Is the +4 volt (VGnd)
measurement
> >>> on the low side? This would contribute to a low J5 reading. If not
then
> >>> double check the resistors R31, R32 & R35; as to being 1% to and 10K &
> >>> 100K.
> >>
> >> The VGnd voltage is about 3.95v -- so it is on the low side.  Could
this be
> >> a result of my power supply being on the 12.5v?  Does it matter?  Those
3
> >> resistors are all very close to their target values (<0.5% error).
> >
> > 3.95v is at 1.25%, darn good. Lets see, 1.8v/2.0v = 10%. That is why I
> > believe it should be higher. Maybe check the specs on the DVM you are
> > using. It may be loading the circuit.
>
> Hmmm.  Unfortunately I don't have the manual for this unit anymore.  Its a
> Sperry DM-4100A... nothing fancy just your basic DVM.  Should I go and
> invest in something better?  Recommendations?
>
>
> > You can try the tests, if they wwork good. If not, then do not worry
> > about it.
>
> Heh, this seems like an interesting testing policy.  :)
>
> Cheers,
>   Andrew
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 7
> From: Djfreggens at aol.com
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 19:46:57 EDT
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] v6 4.3 ecms. Got Code ??
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
> yes vortec can you share please ??
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 8
> From: "Bruce" <nacelp at bright.net>
> To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] DIY-WB construction & testing... help
> Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 20:28:04 -0400
> Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andrew Brownsword" <asword at telus.net>
> >Can flux cause shorts?
>
> Once upon I time I used fluxs.  Now only on heavy guage wiring harness
type
> work.  They can etch the board,
> They can cause high resistance *traces*
> These resistances can vary with temp., and yes I was using non acid
> versions.
> Some electrical supply sources sell areosol neutrilizers, and cleaners.
> I've had consistant good luck just using regular flux type solders, Kester
> being the only one I use now.  The archives have some other opinions about
> solders
> Bruce
>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 9
> From: "Robert A. Ward Sr." <rawardsr at ameritech.net>
> To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] DIY-WB construction & testing... help
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 21:54:15 -0400
> Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
> At work we use organic core solder with water soluble flux, mainly alcohol
> with a mild hydrochloric acid. Wash the boards with plain water and dry.
> Just have to make sure all your water sensitive components are sealed. All
> are boards leave clean as a whistle :-)
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bruce" <nacelp at bright.net>
> To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 1995 8:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] DIY-WB construction & testing... help
>
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Andrew Brownsword" <asword at telus.net>
> > >Can flux cause shorts?
> >
> > Once upon I time I used fluxs.  Now only on heavy guage wiring harness
> type
> > work.  They can etch the board,
> > They can cause high resistance *traces*
> > These resistances can vary with temp., and yes I was using non acid
> > versions.
> > Some electrical supply sources sell areosol neutrilizers, and cleaners.
> > I've had consistant good luck just using regular flux type solders,
Kester
> > being the only one I use now.  The archives have some other opinions
about
> > solders
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Diy_efi mailing list
> > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > http://www.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> >
>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 10
> From: "95_HCMS" <sandoren at worldnet.att.net>
> To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 19:11:58 -0700
> Subject: [Diy_efi] coolant temperature sensor extension (?!)
> Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0070_01C22F58.27B3D680
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> I pulled out my coolant sensor while working to replace my water pump =
> and thermostat.
>
> Strange (?), the sensor is mounted in an extension.  The aluminum =
> extension has what looks to be a sensor on the end of it.  When I =
> seperated the two, the actual sensor looks normal except for what looks =
> like a little lithium grease inside the extension where the actual =
> sensor resides.
>
> What's odd, is that the threads on the extension are the same size =
> threads on the sensor.
>
> Why would this combination exist?  Am I missing something, here?
>
> Can I dump the extension and just put only the sensor back in the block?
>
> Does anyone have any incite into this combination/situation?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bob
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0070_01C22F58.27B3D680
> Content-Type: text/html;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
> charset=3Diso-8859-1">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
> <STYLE></STYLE>
> </HEAD>
> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I pulled out my coolant sensor while =
> working to=20
> replace my water pump and thermostat.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Strange (?), the sensor is mounted in =
> an=20
> extension.&nbsp; The aluminum extension has what looks to be a sensor on =
> the end=20
> of it.&nbsp; When I seperated the two, the actual sensor looks normal =
> except for=20
> what looks like a little lithium grease inside the extension where the =
> actual=20
> sensor resides.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>What's odd, is that the threads on the =
> extension=20
> are the same size threads&nbsp;on the sensor.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Why would this combination exist?&nbsp; =
> Am I=20
> missing something, here?</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Can I dump the extension and just put =
> only the=20
> sensor back in the block?</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Does anyone have any incite into this=20
> combination/situation?</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks,</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Bob</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0070_01C22F58.27B3D680--
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 11
> From: "Bruce" <nacelp at bright.net>
> To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] coolant temperature sensor extension (?!)
> Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 22:59:50 -0400
> Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_070E_01BA562B.5A6BB2E0
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
>
> Might be there to dampen the sensors response.
> ie be there to cover for not enough filtering in the code, and resultant =
> timing/fuel corrections, that result in a lack of smoothness in the way =
> the engine runs.
> Bruce
>
>   ----- Original Message -----=20
>   From: 95_HCMS=20
>   To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org=20
>   Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 10:11 PM
>   Subject: [Diy_efi] coolant temperature sensor extension (?!)
>
>
>   I pulled out my coolant sensor while working to replace my water pump =
> and thermostat.
>
>   Strange (?), the sensor is mounted in an extension.  The aluminum =
> extension has what looks to be a sensor on the end of it.  When I =
> seperated the two, the actual sensor looks normal except for what looks =
> like a little lithium grease inside the extension where the actual =
> sensor resides.
>
>   What's odd, is that the threads on the extension are the same size =
> threads on the sensor.
>
>   Why would this combination exist?  Am I missing something, here?
>
>   Can I dump the extension and just put only the sensor back in the =
> block?
>
>   Does anyone have any incite into this combination/situation?
>
>   Thanks,
>
>   Bob
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_070E_01BA562B.5A6BB2E0
> Content-Type: text/html;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
> charset=3Diso-8859-1">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4728.2300" name=3DGENERATOR>
> <STYLE></STYLE>
> </HEAD>
> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Might be there to dampen the sensors=20
> response.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>ie be&nbsp;there to cover for not =
> enough filtering=20
> in the code, and resultant timing/fuel corrections, that result in a =
> lack of=20
> smoothness in the way the engine runs.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Bruce</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
> style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
> BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
>   <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
>   <DIV=20
>   style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
> black"><B>From:</B>=20
>   <A title=3Dsandoren at worldnet.att.net=20
>   href=3D"mailto:sandoren at worldnet.att.net">95_HCMS</A> </DIV>
>   <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
> title=3Ddiy_efi at diy-efi.org=20
>   href=3D"mailto:diy_efi at diy-efi.org">diy_efi at diy-efi.org</A> </DIV>
>   <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, July 19, 2002 =
> 10:11=20
> PM</DIV>
>   <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [Diy_efi] coolant =
> temperature=20
>   sensor extension (?!)</DIV>
>   <DIV><BR></DIV>
>   <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I pulled out my coolant sensor while =
> working to=20
>   replace my water pump and thermostat.</FONT></DIV>
>   <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
>   <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Strange (?), the sensor is mounted in =
> an=20
>   extension.&nbsp; The aluminum extension has what looks to be a sensor =
> on the=20
>   end of it.&nbsp; When I seperated the two, the actual sensor looks =
> normal=20
>   except for what looks like a little lithium grease inside the =
> extension where=20
>   the actual sensor resides.</FONT></DIV>
>   <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
>   <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>What's odd, is that the threads on =
> the extension=20
>   are the same size threads&nbsp;on the sensor.</FONT></DIV>
>   <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
>   <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Why would this combination =
> exist?&nbsp; Am I=20
>   missing something, here?</FONT></DIV>
>   <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
>   <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Can I dump the extension and just put =
> only the=20
>   sensor back in the block?</FONT></DIV>
>   <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
>   <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Does anyone have any incite into this =
>
>   combination/situation?</FONT></DIV>
>   <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
>   <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks,</FONT></DIV>
>   <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
>   <DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
> size=3D2>Bob</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_070E_01BA562B.5A6BB2E0--
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 23:08:32 -0400
> From: Shannen Durphey <shannen at grolen.com>
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] DIY-WB construction & testing... help
> Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
> LOL!!!
>
> I was very careful to install everything correctly.  When the LED wouldn't
> work, and the tests were all passing, I referred to a prior post from
Bruce
> R which said "If all tests are good, and the LED doesn't light, the LED is
> probably reversed."  I chalked it up to a late night mistake and just
> swapped the leads.  If the el cheapo DVOM had been able to test LED
> polarity, it wouldn't have ever happened.
>
> <g>
> Shannen
>
> "Gregory A. Parmer" wrote:
> >
> > Absodamnlutely. I wrote that and it's been reviewed, even. Ouch.
> > I'll gladly make the update as soon as I can figure out exactly
> > how to reword it. Thank goodness there's only a single LED.
> >
> > -greg   the #1 Dummy
> >
> > > Who's website is that anyhow?  Perhaps an update is in order...
> > >
> > > Thanks for the info guys,
> > >   Andrew
> > >
> > >
> > > on 7/19/02 10:41 AM, Scott Campbell at oneslowalltrac at yahoo.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > Oops I spoke too soon.
> > > >
> > > > The length of the lead, and the position of the flat
> > > > spot varies between LED manufacturers.  However the
> > > > Cathode can be identified by holding the LED up to the
> > > > light.  The larger of terminal inside is the Cathode.
> > > >
> > > > Scott.
> > > >
> > > > --- Scott Campbell <oneslowalltrac at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > >> Hi Andrew,
> > > >>
> > > >> As you now know, that description of Anode/Cathode
> > > >> identification is backward.
> > > >>
> > > >> On an LED, the Anode(+) is identified by the longer
> > > >> lead and/or a flat on the side of the LED.  The
> > > >> Cathode(-) is the shorter lead.
> > > >>
> > > >> (pin 2) Cathode ----|<|---- Anode (pin 1)
> > > >>
> > > >> Scott.
> > > >>
> > > >> --- Andrew Brownsword <asword at telus.net> wrote:
> > > >>>>> on 7/18/02 2:27 PM, rr at RRauscher at nni.com
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>> I reversed it and now it works fine.  I had it
> > > >>> backward because this page
> > > >>>
> > > >> http://www.aces.edu/~gparmer/efi/temp/wb/guide.html
> > > >>> says:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> "The cathode (+) is identified by end having the
> > > >>> stripe , a "+" marking, or
> > > >>> a longer lead. Also notable is that the LED has a
> > > >>> flat spot machined on side
> > > >>> of the lens corresponding to the anode (-). On the
> > > >>> schematic, the cathode is
> > > >>> the base of the triangle and the anode is the
> > > >>> straight bar with the triangle
> > > >>> pointing at it. Notice that the cathode (+) being
> > > >>> identified by a stripe is
> > > >>> a theme repeated on the circuit board (even for
> > > >>> diodes like the LED which
> > > >>> are not identified this way). If the leads have
> > > >>> already been cut on your
> > > >>> LED, look inside the diode. You'll notice two
> > > >> hunks
> > > >>> of metal. The larger is
> > > >>> the anode."
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Diy_efi mailing list
> > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > > http://www.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Diy_efi mailing list
> > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > http://www.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> http://www.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>
>
> End of Diy_efi Digest
>



_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
http://www.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi



More information about the Diy_efi mailing list