[Diy_efi] DIY-WB -- Rcal vs. Ip samples

[Garfield Willis]

On Wed, 23 Oct 2002 20:50:02 +0100, "William Shuv-a-ton"
<shurvinton at orange.net> wrote:

>I'd just like to point the readers to the archives of March-May 1998 =
when
>Gar was learning about this.
>
>'Calibration <snip> What I think this MUST mean, is that with the CAL
>resistor properly used, AND with the instrument operating in ATM 02, you=
 can
>expect the measured Ip to be within 1% of the average/nominal spec'd =
value
>(happens to be 7.5ma)'
>
>And a little later he said
>
>'The free-air 02 ion pumping current my circuit settles at is only 5% =
off
>from what Frank gets with his NTK sensor' <SNIP>''I measured 6.3mA@ =
0.445V
>and he (Frank) gets 6.0mA@ 0.428V'
>
>He mentions a whole load of other stuff too you can look up if you want.
>Interestingly at some point he has decided that he has not posted the =
whole
>story but decided that 1000s of words of bluster are far better than 10
>lines to explain the exact differences between when this was a DIYeffort=
 and
>when he became a 'commercial' outfit.

That's a pretty amusing spin there. It's really alot simpler than your
cloakNdagger insinuation. Four years and considerable research and
measurement beyond a couple sensors is what makes the difference, Herr
BS. If you think the whole story of 1000 words is somehow tainted by
commercial interests, then you might try speaking to the DATA and the
facts that have been posted by several OTHERS on this list, not me,
confirming the CalR lumpyness, the measurement errors, the multiple
other flaws in the DIY-WB design, and especially the fact that the
original NTK and the Honda/NTK sensors are clearly different animals.
All the slimeball aspersions you might try to cook up by quoting initial
impressions at a very early stage, CANNOT overthrow the simple DATA that
confirms that this 1000 word story you don't seem to like, is indeed the
way the story works out. I guess you'd like to stick with the early
preliminary assumptions like others have stubbornly tried to do, instead
of spending the mental energy to follow along as the story unfolded. OK,
well suit yourself. But that's the symptom of a lazy spin-doctor, not a
student of technology.

Those posts were at the very beginning of the dawning of the EGOR
project. If you go and LOOK at the graph in the SAE paper, you'll see
how it's quite easy to happen on an original NTK sensor and a Honda/NTK
sensor that are close to each other in Ip @ free-air. That's the whole
point. You can't just stop there, since one may be near one side of the
bell-curve, and the other on the other end, and they both look close to
each other. Indeed the bell curves overlap some, which is exactly the
import of that SAE paper's graph of Ip value spread. The real proof that
they weren't the same sensors (nor the same bell-curves) came only after
measuring a larger sample AND calibrating them with reference gases.
Sometimes engineering is a little more involved than cherry-picking, BS.
If you INSIST on cherry-picking, you may end up with unripened fruit. :)

In the early days, we were all hopeful that the CalR would give us a
good calibration (the normal assumption in instrumentation is that IF
something is trimmed with a cal device/value, it will likely be trimmed
to within 1%; the mistake in that assumption was that Honda was
interested in 'measurement' accuracy; they clearly weren't nor did they
need to be), AND we also indeed hoped that the NTK paper was a true
rosetta stone that would open the whole thing up, plus we knew nothing
(much) about the aging phenom at that point. Your attempt to slime me
with the suggestion that my 'story' has changed only proves that you're
completely incapable of understanding what kind of effort and care it
takes to actually make these kinds of things work in practice, and stand
up to industrial grade muster. The DIY-WB 'design' is a perfect example
of throwing something together and announcing it to the world, when it
hasn't even been tested in situ, or vetted against other devices or
gases or SOME sort of standard, nor even checked with a decent sample of
the sensors it's intended to work with. Not even the very rudiments of
engineering practice were applied to this 'design'.

Soooo... DO post all you can about "when Gar was learning about this";
just be sure you follow along in the book, instead of trying to guess
the whole plot from just reading the first few pages. Unless of course
you don't happen to like the ending,and so wish to revise the book based
on the first few pages and the way YOU imagined the book should turn out
from that. The latter approach would suggest 'skimmer' laziness in the
very least, and perhaps even more unseemly motives. :)

Nice try though, at BS'ing, Herr BS. Your true colors once again. Thank
you for sharing your skills with us again.

Gar


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