Traction control (long and sorta related to Software Dyno)

[CSH-HQ]

I'm done, since you won't be bother to read the relies
Grumpy

>Grumpy,
>
>Uh oh, another wordy post on the way...
>
>> Gee, dismiss ideas before even thinking about, them, why post?.
>> Did you see the logic in the cyl sel?.
>> Never mind you made your mind up.
>> IF all you want to do is waste someones time, why not be up front and say 
that.
>> Sorta long, and of no value.
>> Grumpy, and getting more so
>
>Well, I was actually trying to generate discussion on a couple of other
>ideas rather than the traditional one.  I personally have many years of
>racing experience with the dropped spark and don't care for the
>results.  I do see the merit in the adjustability of such a system, but
>would REALLY like to explore something a little less damaging to the
>engine and a little more driver friendly.  It's acceptable in a racecar
>that gets torn down on schedule and is easy to work on.  If I build a
>car as a driver, I don't want something like the traction control system
>to be taking huge amounts of life out of the engine when alternate
>schemes are possibly available.  logically, it seems a drive by wire
>system that attenuates the throttle opening HAS to be less damaging to a
>high powered engine than cutting the spark.  If the car were
>turbocharged, taking away boost with a controllable wastegate SEEMS to
>be a good solution on the surface.
>
>Another reason: how to you throttle back the power on a nitrous engine
>without destroying it?  Cutting spark?  I don't want to be the one to
>try it.  Cutting fuel?  Definitely not.  How about a system that will
>'slow down' the nitrous system delivery?  It HAS to be possible.
>
>That said, I honestly don't understand the systems that were being used
>in F1 a few years back (until they were banned).  I do know that the
>cars all sounded like they had cylinders pulled out and these were teams
>with seemingly unlimited budgets.  Maybe they had a better cylinder
>cutting scheme than I can imagine...but then again, maybe their engines
>only have to last one race and they have very sophisticated cam drives
>and distributorless ignition systems that aren't affected by rattling
>the titanium crankshaft so much <G>.
>
>THAT ALL said, what I am thinking is that some of the newer ECMs that GM
>is using control transmission, AC, and probably some other things on
>cars I haven't looked at, could have the, say, the transmission control
>drivers reassigned to traction control duties.  Realizing that I have no
>experience yet with these things, I am asking the group I consider to be
>a collective of thinking gurus if they think it is possible.  Here is
>how I think: if an ECM can control an IAC motor in a feedback loop, why
>not a wastegate or throttle control system?  Seems like a good idea to
>me.
>
>One day, I WILL make a traction control system, whether it is by
>modifying an existing GMECM or building a bolt-on system from scratch. 
>It is a pet project and we all know how they can get a life of their
>own.  I have just pondered the architecture of this for a while now and
>am excited that the newer PCMs have so much available functionality. 
>Unfortunately, I don't understand the logistics of making it happen
>right now and want a quick samity check.
>
>Hopefully, even though this is almost as long as the first post, it is
>slightly more useful...
>-- 
>Scott Knight  mailto:sknight at mich.com
>http://www.mich.com/~sknight IRC:SS396man
>'95 Black Impala SS
>'94 Ducati 900SS CR
>