From wmcdonal at optushome.com.au Thu Nov 10 18:34:08 2005 From: wmcdonal at optushome.com.au (Wayne Macdonald) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 11:34:08 +1100 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board Message-ID: <017001c5e657$a132c750$6501a8c0@wayne2k> Hi. I have one of the first DIY-WB circuit boards that was designed for the L1H1 wide band sensor. Can I adapt this circuit board to use the cheaper Bosch wide band sensors like the one found on the VW? Thanks Wayne -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.diy-efi.org/pipermail/wbo2/attachments/20051111/9bd8200d/attachment.html From tmarstei at yahoo.com Thu Nov 10 20:55:03 2005 From: tmarstei at yahoo.com (Tim Marsteiner) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 18:55:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board In-Reply-To: <017001c5e657$a132c750$6501a8c0@wayne2k> Message-ID: <20051111025503.70975.qmail@web30212.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Wayne, Here are some old posts on this subject. I think the general conclusion was that DSP processing is needed to get decent accuracy out of the Bosch LSU sensor. A couple of people have mentioned that http://www.plxdevices.com/ makes a very good unit for this sensor. Tim http://thirdgen.org/techbb2/showthread.php?s=&threadid=248035 -----Original Message----- From: wbo2-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:wbo2-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of allen brown Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 5:31 PM To: wbo2 at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Wbo2] Bosch LSU4 with the DIY-WB Considering the source not a surprising response. The Bosch sensor has been made to work with the DIY-WB design years ago. IIRC (it's in the archives) the gentleman that did this lowered the heater voltage and it worked. He was in Greece (help for a search). Also, why not a junkyard sensor? For the price it is well worth trying out. Absolute accuracy isn't always a requirement. Much tuning can be accomplished with a WB. Al. allen brown wrote: > Considering the source not a surprising response. The > Bosch sensor has been made to work with the DIY-WB > design years ago. One of the first things we (Tech Edge) did when we decided the L1H1 was way overpriced was to connect the LSU up in much the same DIY-WB circuit as the NTK. Sure, we got it to work, and it gave some sort of readings that we could have worked out a new Vout Vs. AFR table for. But I couldn't see the point of people spending time and money building something that was going to give just an "indication of AFR" - I mean, that's just what a zero-extra-cost narrowband sensor will do for you - or, for a little more accuracy, a fairly expensive NTK sensor and an inexpensive DIY-WB circuit. At the time the NTK sensor jumped in price, I decided Tech Edge had come to a junction, so I asked the question : do we drop DIY-WB, or make AFR sensing a "proper" business? So, finding some local people who had a similar interest, I put a lot of development dollars into producing a professional quality microprocessor controlled WB unit primarily for the LSU. And shortly after we released that unit, we made it available as a DIY kit. We have sold thousands of these version 2A0 kits (as kits, and many more as "prebuilt" units). I have published the schematics for the 2A0 design, (but we retain the unpublished firmware) and it is a very popular device. But ... It's important to realise that the Bosch LSU is designed to be different to the Honda-NTK UEGO device. It really needs to be controlled better to give similar results to the NTK. But, if it's controlled properly, it has the potential to be more accurate than the NTK. > IIRC (it's in the archives) the > gentleman that did this lowered the heater voltage and > it worked. He was in Greece (help for a search). In early 2003 I was in contact with the "Greek guy" (Giannoulis Kafetzis) that did this, and provided him with a little information to get him going. I can provide an email address if it's not readily available in the archives. > Also, why not a junkyard sensor? For the price it is > well worth trying out. Absolute accuracy isn't always > a requirement. Much tuning can be accomplished with a > WB. Sure, if you can get a junkyard part for a few tens of dollars, but if we're talking around the $100 mark then I can't see that the cost/benefit ratio is good. I'd stick with the NB sensor or go with a field proven low cost design with a low cost sensor. But if you want to go NTK ... I'd suggest that Steve Nichols (see previous email from Jurgen) is the person to get the sensor from if you really want to use the "old" circuit. I believe he sells them for US$120. (we sell a connector kit for AU$9 that mates to it). Final point: I'm not writing this in order to drum up sales, but to provide an alternative view point on the cost benefit ratio of the original DIY-WB design. And, to those who, after all these years, think I did something wrong in making the original OZ-DIY-WB design readily available, and at a small cost - please don't put that forward as an argument to otherwise unbiased people who couldn't give a damn, and are just after honest accurate advice on how to get a low cost WB instrument. Peter. PS. I don't intend to get into any discussions that are otherwise ancient history, but I will respond to technical questions about using the LSU sensor. --- Wayne Macdonald wrote: > Hi. > I have one of the first DIY-WB circuit boards that > was designed for the L1H1 wide band sensor. > Can I adapt this circuit board to use the cheaper > Bosch wide band sensors like the one found on the > VW? > > Thanks > > Wayne > > > _______________________________________________ > Wbo2 mailing list > Wbo2 at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/wbo2 > __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From bcroe at juno.com Thu Nov 10 20:46:40 2005 From: bcroe at juno.com (bcroe at juno.com) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 20:46:40 -0600 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board Message-ID: <20051110.211605.300.0.bcroe@juno.com> No, they operate completely differently. Bruce Roe 11 Nov 05 "Wayne Macdonald" writes: > Can I adapt this circuit board to use the cheaper Bosch wide band > sensors like the one found on the VW? > Wayne From peter at techedge.com.au Thu Nov 10 23:20:02 2005 From: peter at techedge.com.au (Peter Gargano) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 16:20:02 +1100 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board In-Reply-To: <017001c5e657$a132c750$6501a8c0@wayne2k> References: <017001c5e657$a132c750$6501a8c0@wayne2k> Message-ID: <43742A02.5080609@techedge.com.au> Wayne Macdonald wrote: > Hi. > I have one of the first DIY-WB circuit boards that was designed for the > L1H1 wide band sensor. > Can I adapt this circuit board to use the cheaper Bosch wide band > sensors like the one found on the VW? Wayne, As much as I hate plugging our own product, as you are a fellow Aussi, I'll simply mention we do a DIY controller for the LSU sensor (in fact two DIY controllers, one with an inbuilt display). Our design is fairly mature and we have sold thousands as DIY kits. We also sell them pre-built. We also offer a fix-it service if you have trouble getting your unit to go (they are out of necessity complex pieces of equipment if they are to perform well). As other will mention, there are a few people now who make low cost controllers for wideband sensors. Many are junk, and a few are reasonably good. We believe our DIY unit, when built, tested and calibrated as we describe, are as good as the Motec and Autronic units you'll pay up to AU$2,000 for. I'd say our unit is better, but that would be a bit OTT. Peter Gargano -- Tech Edge Pty. Ltd. http://techedge.com.au http://WBo2.com ph : (02) 6251 5519 Int'l : +612 6251 5519 Fax : +612 6251 0558 Street addr : 37 Jalanga Cres., Aranda, ACT 2614, Australia Postal addr : PO Box 288, Jamison Centre, ACT 2614 te. From abrown02000 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 11 09:15:23 2005 From: abrown02000 at yahoo.com (allen brown) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 07:15:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board In-Reply-To: <43742A02.5080609@techedge.com.au> Message-ID: <20051111151524.2308.qmail@web51301.mail.yahoo.com> >We believe our DIY unit, when built, tested and >calibrated as we describe, are as good as the Motec and Autronic units >you'll pay up to AU$2,000 for. That is quite a claim. What have you done to verify the accuracy of your unit? Have you built a gas bench to verify response time and accurate reporting of the AFR? What certified test equipment do you have? What test procedures have you used to verify the claims you are making? Have you had your WB unit independently verified by certified engineers? What type of environmental testing has been done on your units? Are all of the components used in your product been qualified for automotive use? Are the circuit boards conformal coated? What is the temperature range of the components used? Or is it just another 'hobby' product you as so famous for? Thanks for your time, Al. Peter Gargano wrote:Wayne Macdonald wrote: > Hi. > I have one of the first DIY-WB circuit boards that was designed for the > L1H1 wide band sensor. > Can I adapt this circuit board to use the cheaper Bosch wide band > sensors like the one found on the VW? Wayne, As much as I hate plugging our own product, as you are a fellow Aussi, I'll simply mention we do a DIY controller for the LSU sensor (in fact two DIY controllers, one with an inbuilt display). Our design is fairly mature and we have sold thousands as DIY kits. We also sell them pre-built. We also offer a fix-it service if you have trouble getting your unit to go (they are out of necessity complex pieces of equipment if they are to perform well). As other will mention, there are a few people now who make low cost controllers for wideband sensors. Many are junk, and a few are reasonably good. We believe our DIY unit, when built, tested and calibrated as we describe, are as good as the Motec and Autronic units you'll pay up to AU$2,000 for. I'd say our unit is better, but that would be a bit OTT. Peter Gargano -- Tech Edge Pty. Ltd. http://techedge.com.au http://WBo2.com ph : (02) 6251 5519 Int'l : +612 6251 5519 Fax : +612 6251 0558 Street addr : 37 Jalanga Cres., Aranda, ACT 2614, Australia Postal addr : PO Box 288, Jamison Centre, ACT 2614 te. _______________________________________________ Wbo2 mailing list Wbo2 at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/wbo2 --------------------------------- Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.diy-efi.org/pipermail/wbo2/attachments/20051111/4818f03a/attachment.html From bcroe at juno.com Fri Nov 11 13:03:25 2005 From: bcroe at juno.com (bcroe at juno.com) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 13:03:25 -0600 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board Message-ID: <20051111.130649.316.6.bcroe@juno.com> Building a commercial unit to a very small market can be a costly thing. Some of the features, and most of the overhead of a commercial unit are not too useful to the occasional user. It is not so hard (in some cases) to build a basic no frills unit which may actually better serve the amateur tuner. I would rather have the unit I built (for my purposes), than any more expensive unit available. Check out the specs, don't pay for what you don't need (including a huge overhead). Accuracy to extra decimal places is useless to the amatuer, but a good dynamic display is everything. Bruce Roe 11 Nov 2005 allen brown writes: > >We believe our DIY unit, when built, tested and > >calibrated as we describe, are as good as the Motec and Autronic > units > >you'll pay up to AU$2,000 for. > That is quite a claim. What have you done to verify the accuracy of > your unit? Have you built a gas bench to verify response time and > accurate reporting of the AFR? What certified test equipment do you > have? What test procedures have you used to verify the claims you > are making? > > Have you had your WB unit independently verified by certified > engineers? > > What type of environmental testing has been done on your units? Are > all of the components used in your product been qualified for > automotive use? Are the circuit boards conformal coated? What is the > temperature range of the components used? > > Or is it just another 'hobby' product you as so famous for? > > Thanks for your time, > > Al. From peter at techedge.com.au Fri Nov 11 17:06:13 2005 From: peter at techedge.com.au (Peter Gargano) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 10:06:13 +1100 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board In-Reply-To: <20051111151524.2308.qmail@web51301.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051111151524.2308.qmail@web51301.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <437523E5.1020600@techedge.com.au> allen brown wrote: > >We believe our DIY unit, when built, tested and > >calibrated as we describe, are as good as the Motec and Autronic units > >you'll pay up to AU$2,000 for. Allan, you asked , so I'll reply, but just this once, because this is a DIY forum, and most of the answers below relate to commercial (ie. non-DIY) units we also sell, and it's not my business to be advertising here. And list moderator, yes, I will NOT post any more on this topic in this forum. > That is quite a claim. What have you done to verify the accuracy of your > unit? Have you built a gas bench to verify response time and accurate > reporting of the AFR? What certified test equipment do you have? What > test procedures have you used to verify the claims you are making? A claim verified by many of our customers with Autronic, Motec and many other AFR units. When we (tech Edge) first got serious about AFR (mid 2003), for testing, we purchased a couple of $7,000 ETAS units. We regularly test our own units against their units. We also test competitors' products too. Yes, some of our continuing customers have very favorably tested our units against 4 and 5 gas analyzers they also sell. We sell to a number of dyno manufacturers (who badge engineer our units) in a number of different countries and they provide good feedback to us on the accuracy and response speed of our units. We've also sold units, including large repeat sales, to a number of high profile US and European engine tuners and manufacturers (clearly I cannot say who these organisations are). From this feedback, we're happy that our units' response time and long term stability is better than most of the commercial units out there, and certainly better than some of the semi-professional units costing many times more than ours. > Have you had your WB unit independently verified by certified engineers? No, we don't pay people to test our units. I'd personally find it difficult to believe someone's claims that "we paid ABC to test XYZ, and here's how fantastically well it works"! Perhaps someone demonstrably impartial will take on the task of independently testing our unit against other units, and against a recognised industrial standard. We have recently considered getting UL/CSA certification, but very few potential customers would require this (and anyway, this is an environmental standard, not a "performance" standard). > What type of environmental testing has been done on your units? Are all > of the components used in your product been qualified for automotive > use? Are the circuit boards conformal coated? What is the temperature > range of the components used? We sell a number of units in a number of different forms. Here's a short summary showing DIY status, construction (TH = Through Hole, SMD = Surface Mount), on-board logging memory size, case construction (ABS = Plastic, Al = extruded Al.). and a short feature list. model DIY const. log mem case features --------------------------------------------------------------------- 2A0 yes TH 32k ABS First LSU DIY model (now rev-4) 2A1 yes TH 1M ABS updated 2A0 with 1 Mbyte memory 2B0 - RH 32k Al First non-DIY model 3B1 - SMD 1M Al professional model, LSU 4.9 support 2C0 - SMD - ABS small size 2D0 - TH - - OEM 2D1 - SMD - - OEM, SMD 2E0 yes TH - ABS DIY, inbuilt display 3H1 - SMD 1M Al professional model, DUAL channel LD02 display = DIY LA1 display = SMD Clearly, some of the models are intended for DIY applications, and as such they are presented and sold as such. Our professional models are just that, and are designed, presented, use industrial rated components, and are supported as such. We expect similar performance and accuracy from our DIY models as from the professional models, and have not "dumbed down" our DIY units so we can sell a better professional model. Our models are evolutionary, and we continually update our hardware and firmware, including adding features to "older" models. Of course, when we sell a DIY kit, we cannot assure the purchaser of the unit's end-result performance because it depends in part on how well the unit is constructed, tested , etc. we do however offer a "fix-it" service and regularly get "basket case" units (soldered with a blow torch?) to fix, which we generally achieve. Yes, our new SMD 3.0 range will be conformally coated, but we still don't rate them to be used in the engine compartment. For over a year now we have sold our cables with a fibreglass covering rather than the low cost nylon sheath we originally used. We don't "pot" or encapsulate any of our models because we consider repairability a big factor in our designs. > Or is it just another 'hobby' product you as so famous for? I appreciate the compliment. To do justice to your question I should explain the journey from "hobby", to where Tech Edge is currently. Tech Edge's Lambda meter involvement started off back in 2002 with a PCB we sold with components, and a DIY display kit based on a Jaycar commercial DIY kit. The wideband was basically the DIY-WB design, and I intended selling all 24 of the 25 PCBs I had made, and then calling it quits. I had this PCB made because a small number of the US DIY-EFI community at the time denied me the opportunity to buy the DIY-WB PCB that had just been made available to people primarily in the USA, and I had wanted to just cover my costs (mostly expensive postage charges) by offering a local group buy of parts. Shortly after this, I was inundated with request from people to make more PCBs and make them available with components. Then people wanted me to sell them built and tested units. So, I first contracted someone to help me build units, then later I employed people to build, test, and ship our units - this was in Mid 2003, and this was when I took my OZ-DIY-WB hobby and gave it to Tech Edge, which is the company I had formed some years earlier. All this time I had recognised the shortcoming of the original design, so, after making some improvements, we came out with the version 1.5 design (still using the now expensive L1H1 sensor) and called the original design the 1.0 unit. Looking at the 1.5 design now, and in the light of Tech Edge's current expertise, I cringe a little, but that design did work well, and I regularly get emails saying how their 1.5 unit is still working really well, except that the replacement sensors are so expensive! As soon as we had designed the 1.5 unit, I realised we needed a model that used the LSU sensor that was being made available for less than US$30 compared to the NTK sensor that had risen to over US$180. I started to design this myself but, as the business was expanding, I engaged a local engineer to help. We designed, from the ground up, the 2A0 primarily as a DIY unit that would use the low cost LSU, but we later added L1H1 compatibility due to customer demand. I could go on, but I'm sure you get the idea that we actively support the DIY model and this is primarily why I am spending time to address this email to the DIY community. So, while we're not a hobby organisation at all, DIY is certainly important to us. I should also point out that our current 2.0 range shares nothing with the original DIY-WB design, other than that it measures residual oxygen content! Our 2.0 was designed in-house from the ground up without reference to the DIY-WB design. Lastly, Allen Brown, if you have a problem with my own DIY activities in the past, perhaps you can be a little more forthcoming in explaining why you should care. You could also explain why you single Tech Edge out when there are others who have clearly profited, and without acknowledgment, from the original DIY-WB design. Peter Gargano -- Tech Edge Pty. Ltd. http://techedge.com.au http://WBo2.com ph : (02) 6251 5519 Int'l : +612 6251 5519 Fax : +612 6251 0558 Street addr : 37 Jalanga Cres., Aranda, ACT 2614, Australia Postal addr : PO Box 288, Jamison Centre, ACT 2614 From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Fri Nov 11 17:28:23 2005 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:28:23 -0600 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: wbo2-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:wbo2-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Peter Gargano > Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 5:06 PM > Cc: wbo2 at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board > > And list moderator, yes, I will NOT post any more on this topic in > this forum. List policy is clear in this area. From the WWW page: List member commercial products: List members who are able to provide goods or services to other list members are encouraged to do so. Discussion of these goods and services is desirable as long as the list is not used for free advertising. In this regard, the policy regarding goods and services provided by list members is that when a new product or service is available, or a new version is available, then an announcement to the list is acceptable. Discussion by users of these products or services is explicitly acceptable as long as it is focused on merits and drawbacks. Vendors can participate in these discussions but please do not initiate them, other than simple announcements as noted above. Responding to questions from list members about a list member commercial product is clearly acceptable as long as the exchange remains focused on technical merits. --steve From J_Holland at btopenworld.com Sat Nov 12 12:44:57 2005 From: J_Holland at btopenworld.com (James Holland) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 18:44:57 -0000 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board References: <20051111151524.2308.qmail@web51301.mail.yahoo.com> <437523E5.1020600@techedge.com.au> Message-ID: <003c01c5e7b9$2e7d0b40$bd058356@JAMES> I tried to post this yesterday but hit reply instead of reply all, I apologise to Allen if it seemed like I was having a go at him but I did want to raise a few points, I don't want to get into the who did what or when. I am interested in what tests were performed to verify accuracy. I am curious as to the effects of variations in exhaust temperature and the effect of backpressure too. The Bosch datasheet shows that these do have an influence but never having made any backpressure measurements (or EGT) I can't really equate those values to real world cases. These were my comments on environmental testing, I think some of the points have been answered: I design electronics for military applications so I do appreciate designing to meet temperature ranges and designing to meet environmental requirements. Environmental testing is a good thing in terms of design proving but very expensive and needs a clearly defined set of requirements. What level of testing do you think should be carried out? Proper selection of components will allow you to meet the required temperature spec BUT what spec do you really need? If the unit is going to be inside the vehicle then a commercial temperature range is probably more than adequate, how many of us are going to be out tuning our vehicles when its 40C below. None of the Mitsubishi ECUs that I have seen have been conformally coated, they are clearly designed to be used inside the vehicle where its dry and indeed they are mounted up under the dashboard. Vibration testing is to some extent irrelevant, if you sell something as a kit you can't control the build quality. High specs and thorough testing costs money, there has to be a balance between cost and performance. What I want is the cheapest possible piece of kit that will do what I want it to do. This wasn't intended to be a long winded rant but I think there are some good points here that everyone should consider when they are building their WB kit, wherever they get their design from. Cheers James From ron at poweracumen.com Sat Nov 12 20:27:56 2005 From: ron at poweracumen.com (Ron Vinsant) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 18:27:56 -0800 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board In-Reply-To: <003c01c5e7b9$2e7d0b40$bd058356@JAMES> References: <20051111151524.2308.qmail@web51301.mail.yahoo.com> <437523E5.1020600@techedge.com.au> <003c01c5e7b9$2e7d0b40$bd058356@JAMES> Message-ID: <4376A4AC.3000004@poweracumen.com> James Holland wrote: > I tried to post this yesterday but hit reply instead of reply all, I > apologise to Allen if it seemed like I was having a go at him but I > did want to raise a few points, I don't want to get into the who did > what or when. > > I am interested in what tests were performed to verify accuracy. I am > curious as to the effects of variations in exhaust temperature and the > effect of backpressure too. The Bosch datasheet shows that these do > have an influence but never having made any backpressure measurements > (or EGT) I can't really equate those values to real world cases. > > These were my comments on environmental testing, I think some of the > points have been answered: > > I design electronics for military applications so I do appreciate > designing to meet temperature ranges and designing to meet > environmental requirements. Environmental testing is a good thing in > terms of design proving but very expensive and needs a clearly defined > set of requirements. What level of testing do you think should be > carried out? Proper selection of components will allow you to meet the > required temperature spec BUT what spec do you really need? If the > unit is going to be inside the vehicle then a commercial temperature > range is probably more than adequate, how many of us are going to be > out tuning our vehicles when its 40C below. None of the Mitsubishi > ECUs that I have seen have been conformally coated, they are clearly > designed to be used inside the vehicle where its dry and indeed they > are mounted up under the dashboard. Vibration testing is to some > extent irrelevant, if you sell something as a kit you can't control > the build quality. > High specs and thorough testing costs money, there has to be a balance > between cost and performance. What I want is the cheapest possible > piece of kit that will do what I want it to do. > This wasn't intended to be a long winded rant but I think there are > some good points here that everyone should consider when they are > building their WB kit, wherever they get their design from. > > Cheers > James > > > _______________________________________________ > Wbo2 mailing list > Wbo2 at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/wbo2 > > James, Your comments are well taken; by me anyway. I have also wondered about calibration issues. I have been using a F.A.S.T. fuel injection system on a 5.7L small block Chevy with closed loop A/F ratio control. I have used a couple of A/F meters to see how my system was controlling the A/F. Spark plug color and exhaust pipe color told me that I should question my control system. My quest for answers got me to this forum where I have found thought provoking conversations that have taught me a lot. Peters comments have been particularly helpful. I have never been able to completely correlate one meter to another at low flow rates (idle). At high flow rates I get very good correlation. I am told this is due to partial gas pressure problems at the sensor tip (any sensor). Now to my real point. The sensors themselves, as far as I have been able to determine, do not have a specified tolerence. If anyone can point me to either a Bosch or NTK datasheet that says otherwise, I would be greatful. I did see a graph faxed to me by a NTK engineer that showed "typical" voltage vs. A/F but no where was a max or min accuracy stated. He told me that he beleived that the sensors have a 5% tol when NTK manufacturing tests them in a specific production test set up but he could not tell me how this test was done (flow rate, gass pressure,angle of attack of the gas etc.). I notice that at California Smog test stations a couple of canasters of "calibrated test gases" are used to set up the emmission measurment instruments. I was told by a local technition that A/F is derived from the gas content of the exhaust and not specifically measured by a sensor. Can anyone comment on the issue of measurment accuracy, or even repeatability of the sensors themselves? We could discuss the merits of the rest of the instrument later. Ron Vinsant From bcroe at juno.com Sun Nov 13 01:12:42 2005 From: bcroe at juno.com (bcroe at juno.com) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 01:12:42 -0600 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board Message-ID: <20051113.012559.1036.2.bcroe@juno.com> The purpose of a meter affects everything. The emissions people could care less about transient performance, power, etc. They just want to see that the total accumulated emissions is under their limit. They may be sticky about absolute numbers. You on the other hand, are very interested in throttle response, and power. Consistancy is much more important than absolute accuracy. The best way to display this info will also vary. No, the sensors are not highly precise devices. To get that, each sensor will need to be individually calibrated. Tuners really don't care. If a certain reading is best power, it is best power for you. It really doesn't matter it it's 12.7:1 or 13:1, as long as it always reads the same. What all meters (and display devices) should agree on, is S or Lambda. That is a null point, and error should be relative to that. Transient response is limited by the sensor. Getting electronics to keep up is pretty trivial, and easy to verify. Digital display devices are worthless in this respect, but a graph or logging (another graph) will handle it. The speed, direction, and approximate amplitude are a whole lot more important than the number of decimal places. This was a weak spot on the original DIY-WB, but I found a fix for that. There were also problems with the heater circuit, but those could be fixed too. Certainly reading plugs, etc are still valuable. There was even a transparent plug to observe flame color, perhaps upgraded now with fiber optics. Bruce Roe 12 Nov 2005 Ron Vinsant writes: > James, > Your comments are well taken; by me anyway. I have also wondered > about calibration issues. I have been using a F.A.S.T. fuel injection > system on a 5.7L small block Chevy with closed loop A/F ratio control. > I have used a couple of A/F meters to see how my system was > controlling the A/F. Spark plug color and exhaust pipe color told me > that I should question my control system. My quest for answers got > me to this forum where I have found thought provoking conversations > that have taught me a lot. Peters comments have been particularly > helpful. I have never been able to completely correlate one meter > to another at low flow rates (idle). At high flow rates I get very good > correlation. I am told this is due to partial gas pressure problems > at the sensor tip (any sensor). Now to my real point. The sensors > themselves, as far as I have been able to determine, do not have > a specified tolerence. If anyone can point me to either a Bosch or > NTK datasheet that says otherwise, I would be greatful. I did see > a graph faxed to me by a NTK engineer that showed "typical" > voltage vs. A/F but no where was a max or min accuracy stated. > He told me that he beleived that the sensors have a 5% tol when > NTK manufacturing tests them in a specific production test set > up but he could not tell me how this test was done (flow rate, > gas pressure,angle of attack of the gas etc.). I notice that at > California Smog test stations a couple of canasters of > "calibrated test gases" are used to set up the emission > measurment instruments. I was told by a local technition that > A/F is derived from the gas content of the exhaust and not > specifically measured by a sensor. Can anyone comment on > the issue of measurment accuracy, or even repeatability of the > sensors themselves? We could discuss the merits of > the rest of the instrument later. > > Ron Vinsant From davida1 at hiwaay.net Fri Nov 18 21:04:42 2005 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 19:04:42 -0800 Subject: [Wbo2] Wideband O2 and turbo motors... Message-ID: <014a01c5ecb6$00abf6c0$6700a8c0@frontiernet.net> I'm planning to get (make or buy) a wideband AFR meter for tuning my turbo engine. Having no experience with these i've got a few questions. Is it best to install the WB-O2 sensor before or after the turbo? In other words, should it be between the manifold and turbo; or between the turbo and muffler? I've insalled a conventional narrowband O2 sensor before the turbo in the crossover weldment. Here, it samples blended exhaust from all 6 cylinders just before it enters the scroll housing. Would this suffice for a WB sensor or do I need a second, after-turbo fitting? Second, what should I expect to spend for a commercial wideband AFR meter, preferrable one with a simulated narrowband output and datalogging capability? Thanks in advance, David From abrown02000 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 19 07:18:22 2005 From: abrown02000 at yahoo.com (allen brown) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 05:18:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board In-Reply-To: <001901c5e710$58e346f0$f3158356@JAMES> Message-ID: <20051119131822.35795.qmail@web51304.mail.yahoo.com> Commercial temperature range is 0c to 70c. Which is easily exceeded in the interior of an automobile. Check the tolerances for even passive compoments such as capacitors and resistors at the edge of their commercial grade ranges. Please recall that it was TE that made the claim to fame as to how good their equipment allegedly is. Maybe ask them about the display fiasco and the use of commercial grade parts. . . Al. --- James Holland wrote: > I understand that there is some history here and I > don't want to get into that but I do think your > comments are a little harsh in some areas, though I > would be interested in what tests were performed to > verify accuracy. I am curious as to the effects of > variations in exhaust temperature and the effect of > backpressure too. The Bosch datasheet shows that > these do have an influence but never having made any > backpressure measurements (or EGT) I can't really > equate those values to real world cases. > I design electronics for military applications so I > do appreciate designing to meet temperature ranges > and designing to meet environmental requirements. > Environmental testing is a good thing in terms of > design proving but very expensive and needs a > clearly defined set of requirements. What level of > testing do you think should be carried out? Proper > selection of components will allow you to meet the > required temperature spec BUT what spec do you > really need? If the unit is going to be inside the > vehicle then a commercial temperature range is > probably more than adequate, how many of us are > going to be out tuning our vehicles when its -40C?? > None of the Mitsubishi ECUs that I have seen have > been conformally coated, they are clearly designed > to be used inside the vehicle where its dry and > indeed they are mounted up under the dashboard. > Vibration testing is really rather irrelevant, if > you sell something as a kit you can't control the > build quality. > High specs and thorough testing costs money, there > has to be a balance between cost and performance. > What I want is the cheapest possible piece of kit > that will do what I want it to do. > This wasn't intended to be a long winded rant but I > think there are some good points here that everyone > should consider when they are building their WB kit, > wherever they get their design from. > > Cheers > James > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: allen brown > To: wbo2 at diy-efi.org > Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 3:15 PM > Subject: Re: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with > L1H1 circuit board > > > >We believe our DIY unit, when built, tested and > >calibrated as we describe, are as good as the > Motec and Autronic units > >you'll pay up to AU$2,000 for. > > That is quite a claim. What have you done to > verify the accuracy of your unit? Have you built a > gas bench to verify response time and accurate > reporting of the AFR? What certified test equipment > do you have? What test procedures have you used to > verify the claims you are making? > > Have you had your WB unit independently verified > by certified engineers? > > What type of environmental testing has been done > on your units? Are all of the components used in > your product been qualified for automotive use? Are > the circuit boards conformal coated? What is the > temperature range of the components used? > > Or is it just another 'hobby' product you as so > famous for? > > Thanks for your time, > > Al. > > > Peter Gargano wrote: > Wayne Macdonald wrote: > > Hi. > > I have one of the first DIY-WB circuit boards > that was designed for the > > L1H1 wide band sensor. > > Can I adapt this circuit board to use the > cheaper Bosch wide band > > sensors like the one found on the VW? > > Wayne, > > As much as I hate plugging our own product, as > you are a fellow Aussi, > I'll simply mention we do a DIY controller for > the LSU sensor (in fact > two DIY controllers, one with an inbuilt > display). Our design is > fairly mature and we have sold thousands as DIY > kits. We also sell > them pre-built. We also offer a fix-it service > if you have trouble > getting your unit to go (they are out of > necessity complex pieces of > equipment if they are to perform well). > > As other will mention, there are a few people > now who make low cost > controllers for wideband sensors. Many are junk, > and a few are > reasonably good. We believe our DIY unit, when > built, tested and > calibrated as we describe, are as good as the > Motec and Autronic units > you'll pay up to AU$2,000 for. I'd say our unit > is better, but that > would be a bit OTT. > > > Peter Gargano > -- > Tech Edge Pty. Ltd. http://techedge.com.au > http://WBo2.com > ph : (02) 6251 5519 Int'l : +612 6251 5519 Fax : > +612 6251 0558 > Street addr : 37 Jalanga Cres., Aranda, ACT > 2614, Australia > Postal addr : PO Box 288, Jamison Centre, ACT > 2614 > > > > > > > te. > > _______________________________________________ > Wbo2 mailing list > Wbo2 at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/wbo2 > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in > one click. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > _______________________________________________ > Wbo2 mailing list > Wbo2 at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/wbo2 > __________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page! http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From abrown02000 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 19 07:28:38 2005 From: abrown02000 at yahoo.com (allen brown) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 05:28:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board In-Reply-To: <437523E5.1020600@techedge.com.au> Message-ID: <20051119132839.12471.qmail@web51313.mail.yahoo.com> If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with BS. Nice try, and still trying to make it sound like you created the diy-wb and the diy-wb market. Al --- Peter Gargano wrote: > allen brown wrote: > > >We believe our DIY unit, when built, tested and > > >calibrated as we describe, are as good as the > Motec and Autronic units > > >you'll pay up to AU$2,000 for. > > > Allan, you asked , so I'll reply, but just this > once, because this is > a DIY forum, and most of the answers below relate to > commercial (ie. > non-DIY) units we also sell, and it's not my > business to be > advertising here. > > And list moderator, yes, I will NOT post any more on > this topic in > this forum. > > > That is quite a claim. What have you done to > verify the accuracy of your > > unit? Have you built a gas bench to verify > response time and accurate > > reporting of the AFR? What certified test > equipment do you have? What > > test procedures have you used to verify the claims > you are making? > > > A claim verified by many of our customers with > Autronic, Motec and > many other AFR units. > > When we (tech Edge) first got serious about AFR (mid > 2003), for > testing, we purchased a couple of $7,000 ETAS units. > We regularly test > our own units against their units. We also test > competitors' products > too. Yes, some of our continuing customers have very > favorably tested > our units against 4 and 5 gas analyzers they also > sell. > > We sell to a number of dyno manufacturers (who badge > engineer our > units) in a number of different countries and they > provide good > feedback to us on the accuracy and response speed of > our units. We've > also sold units, including large repeat sales, to a > number of high > profile US and European engine tuners and > manufacturers (clearly I > cannot say who these organisations are). From this > feedback, we're > happy that our units' response time and long term > stability is better > than most of the commercial units out there, and > certainly better than > some of the semi-professional units costing many > times more than ours. > > > Have you had your WB unit independently verified > by certified engineers? > > > No, we don't pay people to test our units. I'd > personally find it > difficult to believe someone's claims that "we paid > ABC to test XYZ, > and here's how fantastically well it works"! > > Perhaps someone demonstrably impartial will take on > the task of > independently testing our unit against other units, > and against a > recognised industrial standard. > > We have recently considered getting UL/CSA > certification, but very few > potential customers would require this (and anyway, > this is an > environmental standard, not a "performance" > standard). > > > What type of environmental testing has been done > on your units? Are all > > of the components used in your product been > qualified for automotive > > use? Are the circuit boards conformal coated? What > is the temperature > > range of the components used? > > > We sell a number of units in a number of different > forms. Here's a > short summary showing DIY status, construction (TH = > Through Hole, SMD > = Surface Mount), on-board logging memory size, case > construction (ABS > = Plastic, Al = extruded Al.). and a short feature > list. > > model DIY const. log mem case features > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 2A0 yes TH 32k ABS First LSU DIY > model (now rev-4) > 2A1 yes TH 1M ABS updated 2A0 with > 1 Mbyte memory > 2B0 - RH 32k Al First non-DIY > model > 3B1 - SMD 1M Al professional > model, LSU 4.9 support > 2C0 - SMD - ABS small size > 2D0 - TH - - OEM > 2D1 - SMD - - OEM, SMD > 2E0 yes TH - ABS DIY, inbuilt > display > 3H1 - SMD 1M Al professional > model, DUAL channel > > LD02 display = DIY > LA1 display = SMD > > Clearly, some of the models are intended for DIY > applications, and as > such they are presented and sold as such. Our > professional models are > just that, and are designed, presented, use > industrial rated > components, and are supported as such. We expect > similar performance > and accuracy from our DIY models as from the > professional models, and > have not "dumbed down" our DIY units so we can sell > a better > professional model. Our models are evolutionary, and > we continually > update our hardware and firmware, including adding > features to "older" > models. > > Of course, when we sell a DIY kit, we cannot assure > the purchaser of > the unit's end-result performance because it depends > in part on how > well the unit is constructed, tested , etc. we do > however offer a > "fix-it" service and regularly get "basket case" > units (soldered with > a blow torch?) to fix, which we generally achieve. > > Yes, our new SMD 3.0 range will be conformally > coated, but we still > don't rate them to be used in the engine > compartment. For over a year > now we have sold our cables with a fibreglass > covering rather than the > low cost nylon sheath we originally used. We don't > "pot" or > encapsulate any of our models because we consider > repairability a big > factor in our designs. > > > Or is it just another 'hobby' product you as so > famous for? > > > I appreciate the compliment. To do justice to your > question I should > explain the journey from "hobby", to where Tech Edge > is currently. > > Tech Edge's Lambda meter involvement started off > back in 2002 with a > PCB we sold with components, and a DIY display kit > based on a Jaycar > commercial DIY kit. The wideband was basically the > DIY-WB design, and > I intended selling all 24 of the 25 PCBs I had made, > and then calling > it quits. I had this PCB made because a small number > of the US DIY-EFI > community at the time denied me the opportunity to > buy the DIY-WB PCB > that had just been made available to people > primarily in the USA, and > I had wanted to just cover my costs (mostly > expensive postage charges) > by offering a local group buy of parts. Shortly > after this, I was > inundated with request from people to make more PCBs > and make them > available with components. Then people wanted me to > sell them built > and tested units. So, I first contracted someone to > help me build > units, then later I employed people to build, test, > and ship our units > - this was in Mid 2003, and this was when I took my > OZ-DIY-WB === message truncated === __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com From abrown02000 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 19 07:30:36 2005 From: abrown02000 at yahoo.com (allen brown) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 05:30:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20051119133036.11831.qmail@web51312.mail.yahoo.com> To which TE violated with their first reply to this thread. And continues to violate with his long winded marketing BS. Al --- Steve Ravet wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: wbo2-bounces at diy-efi.org > > [mailto:wbo2-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of > Peter Gargano > > Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 5:06 PM > > Cc: wbo2 at diy-efi.org > > Subject: Re: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with > L1H1 circuit board > > > > And list moderator, yes, I will NOT post any more > on this topic in > > this forum. > > List policy is clear in this area. From the WWW > page: > > List member commercial products: List members who > are able to provide > goods or services to other list members are > encouraged to do so. > Discussion of these goods and services is desirable > as long as the list > is not used for free advertising. In this regard, > the policy regarding > goods and services provided by list members is that > when a new product > or service is available, or a new version is > available, then an > announcement to the list is acceptable. Discussion > by users of these > products or services is explicitly acceptable as > long as it is focused > on merits and drawbacks. Vendors can participate in > these discussions > but please do not initiate them, other than simple > announcements as > noted above. > > Responding to questions from list members about a > list member commercial > product is clearly acceptable as long as the > exchange remains focused on > technical merits. > > --steve > > _______________________________________________ > Wbo2 mailing list > Wbo2 at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/wbo2 > __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com From davida1 at hiwaay.net Sat Nov 19 13:08:57 2005 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 11:08:57 -0800 Subject: [Wbo2] Re: [Diy_efi] Wideband O2 and turbo motors... References: <20051119140726.55893.qmail@web34411.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <01ae01c5ed3c$b33bf980$6700a8c0@frontiernet.net> Hey thanks for the information. Will check out thel inks later today. Engine is a Chevy 60? V6, 3.2 liters, MPFI injection. Controlled by a 1226869 ECM using 2-bar MAP. It's got a slow ALDL datastream and no built-in datalogging capability, that I know of. It would be good to have a multi-channel datalogger which would work with a stand-alone WBo2 interface. That way I could also use the logger on other projects (non-automotive). This car was running well until the old turbo failed. This new one is good for more boost and I am taking the opportunity to re-do the whole turbo plumbing setup. David From peter at techedge.com.au Tue Nov 22 01:22:12 2005 From: peter at techedge.com.au (Peter Gargano) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 18:22:12 +1100 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board In-Reply-To: <20051119131822.35795.qmail@web51304.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20051119131822.35795.qmail@web51304.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4382C724.9080208@techedge.com.au> allen brown wrote: > Maybe ask them about the display fiasco and the use of > commercial grade parts. . . You're referring to the so-called "Cold Fix" for the 5301 display. That 5301 display works with the DIY-WB. Note: we don't sell it anymore, but the design is still available free on-line here : http://techedge.com.au/vehicle/wbo2/5301.htm for the free firmware, see "Obtaining the Software" paragraph : http://techedge.com.au/vehicle/wbo2/5300.htm I get one or two request per week for the free firmware (hex file only, not in source format, but the original Silicon Chip source I modified is available). The 5300/5301 design used a PIC processor rather than the faster, and nicer Atmel processors we now use. On the first units we sent out we had mis-programmed the "fuses" so that it worked fine until it got very cold, and the internal pull-ups changed in value so much that the unit didn't work as was intended. Using the correct "fuse" setting that the circuit was designed for solved the "problem". It would have made no difference if we had used a commercial or industrial part, we just didn't find there was a problem until the Norther winter arrived. I could only reproduce the problem here with a "can of cold". We never made a secret of the problem .... http://techedge.com.au/vehicle/wbo2/1v5/fixes.htm Allen, you also asked, by implication, what we currently use ... The processor in the 2A0 DIY kit is an Atmel Mega8 running at 16 Mhz with an industrial temperature range. Here's a cut and paste from the data sheet (the P in PI indicated a Plastic DIP package, I = Industrial). ATmega8-16PI Industrial (-40?C to 85?C) You can see an image of the 2A0 constructed PCB with "PI" processor here - this image has been up on the web site since September 2004 ... http://wbo2.com/2a0/const/r4comp.jpg You can also see we have three quad op-amps LMC6484-IN - again industrial temp range, but the 74HC4052 muxes are not industrial range. Peter Gargano -- Tech Edge Pty. Ltd. http://techedge.com.au http://WBo2.com ph : (02) 6251 5519 Int'l : +612 6251 5519 Fax : +612 6251 0558 Street addr : 37 Jalanga Cres., Aranda, ACT 2614, Australia Postal addr : PO Box 288, Jamison Centre, ACT 2614 From J_Holland at btopenworld.com Tue Nov 22 12:08:23 2005 From: J_Holland at btopenworld.com (James Holland) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 18:08:23 -0000 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board References: <20051119131822.35795.qmail@web51304.mail.yahoo.com> <4382C724.9080208@techedge.com.au> Message-ID: <003e01c5ef8f$be606f80$cb578656@JAMES> > > You can also see we have three quad op-amps LMC6484-IN - again industrial > temp range, but the 74HC4052 muxes are not industrial range. > Texas list their 74HC devices as -55 to +125C, last time I looked IIRC most manufacturers list 74HC devices as being at least industrial range. From J_Holland at btopenworld.com Tue Nov 22 12:12:17 2005 From: J_Holland at btopenworld.com (James Holland) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 18:12:17 -0000 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board References: <20051113.012559.1036.2.bcroe@juno.com> Message-ID: <004401c5ef90$461de2e0$cb578656@JAMES> ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Cc: Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2005 7:12 AM Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board > The purpose of a meter affects everything. The emissions people > could care less about transient performance, power, etc. They > just want to see that the total accumulated emissions is under > their limit. They may be sticky about absolute numbers. > > You on the other hand, are very interested in throttle response, > and power. Consistancy is much more important than absolute > accuracy. The best way to display this info will also vary. > > No, the sensors are not highly precise devices. To get that, > each sensor will need to be individually calibrated. Tuners > really don't care. If a certain reading is best power, it is best > power for you. It really doesn't matter it it's 12.7:1 or 13:1, as > long as it always reads the same. What all meters (and display > devices) should agree on, is S or Lambda. That is a null > point, and error should be relative to that. > > Transient response is limited by the sensor. Getting electronics > to keep up is pretty trivial, and easy to verify. Digital display > devices are worthless in this respect, but a graph or logging > (another graph) will handle it. The speed, direction, and > approximate amplitude are a whole lot more important than > the number of decimal places. This was a weak spot on the > original DIY-WB, but I found a fix for that. There were also > problems with the heater circuit, but those could be fixed too. > > Certainly reading plugs, etc are still valuable. There was even > a transparent plug to observe flame color, perhaps upgraded > now with fiber optics. > > Bruce Roe > > 12 Nov 2005 Ron Vinsant writes: > Fair, comment, one point that puzzles ,e is the need to calibrate each individual sensor. Is it the sensor that needs to be calibrated or the meter? If it is the sensor then what is the purpose of the calibration resistor? when an OEM WBO2 sensor is replaced is the ECU recalibrated? Cheers James From bcroe at juno.com Tue Nov 22 18:55:54 2005 From: bcroe at juno.com (bcroe at juno.com) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 18:55:54 -0600 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board Message-ID: <20051122.192528.1160.6.bcroe@juno.com> 22 Nov 2005 "James Holland" writes: > Fair, comment, one point that puzzles ,e is the need to calibrate > each individual sensor. Is it the sensor that needs to be calibrated > or the meter? Its easy to build a meter that is far more accurate than a particular sensor. Multi digit displays may look cool, but they are meaningless if the input is way off. > If it is the sensor then what is the purpose of the calibration > resistor? The sensor is inherently very accurate at Lambda/Stichiometric. But the signal output at other levels varys greatly from sensor to sensor. A calibration resistor is added to make it reasonably accurate at some distance from S. The resistor is not laser trimed to a very precise value, it is just one of a couple dozen values picked out of a bin, "nearest one". Even if it WAS perfect, variations in the shape of the output transfer curve would make the reading perfect ONLY at 2 points. But a sensor may be capable of repoducing the SAME curve very accurately, over and over. So if you measure EVERY POINT for that sensor, you can get much more accuracy until it wears out. This is an expensive process, and virtually worthless to an engine tuner. It might be worth while in some other uses. > when an OEM WBO2 sensor is replaced is the ECU recalibrated? How would it be recalibrated? The ECU accepts the accuracy the calibration resistor provides, which is good enough. Bruce Roe > Cheers > James From peter at techedge.com.au Tue Nov 22 20:31:13 2005 From: peter at techedge.com.au (Peter Gargano) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 13:31:13 +1100 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board In-Reply-To: <20051122.192528.1160.6.bcroe@juno.com> References: <20051122.192528.1160.6.bcroe@juno.com> Message-ID: <4383D471.7010409@techedge.com.au> bcroe at juno.com wrote: >>when an OEM WBO2 sensor is replaced is the ECU recalibrated? > > How would it be recalibrated? The ECU accepts the accuracy the > calibration resistor provides, which is good enough. Bruce Roe All the Bosch LSU sensors I've seen are laser trimmed. The Bosch specifications for the sensor make it very clear how the sensor calibration component is used to account for variation between sensors, so it's not rocket science to create a circuit that will work pretty well with the complete range of sensors that may be plugged in. On the other hand, the problem with the NTK sensors is that Honda/NTK never (to the best of my knowledge) made the calibration component's use public, and the cal part of DIY-WB circuit was a reverse engineering exercise with a bit of guess work. Also, as a WB sensor ages, it's not so much that the calibration points change, but that the sensor's response speed slows right down as its active surface is contaminated (or "wears out"). The calibration is determined primarily by the active chemical area of the sensor. As the pump/sense cells are made from very high temperature ceramic materials with very precise quantities of impurities, there's a fairly large manufacturing spread that has to be accounted for via the cal component. A patent search will reveal that there's a lot of work that's been done on refining the manufacturing spread problem as manufacturing yields to a large extent determine end prices. Peter te. From bcroe at juno.com Tue Nov 22 22:39:02 2005 From: bcroe at juno.com (bcroe at juno.com) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:39:02 -0600 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board Message-ID: <20051122.224053.332.0.bcroe@juno.com> I should have said this was in respect to the NTK sensor. I don't have practical experience with the Bosch, though it probably is not a quantum leap ahead. I don't know of any release of a calibration circuit for the NTK sensor. But there were some equations leaked out. A circuit can be built to exactly follow an equation, even if it is different from the mfgs circuit. That was done on the first DIY-WB, and the results seem to be pretty good. But we don't officially have that equation. As I have said, trying to squeeze another decimal place of absolute accuracy out of the ckt is a waste for engine tuners. Much more important was wide dynamic range in the DIY-WB unit, for which fixes have been described. There was thought that an official NTK wide band unit might be available for testing. This would allow determining the equation exactly, without even opening the unit. Can you say, "reverse engineer"? But this was never actually done. Bruce (experienced reverse engineer) Roe 23 Nov 2005 Peter Gargano writes: > bcroe at juno.com wrote: > >>when an OEM WBO2 sensor is replaced is the ECU recalibrated? > > > > How would it be recalibrated? The ECU accepts the accuracy the > > calibration resistor provides, which is good enough. Bruce Roe > > All the Bosch LSU sensors I've seen are laser trimmed. The Bosch > specifications for the sensor make it very clear how the sensor > calibration component is used to account for variation between > sensors, so it's not rocket science to create a circuit that will > work pretty well with the complete range of sensors that may > be plugged in. > > On the other hand, the problem with the NTK sensors is that > Honda/NTK never (to the best of my knowledge) made the > calibration component's use public, and the cal part of DIY-WB > circuit was a reverse > engineering exercise with a bit of guess work. From ron at poweracumen.com Wed Nov 23 10:33:26 2005 From: ron at poweracumen.com (Ron Vinsant) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 08:33:26 -0800 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board In-Reply-To: <20051122.224053.332.0.bcroe@juno.com> References: <20051122.224053.332.0.bcroe@juno.com> Message-ID: <438499D6.7090005@poweracumen.com> All, I just checked the Motec site and looked at their Lambda meter.. They claim a +/- 1.5% accuracy (depending on sensor, NTK or Bosch, the Bosch uses a PID control for the heater and is more accurate over input voltage variations than the NTK) It would seem that the calibration is based on the sensor and the accuracy based on the control of the heater. I will try to find out how the calibration is accomplished. Ron bcroe at juno.com wrote: >I should have said this was in respect to the NTK sensor. >I don't have practical experience with the Bosch, though >it probably is not a quantum leap ahead. > >I don't know of any release of a calibration circuit for the >NTK sensor. But there were some equations leaked out. >A circuit can be built to exactly follow an equation, even >if it is different from the mfgs circuit. That was done >on the first DIY-WB, and the results seem to be pretty >good. But we don't officially have that equation. As I >have said, trying to squeeze another decimal place of >absolute accuracy out of the ckt is a waste for engine >tuners. Much more important was wide dynamic range >in the DIY-WB unit, for which fixes have been described. > >There was thought that an official NTK wide band unit >might be available for testing. This would allow determining >the equation exactly, without even opening the unit. Can you >say, "reverse engineer"? But this was never actually done. > >Bruce (experienced reverse engineer) Roe > >23 Nov 2005 Peter Gargano writes: > > >>bcroe at juno.com wrote: >> >> >>>>when an OEM WBO2 sensor is replaced is the ECU recalibrated? >>>> >>>> >>>How would it be recalibrated? The ECU accepts the accuracy the >>>calibration resistor provides, which is good enough. Bruce Roe >>> >>> >>All the Bosch LSU sensors I've seen are laser trimmed. The Bosch >>specifications for the sensor make it very clear how the sensor >>calibration component is used to account for variation between >>sensors, so it's not rocket science to create a circuit that will >>work pretty well with the complete range of sensors that may >>be plugged in. >> >>On the other hand, the problem with the NTK sensors is that >>Honda/NTK never (to the best of my knowledge) made the >>calibration component's use public, and the cal part of DIY-WB >>circuit was a reverse >>engineering exercise with a bit of guess work. >> >> >_______________________________________________ >Wbo2 mailing list >Wbo2 at diy-efi.org >http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/wbo2 > > > > From kinrob at xtra.co.nz Wed Nov 23 13:07:18 2005 From: kinrob at xtra.co.nz (Andrew Robertson) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 08:07:18 +1300 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board References: <20051122.224053.332.0.bcroe@juno.com> <438499D6.7090005@poweracumen.com> Message-ID: <001701c5f061$1fc58720$0301010a@KinrobDesktop> As a DIY enthusiast that uses the TE 2AO kit with 6066 to dial in my comp car, accuracy at this level is purely academic - most DIY tuners who dial in on the actual road aim for an AFR thought to correspond to max power without really knowing if their target figure is in fact the one that gives max power (i.e. is it 12.6?, is it 13?etc). I have a turbo car so I aim for AFR of 12 to 1 (i.e. slightly fat) - a 5 % error would be of little consequence to me let alone 1.5%. Stability/consistency of operation is more of a concern to me. Just wanted to add some real world context for the home tuner. Cheers, Andrew Robertson, New Zealand ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Vinsant" To: Cc: ; Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 5:33 AM Subject: Re: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board > All, I just checked the Motec site and looked at their Lambda meter.. They > claim a +/- 1.5% accuracy (depending on sensor From ron at poweracumen.com Fri Nov 25 11:28:42 2005 From: ron at poweracumen.com (Ron Vinsant) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 09:28:42 -0800 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board In-Reply-To: <001701c5f061$1fc58720$0301010a@KinrobDesktop> References: <20051122.224053.332.0.bcroe@juno.com> <438499D6.7090005@poweracumen.com> <001701c5f061$1fc58720$0301010a@KinrobDesktop> Message-ID: <438749CA.7030701@poweracumen.com> Andrew, Agreed. Repeatability is the issue in the direct sense, not calibration. The problem I have is that the sensors go "bad" meaning their results are incorrect, or at least different, after a time. This is a big issue if you happen to use leaded gas, even once, such as on a track day, Now things start to change in the engine response due to contamination of the sensor (in a closed loop control system). Easy you think, I'll just replace the sensor.You install a new sensor and the a/f is still off (as measured by looking the spark plugs or egt). You do some additional experiments and find that the heater current is a little different, the offset voltage is a little different, etc.Thus even if the sensor is calibrated at the factory there are many other things that can make the meter read differently than before. If the meters vary by a significant amount, say -15%, and my air fuel was initially 13.2 then I could be as low as 11.3! If the meters are a 15% span (+/-7.5%) then my 13.2 could be 14.19 or 12.21. If we had a ?5% meter then we would have 12.5 to 13.9. a/f. If can see that there is a reasonable calibration ?1.5% is great, ?5% is probably good enough, then I would not worry as much about changing sensors. The other item that is missing here is how the sensors age. Do they maintain their initial accuracy for their entire lifetime and then, at end of life just quit? My experience says that this is not the case. They start getting off calibration as they age. The dyno shop I do my set up at changes the sensor on the Motec (NTK) after 40 runs as the tech does not trust them after that. I too want consistency. I would also like to understand what consistency I should expect. That is the information that is hard to find. Ron Andrew Robertson wrote: > As a DIY enthusiast that uses the TE 2AO kit with 6066 to dial in my > comp car, accuracy at this level is purely academic - most DIY tuners > who dial in on the actual road aim for an AFR thought to correspond to > max power without really knowing if their target figure is in fact the > one that gives max power (i.e. is it 12.6?, is it 13?etc). I have a > turbo car so I aim for AFR of 12 to 1 (i.e. slightly fat) - a 5 % > error would be of little consequence to me let alone 1.5%. > Stability/consistency of operation is more of a concern to me. Just > wanted to add some real world context for the home tuner. > > Cheers, Andrew Robertson, New Zealand > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Vinsant" > To: > Cc: ; > Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 5:33 AM > Subject: Re: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board > > >> All, I just checked the Motec site and looked at their Lambda meter.. >> They claim a +/- 1.5% accuracy (depending on sensor > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wbo2 mailing list > Wbo2 at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/wbo2 > > From Steve_Marteney at DRSOptronics.com Tue Nov 29 07:41:48 2005 From: Steve_Marteney at DRSOptronics.com (Marteney, Steve) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 08:41:48 -0500 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board Message-ID: <53CB7766CBAB9148BCB56ABC56F408CF0465CADE@california.drso.biz> I was really hoping someone would reply to this email, but no one did, so I'll ask some follow-up questions. Your percentage errors are calculated directly on AFR. One example you gave is 13.2 - 15% = 11.3. However, is the error really in AFR, or is it in Lambda, current/voltage? Also, the typical AFR curve is not linear. It is better approximated as a piecewise linear. If it is just a percentage of AFR, then the actual AFR error depends on whether you are rich or lean. What happens at and around stoich? If you're at 15.1 with one sensor, then is -15% to another really going to give you 12.83??? What about the errors in other fuels? Methanol will give you the same voltage output at stoich as gas, but the real AFR is around 7:1. So do these errors drop also -15%? My point here is I'm not positive you can throw +/-15% (or any percentage) directly at the AFR measurement. But, I don't know where the percentages you are quoting came from, a datasheet, actual testing, pulled from another thread? If any one has any comments on this, it would be appreciated. Steve -----Original Message----- From: wbo2-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:wbo2-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Ron Vinsant Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 12:29 PM To: Andrew Robertson Cc: wbo2 at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board Andrew, Agreed. Repeatability is the issue in the direct sense, not calibration. The problem I have is that the sensors go "bad" meaning their results are incorrect, or at least different, after a time. This is a big issue if you happen to use leaded gas, even once, such as on a track day, Now things start to change in the engine response due to contamination of the sensor (in a closed loop control system). Easy you think, I'll just replace the sensor.You install a new sensor and the a/f is still off (as measured by looking the spark plugs or egt). You do some additional experiments and find that the heater current is a little different, the offset voltage is a little different, etc.Thus even if the sensor is calibrated at the factory there are many other things that can make the meter read differently than before. If the meters vary by a significant amount, say -15%, and my air fuel was initially 13.2 then I could be as low as 11.3! If the meters are a 15% span (+/-7.5%) then my 13.2 could be 14.19 or 12.21. If we had a ?5% meter then we would have 12.5 to 13.9. a/f. If can see that there is a reasonable calibration ?1.5% is great, ?5% is probably good enough, then I would not worry as much about changing sensors. The other item that is missing here is how the sensors age. Do they maintain their initial accuracy for their entire lifetime and then, at end of life just quit? My experience says that this is not the case. They start getting off calibration as they age. The dyno shop I do my set up at changes the sensor on the Motec (NTK) after 40 runs as the tech does not trust them after that. I too want consistency. I would also like to understand what consistency I should expect. That is the information that is hard to find. Ron Andrew Robertson wrote: > As a DIY enthusiast that uses the TE 2AO kit with 6066 to dial in my > comp car, accuracy at this level is purely academic - most DIY tuners > who dial in on the actual road aim for an AFR thought to correspond to > max power without really knowing if their target figure is in fact the > one that gives max power (i.e. is it 12.6?, is it 13?etc). I have a > turbo car so I aim for AFR of 12 to 1 (i.e. slightly fat) - a 5 % > error would be of little consequence to me let alone 1.5%. > Stability/consistency of operation is more of a concern to me. Just > wanted to add some real world context for the home tuner. > > Cheers, Andrew Robertson, New Zealand > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Vinsant" > To: > Cc: ; > Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 5:33 AM > Subject: Re: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board > > >> All, I just checked the Motec site and looked at their Lambda meter.. >> They claim a +/- 1.5% accuracy (depending on sensor > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wbo2 mailing list > Wbo2 at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/wbo2 > > _______________________________________________ Wbo2 mailing list Wbo2 at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/wbo2 From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Tue Nov 29 08:37:37 2005 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 08:37:37 -0600 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: wbo2-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:wbo2-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Marteney, Steve > Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 7:42 AM > To: Ron Vinsant; Andrew Robertson > Cc: wbo2 at diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board > > I was really hoping someone would reply to this email, but no > one did, so I'll ask some follow-up questions. Your > percentage errors are calculated directly on AFR. One > example you gave is 13.2 - 15% = 11.3. However, is the error > really in AFR, or is it in Lambda, current/voltage? Garfield elaborated on this one time after I posted a similar statement. Percentage errors are measured from stoich, not 0, since the meter has a natural null at stoich. To take your example of 15.1 minus 15%: 15.1-14.7=0.4 0.4-15%=.34 14.7+.34=15.04 --steve From Steve_Marteney at DRSOptronics.com Tue Nov 29 09:18:11 2005 From: Steve_Marteney at DRSOptronics.com (Marteney, Steve) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 10:18:11 -0500 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board Message-ID: <53CB7766CBAB9148BCB56ABC56F408CF0465CAE0@california.drso.biz> So, it follows in Ron's original example involving 13.2 ... 13.2 - 14.7 = -1.5 -1.5 * 1.15 = -1.725 (going 15% more rich) -1.725 + 14.7 = 12.975 (a far cry from 11.2, a much more tolerable for the recreational racer/tuner/hot rodder) Steve M. -----Original Message----- From: Steve Ravet [mailto:Steve.Ravet at arm.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 9:38 AM To: Marteney, Steve; wbo2 at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board > -----Original Message----- > From: wbo2-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:wbo2-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Marteney, Steve > Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 7:42 AM > To: Ron Vinsant; Andrew Robertson > Cc: wbo2 at diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board > > I was really hoping someone would reply to this email, but no > one did, so I'll ask some follow-up questions. Your > percentage errors are calculated directly on AFR. One > example you gave is 13.2 - 15% = 11.3. However, is the error > really in AFR, or is it in Lambda, current/voltage? Garfield elaborated on this one time after I posted a similar statement. Percentage errors are measured from stoich, not 0, since the meter has a natural null at stoich. To take your example of 15.1 minus 15%: 15.1-14.7=0.4 0.4-15%=.34 14.7+.34=15.04 --steve From bcroe at juno.com Tue Nov 29 17:06:45 2005 From: bcroe at juno.com (bcroe at juno.com) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:06:45 -0600 Subject: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit board Message-ID: <20051129.170803.692.4.bcroe@juno.com> Sorry I didn't get back on this. The error from stoich is the right way to go. If you really want to be right (at numbers far from stoich), you should make the error calculation on the fuel/air ratio, which is the reciprical of the air/fuel ratio. Bruce Roe 29 Nov 2005 "Steve Ravet" writes: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: wbo2-bounces at diy-efi.org > > [mailto:wbo2-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Marteney, Steve > > Nov 29, 2005 7:42 AM > > To: Ron Vinsant; Andrew Robertson > > Cc: wbo2 at diy-efi.org > > Subject: RE: [Wbo2] Using the Bosch WB sensor with L1H1 circuit > board > > > > I was really hoping someone would reply to this email, but no > > one did, so I'll ask some follow-up questions. Your > > percentage errors are calculated directly on AFR. One > > example you gave is 13.2 - 15% = 11.3. However, is the error > > really in AFR, or is it in Lambda, current/voltage? > > Garfield elaborated on this one time after I posted a > similar statement. Percentage errors are measured > from stoich, not 0, since the meter has a natural null > at stoich. To take your example of 15.1 minus 15%: > > 15.1-14.7=0.4 > > 0.4-15%=.34 > > 14.7+.34=15.04 > > --steve