I'm using this code editor called @
It's great. Often this compiler / editor system does the research, then does the coding then the compiling, then tells me what I wanted coded after it's all done. It's a great hand free coding system It's just like when I try to google for something and google knows what I want better than I know what I want.Statistics: Posted by kb1gtt — Tue May 05, 2015 11:51 pm
]]>
Are you on skype or IRC or anything like that? I'd like to go over some parts of the code for clarification.
Also, what code editor are you using? I'd like to use the same one.
My skype below, right in my signature.Also, what code editor are you using? I'd like to use the same one.
See also http://rusefi.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=9
See also http://rusefi.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=10
Statistics: Posted by AndreyB — Tue May 05, 2015 11:29 pm
]]>
Also, what code editor are you using? I'd like to use the same one.
Statistics: Posted by Weffy — Tue May 05, 2015 10:09 pm
]]>
Statistics: Posted by kb1gtt — Sun Apr 26, 2015 11:23 pm
]]>
This was a few years back... I've since gotten a little rusty with my coding and I'm pretty sure the project file is on 1 of many HDD's in a box in the corner...
Where can I find the project file for rusEFI?
My end goal with this project is a contitioning circuit for the GM CSI signal...
http://www.motor.com/magazine/pdfs/112004_11.pdf
To use the stock ICM module.
Statistics: Posted by Weffy — Sun Apr 26, 2015 7:26 pm
]]>
megasquirt ... if so, a lot of their newer code is CC licensed and open source
can you please elaborate on this? what part of megasquirt is CC (creative commons?) or open source?We are not building an alternative to megasquirt here - we are only building an open source ECU and trying to make it as user-friendly as possible.
Statistics: Posted by AndreyB — Fri Apr 17, 2015 8:37 pm
]]>
forgot my bit about... are we just trying to make a cheaper alternative to the megasquirt here? if so, a lot of their newer code is CC licensed and open source
9but I have no clue as to the architecture of the primary chip vs the MS2 or even the MS3
EDIT: after reading, I understand your knowledge of the MS unit... I will read into this some more, but we are building a more powerful, and option friendly car engine computer to run on an STM32???
"Devices not yet supported: IAC stepper, electronic throttle body "
OHHH PUT ME ON electronic IAC STEPPER! =D
Statistics: Posted by Weffy — Fri Apr 17, 2015 3:23 pm
]]>
Send us each the bare-bones maybe to tinker with. For me, I can help with base-level ignition maping and or fuel parts... as long as the power supply is solid.
I haven't gone over the specs in detail due to lack of interest to be honest... I want to help out as much as I can, but I am limited with funds like the previous member has stated. All my cash goes into car parts, and I can barely keep my DD running right now, I have an L61 ecotec on a test stand (ok I need to weld the test stand still, but once I finish the design I will post it) a full gauge cluster, radiator, cool little lever for throttle. the works...
I have plenty of time to make the most of what I have for my car, and I spend way too much time tinkering and measuring. I can help gather data no problem!
What are the core issues? Software? Firmware? Mechanical??
Statistics: Posted by Weffy — Fri Apr 17, 2015 3:20 pm
]]>
Order board can in China and sold as a kit constructor.
Statistics: Posted by elektrolabb — Tue Mar 11, 2014 4:46 am
]]>
Statistics: Posted by AndreyB — Sat Mar 08, 2014 5:19 pm
]]>
For me, the biggest issue is time, followed closely by money. I have a lot of projects, hobbies, work full time, and am taking classes. I'm definitely more adept at the hardware side of things (I have access to a full machine shop and have built several swapped festivas). I'm pretty good with a soldering iron and have limited C knowledge.
I love learning new things and am willing to try stuff that "might" work. But I don't want to build and populate 6 small IO boards when I can wait a week or two and they become obsolete. My "hobby" money gets eaten up too fast that way. Now that frankenstein has become a reality I'm considering buying the board and necessary components, but I still see frankenstein changing in the not too distant future, so I wonder if its worth the time/money investment yet.
So why isn't anyone else running an engine yet? Because it is still Beta. Why is it still Beta? Because not enough people are running engines. Chicken and egg, as kb1gtt put it. Give it some time and keep working at it, increasing the documentation available, etc. and the project will grow.
Statistics: Posted by skeeters_keeper — Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:13 pm
]]>
I would say our lack of documentation and videos showing how it works are a significant problem for the young players, and people who have limited time. We currently have a group of people who are willing to help over the phone, or in forum threads. However the time it takes is a blah for most people who can only put in a weekend here and there. This results in a priority issue, which puts an install a bit lower level. I think these folks check back from time to time checking the progress. But won't jump in until we get more documentation done.
Then we have hacker types that are willing to try about anything. They are often driven by a desire to learn, and are willing to take some risks. Hard challenges are often an interest to this group. However what is a hard challenge is different for each person, and not very predictable. They also often don't want to do what someone else has simply done before. They are often not so interested in copy paste projects, unless they can tweak it and make it their own some how. They might copy paste, but then they will want to make it faster, or make it harder to hack or something like that. They have a variety of background knowledge and experience, so they may be a licensed engineer, or a grocery store clerk. They are willing to try something risky, and it it hard to understand exactly what motivates them. So it's often hard to figure out exactly why they don't make progress. Herding cats comes to mind.
Then the real hard core developers likely have a different problem(s). They have likely gotten something else running and tend to not want to re-learn a platform. Some may have some concerns about latency. I know the S12X's XGate has a very low latency potential. It can theoretically IRQ in the nS range, while I've only see it work in the uS range. Other multi core chips have similar. They can guarantee uS or better for things like cam crank sensing. Even though the STM has a fast CPU, I think real hard core developer(s) would tend to feel the latency is limiting potential and probably look for lower latency just for the sake of having a lower latency. If you know it can be available, might as well.
I feel this platform has a great potential, I really like the HAL layer, which allows portability. I also like that the OS has an option to port to a multi core chip, which means any concern of latency has been addressed in the long term, if we need lower latency. The Discovery F4 has low enough latency for most applications, it is low cost and readily available. So I feel this platform has a good and solid base, with lots of potential to grow. However it will take time to migrate existing people from there current platforms.
I agree that yes having hardware is a huge problem for most people and it's often hard for many people to toss a pile of $ at something when they don't know it will succeed. In the past I've inquired with other groups about a concept, but it hasn't happened yet. Basically the concept goes like this. A try it before you buy it set of hardware. Theory being that if someone wants to do this, but is concerned it will be to much of a task to accomplish, they provide a credit card number but are not billed for like a month or some kind of time frame, and we ship a developer system with a harness. They are only liable for the harness at that point, as they will have to hack that up. If they don't succeed for any reason, they can return it and only get billed for shipping and the harness, if they hacked the harness. So a liability of something like $30 or so. However if they succeed, we can bill them for the full ECU then ship them a fresh ECU replacement. They snap it in to the existing setup, and they ship back the trail ECU. If they burn up the ECU and ship back a pile of ashes that some how resembles the trail ECU, no big deal, it happens and we do not charge for the trail ECU. I think we can make it tough enough that this is not likely to happen, so the risk of a broken ECU is minimal. We would keep a pile of these trial ECU's around keeping them in circulation, allowing people to kind of try it before they buy it. I think this would allow an opportunity for many people to get in the door. I think that we should find a harness for the mini such that we make russian a drop in fix for that water logged mini, then we offer Frankenstein with that connector / harness for other to use. I also think we should plan for a batch of 10, when we go for a first build. Can we find that harness some where? Even if we get the harness in a batch of say 100, we could probably get the ECU in a batch of 10.
Hmm, perhaps we can also offer that if they do XYZ in the wiki, that they can get the ECU for free or something like that. I guess we need an ECU with harness to start with though. Stupid chicken and egg issue.
Any how, it's kind of a long post, so I guess I'll stop now.
Statistics: Posted by kb1gtt — Sat Mar 08, 2014 11:13 am
]]>
It seems it's not that he wants the cheapest EFI system for his race car.
It's actually still making the cheapest EFI for my race car. In order to make a cheapest EFI for my race car I would need to reuse most of the stock ECU analog side but hack the old chip out and plug my new chip in. In order to get to that phase I need a reliable firmware. In order to get a reliable firmware I need as many people using and reviewing it as possible.
Statistics: Posted by AndreyB — Fri Mar 07, 2014 9:14 pm
]]>
- installing a WBO sensor (I already got one) in my shiny exhaust system (choosing the best place and orientation, drilling stainless steel, not to say welding it);
- upgrading the intake (obtaining the intake from the later engines equipped with EFI). If by chance I manage to get the intake with fuel pipes and fuel injectors installed - it would make things much simpler. Besides, I still don't know what sort of injectors these will be.
Hope, by the time I cope with this, we'll have a working firmware that supports v8s and defined pin designations that would be changed in future.
Speaking of hardware I don't eliminate a possibility of ordering my own board from the same seed studio that would be based on the locally available components (drivers, opamps, power ICs, etc). Finally, I don't need that much: ignition is logically controlled, one IC for crank input,10 (11?)drivers for injectors, fuel pump and idle valve, couple of inputs...
The question to the topic starter is what is his ultimate goal for this project? It seems it's not that he wants the cheapest EFI system for his race car. Making money of it?
Statistics: Posted by puff — Fri Mar 07, 2014 8:53 pm
]]>
First, I'm going to answer personally why one of my cars isn't running on it. Then I'm going to tackle the more general case.
Personally:
-I have no garage for my personal cars. I have a dyno and a shop to work on customer cars but no time or space for my own projects. (weird, I know...)
-It has been bitter ass cold for the past 2 months and I do not like working on cars when I do not have to in the bitter cold
-I have 3 vehicles currently. Truck (diesel engine), CRV-engine swapped civic (daily driver), high-compression vtec toy integra (candidate). Diesel truck is out. I cannot afford to take the chance of breaking something / not being reliable with daily driver. I'm about to sell the integra because I do not have time to do autocross / roadrace that I built it for. Net result: no sacrificial test vehicle currently (Note: I'm working on getting a spare motor and transmission for the civic so that I can offer it up to science with less fear)
-Time. I have almost finished up some of my projects that need to be taken care of before I will have the time to contribute more here. Until I'm more caught up with the projects that are responsible for feeding me / family, I need to remain focused there.
In General:
-At this point, the only thing that I know of that even vaguely resembles a "base calibration" would be Andrey's Mazda things. 95% of people I know who mess with engine management are intimidated by dealing with a system where they are starting from scratch
-The current 1-board + disco board solution is awesome from a hacker/developer perspective (I'm excited) but It's far from a good user solution. A case would go a long way towards making this more practical to use on a car
-I do not know enough about the firmware to be able to comment on the algorithms available for running the car. How well documented are these?
-I do not know enough about the user land software for tuning the thing. How well documented is it?
-From my perspective, the project is kind of in a chicken-and-egg situation in the sense that it needs people to use it (if for no other reason to offer feedback for further development) but there are very few people who have the time and resources to offer a vehicle up for science when there are more "proven" solutions available. Very few people do car computer hacking purely for fun - much more often, dealing with engine management is a means to an end with the end being a well-running car.
-There are very few people with the necessary skills to be able to solder the hardware together, know how to wire it to the vehicle, troubleshoot the install if signals don't work properly on the first try, program the board, etc. You're going to find a lot more automotive types that are going to be able to take a ready-assembled pre-programmed unit and install it on their car and play. You're going to find a lot more embedded system guys who could assemble and program the unit and would be more likely to use it if they had assistance with the harness/hookup/troubleshooting end of things. To be able to do all of this is a very broad range of skills that is very, very, very uncommon to find.
Statistics: Posted by blundar — Fri Mar 07, 2014 4:18 pm
]]>