Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

It's all about the code!
mzk
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 3:44 pm

Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by mzk »

Hello,

Sorry if this question has been asked before, but I couldn't find any topics. Since I plan to play with LPG, but want to preserve also the current gasoline injection, what are the firmware options for doing so?

I ran the rusEfi console and found only single maps for fuel, advance, etc... If it isn't planned, what steps should be taken, what software modifications and so on, or "where to start?".

Thank you!
User avatar
AndreyB
Site Admin
Posts: 14292
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:28 am
Location: Jersey City
Github Username: rusefillc
Slack: Andrey B

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by AndreyB »

It's not in the firmware unfortunatelly.

First step is to reduce existing memory maps - for instance right now fuel map is 16x16x32 bits, it can probably be reduced to 16x16x16 bits safely. This would allow for second fuel map :)

As is with 32 bit maps we are getting close to out of RAM.
Very limited telepathic abilities - please post logs & tunes where appropriate - http://rusefi.com/s/questions

Always looking for C/C++/Java/PHP developers! Please help us see https://rusefi.com/s/howtocontribute
User avatar
kb1gtt
contributor
contributor
Posts: 3758
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:42 am
Location: ME of USA

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by kb1gtt »

You only need once active table. Could a table be stored on SD and then loaded into the active table?
Welcome to the friendlier side of internet crazy :)
User avatar
mobyfab
Posts: 139
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 10:09 am
Location: Versailles, France

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by mobyfab »

You don't even need a single table in memory, just the current computed output values :)
User avatar
kb1gtt
contributor
contributor
Posts: 3758
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:42 am
Location: ME of USA

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by kb1gtt »

Doing an equation driven approach instead of a table driven approach would likely be a large undertaking. Could it be easier to compress the table, such that you decompress the table and use it that way? AKA 2 tables in eeprom when it boots, but one table in RAM. I don't see why we need two tables in RAM, at the same time, as you can only operate from one, and switching between tables happens very rarely.
Welcome to the friendlier side of internet crazy :)
ZHoob2004
contributor
contributor
Posts: 153
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 7:11 pm
Location: Tucson, AZ

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by ZHoob2004 »

kb1gtt wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:24 am
I don't see why we need two tables in RAM, at the same time, as you can only operate from one, and switching between tables happens very rarely.
Wouldn't two active fuel tables be a necessity for flexfuel/E85? E85 ethanol content can vary pretty substantially, afaik, so tuning for just E85 wouldn't really be a good idea unless you plan to mix it all yourself.
User avatar
kb1gtt
contributor
contributor
Posts: 3758
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:42 am
Location: ME of USA

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by kb1gtt »

Good point, if you have 2 tables, one that is tuned for 100% E85, and another which is 100% gas, then you have a sensor which tells you that you are running 50% gas and 50% E85, you could interpolate between the two tables and generate a value. I now see a need for 2 tables.
Welcome to the friendlier side of internet crazy :)
mzk
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 3:44 pm

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by mzk »

As russian suggested, 16 bit values should be enough. 16 bit = 65536, 32 bit = 4 billions

But what about the floats?
User avatar
AndreyB
Site Admin
Posts: 14292
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:28 am
Location: Jersey City
Github Username: rusefillc
Slack: Andrey B

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by AndreyB »

mzk wrote:
Tue Jun 05, 2018 2:07 pm
But what about the floats?
what about floats? The suggestion is to shift from 32 bit floats into 16 bit fixed-point maps, at least for some maps. Tuner Studio supports fixed point maps.
Very limited telepathic abilities - please post logs & tunes where appropriate - http://rusefi.com/s/questions

Always looking for C/C++/Java/PHP developers! Please help us see https://rusefi.com/s/howtocontribute
Number-One
contributor
contributor
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 2:59 pm

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by Number-One »

Hello Russian

I have same problem in my 2 stroke engine. Once 2 stroke have a high range of rpm my injector can´t work good in all rpm band.
My question is...it´s possible you add an option on software like this...
IF rpm > 8000 and load >50% activate output x (if use throttle version)
or if rpm > 8000 and map < y activate output x (if use map version)
?
of course values must be configurable

The idea is use same pulse connected in both injectors and use pin x to do power on/off on the second injector using a transistor/mosfet etc.
Check the picture bellow , red area (only injector 1 working- x output off), blue area (injector 1 + injector 2 working - x output on)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/staqsctmx1dzfoc/dual%20map.PNG?dl=0
Image
User avatar
kb1gtt
contributor
contributor
Posts: 3758
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:42 am
Location: ME of USA

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by kb1gtt »

Am I hearing you correctly if I heard you ask does rusEFI support staged injectors?

I believe your asking if you can turn on an injector when over a set of parameter(s), such that you can have a smaller injector when at idle, AKA controllable fuel at the low end, with large flow at the high end. Is that correct?
Welcome to the friendlier side of internet crazy :)
Number-One
contributor
contributor
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 2:59 pm

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by Number-One »

The idea is use a small injector for lower rpm and a bigger injector for high rpm, but turn on the bigger injector after some parametres. If you look my table i decresse the time as example because i know with 2 injectores flowing to cylinder i will need less injector time duration.

I know this solution isn´t a native dual staged injection but this alternative can solve my problem.
Do you think this is not a good option? I think this is easy to do by software than a native dual stage.
User avatar
kb1gtt
contributor
contributor
Posts: 3758
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:42 am
Location: ME of USA

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by kb1gtt »

I think I should inquire with @about staged injectors. I'm a bit ignorant about how much staged injectors have been developed. I recall they have been talked about, and I think some stuff has been drafted in the firmware, but I'm not sure what the status is of staged injectors. Last I recall there was some debate about which algorithm to use. There are different methods for blending how much each injector is injecting, and at what time it's injecting.

If you are thinking staged, do you have hardware for testing? Is that one injector for manifold injection like a carburetor done for the higher flow? Or is that 2 injectors for every cyl?
Welcome to the friendlier side of internet crazy :)
Number-One
contributor
contributor
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 2:59 pm

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by Number-One »

Now i have only one injector, but i don´t have a good result. I can install another injector, in my case is easy.
puff
contributor
contributor
Posts: 2961
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2013 11:28 am
Location: Moskau

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by puff »

how did you figure out that the problem is in low fuel dosage, not the processes inside intake manifold?
Simon@FutureProof
contributor
contributor
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 8:55 pm
Github Username: Orchardperformance
Slack: Orchardperformance

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by Simon@FutureProof »

You may not need the second injector to have a variable pulse width, it you add a second injector and set it to a fix pulse width per rotation you can then carry on adjusting the fueling with the primary injector.

As RPM of the engine increases and airflows in the ports pick up velocity the need to time the fueling to the valve open period is reduced, this means that a second set of injector with a fixed injection timing for all cylinders and a small fixed pulse width turned on above a set RPM can suffice to provide the extra fuel that would put the primary injectors outside of their duty cycle limits.

I.e. if your engine is struggling for fuel over, say, 7000rpm and the injectors needed to cope are too large to run properly below 2000rpm then you could pick injectors suitable for the engine up to the 7000rpm point and switch a second set on at around 6000rpm with a fixed pulse width and sized suitable to deliver the extra fuel needed to keep the smaller primary injectors below 90% duty cycle all the way up to your redline of say, 10000rpm.

so/ idle to 6000rpm fuel is delivered only by the primaries up to 80% duty cycle
6000rpm onwards is primary injectors + Secondaries at a fixed pulse width of say 3-5ms. This would drop the primary injectors back down to 10-90% duty cycle for the rest of the rev range with the fuel adjustments performed on the primary fuel table still.

Benefit of this is it only requires one output that is triggered by RPM or load or both that switches on the secondary injectors to a simple single value pulse width or at most a small table of pulse widths.
You set this up first to give your fixed secondary additional fueling and then go about tuning the primary table on the dyno as normal. When you breach the limits to trigger the secondary injectors you just have to tune a step change in primary pulse width into the primary map to keep the fueling to the target values.

Think of it less like staged injection and more like booster injection, switching the secondaries in makes the primaries artificially "bigger" by the specified amount.

It makes X-tau fueling a bitch but load/TPS change based fueling would be fine
Now keeping MRE in stock in the UK - https://www.FutureProofPerformance.com
Number-One
contributor
contributor
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 2:59 pm

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by Number-One »

puff wrote:
Sat Sep 08, 2018 3:12 pm
how did you figure out that the problem is in low fuel dosage, not the processes inside intake manifold?
Because all 2 stroke efi engines have this problem. In high revs the opening inlet time is very short , if i increase injector time duration the fuel stops before reed valve (reed valve close first). Next cycle this fuel goes to cylinder in litle drops and don´t burn (or don't burn good). If the engine is above +/- 5k the engine is ok, but if engine run up 7/8k the exaust starts getting soaked. It´s difficul to explain but if i decrease fuel timing i feel engine lean, if i increase the engine soak and have lot´s of fuel on the ground. To solve this i need short pulse with more fuel.
Number-One
contributor
contributor
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 2:59 pm

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by Number-One »

OrchardPerformance wrote:
Sat Sep 08, 2018 4:00 pm
You may not need the second injector to have a variable pulse width, it you add a second injector and set it to a fix pulse width per rotation you can then carry on adjusting the fueling with the primary injector.

As RPM of the engine increases and airflows in the ports pick up velocity the need to time the fueling to the valve open period is reduced, this means that a second set of injector with a fixed injection timing for all cylinders and a small fixed pulse width turned on above a set RPM can suffice to provide the extra fuel that would put the primary injectors outside of their duty cycle limits.

I.e. if your engine is struggling for fuel over, say, 7000rpm and the injectors needed to cope are too large to run properly below 2000rpm then you could pick injectors suitable for the engine up to the 7000rpm point and switch a second set on at around 6000rpm with a fixed pulse width and sized suitable to deliver the extra fuel needed to keep the smaller primary injectors below 90% duty cycle all the way up to your redline of say, 10000rpm.

so/ idle to 6000rpm fuel is delivered only by the primaries up to 80% duty cycle
6000rpm onwards is primary injectors + Secondaries at a fixed pulse width of say 3-5ms. This would drop the primary injectors back down to 10-90% duty cycle for the rest of the rev range with the fuel adjustments performed on the primary fuel table still.

Benefit of this is it only requires one output that is triggered by RPM or load or both that switches on the secondary injectors to a simple single value pulse width or at most a small table of pulse widths.
You set this up first to give your fixed secondary additional fueling and then go about tuning the primary table on the dyno as normal. When you breach the limits to trigger the secondary injectors you just have to tune a step change in primary pulse width into the primary map to keep the fueling to the target values.

Think of it less like staged injection and more like booster injection, switching the secondaries in makes the primaries artificially "bigger" by the specified amount.

It makes X-tau fueling a bitch but load/TPS change based fueling would be fine
Hi, yes i agree with that.
My solution is use same pulse in 2 injectores and turn on/off power of the second injector. After turn on the second injector it´s necessary decrease fuel timing because both injectores are working. Please look my picture above.
User avatar
AndreyB
Site Admin
Posts: 14292
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:28 am
Location: Jersey City
Github Username: rusefillc
Slack: Andrey B

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by AndreyB »

Number-One wrote:
Fri Sep 07, 2018 3:23 pm
IF rpm > 8000 and load >50% activate output x
or if rpm > 8000 and map < y activate output x
https://rusefi.com/wiki/index.php?title=Manual:Flexible_Logic

controlling extra transistor to switch from one injector to another injector is easy - that's FSIO which we have already. Staging logic I would need much more details on what logic you suggest but I am not sure when I would be able to make code changes :(

Switching between two fuel logics based on RPM would be a weird but easy code change I can do this weird thing, are you sure you need it? :)
Very limited telepathic abilities - please post logs & tunes where appropriate - http://rusefi.com/s/questions

Always looking for C/C++/Java/PHP developers! Please help us see https://rusefi.com/s/howtocontribute
User avatar
kb1gtt
contributor
contributor
Posts: 3758
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:42 am
Location: ME of USA

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by kb1gtt »

Hmmm, could you simply tune 2 injectors, such that injector 2 has a table with 0 fuel until something like 6kRPM, then it starts to turn on, or perhaps the entire table above 6kRPM is 100% injector duty.
Welcome to the friendlier side of internet crazy :)
Number-One
contributor
contributor
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 2:59 pm

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by Number-One »

russian wrote:
Sat Sep 08, 2018 11:11 pm
Number-One wrote:
Fri Sep 07, 2018 3:23 pm
IF rpm > 8000 and load >50% activate output x
or if rpm > 8000 and map < y activate output x
https://rusefi.com/wiki/index.php?title=Manual:Flexible_Logic

controlling extra transistor to switch from one injector to another injector is easy - that's FSIO which we have already. Staging logic I would need much more details on what logic you suggest but I am not sure when I would be able to make code changes :(

Switching between two fuel logics based on RPM would be a weird but easy code change I can do this weird thing, are you sure you need it? :)
I know this seems crazy but can work, if you can do this on code i will order a new injector and a new inlet body. I would like to test this.
Number-One
contributor
contributor
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 2:59 pm

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by Number-One »

kb1gtt wrote:
Sun Sep 09, 2018 12:14 am
Hmmm, could you simply tune 2 injectors, such that injector 2 has a table with 0 fuel until something like 6kRPM, then it starts to turn on, or perhaps the entire table above 6kRPM is 100% injector duty.
Once we can´t have 2 separate tables controling 2 injectores i think this is a easy solution. I know in the transition from "stages" the engine can be hard to tune, but on this time i don´t have another option.
Simon@FutureProof
contributor
contributor
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 8:55 pm
Github Username: Orchardperformance
Slack: Orchardperformance

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by Simon@FutureProof »

@kb1gtt - No issues with that from an engine or intake physics point of view, only thing to watch out for with something like that is any additional fueling in other tables triggering the second injectors while they are set to zero pulse width.
If I understand the fuel math of RUSefi right then all additional fueling is multipliers and not adders so a multiplication of zero is no issue but some ECUs do have adders in the fuel math that add pulse width ontop of calculated pulse width, on these it could lead to the injector being triggered during cold starts or acceleration leading to unpredictable fueling.

Certainly an approach that turns a second injector on is better than switching injectors completely, even better if that switch on can coincide with a change to a second fuel map for a couple of reasons:
1. if you swap injectors its possible to operate the engine near the switch over point resulting in constant fluttering between the two states and drivability issues or engine damage.
2. If the fuel tables are interpolated then the switch over point can become problematic with a large pulse width @6000rpm and small @6500rpm the interpolation could cause a lean condition just before switch on and a heavily rich one after switch on.

Bosch got around a similar issue with the on/off of the VVT by using two fuel tables and the trigger for the VVT is also the trigger to swap tables.
In our case the second injector on signal would also need to swap to the second fuel table so that we can smooth the fueling either side of the switch point by tuning each table differently and making the trigger to switch on the second injector switch on a few hundred RPM higher than it switches off.
Now keeping MRE in stock in the UK - https://www.FutureProofPerformance.com
User avatar
kb1gtt
contributor
contributor
Posts: 3758
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:42 am
Location: ME of USA

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by kb1gtt »

I see, the question isn't really staged or not, it's different tune tables for things like variable VE, or different fuels like propane and petro.

About staged, the 50% load could be something like the below.
RPM
1k, 2k, 3k, 4k, 5k, etc
020, 050, 080, 100, 100 for injector 1
000, 000, 000, 020, 040 for injector 2.

AKA you always have injector 1 fuel, and there are no variations caused by some kind of switching from one injector to another. AKA blended not 100% to 0%. This is very much like the old 4 barrel carburetors. The small barrels work, until the air flow opens the 3rd and 4th barrels.

If BOSH used 2 tables as you noted, I would guess that's because BOSH's knew the tune was different for each VE. However that's only applicable to MAP, while most OEM's use MAF. I'm not sure why they would have used MAP with 2X tables. AKA MAP uses measured pressure, with a known VE curve, such that pressure after scaled through the VE curve tells you the number of O2's in the cyl. Once you have used the MAP value and you know the VE curve you can determine the O2's in the cyl. Then you put in what ever fuel you need to get what ever AFR you are looking for. With MAP, the sensor signal directly correlates to O2's in the cyl. Once you know the MAP you know how many O2's are in the cyl, so you simply put in what ever fuel to get the desired AFR. There is no VE calculation with MAP. When you say the BOSH used tables you are indicating they used MAP, not MAF. I find this a bit odd, as most OEM's use MAF, because it allows them to use the same validated ECU code on several product lines with several intake and exhaust changes.

Any how, the key point being, that the code doesn't currently have a method for switching between two tuning tables, which is desired for multi fuel, or variable VE.
Welcome to the friendlier side of internet crazy :)
ZHoob2004
contributor
contributor
Posts: 153
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 7:11 pm
Location: Tucson, AZ

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by ZHoob2004 »

Speaking of OEMs with multiple fuel tables, my 91 Honda VTEC (variable valve lift with map sensor) also uses a pair of fuel tables that are switched on and off with the VTEC solenoid, giving the b series motors their distinctive kick when going to high rpm.

Something I would like to pursue is VTEC with flex fuel, which I think might require 4 fuel maps and 4 ignition maps?

One each for gas and e85 at low lift, another each for high lift.
Simon@FutureProof
contributor
contributor
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 8:55 pm
Github Username: Orchardperformance
Slack: Orchardperformance

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by Simon@FutureProof »

Just to clarify, my comment about the Bosch ECU was more an illustration of how to get around the interpolation and sudden airflow/fuel changes VVT and staged injection or really any sudden on/off device that changes in-cylinder pressure can pose.

The Bosch ECU is a MAF ECU but uses the MAF to calculate VE and then expresses it as a load value (which is equivalent to 1/2 pulse width).
The fuel tables I refer to are correction tables applied to the MAF results to tune around intake resonance, MAF turbulence and the like, they are also used to account for differing injection flows and short pulse width fueling issues so really behave the same way as a MAP table.

As noted with the VVT what that means is when its switched there needs to be 2 tables as the intake air flows will dramatically change with the valve timing and so the correction factors (read fuel trim/fuel tuning) will change as well.

There are actually 2 spark tables, 2 fuel tables, 2 idle tables, and on and on for advanced and retarded cam positions to allow the engine to run perfectly regardless of the cam position, if a fault is detected the ECU goes into a blended mode where it can interpolate between the two sets of tables. Highly unnecessary for this application but was required for emissions, catalyst life and handing the cars to ham fisted owners.

Back to the topic at hand though....
The issue is really the same for swapping injectors or as noted above cutting in things like V-tec or other off/on devices that result in huge changes to the fuel or spark tune.
Others may disagree but I personally feel that having the option of 2 tables for fuel and 2 for spark that can be switched depending on a software or hardware trigger or that could be set to different outputs would provide a huge amount of versatility.

It would allow Zhoob2004 to run his V-tec like the OEM ECU, Number-one to set one table to primary injector and one to secondary injector or someone to set one table as Gasoline and one as E85. It would even benefit for things like water/meth injection or nitrous as you would be able to tune with it on and off and set proper fueling and timing for safe operation.
Even an aggressive high octane timing map and a milder street fuel map could be switched with the push of a dash button.
More interestingly it allows you to have 1 table for the left bank of a v8 and one table for the right bank, an advantage when you are dealing with difficult installations that compromise the intake or exhaust flow on just one bank, like OEM BMW, Porsche or custom build applications.

In Number-one's "staged" injection case he would just need to set fuel/spark table one to use injector bank 1 and fuel table 2 to use injector bank 2 with them both active 100% of the time and then setting the secondary injectors to 0 for a lot of the lower RPM/load points.

In the case of the V-tec it would be all working off the primary table until the V-tec trigger told the ECU to switch the V-tec on and switch to table 2 for fuel and spark.

Any combination of the above could probably also be done provided it doesn't compromise the function of the software, and it would hit a huge number of bonus configurations. (who doesn't want to be able to fully 3d map their nitrous wetshot?)
Would dropping the tables to 16bit and then doubling them leave us with only minimal extra RAM use?
Now keeping MRE in stock in the UK - https://www.FutureProofPerformance.com
ZHoob2004
contributor
contributor
Posts: 153
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 7:11 pm
Location: Tucson, AZ

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by ZHoob2004 »

Another option that's viable in the case of VTEC (and probably many other situations) would be to have a second table that can either be added or multiplied against the first table, but I think this gives basically the same results as having two completely distinct tables that can be substituted or interpolated.
User avatar
kb1gtt
contributor
contributor
Posts: 3758
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:42 am
Location: ME of USA

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by kb1gtt »

I recall that 2 tables is desirable, with interpolation between the two tables for things like E85. AKA E85 table, and normal petro table, then the E85 sensor tells you where you land between the two tables. I recall the problem with 2 tables was memory space. I recall there was some consideration about compressing the tables, as well as changing the tables such that 2 tables could fit, but perhaps with some reduced accuracy. I think that the real issue has been that @ doesn't have hardware to work against, so it takes more time than normal. If he had something to work with, it would make it much easier for him to develop under his limited time budget. I could be wrong as I think he's got VVT. Perhaps it's just a time issue. I believe it's a desired feature, it's lack of existence is more of a resource issue than a desired issue.

I also recall that there is a desire to allow more tables stored in other memory like the SD card, such that you can have more tables, but it takes some time to get them from the SD card. AKA a drive around the track tune, followed by 3 or 4 different tunes to try when at the track.
Welcome to the friendlier side of internet crazy :)
Number-One
contributor
contributor
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 2:59 pm

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by Number-One »

kb1gtt wrote:
Mon Sep 10, 2018 4:26 pm
I recall that 2 tables is desirable, with interpolation between the two tables for things like E85. AKA E85 table, and normal petro table, then the E85 sensor tells you where you land between the two tables. I recall the problem with 2 tables was memory space. I recall there was some consideration about compressing the tables, as well as changing the tables such that 2 tables could fit, but perhaps with some reduced accuracy. I think that the real issue has been that @ doesn't have hardware to work against, so it takes more time than normal. If he had something to work with, it would make it much easier for him to develop under his limited time budget. I could be wrong as I think he's got VVT. Perhaps it's just a time issue. I believe it's a desired feature, it's lack of existence is more of a resource issue than a desired issue.

I also recall that there is a desire to allow more tables stored in other memory like the SD card, such that you can have more tables, but it takes some time to get them from the SD card. AKA a drive around the track tune, followed by 3 or 4 different tunes to try when at the track.
Because memory space i proposed my solution with 2 if´s. I know this isn´t the best solution but is the easiest . My solution only uses 1 table.
Simon@FutureProof
contributor
contributor
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 8:55 pm
Github Username: Orchardperformance
Slack: Orchardperformance

Re: Bi-fue / dual fuel capability?

Post by Simon@FutureProof »

I assume with ChibiOS heading to the bigger nucleo boards with time the RAM issue will become redundant. I believe there are some Nucleos that are pin compatible with the Disco.

It's a shame we are separated by several thousand miles of water, I have hardware coming out of my ears over here that would cover a lot of your needs that I'm sure would be A-OK to play with.
Now keeping MRE in stock in the UK - https://www.FutureProofPerformance.com
Post Reply