View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Fri Nov 24, 2017 8:35 am



Reply to topic  [ 85 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
New wideband controller ALM compared to Innovate LM-2 
Author Message
TO220 - Visibile

Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:22 pm
Posts: 11
Joseph Davis wrote:
I decided to fool with cars instead of get a real job, don't ask me why. :P

Real jobs are boring :D


Sat Jan 07, 2012 3:53 am
Profile
DIP8 - Involved

Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 5:04 pm
Posts: 19
antonmies wrote:
Joseph Davis wrote:
I decided to fool with cars instead of get a real job, don't ask me why. :P

Real jobs are boring :D


100% correct.


Sat Jan 07, 2012 4:07 am
Profile
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:31 pm
Posts: 14879
Location: Home sweet home!
Fred wrote:
ecotrons wrote:
control the AFR instantly.

Not possible. You clearly have no idea about engine control

More clear now? You should be much more careful with posts, both reading/interpreting others, and writing your own.

Quote:
Commins (the largest diesel engine manufacturer in the world).

Cummins, not Commins. Well aware, I own one and have worked on them extensively.

ecotrons wrote:
EDIT: Putting back in content removed while I was asleep when ecotrons realised the magnitude of his mistake:

"Can you show something that you've actually done instead of critisizing others? Have you ever built an ECU or a wideband controller?"

EDIT: I can only imagine the scramble for the edit button that you performed when you realised what you'd done.

You lost your edit rights, sorry. Be more careful with future posts.

I've got to say, unlike our friend antonmies your grasp on English is pretty weak. Ironic considering that you live in Michigan or close to it and he's from Finland (where everyone can read). I generally find that articulate people write the best code, afterall, they're just languages, if you can't operate one properly, you likely can't operate any of them properly. I'll be steering clear of your products unless you force one upon me, that's for sure.

Häkkinen, ahh yes, I thought that sounded familiar! One of my friends used to use that name as part of his email address. The rest of your post wasn't worth replying to and nearly got removed for being OT. I'll leave it alone, though, this time. Not in future.

Fred.

_________________
DIYEFI.org - where Open Source means Open Source, and Free means Freedom
FreeEMS.org - the open source engine management system
FreeEMS dev diary and its comments thread and my turbo truck!
n00bs, do NOT PM or email tech questions! Use the forum!
The ever growing list of FreeEMS success stories!


Sat Jan 07, 2012 12:09 pm
Profile WWW
TO220 - Visibile

Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:22 pm
Posts: 11
Image

This might be familiar to you already, but I just come up with this.
The larger is the LSU 4.2. The difference is huge.
Which you think will act faster in heater controller wise in variable conditions where temperature fluctuations can be several hundred degrees centigrade? I bet both will measure the same in some test tube, but real world might differ.

I also believe that the heater control frequency is not higher only because of the chip but physics. Larger mass requires longer periods to cool down and to heat hence lower frequency. If the heater control frequency would be trivial, it wouldn't be in the datasheet.


Sat Jan 07, 2012 4:15 pm
Profile
TO220 - Visibile

Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:38 pm
Posts: 11
Fred,

It is so obvious that you judge people by whether they can speak good English. But there are majority of people in the world don't speak English. Bosch Engineers at Germany invented the LSU sensors, which you have to use. They do not necessarily speak good English.

You EDIT member's post at your will, and you change member's post rights at your will. I know you are the admin. What a power to have!

Is this what you called "Freedom" or censorship?

You like to play English language games, that's where your professionalism stays. I decide not to respond to your post any more.


Sat Jan 07, 2012 5:02 pm
Profile
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:31 pm
Posts: 14879
Location: Home sweet home!
antonmies wrote:
http://wbo2.com/lsu/cases/C3C4-side.jpg

This might be familiar to you already, but I just come up with this.
The larger is the LSU 4.2. The difference is huge.

Which you think will act faster in heater controller wise in variable conditions where temperature fluctuations can be several hundred degrees centigrade? I bet both will measure the same in some test tube, but real world might differ.

Interesting, though I'd expect the lighter weight element to be more at the mercy of the exhaust flow and speed of the heater control logic, not the other way around. Perhaps that is why the spec it to be higher frequency, IE, such that if you stick to their recommendations you have a hope in hell of controlling it properly.

Quote:
I also believe that the heater control frequency is not higher only because of the chip but physics. Larger mass requires longer periods to cool down and to heat hence lower frequency. If the heater control frequency would be trivial, it wouldn't be in the datasheet.

See above. Perhaps this is a language issue, again. This type of comparison with minimal variables is the way to roll, though. It would be cool if Alan did a 4.2 vs 4.9 test with his controller each tuned optimally, but fundamentally the same, except the sensor and tuning. Then we'd have a real world "which one is faster" test. Both for temperature change and for gas flow change and combinations of the two. Comparing two sensors with two controllers in an unknown gas flow and drawing conclusions about the sensor alone is brain dead, to say the least.

ecotrons wrote:
It is so obvious that you judge people by whether they can speak good English.

No, I don't. Some of my good friends are very average in their English usage. Would I want them writing code for me, no, but they are my friends all the same.

Quote:
Bosch Engineers at Germany invented the LSU sensors, which you have to use. They do not necessarily speak good English.

Have you BEEN to Germany? I have. I've spent enough time there to know what level of English to expect from an average German and a highly educated German. I even have German friends in New Zealand and Kiwi friends in Germany. Furthermore, employees who work in large multinational corporations regularly conduct business in English as it's the common exchange format, just as it is on this forum. I bet you a million monopoly dollars that they did.

Quote:
You EDIT member's post at your will

Let's clarify this statement a little. I did three things earlier today with respect edits:

1) Put your attack back into your post with clearly marked EDIT comments such that it was clear what I put in there and what you put in there. I did this to expose you for what you are. Your original content remains untouched.
2) Removed an extremely long one-piece quote that only disrupted the flow of the thread and was not referenced at all from another post. I marked this as well such that it was clear that I'd done it. I didn't touch the other content in that post despite it being in violation of the rules of the forum.
3) Removed all links back to your site such that you don't gain any sort of google ranking through having posted here. I marked these too and left them accessible via manual copy/paste.

Did I edit, as in change, the content of your posts? NO! Don't attempt to misrepresent the truth with me, I will put you in your place swiftly, I promise.

Quote:
you change member's post rights at your will.

It costs me time to make such changes, so I generally do not. The fact that the content that another member had quoted to me while I was sleeping was gone before I woke up annoyed me. The fact that you have three accounts on here annoyed me. The fact that you had the nerve to ask me to mask your dishonesty and change the post authors to you also annoyed me. Lastly, you have NO rights here. No one does. Only privileges that you LOST by way of your gutter-level antics. You're still free to post, just not edit. This is no one's fault, but your own. You made the bed, now lay in it.

Quote:
You like to play English language games, that's where your professionalism stays.

No, absolutely not. I've played no language games in here with you. My professionalism stays with writing truly excellent software of all types, and ensuring that the hardware associated with that software is also of the highest quality. I care about little other than this and the difference between right and wrong, which you're currently in the process of learning. This thread is the third link when you google "alm wideband" without the quotes. It's bound to hurt your business and that seems right and fair to me, and likely others too.

Quote:
I decide not to respond to your post any more.

Suits me.

Fred.

_________________
DIYEFI.org - where Open Source means Open Source, and Free means Freedom
FreeEMS.org - the open source engine management system
FreeEMS dev diary and its comments thread and my turbo truck!
n00bs, do NOT PM or email tech questions! Use the forum!
The ever growing list of FreeEMS success stories!


Sat Jan 07, 2012 5:56 pm
Profile WWW
Wideband Wizard

Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 2:53 am
Posts: 241
Location: Toronto Canada
antonmies wrote:
Image

This might be familiar to you already, but I just come up with this.
The larger is the LSU 4.2. The difference is huge.
Which you think will act faster in heater controller wise in variable conditions where temperature fluctuations can be several hundred degrees centigrade? I bet both will measure the same in some test tube, but real world might differ.

I also believe that the heater control frequency is not higher only because of the chip but physics. Larger mass requires longer periods to cool down and to heat hence lower frequency. If the heater control frequency would be trivial, it wouldn't be in the datasheet.


The 4.9 has lower thermal mass and a smaller heater. This can be a pro if you engine is running hot, the climate is hot, or the sensor is very close to the exhaust port. This can be a con, if your engine is running cool, the climate is cold, or the sensor is far from the exhaust port. Generally, I think less thermal mass is a pro more than a con.

I have run the heater frequency from 100hz to 100khz, it has absolutely no effect on how fast the heater responds, all that matter is the average duty cycle.

Also the link posted by you/ecotrons to the bosch datasheets, those are not actually the real datasheets, the real datasheets are much more detailed. I know to you/ecotrons it does not matter since you/ecotrons just follow the application circuit and call it winning.

_________________
www.14Point7.com


Sat Jan 07, 2012 11:54 pm
Profile WWW
TO220 - Visibile

Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:22 pm
Posts: 11
toalan wrote:
I have run the heater frequency from 100hz to 100khz, it has absolutely no effect on how fast the heater responds, all that matter is the average duty cycle.

This is what I was after


Sun Jan 08, 2012 8:32 pm
Profile
TO220 - Visibile

Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:35 pm
Posts: 7
Although I could not fully read and understand the fights under this post, I am really confused about the claim of the advantages over innovate.

As I know and in our practive the analog output from LM-2, LC-1, or ALM could be created by PWM output with OP AMP or DAC. That means the output is created by microcontroller via different sampling rate, filtering, averaging strategies rather than the analog output directly from sensor itself. How can I claim that my controller is outputing faster and more accurate than others by just scope snapshots without stating the experienments procedure clearly?

My native languge is not English, but I quite enjoy in getting knowledge and calrifying the arguments in this forum basing on science and practice of people around the world. That was what I had learned by studying in UK: Argument should base on logical science.


Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:44 pm
Profile
Wideband Wizard

Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 2:53 am
Posts: 241
Location: Toronto Canada
This the response time from stoich (1 Lambda) to 0.8 Lambda

One of my Controllers
Image

Innovate LC1
Image

The Yellow line is the 24v power line to the solenoid, when the solenoid opens it dumps 0.8 lambda gas on the sensor @ 40 PSI.

I consider both to have a response of approximately 100ms.

I do not know what firmware the LC1 is running, I bought it in 2009, I never touched the firmware. Sensor was successfully free air calibrated with the LC1 unit before the trace for the LC1 was taken.

What you do not see in the scope traces is that I had to go through 5 sensor that worked perfectly with my system to find one that the LC1 would not reject with an Error8. The trace for my controller is with a sensor that the LC1 threw an Error 8 on.

I do not really care much about response time, my response time is good but it is an indirect result of eliminating most of the analog components associated with lambda controllers. I do almost everything digitally to take advantage of Moore's law.

_________________
www.14Point7.com


Last edited by Fred on Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

Remove image hack advertising.



Mon Jan 30, 2012 7:14 am
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 85 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software for PTF. ColorizeIt.