V8/10/12 Sequencial Injection

From DIY contraptions to sophisticated FreeEMS-specific designs! Plus general hardware development!
User avatar
jharvey
1N4001 - Signed up
Posts: 1607
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 5:17 pm

Re: V8/10/12 Sequencial Injection

Post by jharvey »

Hmmm I haven't seen anyone comment about the use of 2 freeEMS's both as 4 cyls to control both banks sequenctialy for 8 or 12 cyls.

I suspect that folks with the 8's that are pushing the limits, will desire to have extra A/D's, GPIO, ect and using two EMS's will offer that. I think the biggest issue will be the tach signal. Perhaps we should leave a header on the RPM circuit so it's ouput can be routed to a remote EMS?
User avatar
SleepyKeys
LQFP144 - On Top Of The Game
Posts: 549
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:52 pm
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: V8/10/12 Sequencial Injection

Post by SleepyKeys »

jharvey wrote:Hmmm I haven't seen anyone comment about the use of 2 freeEMS's both as 4 cyls to control both banks sequenctialy for 8 or 12 cyls.

I suspect that folks with the 8's that are pushing the limits, will desire to have extra A/D's, GPIO, ect and using two EMS's will offer that. I think the biggest issue will be the tach signal. Perhaps we should leave a header on the RPM circuit so it's ouput can be routed to a remote EMS?

An interesting idea, but my vote goes to making the jump to the XEP100 AFTER we get the Mark-I tested and worked out. XEP100 MCUs are cheap $20< + whatever we end up with for a "CPU Card". Two adapt cards would be a bit pricey IMO let alone two whole FreeEMS systems. As a v8 guy I think I'll be happy with the I/O we have now for quite some time. A header on the RPM circuit could prove to be very useful!

-sean
You snooze, you lose!
User avatar
AbeFM
Post Whore!
Posts: 629
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:11 am
Location: Sunny San Diego
Contact:

Re: V8/10/12 Sequencial Injection

Post by AbeFM »

I like the idea as well, but agree that there's little need for a lot more IO. I guess the bare chip is actually a cheap solution to more ADCs, etc, but I don't want to end up in the MS mindset where it's $100 or more to add a couple inputs.

Designing a mark-II board with a second processor would be awesome, but down the road. I actually have some other projects I want to do which might utilize that, so I'd be in favor anyway.
User avatar
jharvey
1N4001 - Signed up
Posts: 1607
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 5:17 pm

Re: V8/10/12 Sequencial Injection

Post by jharvey »

Really wasn't my idea. Someone here mentioned they did it that way with MS boards, one for each side of a V8. Also I don't think the cost would be to much more to do it this way. I guess one PCB is cheaper then two PCB's, but two chips vs one chip, is most of the variation in cost. You should be able to do it with one tach, temp, ect. I don't object to using a better CPU, but I do think it's a good idea to stear clear of the chip MS3 is using. I think "they" would complain.
User avatar
Fred
Moderator
Posts: 15431
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:31 pm
Location: Home sweet home!
Contact:

Re: V8/10/12 Sequencial Injection

Post by Fred »

tuning multiple boxs like that is a pain though...

there would need to be support for dual tuning in the tuning tool. I could think about that I guess, but I don't see much/any demand for it.

XEP post XDP, sure, but only when XDP is properly decent and finished.

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!
comrade904
TO220 - Visibile
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:53 am

Re: V8/10/12 Sequencial Injection

Post by comrade904 »

jharvey wrote:Hmmm I haven't seen anyone comment about the use of 2 freeEMS's both as 4 cyls to control both banks sequenctialy for 8 or 12 cyls.
I don't think this would be too bad to tune, provided you know enough to tune 1 unit well. Just program one to read the timing signal offset of what the other reads, and split out the sensors so the resistances are the same for each unit. Then each one won't even know the other exists.

This is an idea I've been wanting to try for some time so I could run each cylinder of an I-4 as for 1 cylinder motors, each with knock sensors, ego, map, and timing control on ITBs. Kind of like a homemade JS Safeguard with alot more features.

In theory they would be tuned the same except for trim and timing offset. Should work beautifully.
User avatar
SleepyKeys
LQFP144 - On Top Of The Game
Posts: 549
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:52 pm
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: V8/10/12 Sequencial Injection

Post by SleepyKeys »

You snooze, you lose!
Post Reply