Quantcast

Forum made EFI?

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

jbiplane

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
276
Location
Krasnoyarsk, Russia
hondata was born
But seems Hondata and simular solution for Subaru is illegal? I getting extra carefull.
Tuning of Yanvar is absolutelly legal.

I had to continue my proprietary EFI. We have complete "0" user interface and fuel maps prepared by external primitive application. But complete undependency worth it.

After some experience to sell own and third side ECU I decide user should get not lego, but completelly ready instalation kit, hopefully more reliable and cheap than Ecotron.
We will target only cheapest small, mostly 2-strokes 5...50hp 1..3 cylinder and wankels.

For bigger engines rv7charlie and other professionals would be best choice.
 
Last edited:

stanislavz

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Aug 21, 2016
Messages
909
Location
Lt
But seems Hondata and simular solution for Subaru is illegal?
Not supported by Honda and Subaru. Subaru was only minor modifications, where hondata got axcess for all source code..
After some experience to sell own and third side ECU I decide user should get not lego, but completelly ready instalation kit, hopefully more reliable and cheap than Ecotron.
I did install megasquirts for few years, in my high school - only problems were bad connectors.. Due to working with eu cars only, did my own board for motrnic 55 pin connectors - and all problems were gone :)
 

stanislavz

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Aug 21, 2016
Messages
909
Location
Lt
Right, The Microsquirt is better connection ans build wise.
But you still have to provide other part and join two wirings. Mine was like ms pro, but builded years before.. And then Vems come, and i was too lays/busy to switch to it.
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
5,757
Location
US
Micro news. After sending to HELL RusEFI I become Speeduino supporter and contributor. Very open and friendly comunity. I was suggest my help and translated to Russian Руководство Speeduino
One of user designed boards for 4-cylinders I like
The Speeduino platform has a lot going for it:
- An active and smart user community that is willing to help
- No apparent aversion to aircraft applications
- Open and public software and hardware.
- The stuff works

But, it ain't perfect (nothing is):
- The software is big, complex, and filled with all kinds of features we don't need in airplanes. The code development is driven by the automotive application and the needs of "tuners". The complexity introduces possible run faults that would be better to avoid.
- The software changes over time, with new features and tweaks to meet the desired of tuners, etc. For airplane use, this will require constant "re-validation" to assure the new changes don't destabilize our functionality.
- The official Speeduino hardware might not include all the "hardening" and reliability features we would want. This might include very good filtering of power and sensor feeds, RF shielding, components meeting our temperature and reliability requirements sourced from reliable suppliers who actually populate the boards with the components they promise, etc.
- Do their term of use or other rules allow the for-profit selling of systems that are based on Speeduino? That would be good to know. "Big Speeduino" might be fine with hobbiests using their products on their own airplanes, but might object to a company using their architecture for a commercial product.

So, not perfect. But, maybe a good starting point.

One approach would be to fork off from the present Speeduino project. Use their hardware and code as a starting point, but drop everything that isn't needed (IMO, this might include sequential injection, closed loop operation*, any support for VVT, etc). Then, add in any new code we DO need (e.g. manual leaning capability*, a basic "just fly" mode that allows continued flight with a bare minimum of sensors, etc).
Likewise, with hardware.

After that, the "FlightDuino" project ("AirDuino" would be too confusing!) would pretty much become its own entity. If Speeduino would be willing to have "FlightDuino" as a separate subentity within their world, that would be great (make use of their existing infrastructure, expertise, etc. There could be developments within FlightDuino that Speeduino might want to incorporate). Otherwise, it would exist separately--its own forum, vendors, update cycle and procedures, etc.
A general comment: Nothing is free.
It is unfair to expect the Speeduino folks to devote time to any efforts that don't, in turn, support the Speeduino platform (through purchases of official Speeduino hardware, etc). They have spent a lot of time and effort to build their hardware and code, and that is worth something.

* Edited to add: For FlightDuino, consider the option of a closed loop mode based on EGT rather than lambda. This would allow the program to do the mixture adjustments most pilots do manually to, say, fly LOP in cruise. Could be done individually for each injector so each cylinder is getting the optimum mixture. Simple to implement with software, reduces pilot workload, requires no wideband O2 sensor(s), allows use of leaded fuel, allows for wide variety of desired mixture, etc.
 
Last edited:

jbiplane

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
276
Location
Krasnoyarsk, Russia
good starting point
Exactly
That would be good to know.
Speeduino dont mind commercial use of forks.
But you cannot write Speeduino. Allowed "Powered by Speeduino" or alike.
Donations to comunity like ~5...10USD per board highly appreciated.
allows continued flight with a bare minimum of sensors
If some sensors fault system will use default values. I placing most of sensors on PCB ro minimize wiring and use proven sensor chips.

My experience with my in-house ECU, Speeduino, Megasquirt… shows that reliability is ECU itself are satisfactory. Me nether succeed burn out any of this ECU. 2 of my clients were more "happy" (when tried to modify already working stuff).

Much more important are good wiring, reliable sensors, correct calibration, shielding of some wires etc. Serious faults and errors happens only on stand tests during setting.
Some thingies to avoid are
- counterfeit Spark coils, TPS & crank hall sensors
- bad quality wirings (quality copper)
- bad connectors (in most of cases welding instead of connector behave better).

I start production of installation kits for 9.8...40hp 2-stroke overboard.
Some kits will be betta tested till June 2021 on paramotors in Russia, South Africa and USA.
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
5,757
Location
US
Donations to comunity like ~5...10USD per board highly appreciated.
That seems very reasonable, fair, and a good (practical) investment to retain the goodwill of the Speeduino community and their continued support.

I start production of installation kits for 9.8...40hp 2-stroke overboard.
Some kits will be betta tested till June 2021 on paramotors in Russia, South Africa and USA.
So your plan now is to have your own boards made (marked "Flame-power powered by Speeduino" or something similar), set up the programming and default parameters for your customers (for a fee) or let them do it themselves. Long-term, you would continue to ride along with any changes to the Speeduino code, adapting your programming and maybe hardware as needed. Your programming will be visible to customers.
If I've got that right, it sounds like a low-risk way to go for you. Much would depend on how fault tolerant the underlying Speeduino code is, and what the "costs" will be to you for staying with whatever changes they make to the software. You'll definitely have less flexibility if you stay married to their software, but I can see it might be worth it in order to get support and remain part of that bigger community.
 
Last edited:

jbiplane

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
276
Location
Krasnoyarsk, Russia
Flame-power powered by Speeduino
We designed and produce as well inhouse ECU, but make it supported and understably documented is not trivial.
Speeduino fork would require less efforts at least at the moment. We experienced with Speeduino since 2016 and planing to use with our kits their software ripped in times to definite sensors, trigger wheel, etc.
Customer can download and install original firmware to go out of our limitations.
 

Protech Racing

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Messages
355
Some sort of closed loop will be optimal for Aircraft.. Just add some limits for results for an O2 reading that is out of range . Auto cruise settings, full power settings, all adjusted for actual density. I see no reason to limit the ECU and have manual input while flying for lean. The AFR chart does that all by it self if you build it correctly.

This trigger works well; Crankshaft Position Sensor With Connector Fits: Ford Lincoln Mazda Mercury | eBay

This wheel works fine with at trigger, under 10000RPM ;OEM NEW 2001-2016 Ford Crankshaft Position Trigger Wheel - Crank Sensor Gear | eBay
 
Last edited:

Protech Racing

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Messages
355
The AFR table tiles correspond to a requested injector pulse width . As you can see in this case, running on closed loop, the fuel is lean at the 255 values. But notice the part throttle cruise values will request a PW that is near the requested AFR values that you set up.
So; set your requested AFR table , modifiers can be map, rpm, TPS , but the O2 is the target value.
 

rv6ejguy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Messages
4,079
Location
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
The thing with closed loop is that you don't know if O2 sensor data is valid without another one to compare to continuously. If you start erroneously trimming lean on some fragile engines, you'll melt the pistons. Need more code to compare sensors and then more still to decide how far to go before disregarding and jumping back into open loop.

Using EGT for closed loop is possible but don't forget that EGT cools on either side of stoichiometric so you need to know if you're ROP or LOP. You have to start from the rich side to be safe and trim leaner, register peak EGT in each cylinder and then trim to the desired temperature. Not all cylinders will peak at the same time. A lot of complexity for simple engines which spend most of their time at constant power.

There are lots of things you can do, but should you? Is there real benefit in the end for the user or are you adding complexity and impacting reliability with these features?
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
5,757
Location
US
Using EGT for closed loop is possible but don't forget that EGT cools on either side of stoichiometric so you need to know if you're ROP or LOP. You have to start from the rich side to be safe and trim leaner, register peak EGT in each cylinder and then trim to the desired temperature. Not all cylinders will peak at the same time. A lot of complexity for simple engines which spend most of their time at constant power.

There are lots of things you can do, but should you? Is there real benefit in the end for the user or are you adding complexity and impacting reliability with these features?
Thanks, Ross. I suppose, for simplicity and reliability, running open loop on the rich side of things (best power) would work fine. If someone wanted to go for extra credit, a pilot-selectable LOP-based-on-EGT mode could be incorporated forv use in cruise, but would need safeguards. And it adds complexity.
I don't think many pilots would object to a little manual leaning if it means better reliability and simplicity. Most are still used to carbs, so it isn't a big burden. Things happen in flight, and, say, being able to go rich and reduce a high CHT with a little extra fuel is a capability many people would welcome.
 
Last edited:

rv7charlie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
1,251
Location
Jackson
Actually, a lot of pilots would insist on access to a manual leaning control, for any engine intended for operation beyond pattern altitude. While the auto mfgrs may be able to get tuning 'right' for every operating mode through literally millions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of hours of testing/tweaking, it will be pure luck for any exp. aviation software coder to pull it off.

Manual control is obviously insignificant for 'puddle jumper' type a/c, but any a/c that will be operated in a wide range of operating conditions will make it *very* difficult to account for every MAP/RPM/flight condition. For example, my RV6 can be flown at roughly 21"/2100 rpm, at fuel flows from ~5.3 gph to around 8 gph, depending on flight condition (level flight at part throttle, cruise-climb, high altitude cruise, descent, etc). It's pretty difficult for a controller to 'read my mind' on what flow I want/need.

edit: Having said that, ability to use an O2 sensor for tuning is really wonderful, especially for situations where the intake and exhaust system configuration varies significantly from installation to installation.

Charlie
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
5,757
Location
US
edit: Having said that, ability to use an O2 sensor for tuning is really wonderful, especially for situations where the intake and exhaust system configuration varies significantly from installation to installation.
Yes, for setup/tuning/building the initial fuel map, a wideband O2 sensor gives really useful info.
 

TiPi

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Messages
365
Location
Peeramon (AUS)
Yes, for setup/tuning/building the initial fuel map, a wideband O2 sensor gives really useful info.
a wide-band O2 sensor is also very useful for leaning as it responds quicker than EGT and tells you if your are LOP or ROP. Just need the cross-check with EGT and fuel flow to acertain that it is working correctly. What a lot of people forget is that as an indicator sensor (not a closed-loop sensor), the O2 sensor does not need to protrude into the exhaust stream, it can be setback and fed through a small hole in the exhaust pipe. The delay in the signal update will be minimal and inconsequential for leaning/riching purposes. That reduces the rate of contamination from lead and will give longer life.
 

Protech Racing

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Messages
355
I'm Pretty sure that the Honda engines are using the stock ECU as delivered. Some of you seem to think that the ECU cant adjust for altitude or density. They do both just fine.
Map sensor and the ECU settings will allow for density correction. Sounds like you are trying to complicate a simple situation.
 
Top