Yes, that ECM will work. The ECM little board which has the EPROM and CALPAK on it is removed and replaced with the Embedded Lockers board. The CALPAK and EPROM (a larger size with the UTBI code on it) is placed into the Embedded Lockers board. Machine pin sockets are being used for these parts.

RBob.

P.S. some of the parts arrived today. . .

 

Thank you sir.

I am getting excited. I have been dreaming of Lockers, for years now, but know I couldn't make it. Now I will end up with lockers on roids!

 

Any projections on how many units this first run is going to be?

Teeleton

 

i will send u my ecm (8746) to test it on its a spare so u could take your time w/ it till your ready to ship them out then i will place my order and u can send it back. and u say your making it so the video card dosent have to be too good....how good is that cause my laptop is stoneage as in 250 mhz?? thanks
John

 

250mhz stoneage? Geeze, I'm only 24 and my first computer was a 486 66mhz Compaq Presario!
I don't know what the min requirements will be. I haven't tested the software on anything other than my laptop but like I said, I've been dumbing the graphics down a bit and trying to re-organize the code to be as efficient as possible. The hardest part is the fact that there is a LOT of data to process. We're not talking about just 20-40 bytes every tenth of a second. We're looking at 200 times as much data as the normal 160 baud ALDL and over 4 times as much data as the 8192 baud ALDL! I'll be continuing the software development just like Mark has done with TunerPro.
I have a pII 400mhz machine I'm putting back together to do some testing and RBob has a slower machine that'll get tested. I might even attempt to run this on a win 95 p75 thinkpad. Though I doubt it'll work with less than 200mhz.

 

Not that you need my help, but if you're having problems writing the datalog out fast enough, write it to a buffer in memory, and then dump it all to disk in a large write every so often instead of a bunch of little writes.

Teeleton

 

My first one was an AT&T 8086 with an 8 bit VGA card. Also had a soundblaster on it, too.

As long as you keep XP off it the slower laptops run fine with most things. XP does not play nice with my PII366 laptop. Even causes the cooling fan to stop turning on so the computer comes to a grining hault.

 

I had one of those AT&T ones too, just had a big 5 1/2 floppy drive, then later I installed this crazy new hard disk thing. It fit in a 5 1/2 bay and had a panel on the front with flashing lights. Capacity was probably next to nothing.

 

That isn't the issue. Although having the buffer flushed to the file still hasn't been tested yet. If the program is shut down incorrectly it won't save the data and that can be really annoying. It's easy enough to implement, infact I might as well put that in after I post this reply.
As for the graphics. It's 80% there. I've lowered the processor power by a LOT although the install is nearly 20mb . That's what I get for having active x and LabView . That includes the LabView run-time files so it's not like my program is bloated. It's actually really lean as it should be considering I've spent HOURS working on just speeding up the code.
I tested it out on my system; p4 2.4GHz notebook (crappy and slow EVERYTHING ELSE)... consumed only 6-20%CPU, 23Mb Ram, and 17Mb VM. Keep in mind that was playing back a file full of checksum errors, displaying the HUD screen (most graphical intense), and having opened a datalog file that was nearly 8mb. It really depends on how big of a file you playback/record. Not displaying the HUD screen and having a different "tab" on top will change the requirements.
All of my free-time is tied up into getting things ready for release. I'm not even finished with the wizard software although it's code platform is all setup and ready to rock and roll. Very easy to modify and get that done. I expect no more than 2 days to finish it up into a final release. The HUD software on the other-hand will take a little longer. I'm shooting for Halloween but again, no expectations. Worst case is I'm not totally ready but RBob is and I'll just release the software as is. Even as it stands it's very useable and functional .

 

I had twin 5-1/2 20 meg Seagate MFM hardrives and later a twin bay 35 meg IBM unit. Man was that a boat anchor.

P4 2.4 GHz slow? My old 2.0 would run Doom&#179 with a good video card. Also, in this day and age, 20 megs is nothing. The power needed doesnt sound overly excessive, either.

 

As in slow video card, slow HD, slow ram (and shared by video card), slow fsb, slow pci perfs. It's a slow machine considering it's advertised as a desktop replacement. Graphics card is an SiS M650. M standing for modile meaning it's SUPER slow .

 

Sounds like my old desktop, with the exception of the video card. That shared memory thing is complete BS.

 

Tell me about it. I bought 512mb but it's only got 448mb (64mb dedicated to the video).

 

so. after reading this thread im pretty glad i havent bought a carb yet, OR bought the tbi tuning stuff yet. the way this looks, im gonna stick with the tbi and go with your alls product.

so long as it is slated to work with


a 1992 camaro rs 305tbi auto.

?

 

You'll still need the tuning hardware, and software. This board only allows you to datalog fater and use the new U-tbi code. Still need to burn chips.

 

Or get a prominator/romulator/ostrich (the later two shouldn't be used as a chip replacement for long periods of time).

 

JP...........this is an attachment that you posted on the thread " Dyno tune time...finally"

Is this the kind of graphs that we can expect with the lockers/hud setup?

Hope so

DM

 

Very similar.

 

Thanks JP...........the graphs are going to be very useful.

How is the software coming?

 

I got all of you guys beat. We used an 8086 running the
PICK OS with 8 I/O devices hung on it doing bsuiness accounting and parts inventory.

 

Anyone else notice that this thread is barely a month old and already has over 3000 views? I think everyone and their brother is checking this thread daily for updates.

Teeleton

 

i check it about ten times a day at least just to see if they have said okay now taking orders for first 30 boards...cause i gotta get in on em.

 

any updates?

 

Yes, things, items, and stuff is moving along (I know that sounds strange, but it is a good way to put it). Jon and I have been meeting to work out how the released HUD and tuning software will look and operate. Jon has set up the HUD software to use one of three display resolution modes. Along the lines of 8000x600, 1024x768, and a higher resolution (please don't quote me on the exact xy values).

This allows the software to be used on various levels of laptops. Jon is also working on MPG display's, for instant and trip MPGs, then trip miles traveled. There are 3D graphs for VE, SA, and knock information. Another tab for displaying the AE criteria. Delta TPS%, delta MAP, then the AE PW's from each. Everything required for tuning and evaluating engine driveability parameters. The HUD really works, and is a great part of the Embedded Lockers product.

From the hardware standpoint I am sitting on a pile of industrial grade parts. Industrial being the temperature range of the devices. This way the Embedded Lockers setup will operate at automotive interior temperature ranges. I am expecting the bare PCBs any day now. They were ordered ca. 1.5 weeks ago. Arriving any day this week will put them right on schedule.

The PCB boards are double sided, solder masked on both sides and silkscreened on top. Once built and tested they will be conformal coated. This is for reliability purposes, jsut like the ECM they run in.

Once I have PCBs I'll build and test one. Then get some out to beta testers. Jon and I will be testing along with another. As they are being checked out in live vehicles I'll build and test additional units. Once things look OK from the testers, the Embedded Lockers will be released for sale to the public.

A lot of work has already been completed: ECU file, board layout, prototyping and the testing of the design, the TBI code is tested and ready. Work is still progressing with the HUD (more features) and documenting the calibration table parameters.

I went a little long on this post, but most important is that you the reader, understand that this product is happening. It is real, and it will be released in a short of time frame as possible. It will be a good product, one that works as advertised.

RBob.

 

Reading this just made me say it again !!!,
Man this sound so cool.
Two thumbs up

 

Is the HUD software compatible with the old lockers design?

 

one more question that i have is will this be sold on craig's (www.moates.net) website or will you guys be going independant on this?

 

The Embedded Lcokers HUD is not compatable with the original Lockers board. Even if it was it would not be compatible with any of the stock TBI code.

RBob.

 

Thanks for the thumbs up. Another aspect of the Embedded Lockers product is that a TBI equip'd vehicle will run as though they are port injected. The UTBI code is leaps and bounds beyond stock TBI code. It really makes that much of a difference.

At the moment independent. Once the product is available and selling there is the possibility of having a distributor(s).

RBob.

 

Speaking of which, RBob how will your Ultimate TBI code react to say the edelbrock TBI-MPFI conversion. Any chance for us guys looking to PFI a TBI engine without a massive harness rework and an ECM change?

 

oh yeah, different firmware.

 

This is so coool!

 

okay rbob last one for now,by using just the UTBI code how should my car run? as in will it run better before the custom tune?or will it be the same?

 

Not sure if you have beta testers already lined up or not, but I'd certainly like to test one. Got to thinking about this earlier today, but I assume the cylinder select parameter is still present in the UTBI code?

Teeleton

 

The Embedded Lockers system will work better then the Edelbrock '7747 tune. This is just from using better code, data logging, and tuning software. The Edelbrock setup uses the Magneti-Marelli Pico injectors which are claimed to be a 'fast response' injector, and are a saturated type. This is from their web site (M-M's and Edel's). How much faster then a standard port injector I don't know. Even a little faster will help with the doubled firing occurrences.

RBob.

 

It would depend upon the actual engine and transmission. The UTBI code release will have an '85 Camaro 305 LG4 with 350 injectors (ORG/BLK) and an auto trans tune in it. That may be close enough to work in an LO3, maybe bump the BPC a tad if still using the 305 injectors.

The main claim to fame with the UTBI code is the new functionality and improvements. Large high resolution VE tables make a world of difference. Same with larger SA, AE, PE, and a bunch of other tables being expanded. The IAT/CTS blending, and AE compensation vs RPM table.

I'll put you down as being interested as a beta tester. Yes to the cylinder select parameter. It is present, but in a different form then the stock TBI code. Instead of 4, 6, 8 (the actual # of cylinders) it is a ratio to 8 cylinders, with 8 cylinders being 256 (truncated to zero in the calibration table). Then 128 for 4, 192 for 6, and 160 for 5 (any Audi converts out there?).

RBob.

 

Originally posted by RBob
and AE compensation vs RPM table.

Just out of curiosity, how did you handle the sync AE? Is it still represented as a dutycycle like teh stock code? Does this table also double as the conversion for the AE dutycycle to actual pulsewidth?


I'll put you down as being interested as a beta tester. Yes to the cylinder select parameter. It is present, but in a different form then the stock TBI code. Instead of 4, 6, 8 (the actual # of cylinders) it is a ratio to 8 cylinders, with 8 cylinders being 256 (truncated to zero in the calibration table). Then 128 for 4, 192 for 6, and 160 for 5 (any Audi converts out there?).

I take it this was done to tighten up the # of instructions in the routine? I thought of eliminating it as well to free up a few more instructions.

 

and AE compensation vs RPM table.
The AE starts with the PW vs delta TPS and PW vs delta MAP table lookups. These two values are added together along with the IAC opening PW being added in.

This AE PW is compensated by the AE vs RPM table. A table value of 128 is neutral, no change to the PW. A higher value increases the PW, a lower value decreases the PW.

The resultant PW is then compensated by the AE vs CTS table. The final PW value is then added to the synchronous PW.


I'll put you down as being interested as a beta tester. Yes to the cylinder select parameter. It is present, but in a different form then the stock TBI code. Instead of 4, 6, 8 (the actual # of cylinders) it is a ratio to 8 cylinders, with 8 cylinders being 256 (truncated to zero in the calibration table). Then 128 for 4, 192 for 6, and 160 for 5 (any Audi converts out there?).

I made the code cleaner and smaller. Just worked out better this way.

RBob.

 

Interesting...

I rolled it in as a duty cycle to keep it linear and then multiplied it in with the DRP to get the actual PW. I guess the table serves a dual purpose of translating it into a PW as well as providing flexability with how much is applied at each RPM.

 

Yes, the whole AE scheme is interesting. With stock code the AE fires 80 times a second, with no regard to the RPM. This has the affect of providing more fuel per cylinder at lower RPMs. Then as the RPM increases the same async AE PW delivers less fuel per cylinder.

This coincides with an engine at higher RPM not requiring as much AE. However, I found that a AE vs. RPM table was still needed. Without it I was unable to have enough low RPM AE while not having too much high RPM AE.

The RPM affects the AE requirement due to the airflow. Higher RPM provides a higher airflow, pulling the fuel through the manifold. Low RPM has low airflow and the fuel likes to coat the interior of the manifold.

By changing the AE from async pulses to adding it into the sync fuel pulses, the same AE PW at any RPM will provide the same fuel per cylinder. This makes the AE fueling flat. The AE vs. RPM table is now used to add AE fuel at lower RPMs and remove AE fuel at higher RPMs.

The reason I went with adding the AE to the sync fueling was to guarantee a smooth and consistent delivery of AE fuel. I was surprised at how well it works.

RBob.

 

just wondering why u taliored this to a carbed car when its code to make the tbi run better?? How much adjusting will probably be needed to run in a upgraded l03 (cam, 081 heads, edelbrock intake, lt headers full exaust) cause this will be my first tunning process and i dont know if it will be easier to learn w/ the UTBI code or the original tbi code. since my engine wont be very stock anymore i imagine both would be pretty difficult.

 

The code was actually tailored to run a warmed over 327 in a 1st gen car. The LG4 is just a test mule before the code goes to the 327. Testing after code changes starts on the ECM bench, goes to the LG4, then on to the 327.

The UTBI code has also been run on a 330 HP(?) GM Vortec crate motor. And will be run on a 355 Trick Flow headed and cammed engine in another vehicle as a beta test.

As for tuning, it will be easier with the Embedded Lockers system then on any of the GM TBI ECMs. One part of the HUD software uses the BLM values (or WB in open loop mode) and generates corrections to the VE tables. These corrections can be viewed in a 3d surface graph and hand adjusted.

They can be applied to the current bin with the corrected one becoming a new bin. Jon is working on a few other areas that will aid the user in tuning. Don't want to say too much, yet.

RBob.

 

I happen to have a 2.2L Turbo, and a 2.3L N/A 5cyl motor...hmmm.

Nothing else to really contribute, other than I can't wait. I am going to do some more stuff to car here shortly, so I will really get a chance to see the UTBI code in action. I can't wait.

 

This was also the same stratagy used by GM in the later P6's. While the TPS AE still works in a similar manner with async only, but with other improvements like a temp based filter coeff (really wanted that with the C3). The MAP works the same way you have yours. There is a table of correction factors vs. RPM. They provide the correction based on the period of rotation, but the corrections taper off below 1200 RPM to lessen the AE somewhat at low RPMs.

 

PCBs arrived. . .

dimented24x7: the UTBI code has a filter coefficient vs CTS lookups to individually lag the MAP and TPS (table for each a MAP and a TPS coefficient). The lagged values are then used for the AE PW vs delta MAP & delta TPS lookups.

RBob.

 

do u guys for see this being out by Xmas time if the beta testing goes good w/ few snags?? im getting so anxious i cant stand it almost and i dont even know how to tune ive read and read but never took it from paper to real world which is a large step but i think i want to make it w/ this code!!!

 

YEAH!

 

The GUI is nearly done but the wizard hasn't gotten attention for over a week.
One program now instead of different versions for different resolutions. There will be a more graphically intense version later down the road. Right now it's about getting some real-world testing with the new hardware.

 

Breaking news. . . built an Embedded Lockers board up and installed it into an ECM. Tossed it on the ECM bench, plugged in the latest cal for the ElCamino, and it RUNS!

Tomorrow (Saturday) I'll put that ECM in the truck while out fetching parts. Both furnace stuff and going to the JY for some ECMs. Will build up more Embedded Lockers boards into ECMs to get out to beta testers.

Jon and I still have some work to do, but nothing major. Oh, pic's too, I tried to take some tonight but lost the sunlight. Later this weekend.

justlearning, it won't be much longer. I really do want these available for Christmas. For all: getting the hardware squared away was key. With that in place the Embedded Lockers system is usable. Updates for the calibration data document, ECU file, UTBI code, and HUD will only be a Web site away.



RBob.

 

i got an ecm 8746 from a 91 RS tbi that u can use i will even pay to ship it to u cause i would want u guys to install the board anyway when i purchase one. you guys can beta test w/ it all u want as long as u keep it close so that i can get it back w/ the board i purchase and it stays in good shape cause it will go into my daily driver. i would offer to beta test a version but since i dont have any hands on tunning time i wouldnt be much good to u guys as far as helping goes. just let me know thanks
John