Boy, I'd like to get the specs on this baby! Hey, I
am a real time software engineer myself 8)....Maybe
an Open Source Dakota/DakotaRT executable....
===
I tell you this,
no eternal reward
will forgive us now
for wasting the dawn!
--Jim Morrison
http://zeits.net/matt
http://darkharlequin.hypermart.net/
---Bob Tom <tigers@bserv.com> wrote:
>
> I thought that the following information would give
some insight
> into the computer situation involving our trucks.
Keep in mind
> that this information is from the eGroup R/T Owner
Mailing
> List and, thus, some may be specific to the R/Ts
only. I joined
> the eGroup so I could monitor the list and have
another source for
> performance issues but the moderator of the R/T
Owner Mailing list
> denied me membership so I cannot ask questions nor
can I participate
> in their discussions. I have many questions for
this engineer relating
> to all Dakotas but I do not feel that it is proper
for me to privately
> use his email address. Although he is a DC s/w
engineer, he is, first
> and foremost, an R/T owner.
>
> [DC engineer on computer situation in general]
> Software for these computers involves many people
in two main areas of
> expertise. One area writes the algorithms on how
things are to function.
> The other area works on what is called
calibrations. These are the values
> that the programs used to operate the engine.
These calibrations would
> include,
> for example, fuel injector pulse width, ignition
advance, cold start fuel
> priming,
> etc. All which affect fuel emissions. With so
many government regulations,
> the software groups are so busy keeping up with new
restrictions that playing
> around with performance calibrations has been
severly restricted. That's why
> everybody, including the aftermarket, is "coming
out with one" but can't
> quite do it.
>
>
> [R/T owner question]
> Someone recently wrote to the group with a
difference in the computers
> from a 98 to a 99. What, if the computer chip is,
is the difference?
> [DC engineer]
> Complete controller is different, not just memory
chip. Complete software
> program is also different. Software and hardware
are not interchangeable.
> Some input/output sensor controls are different.
Externally they look
> the same, but are nowhere close inside.
>
>
> [R/T owner question]
> If this is the case, then sign me up for the
purchase of a 98 computer.
> I think that if I get that my performance will
increase.
> [DC engineer]
> No, truck probably would do worse since I/O control
is wrong and some
> default computer values would be used instead of
actual "real reading" values.
>
>
> [R/T owner question]
> I think that someone wrote that the 99 computers
have a 16 bit memory
> chip or learning chip....something like that,
anyways, the 98's don't have
> such a thing.
> [DC engineer]
> Yes, the '99 is a 16-bit based controller and the
'98 is an 8-bit based
> controller. They both have learning algorithms in
software. This
> allows the truck to learn your driving habits and
adapt accordingly.
>
>
> [R/T owner question]
> I have a quick question about WOT on the R/T. Does
the computer
> "learn" anything when it is at WOT (open loop)?
That is to say... can
> my WOT settings be different than say, someone
else's R/T due to my
> driving habits? Or is this a part throttle closed
loop situation only?
> [DC engineer]
> Conceiveably everybody could have different WOT end
points (highest and
> lowest voltage values learned by their computer).
However, when
> components are designed, upper and lower limits are
set and a mean is
> established. This mean (or average value) is
normally maintained by the
> sensor supplier so that most sensors produced are
almost identical.
> When you talk about open loop, I am assuming you
understand that that
> means that some external sensors inputs are ignored
until valid data is
> available. Most of these are for fuel emissions
controls. That is why
> manufacturers now use heated oxygen sensors.
Oxygen sensors only
> provide useful data once they are "warmed up". The
old way was for the
> exhaust pipe to heat up and then, in turn, heat up
the oxygen sensor.
> Now with heated sensors, an internal heating
element heats the sensor
> way before the exhaust pipe is hot. This now
allows for closed loop
> operation sooner. So a long story, trying to stay
short, WOT does not
> determine closed vs open loop that much.
>
>
> [R/T owner question]
> Also one more question... what do you think about
the 98s being quicker
> than the 99s due to the new computer? Shouldn't
they be the same if
> they have the same horsepower and torque levels?
> [DC engineer]
> Yes and No...
> Performance differences have always been the case.
Even though the
> engine H/W (hardware/engine mechanicals) are the
same, the more "smog"
> restrictions/controls you put on them, the more
performance is
> degraded. That's also why "stock" California S/W
(software) programmed
> vehicles are slower than Federal S/W programmed
"stock" ones. However,
> that's changing as well, future "new development"
engine packages have
> the same restrictions for both Federal and
California. The hardware
> in the controller is different, as discussed
previously, and the
> software is different. Guess what, you got it,
more restrictions/controls
> added.
> Anybody ever wonder how the performance numbers of
the old muscle cars slowly
> dwindled away. It wasn't just the manufacturers
trying to reduce hp numbers
> for cheaper vehicle insurance. Surely you guys
didn't believe that story.
> There was this big thing called an oil crisis,
which seemed to get the
> government
> involved and mandate better economy figures.
>
>
> It's a damn shame that we've got all these lists
going ...
>
> Bob
> Burlington, Ontario
>
> '97 CC Sport, 5.2L, 3.55, auto., 4x2, flame red
>
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:15:40 EDT