reinoso
Newbie
Karma: +1/-0
 Offline
Posts: 8
|
 |
« on: October 31, 2012, 05:49:25 AM »
|
|
|
Hello all, I am an electronic engineer and very passionate about diagnostic protocols, specially older and non-standard. I have a C20LET GSI, and I always wanted to use modern OBD2 software tools in it. I have developed a device which is able to translate old Keyword Protocols to standard OBD2 CAN. Besides that, some analog sensors can be connected and the data is added to the OBD2 stream too, so you can log stock sensors + additional sensors all together. http://www.proenium.com/products/pge1/KW1281 is not finished yet, but I need to know some impressions about the device before adding fully support to it. Regards. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #1 on: November 06, 2012, 04:01:58 PM »
|
|
|
I don't really want to sound like a dick, but you are basically advertising your product here, are you not?
KW1281 and so on is not interesting, it is way too slow for any real time logging.
McMess on the older ECU's is much more interesting, if you want to have fast data monitoring. I just intercept the stock diagnostic routine and write my own logic and own protocol.
That said - I don't see the point of your module as is.
Most people here work with ME7 and up, and those ECU's have fast data logging protocols from factory, and we have the tools to use them.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
reinoso
Newbie
Karma: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 8
|
|
« Reply #2 on: November 06, 2012, 08:04:20 PM »
|
|
|
I'm not advertising anything, yet. I'm sorry if that was the impression.
This is a very technical forum and old protocols have been discused several times. I have been reading about the projects exposed here for months, and before implementing the entire KW1281 protocol, I thought that this would be a good place to get some objetive feedback about my device. I know you're using more powerful ways of catching data from the ECM, but there are lot of 'amateur' people that would love to use Torque App in their KW cars, even at a slow refresh rate.
Although KW protocols are slow, the generic analog inputs encoded to ISO15765-4 (OBD2 over CAN) could be interesting, and in this case the refresh rate is really fast. What do you think about that?
Thank you for your comments.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #3 on: November 07, 2012, 01:21:22 AM »
|
|
|
I think you might have a potential market there (bundling the inputs together), but for it to be attractive to tuners, you should probably implement the McMess protocol on older ECU's...
That's what I think from a tuning perspective.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
reinoso
Newbie
Karma: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 8
|
|
« Reply #4 on: November 07, 2012, 05:08:31 AM »
|
|
|
Don't know if you know anything about KW82, but this is a very improved version of KW1281. I think that it is quite similar to Mcmess. I have implemented KW82 and get more than 25 PIDs/sec from stock ECM (at only 9600 baud).
Since mcmess physical layer is K-line too, if I had the complete specification of this protocol, I would love to support it in my device.
What are the ECMs supporting mcmess?
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #5 on: November 07, 2012, 05:32:24 AM »
|
|
|
Which ECU's support KW82 though?
From older ECU's I mostly work on M2.X ECU's in the old Audis V8 and 5 cyl engines as well as VR6.
There are two or three "rapid data transfer" protocols at high baud rate in those ECU's but I never bothered to reverse engineer them enough to figure out what they are exactly.
There are provisions for mapped crankshaft-synchronous measurements, as well as memory read requests...
So what I do now is use 9600 baud and just dump the memory locations to K-Line (of course this disables all factory diagnostics), but I only do that during tuning.
This way I get about 15-20 parameters, 30 times per second.
If I increase the baud rate to 187500, I get the parameters 100 times a second.
As I understand both the KW71 and KW82 protocols are specific to Opel ECU's. McMess should be inside almost any Bosch ECU for calibration purposes.
There are some specifications floating around in some EDC funktionsrahmen, but I am not sure how applicable they are to older engines.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
reinoso
Newbie
Karma: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 8
|
|
« Reply #6 on: November 07, 2012, 06:20:45 AM »
|
|
|
Very interesting what you're doing with your own diagnostic routine. unfortunately, KW82 was a GM improved version of original Bosch KW71. So you will only find this protocol on nineties opel engines (maybe in other GM makes?). However, KW71 was used in serveral car makes, BMW, Porsche, Opel, Fiat ... all them sharing the same Bosch Motronic family ECMs. But I think that these older ECMs do not implement nothing about mcmess, one protocol is enough for them  The real issue with KW71 is the interbyte timing, not baud rate. Long time waiting for the next byte. KW1281 is faster, but still needs the complement of each byte transmited ... Anyway, if you are not logging too much PIDs at once, KW1281 has acceptable refresh rate, at least for those who are not playing around critical processes on their engine. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #7 on: November 07, 2012, 06:47:35 AM »
|
|
|
However, KW71 was used in serveral car makes, BMW, Porsche, Opel, Fiat ... all them sharing the same Bosch Motronic family ECMs. But I think that these older ECMs do not implement nothing about mcmess, one protocol is enough for them And I think you are incorrect. Disassemble IEX0, and look towards the end... This is an interrupt which is fired every time the engine is at TDC... Anyway, if you are not logging too much PIDs at once, KW1281 has acceptable refresh rate, at least for those who are not playing around critical processes on their engine. Best you can get out of it is 4hz for a measuring group... If you log three groups it's 1hz or something like this. Acceptable? Well, I don't know... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
reinoso
Newbie
Karma: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 8
|
|
« Reply #8 on: November 07, 2012, 08:17:28 AM »
|
|
|
Each KW1281 group has 4 parameters. For most people, watching/logging four PIDs at once at 4hz is sufficient. Always refering to non-advanced tunners, of course. About dissasembling te ECM, I think it is not profitable. It a very costly and time-consuming process. Even reverse engineering the old protocols sometimes is too tedious to be worth the effort. I'm only designing a device for non-professional users, and it has some interesting features, like the possibility of adding analog sensors and the easy configuration from the smartphone. If I could support faster protocols like mcmess (or even your custom one  ), it would be more attractive for professional tunners, as you said before. In my opinion, smartphones, tablets and embedded devices in general are more ergonomic and portable than a notebook when you are logging data in your car. Regards. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 07, 2012, 08:20:28 AM by reinoso »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #9 on: November 07, 2012, 08:36:48 AM »
|
|
|
Each KW1281 group has 4 parameters. For most people, watching/logging four PIDs at once at 4hz is sufficient. Always refering to non-advanced tunners, of course. It seems you are on the wrong forum in that case... In my opinion, smartphones, tablets and embedded devices in general are more ergonomic and portable than a notebook when you are logging data in your car. Your tool does not really provide any useful data logging for people who frequent this forum... plus, probably the majority here is happy logging with the computer, since maps are also adjusted with the computer and the ECU is flashed using a computer as well. This might be better received on a general car forum. Over all, I personally think your tool is a bit too complicated to use/too expensive for those who would use it (simple users) and not very useful for those who would buy it and use it for tuning. So basically, I guess I don't really see the point. I mean, I have implemented KWP1281 myself before from scratch, yes it's a pretty tedious process, and I appreciate the work you have done, but I just don't really see the point... And I don't mean to offend at all, this is just my opinion. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
reinoso
Newbie
Karma: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 8
|
|
« Reply #10 on: November 07, 2012, 08:52:06 AM »
|
|
|
The tool is extremely easy to use. Connect power, k-line, your favourite ELM bluetooth adapter and that's all, even the OBD2 connector is included. Nothing to configure, the translation is absolutely transparent.
The configuration of extended custom sensors is only offered by very proffesional PC based software tools (e.g. AEM). My device along with the android app, makes this process accessible to simple users, in less than three steps. And if the sensor is in the library, only one step.
I appreciate your opinion, it is technical and objetive like I was expecting in this forum. I know this is a very professional forum, as I said before, I'm here to get some impressions like yours.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #11 on: November 07, 2012, 09:00:37 AM »
|
|
|
Connecting power and K-Line... well, let's say it would be easier if it would be plug and play into diagnostic connector. To connect power and K-Line the dash or underdash has to be removed on many cars. Not exactly plug and play. One more thing I don't like. Operating temperature of 0 to 85... It seems this device is only for people who are in warm climates. It can be -25C here in winter  Generally everything on the car is rated from -40 to 85 or -40 to 125. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 07, 2012, 09:04:07 AM by prj »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
reinoso
Newbie
Karma: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 8
|
|
« Reply #12 on: November 07, 2012, 09:06:42 AM »
|
|
|
Ok, you have to locate three wires. In most cars they are in the stock Diag port. It is absurd that Diag port was very hidden, so it is not necessary to remove the dash at all.
About operating temperature, the web is obsolete. The device works well in negative temperatures. Here in Spain is a bit difficult to test under 0ºC
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 07, 2012, 09:47:25 AM by reinoso »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #13 on: November 07, 2012, 09:09:25 AM »
|
|
|
ok, you have to locate three wires. In most cars they are in the stock Diag port. Not plug&play but easy after all.
It is a bold assumption that your average user who would be interested in watching his car parameters on the phone is capable of this. Most people don't know how to use a multimeter, never mind how to splice wiring in the car, and will be instantly turned off by even the idea of it. All your signals are present in the OBD II plug, try to provide an adapter with your unit, which will allow it to be just plugged in directly. I also think the ELM327 bluetooth functionality should be built into the unit. That way you plug in, connect with your phone and done. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 07, 2012, 09:10:57 AM by prj »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
reinoso
Newbie
Karma: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 8
|
|
« Reply #14 on: November 07, 2012, 09:31:05 AM »
|
|
|
The device is designed for permanent installs, not to be left hanging from a Diag port, along with the extended sensor wires. Besides that, to make it versatile to some car makes, each one with its own Diag port shape, I could not design an unique plug&play enclosure.
I don't like to reinvent the wheel, so integrating the ELM inside was dismissed. And, there is more tools able to read OBD2 over CAN than ELM based. Once again, it is more versatile to provide an OBD2 connector. So you can choose an ELM BT, USB or any other tool able to talk ISO15765-4. For standard user, we recommend ELM BT.
So, the potential customer maybe needs some electrical skills, but nothing special at all. In fact, I'm selling it in an spanish forum, and people are not really finding many problems with the installation.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 07, 2012, 09:49:29 AM by reinoso »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
