jacky4566 wrote:My point is there must be a faster better stronger cpu than the one introduced in 2004.
See the last sentence in my previous post.
And if your goal is to reduce the BOM, adding level shifters (which are not what you need for analog signals) is not the way to go. And 5V tolerant inputs are useless for analog signals. I think you need to find out what is needed for engine management before you tell people here what they should be looking at. Generic consumer type CPUs look very interesting and cheap until you try finding one that will actually do the job. I have not seen one ARM-based one that fills the needs (for a start: lots of timers of the right kind, lots of 5V ADC inputs, at least one CAN bus).
The uC's used currently are automotive spec. If I am not mistaken the initial use for this family of uC was ABS controllers. Just think how many people are driving around with this family of controller keeping them safe and the reliability required for such an application.
Find the Manuals up top under Quick links: Manuals.
Cheers Luke
Everyone will think I'm nuts, but I'm a little nostalgic for the multi processor topology like the MS2 Sequencer used.
It was nice having stumble free burns with MS2 hardware.
With more Canbus applications, main processor is going to get a workout.
Having said that, I don't have to do the programming, so not sure implications of multi processor topology.
Peter Florance
PF Tuning
81 BMW Euro 528i ESP Car
60-2 Wheel LS2 Coils, Low Z Inj
Co-Driver 1999 BMW E46 DSP car.
Fascinating. How was the stumble-free burn achieved, using (I assume) a second identical processor? Without denigrating the suggestion, if the MS3 is capable of smooth burns and the MS4 will presumably have a newer processor, what is achieved by adding a second older processor?
Or am I not understanding the point? (Always a possibility ...)
Temporarily shut down - back soon!
QuadraMAP Sensor Module -- PWM-to-Stepper Controller -- Dual Coil Driver
Coming soon: OctoMAP Sensor Module TTR Ignition Systems
racingmini_mtl wrote:You can have a much better hardware and software solution with a single processor that has things like multi-cores, DMA and other specialized modules.
Jean
Makes sense.
The broadcast rate required to make our OEM cluster function is a pretty good load for MS3.
Multicore; I guess in a way the MS2 Sequencer demonstrated the power of more than one core or processor.
Peter Florance
PF Tuning
81 BMW Euro 528i ESP Car
60-2 Wheel LS2 Coils, Low Z Inj
Co-Driver 1999 BMW E46 DSP car.
What is the difference in a processor thats used for a deaktop and one thats used for a car? Is it the volage requirements or what? I ask because i dont have a clue. i know that while the processors used in ms3 are way cheaper than the one i have in my custom built desktop, dual and quad core processors for that matter can be had cheap that far surpass a 50 mhz cloak speed.
jsimmons what your really asking is the difference between Microprocessor and Microcontroller.
Microprocessor is an IC which has only the CPU inside them i.e. only the processing powers such as Intel’s Pentium 1,2,3,4, core 2 duo, i3, i5 etc. These microprocessors don’t have RAM, ROM, and other peripheral on the chip. A system designer has to add them externally to make them functional. Application of microprocessor includes Desktop PC’s, Laptops, notepads etc.
But this is not the case with Microcontrollers. Microcontroller has a CPU, in addition with a fixed amount of RAM, ROM and other peripherals all embedded on a single chip. These are the chips used for the MS project and include features like dedicated CAN BUS controller, Analog inputs, and special timer circuits.
Microcontrollers are designed to perform specific tasks. Specific means applications where the relationship of input and output is defined. Depending on the input, some processing needs to be done and output is delivered. For example, keyboards, mouse, washing machine, digicam, pendrive, remote, microwave, cars, bikes, telephone, mobiles, watches, etc. Since the applications are very specific, they need small resources like RAM, ROM, I/O ports etc and hence can be embedded on a single chip. This in turn reduces the size and the cost. Additionally Microcontrollers tend to be harded for harsh environments and can tolerate bumps, shocks, and cold weather without problem, they tend to be more reliable.
There's no DMA on the processors we currently use. Newer parts do.
The MS3's second core (XGATE) is used to operate the fuel and spark outputs with low latency.
Stumble free burn is possible because the processor used in MS3 has "data flash" and "programme flash" so we can store new calibration data while the engine keeps running. MS2 only has programme flash and execution stops while the 'burn' takes place.
Forget about what? Do you think MS is dying?
Its inevitable there will be a 4. I was just curious if anyone was actively working on it, or if its more of a pipe dream for now.
jsmcortina wrote:There's no DMA on the processors we currently use. Newer parts do.
The MS3's second core (XGATE) is used to operate the fuel and spark outputs with low latency.
Stumble free burn is possible because the processor used in MS3 has "data flash" and "programme flash" so we can store new calibration data while the engine keeps running. MS2 only has programme flash and execution stops while the 'burn' takes place.
James
Cheers James.
I'm hoping for enough horsepower that we can broadcast CANbus at a good rate without threat of main loop getting too long (if that was the issue; forget exactly what the concern was)
Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
Peter Florance
PF Tuning
81 BMW Euro 528i ESP Car
60-2 Wheel LS2 Coils, Low Z Inj
Co-Driver 1999 BMW E46 DSP car.
I would like to see DBW so we can do throttle mapping and serious traction control.
On board GPS and accelerators/gyros.
Plenty of IO so that we can do suspension data and aero data.
Larger generic PWM tables.
Larger VE tables up to about 30x30 or so. High reving boosted motors simply don't fit a 16x16 model very well. Jet skis are commonly reving to 9000 rpm and pushing 250 KPA and spending lots of time there. They idle at 1600 RPM.
Plenty of speed to pass data to a dedicated dash package that is just as slick as the typical factory dashes. Having the ECU and touch screen dash as one integrated package would be cool.
