Holset VGT HE351VE Controller
01-07-2011, 05:52 PM
#111
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 15
after looking at pictures (since i'm still waiting on my turbo to show up) I realized how I believe the stock controller was designed to work as far as controlling the motor itself.
the magnet on the gear does infact go over an IC Hall sensor. its off to the side of the board but measuring the approximate distance it goes over it perfectly.
this sensor is there to identify the minimum and maximum turning range for the motor, when the system is started up the sweeping cycle for cleaning is also there to calibrate where that min/max position is. then when it needs to make an adjustment based on sensor input it just counts the number of pulses from the Hall sensor ring in either direction from the min/max point.
there was some debate weather a picaxe would be fast enough to measure the hall sensor output. considering there are plenty of arduino boards running bldc controllers which run at only 16mhz slightly less than the 20mhz picaxe that civic was using it shouldn't be an issue at all. although if it were, you could easily use a Maple instead which runs a 75mhz arm but I think thats overkill.
I was actually trying to decide how many inputs would be optimal atleast for a diesel truck owner.
1. min/max hall
2.MAP
3.Turbo speedo
4. pwm comparator from motor hall sensors
5.throttle activation
6.possibly a drive pressure sensor from the exhaust as well
the magnet on the gear does infact go over an IC Hall sensor. its off to the side of the board but measuring the approximate distance it goes over it perfectly.
this sensor is there to identify the minimum and maximum turning range for the motor, when the system is started up the sweeping cycle for cleaning is also there to calibrate where that min/max position is. then when it needs to make an adjustment based on sensor input it just counts the number of pulses from the Hall sensor ring in either direction from the min/max point.
there was some debate weather a picaxe would be fast enough to measure the hall sensor output. considering there are plenty of arduino boards running bldc controllers which run at only 16mhz slightly less than the 20mhz picaxe that civic was using it shouldn't be an issue at all. although if it were, you could easily use a Maple instead which runs a 75mhz arm but I think thats overkill.
I was actually trying to decide how many inputs would be optimal atleast for a diesel truck owner.
1. min/max hall
2.MAP
3.Turbo speedo
4. pwm comparator from motor hall sensors
5.throttle activation
6.possibly a drive pressure sensor from the exhaust as well
Last edited by dracozny; 01-07-2011 at 06:12 PM.
01-12-2011, 08:40 PM
#112
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 15
after looking at pictures (since i'm still waiting on my turbo to show up) I realized how I believe the stock controller was designed to work as far as controlling the motor itself.
the magnet on the gear does infact go over an IC Hall sensor. its off to the side of the board but measuring the approximate distance it goes over it perfectly.
this sensor is there to identify the minimum and maximum turning range for the motor, when the system is started up the sweeping cycle for cleaning is also there to calibrate where that min/max position is. then when it needs to make an adjustment based on sensor input it just counts the number of pulses from the Hall sensor ring in either direction from the min/max point.
there was some debate weather a picaxe would be fast enough to measure the hall sensor output. considering there are plenty of arduino boards running bldc controllers which run at only 16mhz slightly less than the 20mhz picaxe that civic was using it shouldn't be an issue at all. although if it were, you could easily use a Maple instead which runs a 75mhz arm but I think thats overkill.
I was actually trying to decide how many inputs would be optimal atleast for a diesel truck owner.
1. 50% (mid point) hall
2.MAP
3.Turbo speedo
4. pwm comparator from motor hall sensors
5.throttle activation
6.possibly a drive pressure sensor from the exhaust as well
the magnet on the gear does infact go over an IC Hall sensor. its off to the side of the board but measuring the approximate distance it goes over it perfectly.
this sensor is there to identify the minimum and maximum turning range for the motor, when the system is started up the sweeping cycle for cleaning is also there to calibrate where that min/max position is. then when it needs to make an adjustment based on sensor input it just counts the number of pulses from the Hall sensor ring in either direction from the min/max point.
there was some debate weather a picaxe would be fast enough to measure the hall sensor output. considering there are plenty of arduino boards running bldc controllers which run at only 16mhz slightly less than the 20mhz picaxe that civic was using it shouldn't be an issue at all. although if it were, you could easily use a Maple instead which runs a 75mhz arm but I think thats overkill.
I was actually trying to decide how many inputs would be optimal atleast for a diesel truck owner.
1. 50% (mid point) hall
2.MAP
3.Turbo speedo
4. pwm comparator from motor hall sensors
5.throttle activation
6.possibly a drive pressure sensor from the exhaust as well
I'm sure I am talking to myself but atleast I can keep track of what I am doing.
01-12-2011, 08:58 PM
#113
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5
You aren't just talking to yourself, haha. I am working on a controller as well. We are looking to use an arduino.
I think for a diesel truck, you could simply run it off of the MAP sensor, and that could be a standalone in itself. With so little powerband, and so much exhaust gas, it wouldn't matter if you had full boost right away, in fact, it would be desirable. You program the controller not to exceed a certain voltage from the MAP sensor, and you get it to try to maintain that. Say I want 22 psi (265kpa including atmosphere), and that equals 4.5V (number used for illustration only), you program the controller to move the vanes according to the input voltage. Anything more than 4.5V input, have it open, anything less, have it close. It would balance itself... sure its crude, but depending on what diesel you have, more than likely the diesel is pretty crude in itself.
I have this turbo on a 12V Cummins. The entire motor is run from boost reference line from the intake manifold to the high pressure fuel pump. EVERYTHING is air load dependent, and it works just fine. Its simple, not exactly crude. To keep the controller in check, you could wire in an EGT monitor to the controller, and if EGT's start to get out of hand, it could override the MAP sensor input, and open the vanes a bit.
I think for a diesel, the MAP would work splendidly. I think for a car, its a different story, since you can't have the vanes completely closed, but you also can't have it completely open, and you don't want full boost at 2k rpm.
These are just some thoughts I have had. We are working on a diesel controller with a standalone MAP sensor, and a car controller with a minimum of 3 inputs. Like I said in my previous post, I have plenty of cars to try it on, and I will test the diesel controller on my truck if need be. Right now I have it all set up mechanically on the truck, and it works wonderfully. Just looking for more fuel.
I think for a diesel truck, you could simply run it off of the MAP sensor, and that could be a standalone in itself. With so little powerband, and so much exhaust gas, it wouldn't matter if you had full boost right away, in fact, it would be desirable. You program the controller not to exceed a certain voltage from the MAP sensor, and you get it to try to maintain that. Say I want 22 psi (265kpa including atmosphere), and that equals 4.5V (number used for illustration only), you program the controller to move the vanes according to the input voltage. Anything more than 4.5V input, have it open, anything less, have it close. It would balance itself... sure its crude, but depending on what diesel you have, more than likely the diesel is pretty crude in itself.
I have this turbo on a 12V Cummins. The entire motor is run from boost reference line from the intake manifold to the high pressure fuel pump. EVERYTHING is air load dependent, and it works just fine. Its simple, not exactly crude. To keep the controller in check, you could wire in an EGT monitor to the controller, and if EGT's start to get out of hand, it could override the MAP sensor input, and open the vanes a bit.
I think for a diesel, the MAP would work splendidly. I think for a car, its a different story, since you can't have the vanes completely closed, but you also can't have it completely open, and you don't want full boost at 2k rpm.
These are just some thoughts I have had. We are working on a diesel controller with a standalone MAP sensor, and a car controller with a minimum of 3 inputs. Like I said in my previous post, I have plenty of cars to try it on, and I will test the diesel controller on my truck if need be. Right now I have it all set up mechanically on the truck, and it works wonderfully. Just looking for more fuel.
01-12-2011, 10:58 PM
#114
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 15
You aren't just talking to yourself, haha. I am working on a controller as well. We are looking to use an arduino.
I think for a diesel truck, you could simply run it off of the MAP sensor, and that could be a standalone in itself. With so little powerband, and so much exhaust gas, it wouldn't matter if you had full boost right away, in fact, it would be desirable. You program the controller not to exceed a certain voltage from the MAP sensor, and you get it to try to maintain that. Say I want 22 psi (265kpa including atmosphere), and that equals 4.5V (number used for illustration only), you program the controller to move the vanes according to the input voltage. Anything more than 4.5V input, have it open, anything less, have it close. It would balance itself... sure its crude, but depending on what diesel you have, more than likely the diesel is pretty crude in itself.
I have this turbo on a 12V Cummins. The entire motor is run from boost reference line from the intake manifold to the high pressure fuel pump. EVERYTHING is air load dependent, and it works just fine. Its simple, not exactly crude. To keep the controller in check, you could wire in an EGT monitor to the controller, and if EGT's start to get out of hand, it could override the MAP sensor input, and open the vanes a bit.
I think for a diesel, the MAP would work splendidly. I think for a car, its a different story, since you can't have the vanes completely closed, but you also can't have it completely open, and you don't want full boost at 2k rpm.
These are just some thoughts I have had. We are working on a diesel controller with a standalone MAP sensor, and a car controller with a minimum of 3 inputs. Like I said in my previous post, I have plenty of cars to try it on, and I will test the diesel controller on my truck if need be. Right now I have it all set up mechanically on the truck, and it works wonderfully. Just looking for more fuel.
I think for a diesel truck, you could simply run it off of the MAP sensor, and that could be a standalone in itself. With so little powerband, and so much exhaust gas, it wouldn't matter if you had full boost right away, in fact, it would be desirable. You program the controller not to exceed a certain voltage from the MAP sensor, and you get it to try to maintain that. Say I want 22 psi (265kpa including atmosphere), and that equals 4.5V (number used for illustration only), you program the controller to move the vanes according to the input voltage. Anything more than 4.5V input, have it open, anything less, have it close. It would balance itself... sure its crude, but depending on what diesel you have, more than likely the diesel is pretty crude in itself.
I have this turbo on a 12V Cummins. The entire motor is run from boost reference line from the intake manifold to the high pressure fuel pump. EVERYTHING is air load dependent, and it works just fine. Its simple, not exactly crude. To keep the controller in check, you could wire in an EGT monitor to the controller, and if EGT's start to get out of hand, it could override the MAP sensor input, and open the vanes a bit.
I think for a diesel, the MAP would work splendidly. I think for a car, its a different story, since you can't have the vanes completely closed, but you also can't have it completely open, and you don't want full boost at 2k rpm.
These are just some thoughts I have had. We are working on a diesel controller with a standalone MAP sensor, and a car controller with a minimum of 3 inputs. Like I said in my previous post, I have plenty of cars to try it on, and I will test the diesel controller on my truck if need be. Right now I have it all set up mechanically on the truck, and it works wonderfully. Just looking for more fuel.
as it is i run a 24v so there are allot more electronics going on. the pin layout i showed so far is the minimum needed, the speed sensor is just to prevent overspeed at specific map pressures. slamming 100% closed is only ideal for EB. you still want to aim for a 1:1 ratio on boost to exhaust. the 6.7 trucks look at exhaust pressures as far as i know.
01-13-2011, 08:33 PM
#116
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 15
ST72F561J9 datasheet(1/262 Pages) STMICROELECTRONICS | 8-BIT MCU WITH FLASH OR ROM, 10-BIT ADC, 5 TIMERS, SPI, LINSCI , ACTIVE CAN
some of the pinouts of the can chip are somewhat obvious as to what they are intended for.
and apparently we could even reprogram the chip as well.
ST72561J6 - STMicroelectronics
some of the pinouts of the can chip are somewhat obvious as to what they are intended for.
and apparently we could even reprogram the chip as well.
ST72561J6 - STMicroelectronics
01-13-2011, 08:40 PM
#117
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5
I have no intention to use the OEM canbus. Too confusing for me, haha. Sure would be nice though. But, to get the canbus to work, you have to have the same inputs, if I am not mistaken. For older cars like I plan to use this on, we don't have MAP, MAF, and all the other sensors needed for all the canbus inputs. Much less an OBD2 computer...
01-13-2011, 10:08 PM
#118
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 15
I have no intention to use the OEM canbus. Too confusing for me, haha. Sure would be nice though. But, to get the canbus to work, you have to have the same inputs, if I am not mistaken. For older cars like I plan to use this on, we don't have MAP, MAF, and all the other sensors needed for all the canbus inputs. Much less an OBD2 computer...
01-13-2011, 10:29 PM
#119
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5
Or, we could get rid of the onboard canbus, and just use the arduino to control the motor with a standard duty cycle. Basically, inputs to arduino, converts to duty cycle. Plus the motor shield is cheaper than the canbus shield.
Obviously 2 excellent ways we could go here. I like the canbus idea, but I think it complicates things. Plus, without the OEM chip in there, we have no need to run coolant lines to the turbo to cool the circuit board (I think the motor can handle the heat, but I could be wrong).
Obviously 2 excellent ways we could go here. I like the canbus idea, but I think it complicates things. Plus, without the OEM chip in there, we have no need to run coolant lines to the turbo to cool the circuit board (I think the motor can handle the heat, but I could be wrong).
01-13-2011, 10:53 PM
#120
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 15
I will still run the coolant lines, maybe overkill but just seems like a good idea overall for what electronics are still going to be on the turbo, motor hall sensors etc. plus EGT's can spike up over 1400*F or more. I was thinking that even if i strip out the oem board to reuse the sensors and make a simple PCB to hold it all. my thinking is using the hall sensors would be better for calibration instead of using back emf to detect an overload when the motor sweeps too far. since we know how many steps there are and you have the sensor and magnet on the gear for the 50% mark you merely have to sweep back and fourth incrementally to find the 50%
