Remove pull-up resistors for Atom An Temp

[f8.]

Hi,

I'm using the Atom as a piggy-back and would like to know if I could remove the pull-up resistors for the AnT1 and AnT2 inputs please?

Unfortunately all 3 An V inputs are being used.

Failing which, what would happen if 2 ECU's pull-up the same thermistor sensor? If the other ECU also has a 1kOhm pull-up, this would make the Atom always under-read the temperature with NTC sensors?

And lastly, assuming the above situation, could we then program eg Cal Table 1 to compensate for this?

Sorry for the many questions but just thinking out loud what the possible options might be.

Thanks,

Foo

[Dave Kriedeman]

Hi f8,

another way around your issue is to use an ANALOGUE VOLT input and set that up as a temp input, the external pull up that is required to do this will be supplied via the OEM ECU.

You could also always fit extra sensors to the engine as the IAT and ECT sensors are very important calibration inputs to the ecu for correct tuning strategies and limiters etc, etc.

Leaving the factory ECT sensor in use with the OEM ECU so that things such as the temp gauge still works, if it uses the ECT sensor and not a separate temp gauge sensor.

((((((((( SORRY JUST REALISED YOU HAVE USED ALL AN VLT INPUTS)))))))))

I would suggest that the ECU be sent back to LINK to have the pull ups removed, if you don't wish to add separate sensors.

Any alteration to the ECU circuit boards and or components would render your Life time warranty void.

My advise only, not LINK's.

Regards

Dave.

Edited December 16, 2015 by Dave Kriedeman
added information

[Davidv]

Although a bit of a pain, fitting second temp sensors sounds like the easiest option.

[Dave Kriedeman]

Hi Davidv,

yes this is what I would and have done.

Regards

Dave.

[f8.]

Thanks Dave and David. Yes it does seem like extra set of temp sensors is the solution.

Just wondering if Links have any comments on this. In terms of product positioning, it would be ironic in the scenario of a piggy-back where not many inputs and outputs are required, the Atom should be ideal; Yet 2 of the already limited inputs on the Atom can't be used without duplicating temp sensors and the Storm/Xtreme needs to be called in. But in that case, wouldn't it be better to have Storm/Xtreme replace the stock ECU completely?

Maybe an Atom Piggy-Back version?

[Simon]

Yeah it is a bit of a catch 22.

I would only advise doing a piggy back on applications where there is factory systems that we are unable to control or CAN that is not supported.

We cant be making the atom too powerful as we need people to have reason to go for the higher end ecus

 

[f8.]

Thanks Simon.

Agree on the need for going to higher end. For me at least I'm new to Link and came from more than a decade of Motec M800. I was really attracted to the Atom by the price and bought 2 at a go. 1 to take over the M800's role and another for this piggy-back function (which was a 'just for fun' after thought thing). Will let you guys know what I think of the baby Link vs the grandpa Motec .

The point is had there not been an entry level like the Atom, I might never have explored beyond Motec onto Link (playing with PCLink convinced me you guys knew what you're doing and sealed the deal). So whoever came up with the Atom strategy is a bit of a genius! (And I'm pleading for Atom to lose 2 resistors....)

[Dave Kriedeman]

Hi f8,

the plead for the ATOM to lose 2 resistors wont happen, however FIRMWARE to be able to switch them OFF may.

But that is LINKS call.

Regards

Dave.