[Honda hybrid442]

Save time and contact Sargent ,he will build you one if you ship him your harness,I have a kit ready to go too,but he started helping guys who not good with soldering.

 

[Honda hybrid442]

Save time and contact Sargent ,he will build you one if you ship him your harness,I have a kit ready to go too,but he started helping guys who not good with soldering.

Srgusmc2012

 

[mudder]

Okay, fresh install of the arduino and bam, similar error code for the test code above.

If the test code returns the same error, then your compiler isn't installed correctly... you might try downloading Arduino's standalone version (that doesn't require admin install).
Windows ZIP file for non admin install

No need to continue troubleshooting anything else until the test code works... Arduino needs to be able to 'cast' a boolean variable into a function's boolean input.

 

[Drtye]

Okay... it appears the solution is code side. Some things are over my head and I truthfully don't understand completely what exactly is going on. It appears that some language changes have occurred and a minor tweak will appease and compile.

The argument to digitalWrite for the Nano Every is an enum, if you change the argument type of the function to PinStatus it should work with the 0/1 input. It has broken a lot of code making the change to the enum.

typedef enum {
  LOW     = 0,
  HIGH    = 1,
  CHANGE  = 2,
  FALLING = 3,
  RISING  = 4,
} PinStatus;

(edit) Type-casting the bool to PinStatus seems to appease the compiler;

digitalWrite(MOTFSBpin,(PinStatus)jj);  //set data

Just FYI, this issue of breakage from changing the parameter type of digitalWrite() has been reported to the Arduino developers and they have proposed a solution (but not implemented and released it so far):
https://github.com/arduino/ArduinoCore-API/issues/25

Going to upload with the code tweak and hopefully install tonight and pray that lean burn will work.

Thank you for all the help!

 

[Drtye]

CEL, 88-10 code, IMA not delivering torque and another for no communication. I believe that I may have used an improper pin on the arduino...

 

[Drtye]

CEL, 88-10 code, IMA not delivering torque and another for no communication. I believe that I may have used an improper pin on the arduino...

EDIT:

actual values while at idle,

IMA torque -98Nm
SOC 2%
IMA standby EXIST

 

[tryingbe]

Drtye
Why not just use a Arduino Uno clone?

 

[Drtye]

Got a killer deal on this one, plus smaller package for when I repurpose it into a temperature compensated PWM boost controller. I was under the assumption that this was a direct pin number for pin number wise replacement for the uno.

 

[Drtye]

Had to change pin locations (nano every supports PWM on different pins) tweaked the lean burn code to compile and initially no CEL, a few miles down the road however it returned. I'm spent for the day and will see why it's on tomorrow. No driveability concerns and lean burn easier than ever to get into and maintain even with the CEL, thanks again mudder and the rest of the community here on ic for getting this car limping by until the swap

 

[AwkwardTime]

Hey guys I've got everything plugged in and running well with the Arduino IMA delete, minus I have the p1646 code. Double checked all my connections. Any tips? Which wire specifically? Pin 12 out of the Arduino? Red/yellow what where? Do I need to update the code?

 

[tryingbe]

Hey guys I've got everything plugged in and running well with the Arduino IMA delete, minus I have the p1646 code. Double checked all my connections. Any tips? Which wire specifically? Pin 12 out of the Arduino? Red/yellow what where? Do I need to update the code?

P1646 is MOTSTB (YEL/RED) signal not present/signal error.
Look at the wiring diagram.

 

[dsteele713]

NO. Take them all off!

http://www.thelostartof.net/tryingbe/insight/imabypass/imabypassinstalled.jpg

I'm finished with the first part of the build (arduino w/ soldered connections on harness so I can revert back to stock at a later date, but I was having trouble finding parts for the fused DC/DC high voltage loop. Home depot had some 250V fuses that looked like they were intended for AC current, but I assume as long as they handle the voltage then it's fine. What I didn't see was that fuse case. Where did you get yours from?

Also, for those wires you made, is it just standard ring connectors with some heat shrink tubing over the connector?

 

[mudder]

Your assumptions on fuse ratings are incorrect. Breaking a DC spark gap is MUCH more difficult than an AC, because the AC signal has numerous zero crossings per second (e.g. 120 per second at 60 Hz). Each time the voltage crosses zero, the spark will extinguish, which will allow the ionization in the air to disperse, which will increase the breakdown voltage. DC doesn't get this benefit, which is why most high voltage DC fuses have an infused silica layer. In short, DO NOT USE AC-ONLY RATED FUSES IN DC SYSTEMS!

Use the DCDC fuse (you already have) that's bolted to the junction board. It even has eyelets you can directly bolt to. Place it in a PVC pipe to keep it insulated.

 

[dsteele713]

Your assumptions on fuse ratings are incorrect. Breaking a DC spark gap is MUCH more difficult than an AC, because the AC signal has numerous zero crossings per second (e.g. 120 per second at 60 Hz). Each time the voltage crosses zero, the spark will extinguish, which will allow the ionization in the air to disperse, which will increase the breakdown voltage. DC doesn't get this benefit, which is why most high voltage DC fuses have an infused silica layer. In short, DO NOT USE AC-ONLY RATED FUSES IN DC SYSTEMS!

Use the DCDC fuse (you already have) that's bolted to the junction board. It even has eyelets you can directly bolt to. Place it in a PVC pipe to keep it insulated.

Wew, glad I didn't actually put it in, then. I was trying to avoid doing anything to the system that would be a pain to fix later, but I guess replacing that fuse will be pretty easy. When I go to take the fuse off, is there anything hot anywhere on the junction board once you've flipped the breaker switch on the battery? I'm pretty sure I've seen a "no" to that question somewhere, but pointing google at IC.net isn't returning any answers, and I like not being dead.

 

[mudder]

Flipping the switch to "off" breaks the pack voltage in half. Since half the pack voltage exceeds 60 VDC (the point above which DC voltage can break down the insulating properties of human skin), then yes there are still hazardous voltages on the junction board.

When you look at the junction board, you will find that there are four bus bars that bolt to the actual battery cells. Two of these bus bars go to the switch you turned off. The other two are the pack negative and positive. Since the entire pack voltage is isolated from the car frame, when the switch of off, that means you can safely, simultaneously touch any of the following without harm:
-Any ONE (single) conductor on the junction board & the car frame, OR;
-both conductors on either side of the switch, OR;
-the pack positive & negative terminals, OR;
-the pack positive & negative terminals & the car frame, OR;
-the pack positive & negative mid-stack conductors, OR:
-the pack negative & positive mid-stack conductors.

However, you CANNOT touch any of the following:
-the pack positive & the positive mid-stack conductors (this will apply half the pack voltage across your body), OR;
-the pack negative & the negative mid-stack conductors (this will apply half the pack voltage across your body).

As you can see, flipping the switch off makes the pack safer, but you CAN STILL ELECTROCUTE YOURSELF if you touch certain wires simultaneously. I like to remember it this way: In a properly functioning car that isn't throwing IMA error codes (most notably IMA insulation breakdown), flipping the switch to off allows you to touch the body (ground) AND up to ONE conductor on the IMA pack without electrocuting yourself. Therefore, with the switch off you can place a metal socket wrench on ANY bolt on the junction board without electrocuting yourself.

It's still best practice to initially touch the conductor with the back of your hand/finger... that way if you do get zapped your muscles will tense and pull away from the conductor... if you grab a socket wrench and put it onto a bolt (and someone don't follow one of the rules above), then you will not be able to let go of the wrench, as your muscles will contract due to the current flowing through your body. You be dead.

 

[dsteele713]

Edit: Decided to just start from scratch and cut the harness. Not worth all this headache when there are harnesses you can source from junk cars if need be.

OK, I'm getting a persistent P1640 IMA code, which it seems like no one else in the thread has, which seemed odd, so I wondered what I was doing differently. As mentioned before, I'm trying to tap into the existing harness rather than cutting it, because I want to keep it intact. So my solution was to pull the pins out of the connectors, solder on a small wire towards the back where there was a little extra space, and slide the old wires back into the connector. For the extra pins that aren't part of the new "harness", I just pulled them and wrapped them in a bundle in saran wrap and electrical tape.

I did that for all wires on the schematic, then soldered the other end to the respective holes on the board (I'm using a mega 2560 because that was what was on hand, but it doesn't look like that should matter). I then checked continuity from the pins on the board to the connectors, from pins on different connectors to each other, and then also checked that one pair of pins to verify a short. As far as I can tell I have full continuity from all pins to each other and to all board pins as the schematic calls for.

The board appears to have been flashed correctly (I've got an LED blinking maybe 5 times every 4 seconds), but when I plug this in and turn the key the only thing I get is what sounds like the fuel pump. The starter doesn't turn over at all. Note that it was working fine with the standard "unplug the BCM" bypass.

My first thought is maybe I damaged the arduino board when I was soldering, so even though the pins have continuity maybe a chip is burnt out or something. Another thought is maybe I was incorrectly assuming that the extra pins not used in this setup couldn't be connected to anything, so it was safe to have them all wrapped together. But there are some extra connectors that look like they might be splitters? If that's the case then in putting the rest together I may have been shorting something that shouldn't have been shorted.

Any thoughts?

 

[mudder]

Did you get it working?

 

[dsteele713]

Did you get it working?

Well, the car isn't starting, but the CEL goes away after several seconds. Is this the expected behavior since the board is powering on after the car starts? If so, then it seems like I finally have a correctly-working IMA bypass, but managed to fry something with my fail-harness.

 

[mudder]

Did the car start before? Difficult to answer the remaining questions until we know the answer.

 

[dsteele713]

Did the car start before? Difficult to answer the remaining questions until we know the answer.

Yeah, it was running on the 12V starter just fine. I had pulled those two BCM plugs for a standard battery bypass several months ago. Was running when I parked it to do the procedure. At this point I'm going to follow the owner's manual for diagnosing a car that doesn't crank. My first guess is the ECU isn't closing the starter cut relay properly, but I should know for sure in a few hours.