Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Message #45702
From: Paul Lipps <elippse@sbcglobal.net>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: EI cont.
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 15:23:25 -0500
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>
...plus, I told Klaus at the outset that the only way I would design a micro-based ignition is if it was triply redundant with majority voting on the outputs. And that he better be ready to do Monte-Carlo simulations with all kinds of different things going wrong to demostrate that it would not harm the engine or pilot when some sensor or transient failure occured. I really like computers; I use one all the time to design my props. I've worked with them since 1958! But some of the problems I've had have been with software routines programmed by others, that took control or turned off interrupts. 'Had that last happen on an Atlas flight! But I have to consider what the software in a single-processor ignition or fuel injection system would do if a cosmic ray/high energy particle came burrowing through the solid-state program memory and changed the state of one bit. For those who don't know about this, it's referred to as an SEU, a single-event upset. That's why space hardware has to be radiation hardened. But it can happen at sea-level too, but occurs more often the higher you go. It also is more of  problem with with the more miniature, smaller-junction size devices. Since an ignition system is a relatively slow system, it's better to use the larger, slower devices which have greater immunity to SEUs due to their junction size. My rule is to not use faster gates than what are necessary!
    These are some of the things you should ask someone who wants to sell you a single-processor system. BTW, Klaus tells me that one of his customers had a lightning strike that let the smoke out of his avionics but the Plasma kept on ticking.
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster