1200 DVT Reflecting On 2 Years And 16500 Miles Of Ownership.

For a digital signal we interpret its level as conveying just one bit of information. For instance, below 2.5V (but ideally 0V) it conveys a 0, above 2.5V (ideally 5V) it conveys a 1. So this simple system you mention is in fact how digital works and 5v is not large, it's a typical high in a digital signal, all of the 1s and 0s are voltages. Therefore, if the unit was putting out spurious highs and lows, then surely the ECU could be misinterpreting the message? I noticed the words unlikely and likely a fair bit, which would make one think, not impossible. I don't fully understand how the duc.ee works but in my limited understanding, if it talks to the bikes brain, then surely it's feasible that the signal could be corrupt if the unit has a fault?

 

5v is significant for a modern DSP solution for similar applications. Somewhere between 0.8v and 1.5v isn't uncommon. No point in pushing those voltages around if you don't need to do something with it at the other end. The higher the voltage then more work is required to modulate it, increasing the cost and weight of the system. What you're describing is a legacy digital system (which is actually closer to analogue as voltages change), which modern ECU's bare no similarities with. On a "bus" system this isn't the case, as all connections to the bus need to be identifiable from each other because potentially they are sharing the same network of connections, hence each signal has to be encapsulated within packets of data - just modulating a plain voltage signal will not work.

Absolutely zero chance. Not only would it need to be putting out spurious highs and lows with the exact frequency timings (at least in the KHz range, and deliberately in a range well away from any potential background noise), but the sequence would also have to effectively create a valid packet of data (encapsulated in a valid header and footer) to be received and processed. If you then add into that you're presently assuming that only one line is carrying the signal, and that it can often be more than one with the data needing to be aggregated from both to form a single packet received over 2 or more discrete "channels" then the odds of a random voltage jitter looking like a legit packet of data climb exponentially. Now add into that the possibility of combining more than one signal over the same set of connections (multiplexing) and you can have a highly complex but very reliable communication protocol over just 3 wires.

My use of those words is because I have quite a bit of knowledge of "Digital Signal Processing", "Digital Analogue Conversation", controllers and bus systems, but I don't know precisely how the Ducati ECU works because it is proprietary and to date I'm not aware of anyone that has "cracked" it. Hence I'm happy to throw $50 at someone with a solution which works rather than breaking out an oscilloscope just to re-invent someone else's wheel. What I do know is that the Ducati ECU follows very well defined standard for it's communications protocols (I can look it up and tell you the names and numbers of the standard if you like?) but that the data contained within it is highly non-standard.

You've got more chance of blowing up the ECU entirely than to just give it random duff data. Given what I've described above, consider that alongside a well defined communication protocol there will also be over-voltage protections, etc, built right into the ECU. It has to be a resilient device or it is simply not fit for purpose. Since the ECU sits at the heart of many systems the safety of the rider is at stake. You've actually got to try pretty hard (or just be plain stupid) to actually fry the ECU - how many people do you see on these forums that have had to have ECU's replaced? I think I can recall one in the last couple of years, and I think that was as a result of someone crashing their bike.

The system that you initially described with simple high-low voltages could be achieved merely with a VR and a relay, or potentially even with some straight through wiring. If it were possible to achieve the exact same thing without adding a solid-state device between the ECU and Servo controller do you not think we would have shared the heck out of that solution all over these forums already?

 

They don't have one listed for the 1260 yet, but I enquired as to whether the one for the XDiavel would work and they've confirmed that it does.

Once my 1260 is run in and had it's first service I'm going to order one. Regardless of whether there may or may not be an issue with the valve on the 1260, leaving it open made quite a difference to the sound and low rpm performance on the '15 DVT - not that the low rpm performance is lacking at all on the 1260.

 

Everyday is a learning day...

But my £3.99 Ti coated drill was still easier and cheaper