Moderator: Freon
Spiider wrote:I think the failure rate would be closer to 1000 full reflashes of all memory blocks. I'm not saying it couldn't happen at 100, as some people say, but I just think its highly improbable.
cboles wrote:The flash memory is erased in blocks, and rewritten. EcuFlash examines the changes between what is currently in your ECU's flash memory and what you would like to have in the flash memory and only reflashes the necessary blocks. When tuning a car, you are typically only changing some data tables which reside in one area of ECU flash memory.
Since this may involve only one block, the reflash process can be done much faster, and without wearing out the other flash blocks. In reality, certain blocks are always the ones which get changed, and so these will fail before the others. I have yet to experience a failed flash block that didn't erase or rewrite. What is more likely is that the memory may get bit errors over time or temperature variation many years down the road. The chip manufacturers want these memories to last a very long time in harsh environments, so they are rated very conservatively.
chuckdez wrote:Does anyone have the model number for the flash? A little research could be done on the manufacturer specifications.
NoCtrl wrote:I did a lot of reflashing on varios applications (many PIC16c84 based) some time ago.
What killed the chips when they were in for a upgrade:
2: Static electricity and mechanical stress(some of the boards was delivered to me out of the casing ):
Basically a healthy wiring - power and ground, system on car?NoCtrl wrote:3: wrong/unstable programming voltage and/or power supply. Mostly bad grounding and connectors!:
C6ect.ect wrote:Im using a 20' extension USB to reach my car in the garage, will this cause anything?
C6ect.ect wrote:So for the personal car flasher (like me) this means don't allow static electric discharge?
Basically a healthy wiring - power and ground, system on car?
Im using a 20' extension USB to reach my car in the garage, will this cause anything?
cboles wrote:I think the high potential used to create tunneling to remove charge during the erase process can trap charge in the oxide, which is going to shift your effective Vt, amongst other things. Trapped charge == bad. I haven't done IC design in 10 years, so maybe someone else can give a better answer.
Colby
JonnyM wrote:Renesas specifies that the flash can take a minimum of 100 reflashes., no
typical or maximum figures given.
100 is a very low figure compared to what other manufacturers guarantee, they are usually in the range 1000 - 10000.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests