One of the benefits of working for a company like Datron Technology is that we often get the chance to get out and about and meet our clients. We did this last week when we met up with a racing team that competes at an international level. The governing body of this series has, like many others in the world of motorsport, sought to bring a sense of equilibrium and balance to the competition by restricting costs and controlling what racing teams can and can't use: the theory behind this being that then no team is given an unfair advantage because they have access to better technology and more financial resources. All teams therefore compete on a level playing field and the competition is won by the most talented, not the richest, or best connected.
All teams consequently have to use a ‘fixed control' ECU (Engine Control Unit). The ECU's primary task is to look after and monitor the engine, controlling such things as the fuel mixture, ignition timing, idling speed and valve timing. As every car has to use the same equipment there is no competitive advantage to be gained in areas like traction control, launch control, driver's aids and the like. The positive aspect for racing teams is that this should keep the costs down and make each race fair: well, in theory at least. What can tend to happen is that such rigorous rules can actually stifle innovation and development: all technological advances are driven by a desire to make things perform better or more efficiently, but ‘fixed ECUs' make these changes irrelevant and unnecessary.
The other problem with these ECUs is that they are only capable of providing a limited amount of data logging information, and that information generally tends to lack depth and quality. There's certainly no way that a fixed ECU can compete with a product like Datron's 2D data logging system. The other problem with ECUs is that they can be inflexible and can often be difficult to set up. We noticed exactly this problem last week, when the racing team couldn't configure their MoTec data acquisition and engine management ECU. They eventually had to seek assistance from the supplier to get the unit functioning correctly. Ironically, we could've set up the 2D system in around 20 minutes, and it's that simple to use, the team could've probably done it in the same time too.
Although many teams are locked into using 'control' ECUs, there are no restrictions on the data logging side of racing. Any team is free to invest in technologies like 2D, but not many do, as yet at least. The reason for this is in some ways understandable as the teams do get limited ‘free' data from the ECU, so don't necessarily see the need to add on additional technology. Unfortunately ECUs are difficult to set up, as already mentioned, have limited data handling ability, and importantly have specific data formats, as well as only having a small recording capacity, few spare channels, low sample rates and generally low resolution analogue inputs. Should the relevant governing body decide to change the approved ECU, the existing data cannot be easily compared or overlaid. If they had been using a 2D system, the data hardware could've been fitted to the new ECU and the data then compared. Moto GP teams have been doing this for some time; many using the 2D system, giving them access to the latest ECU technology, where allowed, and the ability to compare data from year to year .
Sadly there appears to e a misconception about 2D. Because MotoGP teams use it, then others mistakenly assume the system has to be very expensive and therefore out of their range. This unfortunately couldn't be further from the truth. The basic entry level 2D kit logger isn't expensive and can cost as little as £1,900. It combines the datalogger, GPS and extension memory in one small, compact housing, and is suitable for all car and motorcycle applications.