ISO-MME

We will be testing a vehicle with two fuel systems, one liquid and the other gaseous.
To keep these two fuel tanks distinct I would like to propose a new "standard location" of FTHP for Fuel Tank High Pressure.
Please let me know if this can be added.
Thank you for your help

Brian Grenke
CHRYSLER - Chelsea proving grounds
Data Analysis Specialist
734-475-5428

I would prefer to use one main location only (FULT) and to distinguish the different fuel tanks by fine locations. We should be carful with increasing the number of main locations.

I would agree to Sebastian to keep the number of main location as low as possible. Especially if there is already a Main Location existing for the fuel tank (FULT). Nevertheless we should also take care not to invent to much special fine locations, because there are just two letters available.

Here some ideas:
a) One suggestion could be if Brian can use a *0FULT00.... and a *0FULT02.... to distinguish between the two tanks. But the disadvantage is, that this suggests that that are two measurements on the same tank but on different locations.

b) One could use something like: *4FULT.... and on the other tank *7FULT... . The different "region code" could help to understand where the tank is located. On the other hand this could not be used if the two tanks occupy a similar region.
(Current possible channels list does just contain ?0FULT?????????C!)

c) New Main Location FUL2 -> second fuel tank -> more general but you need to specify elsewhere in the test documentation which one is the HP one

d) New Main Location FULH -> fuel tank high pressure -> similar to old main location code -> unlikely that we will use this coding for something else because it is similar to FULT. We can use FUL$ in the future to other types of tank

....just to have some more ideas for a discussion in the ISO MME online meeting tomorrow!

Implemented in 1.6 p5 as:
FUL2 / "Second Fuel Tank" / "Zusatztank"