Calc.VET: correcting MAF and calculating VE (in single log)

[Boost]

V2 on its way. Cats next.

Good call on the V2! You will never regret it. Welcome to the party!

[joecar]

Cool :cheers:

[TunasTwins]

Its here...been waiting years:beer:

[TunasTwins]

Im a bit confused about the PID WB settings from post 476 & 477. Is this assuming I have E0 gas as it divides the equation by 14.7? Without buying a E% test kit, can I use the WB to figure out what % Ethanol my gas has? If the WB is set at 14.3 (it is) and its reading 1.02 lambda, can I assume its really E0 or richer than 14.3AFR?

[joecar]

Wideband will not tell you alcohol content.

Which wideband do you have...?
If it outputs serial data, then you can connect it to your V2 using a null modem serial cable
(i.e. you don't need what posts # 476,477 say... )
(i.e. you just keep the standard calc_pids.txt from the Calc.VET thread)

[joecar]

I see you have an LM-1... this will connect serially to V2.

[Boost]

Which is the best recommended WB for EFILive? Is $200 AEM any good?

[TunasTwins]

Wideband will not tell you alcohol content.

Which wideband do you have...?
If it outputs serial data, then you can connect it to your V2 using a null modem serial cable
(i.e. you don't need what posts # 476,477 say... )
(i.e. you just keep the standard calc_pids.txt from the Calc.VET thread)

Thanks joe. I had a hunch the serial pass through worked with the original calc pid. i've read up and will look for the cable supplies tomorrow.

[Tre-Cool]

Im a bit confused about the PID WB settings from post 476 & 477. Is this assuming I have E0 gas as it divides the equation by 14.7? Without buying a E% test kit, can I use the WB to figure out what % Ethanol my gas has? If the WB is set at 14.3 (it is) and its reading 1.02 lambda, can I assume its really E0 or richer than 14.3AFR?

easiest thing to do is give up on afr and go to lambda. just set your tune fueling the same as your wideband. so u dont get any wierd correction happening.

[TunasTwins]

easiest thing to do is give up on afr and go to lambda. just set your tune fueling the same as your wideband. so u dont get any wierd correction happening.
yep

[Haans249]

Hello Everyone,

I have been away from tuning for quite sometime! I sold my TA back in 2012, but I have a friend with a Camaro asking me to do some tuning. Since i was pretty involved, i said yes. Fast forward today, and now we have this badass Calc.VET tuning! Pretty impressive and really neat if you ask me. I set everything up, but i got some results that I am a little confused on, so here is the following setup:

2002 Camaro Auto
Completely Stock, except Lid, Kooks long tube headers with Kooks dual 3" exhaust, and removed Air Pump assembly. This includes a completely stock tune file.
Has front O2's installed and MAF (as opposed to the OL-SD I used to tune), so I am doing the Calc.VET tuning instead of autoVE

What is confusing me, is the following:

I got my calc.pid setup for use with the AEM wideband setup, but the wideband is currently NOT installed. I went ahead and did a run anyway to log at least the non-PE portion of the VE table (<50% throttle) and MAF just to see how it works. What was surprising to me is after logging a run, the VE figures actually went down in the lower RPM bands compared to stock (i didn't get enough logged for upper rpm >2,400 rpm). I figured that with the addition of the kooks headers/dual exhaust, that they would actually be up. Additionally, the fueling (from what I saw on the trims) was +6% on average (according to the log file). So, I'm just wondering if because of the way I have it setup if it is not working correctly. Would it not work because of the following:

1) Not having my Wideband hooked up to give actual readings? Would this cause some sort of mistake in the formula for anything below PE mode?
2) I am using the AEM wideband (http://www.aemelectronics.com/Images/Products/Installation%20Instructions%2030-4100.pdf), and the instructions are not VERY clear as to what it considers "stoich", could a difference between 14.65 and 14.7 have a significant impact? Does Stoich on B3601 being the stock 14.63 value somehow mess up calculations if compared to the AEM wideband stoich of 14.65/14.7?
3) Am I somehow not using the correct PIDs? (I have attached my PID file for your review AND calc_pid.txt file)
4) Have I somehow used the incorrect data for the adjustments on my MAPs in EFILive Scan? I have attached my log file. My VE table Map used Calc.VET (%) data from "Calculated VE, BEN corrected (%)" and my MAF table used data from Calc.SELBEN from "BEN selected from LTFT or WB (factor)".

If someone sees anything funky, please let me know! If I am doing everything correctly and I should just carry-on, tell me that too, ha. I suppose I was just not expecting lower VE figures from those changes in the lower rpms.

Thanks a lot,
Haans249

[joecar]

I'm looking thru your files tonite/tomorrow...

[Haans249]

Thank you very much joecar! Hopefully we can get it figured out.

[joecar]

1) Not having my Wideband hooked up to give actual readings? Would this cause some sort of mistake in the formula for anything below PE mode?
You will have to filter out all data for open loop (i.e. EQIVRATIO not equal to 1).



2) I am using the AEM wideband (http://www.aemelectronics.com/Images/Products/Installation%20Instructions%2030-4100.pdf), and the instructions are not VERY clear as to what it considers "stoich", could a difference between 14.65 and 14.7 have a significant impact? Does Stoich on B3601 being the stock 14.63 value somehow mess up calculations if compared to the AEM wideband stoich of 14.65/14.7?

Set B3601 to the stoich of the fuel you are running.
The AEM's default value for stoich AFR is for converting from the AEM's AFR to lambda (you use this in CLC-00-110 in the calc_pids.txt file).



3) Am I somehow not using the correct PIDs? (I have attached my PID file for your review AND calc_pid.txt file)
Those pids are correct.



4) Have I somehow used the incorrect data for the adjustments on my MAPs in EFILive Scan? I have attached my log file. My VE table Map used Calc.VET (%) data from "Calculated VE, BEN corrected (%)" and my MAF table used data from Calc.SELBEN from "BEN selected from LTFT or WB (factor)".
Since you're not using the wideband, you will have to filter out all open loop data (add a clause to the transient filter).

Post screenshots of your maps.

[joecar]

In the tunetool set your VE units to g*K/kPa and in the scantool map use the g*K/kPa variant of CALC.VET.

[Haans249]

I changed my filter from >50% throttle, to EQIVRATIO /= 1.

B3601 is set to my stoich of the fuel i'm using (which is petrol gasoline, obviously not exact because I haven't tested the fuel)

I'm not sure what you mean by adding a "clause to the transient filter" to filter out the Open Loop data, I'm assuming its the EQIVRATIO /= 1.

I changed the VE units accordingly.

I hid all cells with less than 25 frames, it was a short run. What would be best to use here?

After the changes that I made, the corrections look much better and make more sense. I posted the maps for VE and MAF adjustments after the modifications you suggested. There are still some adjustments in the upper MAP that look off, but i'm assuming that's because I was having kicking the traction control on with too much throttle.

Hope it all looks good now and thanks!

[joecar]

Hi Haans,

For E00 (i.e. no alcohol) 14.63 is ok for B3601.

You transient filter shows the clause "OR CALC.CL not equal to 1"... this will exclude all frames that are not CL, so you did it right; when you apply the transient filter, look thru the log to see if any CALC.CL == 1 shows up (it should not).

Hide cells with few than 25 hits is ok... for short runs try 10.

For the MAF map, in the map properties, goto the Cell tab, and you can constrain the cell width (so it looks narrow instead of spanning your scantool window).

Upper MAF range:
- if you can avoid wheelspin that would be helpful (lol, easier said than done); dragging the brakes (increasing load on engine) usually helps to get good data.
- apply the MAF map (paste-multiply-with-labels) and look at the curve, it should look like a smooth 4th order polynomial; so you can "extrapolate the un-hit cells by making them "flow" with the hit cells (don't alter the hit cells); (also paste-with-labels the VE map into the VE table); try this, and then log again and see what the MAF map looks like now.
- without wideband, there is only so much MAF range you can correct.

[joecar]

You may also have to set B0120 to 400 rpm or less to disable the VE... usually the transient filter removes any frames where VE has contributed to the airmass computation.

[Haans249]

You may also have to set B0120 to 400 rpm or less to disable the VE... usually the transient filter removes any frames where VE has contributed to the airmass computation.

Hey Joe!

Thanks again for the very good information! I hope I wasn't asking questions that have already been answered, it gets tough trying to read through so many posts. I have taken into account everything you've posted. Now I'm just waiting to hear back why my flashscan cable won't upload a tune to the car! Ugh, if its not one thing, its another. I'll post back up once I get some more results.

Adrian

[joecar]

Hey Adrian, no worries...

This thread has a summary of stuff: Summary-Notes (http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?14188-Summary-Notes)

[ecir45]

First time tuner here. Used calc_pids from first post. All went well except CALC.VEN showed invalid.

More info showed:

Calculated VE, not corrected {CALC.VEN}
Expression:
% = {SAE.MAF.gps}*{CALC.DAT.K}/{SAE.MAP.kPa}/{SAE.RPM}*3445.2/displacement()
is NOT valid because:
Required parameter {CALC.DAT.K}, at position 27 is not selected.
PID value cannot be determined because
the following error would occur:
Expression not valid: Required parameter {CALC.DAT.K}, at position 27 is not selected.
Calculated VE, not corrected {CALC.VEN}
Expression:
g*K/kPa = {SAE.MAF.gps}*{CALC.DAT.K}/{SAE.MAP.kPa}/{SAE.RPM}*15
is NOT valid because:
PID value cannot be determined because
the following error would occur:
Expression not compiled

Added CALC.DAT pid to make the CALC.VEN valid.

16508

My OS is 12212156. Using Innovate LC-2 serial wideband.

Did I use the right calc_pid text file.

[statesman]

You've selected ECT in Metric and IAT in Imperial... they need to be on the same scale. Change IAT to Metric and add CALC.DAT back to the list (it's greyed out on your list). See if that helps. Also select CALC.DAT in Metric

[ecir45]

had CALC.DAT not selected to show in pic above that it makes CALC.VEN invalid.

So CALC.DAT is needed but not shown in pid pic in first post?

[statesman]

CALC.DAT is shown in your list but the little icon is greyed out... so it's not selected.

[joecar]

...
So CALC.DAT is needed but not shown in pid pic in first post?Ok, I added a comment to post #1 to include CALC.DAT.

[joecar]

First time tuner here. Used calc_pids from first post. All went well except CALC.VEN showed invalid.

More info showed:

Calculated VE, not corrected {CALC.VEN}
Expression:
% = {SAE.MAF.gps}*{CALC.DAT.K}/{SAE.MAP.kPa}/{SAE.RPM}*3445.2/displacement()
is NOT valid because:
Required parameter {CALC.DAT.K}, at position 27 is not selected.
PID value cannot be determined because
the following error would occur:
Expression not valid: Required parameter {CALC.DAT.K}, at position 27 is not selected.
Calculated VE, not corrected {CALC.VEN}
Expression:
g*K/kPa = {SAE.MAF.gps}*{CALC.DAT.K}/{SAE.MAP.kPa}/{SAE.RPM}*15
is NOT valid because:
PID value cannot be determined because
the following error would occur:
Expression not compiled

Added CALC.DAT pid to make the CALC.VEN valid.

16508

My OS is 12212156. Using Innovate LC-2 serial wideband.

Did I use the right calc_pid text file.More Info shows a clue as to what the problem may be.

I now added a comment to post #1 to include CALC.DAT.

[ecir45]

hopefully this will help when you get to the pdf. Thanks

16509

[joecar]

hopefully this will help when you get to the pdf. Thanks

16509I pasted your pic into post #1 to replace the original pic, thanks :cheers:

[ecir45]

Would there be any benefit from running Calc.MAFT after using Calc.VET or is Calc.VET good enough at getting the VE table right. The only advantage possibly I can see is by using Calc.MAFT you could see how far you are off in the VE table in % instead of a calculation.

Thinking out the box since I have only done one Calc.VET so far and think my MAF is spot on but think VE Table probably needs some refining.

[redhardsupra]

You could (and probably should) run all the different airmass estimators at the same time. This way you can track if/when any calibration or parts are starting to diverge from each other. Also, it can drive you insane, because they will never be perfect, and you'll just end chasing your tail forever. Just a warning ;)

[joecar]

Would there be any benefit from running Calc.MAFT after using Calc.VET or is Calc.VET good enough at getting the VE table right. The only advantage possibly I can see is by using Calc.MAFT you could see how far you are off in the VE table in % instead of a calculation.

Thinking out the box since I have only done one Calc.VET so far and think my MAF is spot on but think VE Table probably needs some refining.Post some log files.

[ecir45]

Also, it can drive you insane, because they will never be perfect, and you'll just end chasing your tail forever. Just a warning ;)

I'll keep that in mind. :bangin:


Post some log files.

Only one log right now, the ones I made corrections from. Won't be able to get another till this weekend. Will post one next week for evaluation.

[ecir45]

Log file is after second Calc_VET. Looks allot better, notice rich on deceleration and at low TPS%. At least its not throwing P0172 Fuel Trim System Rich Bank 1 and P0175 Fuel Trim System Rich Bank 2 codes which it did after first Calc_VET.

Using a 160 degree tstat that need to swap to a 180 but haven't set up my electric fans in the calibration yet.

Hopefully I am on the right path, opinions welcomed :).

[ecir45]

Upper MAF range:
- dragging the brakes (increasing load on engine) usually helps to get good data.

Need to remember to do the above on next Calc_VET.

Used the Interpolation SpreadSheet for VE tables then manually smoothed un-hit cells and extrapolate the un-hit cells on MAF tables.

http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?4399-VE-Table-Interpolation-SpreadSheet

[joecar]

Can you post that spreadsheet here, I get "404 not found".

[ecir45]

Sorry forgot spreadsheet in firt post didn't work see post 31

http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?4399-VE-Table-Interpolation-SpreadSheet&p=156166&viewfull=1#post156166

[joecar]

When you log for performing the Calc.VET procedure (or any other tuning) make sure you keep the pid channel count to 24 or less

i.e. 10 samples/second vs 5 samples/second (or less).

[ecir45]

I always read 24 or less but didn't think going 25 would make that big a difference :bangin:. As you probably noticed that log was a log of the tune and not setup with Calc_VET pids, I'll get another log soon.

[joecar]

Yes, I thought it was a log taken after you performed one iteration of Calc.VET.

[spy2520]

I'm so late to the game with this question. Should B0120 be set to 400 for this procedure?

[ecir45]

You want to read through the summary notes, link is in first post of this thread.

http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?16280-CALC-VET-Summary-Notes&p=174714&viewfull=1#post174714

[joecar]

You can/should set B0120 to 400 rpm (or less).

The thing to note, is that since VE contributes during throttle transients, the transient filter can filter out VE contribution if the filter is sufficiently wide.

[joecar]

Updated post #1 to make it clearer.

[spy2520]

I thought that was the case, I did the procedure some time last year, and I was reading through this thread today and didn't see that so I got confused.

[ecir45]

spy2520, Thanks for bringing that up.

[joecar]

I'll add a mention of B0120 to post #1.

[joecar]

Updated post #1 again.

[spy2520]

Another question, can you disable trims and use just a wideband with this method? Or is there a more preferred way?

[joecar]

Another question, can you disable trims and use just a wideband with this method? Or is there a more preferred way?Yes you can...

disable CL/LTFT/STFTOL (see B3801, B4205, B4206); if you have a COS then make sure that cells in B3647/B3749 are not stoich (EQR 1.00).

you will have to edit the calc_pids.txt file so that the the pid CALC.CL (CLC-00-032) is always zero:

i.e. edit this:

*CLC-00-032
factor 0 4 .0 "{GM.EQIVRATIO}=1"

to this:

*CLC-00-032
factor 0 4 .0 "0"


this will steer the pid CALC.SELBEN (CLC-00-220) to always select CALC.WO2BEN;

you then apply the maps as said in the Calc.VET thread.


Note: for Calc.VET you can also set B0120 to zero.

[spy2520]

Why would you not just use CALC.W02BEN instead of CALC.SELBEN?

[joecar]

Why would you not just use CALC.W02BEN instead of CALC.SELBEN?That is another way of doing it... you would replace every use of CALC.SELBEN with CALC.WO2BEN...

i.e. the Data for the MAF map would be CALC.WO2BEN, and in CALC.VET the use of CALC.SELBEN would be replaced by CALC.WO2BEN.

[spy2520]

OK great, my NB O2s are crapping out on me.

[Tinbender59]

Help I cant find the tunning pids???

[Tinbender59]

joecar i am getting an error message, could you point me in the right direction? EFI won't come up now??

Error code: ERR_CONFIG/92

C:\Users\Lloyd\Documents\EFILive\V7.5\User Configuration\calc_pids.txt(47): Units /(5.669()*{SAE.RPM}*{SAE.MAP.kPa})*{CALC.LTFTBEN}" not found. .

[joecar]

joecar i am getting an error message, could you point me in the right direction? EFI won't come up now??

Error code: ERR_CONFIG/92

C:\Users\Lloyd\Documents\EFILive\V7.5\User Configuration\calc_pids.txt(47): Units /(5.669()*{SAE.RPM}*{SAE.MAP.kPa})*{CALC.LTFTBEN}" not found. .Post your calc_pids.txt file here so I can look at it.

:)

[Tinbender59]

thanks Joecar, I did go ahead and download the pid file from this thread post #1, and reloaded EFILive, seems to have fixed the issue. I do not know what the heck I did, I was able to get one VET data log then the next day problems problems problems. here is the bad calc pid

[joecar]

Ok, yes, use the calc_pids.txt file form Calc_VET thread post #1.


(the file you attached above has some extraneous text in it which will cause the scantool to complain as you posted further above).

[djv86]

I've read all pages of this thread and I've also had an issue with the calc.ve table values being all 0.0 and the pid for the engine disp says nothing. I've tried to manually change it under the edit tab and no luck. I'm also messing with a supercharged engine using the efi custom os for 2 bar map sensor does this calc.vet table work for both individual maps >105kpa and <105kpa or could I make a custom map from 5-160 and combine them? Also does the calcvet table control afr at the instances or just reads how much air it sucks in at those values. I'm looking to set up diff af ratios for diff boost levels. I've posted a log in a diff thread and having serious ping issues with this truck. Under wot SAE.KR never sees more then 6 degrees and yet still pings and broke a piston

[joecar]

I've read all pages of this thread and I've also had an issue with the calc.ve table values being all 0.0 and the pid for the engine disp says nothing. I've tried to manually change it under the edit tab and no luck. I'm also messing with a supercharged engine using the efi custom os for 2 bar map sensor does this calc.vet table work for both individual maps >105kpa and <105kpa or could I make a custom map from 5-160 and combine them? Also does the calcvet table control afr at the instances or just reads how much air it sucks in at those values. I'm looking to set up diff af ratios for diff boost levels. I've posted a log in a diff thread and having serious ping issues with this truck. Under wot SAE.KR never sees more then 6 degrees and yet still pings and broke a pistonUse g*K/kPa for VE units (in V7 tunetool, go Edit->Properties and set VE units to g*K/kPa)(i.e. avoid using % units, because % units requires displacement).

Yes, it works for both VE tables (<105 kPa, >105kPa).

Calc.VET procedure corrects MAF table and calculates a new VE table... neither of these control AFR (or more specifically, neither controls commanded EQR).

MAF and VE tables determine the calculated airmass... then commanded EQR (AFR) is looked up (either stoich for CL, or from PE table if enabled)... i.e. airmass and commanded EQR are separate.

Also, avoid AFR for fueling units (it does not consider what fuel you run)... instead use EQR (in V7 tunetool, go Edit->Properties and set fueling units to EQR)(in V7 scantool, log the pid GM.EQIVRATIO... and discard the pid GM.AFR).

[joecar]

I've read all pages of this thread and I've also had an issue with the calc.ve table values being all 0.0 and the pid for the engine disp says nothing. I've tried to manually change it under the edit tab and no luck. I'm also messing with a supercharged engine using the efi custom os for 2 bar map sensor does this calc.vet table work for both individual maps >105kpa and <105kpa or could I make a custom map from 5-160 and combine them? Also does the calcvet table control afr at the instances or just reads how much air it sucks in at those values. I'm looking to set up diff af ratios for diff boost levels. I've posted a log in a diff thread and having serious ping issues with this truck. Under wot SAE.KR never sees more then 6 degrees and yet still pings and broke a pistonOnly post #1 is the "tutorial" (follow all of the links it contains)... the rest of the thread is merely discussion.

:)

[djv86]

What table "xxxxx" is the command afr for what map pressure

[joecar]

Commanded EQR:
- OL: B3605 or B3647 for COS.
- PE: B3618.



Do use EQR rather than AFR (set tunetool fuel units to EQR), you will find it easier...
CL will be EQR 1.00, and PE should be EQR 1.17 for NA, and EQR 1.25 for boost (regardless of the fuel you run)

( you view the tunetool tables in EQR, you log EQR and/or Lambda from wideband )

( you do have to set the stoich AFR in table B3601 )

( for example, stoich AFR's: gasoline 14.7, E10 14.2, E85 9.6 )

[djv86]

The truck in working on doesn't go into PE like it should. It stays in CL under WOT and removes fuel under boost when the whipple ecm is adding fuel. I've got another thread somewhere with the tune posted and data logging file if you would be up for examining it for me ?

[joecar]

Post your tune file/log files.

Point me to your other thread...

[djv86]

Post your tune file/log files.

Point me to your other thread...

https://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?t=25108

[400ss]

using this method, if the car will be open loop, i need to modify the CALC.PIDS as said above. wich one will be the input data to correect the maf? and wich one will be the input data to calculate the VE MAP

[joecar]

If you're running OL (no CL) you'll be using WO2BEN only (no LTFTBEN)...

so you must edit calc_pids.txt as follows:

change CLC-00-200 from this:


*CLC-00-220
factor 0.5 1.5 .4 "iff({CALC.CL}, {CALC.LTFTBEN}, {CALC.WO2BEN})"


to this (see the red zero):


*CLC-00-220
factor 0.5 1.5 .4 "iff(0, {CALC.LTFTBEN}, {CALC.WO2BEN})"


( This forces CALC.SELBEN to always use CALC.WO2BEN for corrections. )

Use Notepad to make the edit (when you exit Notepad click Yes to save the changes).

You now proceed as said in post #1 (use CALC.SELBEN map to correct MAF, use CALC.VET map to make a new VE).

[joecar]

Also, do this (very important):


Make sure you also download and install the obdiiV7.dll attachment that is explained in Issue 5 here:
Known-issues-with-Feb-09-2015-release-of-the-EFILive-software-and-firmware (https://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?25151-Known-issues-with-Feb-09-2015-release-of-the-EFILive-software-and-firmware)

Regards
Paul

[Haans249]

When doing this tuning I have followed all procedures and Im getting corrected MAF and VE table as expected. The only thing that is throwing me off is how choppy my AFRs are looking while logging. Im assuming this is because I'm doing CL tuning using this method. The up and down swings correlate perfectly to the switching of the O2 sensors. Would it be better to do this tuning using OL so that fueling isnt so choppy? Or is it a function of the wideband I'm using (AEM analog)? Or does it not matter as it is averaging out over time?

[joecar]

Post some log files.

LTFT's are a filtered from STFT which are filtered from NBO2 swings (i.e. they should not look choppy).

[Haans249]

Well that's what I had thought. Maybe it has something to do with the wideband I'm running then. Eitherway, here is the log, my tune file (VE table updated more recent than the log), and my setup file.

I appreciate you taking a look.

18017

18018

18019

[statesman]

In closed loop, the pcm constantly switches the fueling between rich and lean. Your wideband is only seeing what the pcm is doing. If you don't like to see that, then go open loop and tune with the wideband exclusively.

[djv86]

I'm going to be using this method this upcoming weekend and trying to set up all the stuff prior to the weekend its a 2007 L92 with 6L80 and I'm using and E38 with

OS 12614088 the

The B4901 is not in my OS. and this OS is Not listed in the ls1 os's.

does anybody have an idea on how to setup the B4901 table with a os that does not have that map ?

[joecar]

E38 would have a different table id for B4901...

are you trying to do this with E38...? Correcting the MAF will be easy, but calculating the VVE table will require the calc pids to be edited (not sure how yet).

[djv86]

E38 would have a different table id for B4901...

are you trying to do this with E38...? Correcting the MAF will be easy, but calculating the VVE table will require the calc pids to be edited (not sure how yet).

Ive got a l92 with 6l80 inside a jeep and we're trying to make it smog legal and correct the fuel trims. The engine is bone stock as is the exhaust just the cold air intake is a smog legal kit from gm and the LTFTs are positive 22 something isn't right and unsure if just correcting the maf will fix this issues or is there something wrong with the VVE table skewed

[400ss]

Correct maf and vve tables. Or easier. Do a maf only tune with o2s and youre good to go

[djv86]

Correct maf and vve tables. Or easier. Do a maf only tune with o2s and youre good to go

I'm very new to the tuning deal. Found a tutorial on here about VVE table tuning but haven't got to the vehicle yet to try it

[joecar]

You will have to correct MAF and VVE separately...

Correcting MAF: disable VE (set dynamic airflow threshold to zero/idle rpm), disable CL/LTFT/STFT, use wideband.

Correcting VE: disable MAF (cause/force immediate MAF DTC), disable CL/LTFT/STFT, use wideband, use VVE documents (see below).


E38 VVE Setup Guide (http://forum.efilive.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=4354&d=1229048532)

Virtual VE Tutorial (http://forum.efilive.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=8002&d=1274505151)

[djv86]

Whenever I apply the filter as listed in page 1 all the data becomes invisible any ideas ?

[joecar]

Whenever I apply the filter as listed in page 1 all the data becomes invisible any ideas ?Post screenshot of your filter and pre-filter map (data).

[djv86]

Post screenshot of your filter and pre-filter map (data).

I think I had it say "include" instead of "exclude"


All thought the second I save the vet datalog and click on it again the map readings go way out of Wack. http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/04/19/02a3ef5b1aee5548ac6a1bedf54b0877.jpg

Like 100kpa while logging they read accurately then all of a sudden they turn into reading that are wrong so I have to change the data on the map into the ven instead of vet to make any type of accurate change

[joecar]

Post your log file and your calc_pids.txt here...

which V7 software build version do you have (go Help->About)...?

[joecar]

To help with screenshots see post #10 here: Hosting-an-Image (https://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?3064-Hosting-an-Image)

I want to see your filter...

[joecar]

BTW: in the map properties, on the Data/Col/Row tabs checkmark Show Units and click Save.

[djv86]

Post your log file and your calc_pids.txt here...

which V7 software build version do you have (go Help->About)...?

I'm using the feb2015 programs

[djv86]

BTW: in the map properties, on the Data/Col/Row tabs checkmark Show Units and click Save.

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/04/20/e03eac9be042f1fb9c02793cbb68db4d.jpg

[djv86]

Post your log file and your calc_pids.txt here...

which V7 software build version do you have (go Help->About)...?


i think i figured it out.. my brother installed the wideband bung POST cat convertors and under cruise reading was fine but under WOT or heavy load the wideband would become extreme lean and gauge would give inaccurate readings

[darcy]

Post-cat positioning of your wideband should not cause it to read lean under load.

[djv86]

Post-cat positioning of your wideband should not cause it to read lean under load.

Well I know the sensor was after the cats at the collector and the sensor bung was welded upside down so idk it moisture was giving a fake reading but it never had the issuer before only after the car and it's was only at 85kpa ish and above so under load im guessing cats are getting hot and working and removing hc/fuel from the exhaust stream and making it appear to have a hight O2 content making the sensor read lean. But that's just my guess

[Whipped383]

So Im totally lost on setting up the PIDs for this. I have a 12593058 OS so they arent setup for me correct? im not sure how to st them up Im lost.18293 Thats my tune if someone would like to help me out thanks

[djv86]

So Im totally lost on setting up the PIDs for this. I have a 12593058 OS so they arent setup for me correct? im not sure how to st them up Im lost.18293 Thats my tune if someone would like to help me out thanks

Setting up the pids for calcvet tuning ?

[Whipped383]

Setting up the pids for calcvet tuning ?

it's the txt file I don't understand. On the first base it says if your OS is different than the ones listed you need to set it up

[djv86]

it's the txt file I don't understand. On the first base it says if your OS is different than the ones listed you need to set it up

Ahh I'll be home in like 20mins and take a peek I used this calcvet on a 2003 8.1 also and it worked fine I just used the gm/kpa or whatever that is for the vetable instead or % value

[djv86]

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/04/22/1e7772c2d6528a0181d818d2ed2d033d.jpg

For starters read a little closer your OS is one that works with the pid. There shouldn't be any errors with this method unless you didn't set it up as this thread is stating. But make sure you save the calc_pids. In the documents/efilive folder too

[Whipped383]

Sorry I must have glanced over it that's right where I was looking to. To many numbers in a row and I missed it. Thanks for the help

[djv86]

Sorry I must have glanced over it that's right where I was looking to. To many numbers in a row and I missed it. Thanks for the help

I problem I have the feb 2015 programs and used the setup as listed in post one and it works just fine with the 8.1 I messed with. Just go to your properties and change the default ve data to the gm/kpa instead of %


I had issues with the calcvet table building the data properly with the % due to the "displacement" area in the actual txt format of the pid

[joecar]

Use g*K/kPa rather than %

(to use % you have to tell the scantool your engine displacement as explained in post#1 of the Calc.VET thread)

Please work thru post #1 of the Calc.VET thread carefully and methodically (print it out, and check it off as you go; also follow/print any links it points you to)... this is not just the Calc.VET procedure, but it shows you how to setup maps, explains about DAT, and gets you to think in Lambda or EQR (rather than AFR).

[joecar]

To help with taking and posting screenshots, see post #10 here: Hosting-an-Image (https://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?3064-Hosting-an-Image)

[Whipped383]

Thanks Joe I'm still working on setting it up. Iv read through it several times and taking my time.

[joecar]

No worries, take your time :cheers:

[Whipped383]

Got my VALC_VE all setup and took a log. Let me say for anyone thats never done it this way it is so much easier than AUTO_VE and AUTO_MAF seperatly and saves alot of time . The proof is in the pudding with before and after fuel trim shots. My MAF Was off a long ways, My VE not so much but it was off some. Heres some screen shots of my fuel trims

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac51/mcdbrendon/Whitey/Fuel%20Trim%20screenshot%20Before_zpshuleodip.jpg
Before

http://i885.photobucket.com/albums/ac51/mcdbrendon/Whitey/Fuel%20Trim%20screenshot%20After_zpsiwjuzk93.jpg
And After.

Should I do it again or do you think thats close enough?

[Whipped383]

I just did this on my 8.1 and loved the results. My question is on my other truck (see Sig) I am running boost and a COS3. Do I just make sure the OS listed in the first post matches my original OS#? Then just add the over 105KPA tables to the chart? Or will it not work for me at all?

[djv86]

I just did this on my 8.1 and loved the results. My question is on my other truck (see Sig) I am running boost and a COS3. Do I just make sure the OS listed in the first post matches my original OS#? Then just add the over 105KPA tables to the chart? Or will it not work for me at all?

When I made a custom os for the whipple 8.1 I messed with the custom os makes an addition be table from 105kpa - like 300 or something. And I'm guessing for the vet tuning you would have to make a new map for that spot or possibly add rows or columns to the vet map currently and expand the kpa values but not positive

[joecar]

...

Should I do it again or do you think thats close enough?That is quite good, further iterations won't get closer.

Good job :cheers:

[joecar]

I just did this on my 8.1 and loved the results. My question is on my other truck (see Sig) I am running boost and a COS3. Do I just make sure the OS listed in the first post matches my original OS#? Then just add the over 105KPA tables to the chart? Or will it not work for me at all?Yes (OS matches). Correct (Boost VE table simply extends Main VE table).

[joecar]

When I made a custom os for the whipple 8.1 I messed with the custom os makes an addition be table from 105kpa - like 300 or something. And I'm guessing for the vet tuning you would have to make a new map for that spot or possibly add rows or columns to the vet map currently and expand the kpa values but not positiveYou can go either way, two maps, or a single large map... the single map is easier to work with.

[Whipped383]

Thanks joe

[LastCall]

Trying to get the maps to display the right information, and I'm doing something wrong. A short log and calc_pids are attached below. The values that are being calculated seem wrong. I cannot get the g*K/KPA to either display or calculate correctly in the scan tool. When I added in displacement, the % percentages seemed way to low. I'm primarily looking at the 50 kpa and 800 rpm cell. I know I will need to significant logging, just want to make sure my PID selection and calc_pids are configured correctly. Comparing the LFTBEN to calculated VE do not match either. 10% based on LFTBEN and almost 50% on calculated VE, BEN corrected.

Any ideas what I might be doing wrong?

[joecar]

Post some screenshots.

On the PIDs tab, do the pids CALC.VET and CALC.VEN have red X thru them...?

[joecar]

Hmmm, CALC.VET data looks wrong... MAF data looks ok.

Need more data, drive around the block.

[joecar]

Fix this:


Out of Range calibration summary: 04:00:37 am, Friday May 22, 2015

Engine Calibration.Abuse Management
{B1207} Abuse Management Vehicle Speed Threshold, was out of range when loaded.

[joecar]

Is your FPR manifold-referenced or un-referenced...?

[LastCall]

Thanks for the quick response Joecar!


Post some screenshots.

On the PIDs tab, do the pids CALC.VET and CALC.VEN have red X thru them...?

No they don't, see screen capture below:

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b165/j_port21/PID%20selection%20for%20Calc_VET_zpsuopkuico.jpg (http://s19.photobucket.com/user/j_port21/media/PID%20selection%20for%20Calc_VET_zpsuopkuico.jpg.h tml)


Hmmm, CALC.VET data looks wrong... MAF data looks ok.

Need more data, drive around the block.

Okay, I'll do that. I did the math on a calculator and couldn't get it to line up either.

One thing I noticed, the temps dob't look right. The dynamic (DAT) air temps are negative and/or really low. But the IAT sensor looks accurate. Weird.


Fix this:

Just did - thank you.


Is your FPR manifold-referenced or un-referenced...?

Vacuum in not-referenced. Using a corvette-fuel filter a few feet off the tank with a single line to the rail.

[joecar]

...

One thing I noticed, the temps dob't look right. The dynamic (DAT) air temps are negative and/or really low. But the IAT sensor looks accurate. Weird.

...

Vacuum in not-referenced. Using a corvette-fuel filter a few feet off the tank with a single line to the rail.If GM.DYNAIRTMP_DMA pid is returning bad values, then for now use (temporary solution) IAT in place of DAT, and do take a look at how to create the pid CALC.B4901 in the Calc.VET thread.

Ok, so your FPR has no reference hose going to the manifold (or any source of vacuum and/or boost).



I see it in your log, your CALC.DAT being wrong is causing bad CALC.VET.

[LastCall]

If GM.DYNAIRTMP_DMA pid is returning bad values, then for now use (temporary solution) IAT in place of DAT, and do take a look at how to create the pid CALC.B4901 in the Calc.VET thread.

Ok, so your FPR has no reference hose going to the manifold (or any source of vacuum and/or boost).

I see it in your log, your CALC.DAT being wrong is causing bad CALC.VET.

I found the calc_pid text file with 4901 and replaced the old calc_pid file. That seems to have fixed the DAT.K temp issues. However, the values still seem really low. Based on the LTFTBEN, I should be multiplying the values by 1.05-1.10 (increase of about 10%). However, on the BEN calculated VE, I should reduce the values by about 25%. See screen capture below:

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b165/j_port21/Calc_VET%20map_zpsuexb1fiv.jpg (http://s19.photobucket.com/user/j_port21/media/Calc_VET%20map_zpsuexb1fiv.jpg.html)

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b165/j_port21/VE_LTFT%20BEN%20correction_zpsrx8zeqwm.jpg (http://s19.photobucket.com/user/j_port21/media/VE_LTFT%20BEN%20correction_zpsrx8zeqwm.jpg.html)

[LastCall]

Here is the VE table I was reffering to when I was comparing the calculated values in the MAP and the values in the VET table.

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b165/j_port21/Tune%20B0101%20Table_zps597rhtli.jpg (http://s19.photobucket.com/user/j_port21/media/Tune%20B0101%20Table_zps597rhtli.jpg.html)

[joecar]

You haven't applied the transient filter... but I don't think that's the problem.

How is the MAF table coming out, post a pic of it.

[joecar]

You show two maps:
1. VET [g*K/kPa] x MAP x RPM,
2. LTFTBEN [%] x MAP x RPM,

are you calculating the VE or are you correcting it...?

[joecar]

Is your IFR table correct for the injectors...?

You said FPR is un-referenced, right...?

Measure rail pressure (in psi) at idle, and observe pressure as you snap throttle open and then shut... what did rail pressure do...?

[LastCall]

You haven't applied the transient filter... but I don't think that's the problem.

How is the MAF table coming out, post a pic of it.
I added in the filters and the changes were minimal.

Pic of MAF MAP:
http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b165/j_port21/MAF%20SELBEN%20MAP_zpsdw68svfw.jpg (http://s19.photobucket.com/user/j_port21/media/MAF%20SELBEN%20MAP_zpsdw68svfw.jpg.html)


You show two maps:
1. VET [g*K/kPa] x MAP x RPM,
2. LTFTBEN [%] x MAP x RPM,

are you calculating the VE or are you correcting it...?

I was trying to show that the correction shows to add between 5-10% to the VE table. And the calculated numbers in g*K/kPa suggest to lower the values in the VE table by way more than that, almost 30%.


Is your IFR table correct for the injectors...?

You said FPR is un-referenced, right...?

Measure rail pressure (in psi) at idle, and observe pressure as you snap throttle open and then shut... what did rail pressure do...?

Injector values are stock and correct.

Yes, unreferenced. Corvette fuel filter close to tank with no manifold vacuum feed.

I'll borrow a fuel pressure gauge and try to get a read as you described.

[joecar]

New calc_pids.txt attached here...

changes:
- added STFTBEN,
- removed VE[%] (since VE[g.K/kPa] is simpler to use).

[Whipped383]

Thank you

[zayne0]

New calc_pids.txt attached here...

changes:
- added STFTBEN,
- removed VE[%] (since VE[g.K/kPa] is simpler to use).

when i click on the calc_pids.text link a box comes up saying invalid log file and i cant pull it up.

[joecar]

when i click on the calc_pids.text link a box comes up saying invalid log file and i cant pull it up.
You're trying to open calc_pids.txt directly in the scantool...

do this:
- close scantool,
- save calc_pids.txt to folder Documents\EFILive\V7.5\User Configuration,
- now open the scantool,
- on PIDs tab select the relevant calc pids (including any dependent pids).

[zayne0]

You're trying to open calc_pids.txt directly in the scantool...

do this:
- close scantool,
- save calc_pids.txt to folder Documents\EFILive\V7.5\User Configuration,
- now open the scantool,
- on PIDs tab select the relevant calc pids (including any dependent pids).

Alright i tried that and i keep getting an invalid pathway message when i try saving the calc_pids.txt to the Documents\EFILive\V7.5\User Configuration I dont understand why it keeps wanting to open directly to the scan tool.
nevermind i got it! thanks for your help!

[joecar]

It's ok now...?


( in the webbrowser you have to go rightclick->Save Link As )

[zayne0]

Yes It's working good now. Another question though, my new maf table I copy and pasted into the b5001 it has a couple spikes (i know I have to smooth) but then maxes the table out halfway through the table. Engine is an lq4 with ls1 heads and ms3 camshaft.

[joecar]

When you see spikes (up or down), manually flatten them out, avoid doing too much smoothing, make the rest of the curve (not hit in the log) follow the shape/curvature of the corrected portion of the curve.

[zayne0]

When you see spikes (up or down), manually flatten them out, avoid doing too much smoothing, make the rest of the curve (not hit in the log) follow the shape/curvature of the corrected portion of the curve.

I do understand what you are saying. I'm just wondering why the corrected table curves up to max at about 4500rpm range.

[darcy]

I do understand what you are saying. I'm just wondering why the corrected table curves up to max at about 4500rpm range.


VE table should approximately mimic torque - 4500 is about the right spot for efficiency to start declining in a stock engine.

[zayne0]

VE table should approximately mimic torque - 4500 is about the right spot for efficiency to start declining in a stock engine.

My bad I didn't specify that the corrected table for maf is wanting to max out the maf around 4500rpm

[joecar]

Post a screenshot (SHIFT-PRTSCR and save to .png file, post .png file).

[zayne0]

18897
my first time to screen shot something sorry it took so long.

[darcy]

Something wrong with your data there zayne0.
Maybe paste your log and tune files.

[zayne0]

1889818899

[joecar]

18897
my first time to screen shot something sorry it took so long.No worries (many people don't even realize screenshots can be taken like this)...

also post screenshot of your scantool map that you applied to tunetool MAF table .

[joecar]

+1 what darcy said...

EXT.WO2LAM1 is stuck at 28.5...

which wideband do you have...?

[joecar]

CALC.DAT is jumping alot... and maybe it's too high.

[joecar]

What elevation are you at...?

[zayne0]

I'm at 3200 ft.

[zayne0]

+1 what darcy said...

EXT.WO2LAM1 is stuck at 28.5...

which wideband do you have...?

I have an lm2

[zayne0]

No worries (many people don't even realize screenshots can be taken like this)...

also post screenshot of your scantool map that you applied to tunetool MAF table .

18907
maf map sorry im just now getting back my laptop quit on me, just now got it going again.

[joecar]

No worries, take your time...

In the map properties, on the Data tab set Precision to 3 or 4.

In your map, I see some values creeping too far from 1.0, namely 2.2, 4.0, 2.2, 1.8 and others... your MAF table can't be that far out, post a pic of it.

[joecar]

Post new log and tune files.

[joecar]

I have an lm2Do both of these:
- LM-2 heater calibration.
- LM-2 free air calibration.

[zayne0]

No worries, take your time...

In the map properties, on the Data tab set Precision to 3 or 4.

In your map, I see some values creeping too far from 1.0, namely 2.2, 4.0, 2.2, 1.8 and others... your MAF table can't be that far out, post a pic of it.

18909

[joecar]

18909That loooks pretty good.

Post new log and the tune file it came from.

[zayne0]

alright i finally got back around sorry for taking so long. what all am i doing wrong here??

[joecar]

No worries...

post some screenshots of the steps you did...

[zayne0]

18959

[zayne0]

18960

[zayne0]

i took the above maps created by the calc ve tutorial but i think i must have something wrong in the pids or the maps... can any of you view my created maps through my log i posted?

[joecar]

Something is wrong with the values of the pid EXT.WO2LAM1, they should range from 0.5 to 1.5.


Which wideband are you using (did you say LM-2)...? Something is wrong with it.

Can you log it's 0-5V analog output to see if it correlates...?

[zayne0]

Something is wrong with the values of the pid EXT.WO2LAM1, they should range from 0.5 to 1.5.


Which wideband are you using (did you say LM-2)...? Something is wrong with it.

Can you log it's 0-5V analog output to see if it correlates...?

yes it is the lm-2. i am trying to trouble shoot that issue. do i need to be looking for a problem with the wideband controller itself or something incorrect with how i have my scan tool setup. sorry i feel so dumb on this. i am not understanding how i am getting wideband data on to the scan tool yet that one pid is showing what it is.

[zayne0]

My calc.vet setup on the scan tool, something is not right. And when I click on the calcpids in the beginning of this post an error comes up saying that calcpids is an invalid efilive file

[joecar]

I just clicked on the calc_pids.txt link at the beginning of post #1 and it opened ok in Windows Notepad...

when you click on it you want to save it to your PC (i.e. do not open in as an EFILive file).

[zayne0]

I just clicked on the calc_pids.txt link at the beginning of post #1 and it opened ok in Windows Notepad...

when you click on it you want to save it to your PC (i.e. do not open in as an EFILive file).

okay... duh its been a minute since ive been at it. it kept opening it with efi live...

[sweettl69]

i need help i have went thru this post on calc ve and my question is i run sd mafless and i always disable ltft and stft and tune my ve i use a map that shows me the wideband afr rpm vs map kpa and then i go cell to cell and make adjustments i would love to use this method im just curious what script i need and pids to use i use a lm2 in serial . i also see auto ve is a option but the write up uses analog wideband im sure i could switch to analog but there has to be a way to do it in serial thanks in advanced im a rookie

[joecar]

i need help i have went thru this post on calc ve and my question is i run sd mafless and i always disable ltft and stft and tune my ve i use a map that shows me the wideband afr rpm vs map kpa and then i go cell to cell and make adjustments i would love to use this method im just curious what script i need and pids to use i use a lm2 in serial . i also see auto ve is a option but the write up uses analog wideband im sure i could switch to analog but there has to be a way to do it in serial thanks in advanced im a rookieOk, you're running OLSD (no MAF, no LTFT, no STFT)...

in that case you would do the Calc.MAFT procedure, concentrate on the VE correction part, and ignore the MAF calculation part...

i.e. just correct the VE table, use the pid CALC.WO2BEN instead of CALC.SELBEN to correct the VE.

[Tom B.]

I must be missing something. When I copy and paste the calc_pids-2.txt I cannot see the additional pids CALC.LTFT CALC.LTFTBEN CALC.VE_Table. can anyone enlighten me?

[joecar]

I must be missing something. When I copy and paste the calc_pids-2.txt I cannot see the additional pids CALC.LTFT CALC.LTFTBEN CALC.VE_Table. can anyone enlighten me?You have to name the file exactly calc_pids.txt

and download it to the folder C:\Users\xxxxx\Documents\EFILive\V7.5\User Configuration

the pids defined by this calc_pids.txt are these:
- CALC.DAT
- CALC.LTFTBEN
- CALC.WO2BEN
- CALC.SELBEN
- CALC.VEN
- CALC.VET
- CALC.MAFN
- CALC.MAFT

[joecar]

If you download it once you will see calc_pids.txt, if you download it again you will see calc_pids-2.txt... it's what Windows does.

[LastCall]

You can do what Joe mentioned above, you may need to replace the existing calc_pid text file. Usually Windows will ask if you want to "Copy and Replace" and you should select yes. Usually files from Internet Explorer or Chrome default to the c:temp or a downloads folder. So just make sure it is going to the path Joe posted above.

Or you can make a copy of the calc pid text file that is posted in this thread - call it something like "Calc_PID for CalVet", and then copy and paste the content (text) into the calc_pid file in the user configuration folder. I have several calc_pids files depending on what I'm doing.

As long as you get the content into the calc_pid file in the user configuration folder, you should be good.

[Tom B.]

Thanks Joecar and Lastcall. I copied the files directly to the pids file instead of the user configuration file. I should probably wear my glasses more often.

[LastCall]

Thanks Joecar and Lastcall. I copied the files directly to the pids file instead of the user configuration file. I should probably wear my glasses more often.

Good deal, glad you got it figured out.

[SOMhaveit]

Use g*K/kPa for VE units (in V7 tunetool, go Edit->Properties and set VE units to g*K/kPa)(i.e. avoid using % units, because % units requires displacement).

Yes, it works for both VE tables (<105 kPa, >105kPa).

Calc.VET procedure corrects MAF table and calculates a new VE table... neither of these control AFR (or more specifically, neither controls commanded EQR).

MAF and VE tables determine the calculated airmass... then commanded EQR (AFR) is looked up (either stoich for CL, or from PE table if enabled)... i.e. airmass and commanded EQR are separate.

Also, avoid AFR for fueling units (it does not consider what fuel you run)... instead use EQR (in V7 tunetool, go Edit->Properties and set fueling units to EQR)(in V7 scantool, log the pid GM.EQIVRATIO... and discard the pid GM.AFR).

Joe, is there a reason not to use Lambda?

[joecar]

Joe, is there a reason not to use Lambda?

You can use Lambda, just remember that you're doing so :)

[steve40]

Is this meant to replace autove? Or does this assume the car is close in tune?

[joecar]

Is this meant to replace autove? Or does this assume the car is close in tune?No... it replaces AutoMAF (but using both WB and LTFT), and calculates a VE table from it.

[steve40]

No... it replaces AutoMAF (but using both WB and LTFT), and calculates a VE table from it.
maybe the wrong spot for asking, but is there a preferred way to tune a car now. i've been out of a car for years now and just got mine fired up and started with the autove, that's what i used last time. this is for a car that is well, decently far off.

[joecar]

You use the mdthod that works for you and that you are comfortable with.

A large part of tuning is knowing when to use which method, and to understand the method (and its implications) sufficiently well to get good results.

[pinstripebob]

Hi guys, I'm fairly new to the EFI tuning world. I'm tuning my slightly modified 2004 GTO, and I'm having issues with CALC.VE and CALC.VET. I've attached my latest log, tune, and calc_pids files. Whenever I paste (with labels) my new VE values (in g*K/kPa, or %) I get some really weird values. Any idea what I might be missing here, or is my factory VE table off this much? Any help would be great!

20052
20053
20054

[joecar]

Can you post screenshots of what is happening...

I now use Calc.VET instead of Calc.VE: Calc-VET-correcting-MAF-and-calculating-VE-(in-single-log) (https://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?15236-Calc-VET-correcting-MAF-and-calculating-VE-(in-single-log))


Try the attached tune.

Hints: use more throttle, try to make smaller motions on the throttle.

Question: did you change your MAF plumbing air duct...? Post pics.

[pinstripebob]

Thanks Joe!

I've attached screenshots of my B0101 and B5001 before and after using Calc.VET, as well as the tune with these changes. I started with Calc.VE a few days ago, but after I got wonky results (similar to what I see with Calc.VET), I found this thread. The two big things that I'm unsure of are the spikes in the B0101 table, and the drop in the B5001 table. These are following the first post's tutorial, and making sure to apply the Calc.VET filter.

I'll give your tune a shot and get some drive time logged. Should I shoot for more RPM, or just try to get more load on the engine? By smaller motions, do you mean accelerate more slowly and get to higher RPMs, then hold it with steady throttle input?

I have changed my induction, I've attached a picture of that as well. The main changes are an XAir intake and fast acting IAT. I do have aftermarket headers (short) and JBA mid pipes (catted).

After:
20056
Before:
20057
After:
20058
Before:
20059
Induction:
20061
Tune with Calc.VET logged updates:
20060

I looked through your tune, thanks for running through that! I think I understand what you did. It looks like you took out the PE enable delay, made the PE modifier 0.85 across the board, and modified the TPS % for PE enable. I assume the B3615 modifications are based on experience?

For the B0101, did you mainly smooth the lower RPM "dip" it had? I think that makes sense, I actually had an issue under higher load, lower RPM acceleration where the engine would lean out for a second or two. Did you do a decent amount of smoothing on the B5001 and lower it a bit? Sorry for all the questions, I'm an engineer and can't help it!

[joecar]

...
I'll give your tune a shot and get some drive time logged. Should I shoot for more RPM, or just try to get more load on the engine? By smaller motions, do you mean accelerate more slowly and get to higher RPMs, then hold it with steady throttle input?
...You need more load, and larger throttle opening... but try to keep throttle smooth (less jerkiness), this is hard on the street... dragging hard on the brakes for a few moments will help increase load.

After doing low RPM and seeing the trend in MAF, then edit MAF table to continue trend, and then do a high RPM log (but pay attention it does not go lean, i.e. want PE fueling to be 0.86 lambda (1.163) or richer (not leaner).




Induction:
20061

I suspected your MAF duct had changed (see my comment below regarding B5001)...



...
I assume the B3615 modifications are based on experience?
...
If the driver does not realize the PCM is in hot mode, then PE should still kick in as normal, there is no reason to hold it off.



...
Did you do a decent amount of smoothing on the B5001 and lower it a bit?Yes, the trend was downward a bit, so I carried it up.



Sorry for all the questions, I'm an engineer and can't help it!
No worries. Me too :)

[pinstripebob]

Alright so I loaded your tune and did some logging. I did three logs (really just two, the first was a quick spin around the block). I wasn't able to get some good time with high load/throttle opening. So today on my way to work, I used a stretch of fairly flat highway to log high load/throttle opening. I got a log there and one back. The log there seemed to give me pretty good data. It looks like my B5001 wants to come down a hair, and most of the data for B0101 wants to bump it up a bit. Can you take a quick look and make sure I'm on the right track with my thinking? I've attached my later two logs, and a modified tune based off the first log.


First log:
20069
Secong log:
20070
Tune:
20068

[steve40]

just a quick question setting up the calc.ltftben {b5001} map, why is engine rpm used in the column tab?

[Dannn]

just a quick question setting up the calc.ltftben {b5001} map, why is engine rpm used in the column tab?

Basically its just a placeholder to get the map to fill in that column. Pretty sure you can use almost any selected PID, but RPM for sure works.

[joecar]

Yes, correct, a placeholder, you can use any logged pid here.

[joecar]

Alright so I loaded your tune and did some logging. I did three logs (really just two, the first was a quick spin around the block). I wasn't able to get some good time with high load/throttle opening. So today on my way to work, I used a stretch of fairly flat highway to log high load/throttle opening. I got a log there and one back. The log there seemed to give me pretty good data. It looks like my B5001 wants to come down a hair, and most of the data for B0101 wants to bump it up a bit. Can you take a quick look and make sure I'm on the right track with my thinking? I've attached my later two logs, and a modified tune based off the first log.


First log:
20069
Secong log:
20070
Tune:
20068I'll take a look at these tomorrow, sorry I'm running behind.

[pinstripebob]

No worries! I've kind of gotten addicted to this whole tuning thing. I've attached my latest tune for reference, but now I'm going after knock retard. For some reason I'm getting a few degrees of knock retard kicking in around 2800-3600 and .40-.64 grams/cyl. I've gotten to the point that B5001 is just about 1.00 after some logs.

20126

[n8dogg]

hey guys, I've been MIA, but back into a C5 vette so back into the tuning world! 1 of my LC-1's crapped the bed last night, I'll have to get my 2nd one up and running. I shut the door on the cords and I think I pinched a wire that didn't want to be pinched, darn!

Anyhow, I question about the Calc Vet VE map. In the how-to it says to use "Calculated VE %, BEN corrected" for the map data. When I use this, I get decimals as data, lower regions are around .5, upper regions 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0. Why? Why isn't it a percentage like the VE table? If I replace "Calculated VE, BEN corrected" with "Calculated VE %", the data shows as it should. But don't I want the BEN corrected VE %?

If needed, I'll post up my log and PID's when I get home from work.

Thanks!

[joecar]

Post screenshots so I can see what is going on.


Use VE [g*K/kPa] instead for VE (in tunetool go Edit->Properties and set VE units to g*K/kPa).

[n8dogg]

Post screenshots so I can see what is going on.


Use VE [g*K/kPa] instead for VE (in tunetool go Edit->Properties and set VE units to g*K/kPa).

Thanks Joe, I figured it out. My OS is not compatible with Dyn Air Temp in the standard Calc VET PIDs file. I had to use the alternative. I did switch the VE table over to g*K/kPa, made life a little easier!

Question in regards to Lambda/AFR. Stoich setting in the PCM is 14.68 assuming 100% gasoline. We have (up to) 10% ethanol in our gas here. While I'm performing Calc VET tuning do I need to make any adjustments to the stoich/target AFR in the PCM? Or is that irrelevant when we tune the VE/MAF tables for lambda 1.0? Thanks!

[joecar]

Yes, for E10, set B3601 to 14.2.

[n8dogg]

But in my log Lambda averaged at 1.002. Does this indicate that E10 isn't actually 10%?20997

[joecar]

Yes, correct.

I'm told that alcohol content in gasoline can be +/-8%... i.e. your E10 can be close to plain gasoline.

~ by phone ~

[n8dogg]

Yes, correct.

I'm told that alcohol content in gasoline can be +/-8%... i.e. your E10 can be close to plain gasoline.

~ by phone ~

Wow! No wonder why sometimes after getting gas it feels like I gained some hidden power! Guess I'll stick to the gas station that yields me the closest to Lambda @ 14.68 AFR.

[EspenT]

Hi

I have a 03 Silverado 5.3 Im in the process of supercharging. Ive installed headers and exhaust. Upgraded fuel system. As I struggle a bit learning EFI Live Ive not installed the supercharger itself, and are using stock injectors and fuel pressure.

As I have problems quoting text from the summary notes(norwegian character set seems to do strange things). I will just copy some of the text.

------
6. B3616: PE Enable: make sure PE enables as load becomes significant
(e.g. below 60% TP below 3200 rpm, 35% TP above 3200 rpm).
-------

After reading this, my understanding is that PE should be used for all significant loads.

-------
PE Mode/WOT:

PE Mode is best performed utilizing 100% TPS (WOT). This is because a number of Fuel Dynamic Parameters are kept steady and constant (evaporation, cylinder wall-wetting, etc). Also, a steady 100% TPS insures accurate computation of the MAF Airflow. Avoid part-throttle PE Mode Tuning.
-------

But after reading this later text, my understanding is that PE is only for WOT. Whats correct?


Then I somwhere read that high postetive fuel trims are no good. Since mine are pretty high, I do not know what to do. Please se attached screenshot .
21039

[joecar]

Hi ET,



------
6. B3616: PE Enable: make sure PE enables as load becomes significant
(e.g. below 60% TP below 3200 rpm, 35% TP above 3200 rpm).
-------

After reading this, my understanding is that PE should be used for all significant loads.




-------
PE Mode/WOT:

PE Mode is best performed utilizing 100% TPS (WOT). This is because a number of Fuel Dynamic Parameters are kept steady and constant (evaporation, cylinder wall-wetting, etc). Also, a steady 100% TPS insures accurate computation of the MAF Airflow. Avoid part-throttle PE Mode Tuning.
-------

But after reading this later text, my understanding is that PE is only for WOT. Whats correct?

Yes, correct, WOT.




Then I somwhere read that high postetive fuel trims are no good. Since mine are pretty high, I do not know what to do. Please se attached screenshot .
21039
Yes, correct, high positive trims indicates that the MAF and/or VE tables are under-calculating the cylinder airmass.

If you isolate the MAF (i.e. disable VE by setting B0120 to zero) you can use the trims to correct the MAF table.

If you isolate the VE (i.e. disable MAF by causing a MAF DTC) you can then use the trims to correct the VE table.

[joecar]

Hi ET, something happened to your screenshot, can you please post it again.

[EspenT]

Uploaded a new screenshot in the post above.

Here is the complete log.
The tune is the stock tune from the car except the changes in the summary notes.

21040

[joecar]

Post your tune file.

[joecar]

Looks like you're running lean, can you hear it knocking...?

[EspenT]

Yes.. Its way leaner than I would like. Except when in PE mode. Cant hear the ping, but I see knock on the logs.

Here

[EspenT]

Used the ltftben from the first log and made adjustments to the maf calibration. logs now show close to zero ltft :) No more knock retard :)

21050

Tok another drive/log and did some adjustments to main ve. Probably need some more logging/smoothing. But does it look reasonable ?
21051

[joecar]

Used the ltftben from the first log and made adjustments to the maf calibration. logs now show close to zero ltft :) No more knock retard :)

21050Good job :cheers:



Tok another drive/log and did some adjustments to main ve. Probably need some more logging/smoothing. But does it look reasonable ?
21051VE looks quite good (did you use LTFTBEN...? did you disable the MAF when adjusting the VE)...?


I don't know how high your engine revs, but for safety bump up the VE table from 5200 thru to 6400 or 6800 rpm.

[EspenT]

Good job :cheers:

VE looks quite good (did you use LTFTBEN...? did you disable the MAF when adjusting the VE)...?


I don't know how high your engine revs, but for safety bump up the VE table from 5200 thru to 6400 or 6800 rpm.

Thank you :cheers:

I followed the Calc VET tutorial to calculate the VE table. Used "Calculated VE, BEN corrected (g*K/kPa)" so the VE is calculated with data from the MAF ?

My next step is to disable MAF and se how the engine would run on the VE table. But due to some unexpected snow I will need to wait for the roads to dry up.
21058

[joecar]

Thank you https://forum.efilive.com/images/smilies/oldforum/cheers.gif

I followed the Calc VET tutorial to calculate the VE table. Used "Calculated VE, BEN corrected (g*K/kPa)" so the VE is calculated with data from the MAF ?
Yes, VE is calculated with corrected MAF data.



My next step is to disable MAF and se how the engine would run on the VE table. But due to some unexpected snow I will need to wait for the roads to dry up.
21058

Ok, no worries, that's a lot of snow, take your time, keep safe.

[BADCADDY]

Will this method work for any controller ? Sorry if it's been answered in the thread. I have a 2009 CTSV E67

[joecar]

Yes, it will work... you need the calc_pids.txt file that has pids compatible with your controller (we currently fine tuning those calc pids).


Are you using one or two widebands...? And which ones...?

[BADCADDY]

I'm using mtx-l plus, single wideband.

[joecar]

I'm using mtx-l plus, single wideband.Are you connecting this wideband to your FSV2 using analog 0-5V or serial comms...?

[joecar]

BADCADDY,

please can you post your E67 tune file here, I want to look at a few things.

[BADCADDY]

I am using serial comms to connect to wideband, below is my current tune.

2009 CTSV
2.55 Pulley
Airaid Intake
kooks 1 7/8 headers, 3 inch X pipe
ID 1050x injectors
Tune is not scaled for injectors as of now.

21613

[joecar]

Ok, I have the calc_pids.txt for the E38/E67 on my PC at home, so tonite I'll post it here.

[BADCADDY]

Right on brother, do you want me to upload a log or two afterwards? Thanks for sharing too. I really do appreciate it.

[joecar]

Sorry, I forgot last night :doh:my apologies... I'll send myself an email to remind me.

[joecar]

BADCADDY,

Here is the E67 calc_pids.txt file, rename it to calc_pids.txt, move it to folder C:\Users\<you>\Documents\EFILive\V7.5\User Configuration


then start the scantool, select the pid CALC.WO2BEN and/or CALC.SELBEN, and then on these same pids go rightclick->More Info to see which other pids need to be selected also.



In your tune file, table B0179 is all zeros, which I was not expecting, so in the calc_pids.txt you will see that the pid CALC.B0179 looks up zeros... when you get table B0179 populated with better values, we can update the pid CALC.B0179 with the same values.

[BADCADDY]

Hey Joe,

Doing some logs tonight and will post them up, just double checking PID list looks good ?

21630

[joecar]

replace SAE.TP with GM.ETCTP

and rest looks good.

[2002_z28_six_speed]

I have a dumb question if this is allowed. Is it suggested/recommended to run this process with STFT only?

[joecar]

Yes, you could do it that way if you wanted...

( you could do it using LTFT, or STFT, or LTFT+STFT )

the reason we chose LTFT is that LTFT is the trend of STFT.

[trona]

Hi there
I have been following the instructions to preform CALCVET but no where in the instructions does it say how to run the log file to effect changes to the tables I cut and pasted from my tune.
I must be missing a common unstated task?
VERY NEW TO EFI LIVE so I no nothing about how to do this so every step needs to be specified
Thanks for your patients
D

[detroitmuscle07]

My hard drive recently crashed and I had to reinstall EFI live. I'm having trouble with the PID selection in my scan tool now. I copied the Calc Pids into their proper location, but a bunch of other pids are now invalid. If I right click for more information, they do not tell me why they are invalid. Please see the screenshot and advise. Thanks!

23054

I apologize. I forgot to actually connect the flashscan to my controller. Seems to be fine now!

[joecar]

Ok, you did Info->Validate Pids and now they are valid...

[aaronc7]

Ok, you did Info->Validate Pids and now they are valid...

Joe, here are the pics in the OP without the photobucket watermark nonsense. Use them to update the OP if you'd like and I think it would be wise to host them directly on the website so it's not reliant on an external source.

https://i.imgur.com/jMQVZOP.png
https://i.imgur.com/V7Es9Se.png
https://i.imgur.com/HpGMzPO.png
https://i.imgur.com/9jqe07K.png
https://i.imgur.com/jlDG03K.png
https://i.imgur.com/M0diu80.png
https://i.imgur.com/Kwupwj8.png

[joecar]

Sorry, I have been out of town working, and now I'm interviewing for a new job.

I'll take a look at those over the next few days.

[timweber]

So I am new to tuning. From this post I gather that the AutoVE tuning tutorial for LS1 Controllers is outdated? Is there a step by step tutorial for how to begin tuning. I don't really want weed through these 72 pages to try and decipher what is the latest method. Thanks!

97 Vortec, 383, whipple, marine efi, 411 controller.

[ScarabEpic22]

Yes, this is the correct and most up-to-date thread on the topic. You can still use AutoVE, but this is faster and handles the MAF too.

[aaronc7]

So I am new to tuning. From this post I gather that the AutoVE tuning tutorial for LS1 Controllers is outdated? Is there a step by step tutorial for how to begin tuning. I don't really want weed through these 72 pages to try and decipher what is the latest method. Thanks!

97 Vortec, 383, whipple, marine efi, 411 controller.

The original post is good and has been updated for the most part. Different setups may need to be tweaked a little bit but you should be able to figure that out as you go. For example... I have LTFT disabled, so my closed loop histogram portion is based on STFT, not LTFT. I've also messed around and done it based on LTFT+STFT combined.

This is a great method for a MAF car because you can correct MAF and get a decent VE table in 1 log, without having to run open loop etc.

Nothing beats doing an AutoVE to really dial in the VE table with a wideband....but generally CalcVET is more than sufficient.

My car is speed density, but most of the time I still use the logic here to correct closed loop stuff with trims and WOT stuff with wideband. Again just to make it easier and more simple driving the car around like I normally would. You can tweak and combine methods as needed to suit your needs.

[timweber]

Does this have to be competed in V7.5? When I try to connect I get the following error:23286

It says I have the latest versions installed.

[pinstripebob]

Have you plugged in your Flashscan to your computer, opened V8, and checked for firmware updates? Not software updates.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[timweber]

yes, it says it's the latest version

[timweber]

Got it. I guess I didn't have the latest version of V8. After installing that it prompted me for another V2 update.
yes, it says it's the latest version

[raceghost]

Question about the Original Post, since it was a post about tuning and how to. My questions is does GM use a combination of MAF/VE at or below the airflow switch threshold set at 4K rpm's, or is it only VE below 4k and MAF only above 4k, or some variation of the two? I am trying to understand how Gm does there tuning. Insight in to how it all goes together would be great.

[joecar]

Below 4K: VE during airflow/airmass transients, MAF during steady state.

[djv86]

If I do this method with a vehicle with true dual exhaust. Do I need two different wbo2s ? And change the pid or would just using bank 1 be sufficient enough ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[joecar]

Usually use 1 WB.

Would use 2 WB's to compare left/right banks.

I have been using 2 WB's, I setup my correction pid to select the leaner WB on the fly.

[djv86]

And is there a way to perform this without a wide and for non heavy engine loads ? I

[dhoagland]

And is there a way to perform this without a wide and for non heavy engine loads ? I

If I'm reading post #6 correctly yes.

[djv86]

If I'm reading post #6 correctly yes.

Let me go look see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[djv86]

If I'm reading post #6 correctly yes.

Does that post say that if pcm is not in power enrichment mode it uses the ltft to create the corrected data and if in PE it used the wbo2 ? Or would I have to select different

[djv86]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220702/1aa853e575081905c4df33449d14f7b2.jpg
After


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalkhttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220702/1f98e7ca53a94753f54288fc0818ca31.jpg
This is before

[dhoagland]

Does that post say that if pcm is not in power enrichment mode it uses the ltft to create the corrected data and if in PE it used the wbo2 ? Or would I have to select different

Thats the way I read it. But it seems you have to have the specific pids filtered in the correct manner...

I'm new with EFI so I can't be much help... I have used this type of method on a different platform and everything needs to be correct.
I chased my tail because I didn't set my IAT to degrees kelvin for my logging. Before long I had the damn thing so rich up top it ran like crap.

[djv86]

Thats the way I read it. But it seems you have to have the specific pids filtered in the correct manner...

I'm new with EFI so I can't be much help... I have used this type of method on a different platform and everything needs to be correct.
I chased my tail because I didn't set my IAT to degrees kelvin for my logging. Before long I had the damn thing so rich up top it ran like crap.

same here. ive double checked the pids many times. i did notice at one point of my data log it read like 30 degrees of advance. although my high octane table said should be like 24 degrees. im not trying to change timing at all just clean up the fuel trims. and i only commute 2 miles to work from home at a max speed of 45mph and the truck only gets about 13mph. hopefully with perfoming the calcvet it should get a little better mpg. it already runs very dang well for a 1/2 ton truck although maybe its the max part thats helping.

[djv86]

Usually use 1 WB.

Would use 2 WB's to compare left/right banks.

I have been using 2 WB's, I setup my correction pid to select the leaner WB on the fly.

is there a way to setup the v2 under the bbx option to create a data log of the min required pids for the calc.vet theory ? so a laptop wouldnt be required for the data log ? i tried and i dont see half the calc pids under the pid options.

[nonnieselman]

Anybody know if there is a way to incorporate this into V8 software?

[aaronc7]

Not sure if I implemented them 100% exactly like they are depicted in this guide, but here's my custom user calculated PIDs, located at \EFILive\V8\Config\

[Groups]
USER=User-Defined PIDs

[USER]
LTFTBEN="BEN from LTFT",factor,4
WO2BEN="BEN from Wideband",factor,4
SELBEN="Selected BEN from LTFT or Wideband",factor,4
AFR="Commanded AFR from EQIVRATIO",AFR_gas,1
OILPRES="Oil Pressure",psi,1
WB="Wideband AFR",AFR_gas,1
DYNAIR="Speed Density Air Flow",g/s,1
TRANSTPS="Filter out transient TPS data",boolean,0
CALCVET="Calculated VE from MAF",ve,4
FTC_21="Fuel Trim Cell 21 Filter",boolean,0

[USER.LTFTBEN]
0=|-- USER.LTFTBEN
1=|return (pid("PCM.LONGFT1")+pid("PCM.SHRTFT1")+pid("PCM.LONGFT2")+pid("PCM.SHRTFT2"))/200+1

[USER.WO2BEN]
0=|-- USER.WO2BEN
1=|return pid("PCM.EQIVRATIO")/pid("EXT.WO2EQR1")+(pid("PCM.LONGFT1")+pid("PCM.LONGFT2"))/200

[USER.SELBEN]
0=|-- USER.SELBEN
1=|if (pid("PCM.EQIVRATIO")>1.01) then
2=|return pid("USER.WO2BEN")
3=|
4=|elseif (pid("PCM.EQIVRATIO")<1.01) then
5=|return pid("USER.LTFTBEN")
6=|
7=|end

[USER.AFR]
0=|-- USER.AFR
1=|return 14.7/pid("PCM.EQIVRATIO")

[USER.OILPRES]
0=|-- USER.OILPRES
1=|return pid("PCM.EOPS")*32-16

[USER.WB]
0=|-- USER.WB
1=|return pid("PCM.EGRS")*3+7.35

[USER.DYNAIR]
0=|-- USER.DYNAIR
1=|return pid("PCM.DYNCYLAIR_M")*pid("PCM.RPM")/15

[USER.TRANSTPS]
0=|-- USER.TRANSTPS
1=|return dx("PCM.TP",frame()-1,frame())/10 < 5

[USER.CALCVET]
0=|-- USER.CALCVET
1=|return pid("PCM.MAF")*(pid("PCM.DYNAIRTMP_M")+273.15)/pid("PCM.MAP")/pid("PCM.RPM")*613.479*pid("USER.SELBEN")

[USER.FTC_21]
0=|-- USER.FTC_21
1=|return pid("PCM.FTC")==21 and pid("PCM.SHRTFT1")==0

[joecar]

is there a way to setup the v2 under the bbx option to create a data log of the min required pids for the calc.vet theory ? so a laptop wouldnt be required for the data log ? i tried and i dont see half the calc pids under the pid options.Hi djv86,
I just saw your post, I am sorry I missed it, happens on occassions

The answer is this: yes, you set up BBL to log all the non calc pids for Calc.VET, you capture the log using BBL, and later when you open the log in the V7 scantool you can add the calc pids and click Save.

[joecar]

Anybody know if there is a way to incorporate this into V8 software?V8 lets you specify calc pids to log in BBL. When I get home I'll see if I can find an example.