Problem with Calc.VET

[onegonewild]

I am working on the VE table and running into an issue. I have my FJO wideband configured for the 0-5V curve and have modified the calc_pids.txt file to reflect such. After driving and logging data, the VET map shows values way different from my current VE. I have logged the AFR with FJO's software and this matches what the output of the AFR gauge is as well as the voltage being recorded by the Scan software. Yet, the calculated values for B0101 are not where they should be. If I plug these values in from the VET map, the engine is WAY lean and struggles. Right now, the engine idles and runs nearly perfect at 14.7 AFR.

What am i missing here? I have triple checked my equations and the calc_pids.txt file. Using the newest version of EFILive software as well. Thanks in advance!!

159611596215963 15964 15965

This is from the sae_generic.txt file

# FJORacing Wideband
# ========================
*CLC-00-951
V 0.0 5.0 .1 "{EXT.AD1}"
AFR 10.0 20.0 .2 "{EXT.AD1}*2.5+8.75"
*CLC-00-952
factor 0.0 2.0 .2 "{CALC.AFR_FJO1.AFR}/{GM.AFR}"
*CLC-00-953
V 0.0 5.0 .1 "{EXT.AD2}"
AFR 10.0 20.0 .2 "{EXT.AD2}*2.5+8.75""
*CLC-00-954
factor 0.0 2.0 .2 "{CALC.AFR_FJO2.AFR}/{GM.AFR}"

[onegonewild]

There has to be a problem with the calc_pids.txt file. But I dont know where! Any ideas?

[joecar]

( in the map properties, on each of the Data, Row, Col tabs checkmark Show Units. )

[joecar]

In your scantool, make sure that your MAP pid is in Metric (on PIDs tab do rightclick->Metric).

[joecar]

Post a log file (and the tune file from which it was logged).

[joecar]

It looks like you didn't apply the transient filter.

[joecar]

Does your IFR match your injectors and your FPR reference (i.e. manifold-referenced = flat IFR; un-referenced = sloped IFR)...?


You IFR is flat, so I take it your FPR is manifold-referenced.

[onegonewild]

PID is metric, all units in the Scan tool Map correlate to the tune file properly (MAP is in kPa, RPM is correct, using Calc.vet and values are g*K/kPa)

1596615967

[onegonewild]

I have applied the filter after taking the data. Yes, FPR is referenced and is accurate.

[joecar]

You have:
- CL disabled,
- LTFT disabled,
- STFT enabled <-- this is ok if you intended to have CL/LTFT enabled,
- MAF failed;

which procedure are you following...?

you can't be correcting the MAF since you have the MAF failed;
you can't be using CALC.SELBEN to correct the MAF since LTFT are disabled;
you can't be using CALC.VET to calculate the VE since it applies CALC.SELBEN to the calculation.


Those are the reasons why:
- your MAF table is not correct (it cannot be lumpy),
- your VE table is diverging.

[joecar]

Recommendation:

set VE and MAF back to stock;

enable CL, LTFT;

enable MAF;

start over (post your tune file before starting).

[joecar]

You should also set your HO and LO spark tables back to stock.

:)

[joecar]

BTW:

in your trans segment:

set the throttle kickdown tables to 100% all across;

set the WOT 4->3 mph lower than the WOT 3->4 mph;

there are several cells in the PT 4->3 mph table that should be set below the same cell in the 3->4 PT mph table.

set the Torque Reduction -> Abuse parameters back to stock.

[onegonewild]

I am trying to complete the Calc.vet tutorial. Here is a log today with SELBEN added to the PID selection. Still seeing the same data.

15968

[joecar]

I am trying to complete the Calc.vet tutorial. Here is a log today with SELBEN added to the PID selection. Still seeing the same data.

15968

Do this:


Recommendation:

set VE and MAF back to stock;

enable CL, LTFT;

enable MAF;

start over (post your tune file before starting).

[onegonewild]

15971

Changed back what you have requested.
Thanks for your help JOECAR!!

[joecar]

Log file 1.efi shows:
- MAF DTC was present (you want the MAF to be enabled not failed);
- 26 pid channels (you want 24 for tuning; remove the pid AFR);
- LTFT are zero always (you want CL and LTFT enabled).

[onegonewild]

So basically you are correcting the VE table by using the MAF table?

I will remove AFR from the PID list and start this again. Just to confirm, I am ready to put this in the PCM and log for the Calc.vet map?

[joecar]

So basically you are correcting the VE table by using the MAF table?

I will remove AFR from the PID list and start this again. Just to confirm, I am ready to put this in the PCM and log for the Calc.vet map?Calc.VET procedure does this:
- corrects MAF using LTFTBEN and WO2BEN,
- calculates a new VE from the corrected MAF.

Let me look in your 10-13 FRESH.tun file...

[onegonewild]

Just wanted to touch base here since the weather is nearly perfect for tuning. Is this a good starting point to work on the VE?

Thanks!

[joecar]

15971

Changed back what you have requested.
Thanks for your help JOECAR!!
Just wanted to touch base here since the weather is nearly perfect for tuning. Is this a good starting point to work on the VE?

Thanks!I looked thru your file and it looks good to start the Calc.VET procedure (which corrects MAF and calculates VE).

[onegonewild]

I have a pretty decent log so far. Let me know what you think!

Will add filters to clean up the data, but is looking good!

15993

[joecar]

I'll look later today (I've been swamped yesterday).

[joecar]

I have a pretty decent log so far. Let me know what you think!

Will add filters to clean up the data, but is looking good!

15993You have 26 pid channels which results in only 5 frames/second...

Can you reduce the pid channel count to 24 (or less), this will get you 10 frames/second (more/closely spaced data).

[onegonewild]

Will do. The weather here is topping out around 60 degrees. Is this still a decent temperature for tuning? What temperature range for outside ambient is suitable for tuning?

[joecar]

Yes, that ambient temperature is ok, alto I'm used to warmer weather around 80.

Take your time, I've got an emergency going on with our pet cat.