PDA

View Full Version : B3618 PE based on RPM



joecar
April 10th, 2006, 01:36 PM
B3618 PE based on RPM

Opinions on what values should I be aiming for and why...?

Anyone care to post pictures of actual curves...?


Thanks, appreciate it,
Joe
:cheers:

SSpdDmon
April 11th, 2006, 04:51 AM
Here's what mine looks like. I prefer a little more fuel down low around peak torque because I remember reading somewhere (don't remember where) that peak torque performs best around 12.2~12.3 AFR. Although, since the torque converter went in I'm not down that low too often.

joecar
April 11th, 2006, 06:53 AM
SSpd, thanks. :cheers:

joecar
April 11th, 2006, 12:43 PM
And what does the PE enable curve B3616 look like...?

Thanks again
Joe
:cheers:

ringram
April 12th, 2006, 02:37 AM
Do a search on efi101.com the forums there have some good info on ls1 tuning for timing and afr.
From there it seems 13:1 peak power and 12.5:1 peak tq was suggested.
The suggestion was its better leaner than with more timing.

joecar
April 12th, 2006, 03:47 AM
Do a search on efi101.com the forums there have some good info on ls1 tuning for timing and afr.
From there it seems 13:1 peak power and 12.5:1 peak tq was suggested.
The suggestion was its better leaner than with more timing.

So it should be richer at peak TQ and leaner at peak HP; what about below peak TQ...?

And what TPS vs RPM values should I have in the PE enable curve...?

I'll visit the site, thanks mate, appreciate it.
:cheers: :cheers:

SSpdDmon
April 12th, 2006, 04:08 AM
I'd leave the settings stock for the enable curve. The only direction you should go (if you feel the need to play with this table) is smaller TP% values so PE comes on sooner. At least, that's my $0.02...

joecar
April 12th, 2006, 06:41 AM
smaller TP% values so PE comes on sooner
This seems to be what I'm looking for, thanks, appreciate it. :cheers:

bink
April 12th, 2006, 06:45 AM
Here's my PE RPM table - I smoothed the ragged edges a bit.

:cheers:
joel

joecar
April 12th, 2006, 06:54 AM
Here's my PE RPM table - I smoothed the ragged edges a bit.
Joel, thanks, very intersting, can you explain the reasoning of what happens below 4000 RPM and when is this enabled...?

I am wondering if I can can use PE to get rid of knock that happens at 1500-1700 RPM with throttle increasing from zero.

:cheers:

bink
April 12th, 2006, 02:49 PM
Joel, thanks, very intersting, can you explain the reasoning of what happens below 4000 RPM and when is this enabled...?

I am wondering if I can can use PE to get rid of knock that happens at 1500-1700 RPM with throttle increasing from zero.

:cheers:

PE enable at 50% TPS 3600 rpm and down, 45% TPS at 4000, for me.

Table is from reading various books and info from NoGo and Slowhawk - both realworld tuners (It could be wrong and I'd appreciate any and all suggestions:D )

My idle is 1200. 12.5 afr is a solid, safe afr for developing torque - I started below 12.5, @1200 to help with tip in.

11.9 - 12.1 is best for max torque. My max torque developes at 4500 rpm so I dropped the afr to 11.9.

12.9 - 13.2 is for max horsepower. So I leaned it out after the Best/Max Torque to Max RPM.


Are you sure you don't have false knock?
Have you considered using a custom OS so you can richen it up at desired RPM and MAP - semi- closed loop?? Or, are you Open Loop??

:cheers:
joel

joecar
April 12th, 2006, 03:08 PM
Are you sure you don't have false knock?
Have you considered using a custom OS so you can richen it up at desired RPM and MAP - semi- closed loop?? Or, are you Open Loop?? Joel, thanks.

I can hear and log the knock; it goes away if I remove alot of timing at low rpm and low cylair.

I was considering COS for this reason, but first I wanted to explore what I could do with the stock OS.

I'm running CLSD using stock OS
BEN's are 1.00+/-0.01
LTFT's are inside +/-1.0% except when MAP < 25kPa (DFCO enabled);
WBO_AFR follows the commanded AFR (WBO AFR "straddles" the commanded AFR);
with VE table dialed in, it's easy to command a specific PE AFR.

Joe
:cheers:

bink
April 12th, 2006, 11:17 PM
Tried lower TStat (160*F) and colder plugs?
Any ideas on the cause of the knock (besides detonation! LOL!!)?

Just a thought.
:cheers:
joel

joecar
April 13th, 2006, 02:54 AM
I have a 180F TS.
I can try colder plugs, that's an idea.

I think it may be due to the 91 we're limited to here, and whatever they blend into it to make it 'environment friendly'.

Thanks
Joe
:cheers:

bink
April 13th, 2006, 04:50 AM
Try NGK TR6s.
Maybe a 160* TStat ?
I run both of these in the summer months.

:cheers:
joel

Tordne
April 13th, 2006, 07:13 AM
I changed from TR55IX to TR6 plugs a few months ago (thanks for shipping theses to be Chad :)) and heaps of my unexplained low RPM KR disappeared just like that!

The other things I did that made an immediate difference to the amount of logged KR was:
1) Install a PCV catch can (nice work Andy)
2) I 0'd out both the Burst Knock tables (B6210 & B6212). I experimented with this the other day. I put the stock values back in both these tables and log a drive home. It registered up to 8* of KR (nothing audible). I 0'd the tables again and have had nothing for about 200 km's now.

Just my $0.02 :)
Cheers,

joecar
April 13th, 2006, 08:28 AM
Is this the right one, NGK TR6, colder plug....

http://www.ngk.com/results_cross.asp?pid=TR6&kid=2526


(http://www.ngk.com/results_cross.asp?pid=TR6&kid=2526)

Tordne
April 13th, 2006, 08:39 AM
Yup, their product code 4177 is the right one. One heat range colder.

joecar
April 13th, 2006, 08:55 AM
Joel, Andrew, thanks, I will give these plugs a try. :cheers:

bink
April 13th, 2006, 09:32 AM
You're welcome. :D
FWIW - I run TR55s in the winter with a 185* TStat.

:cheers:
joel

Tordne
April 13th, 2006, 10:05 AM
I am running a colder 180 t-stat as well. Basically it keeps the ECT about the same (89-92*C - 192-198*F) but requires less fan on time.

joecar
April 13th, 2006, 10:28 AM
You're welcome. :D
FWIW - I run TR55s in the winter with a 185* TStat.

:cheers:
joel
In So. Cal. I should be able to run TR6's all year.

joecar
April 13th, 2006, 10:34 AM
I am running a colder 180 t-stat as well. Basically it keeps the ECT about the same (89-92*C - 192-198*F) but requires less fan on time.
Yes, my ECT has the about same range.

minytrker
April 15th, 2006, 04:50 AM
How do you switch you values to read AFR and your afr instead of Lambda? I got it swith to afa but the numbers are still Lambda?

joecar
April 15th, 2006, 09:02 AM
I prefer to work in EQ units (STOICH/AFR)...

http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/9367/afr5fk.png

joecar
April 18th, 2006, 10:54 AM
The richer of B3605 "OLFA" and B3618 "PE vs RPM" (gated by B3616 "PE Enable")
detemines the AFR in OL/OLSD, is this how it works...?

joecar
April 19th, 2006, 04:17 PM
The richer of B3605 "OLFA" and B3618 "PE vs RPM" (gated by B3616 "PE Enable")
detemines the AFR in OL/OLSD, is this how it works...?
Hmmm, I'll answer my own question: yes.

http://img160.imageshack.us/img160/3719/olsdpe6zc.png

dc_justin
April 19th, 2006, 05:59 PM
Hmmm, I'll answer my own question: yes.



Hey joe, question for you. What drivetrain is this a log of? 13* of timing with .73 g/cyl at 5200rpms seems low for any LSx tune I've seen unless there is a ton of Burst knock retard or something.

:cheers:

joecar
April 20th, 2006, 03:29 AM
Stock 2001 F-body with a tankfull of EPA-smog-reducing-gas. :bawl:

It seems worse on gas formulas where they excluded MTBE.

It seems to ping right in that area if the timing is any higher (I can hear it too), I can make it go away if I mix in half a tank of 100 (50:50 gives 95.5), but at $9/gal... ouch... :bawl:

At the top end of that curve right before the shift at 5900+PRM the timing is 18*.

It always pinged from the day one, brand new off the dealer's lot.

I'll get my PE and MAF sorted out and then I'll work on timing, that's my next project.


Check this out, this is the day before the above log, wasn't very loud but I could hear it both times (was about 5 seconds long each time)...

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/7754/ping4dj.png

:bawl:

dc_justin
April 20th, 2006, 03:35 AM
Stock 2001 F-body with a tankfull of EPA-smog-reducing-gas. :bawl:

It seems worse on gas formulas where they excluded MTBE.

It seems to ping right in that area if the timing is any higher (I can hear it too), I can make it go away if I mix in half a tank of 100 (50:50 gives 95.5), but at $9/gal... ouch... :bawl:

At the top end of that curve right before the shift at 5900+PRM the timing is 18*.

It always pinged from the day one, brand new off the dealer's lot.

I'll get my PE and MAF sorted out and then I'll work on timing, that's my next project.

:bawl:

Wow. That's nuts.

In my 02 WS6, all stock with the exception of the cat back, running 91octane CA crap gas, my high octane spark table is sitting at 28.5* in that same cell, and I get 0 knock anywhere in the tune (with exception of 6th gear low rpm lug). Perhaps you're getting lean knock? Maybe up your PE one or two hundredths of a point...

Send me a PM if you want to see my tune to compare...

ringram
April 20th, 2006, 04:07 AM
If you are running NA Ive heard to trigger map for PE at 80kpa so you dont get into PE at low load. TPS I guess is up to you, Id have thought 60% or so was good.
Also when running COS3 you can forget PE alltogether and just make it map/rpm based. (ie) Disable PE and run full commanded map B3647

I run a fully commanded B3647 with no PE. Its very smooth and progressive. Not like the stock one where you can feel PE kick in. I go from 16:1 at 15kpa to 12.5:1 at max torque and 90+kpa Either side I run leaner like bink at low and high rpm.

Dirk Diggler
April 20th, 2006, 04:57 AM
Wow. That's nuts.

In my 02 WS6, all stock with the exception of the cat back, running 91octane CA crap gas, my high octane spark table is sitting at 28.5* in that same cell, and I get 0 knock anywhere in the tune (with exception of 6th gear low rpm lug). Perhaps you're getting lean knock? Maybe up your PE one or two hundredths of a point...

Send me a PM if you want to see my tune to compare...

to addd to this have you verified your fuel pressure?

joecar
April 20th, 2006, 09:38 AM
to addd to this have you verified your fuel pressure?58 psi at the rail (fuel filter has 5K miles on it), checked about 2 weeks ago, I'll make a habit of checking it once a day, it's easy enough to do. :cheers:

joecar
April 20th, 2006, 12:11 PM
I had changed my plugs and wires at 35K, now I have 65K, I'm going to try NGK TR6 plugs, some people have said in various places that this might cure pinging.

joecar
April 20th, 2006, 12:15 PM
Another unrelated question I have...

Can I AutoVE tune (OLSD) with PE enabled...?

Looks alright to me, is there is a reason I don't want to do this...?

Tordne
April 20th, 2006, 12:41 PM
Another unrelated question I have...

Can I AutoVE tune (OLSD) with PE enabled...?

Looks alright to me, is there is a reason I don't want to do this...?

I left PE enabled or used the B3647 table in the V3 custom OS to enrich for me while auto tuning (I'm still playing with it LOL). I figure that after the first couple of sedate runs you will have a feel for how far out the VE is and you can increase it across the board to be "safe". Then even if the AFR is enriched to say 12.5 I guess the theory (or mine anyway) is that the BEN should be the same weather you command 14.7 or 12.5.

Just my $0.02.

Cheers,

SSpdDmon
April 20th, 2006, 03:50 PM
Another unrelated question I have...

Can I AutoVE tune (OLSD) with PE enabled...?

Looks alright to me, is there is a reason I don't want to do this...?
To make things easier, I'd just set all AFR's to 12.0 or 12.5 (if you can) in the OLSD and PE tables. That way you're commanding the same AFR and don't have to worry about averages or one table taking over the other.

TAQuickness
April 21st, 2006, 01:04 AM
I've found auto tuning with PE enabled yeilds inconsistant results around the transition into PE. However WOT appears to be consistant.

joecar
April 21st, 2006, 03:13 AM
Ah, the transitions into (and out of, I assume) PE, I'm going to look at this closely.

Thanks for all comments.
:cheers:

TAQuickness
April 21st, 2006, 04:29 AM
Ah, the transitions into (and out of, I assume) PE, I'm going to look at this closely.

Thanks for all comments.
:cheers:

yessir. gradual transitions into PE, opposed to just flooring it, will throw off some of the cells around the boundries. COS3 is quite helpful overcoming this.

redhardsupra
April 21st, 2006, 04:33 AM
yessir. gradual transitions into PE, opposed to just flooring it, will throw off some of the cells around the boundries. COS3 is quite helpful overcoming this. so can't we just filter out cells with tps% >10% or something?

i understand that it would be easier to just tune with olfa table, but last weekend i had this one guy put put 1.0 across PE table, and then forgot to disable close loop, so he went to the track and ran 5 20 min sessions with 14.6afr at wot :eek: needless to say, i'd rather have some fallback/sane settings.

TAQuickness
April 21st, 2006, 04:49 AM
i imagine you could filter it out around the PE enable condition. Been a long time since i've used the PE table, I don't recal the enabler conditions.

joecar
April 22nd, 2006, 08:38 AM
Would I filter out TPS == 0% or TPS < 10% or something like that...?

If my VE table is pretty much dialed in, can I also filter out, say, WBO2_AFR > 16...?