Knock sensor and updating to newer O.S.

[87gmc]

I updated my O.S. from 99 to 01 and notice that 01 only has one knock sensor on the table where as my 99 O.S. had two. Will this affect how my knock sensor work? I'm not seeing as much loss in the ASPARK pid as i was before the upgrade.

Also can some of the old and new knock parameters be explained

[87gmc]

anyone?

[marcink]

I would like to clarify this too as I will be in the same situation soon...
Anyone?

[hpcubed]

I was going to post the same question. Also, if you look at the parameters, they are different such as the gain settings (If I remeber correctly). Were the knock sensors changed from 99 to 01 or were the parameters updated for better performance or for the new block design?

[GMPX]

Sorry guys, I remember reading this post when it first came up :(

The knock sensor 'handling' changed in the 2001+ O.S's, perhaps GM had issues with the earlier programs I don't know, but we grouped them as 'old' and 'new'.
I am going to land Paul in this one, he figured all those cals out :)

Cheers,
Ross

[hpcubed]

Sorry guys, I remember reading this post when it first came up :(

The knock sensor 'handling' changed in the 2001+ O.S's, perhaps GM had issues with the earlier programs I don't know, but we grouped them as 'old' and 'new'.
I am going to land Paul in this one, he figured all those cals out :)

Cheers,
Ross

Not sure I understand. Did paul miss some parameters that needs to be there for the second knock sensor?

I copied my parameters from my 99 operating system to the 2001. Was this "not as" correct. If the knock sensors are the same for the different year engines, then I think the we should stick with whatever the calibration is in the 2001 OS.

This is kind of an important issue as knock sensor operation is vital.

[87gmc]

Hp when i went from 99 to 01 i was getting knock. In the knock parameters on the old B6228 everything is set at 0. Go into to your 99 and copy that table and paste it into the new os it is table B6228. You will notice in the 99 these are filled in and 01 does not have them. After coping mine the knock sensor began to work

[BlownAlaskan]

Yes, I really need to know this also. I have a 99 and am runing a 2002 cos3. The knock retard values seem really wierd to me, and at one point I actually heard a little audible knock and got NO KR in the scanner. Pretty scarry.

Anyone??

[87gmc]

Yes, I really need to know this also. I have a 99 and am runing a 2002 cos3. The knock retard values seem really wierd to me, and at one point I actually heard a little audible knock and got NO KR in the scanner. Pretty scarry.

Anyone??

I was in the same boat and fixed it just look at my previous post

[hpcubed]

I have copied all my tables from the 99 OS to the 2001 OS. However there is no secondary Knock sensor tables on the 2001 OS. Does the 2001 only use 1 table? I don't think this question has been completely answered.

Also, I have read in my "corvette fuel injection tuning book" that the computer checks the operation of the knock sensor in the following manner: when you go WOT the computer momentarily increases the timing until a slight knock is detected and then returns the timing to normal operation. If no knock is detected then the computer throws a code. Is this accurate?

[hpcubed]

Hp when i went from 99 to 01 i was getting knock. In the knock parameters on the old B6228 everything is set at 0. Go into to your 99 and copy that table and paste it into the new os it is table B6228. You will notice in the 99 these are filled in and 01 does not have them. After coping mine the knock sensor began to work

Yes I remembered correctly that the gain setting was different. But the gain setting is different for second sensor than the first as well. So what is going on with the second sensor in the 2001 OS?

[leres]

I just checked the 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002 F-Body service manuals and all LS1s have two knock sensors. I did parts search on acdelco.com and gmpartsdirect.com and 1999-2002 all use the same knock sensor (Delco 213-362/GM 10456603). Assuming you did your 1999 to 2001 upgrade the way I did my 2000 to 2002 upgrade (start with a 2001 or 2002 Camaro calibration with the same type transmission) I don't see how you can be having knock sensor issues.

That said, this is definitely worth getting to the bottom of.

[joecar]

I thought the 2 sensors were identical and so had same noise characteristics, and I assumed that same filter parameters were used on both.
:?:

[hpcubed]

I just checked the 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002 F-Body service manuals and all LS1s have two knock sensors. I did parts search on acdelco.com and gmpartsdirect.com and 1999-2002 all use the same knock sensor (Delco 213-362/GM 10456603). Assuming you did your 1999 to 2001 upgrade the way I did my 2000 to 2002 upgrade (start with a 2001 or 2002 Camaro calibration with the same type transmission) I don't see how you can be having knock sensor issues.

That said, this is definitely worth getting to the bottom of.

Ok great info,

Now, if the knock sensors are the same then why are the parameters different? Why are the gain values not filled on the 01????

I am not having any problems at this stage. I am getting no KR and I do not have any audible knock. (Probably becuase I am running 40% 109 octane right now) But I really don't know if they are functioning. I guess I could flash back to the 99 OS to see if I see anything different. I really don't feel like increasing my timing until I make it knock to test them.

[Blacky]

The *only* difference between the knock sensors is their location in the block. The different locations "hear" the same noise differently. Also, there is actually only one knock sensor being used at any one time. Each cylinder is allocated to a particular knock sensor and only that knock sensor is "consulted" when that cylinder is firing.

I will try and provide some more info on how the knock tables work. But right now our priority is 98 bootloaders, then 7.3 release.

P.S. Someone please post a reminder in here after the 7.3 release.

Regards
Paul

[87gmc]

The *only* difference between the knock sensors is their location in the block. The different locations "hear" the same noise differently. Also, there is actually only one knock sensor being used at any one time. Each cylinder is allocated to a particular knock sensor and only that knock sensor is "consulted" when that cylinder is firing.

I will try and provide some more info on how the knock tables work. But right now our priority is 98 bootloaders, then 7.3 release.

P.S. Someone please post a reminder in here after the 7.3 release.

Regards
Paul

I like that 98 bootloader

[87gmc]

so did we figure out anything on the secondary knock table of the old knock table? I was getting some knock and scanner showed 0 and i could hear it :shock: . I'm running a 01 O.S. in a 99 5.3L

[Blacky]

I have looked into it, but have found nothing that is making any sense yet :(
V7.3 is nearly done...
Paul

[hpcubed]

I have faith in you Paul just keep at it. Sometimes you have to step away an then come back to it.

I did get some slight retard when using the 2001 OS. However, I did a back to back run with the 99 OS and 2001 OS and they showed knock at different rpms. So maybe only one sensor is functional? Or maybe different conditions for different runs.

I need to set up a pid to log cylinder air without a maf (ie calc cyl air from map) so I can plot the normal KR x cyl air x rpm. Or is there a pid that already does this? I can't find it.

[Blacky]

I need to set up a pid to log cylinder air without a maf (ie calc cyl air from map) so I can plot the normal KR x cyl air x rpm. Or is there a pid that already does this? I can't find it.

{GM.DYNCYLAIR} or GM.DYNCYLAIR_DMA} - they should both display the same value.

Paul

[87gmc]

So any update of where the secondary knock sensor parameter went? I'm still getting some audiable knock :shock: and knock sensor are not picking it up

[Blacky]

So any update of where the secondary knock sensor parameter went? I'm still getting some audiable knock :shock: and knock sensor are not picking it up

Glad you reminded me, it had been forgotten. I'll start again...
Paul

[hpcubed]

I don't know if it will help find the problem. But whenever I open a new 2001+ bin, the values in the "Knock Sensor 1 Sensitivity" table are all zeros. When I open a 99 bin they have values. Either the 2001 OS came with zeros in the sensitivity table (which I doubt) or the software is not accessing the table - and probably not writing back to the correct location of the table????

[Blacky]

I don't know if it will help find the problem. But whenever I open a new 2001+ bin, the values in the "Knock Sensor 1 Sensitivity" table are all zeros. When I open a 99 bin they have values. Either the 2001 OS came with zeros in the sensitivity table (which I doubt) or the software is not accessing the table - and probably not writing back to the correct location of the table????

That's the tricky part - In later PCMs GM appears to have changed the tables used to calibrate the knock sensors. Unfortunately the "old" tables have been left in the newer PCMs. I'm still not convinced one way or the other whether the "old" tables are still used or only the "new" tables are used exclusively on the newer PCMs.
I guess when things quieten down here a little, we may get some time to "play" with different knock tables and settings to figure out which does what...

Regards
Paul

[caver]

I inadvertently changes some values in the old knock table and it definitely is used took me a while to figure out why the knock sensors wer'nt working anymore.

[87gmc]

I inadvertently changes some values in the old knock table and it definitely is used took me a while to figure out why the knock sensors wer'nt working anymore.

I know for a fact also that the old table is being used. I have played with numbers on the old side and you can hear the difference. I'm still getting pinging you can hear but the knock sensor are not seeing it on the flashscan when logging. I believe its due to secondary knock sensor table but its not there to adjust when you upgrade to a newer O.S. The ecm is probably seeing this table as all zeros and thats why the knock sensors are not picking up the pinging.

[hpcubed]

I inadvertently changes some values in the old knock table and it definitely is used took me a while to figure out why the knock sensors wer'nt working anymore.

I know for a fact also that the old table is being used. I have played with numbers on the old side and you can hear the difference. I'm still getting pinging you can hear but the knock sensor are not seeing it on the flashscan when logging. I believe its due to secondary knock sensor table but its not there to adjust when you upgrade to a newer O.S. The ecm is probably seeing this table as all zeros and thats why the knock sensors are not picking up the pinging.

Sorry but what are you refering to when you say "old table" and "new table". Are you refering to table B6228 as the "old table". If so, what is the new table? The table that our software does not read?

[Blacky]

See image.
Older PCM (obviously) will not have the Knock-new tables. Newer PCMs have them both.

Regards
Paul

[ringram]

Maybe the old ones are like base settings and the new ones modifiers.
So older ones run a less granular setup and newer ones can fine tune much easier?

[87gmc]

Where paul has circled the knock-old sensor is the one i am talking about. If you open a 99 O.S. you will notice there is not only a #1 but also a #2. When you upgrade to 01 or 02 O.S. the #2 dissappears. I believe the knock sensors when upgrading from a 99 to a 01 or 02 still function off of the knock-old. So if im not able to adjust the #2 table and the computer is seeing this table at 0 it is unable to detect knock. I believe that is where i am getting my pinging from. When I Flash my pcm back to 99 pinging goes away. I adjust the #2 table to all zeros and I get the same knock as if i was on the 01 o.s. So my theory for us upgrading to 01 or 02 O.S. we need that secondary table on Knock-old

Maybe i'm wrong

[Blacky]

Where paul has circled the knock-old sensor is the one i am talking about. If you open a 99 O.S. you will notice there is not only a #1 but also a #2. When you upgrade to 01 or 02 O.S. the #2 dissappears. I believe the knock sensors when upgrading from a 99 to a 01 or 02 still function off of the knock-old. So if im not able to adjust the #2 table and the computer is seeing this table at 0 it is unable to detect knock. I believe that is where i am getting my pinging from. When I Flash my pcm back to 99 pinging goes away. I adjust the #2 table to all zeros and I get the same knock as if i was on the 01 o.s. So my theory for us upgrading to 01 or 02 O.S. we need that secondary table on Knock-old

Maybe i'm wrong

It's a good theory, we might have to have a dig around and see if we can find the #2 tables... :shock: :shock: :shock:

Paul

[hpcubed]

Dig deep brother. My 402 is going in and the turbos are sitting in my bedroom. Need those sensors working proper:exactly:

[Blacky]

Thanks for the reminder - something to do tonight :)
Paul

[Blacky]

Ok, I took another look. I am not 100% sure yet, but it appears the #1 and #2 may not be directly related to the 1 and 2 knock sensors as the EFILive descriptions imply. Instead it appears they may be invoked one after the other. Sort of like a double-pass filter. In later models, it appears the second pass was dropped. It seems to me like both knock sensors' voltages are filtered through the same table(s). Twice in early PCMs and just once in later PCMs.

It is difficult to be absolutely certain because the data from those tables is sent to an external chip to configure it to handle the filtering. I can't "see inside" that chip to see exactly what it is doing with the data. :(

Another possible option is that the knock filter chip has multiple modes of operation and early PCMs used a mode that required two sets of filter tables whicle later PCMs used a mode that only required one set of filter tables.

Sorry to be so vague, but whatever happens inside the knock chip is purely speculation at this point.

Regards
Paul

[87gmc]

Could we update to 01 knock sensors maybe?:beer:

[hpcubed]

Well sounds like a little more time is needed for Paul to resolve this but I think he has it in sight. Paul, I follow what you are saying. So how does the situation relate to EFIlive? If the hardware is different for the older PCM's then it seems that the software will need to convert the 2001+ OS so that the OS formats the data for the old hardware (ie. custom OS) - possibly with an enumerated type - old hardware/new hardware selector.

[hpcubed]

Any closer on solving this issue?

[kokki]

Any news?

I have ECM #9381344 .. 1999 Camaro Z28, can I first go to the 2000's OS and from there to COS3?

[hpcubed]

Can we put a 2001 computer in a 99 car without any side effects?

[hpcubed]

What about a custom operating system for the 99 so that it does not revert to the backup VE table?

[Black02SS]

What about a custom operating system for the 99 so that it does not revert to the backup VE table?
Just upgrade it to a 01-02 and use those. That is the best bet.

[hpcubed]

Just upgrade it to a 01-02 and use those. That is the best bet.

The whole point of this thread is when upgrading from a 99 or 00 OS to an 01+ OS, the knock sensors are not configured properly. The hardware in the computer is not compatible with the software of the newer OS.

[Black02SS]

The whole point of this thread is when upgrading from a 99 or 00 OS to an 01+ OS, the knock sensors are not configured properly. The hardware in the computer is not compatible with the software of the newer OS. I totally understand that but that post was asking directly about the backup table, not the knock sensors and I noticed in your sig that a TT is in your future. ;) I was taking that into consideration as well and figured a custom OS would be your best solution. I have done several 99/00 to a 01/02 OS and haven't experienced any issues with this. That is just me though as each car is different.

[hpcubed]

Ok.

And yes I will definitely be running custom OS ver. 3. But I would like to have the knock sensors work properly - ESPECIALLY with forced induction.