As the title suggest, I just want to see if I am on the same track as others on here.
Heres mine :nixweiss:
http://www.angermanagementracing.com...rary/A0014.JPG
Printable View
As the title suggest, I just want to see if I am on the same track as others on here.
Heres mine :nixweiss:
http://www.angermanagementracing.com...rary/A0014.JPG
Mine is the total reverse of that one. Using a Over radiator cai - i have about
0.96 at 10deg C
0.98 at 20deg C
1.00 at 30deg C
1.04 at 40deg C
1.08 at 50 deg C
It seems weird but its working!
Mine is same as flyer pretty much. Again, not sure why. Maybe the charge blend table is out of whack and the backwards A00014 fixes it?
Will investigate more in a few weeks when my dart heads and cam are on :)
I too change like Flyer does
Yea, I guess i was going the wrong way. My assumtion was that I needed more fuel with lower IAT's. I guess the assumption is right, but the application is wrong.
I know EFILive is coming out with a new OS that will address this after LS2/7 support, are they having it work the opposite way like stated here, or is it going off theory, and not whats seen in the real world?
I have been testing with this table a bit lately and this is what I have found works for me:
In another thread Paul (Blacky) posted a spreadsheet that attempted to calculate (I guess with scientific basis) what the values should be. It had many columns to allow you to define at which IAT temp is your 1.0 factor and then scale the rest of the table appropriately. The results seemed to be in contrast what what people (me included) are seeing.
In my previous testing I have found the same results as Flyer and ringram (where the factor increases as the IAT increases).
This last test what I decided to do is reverse the values in the spreadsheet that Paul produced. This seems to be pretty much spot on IMO.
So my table scaled so that an IAT of 30*C is 1.00 looks like:
LABELS IAT VE Multiplier (Multiplier)
IAT °C {link: SAE.IAT} Value
-40 0.911377
-30 0.922607
-20 0.934082
-10 0.946289
0 0.958984
10 0.972168
20 0.985596
30 1.000000
40 1.014892
50 1.030517
60 1.046875
70 1.063965
80 1.081787
90 1.100830
100 1.120849
110 1.141846
120 1.164307
130 1.187988
140 1.213135
Cheers,
tordne - will you email a copy of that spreadsheet. I get an error when i try to download it
Yes, that is backwards, most have found the hotter the intake temp it leans out, esp at idle, low throttle. I found the charge table didn't seem to help the problem either.......oh, this is running full open loop, no O2 feedback at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by vetteboy2k
Cheers,
Ross
My table was very similar
but i have just pasted yours Tordne
Here was my one.
0.979980
0.979980
0.979980
0.979980
0.979980
0.979980
0.979980
0.989990
1.010010
1.030029
1.050049
1.070068
1.090088
1.110107
1.100098
1.100098
1.100098
1.100098
1.100098
Here is the difference between mine and yours
0.068603
0.057373
0.045898
0.033691
0.020996
0.007812
-0.005616
-0.010010
-0.004882
-0.000488
0.003174
0.006103
0.008301
0.009277
-0.020751
-0.041748
-0.064209
-0.087890
-0.113037
I'll be interested to see your results (either way).
I think if I was to start all over again with the Custom OS I might actually find where my IAT is most likely to be at 1.00 and then install the appropriate table to start with. I think that a lot of my changes have been related to variances in IAT. Often times the same cells will toggle from perhaps 0.98 to 1.02 BEN, and it might be that one log was done at say 20*C IAT and another at 30*C IAT.
I am finding that my values are a lot more consistent as a result :)
Yep. Works nice for me as stated above. I might just need to extend the operating range for summer. Hopefully heads and cam in about a week. (Got postponed 7 days!!!!!)
What I am thinking might be a valuable addition to the next custom OS is to have the A0014 Open Loop IAT VE Multiplier Table have a range more closely related to real world temps. My IAT's generally are around 10°F above ambient and I am never near -20,30,40°C nor near 100,110,120,130,140°C. If we could have more values near 20-30°C I think that will help most of us be more spot on during those normal operating IAT area's.
I see through my logs in Open loop, the closer I am to colder IAT's the ritcher the A/F but then as the IAT's rise (in the same 20°C row) the mixture gets leaner. If there were more values for this table I could really hone A0014 in.
Something like below for example.
LABELS IAT VE Multiplier (Multiplier)
IAT °C {link: SAE.IAT} Value
-10
0
8
11
14
17
20
23
26
29
32
35
38
42
45
50
60
70
80
It will automatically interpolate dude.
So if its 1.0 at 20 and 1.1 at 30 it will be 1.05 at 25.
So Id not worry too much about the resolution myself.
Gotya, I will then just create a filter on the logs to filter out the inbetween temps to get the 100% correction factor for that temp and let the interpolation do its job.
has anyone setup a MAP to make this easier?
It would be similar to RAF maps but I cannot see what the column should be (Data = BEN, Row = IAT, Column = ??)
This is what I did, not saying its 100% right.
Anyone else feel free to correct.
It is a lot harder to change table axis in code than it is to add a table in to the code .Quote:
Originally Posted by vetteboy2k
The interpolation that the PCM does makes the table axis scaling not a issue in our case , the biggest issue is getting your VE right at a fixed temp then once the VE table is 100% correct you can then start tuning A0014 Open Loop IAT VE Multiplier Table,
Set up a ben factor and IAT map and use that to correct the A0014 Open Loop IAT VE Multiplier Table.
My table is
0.911377
0.922607
0.934082
0.946289
0.958984
0.972168
0.985596
1.000000
1.014892
1.030517
1.046875
1.063965
1.081787
1.100830
1.120849
1.141846
1.164307
1.187988
1.213135
Its pretty close
Your attachment isn't opening vette, says the zip file is corrupt
The original .zip I made opens fine, I downloaded the one that was uploaded to the forum saved to a new name and it didn't open.
I will upload again. Must be something with the upload to the forum or something. Too bad we can't just upload .maps
Ok that still didn't work,
Here you go a link to it hosted on my buddies website.
http://www.angermanagementracing.com...maps/A0014.zip
thanks mate, that download worked
That's exactly how I had my map setup :)
Welcome, I think we should have an area to share maps created to help others with certain tasks.
That is a great idea.....Quote:
Originally Posted by vetteboy2k
Bill
:beer: :notacrook:
Any suggestion for those of us with manifold mounted blowers? We experience very wide IAT swings, and it seems that a certain amount of compensation is "built in" to our VE tables due to the nature of the beast. Since my new setup isn't really tuned yet, I'm wondering if it might not be a good idea to start out with something like Oztrack's or Tordne's tables and work around that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Delco
Hmmm....I'm going through this at the moment.
My A0014 as of this morning is below....
1.000000
1.000000
1.000000
1.000000
1.000000
1.000000
0.959961
0.953125
0.961182
0.979492
0.986084
0.984375
0.985107
0.985107
0.985107
1.000000
1.000000
1.000000
1.000000
crazy stuff mate. Might suggest that your ve is a bit skew whif..?
Is your ve dead on at a certain temp, (eg) 30* IAT at all load points?
Well...that's where I'm having trouble.
I've taken around 200 logs and am still working on the VE!
Here's a log from a couple of days ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oztracktuning
Does this table effect wot commanded af?
Yes it affects everywhere the VE table is used.
There are some funny tables there guys , normally you need to add enrichment at high and low temps to correct the std VE table compensations , and flatter in the middle at the normal 20-30 deg region where the original tuning was done
Currently on base setup running the 04 HSV Clubsport tune in semi-open loop I set as standard to 1 over the full range.
Still no widebands so hoping the stft will cover things?
I have the Map setup but the IAT is soo hot right now it will take a few months to get a complete table. Should I just start with 1.00 in this table before before starting to log? I think I should.
Bill
Yeah I think so. Then try and log at constant IAT and shape your VE on that. Then you can have that as your stake in the ground. Then you can do some logs with average BEN vs IAT and make your A00014 from that.
At least thats what I tried to do. Seems ok. Still a little tail chasing though.
Talk about chasing your tail. Try using a blower that "modulates" your IAT with every stomp of the pedal. LOL. Constant IAT? I've heard of it.
This whole thing has me a bit flummoxed. In general people comment that things go lean at low IAT's. Fair enough. However the A0014 tables people are coming up with indicate the opposite. OK, maybe something got reversed along the way. Then to add to the fun, DELCO comments that the tables being posted up are inconsistant with his experience, and that VE needs a push at both ends of the temperature range. Well, Dan has tuned more cars than any 10 of us put together, so I take what he says seriously.
It would seem to me, that for a given ECM type, the A0014 table required to get stable VE's over a wide temperature range wouldn't vary much from car to car. If that assumption is correct, then a "canned" setting should get us pretty close to the truth. Perhaps I'm full of hot air. (pun intended)
With my setup, the only hope for a useful temperature compensation would be to use someone elses A0014 table and remap my VE based on that, or plot BEN against temperature at the AIR INLET, because of the wild temperature swings caused by the blower and aluminum manifold, even with a constant ambient temperature.
prior to running a custom OS I see there was no A0014 style table. Ignoring my ignorance for a second is this just a fine tuning table to improve over stock calculations? If so, leaving at 1 should have a similar result to as if I was still using the factory OS?
Very good observation. {Just a little push} The stock OS Fuel Commanded in Open loop is based on ECT and MAP, since the COS goes off of RPM vs. MAP A0014 becomes the ECT mitigating factor.
This is the beauty of the COS...generally speaking once you have gotten up to full operating temp you will stay there and, gain further useful resolution based on RPM vs. MAP commanded fueling.
.. Also stock is closed loop :) Most guys with COS run open loop.
I also suspect the charge blending tables might need a touchup, the A00014 is somewhat easier to massage as its 1 dimensional, anyone had a go at fixing the VE vs IAT issue by messing with charge blending?
ringram, i've got a method where I optimize VE and charge bias at the same time, to yield the smallest errors across the board. it works--the AFR scatter is smaller, idle is smoother, yada yada yada. that's all on stock e40, no COS tricks. it's not perfect, as i'm suspecting the imperfect data for injectors dump different amount of fuel than they need, which makes some errors persist. tuning charge air bias is not the 'end all' solution, but it's a step in a right direction.
Just curious, what does your blend look like?Quote:
Originally Posted by redhardsupra
Mine is about 50~80% below stock:
LABELS Charge Temperature Blending (Factor)
Grams/Second {link: SAE.MAF} Value
0.00 0.145000
10.00 0.126000
20.00 0.112000
30.00 0.102000
40.00 0.095000
50.00 0.090000
60.00 0.086000
70.00 0.082000
80.00 0.078000
90.00 0.074000
100.00 0.070000
110.00 0.066000
120.00 0.062000
130.00 0.058000
140.00 0.054000
150.00 0.050000
This seems to work fairly well with the IAT relocated to capture true initial IAT temps prior to progressing through the intake tract and into the cylinders.
Kewl, do you have a script kiddie spread sheet or something Sir?Quote:
Originally Posted by redhardsupra
no not really, i've barely coming to grips with all the new math and ways of thinking about how to approach such problems. right now i have some rough 'engineering samples' with a lot of manual steps (aka hundred ways to do it wrong).
if you want a spreadsheet with just the bias optimization, i can probably do that. send me an email or something i'll send you a sample so you'll see what data you need to gather and how to go about the process.