Page 4 of 19 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 185

Thread: Tuning Notes by WeathermanShawn

  1. #31
    R.I.P Shawn, 1956-2011 WeathermanShawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,807

    Default

    Marcin, all good points, but you need to back it up with data.

    The issue presented on this forum was that beginners lack any viable Tutorials on how to tune. If you leave customers frustrated and unhappy..word of mouth spreads and people will hesitate to pay big bucks to buy tuning software.

    I think you are missing my conclusion. This method of Mapping the VE Table has virtually perfect stoich AFR values in non-PE Modes and perfect WOT AFR's. You are simply utilizing a closed-loop system and applying LTFT corrections to help in perfecting the model.

    I am just skipping the entire AUTOVE BEN application and secondary MAF Calibration that uses the current AFR and BEN method. Again, Marcin..if this is nothing new, and you published it in 2006..you need to help us out and publish a Tuning Tutorial. You need to have an open-mind here. I thought that was the goal of tuning?
    Last edited by WeathermanShawn; February 9th, 2010 at 09:12 AM. Reason: Length, Redundant..
    2002 Black Camaro Z-28 M6 Hardtop 11.0:1CR 425HP/410TQ SAE (400TQ@3500RPM)
    200cc Heads, 228/232 110+2 Cam, 1 3/4" LT's w/catts, GMMG, Koni Shocks, Hotchkis Springs, 35/21 Sways, 17" ZR1's, 3.90 Gears Roadrunner PCM LM-2 Serial Wideband
    EFILive Closed-Loop MAF/SD Hybrid Tune..


  2. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    62

    Default

    Shawn - Let me start by saying I am not even a beginning tuner yet, but your theory sounds really exciting. I just recently bought an '02 Z28 and EFILive, and have an LC-1 on the way. I'm doing my best to take the advice I see here and on other forums - read, read, read - before I start making changes. I have a book on the way and I read here & LS1Tech daily. I initially liked the AutoVE idea after reading the tutorial until I came across some posts that talk about stalling and other issues. I'm not sure I'm your 'target' tuner at this point by I'd love to see how this plays out. Obviously some of this is way over my head but it appears you are trying to simplify the process. Kudos and keep the wheels turning.

  3. #33
    Lifetime Member mr.prick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    I understand the "waste your time" argument but it would make it easier to understand the method and end result for some of us.

    I don't see why one can't be modeled from the other,
    as long as the first one's done right.
    IMO
    As long as LTFTs are "good" and BENs are close to 1.00 @ WOT
    who care what anyone thinks.
    Your VE is not rocky and your off throttle AFR does not go overly rich so I'm inclined to believe you on to something.
    512k RoadRunner Firmware 12.14R
    FlashScan V2 Bootblock V2.07.04 Firmware V2.07.22 EFILive V7.5.7 (Build 191) V8.2.1 (Build 181)
    LC-1 WBO2

    _________________________________________________

  4. #34
    Joe (Moderator) joecar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    28,403

    Default

    tinindian, welcome to the forum...

  5. #35
    Lifetime Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    702

    Default

    Shawn,
    1. you're assuming that MAF calibration is correct. I find that rarely to be true, whether you're using narrowbands, widebands, or ouija board. Fix the basics first, do not move forward until the fundamentals are satisfied.
    2. whatever error you carried over from #1, now you're spreading to other tables.
    3. The fact that you do some stuff, and then you use CL to cover up your results sounds awfully weak. Let's compare apples to apples. Do one tune, using whatever method you'd like. Create a metric for it, make it a good one, none of that AFR%Error average based weaksauce. Fix it up with your method. Use the same metric again. CL is to be used as a corrective measure, not the main driving force behind where do calibration comes from. The idea of a perfect tune is that no corrective mechanisms are needed. The rarer and smaller the corrections are, the better the underlying tune.

    anyway...
    if you find my writeups hard to understand, ask me a question, on my site, through email, through IM, on this forum, skype, whatever. you can accuse me of many things, but not willing to discuss tuning issues ain't one of them

    yes, you are correct, i am knee deep in theory. why? because without _correct_ underpinnings, you end up with the sort of horsepoop we have now: improper attribution, corrective mechanisms that never converge on stable solution, oversimplifying complex systems, disabling not understood functionality, etc.
    I've developed enough theory so I know that the sort of calibration you're talking about is a formality. It's a linear regression from some scannable data. I've played with it, I tried to make it better by using robust fitting and other tricks, but ultimately it will not work, because the very fundamentals are plain wrong.

    Why don't I publish some step-by-step instructions for it? Because it's incorrect.

    'Incorrect' does not make a good 'second best' in absence of 'correct' solution.

  6. #36
    Lifetime Member 5.7ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,840

    Default

    Marcin. While I agree 100% in what you are saying, I believe you are missing Shawns point.
    What he is attempting to do is design a method for the newbie tuner that will get him off & running with a minimum of fuss. Bad science aside it should result in a much better tune than the one that the factory with millions of dollars & thousands of man hours has produced.
    As this person gains more knowledge, of which IMO your blog is required reading, they can then begin addressing the system one table at a time.(or more if necessary)
    my 2c
    The Tremor at AIR

  7. #37
    Senior Member Wolfie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    182

    Default

    Not that anyone cares, BUT I have only been "toying" with EFILive for 2 years now, but for over 200,000 miles... I am waiting on the results of WeathermanShawn. I like the way he is looking at it. I have tried the auto ve, but never actually got through it. I just ended up enabling lean cruise, running ol without cats and a base afr of 15 and some adjustments which keeps me in the 16/17:1 afr most of the time. I am/was only interested in mpg as I drive over 100,000 miles a year. So... You Go! Shawn...
    Wolfie
    LS1B 2007 Express 6.0 /w 470,000+ miles (parked as of 01April2011)

  8. #38
    R.I.P Shawn, 1956-2011 WeathermanShawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,807

    Default

    Mick, you hit the main point on the head! I appreciate it.
    Marcin, I think you need to accept that closed-loop under certain circumstances is of use. The idea is for beginners. People need clear and concise instructions to learn.
    Last edited by WeathermanShawn; February 9th, 2010 at 09:12 AM. Reason: Length, Redundant..
    2002 Black Camaro Z-28 M6 Hardtop 11.0:1CR 425HP/410TQ SAE (400TQ@3500RPM)
    200cc Heads, 228/232 110+2 Cam, 1 3/4" LT's w/catts, GMMG, Koni Shocks, Hotchkis Springs, 35/21 Sways, 17" ZR1's, 3.90 Gears Roadrunner PCM LM-2 Serial Wideband
    EFILive Closed-Loop MAF/SD Hybrid Tune..


  9. #39
    Lifetime Member 5.7ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,840

    Default

    Shawn, Marcin does make some extremely valid points which could be added as a disclaimer in your method. This being that any inaccuracies in the fuel or temperature model will be carried over into these tables & that this is a work around & not a final solution to these issues.
    The Tremor at AIR

  10. #40
    Lifetime Member 5.7ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,840

    Default

    Shawn, I dont think that my last post came out right. Those fuelling & temperature inaccuracies are there when most people are attempting to autove or automaf. The quickest work around is to get it close & use the trims to keep it there. Hence the "bad science" quips which you have recieved.
    I personally still use semi closed loop from 2000rpm up where the cam doesnt mess with the o2 sensors. Why? because I cant get a good enough fit of the temperature model due to heatsoak giving erronous data. Our temperatures here can vary by over 30 degC in a day, so what works on a cold morning with corrections, can be out in the afternoon when it heats up.
    Don't for a minute think that I am against your methods, I believe they have merit in many applications. Especially for the newbie tuner. BUT, & this is the main issue. Anytime airflow is calculated from o2 sensor readings, no matter if a wideband or narrowband sensor is used, any inaccuracies within the fuel or temperature model will be carried over to the airmass estimation tables. Maf or mafless. This is one of the reasons why I have spent so much time on injector characteristics. Get these right & any method will fall into line much faster.
    Keep going, there will be a lot of use for your methods.
    The Tremor at AIR

Page 4 of 19 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. New Tuning Tutorial: WeathermanShawn
    By WeathermanShawn in forum Tutorials
    Replies: 201
    Last Post: March 1st, 2011, 08:31 AM
  2. WeatherManShawn's Tutorial: can someone look/help...??
    By tatasta in forum Gen III V8 Specific
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: April 28th, 2010, 01:25 PM
  3. Release notes
    By PSWired in forum General (Petrol, Gas, Ethanol)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 8th, 2009, 02:40 AM
  4. Beta Releases and Log Files Full Of Notes
    By swingtan in forum FlashScan V2 BB Logging
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: April 28th, 2008, 09:10 PM
  5. User Notes
    By Lextech in forum General (Petrol, Gas, Ethanol)
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: April 8th, 2007, 11:57 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •