WeatherManShawn's Tutorial: can someone look/help...??

[joecar]

+1 on what Shawn said, good log, LTFT's showed deviation from tables, good job...

Did you use VE_Table[%] or VE_Table[g*K/kPa]...?

Thanks for posting.

[joecar]

...

That was bar none the quickest way I have used to clean things up.
...

Well said, the intent of the tutorial was to be able to get the tables corrected in a simple and quick manner...

[joecar]

I'm going to change the title of this thread, if it's ok with everyone...

[tatasta]

I'm going to change the title of this thread, if it's ok with everyone...

Good with me. It was a poor choice of words.

[tatasta]

+1 on what Shawn said, good log, LTFT's showed deviation from tables, good job...

Did you use VE_Table[%] or VE_Table[g*K/kPa]...?

Thanks for posting.

It was VE_Table[%].

[tatasta]

Should I smooth my new B0101 or leave it through the next several logs? It is pretty rough.

[RevGTO]

It's time for me to update also. Hope this isn't a hijack, but it seemed like the right place.

While I was able to bring a lot of my parameters into harmony, my commanded vs. logged AFR continued to be way off in the lean direction. I fooled around with my LM-1 settings and came to the conclusion that my WB was probably functioning properly.

Then I did a bunch of logs with my old OLMAF tune with the modified VE and MAF tables to eliminate narrowband contamination. Commanded vs. logged AFR was much closer. A little more MAF tweaking and it got very close. Then I went back to a CL tune and the AFR's were wildly off and lean again. LTFTBEN's varied quite a bit from log to log, too, but indicate a reduction in MAF values which would push AFR's further in the lean direction.

At this point, I'm stymied. I'm attaching one of my better logs for review and comment.

[joecar]

Should I smooth my new B0101 or leave it through the next several logs? It is pretty rough.

I would push down a little on these two spikes (not completely flatten)... and leave the rest of the table as is.

$0.01

[WeathermanShawn]

Rev:

All I can say looking at your log is that I have never seen closed-loop AFR's so far from stoich. I am using a serial connection with my wideband and always average 14.63 AFR during closed-loop.

The method can not work if closed-loop is not functioning properly. What is odd about your log is that your LTFTBENS are pulling fuel (too rich), but your wideband says lean.

Either your narrowband O2's need replacing, or their is a problem with the wideband reading. Are you sure you are in closed-loop?

Again I have never seen closed-loop AFR's so far from stoich. It is a little puzzling..

[joecar]

It's time for me to update also. Hope this isn't a hijack, but it seemed like the right place.

While I was able to bring a lot of my parameters into harmony, my commanded vs. logged AFR continued to be way off in the lean direction. I fooled around with my LM-1 settings and came to the conclusion that my WB was probably functioning properly.

Then I did a bunch of logs with my old OLMAF tune with the modified VE and MAF tables to eliminate narrowband contamination. Commanded vs. logged AFR was much closer. A little more MAF tweaking and it got very close. Then I went back to a CL tune and the AFR's were wildly off and lean again. LTFTBEN's varied quite a bit from log to log, too, but indicate a reduction in MAF values which would push AFR's further in the lean direction.

At this point, I'm stymied. I'm attaching one of my better logs for review and comment.

Can you also log HO2S11 and HO2S21 (you can remove say IAT to make room since we're using DYNAIRTMP_DMA now).

What value does your B3601 contain...?

Like Weatherman said, your measured AFR has an average value of 15.1...

You should see the measured AFR being equally balanced above/below the stoich AFR like this pic (its average value being stoich)...

[ in pic, to get the wideband AFR add 11.0 to AD1 ]