new guy here look for some help

[WeathermanShawn]

I attached a sample VE Table from your latest Log & Tune. Here I manually smoothed it. I took out some spikes and dips, but tried to keep the general slope of your VE Table. Ideally your VE Table should follow the natural Torque curve of your engines output on a dyno.

The two additional screen-shots are your MAF curve and your VE Table plotted in g/s and portrayed two-dimensionally. (under Tune Tool Tab Edit-properties-Display in g/s). Again, ideally the g/s value should match your MAF airflow in g/s. Its kinda a brain twister to think of it that way, but that is why your truck will run differently MAF vs no-MAF. Ideally you want the airflow's to match perfectly..

Hope that helps..

[kelly brooks]

so my maf curve should look like my ve curve at gm/s. that helps now I just need to figure out how to do it. LOL

[WeathermanShawn]

Yes.

Primarily in the 'slope' of the curve. Ideally it should match airflow (g/s) from the lowest MAF Frequency you encounter to the highest.

If you know how to work an Excel program you can actually line up the axis's and graph the two. Not to over-complicate, but the VE Table (g/s) utilizes a charge temperature. If you use your log's average Dynamic Air Temperature that will get you close.

The MAF also uses CYLAIR and the VE Table DYNCYLAIR for its airflow calculations. You can easily plot those and compare. You might checkout Joecar's Tutorial Links in his signature. He explains all the differences in a very clear and concise manner.

The bottom line is the VE Table can be accurately calculated. A log utilizing a MAF Frequency allows you to do it. Smoothing the resultant calculated VE Table to match it to the MAF will make it even more accurate.

Good luck..

[joecar]

Follow link in my sig, see Summary Notes.

[kelly brooks]

good stuff. guess I got some reading to do.