Hey Guy's,
'Ok', it’s probably nice to see the VE's looking like a quilt blanket; it’s not going to be a point of embracement if you have a slight roughness in the 3D graph. We are tuning, "not displaying art work". The Cells will still interpolate well smoothing with multiple weights of about 10-20 at a time,
If you have used our mate "BEN" to do your Autotune, Then you sould trust his judgment without OVER smoothing.
Cheers Scotty.
It's a lot easier to ask for forgiveness than it is to ask for permission.
So you are saying to only smooth by 10 to 20? Its early here. LOL
The pic shows part throttle section of the VE table from my car, this runs 14.6 - 14.7 spot on in all these area's, it looks ugly, but thats what the engine and the WBO2 tell me what it needs.
I think smoothing the VE table might not be very wise if you have used the BEN factor, it is what it is!!.
However, I do think smoothing the spark maps is probably worth doing.
Cheers,
Ross
One thing to remember when using the ben factor is that it take the area around it data as well
lets take a 2000/50kpa point , it will use all the data from 1800-2200 and the data from the 57-62kpa region , if you only gather a small median of data the area can see a spike , also different air temps and atmospheric onditions will slew the data slightly. To see what I mean go and have a look at the min and max value for each point is.
You will also get transients creeping into the data.
The errors can be smoothed by taking a large chunk of data for each point. On my car whe have done approx 30 logs and used the data to get the table very smooth but each log has been about a hour+ of driving in lots off different conditions.
the ben factor is not a be all and end all to get the perfect tune , its to get you into the ballpark in a very small time frame , carefully smoothing ( not excessive ) and lots of data will get you closer to the right point.
Another way to look at this is to log the VE value , in hteory the map should come out exactly as it is in the calibration - it doesnt it has the same sort of spikes ( even though the calibration table may be completely smooth) due to the above mentioned problems.
Its the same with any auto tune feature - be it motec, autronic ,ame , kalmaker etc.
My VE on the LS6 with headers, and 3" dual exhaust came out smoother than Ross's example. Consistent weather during AutoVE, careful throttle application, filtering of transients, and huge 1+ hour log files and several iterations got all my BENs within less than 1%. Took about 6 hours of logging and six iterations of the VE.
If there is a cell in the VE that comes up 120 surrounded by completely by cells reading 65, by all means, hand tweak the 120 cell and re-AutoVE and see where it comes up again.
The 120 example may be a real spike (usually not that big of a difference or limited to one cell) due to the harmonics of the intake, rapid throttle application, etc.
As you are SD AutoVE tuning and getting the BENs all close to 1.00, you will notice how nice the car runs - you can feel it - smooth power delivery from idle to redline at any manifold pressure.
Smoothing VE maps in the past has just had me chasing my tail.
2009 Z06 LS7 / 2008 Sierra Denali AWD L92 6L80E
Flashing control modules since 2001. 8-)
Who needs a MAP sensor on a supercharged LS6 anyway.
There is so much confilcitng information about a smooth ve table and a not smooth ve table. I think our frined "BEN" coupled with well chossen filter criteria will make up and get us damn close to a fairly smooth ve table....
Maybe tightening up the TP% change criteria will lead to a smaller more uniform BEN factors that wont creat that many spikes and valleys. 2% 2.5% maybe?
Also as far as smoothig is concened I think going from a stock table to tuning something like a full bolton and greater car. You can start out will 100% smoothing on the first pass to normalize everythign. Each addition pass on the ve table should decrease the smoothing weight. The closer you get the more you decrease the wieght. After a while it shouldnt really affectt the table anymore unless you are looking and the numbers to 6 decimal places
EFILive - The Single version of the Truth
Larry - HumpinSS
Exactly. Smoothing works well when making that first AutoVE major tweak to the stock VE. Then just "let it ride" and see where it all shakes out.
A large portion of the tuning threads I see on LS1Tech are quite funny.
My favorite one of recent "What is the difference between open and closed loop?"
Put the laptop down, step away from the tuning software.
:lol:
2009 Z06 LS7 / 2008 Sierra Denali AWD L92 6L80E
Flashing control modules since 2001. 8-)
Who needs a MAP sensor on a supercharged LS6 anyway.
GMPX/Blacky - If either of you get a chance, please read this thread..(starts really on page2)
http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showth...9&page=1&pp=40
This is a conversation mainly between myself, DirkDiggler(HumpinSS), and Magnus regarding smoothing the ve table. Like Dirk mentioned above, why is their such a controversity over weather to smooth it or not? Keith says that it needs to be smooth because of the interpolation of the cells, where I have stated since day one like Ross did, its what the car wants and what is what the wideband tells me it needs. So is there really a correct way or is it just a personal preference? I have tried to smooth and make it look perty, but it just doesn't seem to work as my actual differes greatly from my commanded.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:Originally Posted by SinisterSS
Keith has a point in that you would not get away with BIG differences between cells, smoothing is helpful there, but as Rick said (hope it was you Rick) your first log of the BEN factor might produce some spikey areas, smoothing on the first pass would be a good idea to get things in the ballpark, then logs done after that will be pretty much what the engine wants, it does depend on how crazy you want to get with this stuff, but because the PCM can interpolate (256 from memory) values between the cells so you are never going to hit the same points at say 2000 - 2400 and 55 - 60kPa, so between those cells the PCM may calculate a VE number of 1.203 or 1.209 or 1.198 etc (I did a thread on that somewhere), the more logging you do, the more correction you apply will pretty much reduce those error factors.
You are always fighting the PCM interpolating between the cells, the idea is to narrow the range of that interpolation by either 'measuring it' or 'smoothing' it which is a calculated correction.
I don't spend 8hrs a day tuning cars so I just can't say 100% that you should not use smoothing all the time, mathematically it doesn't make sense to me to do it that way. But practically I'd love to hear from others, I found on my own car making the graph look like a babies blanket screwed my WBO2 values.
Delco, if you wouldn't mind passing on your eperiences with your car that would be good, I know that thing has a BEN factor of what 1.0001 everywhere!!.
Cheers
Ross
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
