Tuning the transient parameters

[hquick]

Sweet!
This morning.....with the impact table looking like this....

0.429688 0.534669 0.640138 0.669923 0.700197 0.715334 0.729982 0.729982 0.729982
0.420899 0.514161 0.606935 0.636720 0.666994 0.681642 0.696779 0.696779 0.696779
0.412599 0.492677 0.573243 0.603517 0.633302 0.648439 0.663087 0.663087 0.663087
0.403809 0.466798 0.529786 0.560060 0.590333 0.604982 0.619630 0.619630 0.619630
0.395509 0.439454 0.483399 0.511720 0.540040 0.553224 0.566407 0.566407 0.566407
0.386720 0.419923 0.440431 0.465333 0.489747 0.500001 0.510255 0.510743 0.511720
0.378419 0.398927 0.423341 0.447267 0.472169 0.484864 0.495607 0.496095 0.497071
0.368165 0.382813 0.400391 0.423341 0.471192 0.488282 0.496583 0.484376 0.482423
0.338868 0.354005 0.371583 0.397462 0.456544 0.476075 0.483888 0.471192 0.467286
0.310059 0.325196 0.343262 0.370118 0.435060 0.455567 0.466798 0.455079 0.451661
0.281251 0.296387 0.314454 0.340821 0.407227 0.430665 0.443360 0.443360 0.440919
0.252442 0.267579 0.285645 0.310548 0.361329 0.398927 0.414552 0.406251 0.395997
0.225098 0.239747 0.256836 0.278321 0.314454 0.345216 0.362794 0.360352 0.323731
0.196289 0.202637 0.219727 0.237305 0.254883 0.276856 0.301270 0.301270 0.301270
0.110840 0.140625 0.155762 0.167969 0.179688 0.190918 0.200684 0.202637 0.203125
0.078613 0.099610 0.125000 0.135254 0.145020 0.155274 0.165039 0.167481 0.169922
0.068848 0.084473 0.103028 0.111328 0.120117 0.129883 0.140137 0.145020 0.149903
0.057617 0.067871 0.083008 0.088379 0.093262 0.103516 0.113281 0.118164 0.123047
0.043945 0.048828 0.049805 0.055176 0.060059 0.070313 0.080078 0.084961 0.089844

I actually felt quite a difference.

[Aloicious]

Sweet!
This morning.....with the impact table looking like this....

0.429688 0.534669 0.640138 0.669923 0.700197 0.715334 0.729982 0.729982 0.729982
0.420899 0.514161 0.606935 0.636720 0.666994 0.681642 0.696779 0.696779 0.696779
0.412599 0.492677 0.573243 0.603517 0.633302 0.648439 0.663087 0.663087 0.663087
0.403809 0.466798 0.529786 0.560060 0.590333 0.604982 0.619630 0.619630 0.619630
0.395509 0.439454 0.483399 0.511720 0.540040 0.553224 0.566407 0.566407 0.566407
0.386720 0.419923 0.440431 0.465333 0.489747 0.500001 0.510255 0.510743 0.511720
0.378419 0.398927 0.423341 0.447267 0.472169 0.484864 0.495607 0.496095 0.497071
0.368165 0.382813 0.400391 0.423341 0.471192 0.488282 0.496583 0.484376 0.482423
0.338868 0.354005 0.371583 0.397462 0.456544 0.476075 0.483888 0.471192 0.467286
0.310059 0.325196 0.343262 0.370118 0.435060 0.455567 0.466798 0.455079 0.451661
0.281251 0.296387 0.314454 0.340821 0.407227 0.430665 0.443360 0.443360 0.440919
0.252442 0.267579 0.285645 0.310548 0.361329 0.398927 0.414552 0.406251 0.395997
0.225098 0.239747 0.256836 0.278321 0.314454 0.345216 0.362794 0.360352 0.323731
0.196289 0.202637 0.219727 0.237305 0.254883 0.276856 0.301270 0.301270 0.301270
0.110840 0.140625 0.155762 0.167969 0.179688 0.190918 0.200684 0.202637 0.203125
0.078613 0.099610 0.125000 0.135254 0.145020 0.155274 0.165039 0.167481 0.169922
0.068848 0.084473 0.103028 0.111328 0.120117 0.129883 0.140137 0.145020 0.149903
0.057617 0.067871 0.083008 0.088379 0.093262 0.103516 0.113281 0.118164 0.123047
0.043945 0.048828 0.049805 0.055176 0.060059 0.070313 0.080078 0.084961 0.089844

I actually felt quite a difference.

nice, I'm still trying to get mine in line, it's helped the lean tip in alot, but I still have pretty bad richness on "tip out" I guess you could call it.

[hquick]

Yeah....I still get a litle rich decel when cool and lean when hotter.
The lean tip in is all but gone.
Need to 'play' with the other stuff now.
Anyone understand which way to adjust the 'boiling time constant' table?

[Aloicious]

Yeah....I still get a litle rich decel when cool and lean when hotter.
The lean tip in is all but gone.
Need to 'play' with the other stuff now.
Anyone understand which way to adjust the 'boiling time constant' table?

yeah I only get rich on decel, its pretty bad at times, like down to 0.7 BEN. but usually averages around .85-0.9, depending on how dramatic the throttle difference is....but falls back into line fairly quick. I'm just really OCD about it all, you know how it is.

[hquick]

Yep....I know 'EXACTLY' how it is. Lol!
I run two logs and do two flashes a day...atleast. Lol!
Have tyou tried bumping up the 20 and 30 KPA rows?
After doing that this morning...I felt a big difference in acceleration.

[hquick]

Just for an update....and for the sake of it.
Here's a log and tune from this morning.

[Whippled 496]

Man you guys are making me jealous as hell!!! LOL. I cant wait till my OS is ready for some testing

[hquick]

LOl! oh....it's worth the wait!

[Aloicious]

Yep....I know 'EXACTLY' how it is. Lol!
I run two logs and do two flashes a day...atleast. Lol!
Have tyou tried bumping up the 20 and 30 KPA rows?
After doing that this morning...I felt a big difference in acceleration.

I'm going to try that on my way home from work today. I'm also swapping back to COS 3 (02020003), I've found I don't really like the lean cruise tuning via the LC CAX file (using the GM lean cruise tables), so I'm going to use the pseudo lean cruise w/ RPM vs MAP commanded fuel. we'll see how it goes, although I ran COS 3 for a while earlier this year and it seemed to do okay. so I don't expect problems from the OS swap.

[hquick]

You can see in that tune above I have the 'pseudo' lean cruise happening via B3647