Jump to content

Steve

Members
  • Content Count

    285
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Reputation Activity

  1. Haha
    Steve got a reaction from Rozsko in High spec EJ257 misfire, cam correlation, cranking compression difference between two banks   
    Sidenote. Here is a car i had yesterday. Problem is a hydraulic lifter resulting in a short EVO duration. About where my markers are set. Care to guess what a conventional compression tester would have showed

  2. Thanks
    Steve got a reaction from jzx_jake in Heat soak   
    https://www.t1racedevelopment.com/product/t1-fast-at/
     
  3. Thanks
    Steve got a reaction from FredMendes in Obd2 Bluetooth Reader and Torque App?   
    Yes. Thats the new one.. 
  4. Thanks
    Steve got a reaction from Miguel Silva in 2µF Suppressor, what type can it be or must be?   
    There we go.
    Granted the RPM line itself is smoother than what i suspected. Could be because of slow logging rate. What gives it away to me though is looking at the RPM ROC parameter. Thats RPM Rate Of Change. How much the RPM changes over a second. Anything over 0 meens RPM is rising at a certain rate and below 0 means its falling. We bot KNOW you are accelerating so the CRANK is certainly not slowing down, right? However you can see i both my screenshots that the ECU is logging a very erratic RPM ROC. It should ALWAYS be on the positive side when the engine is accelerating. That IS the CAS flapping around. There is also some knock registered in one of the logs. I bet because of unstable timing.


     

     
     
    Never mind me saying it looked smoother than expected. I just wasnt looking close enough at it. Its actually one of the worst i have ever seen

     
    You sir, are going to install a cranktrigger before it breaks down completely
  5. Thanks
    Steve got a reaction from Miguel Silva in 2µF Suppressor, what type can it be or must be?   
    I fabbed a simple bracket and bolted it to my ac pump bracket. Drilled and tapped. I have also seen it bolted to the other side of the oilpump on a simple bracket. See if you can find pictures by member lostsoul here or at the aus300zx forum. 
  6. Like
    Steve reacted to Ivaylo Angelov in 2µF Suppressor, what type can it be or must be?   
    Just wanted to clear the VAG coil wiring diagram. These coils have two ground connections when in the OEM installation . One is for the secondary coil - wired to the cyl head. The second is for the coil driver - wired to the chassis/ecu ground.
  7. Like
    Steve got a reaction from Stevieturbo in 2µF Suppressor, what type can it be or must be?   
    There we go.
    Granted the RPM line itself is smoother than what i suspected. Could be because of slow logging rate. What gives it away to me though is looking at the RPM ROC parameter. Thats RPM Rate Of Change. How much the RPM changes over a second. Anything over 0 meens RPM is rising at a certain rate and below 0 means its falling. We bot KNOW you are accelerating so the CRANK is certainly not slowing down, right? However you can see i both my screenshots that the ECU is logging a very erratic RPM ROC. It should ALWAYS be on the positive side when the engine is accelerating. That IS the CAS flapping around. There is also some knock registered in one of the logs. I bet because of unstable timing.


     

     
     
    Never mind me saying it looked smoother than expected. I just wasnt looking close enough at it. Its actually one of the worst i have ever seen

     
    You sir, are going to install a cranktrigger before it breaks down completely
  8. Like
    Steve got a reaction from MagicMike in V6, lambda different bank to bank   
    You could loosen up the WG actuator rod a litte bit to fix that tho..
  9. Like
    Steve got a reaction from jetape in Recovery from quick throttle blips, bogs down   
    ROC stands for Rate Of Change. Or dRPM (delta RPM)  if thats a more failiar term. Its a parameter that tells you how fast rpm is changing pr second. If it rises from 2000 to 3000 rpm in one second you have a value of 1000. Does it use 2 seconds to do the same ROC is 500. If rpm is dead stable ROC is 0.
    In the attached picture you can see an example. Base timing in that is 12 degrees but when rpm drops when i clutch the car (it is usually more than -1000 dRPM)  timing is at about 22 degrees falling towards idle arget. Dropping as dRPM drops.
    Thats not a screenshot from the link software but the same can be done there.

  10. Like
    Steve got a reaction from Adamw in Recovery from quick throttle blips, bogs down   
    If you change the y axis from etc (which you really arent using anyway) to rpm roc you can fix the idle ignition going low when you dont want it to.
  11. Like
    Steve reacted to Davidv in Suggestion: New Mixture Map logic for improved results   
    Hi, 

    Currently with mixture map you set a threshold so that samples within say 25% of the centre of a cell vertically and horizontally.
    This pool of results are used to contribute towards an average value in the centre of the closest cell. 
    However this means that you've got 25% variation of rpm and load, contributing to a static value in the centre - and you need to throw away 75% (?) of recorded values.
    I have another idea that can let you use all of the data instead, and improve the results.
    For simplicity's sake imagine a 4x4 grid, and our current load and rpm point is 25% of the way towards the lower RPM value and 25% of the way towards the lower Load value. 
    If we interpolate these values, as per what the ECU does. 
    Note: I have just titled the columns and rows with percentages to show what percentage of the each cell we are interpolating from.



    We get a value of (25% * 25* 10) + ( 25% * 75% * 30) + (25% * 75% * 20) + (75% * 75 * 40)
    = 0.625 + 6.075 + 3.75 + 22.5

    = 32.95 is the table value that interpolation produces. 

    Now lets say that you wanted to add 10% to this value.

    If we just adjust the closest cell by 10%, as per current Mixture Map strategy. Then our bottom left cell changes to 44 so our table now looks like this:



    If we do the interpolation again, but with the new value to represent running the car again after the update:
    We get a value of (25% * 25* 10) + ( 25% * 75% * 30) + (25% * 75% * 20) + (75% * 75 * 44)
    = 0.625 + 6.075 + 3.75 + 24.75

    = 35.2 as the new overall value. Which is only makes 6.8% difference to the interpolated value, rather than the 10% we wanted.

    On the other hand...

    If PCLink De-interpolated the 10% that it wants to add.

    Instead of adding 10% to the one cell, we split the 10% addition across the 4 cells based on the same percentage that the value was interpolated from initially. 

    So:
    Top left cell: (10 * 1.1 * .25 * .25) = 0.6875
    Bottom left cell: (30 * 1.1 * .25 * .75) = 6.1875
    Top Right Cell:   (20 * 1.1 * .25 * .75) = 4.125
    Bottom Right Cell: (40 * 1.1 * .75 * .75) = 24.75


    = 35.75 is the table value that de-interpolation produces. 

    We were trying to add 10% and this new value produced is 10.5%. So that's pretty good!  
    (The 0.5% error comes from rounding to 3 decimal places in my example)
    So it's accurate to the provided data in every instance. Which is especially relevant when it's applied 1000s of times across all of the cells. You dont need to throw away any of your recorded data, it all contributes to the cell values.

    Mixture map is pretty good for roughing out a map initially but because of the inaccuracies of the "nearest cell" method I don't really use it that much anymore when trying to dial in a fuel map. You always overshoot or undershoot unless you set your cell tolerances impossibly tight and have millions of samples.

    And, since this is all only done in PCLINK rather than the ECU, there's not really any worry about the overheads of the extra maths involved. It's worth having it chug away for a few minutes longer if you can get an awesome result on first or second iteration of Mixture map logging.

    So - that's my Friday night suggestion. 
    Thanks for reading if you got this far, haha.

     
     
  12. Like
    Steve got a reaction from TnF in Differential fuel pressure - Nominal fluctuation range?   
    I actually went from aeromotive fpr to stock when i started pwm'ing my pump.
  13. Like
    Steve got a reaction from GregM in Differential fuel pressure - Nominal fluctuation range?   
    I actually went from aeromotive fpr to stock when i started pwm'ing my pump.
  14. Like
    Steve reacted to mapper in Wall wetting model for accel enrichment / cold start etc.   
    Another thing which I would like is a 3D Accel Cold correction table so it can be spanned with Engine running time or charge temperatur or a modelled intake manifold temp. 
    The reason is simple. Just after cold startup, it needs much more accel enrichment, than after 1-3min running time of the engine.  From a tuning perspective, you need to add a lot of accel enrichment just after the start of the engine so throttle response is good. But after 1-3min running ECT is still similar, but manifold ports have got some temp into it. Now the big Accel enrichment just flushes the cylinders and oil film down.  
  15. Thanks
    Steve reacted to Davidv in Road tuning ignition timing for best economy   
    Hey people, 
    Just thought I'd post up a quick note about something I did recently that worked out well.

    I was wanting to optimise ignition timing for cruise, so using some switches on my dash to trigger a combination of datalogging, 4D ignition, 5D ignition and the 2nd ignition table set to overlay mode.

    With the idea that I could add or remove timing from the main table in varying amounts without having to stop the car, and datalog the whole lot easily.

    Like so: 



    Since you can turn on more than one ignition trim table at once, using those three you can get a combination of timing settings which I then marked on the switches. 

    So +1 degree, + 3 degrees, +5 degrees, etc. 
    I completed a run on a particular stretch of motorway that has lots of ups and downs, with cruise control turned on at a speed that's at 3250rpm in 6th gear.
    Then flicked the first switch, did it again.
    Flicked second switch, did it again, and so on. 

    When home looking through the data, bringing up a time plot with instant fuel consumption and throttle angle it was very easy to see which timing gave best economy. 


    However a secondary method of checking fuel consumption overall is to create a "statistics" page and bring up wheel speed and instant fuel consumption, and look at the mean values:


    Then from here I've made a quick excel sheet that converts it to Litres per 100km:



    Then from here, collated the results from each run.


    So based on this it's pretty clear that an additional 9 deg advance made the engine pretty happy on those particular cells, so updated my ignition table and readjusted some of the surrounding cells to more sensible values too.

    It was a fairly time consuming exercise but it's amazing to see how much fuel I have been throwing down the toilet just based on under advanced ignition. 
    It was also interesting to see that at 100kpa my car only has 14 deg ignition at that rpm, but then by 70kpa it's wanting 33. (The goal AFR changes though, to be fair... 15.2:1 goal AFR for cruising)

    Since changing the timing the car is a lot quieter too! 
    I am guessing because when you dont have enough timing, the flame front is still expanding when the exhaust valves open. So instead of having energy push the piston down, it's coming out the exhaust as noise and heat. 
  16. Like
    Steve got a reaction from TechDave in Could someone look at my log and tune?   
    Quite a few things i question or would change here.
    You have charge temp aproximation on, AND iat and warmupenrichment on. Thats not supposed to be like that. Chargetemp aproximation table doesnt look right either.
    You are running E85 and relatively low boost yet to me your timingfigures seem pretty low. Now i dont know evos but that cant be right. Is the trigger calibrated (Is a timinglamp showing the same as the numbers in the ecu?)
    You have (as far as my google fu can tell) injectors that have a 3D deadtimetable available. Make the deadtime table 3D and fill it in correctly. Then in the main fuelsetup type in the current fuel base pressure and flow  numbers based on reality. (You would need a retune after this so leave it if you are not going to.)
    Your limiters have a delay of 3 full seconds before they cut in. You r engine wont take 3 seconds at wot with no oilpressure.
    Your running closed loop lambda all the time and it is alowed to make up to +-15% changes. even at WOT. Although some do this i wouldnt personaly risk that my sensor faults at wot and the ecu takes out 15% fuel. But thats just me.
    If my findings about low timingnumbers are real i doubt the engine is really knocking. In that case knock control isnt set right.
    I would get a fuelpresure sensor hooked up and use FP referenced fuel type system. Just because its awsome...
    Fuel charge cooling coefficient isnt set right for e85
    Fuel density temp coefficient isnt set fofr e85
    Fuel dencity at 20 deg isnt set for e85
    Engine size is set to 2.4 litres. Is this right?
    Thats a start at least...
    But the fuel table LOOKS pretty though. Maybe too pretty for a real engine.
    HPAcademy.com is your friend.
  17. Like
    Steve reacted to Adamw in DBW Throttle on GTRLink Plugin   
    It can be done.  It would be best to request it at the time of order then it doesnt need to be shipped back to us for modification.  Note if you contact tech support we will also give you the circuit required to get the TP out signal from the Thunder to make the GTR Attessa work.
  18. Like
    Steve got a reaction from Adamw in Subaru 3000rpm rare target AFR   
    Pulsedamper in the fuelsystem? Or is it deleted?
    Also you can try to change the lenght of the vacuumtube to the fuelpressure regulator.
    Have not looked at the log yet. This is just based on experience of myself and others
  19. Like
    Steve got a reaction from Adamw in Tomei Rb28 Pro Cams   
    Fudge the cal 4 calibration to make the ecu read the same as the gauge. What you are seeing is ground offset. Maybe the ecu and the gauge are grounded at different places? This is one reason why getting a CAN based lambda unit is such great idea.
  20. Like
    Steve reacted to Brad Burnett in g4+ thunder plug housing   
    part numbers for a and b connectors in attached pic
    terminal part number is 3-1447221-3

  21. Like
    Steve reacted to Adamw in ross trigger kit rb26   
    GS101201 is the version with integrated metripack connector, GS101202 is the pigtailed version (seems a little harder to find).
  22. Like
    Steve got a reaction from iecku.tavea racing in OS-88 Gear Shift Control   
    The ssr dont use the same pinout tho. Even though they do fit in a regular relay holder. Make sure you understand how to wire it or you will ruin it...
  23. Like
    Steve got a reaction from milton r33 in Cas trigger set up AEM CAS DISK   
    That is correct.
    It supposed to be opticl/hall. The CAS is an optical unit.
    Remember to calibrate your timing before startup now mate.
    Disable the injectors, hook up a plugwire between the coil and plug on cyl one and hook up the timinglight to that. Nowhere else!
  24. Like
    Steve got a reaction from milton r33 in 7k cut off g4+ plug in, cas issues   
    The best and only way I personaly recoment to fix this is with a crankfitted triggerwheel.
    However time is of the essense in your case.
    You should install that AEM disk in the cas and you will be good. You will still have timingscatter in real life but your ecu will not notice it so much causing it to hit the RPM limiter (your limiter is set to 9000 and the rpm spikes goes higher that that) and also will likely fix the trigger errors you get at that area. This will be your quick fix. You set it up as multi thooth in the trigger 1 settings and camx1 in the trigger 2 settings.
    You could also, just to try it out, set the low res mode to on in your triggersettings.
    But again. Real cranktrigger is your only real solution. This also applies to the Haltech...
  25. Like
    Steve got a reaction from TechDave in Holy shit! I wish you guys are all ok!   
    Just found out bout the quake
×
×
  • Create New...