Adamw
-
Posts
20,157 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1,287
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by Adamw
-
-
Trying to tune any fuel or ign table before you have the basic requirements of a running engine in place is pointless. A log is worthless when we cant trust any of the data that it is showing.
The first thing you must do is verify the ignition timing. If you don't have easily accessible TDC marks on the pulley or flywheel, then paint on something temporary using your best guess at TDC based on something like a screwdriver down a spark plug hole - not accurate but at least that will verify if you are in the ball park. Similarly, cam timing is also easy enough to do a reality check on. At TDC exhaust stroke, both intake and exhaust valves will be open a similar amount and it should be relatively small - say 2mm lift. MAP sensor is also easy to verify; Suck on the hose with your mouth - you should be able to get down to say about 50KPa (guessing?), blow on the hose you should see ~110KPa.
-
Have you done the trigger calibration with a timing light per Scott's suggestion earlier? Your MAP is >100KPa at idle - if an engine like this cant pull decent vacuum at idle then most likely either ignition timing or cam timing is out. It also seems odd that MAP is higher than BAP at idle? Maybe your MAP sensor is connected wrong or not calibrated correctly?
-
There are quite a few ways to do this but this would be my suggestion. Your pot will be connected to an analog input. Set the Analog input function to "Voltage 0.5V", name it something like "Launch Pot".
Set the launch mode to "3D Launch RPM table". Put your Launch pot analog channel on one axis of the table (values should span 0-5) and usually non driven wheel speed on the other axis. My rough example below would allow your pot to adjust initial launch RPM from 3000 to 5500RPM.
-
Do these Amps need a lot of cooling? It says they need to be on a heat sink so will do that but didn't know if they would be ok in a box under the dash seeing as they were originally in the Ecu?
How much cooling they need will depend on how much current your coils pull and how often or long the engine spends at high load. Most electronics will give a significantly shorter life expectancy above say 85C so you want to take some steps to minimise this. The general rule is they need to be mounted to an aluminium plate of reasonable thickness and surface area and you really want them in reasonably open air so that convection can do its job. You should also use heat transfer paste on the mating faces (the modules normally come with a small packet). Certainly under the dash is ok but I wouldn't be sealing them in a box.
-
David V's write up here is a good start: http://forums.linkecu.com/index.php?/topic/5441-knock-setup-on-g4-plug-in-evo-6/#comment-39958
-
Bosch part number is 0227100203. The mating connector is a 7 pin JPT.
Wiring is in PC link help or many suppliers have a datasheet with a bit more info like this one:http://www.nzefi.com/wp-content/uploads/3ch-Ignitor-wiring-Rev1.2.pdf
-
I guess the first step is to program the PDM to ensure both outputs are always switched together. Provided the wiring is reasonably sound and you have similar loads on each PDM output hopefully they will see a similar voltage. I would confirm that by comparing the bat voltage displayed in PCLink with a voltmeter attached to an injector 12V (preferably whilst engine is at full load).
The trouble will arise if for instance the ignition circuit pulls 5 amps whilst the fuel pump circuit pulls 15amps, with voltage drop along wiring and through every connector could mean the injectors see significantly less voltage than the ecu.
-
It is not a hardware or software issue, it is your wiring. You must wire as per one of the schematics in the help file. Not only to prevent back feed issues like you are experiencing but for the ecu to correctly apply voltage based compensations like injector dead time etc, then the ecu and injectors (& preferably coils too) must share the same common power source.
-
Andy, yes I think you are right with a factor of 10 being at play in the mix somewhere...
Fant, another work-around you could use to get you running with realistic numbers and settings would be to switch your equation load source to MAP. Then just set up one of the analog inputs as a MAP (but you don't need to have a MAP sensor connected), just set up the error value to 100Kpa so the ecu sees a MAP of 100 all the time.
-
I would 100% agree with Simon here. The ECU needs to the fuel system type to determine the differential fuel pressure. The fuel pressure must move around at some point in the RPM range of this particular setup. With NO FP calculation the injector rate is used with no compensation to pressure. I would assume that the pressure is increasing to a point where it is actually making a difference and the ECU can not calculate this. Try switching to traditional and see if it changes. I have been meaning to bring up that the modeled fuel equation mode lately has been acting up for me. It would not even run the car the other day. My base was on a similar vehicle I had tuned like 3 months ago and the car would not even run until I switched back to traditional.
I disagree... This is a NA ITB engine. FRP would not normally be MAP referenced in this case, fuel pressure would just be static. Yes, diff fuel pressure will vary a bit over the engines operating range but not enough to make crazy VE numbers like Fant is observing.
I agree that Fant's settings are a little odd (For NA with ITB's I normally still have a MAP sensor and FPR connected to airbox to compensate for aerodynamic effects), but what he has set should still work and give believable numbers. Since it doesn't my feeling is something is wrong in the modelled fuel equation - probably only apparent due to his choice of load =BAP, F system type = none and inj rate = 1/2 but still these are valid choices for his setup and should work
-
Search help for "drag run", the first hit is "editing log file sections", this will show you how to use the drag run wizard. You still need to know where the run starts but you can approximate this from (as you say) a "g meter" (accelerometer), although most would probably use something like a clutch switch or transbrake switch to identify start location.
-
Ok, I just took a closer look and it does seem something is amiss(maybe a bug) in Links calculation. Going off the runtimes posted above here's is how I would do a quick reality check. Since baro etc is missing I will just assume standard air density which will introduce some error but should at least be close enough to give us a ballpark number...
Fuel density 0.74Kg/litre
Air density (std) 0.00122g/cc
Injector flow 264cc/min. Injector mass flow = 264 x 0.74 = 195.4g/min or 0.00326g/ms
Fuel mass per cycle = inj Eff PW (x2 for group fire mode) x injector mass flow = 6.576 x 2 x 0.00326 = 0.0429g/cycle
Air mass per cycle = fuel mass x (target) AFR = 0.0429 x 14.7 = 0.630g/cycle
Air Vol = Air mass/density = 0.630/0.00122 = 516cc
VE = Air vol/cyl capacity = 516/499.5 = 1.03 = 103%
So as I say although there are plenty of sources of error in my calcs above, 103% VE seems in the ball park Vs the ECU's calc at 12% seems wrong from the info you have posted. It will need the link techs to take a closer look.
-
Ok, could you post a map and log so I can check the calcs.
-
The most likely is either your fuel press is higher or your injectors are bigger than you think. You can use the injector test function and a measuring cup to roughly confirm flow rate.
-
Nothing special required for the connectors - you can use normal un-insulated brass spades or search for "walbro 2 pin connector" and you will find the proper mate. Avoid PVC wire. Most common automotive wire as well as Teflon, Tefzel etc are fine. If you need to heat shrink anything use DR25 or one of the other fuel resistant grades. The higher conductivity of E85 is usually considered better from a safety point of view since static electricity can be dissipated faster.
-
switching between 3D and 2D table with 3D map is very usefull function. I can make my maps smooth, I am able to see how my ignition rises with RPM, how look engine VE at certain boost for example.
Yes, I agree with this comment. Although it is not something I sorely miss and cant do without, it would be useful. Some call this "slice view" With many other brands ECU software since the 3d graph view is quite basic this feature is not needed as much - you can just rotate the graph so you are perpendicular to the axis that you want to look at and the shape of the "row" or "column" is already quite clear. However with PClink 3D graphs they have some 3D "vanishing point perspective" as well as odd scaling that means no matter how you rotate it, it is difficult to get a quick feel for the shape of the rows/columns.
I could possibly post a couple of examples later if needed.
-
wire as per firing order? I am following the wiring manual. Can anyone reconfirm?
No it should not be wired in firing order. 1>1, 2>2, etc as you already have it is correct. You need to put a timing light on it now to check your trigger offset. The reason is before when it had a distributor the offset could be out by 180 or 360 deg and it would still run fine, now with COP it will only run when you have that setting correct.
-
I personally would try to avoid an extension if you can - as with any critical electronics, less connections is better. Does it really matter where the ECU is? - what do you need regular easy access to it for?
If it is just to make it easier to connect the tuning cable then I would instead extend the tuning cable and/or leave it permanently connected.
-
-
I agree, very cool project. I have always been intrigued by twin engine possibilities but haven't yet found a customer crazy enough to do it...
A few details I'm curious about;
- Single turbo choice seems pretty odd when you consider how far the exhaust gas from the rear engine has to travel all the way to the front - it obviously works ok but what was the logic behind that choice?
- What's the two different sized intercoolers about?
- I assume the front engine would have less traction than the rear - what strategies do you use to keep wheel speeds roughly in sync?
-
Press letter "K" on keyboard to switch views.
-
-
Are there any options for CAN wideband sensors with the G4+
Yes, There are some CAN receive templates in pclink already for some of the common ones; Motec LTC, Ecotrons, AEM X Series. The CAN configuration is flexible enough to allow you to receive any CAN wideband stream that I know of if you have your eyes on some other brand.
Also Link have their own CAN Lambda controller coming out soon if you are not in a hurry.
-
Yes go online and it should work. I haven't done it myself recently but it used to always work that way.
350Z triggering issue
in G4+
Posted
Your symptoms indicate either ECU hold power or anti-theft is not configured properly - both of these functions will override the triggers. I think the 350Z normally has immobiliser input via CAN so check that has been disabled. You should be able to see the status of both of these items using the runtimes screen.