Electredge
-
Posts
190 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by Electredge
-
-
@Adamw seen this?
-
4 minutes ago, mk3design said:
You can see it happen in the log I posted in the first post
I would lower your proportional and derivative.... I'm sure adam might have better starting points for a G4+ but I'd test it with .5 Prop and .15 Der
-
1 minute ago, mk3design said:
Thanks guys. Just tore the car down today to upgrade brakes but will try hopefully next week.
Any ideas on relieving the overboosting symptoms after shifting?
post a log of it happening
-
1 hour ago, Michael Riedweg said:
Thank you!
I downloaded and updated the newest firmware to my ecu, but it didn't help.
Now I checked all of the wirings, tried on the ECU the CAN1 and CAN2 output with the cable, but nothing happens.
Am I right, that usually I should see the dash, when I search on the ECU in the CAN Setup for CAN Devices (picture attatched)?
And no, I don't have any CAN faults on the ECU.
On the dash I connected the white cable to the CAN High (+) and the blue to the CAN Low (-).
AIM dash will not appear under the CAN device tab... only Link items will pop up here.
-
I don't know G4+ software nearly as well as all the new stuff but your only removing 20% of your timing, and you should turn on fuel trim... try adding 30% fuel.
-
Anyone seen this before? popped up during a store attempt.
-
if you haven't figured this out yet, I've seen similar issues when CAN hi and CAN lo is wired backwards to the dash
-
4 minutes ago, SimonR32 said:
Thanks for the quick reply.
So essentially do a physical clock of the sensor so all line up in a sequential voltage drop?
Ps. I believe that AN4 was logging at 1000hz
yes physically re-clock the sensor so that 1-6 are all ascending/descending voltage changes, as Adam said above reverse and neutral can rotate off the linear scale but not the drive gears.
-
have you done other sequential setups where the barrel sensor rotated back around to a higher volatge? I'm not sure if thats causing your issue but seems likely. does your vehicle speed work? and have you setup the gear ratio table in the ecu?
can you post up a log and copy of the map?
-
-
this is the kind of shit that would waste hours of my day
glad you figured it out
-
I'm pretty sure ethanol temp is not used in the fueling calculation as an actual fuel temp sensor would be but wanted to confirm.
If a separate fuel temp sensor is installed it will have an effect on the fuel calculation but not the ethanol temp. correct?
-
21 minutes ago, MichaelR32GTR said:
I haven’t had much time to finalize tweaking afrs, but I’m headed in the right direction with the help I was given
can I ask, if 4D fuel is enabled, what would happen if all the boxes are 0 and boost is increased instead of removing fuel with minus (-) values
If 4d fuel is enabled and the table has only zero's then it will be doing nothing to change the fueling. It will basically be multiplying the final fuel value by 1
-
12 hours ago, Vaughan said:
Actually given it takes 1s to shut I think it's a mechanical or a TPS reading issue as it shouldn't take 1s to shut even with no power to the throttle
Can you replicate the log while watching the throttle to confirm TPS is correct?
car already had to leave on its way to a race event but after reading Adam's email and learning about a change that was made to the throttle body flange I'm pretty sure Adam is correct.
Thanks for the help
-
Just now, Vaughan said:
Changing PID numbers won't improve it as the ECU is commanding -90% E-Throttle 1 DC so it's putting as much force as it can on the throttle to shut, you have an electrical or mechanical issue not a tune issue, it also required -85% Duty to hold it at 6% after that which is an insane amount.
ok so if the throttle body isn't the issue I need to look at the wiring.... and I was just testing the reaction with the PID but I was pretty sure it wasn't gonna change anything. I'll look into the wiring, thanks Vaughan
-
As you can see in the log at the end of the dyno pass the throttle is closing slowly... target drops immediately to zero but it slowly shuts. I've tested multiple PWM Frequencies, modified the PID numbers... nothing seems to help. I have even tested it with a new throttle body with same result.
Bosch Motorsports 74mm E-Throttle
Let me know if anyone has seen something like this
PC Datalog - 2023-04-27 1;35;53 pm - throttle hang issue.llgx
-
1 hour ago, RyanG said:
No, I want to interpolate between cells on the fuel/ignition table, but I want it to do it linearly and with respect to the break-points in the axis between them.
I wish I could post images, but I have no kB left.
With a MoTeC M1 if you interpolate between 50kpa and 80kpa, with 60kpa between:
50kpa: 50% VE
60kpa: X% VE
80kpa: 60% VE
You will get X = 53.3% VE. If you do the same on Link G4X, you get 55% VE. It doesn't make any sense?I see what your saying, interesting... I never even noticed m1 was doing that. I see how it would be helpful when the axis is MAP but I think it would be less helpful tuning via alpha n with tps as the axis, since you usually need big jumps in VE over very small throttle changes down low.
-
On 3/16/2023 at 4:50 PM, mapper said:
That's exactly what I did for testing. However, there should be some additional conditions used like PT1- like reduction of fuel de-enrichment, coolant temp compensation, and all the stuff which is used in the acceleration model, just with a negative sign, before it is applied to the fuel model.
the accel table can be 3d,using (tps delta) if they allowed for negative numbers in that table that could work assuming a negative number in that equation would give a reduction in fuel as I expect it would.
-
On 3/22/2023 at 9:04 PM, RyanG said:
Any chance the interpolation feature could take into account the axis breakpoint so that it's linear? Given the lower table resolution compared to some other ecu's (arguments to whether needed or not, I'm sure) often axis breakpoints aren't evenly spaced.
I've attached an exaggerated example. Please let me know of any downsides with what I've suggested?
Ryan
are you wanting to be able to use interpolate in the axis setup window?
-
On 3/16/2023 at 4:58 PM, mapper said:
We need many more target lambda tables, like for:
- post start
- ECT based
- IAT based
- Exhaust Temp
- Throttle Position
- average load based
- knock fuel trims (apply target trim instead of enrich, which the CL pulls back)
- NOS compensation
- two separate targets for Multi fuel mode
- Launch
One way I can think of to do it, is use 4,5,6D and better some more tables as a target lambda or target lambda trim instead of a fuel trim. However, the ECU should just use the richest target within the calibration, so it doesn't get too rich when several conditions are meet. Like high IAT, ECT and Exhaust Temp, which are usually hit at the same time. Using target modifier for each condition, would end up in extensively rich target lambda.
when you say post start, I assume your wanting a richer target when starting up a warm car? if you are using it for cold start then obviously you could just use the overlay table with ect as the axis, and if you wanted to implement IAT you could use charge temp as the axis instead... I agree IAT could be useful in certain conditions if separate.
I like the exhaust temp one :D, I have requested exhaust temp boost target trim.
if you did throttle position it would likely need to be a trim target table, I'm assuming your wanting throttle and map to be involved in the target calculations. if NA you can just make the target table axis throttle instead of MAP.
average load over a specific time? like around a race track?
multi model fuel mode does have 2 target tables
And I think the problem they will have implementing all of that is the processing power needed for using tables. If I'm not mistaken the tables is the largest draw on resources for the ecu, I'm even quite sure they have a table limit. Someone from Link can chime in here if I'm wrong. @Adamw @Vaughan
-
1 hour ago, koracing said:
One problem with that math is that 10% of .8 lambda is not the same as 10% of 1.0 lambda. It would still be close but ideally you would modify your math as follows: a*(1+(b/100)+(c/100))
this is what I usually use but math ends up with same result
-
1 hour ago, castillaricardo said:
Sure. Here is a trigger scope and log of it cranking this morning: https://1drv.ms/f/s!Amu_1gWOWFlvmzvylI-WYSu8K6wN?e=pMfFJx
I would definitely already be doing what koracing just said above, but I have done a few of these and my offset is 70.
-
maybe someone smarter will chime in but you could blip for up and down shifts, then rev match would work
-
6 hours ago, ellisd1984 said:
I'm Talking more for the sensor's calibration itself not the blend tables
you can turn off multi fuel and use dual map with a trim knob and just watch the ethanol % on the sensor and manually move the knob where you need it.
glad you figured it out
G4x E36 M50 Stroker Stalling Issues
in G4x
Posted
essb00 is correct about the lack of AFR, but you also idle at roughly 950 with an IAC output duty cycle of 45 but your base IAC output duty cycle is set to 33.... you need to raise the base to match what it actually needs when idling properly. (Idle Base Position Table)