AbbeyMS Posted February 26 Report Share Posted February 26 does the fuel pressure drop off towards the high rpm? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japtastic141 Posted February 26 Author Report Share Posted February 26 Not sure actually. I'll check on my run shortly. I need to see if there is a way to take the data from the Greddy boxes output or directly from the sensors and pull that into PC Link via ohms or voltage. I tried the EGT sensor direct to PC link on AN Temp 3 but it's not working. The EGT sensor puts out ohms and I have some recorded vs temp and put that in a table but it's not recording correctly. I haven't spent any time troubleshooting but it's next on my to-do list as if I can make it work it will give me the ability to log fuel pressure, oil pressure and EGT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbbeyMS Posted February 26 Report Share Posted February 26 dont think the gauges have a 0-5 volt output to allow this to be inputted into the ECU via a AN input Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japtastic141 Posted February 26 Author Report Share Posted February 26 You could well be right. I'll spend some time on it and let you know. The EGT sensor does put out ohms in relation to temp so not sure why it doesn't work... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japtastic141 Posted February 26 Author Report Share Posted February 26 Ok so I think my 50-100% TPS runs are fairly good now? Did a few and they match fairly well and AFR's track pretty good. If I get them all to within what I have below is that considered ok? I've worked on my 10-40% TPS area after seeing the log. That whole area of the map needed a few % taken out of it. The 3D shape roughly stayed the same though. Still not getting a taper-off at the top end of the fuel map. Fuel pressure increased to around 4-4.2 bar on full power runs and doesn't drop near the top end / redline. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1guOFCBuTnZ82_vRB03udr2Jhw6VVh-Zj/view?usp=sharing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbbeyMS Posted February 26 Report Share Posted February 26 you are a little rich(fat) at 100% throttle, looking at your log file, this maybe the kick in the top of the map your mentioning. The map shape is good , far better than the initial fuel maps you posted. What IAT sensor do you have fitted , the IAT temp changes are pretty slow on the logs, your also pulling too much fuel @ a low IAT value in my opinion, I wouldnt start to pull fuel until 38/40 deg IAT with a fast responding IAT sensor fitted. The logs you are hosting for us to view are they coming from the computer or via the ECU log? the RPM signal looks pretty unstable , maybe due to log frequency or maybe due to something else. Ignition timing looks a little low , this could cause issues with fuelling due to incomplete combustion Can we see the current cal (map) file as well please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japtastic141 Posted February 26 Author Report Share Posted February 26 Thanks for looking again. What does fat mean? AFR seems to be tracking well I thought. Ok, glad the map shape is looking better. Standard IAT. Should this be replaced/moved? Ok, will make some changes to the IAT fuel trim table. I'm just using the standard base map from link so whatever came in that is what's in mine. They are coming from the laptop logs. Anything I check or troubleshoot for that? The latest map I've tested/logged is the last one I posted. I have a new iteration now just with the tweaked fuel map again. I'll be testing and posting a log for that tomorrow. Here is the unlogged map in the meantime. REV16 - G4X R32 GTR+OLLC ON-AMS AFR-3rd changes.pclx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbbeyMS Posted February 26 Report Share Posted February 26 Fat means too rich; You really need a faster responding IAT sensor, this will help with tuning; Laptop logs are a little slow for trimming the fuel map I find your only logging @ 40 hz. I have modified you CAL for internal ecu logging at faster HZ, your need to download the data from the LOGGING drop down. CLL fueling is set up , I have just raised the ECT start temp to 125 deg C to stop CLL working until you want it to work I cant attached the CAL here, I also cant find our emails between each other , email me @abbeymotorsport I will fire you the new CAL back Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japtastic141 Posted February 26 Author Report Share Posted February 26 Ok cool, will look in to the IAT. Factory location ok or worth spending the time moving it? Got you and that makes sense about the logging and CLL. Cheers, appreciated it, just emailed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbbeyMS Posted February 26 Report Share Posted February 26 2 minutes ago, Japtastic141 said: Ok cool, will look in to the IAT. Factory location ok or worth spending the time moving it? Got you and that makes sense about the logging and CLL. Cheers, appreciated it, just emailed. factory position is fine, the fast responding sensors are longer reaching Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japtastic141 Posted February 26 Author Report Share Posted February 26 Brill thanks. Can I presume the change to IAT fuel trims / and or a swap to the new sensor may mean a few tweaks of the map again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbbeyMS Posted February 27 Report Share Posted February 27 Once you have changed the IAT sensor you can calculate the changes needed using the datalog with IAT fuel % change easily. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japtastic141 Posted February 27 Author Report Share Posted February 27 Thanks, will do. Does ECU logging look any better? Looks about the same to me. BTW Went out and logged some more and looking pretty good across the board imo. Well happy with the way the car feels. Turned the boost back on to 1 bar and did some hard pulls. Worked a treat and still tracked AFR target well! EGT's max out at around 1050c Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koracing Posted February 27 Report Share Posted February 27 On 2/24/2024 at 11:35 AM, AbbeyMS said: ABBEY 01_2024.llf5 220.01 kB · 2 downloads I will admit I don't have a lot of RB26 experience, but this table looks a LOT leaner than I would typically tune anything on boost on pump fuel. Can you elaborate your reasons for this target table (i.e. 14.7 AFR gasoline at 7.5psi of boost)? Is there something special with the ITBs and boost that would make one decide to use leaner values for some reason? 38 minutes ago, Japtastic141 said: EGT's max out at around 1050c This seems very hot to me as well... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbbeyMS Posted February 27 Report Share Posted February 27 15 hours ago, koracing said: I will admit I don't have a lot of RB26 experience, but this table looks a LOT leaner than I would typically tune anything on boost on pump fuel. Can you elaborate your reasons for this target table (i.e. 14.7 AFR gasoline at 7.5psi of boost)? Is there something special with the ITBs and boost that would make one decide to use leaner values for some reason? This seems very hot to me as well... The multi throttle bodies on the RB , change a few things, if you map in Speed Density (RPM versus MAP) your have to have a throttle compensation map to adjust the fuelling at smaller throttle openings 1 bar boost @ 100% throttle at 4500rpm needs different fuelling than 1 bar boost @ 60% throttle at 4500rpm. Moving over to Alpha n with overlay lambda removes the need to have a throttle compensation map. 0.5bar boost will not normally be seen at full throttle , it will be seen on part throttle or transistion to a higher boost level. 50% throttle at 0.5 bar @ lambda 1.0 wont cause any issues in my opinion now seen in all the years we have been tuning RB's also makes the car have super snappy throttle response . looking at the screenshot of the log file above the map was 0.68 so was bleeding into the higher map level on the AFR layout table, log shows 13.2/13.5 not 14.7. Maybe we can see the ECU log file? This is how I work with an RB with a Link ECU on multi throttle bodies, an RB on a single throttle body doesnt need tuning on Alpha N, it is easier to tune the car on Alpha N on a dyno thou and faster as you can pick up all the map points easily Thanks 16 hours ago, Japtastic141 said: Thanks, will do. Does ECU logging look any better? Looks about the same to me. BTW Went out and logged some more and looking pretty good across the board imo. Well happy with the way the car feels. Turned the boost back on to 1 bar and did some hard pulls. Worked a treat and still tracked AFR target well! EGT's max out at around 1050c The EGT's are they from running 1.0 bar boost? you can try very easily to run a richer/fatter fuelling by just adjusting the AFR layout map number , try lowing the AFR number by 0.2 , the fuelling will instant track a richer mixture by 0.2AFR without any work on the main fuel map. The RPM log looks better now it is being logged at 200HZ, so the irregularity on the RPM logs before must of been the low log frequency it was being logged at. castillaricardo and koracing 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dx4picco Posted February 28 Report Share Posted February 28 yeah 1050C is cooking! you shouldn't be hitting more than 800°C on a single pull if you want to have a chance to stay under 950° under sustained load Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japtastic141 Posted February 28 Author Report Share Posted February 28 I have no idea what's normal for an RB EGT wise. EGT not on the log but here it is anyway. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1X5Q9c1t8pCOMmEAnYJPyi9HoaHEEe4Gy/view?usp=sharing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dx4picco Posted February 28 Report Share Posted February 28 its not RB specific. the general rule is the same for all the engines. Too hot and you start melting turbines and exhaust valves, and damage manifolds. 1050C is way too hot for any enthusiast engine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbbeyMS Posted February 28 Report Share Posted February 28 AFR/LAMBDA looks a lot closer now. Regards EGT , yes a little hot , I would say the car needs some more ignition timing in the map this will lower the EGTS as the energy for the combustion will be used more than wasted down the exhaust port. Are we happy that the timing commanded in the map is what the car is actually running, something that could be verified on a dyno under a constant rpm load with a timing light, while I think about ignition timing how did you check the trigger offset , did you add a HT lead in between the coila nd plug on cylinder 1 to attached the timing light too or did you use the loops at the back of the cylinder head? Wonder how many cars have been tuned without EGT measurement? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japtastic141 Posted February 28 Author Report Share Posted February 28 Thanks. I'll be sorting out the det cans soon so will be able to start working on the ignition timing. No loop as I upgraded the harness so used the trigger wire on the first coil pack. Yeah, that was my thought as well. It's only by chance that I have the gauge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koracing Posted February 28 Report Share Posted February 28 Running a richer AFR target will also aid in reducing cylinder and exhaust temps. Typically on pump gas, I target around 12.7 AFR (gasoline scale) or .86 Lambda at 0psi (101kpa MAP) and by 10psi (170kpa MAP) I normally target around between 11.5 AFR or about .78 lambda. EGT I don't like to see over 850-860°C. I may be a bit more conservative on my targets than most, but I would rather give up some power in exchange for longevity. You can pull and inspect your spark plugs also to see if it has evidence of running extra hot. Just FYI aluminum melts at 1300°F, and it's the intake air and fuel that cools the pistons during the combustion cycle (as well as oil splashed on the back/bottom side). castillaricardo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbbeyMS Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 12 hours ago, koracing said: Running a richer AFR target will also aid in reducing cylinder and exhaust temps. Typically on pump gas, I target around 12.7 AFR (gasoline scale) or .86 Lambda at 0psi (101kpa MAP) and by 10psi (170kpa MAP) I normally target around between 11.5 AFR or about .78 lambda. EGT I don't like to see over 850-860°C. I may be a bit more conservative on my targets than most, but I would rather give up some power in exchange for longevity. You can pull and inspect your spark plugs also to see if it has evidence of running extra hot. Just FYI aluminum melts at 1300°F, and it's the intake air and fuel that cools the pistons during the combustion cycle (as well as oil splashed on the back/bottom side). Everyone tunes a little differently , I feel 0.86 at 100kap is far to rich , these cars feel woolly when running those numbers dont spool very quickly. Totally agree the EGT's are a little worrying pretty easy to add some fuel via the open loop lambda map now the fuelling is pretty close. Just drops the numbers of the lambda/AFR to richen the car up a little and see if it does change the EGTS at all. As we all know controlling EGT is all about a combination of things. koracing 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japtastic141 Posted February 29 Author Report Share Posted February 29 Thanks both, lots to consider. I also don't know how reliable this guage or sensor is after 20-30 years. What kind of temp do you normally see at idle? This might tell me at least if the sensor/gauge is in the ball park. I'm seeing 300c ish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dx4picco Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 cold/warmup idle 300°C, warm idle 450-500°C as the exhaust is still warm from the previous running koracing and Japtastic141 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japtastic141 Posted March 17 Author Report Share Posted March 17 Decided to get some new injectors as I wasn't convinced these 20+ year-old ones were still reliable. So this has meant a retune to accommodate them. That's fine and I feel like I have that process sorted (so ignore the general mismatch of AFR/Target AFR) as I'm still going through that process but I still have an issue with fuel pressure at higher rpm's. It tails off right towards the end of the map, hence my map needing more fuel rather than less in that area. I thought it was the FPR so took that off and it was leaking from around the adjustment screw. I sorted that with PTFE tape so was hoping that was the cause but doesn't seem to be but maybe the FPR is still at fault? I've already replaced the fuel pump and sock + fuel filter in the engine bay and the pump has a direct + feed from the battery bypassing the FPCM and new earths to the chassis. I did leave the pulse damper connected in the fuel tank. You can see here what it does. TPS and Boost are the same but dropping off at the end which of course pushes AFR well out of range. 3.2Bar drops to around 2.8. Any other tests I can do to figure this out or is this all pointing towards the FPR https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dJ5j2NHweEFK3gwidQXCMBfCsIbZg-09/view?usp=sharing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.