Notices
ECU Flash

Advanced fuel control options

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 16, 2009, 06:53 PM
  #121  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Slo_crx1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Simpson, PA
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I tried changing mine in increments and it still zeros the values out. I pretty much got fed up with it and changed the scaling back to the standard uint8 and left it at that. It still adjusts the way I want it to with the uint8 scaling, so will it adversely affect anything if I leave the scaling alone?
Also, Phenem...how were you able to keep the % sign intact without it screwing up the graph? Whenever I left the % sign there it lined all the values up vertically on the graph, so I removed that as well lol.
Old Dec 16, 2009, 08:41 PM
  #122  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (39)
 
phenem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Central PA
Posts: 811
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by RoadSpike
<scaling name="Mult128-16" units="Multiplication Factor" toexpr="x/128" frexpr="x*128" format="%.2f" min="0" max="5" inc="0.02" storagetype="uint16" endian="big"/>
<scaling name="Mult128" units="Factor" toexpr="x/128" frexpr="x*128" format="%.2f" min="0" max="5" inc="0.02" storagetype="uint8" endian="big"/>
Overwrite your scaling of these two types with the above. Notice the frexpr expression is different....that fixed mine
Old Dec 16, 2009, 09:12 PM
  #123  
EvoM Guru
Thread Starter
iTrader: (50)
 
mrfred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tri-Cities, WA // Portland, OR
Posts: 9,675
Received 129 Likes on 97 Posts
I meant to help you guys out and take a look today, but was too busy. Glad you figured it out. I'm going to update the first post.
Old Dec 20, 2009, 10:53 PM
  #124  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
 
03whitegsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Utah
Posts: 4,001
Received 15 Likes on 13 Posts
Originally Posted by mrfred
Yes, the constant is adjustable. If this constant is allowed to be adjusted, then it would throw off the scaling for the injector open time during cranking. A %128 scaling could be used for the injector open time if the multiplier is allowed to be adjusted. From my perspective, its two ways of looking at how to adjust the values. My preference is to keep the millisecond scaling as it gives me a reference point to compare to idle pulse width.

I think there is value to using the time scaling for the IPW decay table because it is accurate and can be related to real world response.
Bringing this back up. This was in regards to the section 2) on Cranking injector pulse.

The stock tables have very small values in the 50C-82C part of the table and very large at the cold side of the table.

With the warm start issues on the ID1000s, I'd like to mess with the table, but with the values being so small, it really limits the range of adjustment.

Changing the constant would let me rescale the table to give some added resolution. I looked at the dissassembly, but this constant wasn't real apparent to me. If you have a second at some point, would you be willing to post up this table scalar for 96530006?

Last edited by 03whitegsr; Dec 21, 2009 at 09:16 AM.
Old Dec 22, 2009, 10:10 PM
  #125  
EvoM Guru
Thread Starter
iTrader: (50)
 
mrfred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tri-Cities, WA // Portland, OR
Posts: 9,675
Received 129 Likes on 97 Posts
Originally Posted by 03whitegsr
Bringing this back up. This was in regards to the section 2) on Cranking injector pulse.

The stock tables have very small values in the 50C-82C part of the table and very large at the cold side of the table.

With the warm start issues on the ID1000s, I'd like to mess with the table, but with the values being so small, it really limits the range of adjustment.

Changing the constant would let me rescale the table to give some added resolution. I looked at the dissassembly, but this constant wasn't real apparent to me. If you have a second at some point, would you be willing to post up this table scalar for 96530006?
Send me an email to remind me about this, and I'll post up more info later this week.
Old Dec 23, 2009, 07:22 AM
  #126  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
 
03whitegsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Utah
Posts: 4,001
Received 15 Likes on 13 Posts
Originally Posted by mrfred
If the logged values during warmup are a bit different than what's in the table, remember there is another trim table that I have not posted. If you want to see it for 96530006, the first axis at 0x66F2 is 14 elements long and is 2-byte load. The second axis at 0x7ADC is 8 elements long and is 2-byte RPM. The table data itself is at 0x6071.
Finally got around to looking at this table, honestly, I think I missed it the first time through the thread that you posted all the addresses. I think this is where most of the warmup based enleanment is coming from. My car still goes lean in that area, but no where close to what it use to do. It may just be a fluke this morning, but my car always goes VERY lean, 20:1 and the car just won't even drive below 2000 RPM when it's cold. With this change, car never went leaner then 16.5:1 or so and the enleanment could barely be felt at all. Drove right through it.

I know a couple other guys have noted a problem in the same area so if a couple others can try it out, it would be helpful.

Here is the ECUFlash xml, you'll need to be in developer mode to see it.

Code:
	<table name="***Warmup Enrichment Load vs RPM" address="6071" category="Engine Coolant Temperature Trim" type="3D" level="1" scaling="uint8">
		<table name="Engine Load" address="66f2" type="X Axis" elements="14" scaling="Load"/>
		<table name="Engine Speed" address="7adc" type="Y Axis" elements="8" scaling="RPM"/>
	</table>

Stock Table


New table (just to see what happens)...
Attached Thumbnails Advanced fuel control options-warmup-table.jpg   Advanced fuel control options-warmup-table-stock-.jpg  

Last edited by 03whitegsr; Dec 23, 2009 at 07:39 AM.
Old Dec 23, 2009, 07:49 AM
  #127  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (22)
 
Appauldd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Northern KY near Cincy
Posts: 2,408
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
I knew there had to be a warmup fuel table somewhere......This one, allong with the hole of -5s timing map will allow for ultimate cold drivability.

Great job guys ! !
Old Dec 23, 2009, 08:06 AM
  #128  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
 
l2r99gst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: CA
Posts: 3,499
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
So, is that table a warmup enrichment or warmup enleanment table? It looks like you lowered the values and it richened up your lean issues, correct? If so, higher numbers would mean leaner/less fuel?
Old Dec 23, 2009, 08:11 AM
  #129  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
 
03whitegsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Utah
Posts: 4,001
Received 15 Likes on 13 Posts
I was unsure about that too. I just noticed the big hole right in the area that my car always drives like crap in, then the 128 area surrounding it where the car drives fine. 1+1 = 2

On top of that, it looks like at higher loads and engine speeds,the table is setup to eliminate the enrichment of the other two enrichment tables so WOT AFRs don't get insanely rich.

Honestly though, I'm just wondering if that hole has something to do with the MAF filter setup as well where maf frequency gets halved and then corrected for. Maybe we jumped around some part of the fuel routine that deals with this big difference but now we have a table setup for it when it's not there?

Last edited by 03whitegsr; Dec 23, 2009 at 08:15 AM.
Old Dec 23, 2009, 08:24 AM
  #130  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
 
l2r99gst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: CA
Posts: 3,499
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
I'll test it out today. On E85, while very cold, if I stab the throttle to 100% for a split second, it's almost like no fuel is being delivered. Car goes very lean. When warmer, no issue at all. I'll let you know if this has any effect.
Old Dec 23, 2009, 08:35 AM
  #131  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
 
03whitegsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Utah
Posts: 4,001
Received 15 Likes on 13 Posts
The issue for me is if I let the clutch out and keep the engine speed very low. Basically keeping engine speed around 1000 RPM starting out.

Any amount of gas I give it from this point on results in 20:1 AFRs until about 1500 RPM.

Easiest way to replicate is start off, shift to second and let the revs fall back to 1000RPM. Good luck getting back above 1500 RPM in under a block or two.

It's something you can drive around, but if you happen to find yourself cutting across a road and happen to hit that critical RPM range, it can be a little scary when the car just doesn't go anywhere and on-coming traffic is coming up quick.

Last edited by 03whitegsr; Dec 23, 2009 at 09:29 AM.
Old Dec 23, 2009, 10:43 AM
  #132  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
 
l2r99gst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: CA
Posts: 3,499
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
The change didn't do anything for my particular issue. But, it's really no big deal at this point anyway. I think it may be a bit of a side effect of E85 when cold.
Old Dec 26, 2009, 08:17 AM
  #133  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (23)
 
nothere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Bellevue. WA
Posts: 2,680
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Stock Table


New table (just to see what happens)...
[/QUOTE]

is there a table that modulates this map for coolant temp?
Old Dec 26, 2009, 10:15 AM
  #134  
cmj
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
cmj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Anyone have this table for the 9? I'm having the same lean issue under 1500 rpm.
Old Dec 26, 2009, 03:22 PM
  #135  
Evolved Member
 
merlin.oz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 824
Likes: 0
Received 23 Likes on 19 Posts
Found a similar 3D map for the AUDM9 88580013, at address 647D.
It has a bit more complex data than the evo8 described above though.
I am currently using scaling "EnrichmentAdj" which sets value 128=1.00 so its easy to read the increment.

Nothere, there probably is a modulating table to go with it, back to the disassemblers...


Quick Reply: Advanced fuel control options



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:20 AM.