AFR calibration map
Jun 18, 2010, 01:53 PM
#17
I am starting to see why possibly, we have better gas mileage at about 75mph... in GSR.
Since its about 3500-4000RPM... just look how much more negative the pulse wideth goes in that area... making sense now...
Bryan, can you post the data parameter for changing the map to pulse width...
Or screen of the settings in ECUflash?
Since its about 3500-4000RPM... just look how much more negative the pulse wideth goes in that area... making sense now...
Bryan, can you post the data parameter for changing the map to pulse width...
Or screen of the settings in ECUflash?
Jun 18, 2010, 02:40 PM
#18
Account Disabled
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hayward
Posts: 3,366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here you go:
<scaling name="InjectorTime" units="ms" toexpr="(x-128)/1.275" frexpr="x*1.275+128" format="%.3f" min="-10" max="10" inc="0.05" storagetype="uint8" endian="big"/>
- Bryan
<scaling name="InjectorTime" units="ms" toexpr="(x-128)/1.275" frexpr="x*1.275+128" format="%.3f" min="-10" max="10" inc="0.05" storagetype="uint8" endian="big"/>
- Bryan
Jun 19, 2010, 12:20 AM
#21
This table reminds me of the Injector Scaling Battery Voltage table, except it seems to be load and rpm based instead. Why you would need to multiply the AFR again on a base AFR table such as this, is very strange indeed. unless it really is an injector calibration table,
Can someone answer these for us:
1) really how many injector types does EvoX have so far across all variants?
2) how does this table compare across all EvoX stock roms found so far?
I think this table should be left alone if using stock injectors, because it will be heavily used in combination with fuel trims to keep them well in check. Which I think I saw someone else mention already. Consistent fuel trims will keep the fuel map closer to the Tuners fuel settings provided in all conditions. Once you add non factory parts though you might as well throw the AFR table out the window anyway. lol
Can someone answer these for us:
1) really how many injector types does EvoX have so far across all variants?
2) how does this table compare across all EvoX stock roms found so far?
I think this table should be left alone if using stock injectors, because it will be heavily used in combination with fuel trims to keep them well in check. Which I think I saw someone else mention already. Consistent fuel trims will keep the fuel map closer to the Tuners fuel settings provided in all conditions. Once you add non factory parts though you might as well throw the AFR table out the window anyway. lol
Jun 21, 2010, 08:06 PM
#23
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 1,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, Ok... Well, let us know what you find. I am very curious, as I've replaced my stock injectors and my car runs really rich where the map has all the 102%. It would be nice to turn this down some so my Fuel map doesn't have to be in the 13+ afr to get an actual afr of 11.8. I've had to change my max lean afr values to something higher than 12.9 to get it to lean out enough. And lately I've been scaling the MAF down a hair to also compensate for the relatively rich car / lean settings to get what I want.
Note, the MAF settings were perfect with the stock injectors. I scaled the new injectors with Latencies and Scaling only and am always at -3% to 1% trims.
Note, the MAF settings were perfect with the stock injectors. I scaled the new injectors with Latencies and Scaling only and am always at -3% to 1% trims.
Jun 21, 2010, 09:01 PM
#24
well the code isn't as simple as Fuel_Map * (AFR_Calibration_Map/128)
which really sux
But I can say that the value in the AFR_Calibration_Map modifies the "injector scaling"
HOWEVER the injector scaling is used in upto 5 different places in the code, and only one of those is using this AFR_Calibration_Map lookup...
:S
which really sux
But I can say that the value in the AFR_Calibration_Map modifies the "injector scaling"
HOWEVER the injector scaling is used in upto 5 different places in the code, and only one of those is using this AFR_Calibration_Map lookup...
:S
Jun 21, 2010, 09:13 PM
#25
ok I will post up what I see... see if you guys can think of anything.
in this subroutine which applies the AFR_Calibration to the injector scaling there are coolant AND IAT compensators
there is also a check to see whether this car is SST equiped
the value gets stored in a temporary variable which is then looked up with the AFRMAP variable AND LTFT's
in this subroutine which applies the AFR_Calibration to the injector scaling there are coolant AND IAT compensators
there is also a check to see whether this car is SST equiped
the value gets stored in a temporary variable which is then looked up with the AFRMAP variable AND LTFT's
Jun 21, 2010, 09:36 PM
#26
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 1,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Then I guess a good question is, what are the other 4 places using the injector scaling for that don't need this scaling?
I can do some empirical testing at set RPM / Load and see if it is a linear change to fuel. I guess we really only care how it affects Open Loop operations. The other areas are probably for Closed Loop stuff.
I can do some empirical testing at set RPM / Load and see if it is a linear change to fuel. I guess we really only care how it affects Open Loop operations. The other areas are probably for Closed Loop stuff.
Jun 22, 2010, 07:21 AM
#27
I noticed if I change all the negative values to 0.00 or 100. Then I my spool up will be richer than previously it was leaning out. So I guess it does work... but what else it affects who knows... I left the table alone for cruising 0-100 load.
