follow ft86club on our blog, twitter or facebook.
FT86CLUB
Ft86Club
Speed By Design
Register Garage Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB > Technical Topics > Software Tuning

Software Tuning Discuss all software tuning topics.


User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-02-2017, 07:23 AM   #15
aagun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Drives: 86
Location: uae
Posts: 403
Thanks: 202
Thanked 67 Times in 56 Posts
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
normal . avcs ERROR . u cold start the car right. it will back Normal stat after worn up the oil temp
aagun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2017, 07:32 AM   #16
aagun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Drives: 86
Location: uae
Posts: 403
Thanks: 202
Thanked 67 Times in 56 Posts
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
i found when i patch adle code that the ecu do alot of testing and checking when start in the engine . on AVCS.
keeping the engine out of troubles is one of major job by ecm . any disactives happens in this case

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tor View Post
Okay I shouldn't be posting here late at night, let alone mess with flashing and logging.

The load change log I posted above is totally messed up. The AVCS is not active at all. I don't understand why. I followed my usual procedure. After flash:
- Ignition on, wait 20 secs, then off again.
- Ignition on, wait 20 secs, start engine.
- Without touching anything let the car idle for 1 minute.

I even timed the one minute yesterday because it was late and I didn't want to let the car idle for too long unnecessarily (neighbors bedroom facing my driveway).

Anyway the log shows AVCS is not active at all:
http://datazap.me/u/tor/205?log=0&data=22-33-34-35-36

So I suppose 1 min wasn't enough for the calibration to complete?

If AVCS stayed at 0 during the drive, I suppose that would throw everything off including MAF?

P.s.
The load change is the only thing changed (OL fuelling back to normal):
aagun is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to aagun For This Useful Post:
Tor (02-05-2017)
Old 02-02-2017, 07:35 AM   #17
Tor
Senior Member
 
Tor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Drives: Toyota GT86
Location: Europe
Posts: 919
Thanks: 369
Thanked 554 Times in 301 Posts
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Yes, it was a cold start yesterday. I just started the car again. Was a bit nervous because I never had that problem before. Now it's working again:

http://datazap.me/u/tor/avcs-wake?lo...zoom=3552-4083

So the previous post with the logs can be disregarded. Going for a drive and will post how the increased 3700 load limit works out.

Note, this is an experiment to see how the load limit affects AFR.

Last edited by Tor; 02-07-2017 at 08:34 AM.
Tor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2017, 08:07 AM   #18
Tor
Senior Member
 
Tor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Drives: Toyota GT86
Location: Europe
Posts: 919
Thanks: 369
Thanked 554 Times in 301 Posts
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Haha, the AVCS problem led me to the completely wrong conclusion. It's not load limit related at all, and the load doesn't go higher than 1.05ish even with the limit raised:

http://datazap.me/u/tor/tor-205-avcs...zoom=4743-4849

I didn't notice any adverse effect of the raised limit by the way. No hesitation or anything. Which makes sense, since it doesn't exceed the value anyway.

Dip is still there too. So aagun is right, it has to be the AVCS (now that I've driven with it inactive by accident it must be pretty safe to conclude).

Since I have been wrong several times, I am going to give the OL fueling adjustment one more try. I guess the easiest way to find out if the dip is real or not, is to eliminate it as best as possible and observe the effect.

Anyone that can point me to a log from someone with an OpenFlash Header? I would be curious to see how it compares to the Gruppe S.
Tor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2017, 08:17 AM   #19
Tor
Senior Member
 
Tor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Drives: Toyota GT86
Location: Europe
Posts: 919
Thanks: 369
Thanked 554 Times in 301 Posts
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Just an after thought:

Maybe the load is going down, because it is dipping rich? That would explain the flat spot after somewhat fixing the dip. With the dip fixed, it then hangs at the limit.

I am going to try to fix the dip and keep the raised load limit. In my virtual dyno curves I do have a slight torque dip in the same range still. Maybe this is the way to eliminate is?

Tor is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Tor For This Useful Post:
Vin (02-02-2017)
Old 02-02-2017, 08:37 AM   #20
Vin
Senior Member
 
Vin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Drives: 2012 GT86 EU-spec
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 204
Thanks: 232
Thanked 149 Times in 99 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Great effort for trying to find the cure for the dip. In case it doesn't work out, just a tip I got is to change the CL to OL transition, but having no knowledge on this stuff I have no idea where to start, but maybe you have.
__________________
Vin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2017, 12:26 PM   #21
elBarto
Senior Member
 
elBarto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Drives: Toyota GT86
Location: Belgium
Posts: 452
Thanks: 88
Thanked 386 Times in 183 Posts
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tor View Post
Anyone that can point me to a log from someone with an OpenFlash Header? I would be curious to see how it compares to the Gruppe S.
This is one of my 102Ron Wayno tune, log after around 100km's of driving.
Mods:
- OpenFlash Header
- Milltek resonated primary exhaust
- Modified intake-tube with stock filter and box
- Crawford BPB
- Cusco 4.556 Final Drive

Datazap log
__________________
"Oversteer is when your ass hits the wall, Understeer is when your face hits the wall!" - Unknown Stockcar driver
BeNeLux FB group: GT86/BRZ Owners
elBarto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2017, 03:44 PM   #22
aagun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Drives: 86
Location: uae
Posts: 403
Thanks: 202
Thanked 67 Times in 56 Posts
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
one minute . u wanna take off that dip. ........
that think Give you huge power at low mid range . happed becose of overlap the firing whats that mean . it means the intake and exhaust cam open in the same time or before that . means the intake gas go to exhaust Directly without burn the o2

what we read is rich
what the cp is lean . so the reason of knocky range at low mid area

u try to lean it more . it will lose power .

how to fix that dip . the only way is lower pushing avcs . it coz lose power little . same oem tune

what i recommend in this is rich ur tune more Maybe in ur will 12 From 1 load . test and check knock . then add timing . will make ur car fly on the sky
aagun is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to aagun For This Useful Post:
Tor (02-02-2017)
Old 02-02-2017, 09:58 PM   #23
Tor
Senior Member
 
Tor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Drives: Toyota GT86
Location: Europe
Posts: 919
Thanks: 369
Thanked 554 Times in 301 Posts
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Yes, it's back to square one, i.e. if it worth spending time on or not.

I just drove the car to and from work with the version with the raised 3700 load limit and normal OL fueling. It feels great, dip or not.

Thanks elBarto for the log. It's a bit hard to see with the resolution of the OFT logs, but it seems to dip too at 3700 rpm, though generally it is leaner below 4300 so it doesn't dip that rich. The dip appears to be smaller too. The reason I wanted to see an OFH log is that it's my understanding that the AVCS is tuned on that header. Maybe the same values are just not optimal with the Gruppe S header? I don't want to change AVCS randomly, though, so I guess I am stuck using other options or leaving it alone altogether.

I do think there was a difference with the corrected lean spot just above 4000 rpm. But it could be that I imagine things. I will for sure try to pull that down again.

Infact, I already made a new attempt at correcting the OL fueling, but didn't flash it because of the inactive AVCS ordeal. I think I will flash that next and see how it goes, including the raised load limit. I have to work quite a lot the next days, so next time I have some spare time.

I think the mistake here, was pulling the bend too high up at 3950:


Going to try with something more like this:
Tor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2017, 10:46 AM   #24
BRZoomTX
Senior Member
 
BRZoomTX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Drives: '13 BRZ
Location: Texas
Posts: 362
Thanks: 179
Thanked 234 Times in 149 Posts
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vin View Post
Great effort for trying to find the cure for the dip. In case it doesn't work out, just a tip I got is to change the CL to OL transition, but having no knowledge on this stuff I have no idea where to start, but maybe you have.
In EcuTek, Maps by Function > Fueling > Open Loop. Threshold settings are there.

By default, there are delay timers preventing immediate operation of open loop. There are also RPM thresholds that need to be passed before open loop is allowed to operate. Default settings are no open loop until around 5k RPM in 1st, and 4k RPM in the rest of the gears. Check fuel system status when logging to verify what mode you are in.

@Tor - Verify your car is hitting open loop mode when you are testing these changes. If you are not in open loop, the primary fuel map table you are adjusting won't apply. Check your open loop thresholds and delay timers, and minimize these for immediate open loop transition. This will help the fueling issues you are seeing, but will not solve them.

You are adjusting fueling incorrectly. You do not want to adjust the fuel map to correct commanded vs actual AFR. If your actual AFR does not match your commanded AFR in open loop, either the top end / that problematic area of your MAF is not scaled properly, or your injectors are not scaled properly (CC/min and lag times). Ecutek CC/min setting is not linear from my testing, so 1000cc injectors != setting this table to 1000. My ID1000's worked best with this table set to around 600 to 650 after I verified my injector latency was correct. Still not sure why, as EcuTek claims this is linear. Other posts here back up my experience with this. Maybe someone else can chime in, but I was able to nail down my port injector fueling with this setting on ID1000's.

To fix your high end MAF curve, run the car on 100% DI and scale your MAF against fueling error (only for N/A cars, DI alone isn't enough fueling for FI so this trick wont work fully). Once your fueling errors are minimal, switch to 100% port injection, and use the cc/min and injector dead time tables to adjust fueling error. Do not adjust MAF at this point as you've already scaled it properly on DI. Once your MAF is set, you don't really want to mess with it too much as this changes the entire engine load calculation when adjustments are made.

Do new pulls at this point and your AFR error should be minimal. You don't want to trick the ECU to get the AFR you want by setting the fueling table to really high / really low settings to get the values you want. You want to avoid these kids of large spikes as much as possible (interpolate!).

The default RPM vs load scale on the fueling table is perfectly fine for N/A cars and does not need to be adjusted. If you're hacking up table scaling to fix issues, something else is off in your tune. After you have corrected your fueling issues, you can tweak ignition and cam timing from there to improve the torque curve. Once your fueling is corrected, your commanded vs actual AFR should be very close to each other throughout the entire fuel map.

Oh, and the load limiters won't really do much with adjustments on N/A. I believe N/A cars never really go much beyond 1.2 load, so raising this higher wont do anything. This is mostly a setting for FI where load will easily go in to the 2.0+ range.
__________________
'13 WRB BRZ ~470whp // Instagram // YouTube

Last edited by BRZoomTX; 02-03-2017 at 11:59 AM.
BRZoomTX is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to BRZoomTX For This Useful Post:
aagun (02-03-2017), Tor (02-04-2017), Vin (02-03-2017)
Old 02-04-2017, 07:55 AM   #25
Nah
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Drives: 2013 Scion Frs 6mt
Location: Florida
Posts: 234
Thanks: 85
Thanked 48 Times in 32 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
FWIW, After multiple flashes sometimes it'll take take longer than usual. I just wait until the DI injectors kick in than drive normally until they pop on


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tor View Post
Okay I shouldn't be posting here late at night, let alone mess with flashing and logging.

The load change log I posted above is totally messed up. The AVCS is not active at all. I don't understand why. I followed my usual procedure. After flash:
- Ignition on, wait 20 secs, then off again.
- Ignition on, wait 20 secs, start engine.
- Without touching anything let the car idle for 1 minute.

I even timed the one minute yesterday because it was late and I didn't want to let the car idle for too long unnecessarily (neighbors bedroom facing my driveway).

Anyway the log shows AVCS is not active at all:
http://datazap.me/u/tor/205?log=0&data=22-33-34-35-36

So I suppose 1 min wasn't enough for the calibration to complete?

If AVCS stayed at 0 during the drive, I suppose that would throw everything off including MAF?

P.s.
The load change is the only thing changed (OL fuelling back to normal):
Nah is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Nah For This Useful Post:
Tor (02-04-2017)
Old 02-04-2017, 08:39 AM   #26
Tor
Senior Member
 
Tor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Drives: Toyota GT86
Location: Europe
Posts: 919
Thanks: 369
Thanked 554 Times in 301 Posts
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRZoomTX View Post
@Tor - Verify your car is hitting open loop mode when you are testing these changes. If you are not in open loop, the primary fuel map table you are adjusting won't apply. Check your open loop thresholds and delay timers, and minimize these for immediate open loop transition. This will help the fueling issues you are seeing, but will not solve them.
@BRZoomTX thanks for taking your time to write in details. I didn't change the timers, but I am sure Wayno did. As can be seen the ECU runs in OL as soon as I put my foot down.
http://datazap.me/u/tor/tor-205-2-mo...mark=9384-9403

Quote:
You are adjusting fueling incorrectly. You do not want to adjust the fuel map to correct commanded vs actual AFR. If your actual AFR does not match your commanded AFR in open loop, either the top end / that problematic area of your MAF is not scaled properly, or your injectors are not scaled properly (CC/min and lag times).
I am not blanket adjusting fueling with OL. The MAF is already scaled to provide solid low LTFT and generally, AFR follows AFR command.

The point is to make an adjustment to one specific problematic area. If fixing this with MAF I would have to make the scaling extremly lumpy, if it would even work.

The idea came from Kodename47, and the point of the thread is to test out the idea:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodename47 View Post
.... Just take some fuel out the fuel map. If MAF scale is good, then don't use that to fix it. There's more than one way to do it
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tor View Post
You mean instead fix it in open loop fueling so that AFR becomes correct and AFR_Command has the tops and valleys instead?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodename47 View Post
Yes, in open loop you don't need commanded and actual AFR to match. the timing advance is less. You want them to almost be the reverse of each other.
Tor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 09:18 AM   #27
Tor
Senior Member
 
Tor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Drives: Toyota GT86
Location: Europe
Posts: 919
Thanks: 369
Thanked 554 Times in 301 Posts
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Better repesentation of the problem area:
http://datazap.me/u/tor/tor-205-2-mo...9403-9393-9374
Tor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 09:52 AM   #28
freerunner
Senior Member
 
freerunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Drives: GT86
Location: Germany
Posts: 142
Thanks: 135
Thanked 41 Times in 34 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Rich dip at 3,7k probably vanishes if you move your load limit closer to 1.0 in that area.
Lower = leaner. In terms of "ecu picks a cell further on the left"

If the engine doesn't respond to it, I think the maf scale is probably off.


Regarding that lean spike around 4,1k, I'm not sure.
It looks like the afr curve follows the shape of the exhaust cam. Coincidence?
freerunner is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
MAF Scaling - Open/Closed Loop Fueling info steve99 Software Tuning 652 02-14-2022 04:11 PM
Stuck in Open Loop? Wepeel Software Tuning 34 05-19-2017 06:30 AM
BRZedit Fuel Trims, Closed to Open loop transiton mad_sb Engine, Exhaust, Transmission 32 08-06-2015 03:14 AM
Fuelling Issues (ECUtek ROM) Kodename47 Software Tuning 4 03-17-2014 04:13 AM
Notes on injector / maf scalining using full time open loop mad_sb Software Tuning 40 03-03-2014 05:49 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.