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

Go Back   Scion FR-S Forum | Subaru BRZ Forum | Toyota 86 GT 86 Forum | AS1 Forum - FT86CLUB > Technical Topics > Software Tuning

Software Tuning Discuss all software tuning topics.


User Tag List
steve99

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-16-2017, 09:38 PM   #589
steve99
Senior Member
 
steve99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Drives: FT86
Location: Australia
Posts: 6,751
Thanks: 916
Thanked 4,233 Times in 2,534 Posts
Mentioned: 459 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Have a look in the first pist mate.

Dont log o2 volts log AFR

Log throttle not absolute throttle

Log load not absolute load, load will be number from 0 to 1.5 not a percentage
steve99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2017, 09:42 PM   #590
allowe
Senior Member
 
allowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Drives: FR-S
Location: mississauga
Posts: 540
Thanks: 215
Thanked 114 Times in 81 Posts
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve99 View Post
Have a look in the first pist mate.

Dont log o2 volts log AFR

Log throttle not absolute throttle

Log load not absolute load, load will be number from 0 to 1.5 not a percentage


I did but I can't find maf volts or ol/cl


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
allowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2017, 11:04 PM   #591
Spuds
The Dictater
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Drives: '13 Red Scion FRS
Location: PA, USA
Posts: 1,669
Thanks: 2,942
Thanked 1,143 Times in 740 Posts
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by allowe View Post
What else should I select? This could help those who have the oft.

Looks like you are missing parameters if those are the only options you have.
Spuds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2017, 10:33 AM   #592
srscion
Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Drives: 2016 FRS
Location: Michigan
Posts: 19
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Disable DTC code P0068 is not in the list

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve99 View Post
MAF Scaling - Open/Closed Loop Fueling info
MAF Scaling - Open/Closed Loop Fueling info
MAF (mass Air Flow) Sensor Scaling - Open/closed loop Fuelling

......

Omni 2.5 Bar MAP

The OFT300 (Vortex supercharger) map uses the 2.5 BAR Omni and has CEL-P0068 disabled in the map
ok for 2.5 Bar OMNI MAP sensor ECUTEK scaling in BAR

Manifold Pressure Sensor multiplier in bar per volt. = 0.500
Manifold pressure sensor offset. Value is measured in bar. = 0.100
MAP Sensor voltage max = 5.0v
MAP sensor Voltage min = 0.0v

Omni 3 Bar MAP Sensor (Metric in Bar)
0.617 - MULTIPLIER
0.03 - OFFSET
scaling limits 0 - 4.75v

Omni 4 Bar MAP Sensor
Manifold Pressure Sensor Scaling - (imperial PSI)
Multiplier - 12.087
Offset - 0.168
Metric/Bar

bar/volt .833
offset (bar) .012

Manifold Pressure Sensor Limits - (CEL still comes on )
High Input CEL Above - 5.00v
Low Input CEL Below - 0.00v
Disable CEL P0103 and P0068





.........
Disable DTC code P0068 is not in the list
srscion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2017, 12:58 PM   #593
steve99
Senior Member
 
steve99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Drives: FT86
Location: Australia
Posts: 6,751
Thanks: 916
Thanked 4,233 Times in 2,534 Posts
Mentioned: 459 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by srscion View Post
Disable DTC code P0068 is not in the list


Hopefully it wont ever trip P0068 if min max values set and map scaling is good
steve99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2017, 06:35 PM   #594
Tor
Senior Member
 
Tor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Drives: Toyota GT86
Location: Europe
Posts: 837
Thanks: 348
Thanked 469 Times in 269 Posts
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Before doing a hopefully final attempt at scaling my MAF I want to do it right this time... So I have quite a few questions.

- Besides from zeroing out the IAT comp, I understand I should zero out the Load comp as well?
- Anything else that needs to be zeroed out?
- If I adjusted my AFR with OL fueling should I restore POL to "normal" values?

- Even with the IAT comp zeroed out, should I aim to find a day where I can get IAT's around 20 deg C?

Also, seeing that my car never reaches more than approx. 4.1v I would like to rescale the current MAF. What are good values to use for an NA car? 4.2v max for some headroom? And if using the tab that @Kodename47 contributed to Vgi's tool, what are good values for "Min V" and "Max Unchanged"?

Also, as I am tired of fuel trims jumping up and down I am considering if I should venture into injector scaling. Could injectors that are off cause LTFT swings? Given that the injector ratios are different in CL and OL?

I watched @jamesm's screencast and it was very helpful in understanding how to collect the data.

Am I understanding it correctly that to do so I should zero out all 3 "Total Injection Ratio Port" tables and do a CL MAF scale only?

I assume, that I shouldn't attempt to run at higher rpm for OL due to insufficient fuel from the direct injectors? Any other precaution that I need to follow (e.g. reduce timing)?

If correct, what is the process afterward to get the port injectors in line with the new direct injection MAF? I assume I should now set all 3 "Total Injection Ratio Port" tables to 100% and collect data as if I would do a CL MAF scaling again. @jamesm says to adjust the port injectors to the new direct injection MAF using Injection Flow Scaling ("BRZ" or the other one or both?) and Latency. How exactly is this done?

Thanks for bearing with all my questions once again!
Tor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2017, 10:19 PM   #595
srscion
Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Drives: 2016 FRS
Location: Michigan
Posts: 19
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve99 View Post
Hopefully it wont ever trip P0068 if min max values set and map scaling is good
It happens and I have the correct values
srscion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2017, 10:52 PM   #596
steve99
Senior Member
 
steve99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Drives: FT86
Location: Australia
Posts: 6,751
Thanks: 916
Thanked 4,233 Times in 2,534 Posts
Mentioned: 459 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by srscion View Post
It happens and I have the correct values


Try swapping MAP sensor, they are known to fail
steve99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2017, 03:06 PM   #597
Kodename47
Senior Member
 
Kodename47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Drives: UK GT86
Location: UK
Posts: 2,630
Thanks: 168
Thanked 1,346 Times in 926 Posts
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
@Tor as you haven't changed the injectors doing the PI/DI separately is probably not worth the effort. The issue is that the DI fuel system runs at different pressures when fully used to when switched off so you can't tune it for just fully on or fully off. The PIs are also the limiting factor, not DI.

4.2/4.25v would work as the MaxV, I leave the OEM minimum and the min unchanged should be the lowest voltage you see.

As for zeroing things out, you could do the ELC but it's not necessary. You'll just reverse the normal compensations but they might make things more accurate as they are. You could also do the same or not for IATs. I now calculate a new ELC table using the same data as adjusting the MAF, kills 2 birds with one stone.

Also, if you're really that bothered about the MAF, set all your open loop fuel target to one value in the region of 12.5-13 and that way you're not chasing a changing fuel target.
__________________
.: Stealth 86 :.
Abbey Motorsport/K47 Tuned Sprintex 210 Supercharger

Litchfield Springs / Abbey MS Geo
Kodename47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2017, 08:15 PM   #598
Tor
Senior Member
 
Tor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Drives: Toyota GT86
Location: Europe
Posts: 837
Thanks: 348
Thanked 469 Times in 269 Posts
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodename47 View Post
@Tor as you haven't changed the injectors doing the PI/DI separately is probably not worth the effort. The issue is that the DI fuel system runs at different pressures when fully used to when switched off so you can't tune it for just fully on or fully off. The PIs are also the limiting factor, not DI.
Since my stock tune, I had issues with my LTFT. Especially with the stock injector ratios where at 5000 rpm port injection come back at 20%. This usually caused a huge split in LTFT once the ECU started learning (different tunes, different MAF scales).

Now I am running an adaptation of the K00C injector ratios with 20% port injection from 2000 rpm and have good flat AFR and a uniform LTFT throughout the rpm range. Only I'm annoyed that the LTFT is so inconsistent causing the AFR to swing up and down.

I am just wondering if the problem could be this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesm View Post
I actually apply this process even when tuning cars with stock fuel systems, because I've found the stock calibration to be imbalanced by as much as 10-15%, and at that point there is a drivability win associated with correcting it.
I should add my car runs great. It never ran smoother, I run a large amount of timing and it feels extremely powerful and willing. However, with LTFT up to +4.56, it runs in the low 11s or even slightly below. I suppose I could just ignore it and enjoy the way it drives but I am curious if there is a way to correct it. LTFT fell back to +3.76 during the last drive. It's almost as if it's responding to the way I drive too, lot's of WOT and the LTFT goes up. Drive like a grandpa and the LTFT falls back down. Could this be because it sits in different cells and with different injector ratios where the LTFT is set and again because the port and direct injectors are off of each other?

Back to the MAF:
Quote:
4.2/4.25v would work as the MaxV, I leave the OEM minimum and the min unchanged should be the lowest voltage you see.
The value in Vgi's tool is called max unchanged and is required to be above "Min V". If I set a value lower than 2.5 it produces weird results. It even created cells with negative voltages in some cases of low values. Could there be a bug in there? Or did Vgi make a wrong implementation somehow if it really should have been "min unchanged" and not "max"?

Quote:
I now calculate a new ELC table using the same data as adjusting the MAF, kills 2 birds with one stone.
Do understand correctly that you mean I could leave the MAF as it is, and use a "MAF scaling log" to instead make adjustments to ELC? And that this would reduce the fuel trims in CL and hence make my LTFT in OL smaller?

Quote:
Also, if you're really that bothered about the MAF, set all your open loop fuel target to one value in the region of 12.5-13 and that way you're not chasing a changing fuel target.
You mean to do this for the MAF scaling only?

Thank you so much once again!
Tor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2017, 02:52 PM   #599
Kodename47
Senior Member
 
Kodename47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Drives: UK GT86
Location: UK
Posts: 2,630
Thanks: 168
Thanked 1,346 Times in 926 Posts
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
I tried to do the rescale from memory, just put an OEM scale into it and:
MaxV is the maximum voltage
Max Unchanged should be left as 2.5v
MinV is the lowest reading you see when running, or just below.

Is the AFR swinging even an issue? Could it be the result of something else? If it bothers you that much and you are always keeping an eye on it, you could just disable the LTFT..... If it's just LTFT is open loop then maybe adjust the fuel trim boundaries. I never found the reason why the split injectors caused odd LTFT at higher RPM

That is correct about the ELC, you could adjust that and see what happens. I use the same log to rescale the MAF and then adjust the ELC after.

Flat AFR targets, yes just for scaling. The leaner the better as the O2 sensor will be slightly more accurate.
__________________
.: Stealth 86 :.
Abbey Motorsport/K47 Tuned Sprintex 210 Supercharger

Litchfield Springs / Abbey MS Geo
Kodename47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2017, 09:40 PM   #600
Tor
Senior Member
 
Tor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Drives: Toyota GT86
Location: Europe
Posts: 837
Thanks: 348
Thanked 469 Times in 269 Posts
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodename47 View Post
I tried to do the rescale from memory, just put an OEM scale into it and:
MaxV is the maximum voltage
Max Unchanged should be left as 2.5v
MinV is the lowest reading you see when running, or just below.
Thanks, from playing around with it, exactly like that seemed to give the most even spacing.

Quote:
Is the AFR swinging even an issue? Could it be the result of something else? If it bothers you that much and you are always keeping an eye on it, you could just disable the LTFT..... If it's just LTFT is open loop then maybe adjust the fuel trim boundaries. I never found the reason why the split injectors caused odd LTFT at higher RPM
The only issue is that it's running richer than I intended (down to 11 when the LTFT are at their highest). Maybe it's not even a problem, I can't really feel a difference when the AFR is 11 or 11.5 and subjectively this feels like the best and most powerful I've had flashed so far. So to be honest I am starting to wonder if the performance difference is even measurable if making it leaner. Still for the learning experience and to satisfy my OCD tendencies I would like to continue and see if I can get it in control.

What would happen if I reduced "AF Learning #1 limits" from +/-40% to e.g. +/-2%? Would that mean I would never see LTFT beyond those limits? And would it pose a problem for CL operation or would it just apply more STFT as needed beyond the limits set, as required?

I assume "AF correction #3 limits" are the STFT? They are +/-50% so I assume this should be plenty to control AFR in all situations anyway?

I like the idea of the ECU still having some control of OL AFR, in case I am forced to use some other brand/quality of fuel than I usually do. If setting the limits as low as +/-2%, does it even still have a reasonable effect, or could I just as well disable LTFT all together?

Quote:
That is correct about the ELC, you could adjust that and see what happens. I use the same log to rescale the MAF and then adjust the ELC after.
This would probably be what I'll try next then. I like the idea of having that table based on my actual mods and not a generic stock table anyway.

Tactrix logs MAP as XX.XX to XXX.XX. Eg. low 22.68 or high 100.29 (tuning engine off). I can't figure the unit out. But it looks like I should just divide them with 100 to get bar (0.2268 and 1.0029 in the examples) to make it compatible with the ELC table?

Quote:
Flat AFR targets, yes just for scaling. The leaner the better as the O2 sensor will be slightly more accurate.
Ok, then flash a tune with zeroed out ELC and IAT Comp and 12.3 OL in all rpm above load 0.9 to collect data to do it all in one go. I suppose it would be a good idea to reduce the timing a bit to avoid it knocking when doing pulls?

Thanks again!
Tor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2017, 11:10 AM   #601
Kodename47
Senior Member
 
Kodename47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Drives: UK GT86
Location: UK
Posts: 2,630
Thanks: 168
Thanked 1,346 Times in 926 Posts
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
If you take a little timing out, you could run AFRs of 13:1 no issue. AFRs of 11.0:1 compared to 11.5:1 is likely to cost you a few HP max. If 11.0:0 allows you to run more timing advance, you'll make better power than 11.5:0 with less timing.

Have a look here:


You could reduce the LTFT range, not sure whether it works or not but could be worth a shot. STFT will still operate as normal so no issues in CL. AF #3 is compensations from the rear O2 and are separate from the LTFT/STFT.

Sounds like the pressure is in kPa, so dividing it by 100 would give Bar. Just make sure you have MAP/MRP correct depending on what you're logging (looks to be MAP) and the defined x axis on the ELC table. I wouldn't bother zeroing it out, you've probably got a better starting point from it with the OEM settings.
__________________
.: Stealth 86 :.
Abbey Motorsport/K47 Tuned Sprintex 210 Supercharger

Litchfield Springs / Abbey MS Geo
Kodename47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2017, 12:17 PM   #602
Tor
Senior Member
 
Tor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Drives: Toyota GT86
Location: Europe
Posts: 837
Thanks: 348
Thanked 469 Times in 269 Posts
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodename47 View Post
If you take a little timing out, you could run AFRs of 13:1 no issue. AFRs of 11.0:1 compared to 11.5:1 is likely to cost you a few HP max. If 11.0:0 allows you to run more timing advance, you'll make better power than 11.5:0 with less timing.

Have a look here:
Haltech Technically Speaking: Ignition Timing vs Air Fuel Ratio - YouTube
Thanks for the link. The Honda K20 even has a lot lower compression ratio, so would it be reasonable to assume that the range he mentions of 11-13 would probably even be lower for our engines?

Quote:
You could reduce the LTFT range, not sure whether it works or not but could be worth a shot. STFT will still operate as normal so no issues in CL. AF #3 is compensations from the rear O2 and are separate from the LTFT/STFT.

Sounds like the pressure is in kPa, so dividing it by 100 would give Bar. Just make sure you have MAP/MRP correct depending on what you're logging (looks to be MAP) and the defined x axis on the ELC table. I wouldn't bother zeroing it out, you've probably got a better starting point from it with the OEM settings.
The ELC unit says "Manifold Abs Pressure (Bar)". I assume the logs are Absolute too (MAP)?

Ok, I'll leave the stock compensation in there then. I think I will convert and use the Euro MY17 K00G tables and use their values. Since it's the same header and manifold, they must have had a plan with the changes.

If the above doesn't help I'll look into either disabling or lowering the limits of LTFT or live with it as it turns out.

Tor 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
AFR in Closed Loop Toyota John Software Tuning 12 12-14-2015 04:53 AM
BRZedit Fuel Trims, Closed to Open loop transiton mad_sb Engine, Exhaust, Transmission 32 08-06-2015 03:14 AM
Notes on injector / maf scalining using full time open loop mad_sb Software Tuning 40 03-03-2014 06:49 PM
Screencast: closed loop boost control with RaceRom jamesm Software Tuning 2 02-10-2014 03:23 PM
Screencast: experimenting with full-time closed loop fueling jamesm Software Tuning 2 12-27-2013 11:19 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.