Quote:
Originally Posted by BRZoomTX
@ 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
.... 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
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
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.
|
|
|