|
Software Tuning Discuss all software tuning topics. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
03-09-2015, 10:47 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Drives: JAWS
Location: socal
Posts: 703
Thanks: 753
Thanked 437 Times in 224 Posts
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
|
Ignition Timing and AFR
I've seen debate on a couple forums about whether changing ignition timing affects A/F Ratio.
I've also seen mentioned that although pulling/adding timing may change the 02 Sensor readings, it doesn't necessarily mean there is an overly rich or lean mixture happening in the cylinder. My reason for looking into this is that in my latest datalog at WOT, my AFR reading is slightly richer than the commanded AFR reading. Also, where the Primary Open-Loop Fueling table in RomRaider shows I should be at 11.76, my AFR reading is 11.25..slightly rich. I'm running the OFT stage 2 with a drop in filter and OFH, with .35-1 degree of timing pulled at engine loads .8-1.4 depending where I saw slight FLKC. Is the pulled timing causing a slightly rich AFR reading? I know slightly rich is better than lean but I'd like to figure this out. |
03-09-2015, 11:12 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Drives: Toyota 86 GTS
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,129
Thanks: 453
Thanked 895 Times in 424 Posts
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
No, it will be because of MAF scale, LTFT and primary OL fueling additive more than timing.
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Wayno For This Useful Post: | JB86'd (03-09-2015) |
03-09-2015, 11:20 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Drives: JAWS
Location: socal
Posts: 703
Thanks: 753
Thanked 437 Times in 224 Posts
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
|
I guess it'd make sense to include my datalog here. I do see that my LTFT during WOT is +2.34% when the datalog is showing AFR 11.25 and Commanded AFR around 12. Should I be concerned or just live with it?
http://datazap.me/u/joshbustos86/206...4-7-9-12-13-14 |
03-10-2015, 03:45 AM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Drives: UK GT86
Location: UK
Posts: 3,040
Thanks: 185
Thanked 1,629 Times in 1,112 Posts
Mentioned: 155 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
|
1) Do you know that you O2 sensor scale is accurate, so can you trust the reading?
2) 11.25 is the lowest value on your O2 scale, it may be reading richer than that. 3) Mild changes to timing wont have a significant impact on AFR. 4) Do you know that the OL Fuel table is actually the target AFR? The question should be is whether running "overly rich" is costing you power, or whether the timing and AFR combination is ideal.
__________________
.: Stealth 86 :.
Abbey Motorsport/K47 Tuned Sprintex 210 Supercharger Kodename 47 DJ: Soundcloud / Instagram / Facebook |
03-10-2015, 04:11 AM | #5 | |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2013
Drives: FT86
Location: Australia
Posts: 7,998
Thanks: 1,035
Thanked 4,987 Times in 2,981 Posts
Mentioned: 598 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
Have noticed the OFT guys appear to deliberately increase the maf flow numbers in the OL section of the scale. making it run richer than target on many cars. I think they do this for a couple of reasons 1. rich is safer than lean 2. MAF sensors vary a bit mine and @Wayno s mafs are about 8% different so maf scaling for my car on wayno maks his car run lean. My car always ran rich like yours on oft tunes. OFT guys need to account for maf sensor variation the maf scaling is adjusted as a compromise for variations in MAf sensors 3. Rich mix generally buys you a bit of knock resistance at upper rpm. If you do scale you maf and correct the OL maf scaling you will then be closer to target or commanded AFR. However on 91 octane your likely going to run into knock issues and will probably have to pull a degree or two of timing over 5000 rpm. |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to steve99 For This Useful Post: | JB86'd (03-10-2015) |
03-10-2015, 03:35 PM | #6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Drives: UK GT86
Location: UK
Posts: 3,040
Thanks: 185
Thanked 1,629 Times in 1,112 Posts
Mentioned: 155 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
__________________
.: Stealth 86 :.
Abbey Motorsport/K47 Tuned Sprintex 210 Supercharger Kodename 47 DJ: Soundcloud / Instagram / Facebook |
|
03-10-2015, 05:35 PM | #7 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2013
Drives: FT86
Location: Australia
Posts: 7,998
Thanks: 1,035
Thanked 4,987 Times in 2,981 Posts
Mentioned: 598 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
|
|
03-10-2015, 06:34 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Drives: 2013 Asphalt FR-S
Location: Orange County
Posts: 1,639
Thanks: 632
Thanked 981 Times in 537 Posts
Mentioned: 100 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
Firstly, lots of good info already posted here, no intention to contradict any of it. Second, if you have ever logged a stock car you will see that the commanded AFR is NOT in correlation with the actual afr, especially when in open loop. You can get close with careful maf scaling but you will rairly ever be dead in when in open loop. The values in the open loop fueling table are just amounts that translate to pulse width once you are in open loop. The number in the cell should not be thought of a the target afr once open loop, but rather a raw value that has been scaled to resemble an AFR value.
__________________
~Namaste~ |
03-11-2015, 08:04 AM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Drives: 2013 ultramarine Scion FR-S
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 293
Thanks: 140
Thanked 137 Times in 70 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
If all of your calibrations are correct the commanded AFR should be the actual AFR. If it is not then there are still some calibrations to be corrected. I'm not sure if we have access to all if the necessary calibrations, and it's obvious that the commanded AFR does not need to be dead nuts accurate, but it would be incorrect to say that it's just s random scalar. If you're seeing a difference, then something is off. That doesn't mean you need to be chasing it, but it's something to be aware of.
|
03-11-2015, 08:47 AM | #10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Drives: UK GT86
Location: UK
Posts: 3,040
Thanks: 185
Thanked 1,629 Times in 1,112 Posts
Mentioned: 155 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
I'm sure the open loop fueling additive table is what's actually needed to correct the fueling to the stock MAF scale, rather than moving the MAF to correct the fueling. However to get that correct then you really need a steady state dyno or lots and lots of data collection in open loop running.
__________________
.: Stealth 86 :.
Abbey Motorsport/K47 Tuned Sprintex 210 Supercharger Kodename 47 DJ: Soundcloud / Instagram / Facebook |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Kodename47 For This Useful Post: | Koa (03-11-2015) |
03-11-2015, 02:44 PM | #11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Drives: 2013 ultramarine Scion FR-S
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 293
Thanks: 140
Thanked 137 Times in 70 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
The big thing is that it's not perfect, but there are things which can be done to help it, such as correcting the MAF scaling based on logs. The factory tuning is based on nominal values for sensors, whereas we have the capability to tune for the actual sensors in our individual cars. |
|
03-16-2015, 12:29 AM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Drives: 10 Series Scion FR-S
Location: PR
Posts: 328
Thanks: 79
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
In my limited knowldge (learning how to tune my car, so I've been reading all of mad_sb's posts, as well as the stickies) I noticed that with the OFT tune my car was hitting -17% LTFT's which is insane, I decided against using the OFT tune and took my time to scale my maf using yikes and getting a general idea of how to scale my maf with james vid.
After I got my LTFT's less than 5% on the stock tune, I basically imported the timing map, fuelling table, cam timings, and O2 sensor scaling from OFT to my scaled tune. With the OFT map as it sat my O2 would go as low as 11.25, which is the O2 sensors limit, even though the lowest requested AFR was 12, now with my rescaled maf my O2 reports AFR readings almost bang on compared to the fuel map, with a .2 variance at some points. |
03-16-2015, 12:58 AM | #13 | |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2013
Drives: FT86
Location: Australia
Posts: 7,998
Thanks: 1,035
Thanked 4,987 Times in 2,981 Posts
Mentioned: 598 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
if you use the VGI utility it heaps easier and quicker than yikes spreadsheet |
|
03-16-2015, 01:05 AM | #14 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Drives: 10 Series Scion FR-S
Location: PR
Posts: 328
Thanks: 79
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
Decided to use yikes as it would show me where the fueling errors where located so I adjusted the maf scale based on a general area in order to keep the MAF scale as perfectly logarithmic as I could. |
|
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How much timing are you running on your FI?!? | Fear | Forced Induction | 4 | 06-09-2014 02:28 AM |
Re-fueling Timing and Amount | Chad86 | Scion FR-S / Toyota 86 GT86 General Forum | 26 | 03-15-2014 02:03 PM |
Stock Rom: Timing + Learn Value | sw20kosh | Software Tuning | 7 | 12-11-2013 07:09 PM |
E85, Boost and Ignition Timing | jamesm | Software Tuning | 23 | 12-11-2013 02:19 PM |
Timing belt shredded..?! | drei | CANADA | 5 | 12-06-2013 05:54 PM |