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

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

Software Tuning Discuss all software tuning topics.


User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-19-2016, 06:05 PM   #1443
Wayno
Senior Member
 
Wayno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Drives: Toyota 86 GTS
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,124
Thanks: 451
Thanked 885 Times in 420 Posts
Mentioned: 206 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 504 View Post
Hi All,

Im just refining my e85 tune (actually using eflex e70ish relatively consistent) and am slightly confused where the car has -6 LTFT but shows the afr is lean in relation to commanded afr. Fuel trims are pretty good most of the time but spike to a supposed rich -8% at times probably due to my maf scale and myself trying to keep it perfectly smooth. actual AFR is 15.7 with commanded being 14.6 with the negative spikes, though on most of the log its ok

I'm using Waynos v111.2 e85 stage 2 tune with my scaled maf (trims used to get to -13% with the supplied maf)

Let me know what you guys think
You are on E70. It's supposed to be -13%.
Wayno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2016, 07:11 PM   #1444
504
Senior Member
 
504's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Drives: 2014 86 GTS
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 168
Thanks: 131
Thanked 85 Times in 57 Posts
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
So I should be leaving it to run that rich since no eflex sensor?

I've been filling from the same station for 2 years and its been really consistent. Its been causing Fine Block corrections upto 1.4 degrees due to the rich condition (I know this cause its leaner now and has much less severe FBKC) and idle has the slight hesitation sometimes.

My intentions were to get it fine tuned for my station but still be slightly rich for safety in case.

Still unsure as to why it reads -6% LTFT when its clearly running leaner than Commanded AFR in some instances

Edit: If e85 consumes 30% more fuel than e0 then e70 would consume 24.7% more than e0. 5.3% would be the fueling error if I put e70 in a perfectly scaled e85 tune. Im guessing this is how it goes

Last edited by 504; 12-19-2016 at 08:20 PM.
504 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2016, 02:58 AM   #1445
Kodename47
Senior Member
 
Kodename47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Drives: UK GT86
Location: UK
Posts: 3,033
Thanks: 185
Thanked 1,605 Times in 1,102 Posts
Mentioned: 149 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 504 View Post
Still unsure as to why it reads -6% LTFT when its clearly running leaner than Commanded AFR in some instances
In open loop? If so, do I need to elaborate?
__________________
.: Stealth 86 :.
Abbey Motorsport/K47 Tuned Sprintex 210 Supercharger

Kodename 47 DJ:
Soundcloud / Instagram / Facebook
Kodename47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2016, 07:09 PM   #1446
504
Senior Member
 
504's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Drives: 2014 86 GTS
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 168
Thanks: 131
Thanked 85 Times in 57 Posts
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodename47 View Post
In open loop? If so, do I need to elaborate?
nah its in closed loop around 1.5-2000 rpm (1.35-1.6 vmaf)

Sorry for not putting it through datazap. It doesn't happen all the time but every time the fuel trims go negative whack, it reads lean. all other tables in tune are exact v111.2 including o2 sensor scaling

504 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2016, 12:25 AM   #1447
steve99
Senior Member
 
steve99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Drives: FT86
Location: Australia
Posts: 7,870
Thanks: 1,008
Thanked 4,899 Times in 2,937 Posts
Mentioned: 572 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 504 View Post
nah its in closed loop around 1.5-2000 rpm (1.35-1.6 vmaf)

Sorry for not putting it through datazap. It doesn't happen all the time but every time the fuel trims go negative whack, it reads lean. all other tables in tune are exact v111.2 including o2 sensor scaling




check your closed loop AFR tables A and
B make sure their are negative values in all cells . Positive or zero values cause weird issues. As its an offset of 14.7, its strange your target afr is leaner than 14.7, usually the ecu wont do that.


unless its a logging issue
steve99 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to steve99 For This Useful Post:
504 (12-21-2016)
Old 12-21-2016, 04:56 AM   #1448
504
Senior Member
 
504's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Drives: 2014 86 GTS
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 168
Thanks: 131
Thanked 85 Times in 57 Posts
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve99 View Post
check your closed loop AFR tables A and
B make sure their are negative values in all cells . Positive or zero values cause weird issues. As its an offset of 14.7, its strange your target afr is leaner than 14.7, usually the ecu wont do that.


unless its a logging issue
Thanks steve, I've attached the flashed rom and a log. Everything seems to be in check. CL fuel target (load) are all negative though (ECT) tables do have zeros in them.

Its all logged through tactrix using supplied txt file but some parameters were removed for faster refresh times. I've updated the file now so I'll find out pretty soon if logging was an issue
Attached Files
File Type: zip CPU-87W A01G E85 v111.2 SCALED MAF with log.zip (1.48 MB, 99 views)
504 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2016, 08:39 PM   #1449
Wayno
Senior Member
 
Wayno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Drives: Toyota 86 GTS
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,124
Thanks: 451
Thanked 885 Times in 420 Posts
Mentioned: 206 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
1. Don't waste everyone's time on logs taken before the car is even remotely warm.
2. There's no such thing as lean in closed loop, particularly not at what you're showing is idle, and especially not while the car is in cat warm up mode.
3. See 1. Why do you think I specify oil temp must be logged.
4. E85 is nowhere near 30% more than E0. It's closer to (or greater than) 40% more. It's just the yanks that don't bother to baseline anything as E0 and confuse the rest of the world by comparing E85 to E8-15.
Wayno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2016, 08:39 PM   #1450
504
Senior Member
 
504's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Drives: 2014 86 GTS
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 168
Thanks: 131
Thanked 85 Times in 57 Posts
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayno View Post
1. Don't waste everyone's time on logs taken before the car is even remotely warm.
2. There's no such thing as lean in closed loop, particularly not at what you're showing is idle, and especially not while the car is in cat warm up mode.
3. See 1. Why do you think I specify oil temp must be logged.
4. E85 is nowhere near 30% more than E0. It's closer to (or greater than) 40% more. It's just the yanks that don't bother to baseline anything as E0 and confuse the rest of the world by comparing E85 to E8-15.
Wayne,

I can't emphasise how much respect I have for your contributions you've made to this platform particularly in the software aspect of cars where most of us wouldn't dare venture into; I just wish the information was delivered in a less aggressive tone.

If I was asking "does the brz seat fit on frs", sure I'll accept being roasted. But this stuff most of us aren't particularly knowledgeable about with very limited information available online to leech off.

You're Right about point 1 where the car wasn't warm in the log screenshot posted earlier. However, I did attach a log along with the tune in my last post from a 30-minute drive that shows that the concern is pretty consistent throughout the entire drive.

[my understanding] [open to discussion] In regards to fueling, If pure ethanol has a stoichiometric ratio of 9:1 and gasoline 14.7:1, E100 would be 38.78% richer, E85 would be 32.96% richer and E70 would be 27.14% richer. Either way, I found it odd how an E85 tune yielded 13% rich on E70.

Happy Holidays everyone
504 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2016, 12:43 AM   #1451
Blue_Elite
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Drives: 2016 Asphalt FR-S, 2008 E90 335i
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 38
Thanks: 1
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Merry Christmas/happy holidays forum dwellers.

Some background: I filled up with E85 for the first time a bit over a week ago. I was initially just going test how the car felt, but, I honestly don't think I can go back to the pisswater CA 91.

Anyway, I've been taking it pretty easy to get the fuel trims set. Just filled up my second tank and I would wager my ethanol mix is right around 75% based on the trims. I finally got a decent data logging session when it wasn't raining down here.

Here's the full graph:

http://datazap.me/u/jevenson123/log-...6?log=0&data=1

And the three WOT 3rd gear pulls for those uninterested in socal city driving:

http://datazap.me/u/jevenson123/log-...zoom=4271-4385

http://datazap.me/u/jevenson123/log-...zoom=4831-4937

http://datazap.me/u/jevenson123/log-...zoom=5493-5595

My analysis:

I do have some FLKC at rpm > ~7k. Not enough to drop IAM, but ~1.3-2.6 degrees at times. I probably should pull a touch of timing.

Fuel trims look decent. Not as close to true 85% ethanol as I would like, but it probably won't matter much.

My AFR seems to vary quite a bit from its commanded value during the WOT pulls. A 0.75 difference in some places. Is this normal?


If anyone is interested, I would greatly appreciate feedback on the data and my analysis.

Cheers!

*Edit*

Here's two more WOT pulls for everyone's viewing pleasure.

http://datazap.me/u/jevenson123/log-...zoom=2538-2634

http://datazap.me/u/jevenson123/log-...zoom=3390-3507

Last edited by Blue_Elite; 12-26-2016 at 01:52 PM.
Blue_Elite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2016, 10:53 PM   #1452
Blue_Elite
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Drives: 2016 Asphalt FR-S, 2008 E90 335i
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 38
Thanks: 1
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue_Elite View Post
...
Bump bump.

Here's two more pulls!

http://datazap.me/u/jevenson123/log-...zoom=6311-6435

http://datazap.me/u/jevenson123/log-...zoom=7091-7190

Trims in the CL city driving look very nice. Knock at RPM > 6500 appears negligible at this point. I see some lean spikes at low RPM during WOT pulls though.

I'll keep going until the grenade goes off or somebody tells me otherwise.
Blue_Elite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2016, 03:39 AM   #1453
Kodename47
Senior Member
 
Kodename47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Drives: UK GT86
Location: UK
Posts: 3,033
Thanks: 185
Thanked 1,605 Times in 1,102 Posts
Mentioned: 149 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue_Elite View Post
I see some lean spikes at low RPM during WOT pulls though.
It's the transient condition and the delay of the O2 sensor location. As the throttle opens, the sudden increase of air will make it go lean briefly, the O2 just detects this with a delay so appears a few lines later in the logs. You can try and increase tip in fueling a little but to see if it helps.
__________________
.: Stealth 86 :.
Abbey Motorsport/K47 Tuned Sprintex 210 Supercharger

Kodename 47 DJ:
Soundcloud / Instagram / Facebook
Kodename47 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Kodename47 For This Useful Post:
Blue_Elite (12-28-2016)
Old 01-16-2017, 06:10 PM   #1454
Blue_Elite
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Drives: 2016 Asphalt FR-S, 2008 E90 335i
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 38
Thanks: 1
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Me again.


http://datazap.me/u/jevenson123/log-...7?log=0&data=1


I got around to installing my JDL UEL catless header. I absolutely butchered the secondary O2 sensor threads. I managed to tap & die the threads and really wedged it in there. No leaks that I can tell. I'm also running on E85 w/ OFT. Took this log after learning the trims for a couple weeks. I am actually very pleased with how this turned out.


CL fuel trims dip a bit far in the negative (rich). This appears to be low E% and is probably not an issue.


OL performance looks good. AFR following commanded and knock is minimal.
Blue_Elite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2017, 11:45 AM   #1455
dogwhistle19
Member
 
dogwhistle19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Drives: 1UZ VVTI Swapped
Location: Saint Paul, Minnesota
Posts: 30
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayno View Post
1. Don't waste everyone's time on logs taken before the car is even remotely warm.
2. There's no such thing as lean in closed loop, particularly not at what you're showing is idle, and especially not while the car is in cat warm up mode.
3. See 1. Why do you think I specify oil temp must be logged.
4. E85 is nowhere near 30% more than E0. It's closer to (or greater than) 40% more. It's just the yanks that don't bother to baseline anything as E0 and confuse the rest of the world by comparing E85 to E8-15.
Wayno, can you verify, this is a drive home a while back I took on my OFT. E85, UEL, and drop in per Shiv's recommendations. Is the positive correction on the Knock Learned, timing being added due to positive feedback, or is that a long history of bad knock? I will be adding our oil cooler kit this spring along with a bigger pan, but nothing else engine wise unless you say a protune is required.

http://www.datazap.me/u/dogwhistle19...s?log=0&data=1
dogwhistle19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 11:07 AM   #1456
Teseo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Drives: frs
Location: Gunsai
Posts: 4,282
Thanks: 5,721
Thanked 2,502 Times in 1,526 Posts
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
http://www.datazap.me/u/teseo/log-14...og=0&data=1-12


Running Stg 2 UEL with 93oct. Stock intake, stock air filter also. @steve99 or @Wayno can chime in? Thanks
Teseo 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
RGM Supercharged 86 performance data TheGooseman AFRICA 14 12-13-2014 01:15 AM
Interpreting Ecutek Data Logs? cuddefred Software Tuning 3 09-02-2013 12:55 PM
VIR - Impressions/Pics/Logs/Video (Track Daze) swift996 Tracking / Autocross / HPDE / Drifting 39 08-30-2013 09:21 AM
Noise tube delete air/fuel logs? jm1681 Engine, Exhaust, Transmission 13 10-17-2012 04:57 PM
ECU Data Logger Motordyne Engine, Exhaust, Transmission 5 07-18-2012 09:27 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2021 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.