Port injector scaling

[ST-A]

did you alter the cranking fuel injector pulsewidth A-J also when going bigger injectors?

[ztan]

Originally Posted by ST-A

did you alter the cranking fuel injector pulsewidth A-J also when going bigger injectors?

*** EDIT *** Below was what I initially posted, has not worked the way I thought.


I did scale them all down, but there is an easier way to do it also:

The IAT cranking IPW compensation table returns a multiplier value of 1.0 across the whole table. Some definitions have the table as % compensation applied, the definition below shows a value of the multiplier returned. You can change this to suit your injectors (enter value of 0.5 for a halving of pulsewidth).

The Accelerator cranking IPW compensation table works the same way: if you turn the engine over with the accelerator depressed, no fuel is delivered.

<table type="2D" name="Cranking Fuel IPW Compensation (IAT)" category="Fueling - Cranking" storagetype="uint8" endian="big" sizey="5" userlevel="4">
      <scaling units="Cranking Fuel Injector Pulse Width Compensation Multiplier" expression="x*.0078125" to_byte="x/.0078125" format="0.000" fineincrement=".005" coarseincrement=".1" />
      <table type="Y Axis" name="Intake Temperature" storagetype="float" endian="little" logparam="P11">
        <scaling units="Degrees C" expression="x" to_byte="x" format="#" fineincrement="1" coarseincrement="5" />
      </table>
      <description>This is the change to the 'Cranking Fuel Injector Pulse Width (ECT)', based on the accelerator pedal.</description>
    </table>

[ST-A]

ace man

[ztan]

Originally Posted by ST-A

ace man

Not so ace.

I just did some logging with that value adjusted and it didn't affect my cranking pulse like I thought it should - I'll have to do a bit more troubleshooting and for now, back to adjusting all the tables.

Having said that, it may still work with values <1.0. I was trying to get increasing fuel for E% and with a compensation value over 1.0, no additional fuel was being put in during cranking.

[ST-A]

well

i rescaled my tables after the asnu 650cc upgrade (699cc in their test sheet), so i changed 228 to 699, also changed the dead time table.

Then i worked all A-J crank tables down (table values / 3)

but the car did not start at all, just a small cough first attempt, nothing after that so i think the plugs are wet now.

then i noticed while cranking it goes from injection mode 2 (DI) to mode 1 (port) maybe we can work it out it starts on DI ??

also i noticed my MAP value was constant at 0.65bar, even if i played the throttle while cranking, so this seemed off so i replaced it with a new omni 4bar map and scaled the 3 tables to 0.831 multiplier and 0.012 offset but nothing, no starting at all.

also tried the 0.825 multiplier and 0.031 offset stated in the ecutek manual, no effect.

either my plugs are wet/fouled or there is something wrong.

[ST-A]

ok....

after some testing found a solution:

revert back to stock the MRP compensation table (was set to 0 overall)
699cc inserterted into port injection tab
insert correct dead times
leave ALL crank tables like stock....
4bar omni map with 0.831 and 0.012 calibration

started now first crank.

[ztan]

Originally Posted by ST-A

well

i rescaled my tables after the asnu 650cc upgrade (699cc in their test sheet), so i changed 228 to 699, also changed the dead time table.

Then i worked all A-J crank tables down (table values / 3)

but the car did not start at all, just a small cough first attempt, nothing after that so i think the plugs are wet now.

then i noticed while cranking it goes from injection mode 2 (DI) to mode 1 (port) maybe we can work it out it starts on DI ??

also i noticed my MAP value was constant at 0.65bar, even if i played the throttle while cranking, so this seemed off so i replaced it with a new omni 4bar map and scaled the 3 tables to 0.831 multiplier and 0.012 offset but nothing, no starting at all.

also tried the 0.825 multiplier and 0.031 offset stated in the ecutek manual, no effect.

either my plugs are wet/fouled or there is something wrong.

When I switched over, I had no start with a new MAP sensor - was reading 0.35 Bar - I had altered what turns out to have been the wrong sensor scaling address. Put my stock sensor back in until I found the proper sensor scale.

Which ROM are you using, and where is the MAP sensor scaling address? For A01G, the MAP multiplier is at 0x11CC20 and the offset is at 0x11CC24. You only need to adjust one set of MAP scaling values. If you're using EcuTek and your MAP sensor reads 0.65 bar despite changing 3 tables, you'll need to get the right ROM address from them.

[elBarto]

As far as I know ST-A is using a G-serie OFT ROM. So that should be a A01G ROM.

send using the coffeemaker

[ST-A]

i'm on the 700G rom.

adresses are:
scaling a - 0x1000cc
scaling b - 0x1000e4
scaling c - 0x11cc20

the map sensor i had before (the denso K series) worked fine before, i just rplaced head gaskets, now i think they went because the map sensor was stuck at 0.65bar, while i was running boost on the kraftwerks sc.

now with the 4bar omni and entered 0.831 and 0.012 in those 3 tables, i run stationairy at about 6.5psi / 0.44bar and when ignition on, engine not running but throttle opened 14.7psi/1bar so it is now good.

[ztan]

Originally Posted by ST-A

i'm on the 700G rom.

adresses are:
scaling a - 0x1000cc
scaling b - 0x1000e4
scaling c - 0x11cc20

the map sensor i had before (the denso K series) worked fine before, i just rplaced head gaskets, now i think they went because the map sensor was stuck at 0.65bar, while i was running boost on the kraftwerks sc.

now with the 4bar omni and entered 0.831 and 0.012 in those 3 tables, i run stationairy at about 6.5psi / 0.44bar and when ignition on, engine not running but throttle opened 14.7psi/1bar so it is now good.

Good. For 700G, I'm pretty sure the value at 0x11cc20 is the one that is used for MAP.

[Yobiwan]

@ztan

there is plug and play data for DW450 on DW site http://goo.gl/BYHCL3

how do you think about this table?

would it work for just copy and paste?

I'm planning to upgrade port injectors,

but in my country , there is no one can handle FR-S, so I should do my self.

I'm on 10~11PSI now, and targeting 12~13PSI for future..

[ztan]

Originally Posted by Yobiwan

@ztan

there is plug and play data for DW450 on DW site http://goo.gl/BYHCL3

how do you think about this table?

would it work for just copy and paste?

I'm planning to upgrade port injectors,

but in my country , there is no one can handle FR-S, so I should do my self.

I'm on 10~11PSI now, and targeting 12~13PSI for future..

I think that data would work - I wish I had that when I installed my injectors as a baseline. I've ended up using values that are quite a bit higher but balance well with my DI system settings.

Just be careful how your injector scaling is described in your .xml file. If in ms/ml, the value needs to go lower for bigger injectors, if cc/min, the value needs to go higher... pm me and I can send you a dropbox link to my .xml and current A01G tune.

You might want to think about 700-1000 cc injectors and/or built engine if you want to go to 12-13 psi. On E85 at 10psi I'm running them at around 80% duty at redline.

I'll be passing through Seoul next month.

[Yobiwan]

Originally Posted by ztan

I think that data would work - I wish I had that when I installed my injectors as a baseline. I've ended up using values that are quite a bit higher but balance well with my DI system settings.

Just be careful how your injector scaling is described in your .xml file. If in ms/ml, the value needs to go lower for bigger injectors, if cc/min, the value needs to go higher... pm me and I can send you a dropbox link to my .xml and current A01G tune.

You might want to think about 700-1000 cc injectors and/or built engine if you want to go to 12-13 psi. On E85 at 10psi I'm running them at around 80% duty at redline.

I'll be passing through Seoul next month.

thank you for detailed advice.

in their Excel file.

injector flow scale

for DW450 is 145.35
for DW700 is 80.35
for DW900 is 72.63

then I think that value is with ms/ml scale (as you said )

and Injector flow scale is 222.32 (cc/min) in my rom.


so I try to solve this math =(

am I going right way?

[ztan]

Originally Posted by Yobiwan

thank you for detailed advice.

in their Excel file.

injector flow scale

for DW450 is 145.35
for DW700 is 80.35
for DW900 is 72.63

then I think that value is with ms/ml scale (as you said )

and Injector flow scale is 222.32 (cc/min) in my rom.


so I try to solve this math =(

am I going right way?

You're on the right path. At the end of the day, that value is quite close and good for a base, but you'll have to dial it in for your setup.

2 Different values in RomRaider:

A01G Injector flow scaling at 0x10C6B4. Default .xml defines as "2707090/x" which displays as 222.32 - this is the value that you are working off above. I didn't touch this value

A01G Injector Flow scaling BRZ at 0x10C680. With scaling as per descriptor below (expression="x" to_byte="x" ; you see what the float value is stored in ROM): Stock value is 263.10, my scaling is 123.18 for DW450; 145.35 would run rich in my car at the top end.

 <table type="2D" name="Injector Flow Scaling BRZ" category="Fueling - Port Injectors" storagetype="float" endian="big" sizey="1" userlevel="2">
      <scaling units="ESTIMATED Flow Rate - Gas Only (ms/ml)" expression="x" to_byte="x" format="#.00" fineincrement="1" coarseincrement="10" />
      <table type="Static Y Axis" name="" sizey="1">
        <data>Injector Flow Constant</data>
      </table>
      <description>This is the fuel injector constant represented with an estimated flow rating (gas only). The underlying raw value does NOT represent the injector flow rate and there is no standard for measuring the flow rate of injectors. Therefore, it should NOT be thought of as a value that is going to exactly match published rates for your injectors but as a means to get you in the general ball park as a starting point to tune from.</description>
    </table>

Check your .xml file for the Injector flow scaling BRZ tag: yours may read [expression="60000/x" to_byte="60000/x"] which roughly approximates a cc/min value.