Tuning with LS enabled
May 24, 2009, 04:44 PM
#31
You can trade off resolution in areas where the trim is fairly constant. It seems like above 800Hz I found the value only varied a very small amount. Off the top of my head, my values were something like
800 1000 1200 1400 1600
121 122 121 120 119
I could probably set the scaling values to something like this:
800 1200 1600 2000 2400
121 121 119 117 115
Or what ever is needed to get the target AFR to match the actual AFR.
I know that I can log the 2-Byte airflow, but it would be nice to log it on 1-Byte like Tephra did with his 1-Byte load calc. I know my 2G MAF would flat line right around 2900Hz. The EVO maf at that same frequency wil be flowing something like 25% more air then the 2G MAF, so yes, it's very capable.
800 1000 1200 1400 1600
121 122 121 120 119
I could probably set the scaling values to something like this:
800 1200 1600 2000 2400
121 121 119 117 115
Or what ever is needed to get the target AFR to match the actual AFR.
I know that I can log the 2-Byte airflow, but it would be nice to log it on 1-Byte like Tephra did with his 1-Byte load calc. I know my 2G MAF would flat line right around 2900Hz. The EVO maf at that same frequency wil be flowing something like 25% more air then the 2G MAF, so yes, it's very capable.
Aug 16, 2009, 04:06 PM
#32
Evolved Member
iTrader: (38)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 660
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone know the correct lean spool load threshold address definitions for 96940011? I cannot find anywhere on this forum.
Last edited by shadow1; Aug 22, 2009 at 09:01 PM.
Aug 16, 2009, 09:15 PM
#33
I have always maintained that its function was not intended as a Leaning function, but rather designed as an Anti-Abuse function. The longer you are on the throttle, the richer it gets. I like it and I also keep it active on my car and is especially valuable for the auto, so as it loads up through the gears it gradually gets richer and safer.
Aug 16, 2009, 09:35 PM
#34
I really never understood the practice of trying to match the AFR fuel targets in the map to the actual AFR as logged by a wideband.
I see this done a lot in the Subaru community. They are trying to match the table AFR to the actual AFR all the time. WHY? What is the point? Do people do this because they want to tune w/o a wideband? Is that the point?
I tuned a stock Subaru STi and the fuel map did not match the logged AFR. That is a STOCK car. The same thing applies to the Evo. On a stock Evo the fuel map AFR does not match the logged AFR. So why bother doing it on a moded Evo? I see this practice being done more and more in the Evo community. I am just trying to understand the advantage. You go through the hassle of changing the stock injector scaling and in the process messing the trims simply to get the fuel map to match the actual wideband AFR. It just seems like a waste of time to me.
I see this done a lot in the Subaru community. They are trying to match the table AFR to the actual AFR all the time. WHY? What is the point? Do people do this because they want to tune w/o a wideband? Is that the point?
I tuned a stock Subaru STi and the fuel map did not match the logged AFR. That is a STOCK car. The same thing applies to the Evo. On a stock Evo the fuel map AFR does not match the logged AFR. So why bother doing it on a moded Evo? I see this practice being done more and more in the Evo community. I am just trying to understand the advantage. You go through the hassle of changing the stock injector scaling and in the process messing the trims simply to get the fuel map to match the actual wideband AFR. It just seems like a waste of time to me.
Sep 1, 2009, 09:04 PM
#36
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Northern KY near Cincy
Posts: 2,408
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
Disabeling LS won't necessarily make more power. What it will do is provide more consistancy from pull to pull since the ECU won't make any artifical adjustments.
Essentially LS is more of a safety feature than a "lean spool" so to speak. The ECU will richen up the mixture as RPM and load increases.
The key to tuning with it enabled is to always use the same method/location to do your pulls. This way you are consistant. Then you can tune your tables as you always would.
Essentially LS is more of a safety feature than a "lean spool" so to speak. The ECU will richen up the mixture as RPM and load increases.
The key to tuning with it enabled is to always use the same method/location to do your pulls. This way you are consistant. Then you can tune your tables as you always would.
Sep 2, 2009, 02:26 PM
#37
I really never understood the practice of trying to match the AFR fuel targets in the map to the actual AFR as logged by a wideband.
I see this done a lot in the Subaru community. They are trying to match the table AFR to the actual AFR all the time. WHY? What is the point? Do people do this because they want to tune w/o a wideband? Is that the point?
I tuned a stock Subaru STi and the fuel map did not match the logged AFR. That is a STOCK car. The same thing applies to the Evo. On a stock Evo the fuel map AFR does not match the logged AFR. So why bother doing it on a moded Evo? I see this practice being done more and more in the Evo community. I am just trying to understand the advantage. You go through the hassle of changing the stock injector scaling and in the process messing the trims simply to get the fuel map to match the actual wideband AFR. It just seems like a waste of time to me.
I see this done a lot in the Subaru community. They are trying to match the table AFR to the actual AFR all the time. WHY? What is the point? Do people do this because they want to tune w/o a wideband? Is that the point?
I tuned a stock Subaru STi and the fuel map did not match the logged AFR. That is a STOCK car. The same thing applies to the Evo. On a stock Evo the fuel map AFR does not match the logged AFR. So why bother doing it on a moded Evo? I see this practice being done more and more in the Evo community. I am just trying to understand the advantage. You go through the hassle of changing the stock injector scaling and in the process messing the trims simply to get the fuel map to match the actual wideband AFR. It just seems like a waste of time to me.
Part throttle is a whole different story though. Below about 300Hz, it required a LOT of changes to get the actual AFR to match the mapped values.
I would assume it's because of my intake pipe and filter. I haven't done it with a stock intake though, so I could be wrong.
Matching actual AFR to MAPAFR seems to make the car drive smoother. It's also nice that you can program an AFR into the table and know it will be very close to reality in actual AFR.
Yes, you tune for what makes power and the numbers are somewhat irrelevant. But it's convenient when making mass changes and rescaling maps.
Sep 2, 2009, 03:19 PM
#38
With LS disabled the MAPAFR and actual AFR matched almost perfectly above 800 Hz on my car. Enable LS and I bet it matches the map still, once you interpolate the LS function into it. It's only a minor tweak of the mAF tables if anything at WOT. This is to be expected as the air velocity becomes high enough that a different intake pipe or filter will make very little difference in how the majority of the air makes it through the MAF.
Part throttle is a whole different story though. Below about 300Hz, it required a LOT of changes to get the actual AFR to match the mapped values.
I would assume it's because of my intake pipe and filter. I haven't done it with a stock intake though, so I could be wrong.
Matching actual AFR to MAPAFR seems to make the car drive smoother. It's also nice that you can program an AFR into the table and know it will be very close to reality in actual AFR.
Yes, you tune for what makes power and the numbers are somewhat irrelevant. But it's convenient when making mass changes and rescaling maps.
Part throttle is a whole different story though. Below about 300Hz, it required a LOT of changes to get the actual AFR to match the mapped values.
I would assume it's because of my intake pipe and filter. I haven't done it with a stock intake though, so I could be wrong.
Matching actual AFR to MAPAFR seems to make the car drive smoother. It's also nice that you can program an AFR into the table and know it will be very close to reality in actual AFR.
Yes, you tune for what makes power and the numbers are somewhat irrelevant. But it's convenient when making mass changes and rescaling maps.
Sep 26, 2009, 06:52 PM
#40
Looking at Applaud's original post for 94170015, it looks like the RPM axes are defined incorrectly (should be 662e, not 63da).
Here's what I found, using his definitions, for 96940011:
And for 96530006:
Hope that helps! 
Here's what I found, using his definitions, for 96940011:
Code:
<table name="Lean Spool Start RPM" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="1280" type="1D" level="1" scaling="RPMStatLimit"/> <table name="Lean Spool Stop RPM" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="1284" type="1D" level="1" scaling="RPMStatLimit"/> <table name="Lean Spool Load Threshold" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="307a" type="2D" level="1" scaling="Load8"> <table name="input value" address="5c22" type="X Axis" elements="14" scaling="RPM"/> </table> <table name="Lean Spool Trailing Time (Rich Side)" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="3052" type="2D" level="1" scaling="uint8"> <table name="input value" address="5c22" type="X Axis" elements="14" scaling="RPM"/> </table> <table name="Lean Spool Trailing Time (Lean Side)" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="3066" type="2D" level="1" scaling="uint8"> <table name="input value" address="5c22" type="X Axis" elements="14" scaling="RPM"/> </table> <table name="Min Temp for Lean Spool" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="127e" type="1D" level="1" scaling="Temp"/> <table name="Lean Spool Enable Load Hysteresis" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="127c" type="1D" level="1" scaling="Load16"/> <table name="Lean Spool AFR Mapping" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="308e" type="2D" level="1" scaling="AFR"> <table name="base AFR" address="5c48" type="X Axis" elements="7" scaling="AFR16"/> </table> <table name="Lean Spool AFR below Enable" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="1282" type="1D" level="1" scaling="AFR16"/> <table name="Lean Spool Clip Value" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="1286" type="1D" level="1" scaling="AFR16"/>
Code:
<table name="Lean Spool Start RPM" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="1680" type="1D" level="1" scaling="RPMStatLimit"/> <table name="Lean Spool Stop RPM" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="1684" type="1D" level="1" scaling="RPMStatLimit"/> <table name="Lean Spool Load Threshold" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="39a2" type="2D" level="1" scaling="Load8"> <table name="input value" address="684a" type="X Axis" elements="14" scaling="RPM"/> </table> <table name="Lean Spool Trailing Time (Rich Side)" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="397a" type="2D" level="1" scaling="uint8"> <table name="input value" address="684a" type="X Axis" elements="14" scaling="RPM"/> </table> <table name="Lean Spool Trailing Time (Lean Side)" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="398e" type="2D" level="1" scaling="uint8"> <table name="input value" address="684a" type="X Axis" elements="14" scaling="RPM"/> </table> <table name="Min Temp for Lean Spool" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="167e" type="1D" level="1" scaling="Temp"/> <table name="Lean Spool Enable Load Hysteresis" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="167c" type="1D" level="1" scaling="Load16"/> <table name="Lean Spool AFR Mapping" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="39b6" type="2D" level="1" scaling="AFR"> <table name="base AFR" address="6870" type="X Axis" elements="7" scaling="AFR16"/> </table> <table name="Lean Spool AFR below Enable" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="1682" type="1D" level="1" scaling="AFR16"/> <table name="Lean Spool Clip Value" category="Fuel Lean Spool" address="1686" type="1D" level="1" scaling="AFR16"/>
Sep 27, 2009, 06:31 AM
#43
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Northern KY near Cincy
Posts: 2,408
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
[QUOTE=logic;7547725]Looking at Applaud's original post for 94170015, it looks like the RPM axes are defined incorrectly (should be 662e, not 63da).[QUOTE]
Which RPM axes are you talking about ? ?
Which RPM axes are you talking about ? ?
Sep 27, 2009, 08:24 AM
#44
The axis for "Lean Spool Load Threshold", "Lean Spool Trailing Time (Rich Side)", and "Lean Spool Trailing Time (Lean Side)"; unless I'm misreading, the axis for those should be at 662e on 94170015, no?
Also, it looks like the axis for "Lean Spool AFR Mapping" should be 6654 rather than 6400 (again, for 94170015)?
I could be completely misreading this though; I'm sure you know this code better than I do.
Also, it looks like the axis for "Lean Spool AFR Mapping" should be 6654 rather than 6400 (again, for 94170015)?
I could be completely misreading this though; I'm sure you know this code better than I do.