Mitsulogger v1.6 Beta 3, INNOVATE SUPPORT to be released
Mitsulogger v1.6 Beta 3, INNOVATE SUPPORT to be released
Instead of going into all the details again..
http://www.aktivematrix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2159

I'm a day or two away from fully supporting the entire Innovate MTS compatible product line.

I know I've said this before, but I'm hoping to release this shortly as the Innovate support, and better looking dashboard are the last things I'm working on for this release.
http://www.aktivematrix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2159
I'm a day or two away from fully supporting the entire Innovate MTS compatible product line.
I know I've said this before, but I'm hoping to release this shortly as the Innovate support, and better looking dashboard are the last things I'm working on for this release.
Joe, I need that simulator tool to test the rest of the MTS chain if you get a chance to send it to me.
I want to thank Innovate for all the tech info and their help getting this working.
I want to thank Innovate for all the tech info and their help getting this working.
-jjf
Account Disabled
iTrader: (38)
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 1
From: Virginia Beach, Virginia
jack can you explain to me how this will work. I have a LM-1 installed and I'm guessing I would plug in the serial connection to the LM-1 and Laptop, your application would talk directly to the LM-1 and log the WB02 while your application is also logging the other sensors from the stock ECU and put it all together in a log for me?
Yep.. Basically the current mitsulogger logs would have the AFR (and any additional data from those widebands or other devices) appended into the logs as new columns.
In some cases you'll have to update the Mitsulogger.txt file you use for importing the logs into data log lab, but thats actually the hardest part.
I've tried to remain consistent in that AFR data is always a column named AFR if there is a wideband, but other items, or in the case of the LM1's additional inputs or other Innovate products, would get their default names or what you configured them in logworks. I will add some code so it knows if its an AFR input and make the column header AFR.
But to answer your question as simply as possible, YES, your wideband will show up in the logs if you enable it for logging.
In some cases you'll have to update the Mitsulogger.txt file you use for importing the logs into data log lab, but thats actually the hardest part.
I've tried to remain consistent in that AFR data is always a column named AFR if there is a wideband, but other items, or in the case of the LM1's additional inputs or other Innovate products, would get their default names or what you configured them in logworks. I will add some code so it knows if its an AFR input and make the column header AFR.
But to answer your question as simply as possible, YES, your wideband will show up in the logs if you enable it for logging.
jack can you explain to me how this will work. I have a LM-1 installed and I'm guessing I would plug in the serial connection to the LM-1 and Laptop, your application would talk directly to the LM-1 and log the WB02 while your application is also logging the other sensors from the stock ECU and put it all together in a log for me?
Trending Topics
Yep, just waiting for a test utility, I am having some trouble with the values my Innovate wideband is spitting out in "Free air" and want to be sure the problem is not my code.
Account Disabled
iTrader: (38)
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 1
From: Virginia Beach, Virginia
Account Disabled
iTrader: (38)
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 1
From: Virginia Beach, Virginia
I typically see 20.9 in Free air but if there's an exhaust leak nearby it'll wander around quite a bit or if it wasn't calibrated properly it'll be way off.
Hi MJ,
The LC-1 (and LM-1) will spit out O2% content if the measured AFR is > 88.2 or Lambda > 6, resulting in code 1 (value is to be interpreted as %O2), value 209 (in 1/10 %). Assuming correctly calibrated in real free air of course. If calibrated in exh. gas by accident, you would get that number also at lower real AFRs. Correspondingly you would get insanely rich numbers when rich of stoich with that calibration also.
Think of the AFR curve as a straight line defined at one point with free air (measured during calibration) and at the other at stoich (fixed by the sensor response) and extendended past stoich into the rich area (that's not how its done, but illustrates the point). By moving the points closer together (calibration in exh. gas) the line becomes much steeper and therefore the rich side would read much richer with a false calibration.
The LC-1 (or LM-1) has no way of knowing what the gas is the sensor is in. It can only compare the relative O2 content (or negative O2 content in rich gas) relative to the sensors reaction in a gas of known O2 content e.g. air at 20.9%.
For logging purposes you can clamp the AFR to a fixed high value (for exmpl. 88.2) if the LC-1 switches to O2 measurement.
To test your code with an LC-1 on the bench, let butane gas from a lighter flow into the sensor. You can get it rich enough that way that it will error out on too rich. You can also breathe on the sensor to see the O2 content of your breath.
BTW: by breathing through a MAF sensor, measuring air volume, and measuring the resulting O2 % content with a wideband you can calculate calories burned. New application for EVO parts
Regards,
Klaus
The LC-1 (and LM-1) will spit out O2% content if the measured AFR is > 88.2 or Lambda > 6, resulting in code 1 (value is to be interpreted as %O2), value 209 (in 1/10 %). Assuming correctly calibrated in real free air of course. If calibrated in exh. gas by accident, you would get that number also at lower real AFRs. Correspondingly you would get insanely rich numbers when rich of stoich with that calibration also.
Think of the AFR curve as a straight line defined at one point with free air (measured during calibration) and at the other at stoich (fixed by the sensor response) and extendended past stoich into the rich area (that's not how its done, but illustrates the point). By moving the points closer together (calibration in exh. gas) the line becomes much steeper and therefore the rich side would read much richer with a false calibration.
The LC-1 (or LM-1) has no way of knowing what the gas is the sensor is in. It can only compare the relative O2 content (or negative O2 content in rich gas) relative to the sensors reaction in a gas of known O2 content e.g. air at 20.9%.
For logging purposes you can clamp the AFR to a fixed high value (for exmpl. 88.2) if the LC-1 switches to O2 measurement.
To test your code with an LC-1 on the bench, let butane gas from a lighter flow into the sensor. You can get it rich enough that way that it will error out on too rich. You can also breathe on the sensor to see the O2 content of your breath.
BTW: by breathing through a MAF sensor, measuring air volume, and measuring the resulting O2 % content with a wideband you can calculate calories burned. New application for EVO parts
Regards,
Klaus
Last edited by klatinn; Mar 22, 2007 at 10:23 AM.
okay so the 209 value is normal. It actually shows normal in Logworks
Ohhhh! I understand what you mean.. its in %o2 at the moment because its in free air...
Its funny you mentioned breathing on the sensor, thats exactly what I did to verify it was actually working. I was just confused by the number.
That solves my dilemma and I can move on..
The proper output flags would be inputtype of AFR or Lambda, and inputfunction of lambda, if its O2 then its 1/10..
Thanks Klaus, this was a major brainfart on my part as I missed the obvious but my gut was telling me that this was the case.
Ohhhh! I understand what you mean.. its in %o2 at the moment because its in free air...
Its funny you mentioned breathing on the sensor, thats exactly what I did to verify it was actually working. I was just confused by the number.
That solves my dilemma and I can move on..
The proper output flags would be inputtype of AFR or Lambda, and inputfunction of lambda, if its O2 then its 1/10..Thanks Klaus, this was a major brainfart on my part as I missed the obvious but my gut was telling me that this was the case.
Last edited by MalibuJack; Mar 22, 2007 at 10:38 AM.



