Advanced fuel control options
After logging all the accel related FPW variables involved, I've decided (as mrfred suggested) they contribute such a small amount as to be insignificant to the overall FPW during lean tip-in. To fix this I've increased MAF Comp vs. Temp #1 and #2 for the warmup coolant temps where the lean AFR occurs and this has made the car much more drivable during low RPM take offs. The down side is much richer AFR's during the warm up period at higher RPMs. I guess this compromise will work for me and I'm calling this one fixed 
guys i have a problem cold idling. I have successfully altered the tables necessary to start very quickly, although the AFR is far too rich at around 10.0 and it wont idle more than 500rpm, usually stalling.
is there a post-cranking table for 8859? would my ISCV tables control this?
is there a post-cranking table for 8859? would my ISCV tables control this?
Evolving Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
From: Santa Monica, CA
For 96530006, the addresses to add to the MUT table (from mrfred's second post) appear to be; note that these are two-byte values, so each value is two MUT table entries:
For "Sync Base FPW", we'll need to get the patch portion of mrfred's post ported over first, but I thought it might be helpful to get this into people's hands sooner rather than later.
(It looks like FFFF8A68 or 8A64 should be workable for Sync Base FPW, in case Eric or someone else gets a chance to look at the patch before I do. And on that note, time for lunch.
)
Code:
60-61 Sync Base FPW (to be determined) 62-63 Sync Load Accel FPW ffff8a72 & ffff8a73 64-65 Sync Load Decel FPW Subtraction ffff8a74 & ffff8a75 66-67 Sync Load Change Idle FPW (doesn't exist) 68-69 Total Sync FPW ffff8a6a & ffff8a6b 6A-6B Async Accel FPW ffff8b38 & ffff8b39 6C-6D Cranking FPW ffff8afa & ffff8afb 6E-6F Primer Pulse ffff8ba8 & ffff8ba9
(It looks like FFFF8A68 or 8A64 should be workable for Sync Base FPW, in case Eric or someone else gets a chance to look at the patch before I do. And on that note, time for lunch.
)A little clarification here.. When adding these to the MUT table, can I add these hex values into any of the unused MUT tables? For instance, I'm not logging anything with requestID 04 and 05, so could I enter 8a72 and 8a73 (to log Sync Load Accel FPW) into the MUT04 and MUT05 cells of the MUT table, and then add requestID 04 and 05 to Evoscan and expect it to work? What is the significance of of "62-63" listed before Sync Load Accel FPW above? Do I instead have to add those hex values to the MUT62 and MUT63 cells? I've found a lot of documentation of different MUT requestIDs but nothing on how to actually use the MUT table.
Beau
Thread Starter
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (50)
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,675
Likes: 132
From: Tri-Cities, WA // Portland, OR
A little clarification here.. When adding these to the MUT table, can I add these hex values into any of the unused MUT tables? For instance, I'm not logging anything with requestID 04 and 05, so could I enter 8a72 and 8a73 (to log Sync Load Accel FPW) into the MUT04 and MUT05 cells of the MUT table, and then add requestID 04 and 05 to Evoscan and expect it to work? What is the significance of of "62-63" listed before Sync Load Accel FPW above? Do I instead have to add those hex values to the MUT62 and MUT63 cells? I've found a lot of documentation of different MUT requestIDs but nothing on how to actually use the MUT table.
Beau
Beau
Evolving Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
From: Santa Monica, CA
Thanks, I got everything working. I'm having the same results with Async FPW as the other guy a few pages earlier, where it doesn't really respond like it should and I've only ever been able to get it to register 3 or 4, and it seems to stick there after. Both Sync Accel and Decel params respond as they should from what I can see. Not a big deal, at least I have something to work with and this should help getting transient fueling dialed in pretty well.
Newbie
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
From: Thesaloniki Greece
8858xxxx tables found so far, use at your own risk, please confirm if they work for you.
Code:
<table name="Cranking Primer Initial Pulse" category="Fuel" address="5240" type="2D" level="2" scaling="TimeInjCranking">
<table name="Coolant Temperature" address="7100" type="Y Axis" elements="9" scaling="Temp"/>
</table>
<table name="Cranking Primer Initial Pulse (Unused)" category="Fuel" address="32fc" type="2D" level="2" scaling="TimeInjCranking">
<table name="Coolant Temperature" address="7100" type="Y Axis" elements="9" scaling="Temp"/>
</table>
<scaling name="TimeTCOMPCrankingHack" units="Approximate ms" toexpr="x*0.9" frexpr="x/0.9" format="%.1f" min="0" max="500" inc="1" storagetype="uint8" endian="big"/>
<table name="Initial Cranking IPW vs Coolant Temp" category="Fuel" address="5F7A" type="2D" level="2" scaling="TimeTCOMPCrankingHack">
<table name="Engine Temp" address="711C" type="Y Axis" elements="11" scaling="Temp"/>
</table>
<scaling name="Percent (128)" units="Percent (%)" toexpr="x/1.28" frexpr="x*1.28" format="%.0f" min="0" max="100" inc="1" storagetype="uint8" endian="big"/>
<table name="Cranking IPW Compensation vs Time" category="Fuel" type="2D" level="2" scaling="Percent (128)" address="323E">
<table name="Time Since Engaging Starter (sec)" type="Static Y Axis" elements="20">
<data>0.000</data>
<data>0.022</data>
<data>0.044</data>
<data>0.066</data>
<data>0.088</data>
<data>0.110</data>
<data>0.132</data>
<data>0.154</data>
<data>0.176</data>
<data>0.198</data>
<data>0.220</data>
<data>0.242</data>
<data>0.264</data>
<data>0.286</data>
<data>0.308</data>
<data>0.330</data>
<data>0.352</data>
<data>0.374</data>
<data>0.396</data>
<data>0.418</data>
</table>
</table>
<scaling name="Percent64(8-bit)" units="%" toexpr="100*x/64" frexpr="64*x/100" format="%.0f" min="0" max="400" inc="1" storagetype="uint8" endian="big"/>
<table name="BFPW Startup Comp vs Coolant Temp #1" category="Fuel" address="3146" type="2D" level="2" scaling="Percent64(8-bit)">
<table name="Coolant Temp" address="7100" type="Y Axis" elements="9" scaling="Temp"/>
</table>
<table name="BFPW Startup Comp vs Coolant Temp #2" category="Fuel" address="3156" type="2D" level="2" scaling="Percent64(8-bit)">
<table name="Coolant Temp" address="7100" type="Y Axis" elements="9" scaling="Temp"/>
</table>
<table name="MAF Comp vs Coolant Temp #1" category="Fuel" address="3136" type="2D" level="1" scaling="uint8">
<table name="Coolant Temp" address="7100" type="Y Axis" elements="9" scaling="Temp"/>
</table>
<table name="MAF Comp vs Coolant Temp #2" category="Fuel" address="3126" type="2D" level="1" scaling="uint8">
<table name="Coolant Temp" address="7100" type="Y Axis" elements="9" scaling="Temp"/>
</table>
<scaling name="LT Trim Hz" units="Hz" toexpr="x*6.29" frexpr="x/6.29" format="%.0f" min="0" max="1610" inc="6.29" storagetype="uint8" endian="big"/>
<table name="Closed Loop - LT Trim Control Ranges" category="Fuel" address="3021" type="2D" level="1" scaling="LT Trim Hz">
<table name="Conditions" type="Static Y Axis" elements="4">
<data>Low -> Mid</data>
<data>Mid -> Low</data>
<data>Mid -> High</data>
<data>High -> Mid</data>
</table>
</table>
<scaling name="AirDensComp" units="Air Density Correction" toexpr="x/129" frexpr="x/129" format="%.3f" min="0" max="2" inc="0.01" storagetype="uint8" endian="big"/>
<table name="Air Density Compensation for Load And IPW" category="Misc" type="2D" level="2" scaling="AirDensComp" address="30fe">
<table name="MAF Air Temp" type="Y Axis" elements="8" scaling="Temp" address="7252"/>
</table>
After doing some digging i found this
Is this working with my 88580714 rom (i own a european spec evo 9 )
in order to unlock Advanced fuel control options ??
Thanks
Does anyone has the 9417 advanced fuel tables defined yet? I'm working on the link between part throttle fueling vs WOT fueling at 100-140 load which doesn't yield the same AFR because of accel enrichment too high.
Is "Accel Enrich base vs engine temp" the same table a "Sync load Accel" in 8859?
Is "Accel Enrich base vs engine temp" the same table a "Sync load Accel" in 8859?
Evolving Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
From: Santa Monica, CA
Does anyone has the 9417 advanced fuel tables defined yet? I'm working on the link between part throttle fueling vs WOT fueling at 100-140 load which doesn't yield the same AFR because of accel enrichment too high.
Is "Accel Enrich base vs engine temp" the same table a "Sync load Accel" in 8859?
Is "Accel Enrich base vs engine temp" the same table a "Sync load Accel" in 8859?
I'm searching the delta load dependant map which was found on the IX ROM first.
Evolving Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
From: Santa Monica, CA
I haven't come across these tables on this ROM. I always use 9653 which has the settings you're looking for.
Again, any accel fuel whether it's load or TPS dependent lasts for a short time and is typically not the cause for what you're describing. Once you're in boost and throttle is remaining mostly constant, very little to no additional transient fueling is needed to keep the AFR on target as the manifold pressure simply isn't changing fast enough, even with a small turbo. Post a log with AFRMap, WB AFR, load, etc so we can try to determine the problem.
I haven't come across these tables on this ROM. I always use 9653 which has the settings you're looking for.
I haven't come across these tables on this ROM. I always use 9653 which has the settings you're looking for.
At 130-140 load steady throttle my afr is 11.5:1. This happens everytime when I'm riding in the city, accelerating from stops. I would want it to not go below 12.5 at least.
But when I go wide open throttle, it goes like that: 100load: 13.0 / 140 load: 12.6 / 180 load: 12.2 / 250 load : 11.8.
So I can't remove fuel in the main map at 140 load because this makes the spoolup too lean. That's where accel enrichment (delta load IPW adder) comes into play.
I have a way to make use of accel enrichment without having the actual table. It's by "stretching" the load: in other words, making 24 psi = 350 load instead of 280. This have the effect of increasing the delta load which give the accel enrichment more effect on AFR while spooling up. But that's more of "patch" and it's not the real fix.
Evolving Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
From: Santa Monica, CA
Interesting. So this is only during spoolup? I assume you've tried disabling lean spool which purposely does exactly what you're describing (short-term time-based AFR target trim)?
Also, another thing comes to mind, something to think about, is lambda sensor delay. Where is the sensor located? If it's in the downpipe, especially near the end, it's surprising how much of a delay in sensor reading you'll have at lighter loads, which is a combination of exhaust travel time and the sensor's inherent response time on its own.
Also, another thing comes to mind, something to think about, is lambda sensor delay. Where is the sensor located? If it's in the downpipe, especially near the end, it's surprising how much of a delay in sensor reading you'll have at lighter loads, which is a combination of exhaust travel time and the sensor's inherent response time on its own.