Advanced fuel control options

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Oct 25, 2009 | 11:15 PM

#46

mrfred

Thread Starter

EvoM Guru

iTrader: (50)

Joined: Mar 2006

Posts: 9,675

Likes: 132

From: Tri-Cities, WA // Portland, OR

Quote:

Originally Posted by merlin.oz

absolutely fabulous!

does this mean that BFPW does not have an enrichment v temp?
ie the only water temperature enrichments are:
primer,
cranking (key on)
post cranking (key off) for a short time

Turns out that the BFPW does have a coolant temp compensation. I had forgotten to analyze one variable as I was writing my summary. Turns out it contains the MAF comp vs coolant temp values. I've updated the summary post accordingly.

Oct 26, 2009 | 08:11 AM

#47

shadow1

Evolved Member

iTrader: (38)

Joined: Feb 2005

Posts: 660

Likes: 0

From: Laurel, MD

Mrfred - do we still need to scale the numbers for "Initial Cranking IPW vs Coolant Temp" for bigger injectors like we did for "Cranking Enrichment IPW Adder (Main)" in the 96940011 ROM? In other words, are these tables equivalent?

Oct 26, 2009 | 08:41 AM

#48

tnt1106

Evolving Member

Joined: May 2008

Posts: 346

Likes: 0

From: Dallas, TX

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrfred

Advanced fuel control options

C) Sync Load Decel Subtractor - Subtracts fuel during rapid load reduction. I believe that its purpose is to transition to a fuel cut mode. The equation for this contribution is:

SyncLoadDecel = constant*DeltaMasterLoadNeg/2048)*LCOMP*TCOMP*(RPMCOMP/128)*Baro*IFPHz

DeltaLoadMasterNeg = decrease in master load, zero when load is steady
LCOMP = 2D table vs load
TCOMP = 2D table vs coolant temp
RPMCOMP = 2D table vs RPM,
Baro = barometric pressure
IFPHz = see description above

The tables for the SyncLoadDecel subtractor for the 88590015 ROM are:

Code:

<table name="Decel IPW Subtraction Comp vs RPM" category="Fuel" address="3350" type="2D" level="2" scaling="Mult128">
  <table name="RPM" address="6b7a" type="Y Axis" elements="10" scaling="RPM"/>
</table>

<table name="Decel IPW Subtraction Comp vs Load" category="Fuel" address="3360" type="2D" level="2" scaling="Mult128">
  <table name="Load" address="6cba" type="Y Axis" elements="14" scaling="Load"/>
</table>

If I were trying to get the car to transition to fuel cut faster on decel load, would i increase or decrease the tables above?

Oct 26, 2009 | 08:44 AM

#49

travman

Evolved Member

iTrader: (26)

Joined: Oct 2005

Posts: 1,712

Likes: 0

From: Pittsburgh

Quote:

Originally Posted by tnt1106

If I were trying to get the car to transition to fuel cut faster on decel load, would i increase or decrease the tables above?

best bet....try it, see what happens decreasing the value vs. stock value? only way to really see and understand how the tables work imo.

Oct 26, 2009 | 08:55 AM

#50

logic

Evolved Member

iTrader: (2)

Joined: Apr 2003

Posts: 1,022

Likes: 7

From: Berkeley, CA

mrfred, it looks like the link to your patched 8859 ROM is dead?

Oct 26, 2009 | 09:22 AM

#51

fostytou

EvoM Community Team

iTrader: (15)

Joined: Sep 2006

Posts: 3,143

Likes: 7

From: Aurora, IL

Quote:

Originally Posted by shadow1

ummm

Quote:

Originally Posted by fostytou

So... silly question, but in "2) Cranking fuel pulse width" we would actually want to do the standard (old_inj_size/new_inj_size)*1.3 on the TCOMP values for proper e85 starting?

I think luckily my injector sizing for E85 winds up being similar to stock for getting cold starts to work properly on E85, but it might be nice to have the correct values for gasoline also. Too bad this didn't come out until after v7!

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrfred

Yes, that would be a good first step to tweaking that table for E85.

Do both or either. Want your values to be right across both? do it to both the when starter engaged and while starter engaged tables.

Oct 26, 2009 | 09:39 AM

#52

mrfred

Thread Starter

EvoM Guru

iTrader: (50)

Joined: Mar 2006

Posts: 9,675

Likes: 132

From: Tri-Cities, WA // Portland, OR

Quote:

Originally Posted by shadow1

The "Primer Pulse" table is the "Initial Cranking IPW vs Coolant Temp (Main)" table that I defined about a year or so ago. The old name was not accurate. And now there is also the Cranking IPW compensation tables (vs coolant temp and vs countdown since engaging the starter). All three of these tables are game for adjustment if you are having starting issues.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tnt1106

If I were trying to get the car to transition to fuel cut faster on decel load, would i increase or decrease the tables above?

Probably not. I still intend to work out the fuel cut subroutine(s).

Quote:

Originally Posted by logic

mrfred, it looks like the link to your patched 8859 ROM is dead?

hehe. I inadvertently put it in on my FTP server. Its on my webserver now.

Oct 26, 2009 | 09:41 AM

#53

tnt1106

Evolving Member

Joined: May 2008

Posts: 346

Likes: 0

From: Dallas, TX

Quote:

Originally Posted by tnt1106

If I were trying to get the car to transition to fuel cut faster on decel load, would i increase or decrease the tables above?

so no matter what number i attempt replace in either of those fields it goes to 0.00. I even tried to re input the same value and still inputs as 0.00. i have the definitions as exactly above in my xml. any ideas?

Oct 26, 2009 | 10:44 AM

#54

mrfred

Thread Starter

EvoM Guru

iTrader: (50)

Joined: Mar 2006

Posts: 9,675

Likes: 132

From: Tri-Cities, WA // Portland, OR

Quote:

Originally Posted by tnt1106

Are you running the patch that I just posted?

Oct 26, 2009 | 11:01 AM

#55

03whitegsr

Evolved Member

iTrader: (8)

Joined: Nov 2006

Posts: 4,001

Likes: 17

From: Utah

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrfred

Excellent News. With it not being marked as an update, I assume it's these two tables?

Code:

<table name="MAF Comp vs Coolant Temp #1" category="Fuel" address="3136" type="2D" level="1" scaling="uint8">
  <table name="Coolant Temp" address="6ff8" 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="6ff8" type="Y Axis" elements="9" scaling="Temp"/>
</table>

What does each of them represent? Open loop vs. Closed loop?

Oct 26, 2009 | 11:12 AM

#56

logic

Evolved Member

iTrader: (2)

Joined: Apr 2003

Posts: 1,022

Likes: 7

From: Berkeley, 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:

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

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.

)

Last edited by logic; Oct 26, 2009 at 02:16 PM. Reason: Add second bytes.

Oct 26, 2009 | 01:25 PM

#57

mrfred

Thread Starter

EvoM Guru

iTrader: (50)

Joined: Mar 2006

Posts: 9,675

Likes: 132

From: Tri-Cities, WA // Portland, OR

Quote:

Originally Posted by 03whitegsr

Excellent News. With it not being marked as an update, I assume it's these two tables?

Code:

<table name="MAF Comp vs Coolant Temp #1" category="Fuel" address="3136" type="2D" level="1" scaling="uint8">
  <table name="Coolant Temp" address="6ff8" 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="6ff8" type="Y Axis" elements="9" scaling="Temp"/>
</table>

What does each of them represent? Open loop vs. Closed loop?

Yes, those are the tables. The code is setup to use a linear average of the two tables based on an averaging variable. I have not determined what the variable is based on, but logging shows the averaging value to be 255 (range is 0 to 255) during pretty much everything except engine cranking and the first few seconds after startup. This means that table #1 is used pretty much the entire time. If you are really interested in warmup MAF compensation, there is yet another table that trims these values based on RPM and load when warmup MAF compensation is not 1.0. I guess I'll post that table later today.

Quote:

Originally Posted by logic

For 96530006, the addresses to add to the MUT table (from mrfred's second post) appear to be:

Code:

60-61 Sync Base FPW			(to be determined)
62-63 Sync Load Accel FPW		ffff8a72
64-65 Sync Load Decel FPW Subtraction	ffff8a74
66-67 Sync Load Change Idle FPW		(doesn't exist)
68-69 Total Sync FPW			ffff8a6a
6A-6B Async Accel FPW			ffff8b38
6C-6D Cranking FPW			ffff8afa
6E-6F Primer Pulse			ffff8ba8

)

These are all 2-byte values. I was thinking that maybe I should redo the patch to convert them all to one-byte values. We'd lose some resolution but would have the number of MUT channels that need to be logged. I suppose it would be good to first see whether the high resolution is needed.

Oct 26, 2009 | 01:35 PM

#58

03whitegsr

Evolved Member

iTrader: (8)

Joined: Nov 2006

Posts: 4,001

Likes: 17

From: Utah

My car (94170015) has always ran very lean on warmup and I would really like to correct the issue. Ran 14.7:1 open loop at cruise when its warm, but mid 16s when it's cold.

I guess I should wait until I swap over to 96530006 to say that though, as right now, I'm just assuming it will do the same on 9653 ROMs.

Oct 26, 2009 | 02:12 PM

#59

logic

Evolved Member

iTrader: (2)

Joined: Apr 2003

Posts: 1,022

Likes: 7

From: Berkeley, CA

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrfred

Sorry, I should have explicitly mentioned that they were two-byte (I just listed the first byte of the two). I'll edit my post to reflect that.

With DMA logging, the bandwidth issue with two-byte values really isn't that big of a deal.

But yeah, if we expect people to log this stuff regularly, multi-byte values may end up being a pain. I'm guessing from the scalings that we won't be able to get away with just logging the low byte?

Oct 26, 2009 | 05:00 PM

#60

03whitegsr

Evolved Member

iTrader: (8)

Joined: Nov 2006

Posts: 4,001

Likes: 17

From: Utah

I believe the warm-up tables correspond to a couple tables possibly mentioned in another thread on 96530006 by mattjin?

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ec...ml#post6457282

Start Up MAF Comp 1 Address = 3712
Engine temperature =69d8

Start Up MAF Comp 2 address = 3722
Engine temperature =69d8

He hypothesized they were decay timers though and only acted during the short post start period?

I definitely like what you are proposing though, just wanted to toss that out there and maybe get a unanimous understanding of these tables.

Reply Share

First
Prev
4 / 18
Next
Last