Notices
ECU Flash

Minimum IPW

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 22, 2015 | 03:52 AM
  #211  
pisyakot's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 96
Likes: 44
From: Russia
HTML Code:
<table name="minimum ipw #1 shll2-nop (0x4908 - 0x0009)" category="misc" address="2af7a" type="1d" scaling="hex16"/>
<table name="minimum ipw #2 shll2-nop (0x4908 - 0x0009)" category="misc" address="2af7c" type="1d" scaling="hex16"/>
<table name="minimum ipw #3 shll-nop (0x4900 - 0x0009)" category="misc" address="2af7e" type="1d" scaling="hex16"/>


<table name="minimum ipw shll0" category="misc" address="1102" type="1d" scaling="ipw16:shll0"/>

Last edited by pisyakot; Sep 23, 2015 at 03:11 AM.
Reply
Old Sep 22, 2015 | 05:56 PM
  #212  
Ksay3's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
From: Phoenix
I don't seem to have scaling="ipw16:shll0 i have InjectorLatency and IPW mcsec under scaling.



Originally Posted by pisyakot
HTML Code:
<table name="minimum ipw #1 shll2-nop (0x4908 - 0x0009)" category="misc" address="2af7a" type="1d" scaling="hex16"/>
<table name="minimum ipw #2 shll2-nop (0x4908 - 0x0009)" category="misc" address="2af7c" type="1d" scaling="hex16"/>
<table name="minimum ipw #3 shll-nop (0x4900 - 0x0009)" category="misc" address="2af7e" type="1d" scaling="hex16"/>


<table name="minimum ipw shll0" category="misc" address="1102" type="1d" scaling="ipw16:shll0"/>
Reply
Old Mar 7, 2016 | 11:46 AM
  #213  
BiFfMaN's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 468
Likes: 5
From: Las Vegas
The code for 88590715 rom above, Can anyone confirm that is the correct Code?

Does not seem to work for me, Keeps giving error on loading Rom.
Reply
Old Mar 7, 2016 | 09:52 PM
  #214  
BiFfMaN's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 468
Likes: 5
From: Las Vegas
Never mind, i was able to find it by Viewing the page source code, nice option in Chrome.
Reply
Old Apr 17, 2016 | 08:59 PM
  #215  
bostonhatcher's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (18)
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 272
Likes: 1
From: Mid-Missouri
Yea the source code in post 211 and 212 do not work for me. Using 88591715 and inserted patch into 88590715 xml file and i can't view anything in ecuflash when the tune opens.
Reply
Old Apr 24, 2016 | 09:48 AM
  #216  
mrfred's Avatar
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (50)
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,675
Likes: 132
From: Tri-Cities, WA // Portland, OR
Originally Posted by bostonhatcher
Yea the source code in post 211 and 212 do not work for me. Using 88591715 and inserted patch into 88590715 xml file and i can't view anything in ecuflash when the tune opens.
Its probably not what you want to hear, but the minimum IPW patch is totally unnecessary if the injectors are tuned properly. In fact the minumum IPW is a complete kluge for when we had no idea about partial opening injector response. See my thread on 2150 settings.
Reply
Old May 23, 2016 | 10:48 AM
  #217  
wreckleford's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,171
Likes: 11
From: Jamaica
Originally Posted by mrfred
Its probably not what you want to hear, but the minimum IPW patch is totally unnecessary if the injectors are tuned properly. In fact the minumum IPW is a complete kluge for when we had no idea about partial opening injector response. See my thread on 2150 settings.
I read through that thread a while ago but didn't get the above understanding. Are you saying that with the latency value added to the pulsewidth adder added to the commanded pulsewidth the value will be above the standard minimum IPW?
Reply
Old May 23, 2016 | 12:02 PM
  #218  
mrfred's Avatar
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (50)
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,675
Likes: 132
From: Tri-Cities, WA // Portland, OR
Originally Posted by wreckleford
I read through that thread a while ago but didn't get the above understanding. Are you saying that with the latency value added to the pulsewidth adder added to the commanded pulsewidth the value will be above the standard minimum IPW?
The best way I can explain it is that the minimum pulsewidth trick is being used as a hack way to represent the partial opening non-linear flow response of these injectors. However, it only works at one specific condition, namely at idle. The pulsewidth linearization table covers the entire offboost driving range.
Reply
Old May 23, 2016 | 04:00 PM
  #219  
tephra's Avatar
Thread Starter
EvoM Guru
15 Year Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,486
Likes: 67
From: Melbourne, Australia
so... really the MinIPW patch is meant to help people with their stock rom setup with 1.280... obviously people that have 1.024 as their stock value wont see much value from this patch...
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2020 | 07:24 AM
  #220  
92LaserRs's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Having issues with 96530706. 1650s on pump. Evoscan logs no less than 1.28ms, Have applied the patch my xml, tables show up in rom. Change Min to less than 1.28 and never see less than that in evoscan, Idle AFR in the 13's. Anyone able to shoot me a tested/working rom and their 9653 xml to see what my issue is? Email is hernandez.954@gmail.com
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2020 | 08:18 AM
  #221  
Biggiesacks's Avatar
EvoM Community Team Leader
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,690
Likes: 708
From: West Coast
a couple of things your going to want to look at:

Your injector voltage latency table. Because its a hard coded value that is added to every fuel calc.

Injector flow rate linearization table: https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ec...ion-table.html

Hope that info helps.
Reply
Old Feb 13, 2020 | 10:19 AM
  #222  
92LaserRs's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Ive played with the Latencies, the scaling and the flow rate table, still minimum is 1.28ms. Fuel trims pegged negative.
Reply
Old Feb 15, 2020 | 08:21 AM
  #223  
240Z TwinTurbo's Avatar
Evolved Member
15 Year Member
Photogenic
Liked
Loved
iTrader: (25)
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,810
Likes: 329
From: Charlotte, NC
I run the FIC 1650's on pump with no problem using a different rom for a IX, but idle is ~1.1ms. Injector linearization tables won't affect your problem because they don't apply until below ~0.6ms. You got something restricting the lower limit of the injector pulsewidth so make sure you added the correct XML for MIPW. If you have maxed out your trims and your latency is around what I have below then you probably need to increase your injector scalar. Here are my values...

Minimum IPW = 0.024
Injector Size Scaling = 1392
Injector Latency = 0.936@14.06V


Reply
Old Mar 25, 2020 | 10:22 PM
  #224  
2winscroll's Avatar
Evolved Member
 
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 816
Likes: 82
From: wisconsin
Logging raw PW you need too subtract the latencys so he is into the linearization table for sure. I agree the min IPW patch probably isn’t working properly.
Reply
Old Apr 5, 2021 | 01:55 AM
  #225  
Lancer_Evo_8's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 157
Likes: 13
From: Switzerland
Its possibile that when i change the OEM MAP with OEM Injectors to 0x0009 that the car will not start?
Whats the description for SHLL2 and NOP? I don't understand them

Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:38 AM.