Minimum IPW
94170015
Code:
<table name="Minimum IPW #1 SHLL2->NOP (0x4908 -> 0x0009)" category="Misc" address="26D2E" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="Minimum IPW #2 SHLL2->NOP (0x4908 -> 0x0009)" category="Misc" address="26D30" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="Minimum IPW #3 SHLL->NOP (0x4900 -> 0x0009)" category="Misc" address="26D32" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <scaling name="IPW16:SHLL0" units="ms" toexpr="x*8/1000" frexpr="x*1000/8" format="%.3f" min="0" max="65" inc="0.008" storagetype="uint16" endian="big"/> <table name="Minimum IPW SHLL0" category="Misc" address="1502" type="1D" scaling="IPW16:SHLL0"/>
Last edited by 03whitegsr; Aug 23, 2010 at 08:37 PM.
^.....THE MAN ! !
Thank you.
If any of you need an updated 94170715 xml please let me know. I am doing my best to keep it up to date with all of the newest findings.
Thank you.
If any of you need an updated 94170715 xml please let me know. I am doing my best to keep it up to date with all of the newest findings.
94170715 shows the minimum IPW as 0.040 ms. This appears to be much smaller than the what was posted for the 8859 rom.
I suppose that the necessity for a smaller value won't be necessary.
I suppose that the necessity for a smaller value won't be necessary.
Just because the minimum can be set that low doesn't mean to scale it down that low, this patch is intended for injectors that may benefit from a lower IPW than the ECU was previously able to adjust to, which will be trial and error when using bigger injectors. If you go to low, then the injectors may become irratic and not open/close properly due to the physical characteristics of the style injector. You may want to do research on your style injector and find the recommended minimum IPW that your injector will still operate properly as well.
Freddie....the value I posted is what is in as a stock setting. I would imagine that this is the value that can be useful for stock 550 injectors.
Where might we find the minimum recommended values for our injectors?
Where might we find the minimum recommended values for our injectors?
The stock value is a raw value of 5. With the stock code, it multiplies that value by 32*8 giving 1280 usec (1.28 ms).
The change in code done now only multiplies it by 8 which means 5*8 = 40usec (0.040 ms).
To return this to essentially stock operation, you would need to type in 0xA0 or just type in =1.28. This will change the ECU value to 0xA0 (160).
160 * 8 = 1280
Make sense?
I wouldn't change this unless you know what it actually needs to be. ID1000s for example have a minimum IPW at 3bar and 14V of ~1.3ms. If anything, it may be wise to raise it slightly when using ID1000s to prevent sending a signal that the ID1000s can't respond to.
Once I get the raw IPW vs. flow information from Injector Dynamics, I will build up all new injector tables for the ID1000s and see how this all works out.
The change in code done now only multiplies it by 8 which means 5*8 = 40usec (0.040 ms).
To return this to essentially stock operation, you would need to type in 0xA0 or just type in =1.28. This will change the ECU value to 0xA0 (160).
160 * 8 = 1280
Make sense?
I wouldn't change this unless you know what it actually needs to be. ID1000s for example have a minimum IPW at 3bar and 14V of ~1.3ms. If anything, it may be wise to raise it slightly when using ID1000s to prevent sending a signal that the ID1000s can't respond to.
Once I get the raw IPW vs. flow information from Injector Dynamics, I will build up all new injector tables for the ID1000s and see how this all works out.
Last edited by 03whitegsr; Aug 24, 2010 at 06:36 AM.
The stock value is a raw value of 5. With the stock code, it multiplies that value by 32*8 giving 1280 usec (1.28 ms).
The change in code done now only multiplies it by 8 which means 5*8 = 40usec (0.040 ms).
To return this to essentially stock operation, you would need to type in 0xA0 or just type in =1.28. This will change the ECU value to 0xA0 (160).
160 * 8 = 1280
Make sense?
I wouldn't change this unless you know what it actually needs to be. ID1000s for example have a minimum IPW at 3bar and 14V of ~1.3ms. If anything, it may be wise to raise it slightly when using ID1000s to prevent sending a signal that the ID1000s can't respond to.
Once I get the raw IPW vs. flow information from Injector Dynamics, I will build up all new injector tables for the ID1000s and see how this all works out.
The change in code done now only multiplies it by 8 which means 5*8 = 40usec (0.040 ms).
To return this to essentially stock operation, you would need to type in 0xA0 or just type in =1.28. This will change the ECU value to 0xA0 (160).
160 * 8 = 1280
Make sense?
I wouldn't change this unless you know what it actually needs to be. ID1000s for example have a minimum IPW at 3bar and 14V of ~1.3ms. If anything, it may be wise to raise it slightly when using ID1000s to prevent sending a signal that the ID1000s can't respond to.
Once I get the raw IPW vs. flow information from Injector Dynamics, I will build up all new injector tables for the ID1000s and see how this all works out.
Thanks for "churching" up my statement with all the tech stuff 03whitegsr!
FIC 1450cc Blue Max @43.5psi (3Bar)
1.35 ms @12v
1.17ms @14v
So, I would want to change the minimum to.... 1.17ms ? ? ? I would want a value of 146.25 * 8 to = 1170. I realize that I won't get exactly 1.17 because of the scaling. I just want to make sure that, hopefully, I am following this correctly.
As I understand this, there is no need to be any lower since the injector will be out of it's operational range which could result in cut out.
1.35 ms @12v
1.17ms @14v
So, I would want to change the minimum to.... 1.17ms ? ? ? I would want a value of 146.25 * 8 to = 1170. I realize that I won't get exactly 1.17 because of the scaling. I just want to make sure that, hopefully, I am following this correctly.
As I understand this, there is no need to be any lower since the injector will be out of it's operational range which could result in cut out.
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,486
Likes: 67
From: Melbourne, Australia
Sounds about right - are you NOP'ing out the scaling (like my code patch)
Ask Jens@FIC if he has a deviation sheet for IPW (like the ID one) or even a recommended minimum IPW
then you can just dial that number in
What is your current AFR+IPW @ idle?
Ask Jens@FIC if he has a deviation sheet for IPW (like the ID one) or even a recommended minimum IPW
then you can just dial that number in
What is your current AFR+IPW @ idle?
AFR at idle is 14.7-15.1 with IPW at 1.792 and duty of approx 1.82.
I have not changed the code patch yet. I just opened the stock form to see the value. I have grown accustom to reading and understanding a table before I mess with changing it's values.
I have not changed the code patch yet. I just opened the stock form to see the value. I have grown accustom to reading and understanding a table before I mess with changing it's values.
Sounds like you probably won't need to change it.
However, I personally see lower IPW cruising at light throttle around 2500 RPM then I do at idle.
When checking for this, I imagine you'll need to log 2-Byte IPW too. I beleive it is MUT 29 and MUT2A for 2-byte IPW. You'll need to put in a new scaling in Evoscan for it. I think simply using x as scaling will give you IPW in usec. If you want it in ms, just divide it by 1000.
However, I personally see lower IPW cruising at light throttle around 2500 RPM then I do at idle.
When checking for this, I imagine you'll need to log 2-Byte IPW too. I beleive it is MUT 29 and MUT2A for 2-byte IPW. You'll need to put in a new scaling in Evoscan for it. I think simply using x as scaling will give you IPW in usec. If you want it in ms, just divide it by 1000.