Notices
ECU Flash

Minimum IPW

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 25, 2010 | 12:56 AM
  #106  
ace33joe's Avatar
Evolving Member
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 394
Likes: 7
From: Used to be in Nor Cal, now working in Seoul
Originally Posted by tephra
step size is 8/1000 ms
That is quite impressive.

If stock injector flow rate is 560cc/min exact, then 8 microsecond step is equivalent to ~7.5 e-5 cc = 75 nano liter!

Of course, as 03whitegsr stated, whether this little step can reliably be applied to the real system is another story.

I guess more resolution about the IPW step size from ECU side may not be needed.
Reply
Old Aug 25, 2010 | 08:26 AM
  #107  
03whitegsr's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,001
Likes: 17
From: Utah
Originally Posted by old4g63
Compare to this:
http://site.titanmotorsports.com/blo...ctor-graph.jpg


We tune around non linearities all the time. Many people non linearize the factory MAF when they take off the stock airbox and put a cone filter on. As long as the IPW is repeatable and reliable (precise) then we can work with it. We don't always have, nor do we need precision (linearity to 0ms). I hope that makes sense?
I see your point but my question though, if you have the tables in the ECU and the data to linearize the desired IPW with actual IPW, why wouldn't you?

Sure, you can tune around it in a main fuel table or with latency changes...or you can compensate for it directly in the tables that were designed to do it. If this was a debate over adding an additional table that required code changes, I could see your point. The tables are already in the stock ECU to make it happen though and it is just a matter of calculating some values and putting them into the ECU.
Reply
Old Aug 25, 2010 | 01:52 PM
  #108  
old4g63's Avatar
Newbie
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 28
Likes: 1
From: Severn MD
I did not know it was in the stock ecu. That would be useful to make it 100% correct, yes.
Reply
Old Aug 25, 2010 | 02:04 PM
  #109  
03whitegsr's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,001
Likes: 17
From: Utah
I'm still waiting on the values from Injector Dynamics...
Reply
Old Sep 4, 2010 | 08:30 AM
  #110  
Dirty25RS's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
From: Akron, Ohio
94170015 code work on a 94170008?

I installed ID2000s last night and will begin the journey of dialing them in on my E85 Evo 8 later this afternoon.
Reply
Old Sep 4, 2010 | 08:31 AM
  #111  
tephra's Avatar
Thread Starter
EvoM Guru
15 Year Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,486
Likes: 67
From: Melbourne, Australia
probably

but upgrade to 0015 anyways.. your going to have to retune with the new injectors anyways... so now is a good time to swap
Reply
Old Sep 4, 2010 | 03:41 PM
  #112  
old4g63's Avatar
Newbie
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 28
Likes: 1
From: Severn MD
ID2000 at 80psi base idle at 0.800ms just fine.
Reply
Old Sep 4, 2010 | 05:18 PM
  #113  
tephra's Avatar
Thread Starter
EvoM Guru
15 Year Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,486
Likes: 67
From: Melbourne, Australia
80psi?

seems a bit over the top doesn't it?
Reply
Old Sep 4, 2010 | 09:45 PM
  #114  
Fast_Freddie's Avatar
Evolved Member
Veteran: Navy
iTrader: (50)
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,706
Likes: 15
From: Lexington Park, MD
Originally Posted by tephra
80psi?

seems a bit over the top doesn't it?
No crap! Unless your car is at 1500hp, that seems a bit extreme!
Reply
Old Sep 5, 2010 | 08:07 AM
  #115  
old4g63's Avatar
Newbie
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 28
Likes: 1
From: Severn MD
Originally Posted by tephra
80psi?

seems a bit over the top doesn't it?
It was a test to see how low I could get the IPW and maintain an acceptable idle.
Reply
Old Sep 5, 2010 | 09:20 AM
  #116  
Fast_Freddie's Avatar
Evolved Member
Veteran: Navy
iTrader: (50)
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,706
Likes: 15
From: Lexington Park, MD
Gotcha... I was like WTF when I saw that...
Reply
Old Sep 5, 2010 | 04:17 PM
  #117  
tephra's Avatar
Thread Starter
EvoM Guru
15 Year Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,486
Likes: 67
From: Melbourne, Australia
ahh..

well I guess with 100000psi, you could run 0.001ms
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2010 | 05:05 PM
  #118  
Dirty25RS's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
From: Akron, Ohio
Ok, I'm trying to do this on my Evo8.

I'm trying to figure out how to set the min IPW to 1.1ms.

ctrl c ctrl v'd the xml, got the IPW 1,2, 3 and min IPW shll0 into ECU flash. the value was 0.040 in the last one.

incremented it up to ~1.1. car wouldn't start. I figured i had the philosphy wrong so i tried instead adjusting it down to 0.032. car started but idle was real erratic and lean.

My scaling and latencies seem to be OK, the car was driveable with the stock min IPW with this scaling and latency but idle was pig rich of course.

so wtf am i doing wrong?

again I"m on a 94170008 Evo8
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2010 | 05:58 PM
  #119  
tephra's Avatar
Thread Starter
EvoM Guru
15 Year Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,486
Likes: 67
From: Melbourne, Australia
Did you do the prescribed changes to 1/2/3?
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2010 | 06:08 PM
  #120  
Dirty25RS's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
From: Akron, Ohio
yeah I changed them all down to 0009.

min IPW is sittin at 1.176ms right now. it oscillates between rich and lean. but it does run.

I'm, going to try lowering my fuel pressure to get a higher actual fuel flow resolution with min IPW increments.

My fuel pressure is not 43.5, its higher. I dont have any tools on me right now so I'll handle it tomorrow and update.

log
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?...thkey=CJ2zh5sL
all stationary, idle, me blipping the throttle a couple times.

Last edited by Dirty25RS; Sep 8, 2010 at 06:11 PM.
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:29 AM.