Injector flow rate linearization table - Page 3 - EvolutionM - Mitsubishi Lancer and Lancer Evolution Community



Injector flow rate linearization table

Reply
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 2, 2015, 09:49 AM   #31
Evolving Member
 
jeffbeagley's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Springfield, MO
Posts: 363
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

Drives: 03 Evo

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrfred View Post
ID2000s and FIC2150s are the same injector, so it might be worth it to try my values or something in between.
I think I remember seeing somewhere ID posted a photo of 4 injectors matched against eachother.. Couldn't we just use the largest variance as the value to input into the table?

Excuse my ignorance, and thank you guys for taking the time to explain!

Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2015, 01:12 PM   #32
Evolved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 793
Thanks: 0
Thanked 14 Times in 13 Posts

Drives: AUDM_EVO IX

Jeff, add this to you definition and then try lowering the Closed loop Idle Integral Gain value to help reduce the random swing.

for 9653:

<scaling name="I-Gain" units="%" toexpr="x/327.73" frexpr="x*327.73" format="%.3f" min="0" max="0.78" inc="0.00305" storagetype="uint8" endian="big"/>



<table name="Closed-Loop Integral Gain Settings" address="36B8" category="Closed-Loop Control" type="2D" scaling="I-Gain">
<table name="Conditions" type="Static Y Axis" elements="4">
<data>Closed-Loop I-Gain After Fuel-Cut, Decrease Fuel IPW (Lean)</data>
<data>Closed-Loop I-Gain After Fuel-Cut, Increase Fuel IPW (Rich)</data>
<data>Closed-Loop I-Gain Idle, Decrease Fuel IPW (Lean)</data>
<data>Closed-Loop I-Gain Idle, Increase Fuel IPW (Rich)</data>
</table>
</table>

Edit:
9653 has quite high stock gain values here:

0.051 to lean the mix
0.066 to enrich the mix

try something like:

0.021 to go lean
and
0.055 to go rich. Maybe a little lower.

Last edited by merlin.oz; Jan 2, 2015 at 01:18 PM.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to merlin.oz For This Useful Post:
ace33joe (Feb 19, 2017)
Old Jan 2, 2015, 01:33 PM   #33
Evolved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 793
Thanks: 0
Thanked 14 Times in 13 Posts

Drives: AUDM_EVO IX

Further comment on the latency change requirement:

I applied revised correction values for FIC1100 to my evo9 the other day and yes I did have to bump the latency UP two steps to get it all back square again.
To clarify this aspect of the tune, the IPW Small Pulse table had stock injector values, so at about 0.6mS was adding 48uS.
My idle IPW was about 1.7mS, with a 14V latency of 1.104mS, ie 1.7mS Idle IPW minus 1.1mS Latency = 0.6mS.

But the FIC1100 Small Pulse Linearization had zero compensation requirements at 0.6mS, and so when that value was plugged into the table it left an idle IPW shortfall, which needs to be made up by a latency increase.
A two step increase in latency (when using 24uS Latency Base) is 48uS.

This does make me think all the more that we would do better if we changed the Latency Base to 15uS (for a 15uS step increase) as per EvoX and most atmo Mitsubishis that use Hi-Z injectors.
I think that will be my next step.


My "tuned" latencies now are so very close to FICs published data sheet, whereas they were about 60-100uS less before applying the Small Pulse Linearization data (from mrfred).

Last edited by merlin.oz; Jan 2, 2015 at 06:11 PM.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2015, 02:23 PM   #34
Evolving Member
 
jeffbeagley's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Springfield, MO
Posts: 363
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

Drives: 03 Evo

Quote:
Originally Posted by merlin.oz View Post
Jeff, add this to you definition and then try lowering the Closed loop Idle Integral Gain value to help reduce the random swing.

for 9653:

<scaling name="I-Gain" units="%" toexpr="x/327.73" frexpr="x*327.73" format="%.3f" min="0" max="0.78" inc="0.00305" storagetype="uint8" endian="big"/>



<table name="Closed-Loop Integral Gain Settings" address="36B8" category="Closed-Loop Control" type="2D" scaling="I-Gain">
<table name="Conditions" type="Static Y Axis" elements="4">
<data>Closed-Loop I-Gain After Fuel-Cut, Decrease Fuel IPW (Lean)</data>
<data>Closed-Loop I-Gain After Fuel-Cut, Increase Fuel IPW (Rich)</data>
<data>Closed-Loop I-Gain Idle, Decrease Fuel IPW (Lean)</data>
<data>Closed-Loop I-Gain Idle, Increase Fuel IPW (Rich)</data>
</table>
</table>

Edit:
9653 has quite high stock gain values here:

0.051 to lean the mix
0.066 to enrich the mix

try something like:

0.021 to go lean
and
0.055 to go rich. Maybe a little lower.
Excellent!! Will try this soon as I'm off work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by merlin.oz View Post
Further comment on the latency change requirement:

I applied revised correction values for FIC1100 to my evo9 the other day and yes I did have to bump the latency UP two steps to get it all back square again.

My "tuned" latencies now are so very close to FICs published data sheet, whereas they were about 60-100uS less before applying the Small Pulse Linearization data (from mrfred).
I haven't had to touch my latencies yet, mine are matched to ID's data... so perhaps I was masking that issue elsewhere.

I made a lot of changes at the same time, I've been fighting my car never being able to start in the cold haha so I've made some major changes elsewhere and will revist the latencies.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2015, 10:30 PM   #35
Evolving Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Overland Park, KS
Posts: 133
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Would FIC 1450's benefit from this? They always seem to be a bit finicky for me.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2015, 10:57 PM   #36
Evolving Member
 
jeffbeagley's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Springfield, MO
Posts: 363
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

Drives: 03 Evo

Here is the idle with the updated values.. Doesn't appear to swing as much however it tends to stay more on the rich side. Will play more tomorrow.

Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2015, 03:19 AM   #37
Evolved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 793
Thanks: 0
Thanked 14 Times in 13 Posts

Drives: AUDM_EVO IX

I am sure the FIC1450s would benefit, but getting the data can be difficult - for most of us anyway.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2015, 02:40 PM   #38
Evolving Member
 
SiriusEvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Facebook/StayTunedTech
Posts: 194
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

Drives: EVO

Quote:
Originally Posted by merlin.oz View Post
Jeff, add this to you definition and then try lowering the Closed loop Idle Integral Gain value to help reduce the random swing.

for 9653:

<scaling name="I-Gain" units="%" toexpr="x/327.73" frexpr="x*327.73" format="%.3f" min="0" max="0.78" inc="0.00305" storagetype="uint8" endian="big"/>



<table name="Closed-Loop Integral Gain Settings" address="36B8" category="Closed-Loop Control" type="2D" scaling="I-Gain">
<table name="Conditions" type="Static Y Axis" elements="4">
<data>Closed-Loop I-Gain After Fuel-Cut, Decrease Fuel IPW (Lean)</data>
<data>Closed-Loop I-Gain After Fuel-Cut, Increase Fuel IPW (Rich)</data>
<data>Closed-Loop I-Gain Idle, Decrease Fuel IPW (Lean)</data>
<data>Closed-Loop I-Gain Idle, Increase Fuel IPW (Rich)</data>
</table>
</table>

Edit:
9653 has quite high stock gain values here:

0.051 to lean the mix
0.066 to enrich the mix

try something like:

0.021 to go lean
and
0.055 to go rich. Maybe a little lower.
Merlin, what address would we use for the 9417 rom?
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2015, 03:21 PM   #39
Evolved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 793
Thanks: 0
Thanked 14 Times in 13 Posts

Drives: AUDM_EVO IX

for 9417: 36B8
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2015, 06:56 PM   #40
Evolving Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Overland Park, KS
Posts: 133
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I'll see if I can get the data from FIC. They're probably busy as hell though.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2015, 04:56 PM   #41
Evolved Member
iTrader: (12)
 
10isace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: East of the Rockies
Posts: 1,008
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

Drives: my wife crazy

Quote:
Originally Posted by MercenaryX2 View Post
Would FIC 1450's benefit from this? They always seem to be a bit finicky for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by merlin.oz View Post
I am sure the FIC1450s would benefit, but getting the data can be difficult - for most of us anyway.
+1 Thanks guys!!!
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 6, 2015, 03:30 AM   #42
Newbie
iTrader: (9)
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: earth
Posts: 73
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

Drives: EVO 9 RR

for 88580714 the same as 88590015 ROM

Last edited by memphis69; Mar 1, 2015 at 07:09 AM.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 4, 2015, 10:32 AM   #43
Evolving Member
 
SeanV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: South Africa
Posts: 207
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

Drives: EVO8

Hi..

Something doesn't seem to be right with the code information for the the table as posted in the first thread.

This is how I see it in my browser, doesn't look anything like the table defenition I have seen posted on the forums before.


Attached Thumbnails
Injector flow rate linearization table-capture.jpg  
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2015, 10:05 PM   #44
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
 
ixbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: so cal
Posts: 146
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

Drives: evo 9

Can somebody please post the table def for Evo 9 88590015 ROM? I think the forum bug made it go away.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 1, 2015, 08:04 AM   #45
EvoM Guru
Thread Starter
iTrader: (50)
 
mrfred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tri-Cities, WA // Portland, OR
Posts: 9,469
Thanked 54 Times in 51 Posts

Drives: Evo IX MR

Quote:
Originally Posted by ixbreaker View Post
Can somebody please post the table def for Evo 9 88590015 ROM? I think the forum bug made it go away.
"quote" the post that has the definition that you want. it will appear correctly in the quote.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NEW INJECTOR DATA Check this out when scaling injectors Raceghost EcuFlash 0 Aug 24, 2017 01:08 AM
Coil Dwell Disassem and Denso Coil Behavior mrfred EcuFlash 50 Feb 26, 2017 04:23 PM
FIC2150 tuning notes mrfred EcuFlash 136 Feb 20, 2017 04:20 AM
Injector flow rate linearization tables for FIC1100 and FIC1650 mrfred EcuFlash 26 Dec 27, 2016 09:26 PM
how-to: control closed loop AFR with your wideband O2 system mrfred EcuFlash 453 May 2, 2016 06:35 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:18 PM.


 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: