When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I'm interested to find out what the cause of the ISC valve problem ends up being.
Hey! I was hoping this would eventually cross your path. I spent ALOT of time self researching threads on the tuning group and definitely consider it one of my best resources for info.
Please feel free to comment at anytime if there is anything you see off, wrong, or even slightly un-ideal. I'm open to suggestions and aim to learn as much as possible. I'll be troubleshooting the valve this weekend and will post an update with what I find.
Not a crazy update, but I wanted to post since this is what I am going to consider my final 15 PSI tune...at least for all of the 0PSI+ regions of the map! I spent ALOT of time between this map and the last going cell by cell and tuning out the small fuel imperfections and now the car pulls smooth and on target all the way through the positive pressure region and sits flat on 11.7 at 15 PSI.
I'm still running the car in closed loop across the entire vacuum portion of the map. While the closed loop function does a great job of trimming the fuel and keeping me on target there, I'm going to move to open loop across the entire map and really sort out these cruise cells, then probably revert to running closed loop in vacuum. Once this region is sorted I will be expanding to 300 rpm increments so as to add map resolution and be able to continue tuning without further modifying my car!
While this is still not very aggressive for E85 I am happy with the tune as it is. I am astounded at the amount of power the car picked up between 11.3 and 11.8 at the same boost level and will be researching the possibility of running leaner instead of turning up the boost further. I feel that as my secondaries are close to 80% duty cycle at 15 PSI now that I will need to upgrade my fuel system before I add more boost. I believe stage one of the upgrade will consist of a fuel pressure sensor and changing out my primaries to either ID1000's or another set of ID2000's and adding some fuel pressure.
Not a crazy update, but I wanted to post since this is what I am going to consider my final 15 PSI tune...at least for all of the 0PSI+ regions of the map! I spent ALOT of time between this map and the last going cell by cell and tuning out the small fuel imperfections and now the car pulls smooth and on target all the way through the positive pressure region and sits flat on 11.7 at 15 PSI.
I'm still running the car in closed loop across the entire vacuum portion of the map. While the closed loop function does a great job of trimming the fuel and keeping me on target there, I'm going to move to open loop across the entire map and really sort out these cruise cells, then probably revert to running closed loop in vacuum. Once this region is sorted I will be expanding to 300 rpm increments so as to add map resolution and be able to continue tuning without further modifying my car!
While this is still not very aggressive for E85 I am happy with the tune as it is. I am astounded at the amount of power the car picked up between 11.3 and 11.8 at the same boost level and will be researching the possibility of running leaner instead of turning up the boost further. I feel that as my secondaries are close to 80% duty cycle at 15 PSI now that I will need to upgrade my fuel system before I add more boost. I believe stage one of the upgrade will consist of a fuel pressure sensor and changing out my primaries to either ID1000's or another set of ID2000's and adding some fuel pressure.
Suggestions are welcome as always!
-Skeese
You can lean out quite a bit on e85. Your 11.8 AFR is based off of a 14.7 Stoich number on your WBo2 Sensor, not an actual 11.8 AFR. I would be MUCH closer to 12.5 AFR @ 15psi knowing this.
So let's convert to Lambda so we're all talking the same language here...
I've actually been wondering when somebody would bring the AFR/Lambda thing up. I understand the difference between lambda and AFR and how AFR relates specifically to gas and Lambda is related to the stoichiometric burn ratio of any given fuel, however I grew frustrated at the information online about it.
It seems to me that every time somebody asks the question what AFR do I need to run with E85 it simply becomes a flaming thread where people explain lambda and state that it is the only way to go, but nobody ever really answers the original question as the question is skewed. The answer I believe most are looking for (whether they have realized it or not) is what lambda should I tune for when running E85 into a 13B.
This is the current lambda target table for which my car is tuned and running on E85.
I guess the real question is how much leaner from a lambda standpoint should these targets be changed to in order to achieve maximum efficiency and power without risking detonation or extremely high EGT’s.
I've actually been wondering when somebody would bring the AFR/Lambda thing up. I understand the difference between lambda and AFR and how AFR relates specifically to gas and Lambda is related to the stoichiometric burn ratio of any given fuel, however I grew frustrated at the information online about it.
It seems to me that every time somebody asks the question what AFR do I need to run with E85 it simply becomes a flaming thread where people explain lambda and state that it is the only way to go, but nobody ever really answers the original question as the question is skewed. The answer I believe most are looking for (whether they have realized it or not) is what lambda should I tune for when running E85 into a 13B.
This is the current lambda target table for which my car is tuned and running on E85.
I guess the real question is how much leaner from a lambda standpoint should these targets be changed to in order to achieve maximum efficiency and power without risking detonation or extremely high EGT’s.
-Skeese
Personally, here's how I'd run it:
You should dial in idle and cruising to be a lot closer to stoich.
AFR is not only in relation to gas, however, 14.75:1 is the ratio of air to fuel for a zero ethanol content gasoline.
In California, we have E10, so it's SUPPOSED to be 14.2:1, however most AFR gauges account for this without us knowing (or rather, forgetting). My Integra prefers 13.2-13.4 AFR at WOT for max power. In the mountains with large elevation change, air density is less, and therefore AFR becomes richer naturally. This is my safety net...although I lose power as a result.
9.75:1 is stoichiometry for E85, and your flex fuel sensor should default to ethanol content being E10 if the sensor fails, not 86% ethanol. That way you'll be safe with RICHER mixtures.
I'd start by leaning out the entire map by at least 5% for e85... This fuel works better with a leaner mixture than what you're used to with gasoline.
Skeese, maybe I should have been more clear with my tuning methods here...
To be more safe, and allow for the occurrence of commuting on 91 Octane E10, long distance travel without an e85 station, etc, I would leave the Fuel 1 Table completely untouched and instead use your "3D Enrichment /Advance Determined by Ethanol Content" option under the "Flex Fuel" tab and subtract/add percentages throughout your map to dial in the setup.
That way, when you go to e10, it's perfect, and when you have ANY ethanol content over that, you've already taken out or added fuel and timing where necessary. Depending on how healthy this motor is, I'd be willing to find MBT throughout and optimize e85 properly. That's a LOT of octane to work with.
Also, what have you done as far as water filtration on your system? Does e85 stay in the lines long? I'm running a combination, 3 micron water/fuel filter.
Lots of good info here. Let me clarify my situation a bit...
I actually live 2 minutes, or 0.9 miles, away from an E85 gas station. I am currently daily driving the car due to my truck getting totaled (no fault of mine) and even then the office is less than 4 miles from my house. I don't plan on taking the car on any long distance travel trips where E85 availability would be a problem nor do I plan on running 93 octane again.
I keep my netbook tuning pc in the car with me pretty much at all times and should I need to make a long distance trip where I would have to use regular 93 again I would load one of my tunes where it was tuned for 11.3 and even then stay off the gas. I should probably go ahead and take one of those, modify it for what mechanically changed to my current setup and have it on standby for if I decide I have to see some 93.
Originally Posted by SirLaughsALot
your flex fuel sensor should default to ethanol content being E10 if the sensor fails, not 86% ethanol.
My logic in the 86% setting was that if the sensor fails, I would rather it spray alot of fuel rather than too little. If I am running E85 and the ECU is trimming +35% fuel and the sensor fails and then defaults to E10 and removes that 35% trim would that not cause me to be extremely lean? I thought erroring on the side of E86 would be the safest thing.
As far as water filtration in my system...nothing yet. I know it is something I need to address, but I don't want to update my fuel system 1 fitting at a time. I currently have 50+ feet of PTFE hose and a million fittings in the garage I plan to install as soon as I get a new DD. At which time I will also be installed a new fuel filter. I currently have a weldon 10 micron fuel filter with the paper element that I plan to install with the new lines after swapping the filtering element.
Anyways, all the updates on here has inspired me to get back on it. Will be taking some logs and doing some updating tonight.
As far as water filtration in my system...nothing yet. I know it is something I need to address, but I don't want to update my fuel system 1 fitting at a time. I currently have 50+ feet of PTFE hose and a million fittings in the garage I plan to install as soon as I get a new DD. At which time I will also be installed a new fuel filter. I currently have a weldon 10 micron fuel filter with the paper element that I plan to install with the new lines after swapping the filtering element.
Anyways, all the updates on here has inspired me to get back on it. Will be taking some logs and doing some updating tonight.
-Skeese
You don't need anywhere near that much I only needed 30ft and I had a lot left over
You don't need anywhere near that much I only needed 30ft and I had a lot left over
I wasn't planning on ending up with this much, but I got a great deal on 32' of -6AN hose on here, then bought another 15' of matching -8AN hose for my feed line. I was only going to buy 10' for the feed but for whatever reason summit had the 15' hose priced below the 10' hose. I doubled checked the aeroquip part numbers with the manufacturer and verified it was the same hose and bought the 15' cheaper hose!
Then on the side I've also got 3' of the regular -10AN aeroquip hose for my catch can setup and 10' of -3AN PTFE hose that will eventually become wastegate line. I've go another round of fittings coming in today and tomorrow then will be ordering my hose ends last when the next payday gets here. This stuff adds up...
Nice bro!
Just dropping in to say you've done a great job with your car.
Thanks for sharing your experience with the Adaptronic.
I'm hoping to achieve the same level of success as you.
Steve
Skeese, you have a point. I'll have to talk with Andy behind that logic, although I'm assuming its how we are setting it up that truly matters.
My Fuel 1/Ign 1 Map is going to 91 octane, period. What I had assumed was that the 3D Enrichment tables FIRST do a fixed enrichment/advance based on ethanol content, and then we fine tune those tables from there.
I plan on running my e85 MUCH leaner than my 91 octane setup, so that's why I assumed the e10 as default would be the richer, safer mixture in the case of a failure. Remembering these are OEM, GM parts, they won't fail. Neither of us will have to worry about that.
I saw you were doing an OMP delete...darn it. I was going to ask what OMP figures you dropped into your cells to get a nice safe margin for the added wear.
I'm more interested in how you set up your inputs/outputs/wastegate settings. Eugene still has a tendency to flip around some of your maps/values to completely wrong cells. My ignition dwell time for instance had it's columns switched with rows...all the values were wrong.
I'll be going to the Adaptronic M6000 in a few months, but the car is still at fabrication... I need to get on their asses.
Nice bro!
Just dropping in to say you've done a great job with your car.
Thanks for sharing your experience with the Adaptronic.
I'm hoping to achieve the same level of success as you.
Steve
Thanks man! It really has been quite a journey. Looking back on the amount I've learned from when I started with it a year and a half ago it is overwhelming. I remember being sooooooo irritated with idle and startup issues on the roof of the parking garage at my old apartment thinking I would never figure it out. I got your email and will check out your tune setup this weekend when I'm free and will get back with you then!
Originally Posted by SirLaughsALot
Skeese, you have a point. I'll have to talk with Andy behind that logic, although I'm assuming its how we are setting it up that truly matters.
My Fuel 1/Ign 1 Map is going to 91 octane, period. What I had assumed was that the 3D Enrichment tables FIRST do a fixed enrichment/advance based on ethanol content, and then we fine tune those tables from there.
I plan on running my e85 MUCH leaner than my 91 octane setup, so that's why I assumed the e10 as default would be the richer, safer mixture in the case of a failure. Remembering these are OEM, GM parts, they won't fail. Neither of us will have to worry about that.
I saw you were doing an OMP delete...darn it. I was going to ask what OMP figures you dropped into your cells to get a nice safe margin for the added wear.
I'm actually still running my OMP with the settings that originally came in the adaptronic twin turbo base tune that came with the ECU, however I do premix 1/2oz per gallon with castor 927 to account for the additional fuel flow of the E85 while also erroring on the side of caution. I've been meaning to delete the OMP for a while now, but as the car has been running great and as of now is still my DD I've opted to not change anything outside or tune progression.
Originally Posted by SirLaughsALot
I'm more interested in how you set up your inputs/outputs/wastegate settings. Eugene still has a tendency to flip around some of your maps/values to completely wrong cells. My ignition dwell time for instance had it's columns switched with rows...all the values were wrong.
I'll be going to the Adaptronic M6000 in a few months, but the car is still at fabrication... I need to get on their asses.
I currently use a mac valve that is plumbed for twin gates like this. Essentially the boost pressure from the turbo compressor outlet runs to a tee that splits to the top and bottom ports of the wastegates with the mac plumbed in the line to the line going to the top ports. The higher the wastegate DC the more air pressure the mac valve lets through to the top ports which holds the wastegate shut and increases the boost. I haven't really researched using a different setup as this one has worked without any issues since I first set it up.
My inputs and outputs are all pretty basic as far as the way they are setup in wari. I drive the mac valve through the 500 rpm increment table in the wastegate tab in wari, but I plan up changing it up soon so I'll have the option to have multiple boost settings that can be changed via a dash switch.
I figure I'll leave my 12 PSI wastegate springs in the gates and wire a kill switch in line to the mac valve so that with the switch in the off position the mac valve sees no electricity and stays open allowing me to run 12 PSI spring pressure and with the switch in the on position the mac would run the wastegate DC from the wastegate tab that I use now.
I am then planning to find a way to use the VVT control outputs to output a second set of wastegate duty cycle values for a 3rd boost level. The plan is to wire in an input for another switch to trigger the output to change from the wastegate tab output to the VVT table. Check out the attached document from adaptronic regarding using these VVT outputs to control the wastegate DC. I actually came across this when I was helping a friend figure out how to control wastegate DC above 7500 rpms. He runs a high revving semi peripheral port engine and was having issues with the boost dropping off past 7500 because when using the standard table the ecu would default to the 7500 wastegate DC value at anything past 7500.
I want to have a 12 PSI setting for low boost, a 15 PSI setting for mid boost, and then a setting for 19-20 PSI available if needed. I don't want to put too much strain on my old motor as it has never been pulled or rebuilt and still has the old mazda 3 piece cells which are prone to come apart and go through my turbo from what I've read, however the motor holds strong and seems to be healthy so we shall see. I plan to eventually pull my motor out and have BDC up in dallas build me a halfbridge that I'll then be running alot more boost into.
On a side note I just picked up a blown 13b that I'll be tearing into this weekend. Once I figure out what can be salvaged and what I still need for a complete motor I'll be planning my first home-rebuild for that one. I figure that I'll be alot more aggressive with my tuning when I have a spare in the garage.
I'm interested in these fancy new adaptronic ecu's, however I'll probably just stick with my old style PnP unit...don't fix what isn't broken, ya know?
I finally bought me another DD so now that I don't have to rely on the RX7 for the day to day grind I'm going to start making some bigger tuning changes! My most recent map was tuned to hold the target 11.8 AFR across the 15 PSI range however as I was seeing places in my logs where the AFR stayed on target at one end of the 500 rpm step size cells, but at the other end seemed to fluctuate +/- 0.1-0.2 off of the target I have decided to finally re-scale my map for a 300 rpm step size.
I've been meaning to do this for quite some time now, however I didn't feel that my map was close enough to the actual fuel requirements to warrant the change, but now I feel that there will be an adequate gain from doing so to justify the extra time it will take to analyze log information and input data into the higher resolution map.
I still plan to change my target AFR values to better reflect the lambda ratio for E85, but first I'm going to ensure this step size change works out the way I'm thinking and I'll likely need to re-tune this 300 step size map according to the way my logs read with this setting. I don't expect a large amount of re-work will be required as WARI automatically interpolates the fuel values for the new RPM points based on the fuel values set in the 500 rpm step size map.
I've attached my latest tune file. As this will be the first in a series of 300 rpm step size map tunes, I've changed my naming to include 300 in the description and started back over with this being version A. I'll be loading this onto the car this afternoon and testing it out! I'll post the results and my thought on the change soon.
So as planned I spent alot of time yesterday logging data on the new 300 rpm step sized map. Initial startup was a little bit rough and it took me several attempts to get the car to start and settle into idle, however this wasn't unexpected. I played with my new idle values and ultimately was able to re-situate my idle and warm-up without too much difficulty.
I typically run closed loop up to 0 PSI and the ECU does an excellent job of regulating my AFR's in the vacuum/cruise region to stay right on target, but I figured since I was adding all of the extra resolution for added precision I really should fine tune these areas in open loop as well. All of the logs yesterday were taken with the ECU in open loop mode so that I could get accurate values across the vacuum/cruise range and to my surprise I wasn't too far off where the target needed to be.
I did find that the added rpm resolution allowed me to make changes where previously I was limited by the 500 cells. I expect that as I further tune this setup I will be able to really dial it in such that my AFR sits directly on target with even less variance than before. I still believe initial tuning should be done on a 500 rpm step size map for the sake of getting it close first, and then fine tuning later.
Attached is the map that resulted from my first round of 300 rpm step sized "fine" tuning. I'll probably work on the predictable map settings some before I load it back onto the car since I was seeing some lean conditions when I would punch it, but the fuel table likely won't change from here...until next time!
do you think the 300 rpm separation is really worth the effort?
If you start with a 500 rpm step size map and tune it then update the spacing to 300 and let the software interpolate the difference it really isn't that bad to re-tune so that it is spot on. I can imagine starting from scratch on one though would be quite a task. I will say I am able to reduce the AFR fluctuations that I wasn't able to tune out on a 500 rpm step size map.
I think a 500 rpm step size map will do just fine as a DD or for racing, as I've done both on it and know others who do both without any issues. That being said, if I paid somebody a gob of money to tune my car I would be expecting a map that took into account every cell available for max resolution. Personally my goal is to meet or exceed the tune a "professional" would have charged me for, so I'm going to opt for the the extra resolution.
In short...is it needed, no. Is it better, yes. Is it worth it to you, up to you.
I wanted to make this post to update all of those following my thread.
I have lost my motor. PAUSE! It was in no way related to tuning or my ECU. The motor was 23 years old and suffered from coolant seal failure. It had been slowly consuming coolant for some time now and I guess the seal finally failed.
I'll be pulling the block apart this weekend and will confirm once I get everything apart that it wasn't anything but coolant seals. I've got a plan already set into motion to build a monster this next go around.
When you're up and running again, let's start from scratch with Eugene. Together, we'll figure out a pattern that works.
The boost (wastegate DC) vs. ethanol content map is pretty dope...I'm sure you'll want to do that.
It is likely going to be a while before that happens. I've decided to go all out and build the monster I've always wanted. I made a deal with a friend of mine to buy his built semi-peripheral motor along with an EFR9180 setup. It is going to be pretty wicked to say the least.
The kicker here is that he is in Germany for 1.5 years, but will be home in 6 months for Christmas which will be the soonest he can pull the setup and send it my way. In the meantime I'll be sorting out the fuel system, electronics, transmission, and rear end all while prepping the chassis to hold 700+ hp. I'm not sure what ECU I'll be going with this next time around. I've had a great tuning experience with the Adaptronic PnP unit and would consider buying one of the new units should a solid version of Eugene be released and have some documented street time success by then, but I'm also looking into other platforms. At these power levels I can't have any tuning error and absolute precision is a must, meaning the tuning platform itself has to be 100% from hardware to software. I plan on tuning this new setup myself, at least to ~20 or so PSI, then depending on how I feel about the tuning progression at that point possibly taking it up to Dallas and having Kan tune the 20-30/32 PSI range.
I quit playing with Eugene as the interface is constantly changing with each new beta revision and I feel like every time I figure something out it changes. I don't have a ton of spare time between work and non-rotor life so I'll be waiting until they firmly settle on an interface before I look back into it. I've sold my turbo locally to a friend as well as my PnP unit. We will be installing my old setup on his car in the upcoming months and then I'll be tuning it using the final 500 rpm step map from this thread as a base map for his car, since it will be essentially the exact same as mine way.
Avoid Kan like the plague. I seriously believe that the "rotaries are unreliable" myth came about because of his hundreds of failed tunes.
Why a guy would ask me for -10AN return line is beyond me. A PWM (and MAP referenced) fuel pump, fuel pressure sensor, regulator, e85 content sensor, and constant feed from a surge tank lift pump should be PLENTY of information to figure out fueling and making it a nearly zero "return" system (as to not add heat to the fuel).
Kan is a hack and stay away. There are so many other reasons why I would personally never use him. Elliot can tune remotely on Adaptronic. Abel Ibarra can tune remotely on Adaptronic. Shane T can tune remotely on Motec. etc. If you need a tuner near you in Texas, I'm sure there's someone else with a bit of rotary engine know-how and experience under their belt. Just not Kan.
You've read my build, you have a good idea of the person I am from our chats. I wouldn't say this without reason.
Avoid Kan like the plague. I seriously believe that the "rotaries are unreliable" myth came about because of his hundreds of failed tunes.
Why a guy would ask me for -10AN return line is beyond me. A PWM (and MAP referenced) fuel pump, fuel pressure sensor, regulator, e85 content sensor, and constant feed from a surge tank lift pump should be PLENTY of information to figure out fueling and making it a nearly zero "return" system (as to not add heat to the fuel).
Kan is a hack and stay away. There are so many other reasons why I would personally never use him. Elliot can tune remotely on Adaptronic. Abel Ibarra can tune remotely on Adaptronic. Shane T can tune remotely on Motec. etc. If you need a tuner near you in Texas, I'm sure there's someone else with a bit of rotary engine know-how and experience under their belt. Just not Kan.
You've read my build, you have a good idea of the person I am from our chats. I wouldn't say this without reason.
Personally I won't be having my car tuned for 700+ horsepower remotely. By anybody. Nor will I be flying somebody here to tune it. At that rate I would just take the time and do it myself.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion, mine being that Mr. Kan knows what he is doing. I've been around a handful of Kan-tuned rotary cars here in Houston and they all run flawlessly as they have been since their tune was written years ago. This thread was meant to be educational and positive. Hell I was even positive about the whole thing when I lost my motor in the middle of this all. Sooooooo lets leave the bashing out of it.
I am going to toss something out a few points here that might be helpful to you and everyone else;
A) if you are not revving past 9K rpms( where very few cars/ports making power anyhow). I like to set the RPM step points to 300rpms. This give more resolution and the ability to make the AFRs across the rev range even smoother. This is found in the Tuning Tab section.
B) Make sure you're target AFR map is setup properly, this affects fueling EVEN when in open loop.
C) Be aware at ALL times of your ecu trim in the engine data page. It is best to be tuning with a trim of ZERO. If the ECU does show a trim, make sure you understand where it comes from and why it is there.
D) Always check your base timing on each coil
E) Datalog EVERY pull, its best to use the megalog viewer software( separate 3rd party )
I am going to do a how to tuning video very soon too.
Did this video ever end up getting made? Curious to watch it as I just switched to adaptronic from a pfc and about to start tuning and setting it up.
With the release of the Eugene software I decided to hold off on the video( and obviously make it with the Eugene software). Its probably going to take a half to full week to shoot, and edit so I don't want to do that twice
I have our test mule coming back after a weekend of racing to tune on the modular FD PNP. However we have 2 cars that need to leave, and we need to do one last high boost dyno session on our ND miata. So its going to be 3+ weeks minimum. I have a lot to learn to be honest on the new software, its quite different..
03-04-16, 09:44 AM
Great work!
