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.
Hey mate, I checked my logs and the primary injector pw is not immediately reduced to offset the secondaries turning on, but my AFR stays on target. I expect at least some of this "extra" fuel is because much of that initial shot is lost to wall wetting. Maybe try setting the secondaries to stage only over 90kpa/4000rpm and see how it behaves? By the way, you have minimum injector pw and volume both set, you only need fuel volume. Minimum injector pw will affect asychronous injection pulse as well which can be... undesirable to say the least. As in why did my car turn off when I floored it.
Ok; setting the min PW on the ID2000 fixed it. Im bit confused why if you select an injector from the dropdown list it sets automatically a min PW, which is 1.5 msec for the ID2000
So to be clear, did you remove minimum injector PW and leave minimum volume or did you remove both? If your secondaries are trying to operate much under 1.5ms when you stage them they will probably be getting close to the non linear zone. Glad it is working better for you now though.
I have held back on giving some input on this subject as I did not feel I could give the best advice yet. This is by far the hardest most difficult part of tuning on an Adaptronic in my opinion. I have a strategy that I have found to be working very well for me.
Step 1 - Turn off map prediction (go to the tuning fuel tab, Transient corrections, basic setup, Uncheck the use map prediction)
Step 2 - go to the Evap Time you will see that the basemap has 0.200 across the board - Go to the 8000 rpm section and set it to 0.020 and then interpolate the rows to the 1000 rpm section)
Step 3 - go to the Precentage Async and bring down the async down to 30 after 160F and after 3000 rpms set it to 0
Step 4 - X Fuel pooling has a few determining factors but primarly is based on injector type I find starting around 25 is a good starting point.
Step 5 - At this point you will need to start tuning the car the Vacuum and boost areas will need to be tuned using light throttle
Step 6 - Once the fuel map is relatively tuned you can start adjustment of the X pooling and the Percentage Async - You can do this by stabbing the throttle and increasing X and Increasing the percentage Async - You will know when you have it close when your AFRs are slightly more rich than your Target AFRS.
Step 7 - You will notice that your AFRs on transient throttle will tend to be leaner than your target AFRs and it goes through the RPM range - I have found using the RPM Rate correction resolves this issue. What RPM rate is a locked rate from 0-5000 rpm rate that based on the value of the RPM rate it adds a % of your total trim value in the RPM Correction table. So lets say your RPM rate is 2500 it will had 50% of the trim value you have in the RPM rate correction table.
Step 8 - During the logging you did during tuning the vacuum and boost areas you use that data to fill out the map prediction table - Enable the map prediction and fill in the table based on the data you can get from the logs.
Step 9 - with map prediction if you have it set to long you will feel a hesitation when you are stabbing the throttle and if you have the table incorrect this will cause the same as you will see the map JUMP to the wrong location and then jump back to were it actually is. I do find having the map prediction values roughly 10% more than what the actual car has seems to work the best.
I use Megalog viewer to average out the data to obtain my RPM rate and the map prediction values.
As for setting the time for the map prediction Adaptronics scope can be used to determine this value by looking at how long it takes the map value to move based on the time in which your throttle moves.
Hope this helps you guys and if you need assistance I do offer remote tuning services and I would be happy to assist on this. www.tunedbyshawn.com
Cheers,
Shawn Christenson
Tuned By Shawn
Hello Shawn,
After looking into the transient tuning I managed to get the car drive almost as decent as stock, now it seems although that the rpm rate correction works different then you say. I logged during some low load conditions a very instable total fuel trim, like values up t0 30% without any rapid throttle movement to speak off. Tracing it back it comes from the fueltrim user enrichment. this should be rpm rate and transients. the AE is not triggered, the wall film model is also not causing it. this leaves that it must come from the RPM rate correction.
To start I filled the whole map with 5%, assuming that 5000 rpm/sec would give 5% enrichment. Now I see like 30% with 5700 rpm/sec (268.658sec). also with negative rpm rates there is a postive enrichment. (268.778sec). Its not an extreme issue but it causes some instability when driving with low loads. I will retry with putting the rpm rate correction off.
After looking into the transient tuning I managed to get the car drive almost as decent as stock, now it seems although that the rpm rate correction works different then you say. I logged during some low load conditions a very instable total fuel trim, like values up t0 30% without any rapid throttle movement to speak off. Tracing it back it comes from the fueltrim user enrichment. this should be rpm rate and transients. the AE is not triggered, the wall film model is also not causing it. this leaves that it must come from the RPM rate correction.
To start I filled the whole map with 5%, assuming that 5000 rpm/sec would give 5% enrichment. Now I see like 30% with 5700 rpm/sec (268.658sec). also with negative rpm rates there is a postive enrichment. (268.778sec). Its not an extreme issue but it causes some instability when driving with low loads. I will retry with putting the rpm rate correction off.
I have missed a specification that I do not use RPM rate in the vacuum area only in positive pressure areas.
__________________ Tuned By Shawn - Adaptronic Modular Dealer and Remote or On-site Tuning Specialist We Specialize in tuning the Mazda Rx7 Platforms with the Adaptronic Modular ECU's Website - www.tunedbyshawn.com Email - service@tunedbyshawn.com Phone - 218-330-7369
I have missed a specification that I do not use RPM rate in the vacuum area only in positive pressure areas.
Hm Shawn to be honest I think it still works different then what you specify. Please see screenshots and attached log.
The values for user enrich are huge even with small rpm rates and small values in the map. this is a 3rd gear pull at 15 psi with a now and then hint of wheelspin.
I appreciate your seaking for knowledge but yes indeed it does work the way I explained. I will now explain how you are getting different results -
Here is your log displayed in a histogram - Rpm Rate x Imap x total fuel trim. I can see the same trims you are seeing from your log.
Now here is your data translated differently - RPM Rate x Imap x Closed Loop Fuel Trim.
Here is your closed loop settings from the ECU file. The ECU is adding/subtracting fuel as you are in boost and doing transient actions.
__________________ Tuned By Shawn - Adaptronic Modular Dealer and Remote or On-site Tuning Specialist We Specialize in tuning the Mazda Rx7 Platforms with the Adaptronic Modular ECU's Website - www.tunedbyshawn.com Email - service@tunedbyshawn.com Phone - 218-330-7369
Ok, but in the screenshot I posted the I turned off the closed loop to rule that out. You can see this at label #11: FuelTrim_closed_lp_1 is 0 over the entire window, also the async is not triggered. the wall film model does a bit but max 4-5%. If you substract the wal film model output from the total trim the only thing that is left is the rpm rate correction if I analyse the results I find that it does roughly 3-4 times more then what is in the map. For instance 3% in the map gives around 10-12% enrichment for 5000 rpm/sec rpm rate.
Im not trying to prove you wrong. I just want to understand how this works and hopefully help others that will without question end up in the same position one day
Ok, but in the screenshot I posted the I turned off the closed loop to rule that out. You can see this at label #11: FuelTrim_closed_lp_1 is 0 over the entire window, also the async is not triggered. the wall film model does a bit but max 4-5%. If you substract the wal film model output from the total trim the only thing that is left is the rpm rate correction if I analyse the results I find that it does roughly 3-4 times more then what is in the map. For instance 3% in the map gives around 10-12% enrichment for 5000 rpm/sec rpm rate.
Im not trying to prove you wrong. I just want to understand how this works and hopefully help others that will without question end up in the same position one day
The screen shots I took from your log if you minus the closed loop trim minus the total fuel trim equals the rpm rate trim you have in the rpm rate field...
__________________ Tuned By Shawn - Adaptronic Modular Dealer and Remote or On-site Tuning Specialist We Specialize in tuning the Mazda Rx7 Platforms with the Adaptronic Modular ECU's Website - www.tunedbyshawn.com Email - service@tunedbyshawn.com Phone - 218-330-7369
maybe they are averaged in the histogram view and one doesn't see the peaks? look at the data vs time in a normal log viewer. below i marked in yellow so you can be sure there is no intervention of the closed loop...... if you look for example at cursor 2 you see 5745 rpm/sec nets 15.3% trim. of which 0.8% comes from wall film. this is 14.5%/5745*5000 = 12.62% per 5k rpm/sec rate with 3% in the map
Hey mate may I ask what log viewer you're using please? FYI with no RPM rate enrichment my AFRs are usually around 10:1 in top gear and 11:1 in first. Not ideal but I think in the real world most tuners would be fine with that.
I'm not sure what processing Adaptronic are doing to the RPM signal before applying the RPM rate enrichment, however this method may be prone to "noise" in the RPM signal, e.g. bumps in the road can cause RPM to spike and this will trigger the enrichment when it may not be necessary.
Its Etas MDA, comes together with Etas INCA. It's used alot in the industry but I am unsure if its remotely cheap for fome users.
I found too now that the rpm rate is not very required something. But I just want to get my head around how it works in case I or anyone else needs it. I found out now it doesn't work as described.
Do you get any bump or spike in the measure lambda or afr during inj transition? I found out the wall film model does not take into account the film of the secondaries and this nets me a 15-20% lean spike just after the transition when staging at about 140 kPa during spool.
Its Etas MDA, comes together with Etas INCA. It's used alot in the industry but I am unsure if its remotely cheap for fome users.
I found too now that the rpm rate is not very required something. But I just want to get my head around how it works in case I or anyone else needs it. I found out now it doesn't work as described.
Do you get any bump or spike in the measure lambda or afr during inj transition? I found out the wall film model does not take into account the film of the secondaries and this nets me a 15-20% lean spike just after the transition when staging at about 140 kPa during spool.
Staging works well for me so far, no lean spike. Where did you discover this? Sounds like you're saying wall fuel is only calculated per cylinder and not per injector stage? That sounds like a **** up if so.
What injectors are you staging when this happens and what have you set the minimum fuel volume to?
If you're referring to the ID2000s and you're using 15ul as the minimum volume as you mentioned above, from what I can tell your secondary injectors may be staging at a pulsewidth as low as 0.25ms, is that right? You mentioned you see a minimum of 1.2ms, but is that after subtracting the dead time?
The ID2000 short pulse adder data seems to indicate they are only delivering approximately 50% of the expected fuel flow at 0.25ms, and I don't think Adaptronic model this in the firmware. I would be attempting to set the minimum fuel volume at around 45ul and see if that improves your staging.
I may have made a mistake with my math as I've proven in previous threads that is not my forte...
Sure bumping the minimum time or volume lessens the lean spike but if you then stay at the transition area (and you can as this software has no hystersis) it will rich out.
Do you use the staging map or just use the logic that it only activates the next stage when the previous reaches the minimum off time? I did not try the last method as the engine doesnt run as good when all the fuel comes through just one port.
The correct way really would be that there is a wall film model for each injector stage. As the film for secondaries is maybe 10x as big as the primaries. Especially with big injectors and xcessive LiM.
I use the logic that activates the next stage when the previous reaches the minimum off time. Where did you discover that wall film is not calculated per stage?
Are you able to try increasing the minimum fuel volume on the ID2000s to 45ul and let us know how it goes?
I use the logic that activates the next stage when the previous reaches the minimum off time. Where did you discover that wall film is not calculated per stage?
Are you able to try increasing the minimum fuel volume on the ID2000s to 45ul and let us know how it goes?
ill retry when I have the chance but I know actually from before it floods the engine when u stay near the transition.
here you see lean spike when the secondaries ramp in and the film model does nothing.
ill retry when I have the chance but I know actually from before it floods the engine when u stay near the transition.
here you see lean spike when the secondaries ramp in and the film model does nothing.
Hey mate, I got my car running and was able to do some testing. The fact that the primary injector PW is not decreased to account for the secondary injector minimum fuel volume seems like a bug to me. I also agree that wall film enrichment should probably be applied per stage. Have you raised these issues with Adaptronic?
That said, staging works well for me on a third gear pull with stock primaries and secondaries. I have the minimum fuel volume on the secondaries set to 0, X at 15% and tau at 0.2ms. AFR tracks target almost exactly.
In second gear I sometimes get a lean bump of around 0.3-0.5 AFR. It seems to happen just after the wastegate fully opens, and only if boost is building quickly.
What gear were you testing in the screenshot above? Does the AFR track the target correctly if you set the staging map to zero and let it stage automatically?
that was a 3rd gear pull. I cannot get away with putting the staging map to zero without cutting up the rywire harness as otherwise it will stage the secondary stage which are the ID1000 in the xcsessive LIM primary runners.
I think with stock injectors and manifold offcourse the atomisation is a lot better due to this diffusors and air injection near the injectors, also a warmer MAT will help as thisreduces the wall film to be considered. the bigger the secondaries and the further away from the ports the more the effect will become visible. I communicated all this months ago to Adaptronic. no response...
Omar has mentioned on his Instagram that the staging works well for him even with Siemens 220lb secondaries, so I'm a bit stumped. I have some ID1050x and Siemens 220LB injectors waiting to go into my car so I'll let you know how that works out when complete but it's likely a few months away.
What about making up or purchasing some injector adapter harnesses so you can switch the injectors around for testing?
11-12-19, 06:02 PM
