Rtek Forum Discuss the Rtek 2.0 and other Rtek ECU's

Rtek Why only +/- 15% Fuel adjustment on 2.0?

Old 05-30-06, 12:19 AM
  #26  
Rotary Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ..
Posts: 1,311
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
crap, I should have asked before, can you log injector pulsewidth as well. Just one log, I don't want you blowin up. I see it's running pretty lean.
turbo2ltr is offline  
Old 05-30-06, 12:26 AM
  #27  
Bastardized RE AE
10 Year Member
Thread Starter
 
edomund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Marysville, CALI
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes I was wondering about the injector pulse width. Is that related to the duty cycle?
I will log some more after work tomorrow, drinking beer right now
not good to data log after drinking

thanks
ed
edomund is offline  
Old 05-30-06, 12:33 AM
  #28  
Rotary Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ..
Posts: 1,311
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
NP, you're giving us great data. You know what...also do a log at the low boost with the afc cranked up again. I'd like to see how much the AFC actually changes the airflow reading.

Pulse width is the on time of the injector (usually in milliseconds). Duty cycle is a percentage of on time based on the available time that it could be open (which is based on the current RPM) 0-100%. 50% duty cycle means the injector is open half the available time. That actual time it's open changes depending on the RPM.

Last edited by turbo2ltr; 05-30-06 at 12:36 AM.
turbo2ltr is offline  
Old 05-30-06, 02:04 AM
  #29  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cool data - I can see its a fun car. There's something odd though, comparing
your runs to mine, I see that you're flowing slightly more air at 7psi than I
do at 10psi (K&N, S5 turbo, 2.5" downpipe -> stock exhaust) but over the same
type of run my AFR's will be in the mid 11's, with no adjustment on the Rtek
other than setting injector config (550/720 in my case). I don't see a fuel
pump on your mod list, so I'm wondering if your current fuel system is not
keeping up and you're unintentionally compensating by adding fuel via
Rtek/S-AFC? Some other things that can affect fuel: altitude setting and AFM
air temp. Can you post what your seeing on a fully warmed engine.

-Henrik
Henrik is offline  
Old 05-30-06, 09:09 AM
  #30  
Bastardized RE AE
10 Year Member
Thread Starter
 
edomund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Marysville, CALI
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I am flowing more air at a lower PSI because I have a T04 Turbo with a 60-1 Trim. I also have the new Racing Beat Rev TII turboback exhaust. It flows a lot of air. I have a Walbro pump and 4X720's. I bought 1000cc secondaries yesterday aswell. These runs are mostly all at fully warmed engine I have a huge Ron Davis radiator that keeps my temps very low, around 175-180. I will do some more data logging today though with the AFC and no AFC and the injector width data logging.

Glad I can give you guys some good feedback and data to work with. I am tired of everyone bitching about needing to run standalones for every application. I dont agree with that theory at all and I am proving them wrong with this Rtek.

ed
edomund is offline  
Old 05-30-06, 09:15 AM
  #31  
Bastardized RE AE
10 Year Member
Thread Starter
 
edomund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Marysville, CALI
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BTW Henrik, thank you for the compliment and yes it is a fun car
edomund is offline  
Old 05-30-06, 09:18 AM
  #32  
Rotary Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ..
Posts: 1,311
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
I don't think hes disputing that you are or why you are flowing more air.
What he's saying is even at that airflow level, you shouldn't be running as lean as you are, especially with +15% across the board. When we look/compare logs, we look at airflow, not boost level as we've already established the former is the more important factor when it comes to fueling. So he was asking about your FP and the other readings that would adversly effect the AFR..
turbo2ltr is offline  
Old 05-30-06, 09:48 PM
  #33  
Bastardized RE AE
10 Year Member
Thread Starter
 
edomund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Marysville, CALI
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I see what he is getting at. I also wasn't disputing our air flow just pointing out I had a different turbo and also a upgraded fuel pump.

Thanks everyone for the input so far it has been very helpful.

There are 2 logs one with no afc and the other with the afc at +35 from 3K on.

ed
Attached Files
File Type: zip
AFC&noAFC-logs.zip (6.8 KB, 40 views)
edomund is offline  
Old 05-31-06, 02:27 AM
  #34  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yep, its all about air flow (mass of air). So for similar air flow at similar
rpms on my car we should see comparable AFRs. This is what is puzzling
me from your logs. A couple of items that could be contributing:
- TPS: does it read to 100%?
- fuel pressure: do you happen to know if the fuel pressure is lower
than stock?

-Henrik
Henrik is offline  
Old 05-31-06, 02:49 PM
  #35  
Bastardized RE AE
10 Year Member
Thread Starter
 
edomund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Marysville, CALI
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My TPS is at 100%. I have a 87 with the stupid S4 TPS so it's at 100% at like 25-30% throttle. I will double check later though just in case. Is you car a S4? Maybe that is the difference in our AFR's.

As for the fuel pressure I think it's normal, I have a Walbro pump and stock FPR. I have new EFI fuel lines as well.

turbo2ltr, What do you think about the new data logs I posted with the injector pulse width? Anything look off or any ideas of what we should do?

Thanks again guys,
Ed
edomund is offline  
Old 06-01-06, 01:17 AM
  #36  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm an S4 as well. The TPS adds an enrichment factor to the fuel
computations, so if its not reading open throttle this correction
wont be applied. I dialed in your AFM and boost readings on
my test board and get higher injection pulse widths than your logs
are showing (by about 15%) and this is with the Rtek set to no
corrections so I'm really suspecting one of the sensors in your
car is not working correctly and its effects are being compensated
for by the corrections. Good thing is these can be logged. So, can
you send a log with:
- Airflow, RPM, boost, tps, afm air temp, intake air temp, injector
pulse width, battery, coolant temp and barometer.

-Henrik
Henrik is offline  
Old 06-01-06, 01:27 AM
  #37  
Rotary Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ..
Posts: 1,311
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Also I don't think you ever posted what you have your ATP value set to under "Use ATP as Analog" in the ECU setup screen.
turbo2ltr is offline  
Old 06-01-06, 07:28 PM
  #38  
Bastardized RE AE
10 Year Member
Thread Starter
 
edomund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Marysville, CALI
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In the ECU setup screen I do have the check mark next to "use ATP as analog input" my altitude is set correctly also. The settings for the external sensor I posted earlier they are:
0.00 volts = 8.98 AFR
4.98 volts = 17.98 AFR

I will post some logs with all of those parameters in the log, but what do you think of the logs so far turbo2ltr? Would it be possible to take the limitations of the fuel map off? I will still probably need the limitaions taken off once the car is fully tuned for 15-16 PSI. I know that 15% will not be enough at those levels. Also if I eventually get another turbo ( full T04, bigger compressor and hotside) I will need the freedom to tune with.

Thank you
Ed
edomund is offline  
Old 06-01-06, 07:47 PM
  #39  
Rotary Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ..
Posts: 1,311
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
What is the altitude set at?

As Henrik pointed out (he is the one that wrote the ECU code), it seems there might be some other problem with your setup. We have not yet concluded that you actually need more adjustment. Right now it seems we need to find out what is pulling your injector on-times down. He's getting 15% more duty cycle with a zeroed out correction map than you are with a +15% correction map, so something seems to be amiss with your setup. The log with the parameters Henrik asked for will help us try and figure out what's going on.
turbo2ltr is offline  
Old 06-01-06, 10:36 PM
  #40  
Bastardized RE AE
10 Year Member
Thread Starter
 
edomund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Marysville, CALI
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Oh ok I didn't realize Henrik wrote the code. I gues he knows his stuff Alt is set to 0 I am little above sea level like 50-60 miles.

Here are a few more logs. My TPS is only going up to 92-93% max.
This log is with NO AFC correction, but I put in my 1000cc secondaries that's why the AFR's are lower under boost when the sec come on. Everting else is the same.

ed
Attached Files
File Type: zip
NoAFC1000ccSec.zip (4.2 KB, 29 views)
edomund is offline  
Old 06-01-06, 11:11 PM
  #41  
Rotary Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ..
Posts: 1,311
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Alt is set to 0 I am little above sea level like 50-60 miles.
Thats not "a little" above sea level..hahaha.
I see you're about 50 ft above sea level though.

These last logs had +15% on the corrections right?

Can you save your ECU setup and upload the maps-RX7L.pdb? Should be in the backup directory with the logs.
turbo2ltr is offline  
Old 06-01-06, 11:52 PM
  #42  
Bastardized RE AE
10 Year Member
Thread Starter
 
edomund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Marysville, CALI
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Whoops, uh yeah feet not miles. That would be more than a little above sea level huh.

Yes these are still at +15%. I didn't change the Rtek settings only the AFC (zeroed out now) because of the 1Kcc sec.

ed
Attached Files
File Type: zip
EdMaps.zip (1.6 KB, 31 views)
edomund is offline  
Old 06-03-06, 02:28 AM
  #43  
Bastardized RE AE
10 Year Member
Thread Starter
 
edomund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Marysville, CALI
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Henrik could you post some of your logs, please? I would love to look at other logs to compare to mine. If possible could you also post the calc for your WB so I can look at that.

thanks
ed
edomund is offline  
Old 06-03-06, 02:39 AM
  #44  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
holy underhood temps! Is it really 130deg at the AFM? If the actual temp is lower than
this, then this could explain why your needing so much +ve correction. (the ECU thinks
the air is less dense than it actually is)

-Henrik
Henrik is offline  
Old 06-03-06, 02:48 AM
  #45  
Bastardized RE AE
10 Year Member
Thread Starter
 
edomund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Marysville, CALI
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It could be 130deg F under the hood. It is 90 deg F outside today when I logged. Thats only 40deg hotter than ambient temp.

Did you check out my last logs? My TPS only goes to 93% max. Do you think that would make a big difference?

ed
edomund is offline  
Old 06-03-06, 02:56 AM
  #46  
Bastardized RE AE
10 Year Member
Thread Starter
 
edomund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Marysville, CALI
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I realize I am really harping on this point but. Would it be difficult to change the fuel correction limits? I really wish I could have some more room for adjustment. I will try to fix my low injector PW problem, but it would not hurt to have more freedom in the fuel map to help compensate, so I dont have to use 2 EMS systems to tune with. Even if I am using the correction as a patch it better then using 2 EMS systems to do what 1 could do.


Thanks
Ed
edomund is offline  
Old 06-03-06, 03:24 PM
  #47  
Bastardized RE AE
10 Year Member
Thread Starter
 
edomund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Marysville, CALI
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I spoke with Hailers and he said

Originally Posted by HAILERS
It's a series four TPS.

A series four TPS will read one (1vdc) at the ECU pin 2G when the thing is set RIGHT.

A series four TPS voltage range is 0-5vdc.

One volt is 20% or five volts. Therefore your TPS should be reading 20% at idle if the car is fully warmed up.

So, warm the car fully. Look at the Palm and see what the TPS reads. Not 20%? Then turn the TPS screw til the reading IS 20%.

As for the top reading only being 90whatever percent, the best I can say about that is don't even give it a thought. Another TPS MIGHT read a little higher or a little lower. Even a new TPS I'd guess might not read 100 %.

And if you look someday, you'll see that at approx 100 %, the secondary throttle plates are just engaging at about that point. Just FYI.

The series four tps is used for fuel cut when you let off the throtte and also for the proper operation of the Relief and Switching solenoids that control the ACV. There might be another function that escapes me right at this moment.
So it seems as if all my sensors are working correctly.

BTW I can't get any good logs with the AFC helping out becuase it skews the air flow #'s.

Last edited by turbo2ltr; 06-03-06 at 03:53 PM.
edomund is offline  
Old 06-03-06, 05:53 PM
  #48  
brap brap brap
iTrader: (7)
 
AlexG13B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,861
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Is ir AFC hooked up to TPS or MAP?
AlexG13B is offline  
Old 06-03-06, 06:00 PM
  #49  
Bastardized RE AE
10 Year Member
Thread Starter
 
edomund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Marysville, CALI
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It is not hooked up to either now. I had it on the boost sensor before though. Now it is just a straight RPM vs. fuel correction %.
edomund is offline  
Old 06-05-06, 12:29 AM
  #50  
Senior Member
10 Year Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Increasing the adjustment range is on the list for the next release. This
needs the chip to be updated (and the PDA software) so it'll be a bit. I
was hoping to not touch the ECU portion until after the S4 NA was out.

Regardless, there's still something up with your car. The stock fuel curve
puts AFR's in the mid 11s. Just by matching the injector config with what
you have installed should still give mid 11's. Your running 1000cc sec
so that gives you ~+20%, and have the Rtek at +15%, so overall about
+35% - this should put your AFR's around 8.5! yet your logs only show
mid 11's - it doesn't add up.

Your sensor reading look ok. So unless the AFM has been tampered
with at some point, I'de suspect low fuel pressure.

As long as the TPS will read above 80%, that's fine. I understand that
130deg underhood could be reasonable if ambient is 90 but your logs
show the air temp (the one in the throttle body elbow after the IC) at
66-68, giving over a 60 deg difference. I'm assuming that the 66-68 was
close to ambient for those runs (and your not spraying the IC with
something)

-Henrik
Henrik is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Rtek Why only +/- 15% Fuel adjustment on 2.0?


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: