Narrow Band Then Wide Band Tuning -Dynojet Power Vision

Started by Sporty 48, October 27, 2011, 08:28:40 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

mayor

Quote from: cts1950 on October 28, 2011, 05:39:09 PM
Before the MT7 software and the 2007 touring set up wasn't the Wego II considered one of the best ways for the home tuner to get close to a proper tune? If it was, why not use the broad band sensor in conjunction to the factory NB sensors. Would that not give more info to tune from realising, the strengths and weakness of either system?
sure, but the key is the data that you are seeing from the WEGO does not control the fuel control of the ecm.  You simply use that to set the open loop ve's using an independent measurement, which allows the closed loop system to function without being in conflict with the ECM system limitations.  From what I understand, the PowerVision is acting in much the same way.  Meaning that the wideband controller is not directly giving feedback to the ECM, but rather indirectly through a supplemental creation of a new calibration that gets flashed to the ecm (much like the way the vtune system works).  Maybe Andy can comment on if I'm reading the PV process correct. 
warning, this poster suffers from bizarre delusions

1FSTRK

After the thread on AFV I believe that the problem with these broad band sensor systems is not a question of sensor accuracy. It seem to me the devil is in the details. Because all of the AFRs that we request in the AFR table are calculated from the values in the VE tables we need consistency in the way we calculate VE. With out any discussion of sensor accuracy, by switching between the two different systems when filling in the VE tables we create an inconsistency in the data gathering unless we have a way to calibrate and synchronize the two different sensors and there by create an offset in the VE tables we calculate from them. Because the VE is at the root of all fuel calculations the Delphi system will use this offset in all later real time adjustments and it does not stay a 1 to 1 ratio.
"Never hang on to a mistake just because you spent time or money making it."

whittlebeast

#27
Quote from: 1FSTRK on October 28, 2011, 07:09:16 PM
After the thread on AFV I believe that the problem with these broad band sensor systems is not a question of sensor accuracy. It seem to me the devil is in the details. Because all of the AFRs that we request in the AFR table are calculated from the values in the VE tables we need consistency in the way we calculate VE. With out any discussion of sensor accuracy, by switching between the two different systems when filling in the VE tables we create an inconsistency in the data gathering unless we have a way to calibrate and synchronize the two different sensors and there by create an offset in the VE tables we calculate from them. Because the VE is at the root of all fuel calculations the Delphi system will use this offset in all later real time adjustments and it does not stay a 1 to 1 ratio.

It has not been an issue with my PowerVision.  I simply tune to 14.7 AFR when tuning in areas that I know that later  I will be running closed loop on the narrow bands.  The Sportys are so challenged at holding AFR at idle, you would never notice anyway.  I was seeing the mixture at idle swing a full AFR from early in a ride compared to the end of a ride.

On the final tune, I turn off adaptive learning and set the VEs to get the AFRs at idle to be correct early in the ride.  Later in the ride, I watch the closed loop integrators have slowly marched their way from close to 100 right down to 93 45 min later.

Here is the trace  http://www.ncs-stl.com/PVTune/IdleAFRChangeWTimeNB.jpg

Here it is on the widebands

http://www.ncs-stl.com/PVTune/IdleAFRChangeWTime.jpg

Beast
Dynos are great for getting the motor close enough to get on the data loggers.

mayor

Andy,
are you saying that you are using the broad bands are feedback active in the closed loop system? as in, hooked directly to the Delphi ECM?  how did you account for the difference in the narrow band sensor calibration that written in the Delphi closed loop control compared to values of the wide band sensors? how did you know what values to use to calibrate the ECM to the wide bands?  how are you keeping the fuel pulse rates from being driven the wrong direction from the different O2 sensor signal rates?
warning, this poster suffers from bizarre delusions

glens

No, he's not using the "widebands" for active fuel control.

Andy, all sporties are challenged, just a few you've seen, or just yours?  BTW, it occurred to me while reading through the XLforums thread that when you'd spurred discussion here regarding your "reloaded stock map" datalogged with the PV, you were then running the stock calibration with a heavy breather.  It's not fair to judge the stock calibration that way, is it?

1FSTRK, a person could always tune the SERT way, setting all the AFR cells to a fixed open-loop value and use the http://www.daytona-twintec.com/Twin_Scan2.html + kit to set VEs.  Going back to closed-loop and vtuning afterward would be a good way to adjust things open-loop depending on what got changed near there by the vtune.  Just for kicks I'd got my Fullsac X pipe with both sets of bungs, though I've done nothing further than vtuning a few times yet.

Mayor, what I was getting at is the closed-loop controller for the broadband sensors is using "switches" of its own to come up with its output, so it wouldn't be suitable for direct closed-loop fuel control.  Assuming it'd take at least two switches of the sensor per controller output, you'd not get the resolution with it that you would with the stock sensor.  If you were to use it for direct control with the Delphi, it seems to me the scheme the Delphi uses would either have to be altered or the upper RPM limit would have to be halved.  That's contemplating keeping things the way the Delphi currently does it.  I'm certainly open for suggestions...

whittlebeast

Quote from: mayor on October 28, 2011, 07:43:40 PM
Andy,
are you saying that you are using the broad bands are feedback active in the closed loop system? as in, hooked directly to the Delphi ECM?  how did you account for the difference in the narrow band sensor calibration that written in the Delphi closed loop control compared to values of the wide band sensors? how did you know what values to use to calibrate the ECM to the wide bands?  how are you keeping the fuel pulse rates from being driven the wrong direction from the different O2 sensor signal rates?

There is no way right now to drive the narrow band logic in the ECU with the wideband sensors.  You can however add two more bungs and run both sets at the same time.

Beast
Dynos are great for getting the motor close enough to get on the data loggers.

whittlebeast

Quote from: glens on October 28, 2011, 07:49:59 PM
regarding your "reloaded stock map" datalogged with the PV, you were then running the stock calibration with a heavy breather.  It's not fair to judge the stock calibration that way, is it?

It all depends what you are looking for.

Beast
Dynos are great for getting the motor close enough to get on the data loggers.

glens

What could you be looking for that would be considered "fair" that way?

whittlebeast

#33
At the time I was figuring out how VE, VE New, CLI and AFF all relate.

I was also trying to refresh my memory as to how bad these bikes run in closed loop.

Beast
Dynos are great for getting the motor close enough to get on the data loggers.

mayor

Quote from: whittlebeast on October 28, 2011, 07:54:51 PM
There is no way right now to drive the narrow band logic in the ECU with the wideband sensors.  You can however add two more bungs and run both sets at the same time.
did you explain this to Sporty48?  he's been posting as if he thinks the PV is controlling fuel.  In reality it's only monitoring the afr. 

So, what do the lambda guys have to do, add a set of 18mm bungs to get this PV thing to work with the wide bands? 

Does the PV save the information and allow you to recalibrate based on combining the data with the calibration like the Vtune software? or do you have to review data and make manual changes?

Quote from: glens on October 28, 2011, 07:49:59 PM
Mayor, what I was getting at is the closed-loop controller for the broadband sensors is using "switches" of its own to come up with its output, so it wouldn't be suitable for direct closed-loop fuel control.  Assuming it'd take at least two switches of the sensor per controller output, you'd not get the resolution with it that you would with the stock sensor.  If you were to use it for direct control with the Delphi, it seems to me the scheme the Delphi uses would either have to be altered or the upper RPM limit would have to be halved.  That's contemplating keeping things the way the Delphi currently does it.  I'm certainly open for suggestions...
I understood what you were saying.  I just don't think Sporty did, since it appeared he was thinking that the narrow bands were RPM limited much more than the other "bands". 
warning, this poster suffers from bizarre delusions

whittlebeast

Quote from: mayor on October 28, 2011, 08:17:40 PM
Does the PV save the information and allow you to recalibrate based on combining the data with the calibration like the Vtune software? or do you have to review data and make manual changes?

They have a program that works a lot like TTS Vtune.  I personally tune by hand using MLV HD it see what is going on.

Beast
Dynos are great for getting the motor close enough to get on the data loggers.

akjeff

So, what do the lambda guys have to do, add a set of 18mm bungs to get this PV thing to work with the wide bands?

No. There are wide band sensors that fit the lambda bungs.

Jeff
'09 FLTR/120R/'91 XL1250 street tracker project/'07 DR-Z400S

mayor

there's a heated wide band in a small enough size to fit in the touring bike lambda location? 
warning, this poster suffers from bizarre delusions

akjeff

My bad. I thought you were referring to the large diameter bungs of the '09 headers(which is what I have). Sorry.

Jeff
'09 FLTR/120R/'91 XL1250 street tracker project/'07 DR-Z400S

mayor

no worries, I wasn't sure myself.   :teeth:  I was referring to the 12mm bung bikes. 
warning, this poster suffers from bizarre delusions

hrdtail78

Quote from: mayor on October 28, 2011, 08:40:57 PM
there's a heated wide band in a small enough size to fit in the touring bike lambda location?

No.
Semper Fi

whittlebeast

Quote from: mayor on October 28, 2011, 08:50:01 PM
no worries, I wasn't sure myself.   :teeth:  I was referring to the 12mm bung bikes.

I heard from a reliable source that the only widebands available for the small bungs are made for the formula 1 cars and way too expensive right now.

I personally would just install a second set of bungs for tuning and then put the narrow bands back online once the tune was done.

Beast
Dynos are great for getting the motor close enough to get on the data loggers.

glens

Those would probably be real widebands.

Quote from: mayor on October 28, 2011, 08:17:40 PM
Does the PV save the information and allow you to recalibrate based on combining the data with the calibration like the Vtune software? or do you have to review data and make manual changes?

http://www.fuelmotousa.com/PVlogtuner.htm gives an overview of the process.  It's somewhat similar to the way vtune operates but a bit less automatic.  It's a bit more automatic than with the TwinscanII+.  They all address VE only.  I'd bet the TTS system typically produces the best, most comprehensive results.

[edit: I just reviewed that page.  I sounds like they're suggesting the PV auto-tune software might pull timing where it was pulled by the Delphi during the log(s) recorded for the "tune".]

akjeff

no worries, I wasn't sure myself.     I was referring to the 12mm bung bikes.

Gotcha. On an unrelated note, I just wanted to add that I don't believe folks can have the "best of both worlds" setup with a PV by running both WB and NB sensors at the same time. I have both sets of bungs in my headers(Jackpot 2/1/2), and posed the question to Fuel Moto. No dice. One would have to use the WB and the AT-100 to develop the tune. Then, if you would like to restore the closed loop function, you remove the WB's and pop your factory NB's in, and enable closed loop in the PV.

Seems to be a rivalry of sorts as far as TTS vs PV vs TM etc.....I'm just not educated enough to really give a rip one way or another. I already had a PC-V w/AT-100 in my bike, so when I decided to give a flash tuner a try, I went with the PV, and kept the AT-100. Definitely enjoying the education in tuning my bike. Perhaps if I were more advanced, I'd prefer the TTS. Don't know. The PV works fine for me, and I'm learning a lot. Some great info on this forum, and I'm grateful that folks like you share your knowledge!

Jeff
'09 FLTR/120R/'91 XL1250 street tracker project/'07 DR-Z400S

whittlebeast

Quote from: akjeff on October 28, 2011, 09:06:08 PM
I just wanted to add that I don't believe folks can have the "best of both worlds" setup with a PV by running both WB and NB sensors at the same time. I have both sets of bungs in my headers(Jackpot 2/1/2), and posed the question to Fuel Moto. No dice. One would have to use the WB and the AT-100 to develop the tune. Then, if you would like to restore the closed loop function, you remove the WB's and pop your factory NB's in, and enable closed loop in the PV.

I am almost sure that you can log the o2s as reported thru the stock port from the ECU as well as the wide band feed off the PowerVison can network.

Beast
Dynos are great for getting the motor close enough to get on the data loggers.

mayor

Quote from: akjeff on October 28, 2011, 09:06:08 PM
Seems to be a rivalry of sorts as far as TTS vs PV vs TM etc.....
don't read too much into that....there's some of us here that are dual sport players.    I think the discusions regarding comparing benefits can sometimes be seen as downtalking the other side, but most of the time it's not meant in malice. 

Quote from: akjeff on October 28, 2011, 09:06:08 PM
I'm just not educated enough to really give a rip one way or another. I already had a PC-V w/AT-100 in my bike, so when I decided to give a flash tuner a try, I went with the PV, and kept the AT-100. Definitely enjoying the education in tuning my bike. Perhaps if I were more advanced, I'd prefer the TTS. Don't know. The PV works fine for me, and I'm learning a lot.
From what I've been reading, you have a good system....so you should have no regrets. 
warning, this poster suffers from bizarre delusions

akjeff

Quote from: whittlebeast on October 28, 2011, 09:15:32 PM
Quote from: akjeff on October 28, 2011, 09:06:08 PM
I just wanted to add that I don't believe folks can have the "best of both worlds" setup with a PV by running both WB and NB sensors at the same time. I have both sets of bungs in my headers(Jackpot 2/1/2), and posed the question to Fuel Moto. No dice. One would have to use the WB and the AT-100 to develop the tune. Then, if you would like to restore the closed loop function, you remove the WB's and pop your factory NB's in, and enable closed loop in the PV.

I am almost sure that you can log the o2s as reported thru the stock port from the ECU as well as the wide band feed off the PowerVison can network.

Beast

Probably depends on what vintage bike you have. My 09 bagger's NB sensors are the larger diameter type. So, only they, or the AT-100's WB Bosch's can occupy the bungs immediately after the exhaust flanges. On a later model bike, that has the new style, smaller diameter NB sensors that are located down near the collector, you could at least physically have them both mounted in your header. In my case, I have no choice but to swap them out.

Jeff
'09 FLTR/120R/'91 XL1250 street tracker project/'07 DR-Z400S

akjeff

Quote from: mayor on October 28, 2011, 09:22:01 PM
Quote from: akjeff on October 28, 2011, 09:06:08 PM
Seems to be a rivalry of sorts as far as TTS vs PV vs TM etc.....
don't read too much into that....there's some of us here that are dual sport players.    I think the discusions regarding comparing benefits can sometimes be seen as downtalking the other side, but most of the time it's not meant in malice.

Understood.

Quote from: akjeff on October 28, 2011, 09:06:08 PM
I'm just not educated enough to really give a rip one way or another. I already had a PC-V w/AT-100 in my bike, so when I decided to give a flash tuner a try, I went with the PV, and kept the AT-100. Definitely enjoying the education in tuning my bike. Perhaps if I were more advanced, I'd prefer the TTS. Don't know. The PV works fine for me, and I'm learning a lot.
From what I've been reading, you have a good system....so you should have no regrets.

Thanks. Definitely no regrets. I'm having a blast with it!
'09 FLTR/120R/'91 XL1250 street tracker project/'07 DR-Z400S

Sporty 48

#48
Some intellectual types can be rather intimidating, that they do not understand why you do not understand their superior logic.
No malice at all, actually very stimulating, have gained a lot more respect for the posters here.
But that is why we are here, to learn.

Yes the slower wide bands confuse me a bit. Changing them out is a pain, for just how much gain?

As far as I am concerned TTS with MegaLogViewer HD is my favorite, simple, like me.
A Sportster, Bird-dogs and an old Airstream, How Sweet It Is.

mayor

Quote from: Sporty 48 on October 29, 2011, 09:02:34 AM
Yes the slower wide bands confuse me a bit. Changing them out is a pain, for just how much gain?
that's the point I was trying to make.  Not that I don't like the wide bands, but the fact that making the switch from the narrow bands in your case is not likely going to give you much of a measurable difference....but the mind can easily play tricks on a fellow so seat of pants might try to tell otherwise. 
warning, this poster suffers from bizarre delusions