Charge Dilution and PV

[UltraNutZ]

This is directly from one of their engineers at DynoJet.  Haven't seen this posted anywhere (I've been looking for 3+ days) so figured I would share.

This is in response to my questions about EGR/CDE changes to their tech support people.



In regards to the CDE (or EGR effect), there's no doubt that depending on the combination of parts, like exhaust, but more so cam shaft design has an effect on the "air and fuel charge" in the engine.. The air mass and fuel mass that should be occupying a certain percent of the engine volume is actually being displaced by EGR to some extent, and the ECM needs to know about this "charge dilution". Adjusting the CDE is tedious and time consuming, but it seems to help with transient fueling and leads to better response in those areas it affects.....which is below 60 Kpa.



We don't have any new tools or information on the "Charge Dilution Effect" / EGR effect at this time.  I hope to have some of the logic and math involved explained to me (from our engineers) in the very near future (See below).  With a better understanding of the underlying strategy, I believe we'll be able to use this calibration item more effectively to level out / smooth the VE surface below 60kpa.



Like I said, it's tedious and time consuming.  If you adjust the CDE, then you need to go and re-tune the VE values below 60kpa.  If you just tune the VE in the first place, and then manually fill-in / blend various areas, I think that's OK.....although a calibration engineer may disagree.  This gets the job done and taking the time to adjust the CDE *may* lead to some perceptible change in rider feel (ie. potentially a touch more torque), but it's not a difference that's easily identified (without a dyno and various instrumentation)..



Engineering notes:

Values in the CDE functions:

0 = 0%

256 = approx 2%



Anyway, very roughly, if you were at 50KPA and the table was set to 2%, then it would assume (60-50)*2%=20% of the charge was from EGR.   



So, I'm not an engineer or an expert, but here's my take on all of this.  Assume you tuned a bike with an aftermarket cam that had a fair bit of overlap, and the thus the potential to "dilute" your intake charge with EGR at low loads, for instance less than 60 KPA. OK, so you tune the bike using stock values that were derived from an OEM calibration engineer for the stock cam, and the you notice, "wow, my VE surface below 60 KPA looks a little choppy".  You want to "knock down" or "fill in" some of the high and low spots, so you increase or decrease the values in the CDE tables accordingly.



Picture, this......the throttle is partially closed, vacuum is relative high and KPA / MAP load is relatively low (below 60 KPA).  EGR present in the combustion chamber results in a richer AFR without the ECM injecting more fuel.  How?...well, the EGR is displacing oxygen and thus with the same amount of fuel delivered by the ECM, the resultant AFR is richer.  You could also look at this "if EGR is present in some appreciable amount, then the ECM needs to make adjustments, because at this time the engine's volume or size is "smaller".  To qualify "smaller" you must look at the equation to determine the VE of an internal combustion engine, and after all the math you end up with an "injection time requirement to achieve a desired AFR".  Again, if the cylinder has some amount of EGR in it, then it will run richer with all other things the same, so the calculation I just mentioned results in error.  We need a way to adjust this, and that's what CDE does.  A Harley doesn't have an EGR valve to control and if it did, the ECM would know it's position / relative flow and make adjustments to the calibration.  Changing the amount of EGR that gets into the cylinders by way of a cam change (regardless if you have an EGR valve), we can use the CDE tables as sort of an "EGR position / relative flow" in regards to how the ECM compensates for this condition.

[Karl H.]

If CDE/EGR leads to a richer mixture, why the hell don't the O2 sensors recognize and take care of that? Why is a correction table needed?

Why is the desription of CDE in WinPV different from what I read here?

Lots of questions...

Karl

[rageglide]

What Karl said.

Closed loop would adapt to meet the target AFR. 

My guess is that CDE is more effective when running Open loop because there's no feedback loop to adapt out the richness.

The "EGR" comments don't make sense because EGR is a totally different beast which comes into play above idle, reducing combustion temps and NOx.

[HD/Wrench]

As well  factor such as IVO IVC will effect this .. Look for the VE table to have some what of a flat area from 50-80 KPA if that is showing up then you are on the right track.. Use of the cam cruncher program will help with what you are dealing with as well. 

[1FSTRK]

If CDE/EGR leads to a richer mixture, why the hell don't the O2 sensors recognize and take care of that? Why is a correction table needed?

Why is the desription of CDE in WinPV different from what I read here?

Lots of questions...

Karl

The O2s detect oxygen level, they do not detect EGR or fuel.

[joe_lyons]

 the charge dilution effect or exhaust gas recirculation is just another calculation in the calibration . The o2 sensor will read whatever it reads but to help calculate the volumetric efficiency it will look at this table to help with its calculations.  All of the calibration are a little different along with the build itself but roughly a 10 percent change in the cde table will equate to a 10 percent change in the ve table but not always

[Frédéric CM]

is there any news about the CDE tuning ?

[joe_lyons]

"When adjusting the EGR table/s it will vary from bike to bike, build to build. As a general rule of thumb if you want to reduce the VE values in the lower RPM range (~0 - 2000) you would double the amount you want to drop in the EGR table. So if you wanted to drop the VE by 10% you would drop the EGR table 20%. In the mid RPM range (~2000 - 4000) it changes to triple, 10% VE needs 30% EGR change. In higher RPM areas it takes even more, 10% VE needs 40% EGR change."

I use this now and it works ok.

[Frédéric CM]

can't we use the CDE to "adjust" the close throttle MAP reading ?

[ben31]

It's an other way to tune the CDE as any CDE value change impact VE but also closed MAP value.

I'm also wondering which of
these methods is the more efficient.

But the point is: how can I find the good target values for closed throttle MAP ?

Envoyé de mon HTC One en utilisant Tapatalk

[joe_lyons]

Idle map should be somewhere in the 30-low 40 range

[ben31]

Yes but what about other rpm

Envoyé de mon HTC One en utilisant Tapatalk

[joe_lyons]

can't we use the CDE to "adjust" the close throttle MAP reading ?

There are other settings to help with the map reading at idle.  Let dynojet know what cams you have and they can make the changes.  It's just like the cam tune tables in TTS but called map tooth read in PV.

[HD/Wrench]

cam choice will effect that as well t/b plenum volume. my 124 with the 640 and 66 t/b will idle at 42 on avg at 550 feet

[joe_lyons]

Another setting that I set every single time that I tune a power vision is the map load bias table. This is essentially calibrating your map sensor to show and match what your ambient pressure is. The way to set this is to figure out exactly what your ambient pressure is for the time and day you go to make a recording, then go record a wide open throttle pull from 1500 RPM up to 6,000, then go alter the table to match what the reading should be.  (Changes are made in .01 Increments). Example - at 3000 rpm I recorded a map reading of 100kpa but I know my pressure at that time was 98 kpa so I go to the table and lower the value at 3000rpm by .02 to achieve a reading next time of 98 kpa.

[Frédéric CM]

IVC IVO is good, map load normalization is tuned (oscilliating from 0.95(@4000) to 1.05 (@6500)). I'm just trying to fine tune my bike and looking for a way to tune CDE.
Btw, tuning MAP load affect VE in what proportion ?

[joe_lyons]

IVC IVO is good, map load normalization is tuned (oscilliating from 0.95(@4000) to 1.05 (@6500)). I'm just trying to fine tune my bike and looking for a way to tune CDE.
Btw, tuning MAP load affect VE in what proportion ?

What are you asking on that last sentence?

[Frédéric CM]

sorry my English is not so good...

When you change the MAP load from 1.00 to 0.98, how il it affect the VE ?

I'm trying to tune the CDE to see how it affect my MAP reading at idle (42kpa), wich a little high isnt it ?
Or maybe it is caused by an incorrect IVC/IVO settings (30/8) for the 57H ?

Thanks

[joe_lyons]

What is your map load value at 1000 rpm?  42 is ok also but 35ish sounds more like it. 

You try to keep the map load reading of 1 at idle. 

IVO and IVC will not affect WOT.  Changing from a value of 1 to .98  should lower the WOT map value by 2 kpa (100->98).

Lower your IVC number and see what your idle map does. 

[Sunny Jim]

So Joe, chiming here, I read my map load normalisation which I understand to be similar to bias global. At 1000 rpm my ratio is 1.02 through to 2000 rpm. I have been trying to correct a rough idle issue on my 120r/ 660sm etc. I have auto tuned it several times with adaptive switched off and I have attempted to set the target afr higher and higher but I still get a richened fuel table at idle. I attempted to drop some points out of my warm up enrichment but I still see this anomaly with the rough idle.  My map is 35- 40 Kpa at idle( 1016 rpm. ) any thoughts?

[Frédéric CM]

What is your map load value at 1000 rpm?  42 is ok also but 35ish sounds more like it. 

You try to keep the map load reading of 1 at idle. 

IVO and IVC will not affect WOT.  Changing from a value of 1 to .98  should lower the WOT map value by 2 kpa (100->98).

Lower your IVC number and see what your idle map does.

This is my current Map Load table, wich achieve a nearly straight MAP at WOT accross the rpms range (corrected for barometric/elevation). I think i'm right here...
1000   1,00
1500   1,00
2000   1,00
2500   1,00
3000   0,98
3500   0,96
4000   0,95
4500   0,96
5000   0,97
5500   0,98
6000   1,02
6500   1,05
7000   1,00
7500   1,00
8000   1,00
8500   1,00
9000   1,00

Do you think the IVC number is incorrect for this cam ? If the IVC/IVO are good for this cam and work for everyone but me, then the problem may be elsewhere, like an intake leak ?

[hdmanillac]

 

TTS VTune 3 offers a CDE calculation algorithm for a while now . Why Dynojet is still not able to offer the same with it's PV ?

[HD/Wrench]

TTS VTune 3 offers a CDE calculation algorithm for a while now . Why Dynojet is still not able to offer the same with it's PV ?

The Vtune 3 does a fantastic job on EGR and timing as well .

[Gordon61]

Sorry to chime in but I've struggled with this for two years now!

I asked Dynojet again the other week about CDE tuning, because I think second to getting your IVO set correctly, it is a significant part of getting idle up to 2000 rpm (i.e. running around town) to run smooth rather than stuttering, surging, and jumping around like a lot of people get after putting cams in and running the so called auto tune bit of whatever little box they have.

Anyway, I got the very same answer as Ultra got two years ago! so I still don't think DJ know

Remember that PV users do not have IVO/IVC settings available in the WinPV software so we have to ask DJ or FM to set them for us but getting that right improves slow running hugely!! or it did for me anyway.

The Next thing I found was that CDE made a difference as well ...but, and to second what Frederic was asking ...we know WHAT it does ...but where is the how much to do it and where and to what end??  Either nobody knows (except Steve at TTS) or nobody is telling 

Regarding MAP - the MAP reading on a Power Vision is a calculation ...NOT a reading off the sensor (try logging MAP Value vs MAP Sensor Voltage  ) ...and... CDE tables are part of that calculation.

MAP at idle 40 - Increase CDE tables 0-2000 by 30% or so and (mine anyway) MAP at idle drops to 30  ...hopefully this is just a PV foible and the ECU is reading the voltage off the sensor directly but then again ...why? and what difference does it make? and what should it read?

With hindsight, I do wish I'd bought a TTS but I already binned an FP3 for the PV and I can't afford to buy a third!! and according to the blurb, they are all supposed to be diy tuners

(rant over  )

[joe_lyons]

CDE helps with valleys and peaks.  Also with abrupt percentage changes in VE from one cell to another vertically.

What did your VE numbers do when you lowered the CDE 30%?  I don't use it just to change MAP reading.

[joe_lyons]

So Joe, chiming here, I read my map load normalisation which I understand to be similar to bias global. At 1000 rpm my ratio is 1.02 through to 2000 rpm. I have been trying to correct a rough idle issue on my 120r/ 660sm etc. I have auto tuned it several times with adaptive switched off and I have attempted to set the target afr higher and higher but I still get a richened fuel table at idle. I attempted to drop some points out of my warm up enrichment but I still see this anomaly with the rough idle.  My map is 35- 40 Kpa at idle( 1016 rpm. ) any thoughts?

Idle is a rough spot for alot of auto tuners.  Try lowering your CDE by 10% and see how it does.  There is also a feature of setting min map closed loop works.  Setting that to something like 39 might help.  There is also a closed loop learn rate, TT is set to 2 from the normal 1.5 but setting it to something like 1.8 i have found to help slow things down at idle so it's not so back and forth.

[joe_lyons]

What is your map load value at 1000 rpm?  42 is ok also but 35ish sounds more like it. 

You try to keep the map load reading of 1 at idle. 

IVO and IVC will not affect WOT.  Changing from a value of 1 to .98  should lower the WOT map value by 2 kpa (100->98).

Lower your IVC number and see what your idle map does.

This is my current Map Load table, wich achieve a nearly straight MAP at WOT accross the rpms range (corrected for barometric/elevation). I think i'm right here...
10001,00
15001,00
20001,00
25001,00
30000,98
35000,96
40000,95
45000,96
50000,97
55000,98
60001,02
65001,05
70001,00
75001,00
80001,00
85001,00
90001,00

Do you think the IVC number is incorrect for this cam ? If the IVC/IVO are good for this cam and work for everyone but me, then the problem may be elsewhere, like an intake leak ?

Every motor is a bit different.

[Frédéric CM]

got my IVC set to 29 by Dynojet, will try it
Jamie went the other way and set the IVO to 7... what difference can i expect between both ? and how do you calculate IVO/IVC ?

Thanks !

[Sunny Jim]

So Joe, chiming here, I read my map load normalisation which I understand to be similar to bias global. At 1000 rpm my ratio is 1.02 through to 2000 rpm. I have been trying to correct a rough idle issue on my 120r/ 660sm etc. I have auto tuned it several times with adaptive switched off and I have attempted to set the target afr higher and higher but I still get a richened fuel table at idle. I attempted to drop some points out of my warm up enrichment but I still see this anomaly with the rough idle.  My map is 35- 40 Kpa at idle( 1016 rpm. ) any thoughts?

Idle is a rough spot for alot of auto tuners.  Try lowering your CDE by 10% and see how it does.  There is also a feature of setting min map closed loop works.  Setting that to something like 39 might help.  There is also a closed loop learn rate, TT is set to 2 from the normal 1.5 but setting it to something like 1.8 i have found to help slow things down at idle so it's not so back and forth.

So Joe, chiming here, I read my map load normalisation which I understand to be similar to bias global. At 1000 rpm my ratio is 1.02 through to 2000 rpm. I have been trying to correct a rough idle issue on my 120r/ 660sm etc. I have auto tuned it several times with adaptive switched off and I have attempted to set the target afr higher and higher but I still get a richened fuel table at idle. I attempted to drop some points out of my warm up enrichment but I still see this anomaly with the rough idle.  My map is 35- 40 Kpa at idle( 1016 rpm. ) any thoughts?

Idle is a rough spot for alot of auto tuners.  Try lowering your CDE by 10% and see how it does.  There is also a feature of setting min map closed loop works.  Setting that to something like 39 might help.  There is also a closed loop learn rate, TT is set to 2 from the normal 1.5 but setting it to something like 1.8 i have found to help slow things down at idle so it's not so back and forth.

[Gordon61]

CDE helps with valleys and peaks.  Also with abrupt percentage changes in VE from one cell to another vertically.

What did your VE numbers do when you lowered the CDE 30%?  I don't use it just to change MAP reading.

Thanks Joe, I've heard that one before and that was my original thinking.
When I put the 57H into my 2014 the VE tables dropped dramatically in the 0% TPS column up to about 2250 rpm and resulted in a steep climb from 0 to 7%.  This gave some steps between adjacent cells anywhere from 5 to 10 of a difference in that depression ...I thought this was what was making the bike jumpy at those low revs.

Without knowing what I was doing as such I used the CDE tables from the 2015 103 HO maps which have higher CDE values ...this raised the VE in that area and the VE tables looked better and the bike seemed to run smoother.  This was when I noticed that the MAP reading had changed from 40 to 30.

However, I'm now trying lower CDE values again, but the front and rear are more similar compared to 2014 stock...
The horrible dip at the 0/0 RPM/TPS corner of the VE tables is back (numbers down as low as 50 with the hills in the rest of the table maxing out about the 122 mark.  The MAP at idle is back up at 40.  BUT... it is running even smoother (I think) than I had with the CDE higher.

It's just all rather horribly confusing 

A bit of discussion elsewhere and I'm wondering if the PV is doing something different with CDE and MAP than the TTS for example.  In the PV it almost looks as if the CDE tables are another bias table for the MAP sensor, that you can change the values and see the MAP reading change??

Just to explain that: No matter what I set the CDE tables to high or low, to give a MAP at idle either 40 or 30 - the PV MAP Sensor Voltage is pretty much the same regardless.  It swings around a bit, as you might expect depending upon sample rate and when the reading is taken within the 4-stroke x 2 cylinders cycle.  But, what remains constant is the regularly lowest voltage on any of the log traces is always 1.6 volts ...according to a delphi MAP sensor spec sheet, I think 1.6 volts equates to somewhere in the high 30s ...see what I'm getting at??

[Frédéric CM]

how was the MAP with modified IVC/IVO and stock 2014 CDE ?

[Gordon61]

how was the MAP with modified IVC/IVO and stock 2014 CDE ?

If you mean my experience - the map I started with I got from someone else running a 57H and came from Dynojet.  If I remember rightly I think the MAP at idle was about 43 or so (I'm pretty close to sea level by the way). 

I just struggled to get it dialled in, autotune would take the numbers one way, then the next day autotune would take them the other way, and low speed running was really jumpy at anything under 2K.  That seemed awfully poor for a reasonably mild cam and I got to wondering if the MAP was being read from the sensor at the wrong time (which is where your Intake valve opening and closing settings come in).

Emailed Dynojet and explained and they sent me a new map. They had changed something because the MAP at idle came down to 38-40 or so and the bike dialled in much better and was reasonably smooth if you kept it above 16/1700 or so.  Note the CDE tables were still the same as stock for the 2014 I had.

I've been learning, testing, and tweaking CDE since then and it will now run reasonably well down to about 1400 or so in 3rd, anything less that that and it gets a bit too jumpy and you have to feather the clutch.  My idle is still a tiny bit jumpy compared to a couple of other bikes I was listening to at the dealers.

If I knew a bit more, I think I could get it better still ...didn't really want to have to buy a TTS or travel across the country to get a dyno tune tho, but it may come to that 

[Frédéric CM]

From PVtech @ Dynojet :
"My Harley expert looked at your situation and his comments were to have the IVC set at 30...  And, he said that changing the IVO from an 8 will only make things worse.  He also wanted me to assure you that a MAP reading of 42 is NOT all that high...  It's kind of borderline.  He said that if you live near sea level, it is not uncommon to see a MAP reading like that."

I did try with the IVC set to 29 instead of 30, idle only went down about 2kpa but idle quality was not as good as previously...
The MAP in your topic on the other forum have IVC/IVO set to 29/7. I can email you the map I have with 30/8, paste your VEs and CDEs/map load and give it a try

What does the CDE of HO cams look likes ?

[hdmanillac]

In every calibration file you have a hidden table called "map default table". I think it is used when the MAP sensor failed.

I suggest you to ask Dynojet to send you a copy of this table.

Then do some logs with a lot of decelerations and compare the MAP you obtain during decelerations with the map default table (columns 3, 4, 5% TP).

Adjust CDE to get map decel curve corresponding to map default table.

After that you will get a smoother bike, stable calibration and iddle and a good MPG (if your afr table is not to rich).

[Frédéric CM]

email sent

[Gordon61]

Never heard of that one, thanks for the new info hdmanillac

email sent

Let me know what you get pleeeeeassse 

You mentioned tooth numbers for IVO and IVC ...can you see/change these or is this just what Dynojet are telling you?

I just got a map and have no idea what my numbers ore set at ...I did wonder about asking to try one either side of what I have but never got around to it.

cheers

[Frédéric CM]

Nope I ask the PVtech to know the settings... you should try emailing him

[Gordon61]

Nope I ask the PVtech to know the settings... you should try emailing him

Knowing what the number was, wasn't any use if I couldn't see or change it so I never bothered to ask, but some of the pros do have the software ...was why I wondered if you had it. 
No doubt once DJ work out how to wrap it all up for us DIY types there will be an update to WinPV or something.

The CDE for the 103 HO 2016's (think I said 2015 earlier sorry) is
Front
140
140
140
121
104
92
79
73
67
61
51
43
35
31
31
31
31

Rear
115
115
115
105
97
90
81
72
61
48
36
33
31
31
31
31
31

[Frédéric CM]

If a pro is willing to share the super-version of the software, I'm here !!

This CDE is what i found on a 2016 softail (DJ tunedb), but is different than a 2016 touring... both sahre the HO cams ?

[Gordon61]

I've looked at so many I'm losing the will to live.  My guess would be significantly different exhaust designs between the two platforms, hence different reversion characteristics

[Sunny Jim]

In my case, I feel reversion is a player in this. Whilst my overlap is only around 38, I do have 660 lift. I figure the way these Vtwins work and the inlet manifold design, I probably have a fair bit ov movement from one cylinder to the other. Surely this would affect idle. No matter what I do - A/Ts, Ve adjustments, new seals on manifold etc , I still have slightly richer event on the rear cylinder and via my data logs- MLV , I have a rougher idle on the rear than the front.

[Frédéric CM]

Attached is the Map default table.
At 0% TP, my MAP is far from this
At 100% my MAP isn't far from this, before a flattened the "wave" with the Map Load Normalisation

[Gordon61]

In every calibration file you have a hidden table called "map default table". I think it is used when the MAP sensor failed.

I got to thinking about this.
If this is a default, backup table in the event of something going wrong ...i.e. a failed MAP sensor, I would have to presume that it was based on the original engine characteristics, no?

If you change exhausts and especially cams, you can dramatically alter the characteristics of the engine, event timing, reversion, flow dynamics etc  This is why we need to re-tune the ECU.

In simple terms it is how much air and how much fuel - surely the MAP sensor voltage (ok with a sensor bias table) is what should be used in the fuel calculation?

So, in the first place, why are we messing around with a calculated MAP value reading? What is the PV doing with that number?

Fiddling with a table (CDE) to make the MAP reading say something other than what the actual pressure is doesn't seem to make sense

And if there are hidden tables designed for limp mode get you home stuff, presumably in an ideal world THEY would need to be changed to reflect the new engine characteristics, rather than the other way around??

Just thinking aloud

[ben31]

MAP value does not reflect exactly engine characteristics. It is a physical/real measure and you need a sensor to get it.

You can guess an average value, using a table, but with the same bike, in two places with different elevation, at the same TP/RPM you won't have the same MAP.
Or even, in your place when atmospheric pressure changes...

[Gordon61]

Just for info, I was using the following CDE tables which on my bike with a 57H and Pro Pipe 2-1, and this gave a MAP at idle of about 31

Front, 153, 153, 150, 133, 114, 96, 79, 73, 67, 61, 51, 43, 35, 31, 31, 31, 31
Rear, 110, 110, 109, 105, 97, 90, 81, 72, 61, 48, 36, 33, 31, 31, 31, 31, 31

[Gordon61]

MAP value does not reflect exactly engine characteristics. It is a physical/real measure and you need a sensor to get it.

You can guess an average value, using a table, but with the same bike, in two places with different elevation, at the same TP/RPM you won't have the same MAP.
Or even, in your place when atmospheric pressure changes...

Exactly what I was getting at ...there IS a sensor so why is the PV calculating a different MAP value to what the sensor is detecting ...at different engine characteristics, and altitude and different weather on different days

[Frédéric CM]

Just for info, I was using the following CDE tables which on my bike with a 57H and Pro Pipe 2-1, and this gave a MAP at idle of about 31

Front, 153, 153, 150, 133, 114, 96, 79, 73, 67, 61, 51, 43, 35, 31, 31, 31, 31
Rear, 110, 110, 109, 105, 97, 90, 81, 72, 61, 48, 36, 33, 31, 31, 31, 31, 31

With your tune that has IVC/IVO modified by Dynojet (12D103_57H_ProPipeQuiiet) or not ?
I'll give a try to 2016 softail HO CDE table to see what happen to the idle kpa...

Just to remember, why are we targeting 35kpa at idle ?

[ben31]

...there IS a sensor so why is the PV calculating a different MAP value to what the sensor is detecting ...

Maybe I'm wrong, but here's how I think it works:

The MAP value is used to calculate how much air is flowing into the engine.
The MAP SENSOR reads the real MAP value

BUT the air volume and the MAP reading are biased due to a reversion effect.

The CDE table estimates this bias amount
Using the CDE you calculate the MAP without the reversion disturbance
With this calculated MAP, you can calculate the VE taking in account only useful fresh air

[Sunny Jim]

Joe, you mentioned some possible changes to CDE. You a
Do mentioned altering the parameters of closed loop regarding min closed loop works and learn rate.
Can you guide me through the PV and target tune as to where these alterations can be made please?

[joe_lyons]

MAP value does not reflect exactly engine characteristics. It is a physical/real measure and you need a sensor to get it.

You can guess an average value, using a table, but with the same bike, in two places with different elevation, at the same TP/RPM you won't have the same MAP.
Or even, in your place when atmospheric pressure changes...

Exactly what I was getting at ...there IS a sensor so why is the PV calculating a different MAP value to what the sensor is detecting ...at different engine characteristics, and altitude and different weather on different days

The ecm does this because with a very short intake track and an odd fire the MAP signal goes crazy up and down.  The MAP tooth read/poll close and open tell the ecm exactly when to look at the map sensor.  This is usually based off of the cam timing events.  The MAP load normalisation table is in essence a calibration bias table to make sure the MAP sensor is on the right track. 

[Gordon61]

I think you are right but I got stuck at

MAP Manifold Absolute Pressure (kpa) = What the voltage from the "MAP" sensor says +- a bias table to cover the accuracy of the sensor.  MAP (kpa) on other tuners, apparently, is what the sensor actually sees.

Internal calculations for the effective air volume are what the ECU does, I don't see why DJ are messing with the MAP (kpa) value.  By all means create another signal but call it Effective MAP or Calculated airflow but anything but MAP, because MAP it aint!

[Gordon61]

The ecm does this because with a very short intake track and an odd fire the MAP signal goes crazy up and down.  The MAP tooth read/poll close and open tell the ecm exactly when to look at the map sensor.  This is usually based off of the cam timing events.  The MAP load normalisation table is in essence a calibration bias table to make sure the MAP sensor is on the right track.

Yea I've logged a whole pile of sensor voltage vs MAP (kpa) and I can kind of see what is going on there ...I suspect the PV MAP Voltage signal that goes into the log is not in sync with the cam timing events. But the ECU is quick enough to read the sensor at the right time so at least it knows what it is doing.

(in the logs; while the MAP voltage does wobble around all over the place there is a consistent minimum value in a trace of that log.  That typical minimum value is around the 1.6 mark at idle - so that, I think, is the maximum suck over the cycle, so should correspond to the cam timing event ...1.6v I think is around the 38kpa mark??)

[Frédéric CM]

guess we will never how to tune the cde table...

didn't a cam with a different overlap value should change the idling kpa ?

[Gordon61]

Well when I put new cams in, it did change so that has to be a yes.

Anything that affects airflow and efficiency is going to affect when and how much air the engine wants.  The MAP sensor is what is measuring how much suck there is and when so that whole MAP vs RPM table you saw is likely to be different if the characteristics of the engine are changed

...or we wouldn't be needing to re-tune, would we.  How to re-tune, properly, is the trick I don't seem to have a full grasp of.  This is not as easy as the adverts make out it is ...at least not past a stage 1 anyway.

[Gordon61]

Mind you, I've just read another thread about one of the supposed pro's not doing a good job either so if they can struggle what chance do we have 

[Sunny Jim]

Don't give up Gordon! I keep working my way through the map and all offerings of PV and target tune . Self taught with HTT support. My Intake reversion( pulsing) was more apparent when I went to a big bore free flowing 2-1 exhaust. I ended up scaling to 158 cubic in. Awsome power but still the ugly idle.  Next step for me is a cam change.
Just sayin.

[Sunny Jim]

Just for info, I was using the following CDE tables which on my bike with a 57H and Pro Pipe 2-1, and this gave a MAP at idle of about 31

Front, 153, 153, 150, 133, 114, 96, 79, 73, 67, 61, 51, 43, 35, 31, 31, 31, 31
Rear, 110, 110, 109, 105, 97, 90, 81, 72, 61, 48, 36, 33, 31, 31, 31, 31, 31

With your tune that has IVC/IVO modified by Dynojet (12D103_57H_ProPipeQuiiet) or not ?
I'll give a try to 2016 softail HO CDE table to see what happen to the idle kpa...

Just to remember, why are we targeting 35kpa at idle ?

Can you explain how this is done?

[rbabos]

guess we will never how to tune the cde table...

didn't a cam with a different overlap value should change the idling kpa ?

When all else fails and no actual reference where to adjust as in the PV, use the ve table as a guideline. Areas too high and too low for what should be a smoother transition, hit those kpa and rpm areas with appropriate CDE corrections and reset the ve tables with a few more tuning runs.
It is a trial and error process sometimes, and does take some time.
Ron

[remington007]

Right or Wrong i generally try to adjust the CDE tables around idle area to get my VE's in the 70 range. Especially on V&H power duals with cams. 
My personal 09 FL idled like crap and low speed sucked. The VE's were in the 50 to 60 range on the front cyclinder. I upped the CDE's in that area to raise the VE's. Straightened out my running issues.

[rbabos]

Right or Wrong i generally try to adjust the CDE tables around idle area to get my VE's in the 70 range. Especially on V&H power duals with cams. 
My personal 09 FL idled like crap and low speed sucked. The VE's were in the 50 to 60 range on the front cyclinder. I upped the CDE's in that area to raise the VE's. Straightened out my running issues.

I went the other way. Light load area ve's only were too high in my tune. The rest looked good. Dropped CDE tables in the light load areas, more so in the front which dropped the ve in that area for a better visual appearance. Most stable tune I've had so far. I was skeptical about the whole CDE deal early on but it does help. It's still a black art, trial and error thing with PV. Joe's reference for amount of adjustments are close to what I found as well.
Ron

[Gordon61]

remington007 / rbabos

That was kind of where I got to as well.  I had worked out what changing CDE actually did to the VE tables and was trying to get them as smooth as possible.  Just as an example, here are three Front VE tables from my maps

One uses the stock CDE tables and puts the low area of the table down to about 58 with some cell to cell steps of up to 11

One of my other configs has higher CDE numbers that raise the low area to about 72 and keep the step changes down to about 4 or 5.  And the other one generally lowers the CDE numbers past 1000rpm which drops the VE down to as low as 48 and with step changes anything up to 15 or so

I like the idea of the VE being around the 70/80 front/rear but I can't find a real answer to they should be.  A 57H is a reasonably mild cam for example so the idea that it would drop the volumetric efficiency of the pump down to 50% doesn't seem to be right in my head ...now a more radical race cam, fair enough.  The fact that the PV reports a calculation partly based on the CDE tables instead of the measured MAP also leave you wondering what that should be.

All 3 ride reasonably well with the Stock CDE probably a touch more jumpy low down than the other two.  So, 3 pictures, who thinks which is right.

[Gordon61]

^^ Sunny Jim

I'm not giving up like a lot of us I suppose, I'm just trying to learn about each bit as I go through the various tables.  My build has a new cam, ported heads and raised compression and for best/optimal/whatever tune ...I do not believe you simply run the so called "auto tune" built into these boxes, regardless of what the suppliers would have you believe.

Not sure what you were wanting explained but what I did was to edit the default CDE tables with those numbers I gave as being my example. I then re-tuned the VE tables (as you have to if you change the CDE tables).  Logging MAP value on the PV showed that the MAP at idle numbers dropped from 38-40 down to 30-32

BTW, so the PV has scaled your motor with a high flow air filter and bigger exhaust up to 158ci ...that seems awfully high, what is the actual ci [I'm also curious as to why the PV scales configs so readily yet if you look at one of the other tuners maps there is no scaling in sight?!?]

[rbabos]

^^ Sunny Jim

I'm not giving up like a lot of us I suppose, I'm just trying to learn about each bit as I go through the various tables.  My build has a new cam, ported heads and raised compression and for best/optimal/whatever tune ...I do not believe you simply run the so called "auto tune" built into these boxes, regardless of what the suppliers would have you believe.

Not sure what you were wanting explained but what I did was to edit the default CDE tables with those numbers I gave as being my example. I then re-tuned the VE tables (as you have to if you change the CDE tables).  Logging MAP value on the PV showed that the MAP at idle numbers dropped from 38-40 down to 30-32

BTW, so the PV has scaled your motor with a high flow air filter and bigger exhaust up to 158ci ...that seems awfully high, what is the actual ci [I'm also curious as to why the PV scales configs so readily yet if you look at one of the other tuners maps there is no scaling in sight?!?]

The problem with the scaling option (a flaw) is if there are cells that are 125-127, even in an area that cannot be hit it during autotuning it will keep scaling until the cows come home. I'd personally remove all base cal cells with 127 and change them to 120 before starting runs, then go out and tune. If you actually do acquire those high cells from the autotune, then scaling is in order, but only then. I don't know why this isn't made known as it bites a lot of people in the ass with ridiculously high CI ,that really isn't needed and complicates the tune process.
Ron

[Sunny Jim]

Gordon, my CI is 120.

[Sunny Jim]

I have several maps for my 120 CI. When I view them I find it remarkable the variations in these maps. The CDE on several maps  are intriguing Some maps have the CDE on both cylinders virtually equal. others have the front cylinder substantially higher in the lower rev range(idle) compared to the rear, but slightly less than the rear in the higher rev range . Now I have humbly received these calibrations from fellas clearly more informed than me, and I am sure these guys know their craft, but I find it confusing that 2,3,4 maps for the same bike can be so different.
Just sayin!

[Frédéric CM]

ssooo what's new folks ?

[Gordon61]

I've come to the conclusion there is no "definitive right" answer.  A bit like timing, lol

my vote goes with remington007 and rabbos and to see if you can get the idle/low area around 70/80 front/rear and the 1125-1750 and 0-7% TPS as smooth as reasonably possible.  The other good indicator seems to be the 50-70 kpa cells being reasonably smooth (mine for example seem to be within a couple of points of VE).

[HD/Wrench]

It really is about getting them smooth and no there is no right or wrong its based on that " build" I had a stock 110 I was tuning it it idled at 39-40 KPS I played around to get it lower , nope that where that engine wanted to be and getting the idle KPA down to me is not the biggest deal ..  Smooth from 35-65 KPA is the goal by 70 + thats a whole different area and timing started to get rolled down inthat area as well . so it becomes then playing with timing..
DOnt give up its yours and play with it.. But end of the day its still a HD engine and by design is well not the best and you can only do so much.

[Gordon61]

Thanks GMR, it's probably been said before and I think it's starting to sink in now but that is a good summary we can use

I hadn't realised about the timing affecting the higher load quite like that so good pointer as well, thanks

[joe_lyons]

Too rich or too lean at idle can have higher KPA also

[Gordon61]

Well if the PV would stick to showing us the actual sensor reading rather than some internal calculation we wouldn't be getting so confused 

A sensor IS a sensor after all 

[Onthefence]

Well if the PV would stick to showing us the actual sensor reading rather than some internal calculation we wouldn't be getting so confused 

A sensor IS a sensor after all 

Is the PV calculating the readings or the ecm?  I thought the items in the log were raw outputs from the ecm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gordon61]

Is the PV calculating the readings or the ecm?  I thought the items in the log were raw outputs from the ecm.

Good question, is it the ECU or does the PV program the ECU to do it, or there are more than one signal that does MAP (i.e. PV can log both MAP value and MAP sensor voltage) ...according to one of the other vendors their MAP value is what the sensor says it is (...which seems to make sense to me) and does not change with EGR.

but we have what we have so probably a bit academic, but it is really useful to know this stuff

[rbabos]

Is the PV calculating the readings or the ecm?  I thought the items in the log were raw outputs from the ecm.

Good question, is it the ECU or does the PV program the ECU to do it, or there are more than one signal that does MAP (i.e. PV can log both MAP value and MAP sensor voltage) ...according to one of the other vendors their MAP value is what the sensor says it is (...which seems to make sense to me) and does not change with EGR.

but we have what we have so probably a bit academic, but it is really useful to know this stuff

CDE tables directly effect afr to alter the VEs from their current state based on tables in the ECM. The altered calibration load sets this up.  I've not seen any difference in MAP readings before or after CDE table changes. Only time I see my MAP change on a daily basis is between cold oil and hot oil and it's corrisponding amount of drag per rpm.   My understanding is the calibration alters what the ECM reads in those areas for fueling once the ve is revised with further tuning runs. Smoothing the ve is also smoothing the afr as the side effect.
Ron

[Frédéric CM]

Changing the CDEs will affect MAP readings at closed thottle

[Onthefence]

Changing the CDEs will affect MAP readings at closed thottle

Do we have proper confirmation that dynojet is programming the ecm to handle map differently than the other flash based tuners. 

I am not sold that dynojet has it's own calculation. 

[Frédéric CM]

Do a log with closed throttle from 6000 to 1000rpms, and monitor the RPMS x TP X MAP (scatter plot or table generator)
Do the same with higher CDE and you will notice that the MAP will be lower

[joe_lyons]

The ecm calculates the map value based off the crank tooth it is told to do so.  It does a sample from tooth to tooth while the valve is open.   That is if the settings match the cam profile.

[Onthefence]

Do a log with closed throttle from 6000 to 1000rpms, and monitor the RPMS x TP X MAP (scatter plot or table generator)
Do the same with higher CDE and you will notice that the MAP will be lower

But does that equate to a dynojet only calculation? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Frédéric CM]

no, i guess it's the same for every tuners

Increasing the CDE will lower the MAP reading at the same rpms, and since MAP is used to determine VE, lowering the MAP raise the VE (as described in TTS guides)

Hope it make sense...

[Gordon61]

lowering the MAP raise the VE (as described in TTS guides)

??that's not what it says??
Raising/lowering EGR raises/lowers VE (in either VE MAP or VE TPS tables) up to 60 kpa.  The effect on VE is greater at lower MAP.

[joe_lyons]

Do a log with closed throttle from 6000 to 1000rpms, and monitor the RPMS x TP X MAP (scatter plot or table generator)
Do the same with higher CDE and you will notice that the MAP will be lower

But does that equate to a dynojet only calculation?

The power vision is just displaying the information that is given
The only field that is calculated by the power Vision itself is injector duty cycle if I can remember correctly

[Frédéric CM]

Just a quick questions to those who can edit the IVC IVO settings,
at what tooth do you set the IVC : the tooth before, after, or the closer ?

[hdmanillac]

I would say before opening for IVO and after closing for IVC.

[Frédéric CM]

What confuse me is this sentence in WinPV help :

MAP Tooth IVC (Front Cyl) This defines when the primary MAP reading is taken. This should be set to the crank tooth number near intake valve closing for the front cylinder.

[Fishonsc]

Do you only change the cde tables when you change cams. My 07 wide glide has stocks cams. My kpa at idle is around 35 but my VE's in the idle area are around 90. Should I be trying to get the VE's lower in the idle area of the VE's tables?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Frédéric CM]

You need to have the IVO/IVC settings edited by Dynojet according to your cam specs.

[Gordon61]

Do you only change the cde tables when you change cams. My 07 wide glide has stocks cams. My kpa at idle is around 35 but my VE's in the idle area are around 90. Should I be trying to get the VE's lower in the idle area of the VE's tables?

Stock cams, IVO/IVC settings are probably where they should be ...unless DJ have moved them for some reason, which I would have to wonder why they did that.

35KPA seems to be typical for stock

VE at 90 ?? ...Stock 2019 rear cylinder is 90 at idle so can't see that being a problem.

The best running I get is with nice smooth VE tables, and CDE helps get you that.  So depends what the rest of the table looks like.  Post a pic?? 

PS: Pertinent to your question, I have a 2-1 and notice changing CDE on the front cylinder can affect the VE table on the rear as well as the front ...so exhaust design I think has a bearing as well.  More so the CAM tho I think.

[Fishonsc]

Do you only change the cde tables when you change cams. My 07 wide glide has stocks cams. My kpa at idle is around 35 but my VE's in the idle area are around 90. Should I be trying to get the VE's lower in the idle area of the VE's tables?

Stock cams, IVO/IVC settings are probably where they should be ...unless DJ have moved them for some reason, which I would have to wonder why they did that.

35KPA seems to be typical for stock

VE at 90 ?? ...Stock 2019 rear cylinder is 90 at idle so can't see that being a problem.

The best running I get is with nice smooth VE tables, and CDE helps get you that.  So depends what the rest of the table looks like.  Post a pic?? 

PS: Pertinent to your question, I have a 2-1 and notice changing CDE on the front cylinder can affect the VE table on the rear as well as the front ...so exhaust design I think has a bearing as well.  More so the CAM tho I think.

Here is pics of the front and rear VE tables.





Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Gordon61]

You look to be around the 82/91 VE F/R which is pretty much stock tune.  Adding more cam seems to drop the numbers in that area and lift them further up but you've not done that so you are probably fine.

The VE tables don't look very smooth to me but I'm wondering if that is more getting good data and plenty of hits from an autotune rather than needing to look at CDE quite yet.

Have you changed the minimum MAP value in the Autotune settings to ignore anything lower than 35? ...I've seen some people suggest to do that, but I got MUCH better data leaving the settings at default.  I do as much decelerating as I do accelerating.

The other thing I've read is about the o2 sensor placement on some exhausts not being very good for getting good sample data.

How good was your last autotune - average change was ? maximum change was ? (I tuned mine until it was down to an average of 0~1% with a maximum change of 2% and that is trying really hard to get as many cells populated with more than 15 hits as possible)

Hopefully the Pro's can help further??

[Frédéric CM]

How do you guys determin the correct value for the IVC settings ? For example a cam with a closing at 29.4 : you round up/down to the closest value (29) or to the next full number (30) ?

[Gordon61]

smoke n mirrors ...and probably best as a separate discussion.

Short offering, TTS has an estimator and tools to find the right one, DJ are still to offer the users something useful but will change the setting for you if you give them the specs.

In reality, there is no cam sensor so the ECU is relying on the crank tooth sensor.  There are what, 32 teeth on the crank, which makes the resolution on IVO/IVC 11.25 degrees.  These settings equate to a tooth number NOT the actual cam degrees in the spec.

Then there is the question of when to measure, just before opening or just after, and is that actual opening or reaching 54 thou, which is often how the cams are spec'd ...but then not all cam manufacturers give true numbers apparently?

[Frédéric CM]

How do you guys determin the correct value for the IVC settings ? For example a cam with a closing at 29.4 : you round up/down to the closest value (29) or to the next full number (30) ?

Bump, I'm curious to see what you guys & tuners awnser to this question

[joe_lyons]

29

[Frédéric CM]

you take the closest number, right ?

I asked this because for this same cam (57H, sorry i only got this one on my bike lol), TTS estimator say 30 (next tooth) and DJ say 29.. (closest tooth)

Thanks Joe!

[Gordon61]

29

...but the TTS estimator suggests this is a definite setting No3, why do you think 29 Joe? counting degrees or experience with the 57H as the example?

[joe_lyons]

29

...but the TTS estimator suggests this is a definite setting No3, why do you think 29 Joe? counting degrees or experience with the 57H as the example?

Dynojet has a program called cam cruncher that shows you what crank tooth the cam starts opening and closing.  Just reading from that.

[Frédéric CM]

That's a point where TTS and DJ tells two different things : TTS say to use the next tooth whereas DJ tell to use the closest
In the case of the 57H, cam cruncher show 29.4 : TTS method would be 30, DJ method would be 29... Wich one is the correct ?

[HD/Wrench]

both its not going to make that much of a difference either way. Sorry but you guys are picking the fly "Potty mouth" out of the pepper.. Run the TTS program in data master with it running that is as close as you can get. A numbers game is just that where as running its based on what is really going on. But even then its not that big of a deal.. Think about how many great running bikes have been tuned before we had this option.

Cam specs vary a bit, chain slop , fitment of the crank sprocket. These are not indy engines . they are glorified tractor engines. VERY basic get it close with the tools at hand and go from there.. 

I get that some want to know but it not going to make any change you can feel seat of the pants.

[Gordon61]

with respect, I disagree.
My ride will pull quite happily from 1200 rpm, and no I don't know who started this rubbish about lugging but all it takes is a proper tune and down that low I can tell seat of the pants what tooth works better than the other.  It's about ride ability.

I have also read plenty about how poorly a lot of bikes run after so called "autotuning", including those that have come out of some dyno shops.

but fair enough, I'll leave it there.

[HD/Wrench]

I think you are missing the point. I am saying that 29 30 or close to that is the best you can do . tuning at lets say 29 vs 30 is not going to be a change you can feel.    Yes the systems have more tuning tools that allow a smoother blend on the ve tables better running bike . 

and I am not a fan of the auto tune myself.. Even with twins on bikes and you use the same map too many variables . SOme times they run well other times they are ... well running   

[Jamie Long]

I am saying that 29 30 or close to that is the best you can do . tuning at lets say 29 vs 30 is not going to be a change you can feel.

Steve is correct; one tooth either way on the IVO/IVC setting is not a smoking gun.

[Gordon61]

I am saying that 29 30 or close to that is the best you can do . tuning at lets say 29 vs 30 is not going to be a change you can feel.

Steve is correct; one tooth either way on the IVO/IVC setting is not a smoking gun.

Thanks Jamie/Steve I appreciate that. I ran two maps for a few weeks 7/29 and 7/30 and couldn't tell any difference so agreed on the IVC.  I did noticed that the IVC seemed to affect the IVO though, not sure if anyone else has seen that before.  These may be rubbish tests and data and possibly irrelevant but just in case anyone's interested

IVC=29            
IVO   5   6   7   8
MAP   32.3   33.2   35.4   38.9
VE-F   78   77.5   75   68
VE-R   93   90.5   84   76.5

IVC=30            
IVO   5   6   7   8
MAP   31.5   33.1   35.1   39.4
VE-F   71   71.5   67   61
VE-R   86   84   83   70.5

[misfitJason]

How are you accessing these hidden tables and furthermore how are you seeing what they are in your map?

[Coyote]

You need a license file to see those settings. IMO the desire to adjust this greatly out weighs the need.

[Mirrmu]

this is at idle? does in then impact as you go up in rpm

[Gordon61]

How are you accessing these hidden tables and furthermore how are you seeing what they are in your map?

TTS and FP3 allow changing of cam timing, I have an FP3 for the same bike.

IMO the desire to adjust this greatly out weighs the need.

Again with respect I disagree.  The original map I got from DJ was stock 8/30 and just didn't seem to want to dial in.  They changed it to 7/30 and things got much better.  I've been testing stuff to get it to run even better down low (for town and slow moving traffic - kangaroo petrol and feathering the clutch is no fun, and not the way it is supposed to be)

Mirrmu ...yea that was at idle, same place, same temp, all the usual control stuff although the VE were taken after CLI and AFF had kicked in rather than a proper tune as such ...so the data may be pants, it may be a meaningless test, who knows, I just found it interesting.

As I said above, certainly for my cam I couldn't tell 7/29 and 7/30 apart at any speed

[Frédéric CM]

For almost the same MAP with the different IVO numbers, there is a significant difference between VE for IVC= 30 or 29

[joe_lyons]

Im lazy is this from a 617 cal that your messing with?

[Gordon61]

Hi Joe, yes it is, is this a different cals work different ways kind of thing we've noticed?

sorry, no it isn't what am I thinking ...it's a 358

[Frédéric CM]

(what the difference between a 357 and 358 cal ?)

[joe_lyons]

357 for stock motor and 358 for bigger Cal's.

[Frédéric CM]

I've a stock 358 cal, 375 for stage1 (357sdq001) and 358 for SE stage2 maps...

Are the difference visible (spark corection by temp, among others) or not ?

[Frédéric CM]

Still arounds ?

[Frédéric CM]

Anyway, very roughly, if you were at 50KPA and the table was set to 2%, then it would assume (60-50)*2%=20% of the charge was from EGR.   

Not sure to understand the fomula