Road tuning VE's different route - different results

[a2wheeler]

I have to drive south 20 miles to get below 6000 ft in order to get the 80kpa column filled in. I have made the same basic route for 8 times, and the final 2 vtunes show a couple of new changes in the low kpa columns. So I decide to go ahead a do a couple of last vtunes in my neighborhood of 7000-7500 ft. I find it wants to change many 50kpa and lower cells now, mostly increases and mostly in the rear.
I had no idea driving at different elevations would effect the VE value in a cell. I thought it would just affect whether I could reach it or not. This looks like it shifted all the VE values towards the left cause many want to be increased.
This just is not making sense to me.

[98fxstc]

the calculated air flow thru the heads are determined from sensors telling the ECM about O2 in the exhaust,
ie testing for rich or lean burn
So O2 in atmosphere changes with altitude and will affect the burn
more O2 at lower altitude so leaner mix when going down
ecm has predetermined VE but thinks more air is flowing and would increase VE
Would expect some difference
no idea how much
my .02 , may be wrong

[a2wheeler]

here are some visuals. The first two are the last two runs at normal location/route. Then the last one is using a new route.

[98fxstc]

Go back to your normal location/route with the map that you last used there and see if your VE's return to previous values
ie Confirm nothing else has changed

Just as well riding is fun 

[a2wheeler]

Yes, going back to normal route is my plan now. I have not loaded the new map because of the amount of change. Something else might have changed. The new route only takes 20 minutes, the old route is 1.75 hours. I definitely get a lot more hits on the old route as well. Maybe it is a better collection, but the bulk of the area that changed on me was blue in the VE histogram of datamaster - meaning enough hits.
I guess it just depends on what altitude I want to use as the base map. Trying to use both routes appears to be an endless battle.
I just have not read any one else running into to situation before. I may have to wait for the weekend now.

[whittlebeast]

You really need to plot MAPxRPM vs Duty Cycle at each altitude and see if the code is compensating for the altitude change.

The Duty Cycle should be a little higher at high altitude for any given MAPxRPM.  The average o2 readings should be no different for any given MAPxRPM if all is working per the books.

Andy

[1FSTRK]

Timing

[98fxstc]

The Duty Cycle should be a little higher at high altitude for any given MAPxRPM.  The average o2 readings should be no different for any given MAPxRPM if all is working per the books.

Andy

Wouldnt the duty cycle be lower at higher altitude ?

[whittlebeast]

That rule is left over from the old TPS based systems from the 70s.  Carbs did need smaller jets as the altitude increased.

Andy

[whittlebeast]

All we need to test this is have someone set a bike up in closed loop in Denver and drive over Loveland Pass and back to Denver with the loggers running.  Denver is at close to 5000 foot and Loveland Pass is like 12000 feet.

Andy

[a2wheeler]

Timing

The timing is pretty much done. There was only a couple of akr's in this last run up at 5000 rpm. But yes, back in the 70's when I started in Leadville at 10,152 ft, half way down to Denver I had to pull my GTO over and dial my timing down a little or I would fry the motor running to high a timing.

[a2wheeler]

Got a good run using the old route. This comes in just like the run before from this route. I still have a couple of areas that want some change, but I am going to call it good for VE tuning at this point. I the auto-extend again as well. I am guessing that while during the Vtune process, the altitude does make a difference. Once I set this map into place with regular main lambda table, then the bike will simply be adjusting for the altitude.

[98fxstc]

Got a good run using the old route. This comes in just like the run before from this route. I still have a couple of areas that want some change, but I am going to call it good for VE tuning at this point. I the auto-extend again as well. I am guessing that while during the Vtune process, the altitude does make a difference. Once I set this map into place with regular main lambda table, then the bike will simply be adjusting for the altitude.

I'd think about bumping the first autoextend column to match the columns either side
Hasnt been any discussion about this but I cant see a problem with it

[a2wheeler]

yes, good idea. I was going to go around the edges of the VE tables and blend to the ends. Not that I will ride in those cells, but it will look pretty - LOL.

[98fxstc]

 

[HD/Wrench]

 

[glens]

The Duty Cycle should be a little higher at high altitude for any given MAPxRPM.

Wouldnt the duty cycle be lower at higher altitude ?

That rule is left over from the old TPS based systems from the 70s.  Carbs did need smaller jets as the altitude increased.

Andy, Andy, Andy...

Think about what you're saying.  Less O2 molecules requires more fuel?  Really?

[whittlebeast]

Glen

You missed that I said for any given MAP and RPM.  Think about this. Say you are were riding are 60 KPA in the intake at 5000 feet below sea level.  The air pressure at the end of the exhaust would be about 120 KPA  because you are so low.  The exhaust system would be terrible at scavenging at this very low altitude with this huge back pressure.

Now you go up to sea level.  The back pressure is now 100 KPA at the exhaust tip.  Still at 60 KPA in the intake.  The motor is running a little better.  The exhaust is starting to work as intended.

Now you go up to Denver and the intake is still at 60 kpa.  Granted you are a little deeper into the throttle but still 60 KPA.  The exhaust back pressure is now at 82 KPA at the exhaust tip.  The exhaust is really starting to work.

How you go to the top of Loveland Pass at 62 KPA atmospheric pressure.  You are at WOT at 60 KPA in the intake.  That is all the power you can get at this elevation.  You are still working out of the same VE table.  Guess what happens?  The motor is running the best it has ever run at 60 KPA as the exhaust is almost sucking the exhaust out, by comparison.  Wow, you need more fuel at 60 KPA and 12000 feet to get the AFR the same.

Keep in mind that at every one of these examples is at 60 KPA and the original RPM.

This came up when we were doing Alpha-N calibrations for motorcycles doing the annual Pikes Peak Hillclimb and we had data logs off the closed loop bikes.  We could watch the motor change are it went up the hill.

Glen, Glen, Glen...

Andy

[whittlebeast]

Here is the baro pressure at each altitude.  I was guessing based on experience on the previous post.  I was close...



Andy

[glens]

Andy, you're right; I did neglect your pressure stipulation.

Yet are you sure the AFR was actually changing?  Maybe it was staying the same but the O2 sensor wasn't responding the same so merely reporting differently (after all, they do tend to lie lean, right?).  Think about it.  The number of O2 molecules in whatever volume of air at 60kPA is going to be the same at Death Valley or at Red Mountain Pass (at the same temperature, of course).  The same AFR should be achieved either location with the same injector duty cycle.  Math is math.

Maybe there were merely "busts" in the tune

[whittlebeast]

O2s are sensitive to temperature and pressure.  I have no idea to what degree as you climb a mountain pass.

The speed of sound sound changes with temperature and I have no way to know how that would affect the scavenging of any single header but with a wobble fire motor, I can see things getting strange from front to rear and have different results in the long term fuel trims.  Notice that the OP was about the trims were being leaned on more on one cylinder than the other.  That has a ring of an exhaust back pressure / exhaust timing issue as altitude changes.

Keep in mind that the factory ECU has baro correction built in.   What all those control is all in the Harley Hidden Tables.

Cranking PW, ignition timing tables, VE corrections, even the effective fuel pressure could have a table in there for altitude compensation.

Most ECUs I have played with for example have at least two VE tables.  High altitude and low Altitude.  Most hacked ECUs only deal with the low altitude one and the other one gets ignored.  Like the pink elephant in the room.

Andy

[a2wheeler]

you guys are way over my head, but what I saw what that no matter what altitude I'm running at , the front cyl is lower VE's than the rear. The change I saw when running at the higher elevation was that the VE's were being increased in the lower kpa and descreased right of 60kpa.  That matches the shift of kpa which is a result of being higher in elevation.
There was discussion in a long thread with Steve Cole regarding the multiple VE tables that the automotive has to handle elevation, even some discussion on how the TTS VE's get set in the base cals, with high, low and medium altitude simulation. The point was HD does not have those multiple tables in the ECM. I'm still looking for that link.

[Admiral Akbar]

Glen

You missed that I said for any given MAP and RPM.  Think about this. Say you are were riding are 60 KPA in the intake at 5000 feet below sea level.  The air pressure at the end of the exhaust would be about 120 KPA  because you are so low.  The exhaust system would be terrible at scavenging at this very low altitude with this huge back pressure.

Now you go up to sea level.  The back pressure is now 100 KPA at the exhaust tip.  Still at 60 KPA in the intake.  The motor is running a little better.  The exhaust is starting to work as intended.

Now you go up to Denver and the intake is still at 60 kpa.  Granted you are a little deeper into the throttle but still 60 KPA.  The exhaust back pressure is now at 82 KPA at the exhaust tip.  The exhaust is really starting to work.

How you go to the top of Loveland Pass at 62 KPA atmospheric pressure.  You are at WOT at 60 KPA in the intake.  That is all the power you can get at this elevation.  You are still working out of the same VE table.  Guess what happens?  The motor is running the best it has ever run at 60 KPA as the exhaust is almost sucking the exhaust out, by comparison.  Wow, you need more fuel at 60 KPA and 12000 feet to get the AFR the same.

Keep in mind that at every one of these examples is at 60 KPA and the original RPM.

This came up when we were doing Alpha-N calibrations for motorcycles doing the annual Pikes Peak Hillclimb and we had data logs off the closed loop bikes.  We could watch the motor change are it went up the hill.

Glen, Glen, Glen...

Andy

Not sure any of this is correct.. You state that the ambient pressure effects scavenging.. Isn't cylinder fill pressure measured at close to bottom on the intake stroke and pressure in the intake during overlap the piston is just starting the intake stroke?   At tdc wouldn't the pressure be close to ambient? 

I'll agree that the pressure range that the motor runs in is higher at higher ambient pressure as you can never go below 0 absolute pressure.. That can effect how the whole system operates..

[whittlebeast]

I am talking about pressure on the exhaust side of the motor.

[Admiral Akbar]

I am talking about pressure on the exhaust side of the motor.

Understood.. If that's the case why do you compare to the intake pressure? 

[a2wheeler]

I need to correct myself on what Steve Cole indicated - it was not multiple VE tables but multiple timing tables. here is the link, and it is related to dialing in the spark tables using high and low octane fuel.
http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,33872.msg349446.html#msg349446
Now that I have the VE tables done, and done all at the same altitude, I will follow the same pattern with Spark tables. If I drop the overall spark table by 2 degrees after I'm done with akr's, then I should be safe at sea level. Current TTS manual says drop by 1 degree after done.

[ToBeFrank]

Keep in mind that the factory ECU has baro correction built in.   What all those control is all in the Harley Hidden Tables.

Cranking PW, ignition timing tables, VE corrections, even the effective fuel pressure could have a table in there for altitude compensation.

I live right next to a 9000 foot high mountain (I live at 2200 ft), which is a great ride in the hot summers here. I can recall on my 03 fatboy that if you started the bike at the top of the mountain and rode down, at the bottom the MAP readings would be much higher than they normally read. If you turned the bike off and back on, they would be back to normal. From that I conclude that the Harley ECM only reads for baro when the bike is first started. Also because of that, I would say it is wise not to tune across large altitude changes. Keep in mind this was an 03, and the code may have changed. I haven't taken my 14 up the mountain yet.

[whittlebeast]

I wonder what happens with the default MAP table as you climb a hill?

Andy

[a2wheeler]

tobefrank,   that is very interesting. I'm at 7400ft and I have been starting the datamaster at the house, then driving south to lower elevation (somewhere about 6000 ft). It definitely allows me to hit the 80kpa and sometimes 85kpa.  I have stopped collections and started new ones while at the lower elevation, but never turned the bike off. I might try that and see what the map ends at and then begins at. It definitely appears that at least VE tuning should be done at one basic elevation. I am actually getting a lot of collection on my way down and back up. But the other route was staying at 7000-7500 the entire time and it shifted things left .

[Steve Cole]

Sometimes you begin to over think all of this, and this is one of those cases. The data that the ECM see's comes from what you were doing that time around and no other time. So unless we give you finer and finer resolution points in the tables your never going to be able to hit the exact same places over and over again. Pressure changes not only how the engine runs but the way the sensors read, then again it also effects fuel pressure and there for the amount of fuel entering the engine and how much O2 enters. So with all that said, you can chase your tail and if you think that you ever going to get it to stay still...... The combustion process also is not stable under non changing conditions. This is just why we tell you once your within +/-5% on the adjustment to call it a day. Just think what happens when you start over again with another tank of fuel as it's not all the same either. The best you can do is get it as stable as possible with the conditions you have. A HD has  a 5.5 gallon fuel tank and most just pull into a fuel station and fill up. No one pays much attention to the pump itself. How much stored fuel do you think is in that pump and hoses? Now most get about 3 gallons on a fill up, so you have to take the stored fuel in the pump (87,89, 91 who knows) and it gets mixed with whatever you select for a fuel grade.................... so what did you really get?

Long ago I tried to teach people how much the Broad Band O2's move around with temperature and pressure but everyone thought they knew better. Now, a few years later people are beginning to get the idea and it is just something you have to live with. Understand they can and do move close to 1 AFR and since none of the aftermarket kits are measuring or applying the corrections you cannot use them as a reliable way to test. The stock O2 sensors are not near as sensitive but they are still effected by temperature and pressure some.

So you can chase your tail or just do the best you can them put it away and go enjoy riding the bike. After all isn't that why we bought them in the first place.

[a2wheeler]

Steve, your point is understood. The significant desire of Vtune to shift the values left-wards  when taken at a higher altitude, just suggested to me that all my runs should be at the same altitude (give or take). I was seeing 10-15% changes but after I just ran back at my lower altitude, I was back in the 5% - accept for a couple on the edges and I said enough is enough. I'm on to timing now.
That brings up the question of vtune 3 manual says once you get the akrs down to a dull roar, then reduce all cells by 1 degree. Should i consider 2 degrees when I'm tuning at 6000 ft and plan to run at sea level sometime during the year? Or is 1 degree close enough?.

[glens]

Regarding the run up Pike's Peak, Alpha-N wouldn't be my first choice.

This is a snippet from the current TTS tuning manual regarding something pertinent.  I don't know which calibrations do or don't have this feature or if there's a level where they diverge.

[attach=1]

[whittlebeast]

Yep Glens, MAF may have been a better choice but that involves adding a couple of pounds and packaging issues.  Speed density gets a little messy on ITB motors past about 15% throttle.  You pick your poison and plunge ahead.

And always be willing to look at the data to verify everything you have access to.

Have fun tuning

Andy

[Admiral Akbar]

Regarding the run up Pike's Peak, Alpha-N wouldn't be my first choice.

This is a snippet from the current TTS tuning manual regarding something pertinent.  I don't know which calibrations do or don't have this feature or if there's a level where they diverge.

[attach=1]

I've run my EGC up Pike's Peak and Mt Evans ( about couple hundred feet higher) with gen II Tmax (alpha-N).. Didn't miss a beat.. Got great mileage. That week 04 SE Deuce (Rick) hit about 90% of the mountain passes above 10,000 feet in Colorado also.. No issues.
Add
Other than the usual power loss you see at altitude. Generally a little more throttle to get it moving.. Runs fine at 300 feet below sea level too.
Full time closed loop systems worked pretty good.

[whittlebeast]

Full blown closed loop systems can do wonders when set up correctly.  I run my FZ1 and my 300 HP jetski in closed loop all the time.

Andy

[Admiral Akbar]

Full blown closed loop systems can do wonders when set up correctly.  I run my FZ1 and my 300 HP jetski in closed loop all the time.

Andy

Did you run the Jet Ski up Mt. Evan's?



Sorry had to ask.. 

I agree tho..

[glens]

How about down the Mariana Trench? 

[ToBeFrank]

Long ago I tried to teach people how much the Broad Band O2's move around with temperature and pressure but everyone thought they knew better.

They do know better. You've been told for years now and multiple times that you have calculated the error due to pressure incorrectly. Unfortunately, the attachments showing the sensor being +- 0.1 AFR over the pressure range are no longer there, but the facts haven't changed since then. Please stop spreading incorrect information.

[Steve Cole]

Long ago I tried to teach people how much the Broad Band O2's move around with temperature and pressure but everyone thought they knew better.

They do know better. You've been told for years now and multiple times that you have calculated the error due to pressure incorrectly. Unfortunately, the attachments showing the sensor being +- 0.1 AFR over the pressure range are no longer there, but the facts haven't changed since then. Please stop spreading incorrect information.

Sorry Frank, but your just as wrong today as you were back then. Attached is a spreadsheet with the parts of the data you left out but are clearly part of the Bosch documents. What's funny is now the suppliers of the aftermarket BroadBand kits admit to the mistake and some go as far as telling you that you need to adjust for every 1000 ft in elevation changes. So if anyone needs to stop the misinformation it's you!

[Coyote]

Unfortunately, the attachments showing the sensor being +- 0.1 AFR over the pressure range are no longer there, but the facts haven't changed since then. Please stop spreading incorrect information.

The attachments have been restored.

[ToBeFrank]

Since Steve is already in attack mode, I'll leave it to someone else to thank Steve for providing further evidence that the widebands are accurate.

[whittlebeast]

Yep Frank, Plenty accurate for the women we date.  You will never feel the difference of a couple of tenths of a AFR when running safe AFRs.  We need to move on to the things that matter.

Andy

[glens]

Since Steve is already in attack mode, I'll leave it to someone else to thank Steve for providing further evidence that the widebands are accurate.

Yeah.  Just tune to 14.83:1 and you're golden no matter what altitude and headpipe pressure combination you encounter.

[Steve Cole]

Since Steve is already in attack mode, I'll leave it to someone else to thank Steve for providing further evidence that the widebands are accurate.

So that's it, "attack mode" when you've been provided with the real facts you do not like    I've provided ALL the facts and figures, did you even bother to look at the data? It's all there in black and white. If you look at the tab that Charts a single AFR of 13.23 for various altitudes and pressures it has a range of  13.58 - 12.86.  That is a Bosch test point and is also close to what many tune for at WOT on pure gasoline. That's a far cry from your claim of +/- 0.1 AFR.   Then move over to the Chart that shows 14.83 and the errors get less. The further from Stoichometric the mixture is the errors continue to get larger too. So if one was to tune for let's say 12.0 AFR the error range increases. Then let's not forget the temperature corrections that need to be added that are still missing. My claim was and always has been and error range of 1.0 AFR which is very close to what it is when you factor in the real data at 13.0 AFR and temperature corrections. Sorry but I like to work in the real world, not make believe!

So for the OP range of riding from  7000 - 7500 ft versus someone who is riding at sea level that's one hell of a range of error. This is just one reason why it's important to understand the details in the data before jumping to conclusions. If you do not know and understand what the accuracy of the sensor is that is doing the measuring and its equipment you cannot make an informed decision of the data being provided.

[whittlebeast]

I have found the very few motors are truly happy at 14.7  13.8 to 14 is a far more happy target if looking for joy.

I have learned to not trust narrow bands at anywhere near this range.

Andy

[Admiral Akbar]

How about down the Mariana Trench? 

Will work fine but need a 2 bar map sensor..

[whittlebeast]

Normally the baro is real close to 100 at the trench.

I run a 2.5 Bar MAP sensor.

The trench will only be an issue if we drain the ocean.  That is not really an issue.

Finding a gas station out there will be an issue if this ever comes up.

And as is typical, Glens is concentrating on all the wrong things.

Andy

[Karl H.]

...Attached is a spreadsheet with the parts of the data you left out but are clearly part of the Bosch documents.

What is Ip? Is "Pressure" the manifold pressure? If so, how do you get 2 bar without turbocharging?

[ToBeFrank]

...Attached is a spreadsheet with the parts of the data you left out but are clearly part of the Bosch documents.

What is Ip? Is "Pressure" the manifold pressure? If so, how do you get 2 bar without turbocharging?

Ip is current. The widebands are actually measuring current. Pressure is in the exhaust.

Steve is only quoting the extremes. The 12.8 number is at 2 bar at 10000 feet. The 13.5 is at the other extreme, .5 bar at 0 feet, which is exhaust backpressure. Every wideband controller I've seen explicitly states it will be inaccurate if you have excessive exhaust back pressure. Here is the relevant section from the TwinScan docs:

Excessive exhaust back pressure. Wide-band sensors are affected by back pressure. Excessive back pressure causes exaggerated AFR indications under rich and lean conditions, but has little effect at 14.7 AFR (stoichiometric). Motorcycle exhaust systems are relatively free flowing and problems with exhaust back pressure are not likely.

[ToBeFrank]

I'm going to sign off this discussion now. I'll let Steve continue attack mode. Make your own conclusions.

[Karl H.]

Ip is current. The widebands are actually measuring current. Pressure is in the exhaust.

Steve is only quoting the extremes. The 12.8 number is at 2 bar at 10000 feet. The 13.5 is at the other extreme, .5 bar at 0 feet, which is exhaust backpressure. Every wideband controller I've seen explicitly states it will be inaccurate if you have excessive exhaust back pressure. Here is the relevant section from the TwinScan docs:

Excessive exhaust back pressure. Wide-band sensors are affected by back pressure. Excessive back pressure causes exaggerated AFR indications under rich and lean conditions, but has little effect at 14.7 AFR (stoichiometric). Motorcycle exhaust systems are relatively free flowing and problems with exhaust back pressure are not likely.

Thanks alot for clarification! 

[whittlebeast]

I generally only worry about exhaust pressure  on the o2s when I find out it is a turbo install with the o2s between the engine and the exhaust.  I have the owner move the o2s.

Andy

[Steve Cole]

...Attached is a spreadsheet with the parts of the data you left out but are clearly part of the Bosch documents.

What is Ip? Is "Pressure" the manifold pressure? If so, how do you get 2 bar without turbocharging?

I see Frank continues to leave out the important parts of this issue. First his claim of 0.1 AFR is BS even at 14.83 AFR. That is due to the temperature correction missing from the data still.

As everyone can see I only plotted the data at two points so you could see what is happening. The further you move from Stoichometric the errors get larger and larger and do not stop. Try plotting a fuel mixture of 11.0 AFR like the Supercharged or turbocharged engines run and see what happens. One needs to remember this is all based on pure gasoline too, think of what happens when you move to E10 or E85!

Ip is the current from the sensor, as this sensor works on current flow.

Pressure is the Absolute pressure not gauge pressure. There is a very large difference between the two measurements.

Absolute pressure is the atmospheric pressure plus/minus measured pressure. So in the case of a engine at or near seal level you have to start with atmospheric pressure then add/subtract what is measured in the exhaust and this must be done each and every time the sensor is read, with a sensor capable of taking accurate readings at a minimum of once per engine cycle per cylinder. So if the O2 sensor is read more than once per firing cycle you must also read the pressure at that same rate and time for it to be accurate.

Pressure swings in the exhaust very greatly as the exhaust valves open and close. We have measured swings of +/- 5 psi gauge pressure in HD Drag Pipes and +/- 10 psi in pipes with mufflers and converters. It will vary as engine speed increases and decreases along with engine build to engine build. So while you may think the range on our provided charts is large, a HD engine uses most all of it.

So when you have no idea of how things are working in the real world of the running engine, what does the measured data mean? You have to have all the surrounding information to make it useful at all. Since the aftermarket Broad Band systems do not measure any of this data to know what is going on, there is no way possible for them to be accurate and repeatable.

[whittlebeast]

I wish someone had a MS3 Squirt up and running on one of these bikes.  We could do a tooth log of the pressure in the exhaust.  A MAP sample every 10 degrees of crank rotation.  Just for fun we could do a O2 read at that same sample speed.

Andy

[Tsani]

Motorcycle exhaust systems are relatively free flowing and problems with exhaust back pressure are not likely.

Really?! Could have fooled me. So I take it that torque dips are all in our minds? Pipe manufacturers are going to love hearing this.

[whittlebeast]

For people looking a MegaLogViewer HD, there is a tab called <ignition Log Viewer>  That is used in the Megasquirt world for just this sort of thing. You have really fast data logging over there.  We use that for things like watching a a motor crank that we have never seen the cranking characteristics.  We watch the timing of the crank sensor teeth compared to the timing of the cam sensor (if there is one) and the pulsations at the MAP sensor.  With that info, we can determine the logic for the wheel decoder section of the code.  Way cool stuff.

Andy

[FLTRI]

I'm going to sign off this discussion now. I'll let Steve continue attack mode. Make your own conclusions.

Thank you

[Steve Cole]

I've gotten a few calls asking for me to better explain the pressures being used, so I will try again

Absolute pressure is the Atmospheric pressure plus or minus any addition measured pressure in the exhaust. So at Sea Level that is ~ 1 bar or 100 kPa. So if you were to look at the chart for 13.23 AFR and find the graph line for your altitude you would be at the 1 bar position on the "X" axis. Now once you start the engine the pressure in the exhaust pipe rises above and falls below Atmospheric as the engine runs. At low RPM the pressure rise is less than it is as the engine is at say 2500 RPM. This causes your position on the graph to swing back and forth on the "X" axis. The range that it will swing is going to be different based on your engine combination and exhaust system. So if the exhaust pressure drops below Atmospheric when the O2 sensor is read you will move to the left of the 1 bar reading and if the exhaust pressure rises above Atmospheric when the O2 sensor is read you will move to the right of the 1 bar reading.

Since we have measured HD drag style pipes with pressure swings of +/- 5 psi or +/- 0.344737864 bar this is going to cause an error in the O2 reading from exhaust pressure ONLY  from 13.447 AFR to 13.142 at sea level only. Since these systems do not account for pressure (Exhaust or Atmospheric) you have no idea where in that range you really are at any given moment in time. If your exhaust system has greater pressure swings as most street driven HD's do, that range increases. Now, add to that, if you are riding the bike, the pressure changes due to altitude and you can begin to see how the mixture could be not moving at all (in this one case 13.23) yet the data shows it moving all over the place.

So now let's think about Whittlebeast comments of how the data showed the mixture changing in a Pikes Peak data log, did the mixture really change or not? As I recall the Pikes Peak race starts at near 5500 ft and climbs to 14,000 ft at the end of the race. The Atmospheric and Exhaust pressures are certainly changing as the engine runs through the race! With no means of measuring any of it, the data from the O2 becomes useless for accurate measurements!

Now, if your Dyno tuning, Atmospheric pressure stays constant, so you only have to deal with Exhaust pressure swings but that still leaves an area greater than 0.5 AFR on most HD exhaust systems that you have no way to know what is really happening. If thats good enough for you, that's fine, but let's not mix good enough for you, with what it really is, or the errors that are caused by people not following what Bosch says needs to be done to get accurate readings. I have yet to find a Aftermarket Broad Band system that measures any pressure or temperature data or applies the necessary corrections that Bosch supply's with the sensor data. When you step into lab quality equipment I have found one that allows for it but then your looking at $10K in equipment.

[Admiral Akbar]

So Steve, could you post the data sheet?

[Karl H.]

For data sheet see reply #38

BTW: The discussion starts gaining quality 

[Admiral Akbar]

I all get out of this is that the afr accuracy of the can vary depending on conditions.  Knowing the issues, the device measuring the AFR can't be stupid.

Add.. Who cares if the variance is +- 0.5 points?? Still better than a carb..

[FLTRI]

I all get out of this is that the afr accuracy of the can vary depending on conditions.  Knowing the issues, the device measuring the AFR can't be stupid.

Add.. Who cares if the variance is +- 0.5 points?? Still better than a carb..

👍 the only criticism I have is reaction speed of the LSU4 not accuracy. Close enough on accuracy but there is a bit of difference in quality of rideablility between alpha-n and speed density. No back to back comparison quantified in a lab environment but based on my own personal experience riding bikes tuned with both systems over the years. Should be a slight fuel mileage advantage to speed density as well.
Bob

[Steve Cole]

I all get out of this is that the afr accuracy of the can vary depending on conditions.  Knowing the issues, the device measuring the AFR can't be stupid.

Add.. Who cares if the variance is +- 0.5 points?? Still better than a carb..

So how does one expect the system to work then? If you tell it to control to a moving target then it will always be moving and never get to a final adjustment. Then experts say it must be xxx number or the tune is no good. You must plot the data and it look like a straight line, and on and on and on. The truth is they have no idea what it really is and have never spent the time to learn what really happens and why it is.  Data is a great thing when you understand what it is and how to use it, properly. Used improperly all you get is pretty pictures that do not mean much of anything.

So is the new rule of thumb going to be that fuel mixture only needs to be +/- 0.5 AFR? So a tuneup can be at anywhere between 13.0 and 14.0 at WOT and it's good enough? The truth is you have no way to know any better! If that's good enough then there is a ton of dyno sheets that got post here on this site that people said we no good and now they are just fine!

[Admiral Akbar]

I all get out of this is that the afr accuracy of the can vary depending on conditions.  Knowing the issues, the device measuring the AFR can't be stupid.

Add.. Who cares if the variance is +- 0.5 points?? Still better than a carb..

👍 the only criticism I have is reaction speed of the LSU4 not accuracy. Close enough on accuracy but there is a bit of difference in quality of rideablility between alpha-n and speed density. No back to back comparison quantified in a lab environment but based on my own personal experience riding bikes tuned with both systems over the years. Should be a slight fuel mileage advantage to speed density as well.
Bob

Not sure what the reaction speed is for the LSU4 but there are ways to declare the samples good or bad in ECU firmware..  I've not seem a whole lot of difference in ride-ability except for partial throttle stuff where Tmax needed to bring out injector timing.. Once they did that certain builds got better.. Many builds ran fine as is..

One thing that Tmax lags on is using throttle based ignition timing instead of map.  I would think that this is one of the main reasons for mileage being less and a partial reason for possible low speed manner issues.  Closed loop systems need to to have a good AFR sample to to make a decision on whether to add or remove fuel.. The problem is that the combustion process at low speeds can be irregular cycle to cycle.. The ignition timing adjustments at light loads become way more critical for the closed loop system.. Also the data needs to be filtered / closed loop response adjusted under these conditions.. 

[whittlebeast]

My wiz-bang, $10000 Motec 150 ECU has throttle based timing.  There is a MAP based correction on top of that.

Throttle based is more "predictive".

Andy

[Admiral Akbar]

I all get out of this is that the afr accuracy of the can vary depending on conditions.  Knowing the issues, the device measuring the AFR can't be stupid.

Add.. Who cares if the variance is +- 0.5 points?? Still better than a carb..

So how does one expect the system to work then? If you tell it to control to a moving target then it will always be moving and never get to a final adjustment. Then experts say it must be xxx number or the tune is no good. You must plot the data and it look like a straight line, and on and on and on. The truth is they have no idea what it really is and have never spent the time to learn what really happens and why it is.  Data is a great thing when you understand what it is and how to use it, properly. Used improperly all you get is pretty pictures that do not mean much of anything.

So is the new rule of thumb going to be that fuel mixture only needs to be +/- 0.5 AFR? So a tuneup can be at anywhere between 13.0 and 14.0 at WOT and it's good enough? The truth is you have no way to know any better! If that's good enough then there is a ton of dyno sheets that got post here on this site that people said we no good and now they are just fine!

As usual you sound technical but really don't say anything that I understand.. Sorry I'm slow so you'll have to esplane' it to me..

What system? 

Who are the experts? 

What is  the XXX number? 

What target are you talking about?   AFR? 

Plot what data?  Do data plots have to be a straight line.. If you know what the curve is, you're half way there. 

You talking about the data collection piloting programs?  I've not looked at them much but it seems to me they be some value. At least there can be a collection of data that cam be tied helping with diagnostic issues.. Definitely not a controlled environment, with better equipment but better reading plugs.. 

So at WOT maybe you want the default to be 13.2  since you are WOT need a little more accuracy.. Figure out ways to make it more accurate. Filtering, taking other measurements and using the data in the data sheet to give you a better number.  If you have fixed bias in the system take it out..   What about partial throttle?   Maybe a swing from 15 to 14 is OK?   

if the transducer is well characterized and consitant does that mean because the output is not a ploted straight line that it's inaccurate? 

[glens]

Not sure what the reaction speed is for the LSU4 ...

Even if they're as fast as plain old switching sensors there's going to be a minimum of another engine cycle delay in the report at higher RPM.  Got one closed-loop system (the sensor) feeding information to the host closed-loop system.  This could be mitigated by asking for the report sooner so the answer comes at the right time, but then the sample wasn't taken at that right time.  It would've been take a while ago when it maybe wasn't quite pertinent.

The minimum change detection time of the sensor itself ought to be easily found documented somewhere.  The speed of its controlling system will obviously vary from manufacturer to manufacturer, even if they're all merely (independent?) implementations of the same (forget the term - something akin to "proof of concept") circuit design.

On a dyno this would matter quite a bit less than on a road-only-tuning system for most every user.  Now we got Bob, a dyno user, saying he doesn't like their speed.  But he didn't quality whether that pertained to his use of them on the dyno or to their use in a general-purpose (so to speak) end-user on-the-road auto-tune system.  Or both.  Or maybe it's just the racer in him disliking anything that's slower than something else

[hrdtail78]

A man needs to know his limitations, or understand the limitations of what he is using.  How does it really effect us at the end of the day.  The standard in the industry is either the stock sensors or the LSU4.2's.  This is what we have.  I target 13 for 80% and 100% tps.  I have it dialed in.  The sensor is off by .5.  I am actually at 13.5, but I noticed on this build that target 12 gives me more power.  Does it matter what I am targeting if the end result is that I tuned it for best power?

Knowing and understanding helps explain this.  Also helps weeding through the propaganda from companies that sell to this industry.  The manufacture of the sensor states 4 times a second.  2000-6000 sweep that takes 7 seconds is going to be sampled 28 times.  At 4000 rpm's the bike is seeing about 33 firing events.  Easy math shows we will be missing some.  That is why you make that pull 5-6 times.  Get an average, and go from there.

I recently did a SE tune on a low compression build.  Spark activity when I enabled wanted to pull 8 degrees in several places in higher kpa area.  I adjusted the timing tables to make the ION sensing system happier.  Couldn't get all the spark activity gone even after pulling 15 degrees.  I lost 10 and 10 and the trace looked like it wanted a bunch of timing.  I never heard it detonate once.  Understanding the data goes a long way.

[whittlebeast]

God bless a man with solid logic.....

Andy

[Steve Cole]

I all get out of this is that the afr accuracy of the can vary depending on conditions.  Knowing the issues, the device measuring the AFR can't be stupid.

Add.. Who cares if the variance is +- 0.5 points?? Still better than a carb..

So how does one expect the system to work then? If you tell it to control to a moving target then it will always be moving and never get to a final adjustment. Then experts say it must be xxx number or the tune is no good. You must plot the data and it look like a straight line, and on and on and on. The truth is they have no idea what it really is and have never spent the time to learn what really happens and why it is.  Data is a great thing when you understand what it is and how to use it, properly. Used improperly all you get is pretty pictures that do not mean much of anything.

So is the new rule of thumb going to be that fuel mixture only needs to be +/- 0.5 AFR? So a tuneup can be at anywhere between 13.0 and 14.0 at WOT and it's good enough? The truth is you have no way to know any better! If that's good enough then there is a ton of dyno sheets that got post here on this site that people said we no good and now they are just fine!

As usual you sound technical but really don't say anything that I understand.. Sorry I'm slow so you'll have to esplane' it to me..

What system? 

Who are the experts? 

What is  the XXX number? 

What target are you talking about?   AFR? 

Plot what data?  Do data plots have to be a straight line.. If you know what the curve is, you're half way there. 

You talking about the data collection piloting programs?  I've not looked at them much but it seems to me they be some value. At least there can be a collection of data that cam be tied helping with diagnostic issues.. Definitely not a controlled environment, with better equipment but better reading plugs.. 

So at WOT maybe you want the default to be 13.2  since you are WOT need a little more accuracy.. Figure out ways to make it more accurate. Filtering, taking other measurements and using the data in the data sheet to give you a better number.  If you have fixed bias in the system take it out..   What about partial throttle?   Maybe a swing from 15 to 14 is OK?   

if the transducer is well characterized and consitant does that mean because the output is not a ploted straight line that it's inaccurate?

So what part are you having trouble with? 1 + 1=2 or maybe it should be 1.5 or 2.5 

Who said anything about a transducer or for that matter a straight line?

"If you know what the curve is" what curve you talking about?

How would you know what the WOT is, if the sensor doing the measuring is incapable of telling you what was measured accurately, now your back to 1 + 1=2 or maybe it should be 1.5 or 2.5 

What it means is simple and even you know it already. Just because you see a graph on a piece of paper if the data that built that graph is wrong, the graph is wrong too! So those that want a magic mixture on a piece of paper to look a certain way, is completely meaningless, if you do not know and understand how the data came to be.

You can use bad data just about anyway you like and it's still bad data. Trying to tell someone that the answer needs to be any one thing from Bad data is like pissing into the wind and hoping you do not get wet.

If you make changes and the engine runs better, performs better and gets better fuel economy does it matter what the data from the control system says? How about it gets better fuel economy but runs hotter? Hotter than what? What's too hot for one maybe fine for another.

The truth to it all is in the eye's of the owner and if the outcome is what he/she wants does the rest of it matter?

[Admiral Akbar]

I all get out of this is that the afr accuracy of the can vary depending on conditions.  Knowing the issues, the device measuring the AFR can't be stupid.

Add.. Who cares if the variance is +- 0.5 points?? Still better than a carb..

So how does one expect the system to work then? If you tell it to control to a moving target then it will always be moving and never get to a final adjustment. Then experts say it must be xxx number or the tune is no good. You must plot the data and it look like a straight line, and on and on and on. The truth is they have no idea what it really is and have never spent the time to learn what really happens and why it is.  Data is a great thing when you understand what it is and how to use it, properly. Used improperly all you get is pretty pictures that do not mean much of anything.

So is the new rule of thumb going to be that fuel mixture only needs to be +/- 0.5 AFR? So a tuneup can be at anywhere between 13.0 and 14.0 at WOT and it's good enough? The truth is you have no way to know any better! If that's good enough then there is a ton of dyno sheets that got post here on this site that people said we no good and now they are just fine!

As usual you sound technical but really don't say anything that I understand.. Sorry I'm slow so you'll have to esplane' it to me..

What system? 

Who are the experts? 

What is  the XXX number? 

What target are you talking about?   AFR? 

Plot what data?  Do data plots have to be a straight line.. If you know what the curve is, you're half way there. 

You talking about the data collection piloting programs?  I've not looked at them much but it seems to me they be some value. At least there can be a collection of data that cam be tied helping with diagnostic issues.. Definitely not a controlled environment, with better equipment but better reading plugs.. 

So at WOT maybe you want the default to be 13.2  since you are WOT need a little more accuracy.. Figure out ways to make it more accurate. Filtering, taking other measurements and using the data in the data sheet to give you a better number.  If you have fixed bias in the system take it out..   What about partial throttle?   Maybe a swing from 15 to 14 is OK?   

if the transducer is well characterized and consitant does that mean because the output is not a ploted straight line that it's inaccurate?

So what part are you having trouble with? 1 + 1=2 or maybe it should be 1.5 or 2.5 

Who said anything about a transducer or for that matter a straight line?

"If you know what the curve is" what curve you talking about?

How would you know what the WOT is, if the sensor doing the measuring is incapable of telling you what was measured accurately, now your back to 1 + 1=2 or maybe it should be 1.5 or 2.5 

What it means is simple and even you know it already. Just because you see a graph on a piece of paper if the data that built that graph is wrong, the graph is wrong too! So those that want a magic mixture on a piece of paper to look a certain way, is completely meaningless, if you do not know and understand how the data came to be.

You can use bad data just about anyway you like and it's still bad data. Trying to tell someone that the answer needs to be any one thing from Bad data is like pissing into the wind and hoping you do not get wet.

If you make changes and the engine runs better, performs better and gets better fuel economy does it matter what the data from the control system says? How about it gets better fuel economy but runs hotter? Hotter than what? What's too hot for one maybe fine for another.

The truth to it all is in the eye's of the owner and if the outcome is what he/she wants does the rest of it matter?

I don't have any problems with addition, thank you..

Whats wrong with calling an O2 sensor a transducer?  You did mentioned the straight line.. "You must plot the data and it look like a straight line,"  up above..   

I have no clue as to what curve/line anyone is talking about,, That is why I asking.

I used WOT as an example where a tighter tolerance is needed.. Doesn't the ECU kinda sorta know where the throttle is based on TPS and MAP?


I'm not really sure what you are saying at the end.. What are you talking about?  Are you saying all measurements of AFR are useless?   Are you saying one sensor sucks pond water?  If this is the 1+1 = 2 then tell me what each 1 is..

Are you talking about the data collection scheme?  Whittlebeast's stuff?    Are you saying his stuff don't work?

Tuning in general?   

Is this whole episode, the result of some other episode that I missed?  Remember I typically don't bother reading subjects that involve flash tuners.. This one may have reminded me why I don't use them..

[whittlebeast]

This is more or less the graph you are looking for.

http://www.nightrider.com/biketech/images/nbo2_output.jpg

Yes, for a very narrow band, they are fairly liner.  At 450mv or so, they are very repeatable.  That graph is implying 600 mv is the sweet spot.  I tend to find where the motor is switching the o2 the fastest and just use that voltage as 14.6 and forget it.

Once the VE table is set, Generally I then turn off closed loop and put the target AFRs where I want to make the motor happy....  within reason...

I shoot for about 14 on the level highway and fade to about 13 AFR at WOT.

Andy

[whittlebeast]

If you look at a population density map of the USA and an elevation map of the USA, it is quite apparent that the majority of the miles driven by Harley riders is under 1500 feet.  Most of this high altitude tuning stuff is simply academic as most of us may only do mountain climbing on a motorcycle once a lifetime.  If the bike makes it to the top and starts when you are done looking at views, we are good to go.

Very few of us actually turn on our data loggers at the base of the mountain just to watch the magic for the fun of it.

I have been involved a couple of times with a guy that want to melt tires on the short shoots between 200 degree turns.  Those motors are a blast to tune.  The snow mobile guys deal with this stuff all the time.

Andy

[HD/Wrench]

WOW still going..


Guys tune the phucking bike get the MPG and the power call it good,  IF you are not a tuner well then ride the bike.. I do not give a rats azz what the sensor can or cannot do or what it come's down to as for a spec point.. +/- whatever

Can I do anything about it?? nope so again who cares ,  Its the tool I have to work with and that's that..

And I disagree I moved from Prescott to flat  Texas. AZ is full of mountains and some of the best riding I have ever done. I miss that , but I can tell you that I have in fact logged countless hours of data.

But again if I log with that data collection system its wrong, or at least one person thinks so. and the other does not

PHX  up the mountain for a little day time short trip 1500 to 5300 feet well that's a 45 minute ride. oh over here up to 7000 then down to 1500 back up to 4500 back to 1250 all in a tiny little day trip inside of 100 miles  , well you will be shocked that in fact that massive loss in pressure happens all over the US and you have AZ, NV NM CA UT CO all in that area that are pretty much the same type of riding in many areas.


I think all of you are pissing in the wind at high altitude..with this entire topic ( you will gain a few FPS on your stream , data log that) .. Have a great day I have to tune a bike with a PV and and I am using win pep 8 . I bet I can get the job done with out all you engineering type's telling me how to use my TOOL and what its capable of.. may a little less measuring it and just knock it home .. Myself I have that area covered very well.. Have a great day guys.... ohhhh look something shiney.

[whittlebeast]

Keep in mind you owe all of that PV tuning ability to engineers that were willing to look at the data and figure out the patterns.  They then give the programming logic to the programmers to type up the code.  Then those same engineers verify that the code is doing as designed based at looking at all that data graph stuff.

It all comes down to PV=nRT 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_gas_law

Andy

[Admiral Akbar]

ohhhh look something shiney.

Quick.. Paint it black before anyone else notices...

[Admiral Akbar]

So this is the old narrow-band vs wide-band sensor thing?..   

[whittlebeast]

It is an exhaust design thing and any o2 will find it as you climb a mountain.  The speed of sound and as a result exhaust scavenging changes and the effective exhaust back pressure changes as you climb the hill.  It shows up in the fuel trims if you have closed loop turned on.  Otherwise it shows up in the target AFR compared to the Measured AFRs.

Andy

[HD/Wrench]

And No I do not agree that its all about your engineers , as we do beta test products and have to deal with engineers that most time cannot see the forest through the trees. 

[whittlebeast]

I hate to bring this to your attention but you can thank the engineers for this formula that the EFI world revolves around.  It is what PV=nRT evolved into.

Pulse Width at the Injector = [ MAP * (RPM,MAP VE Lookup) * (RPM,TPS VE Lookup) * (IAT Temp Correction) * (Baro Correction)  * (AE_DE Correction) * (Injector Size Constant) * (Engine Temp Warmup Correction) * (RPM,MAP Target AFR Lookup) * (RPM,MAP Long Term O2 Fuel Trim Lookup) * (Short Term O2 Sensor Correction) ] + (Injector Dead Time)

Andy

[a2wheeler]

Well, this thread has gone off in a different direction, but to put it back where it began: Using TTS and vtune data collection to set your VE tables, you need to maintain a similar route (as it relates to altitude) for each of your runs. If you go back and forth between a higher altitude route and a lower altitude route, then you will never be able to get to the point that the vtune VE change becomes less than 5%. In my case I got a 10+% change in cells going back and forth. I am guessing from all this detail discussion that it does not matter which route I choose, but in order to make progress with the VE tables, I need to continue to use the same route. I choose the lower altitude route so I can include the 80kpa column in my coverage.

[whittlebeast]

Or if you climb the same mountain all the time, you can split the difference on the results on the VE tables and call it a day.  Consider yourself lucky that you can run most BT motors in closed loop most of the time.

Andy

[Steve Cole]

What this should be all about is understanding the data and where it comes from. Once you understand that, you can make an informed decision. The OP is seeing changes in his Vtune results as he changed his riding coarse. That is to be expected and I tried to explain why. Then the group of people here who feel that it's necessary to say things that are not true, needed to jump in and start trying to mislead people again. Making claims that you can measure things to a much more accurate point than is possible by the equipment currently on the market.

The combustion process is not stable to start with, and then add to that the real range sensors are capable of measuring and you have reached the limits of what can be done. Once your in that range your done, time to move on. The beauty of a closed loop system is that as things move, due to changes in the running conditions, it can make small corrections to keep things adjusted. So when you ride your bike in areas of the western US or the north eastern section of the US or most of Canada or anywhere the conditions you ride in might change, the ECM will correct for the changes.

Is it perfect, NO. Will it ever be perfect, NO. It has it's limits but those limits are leaps and bounds better than doing nothing.

[whittlebeast]

Too bad the Sporty guys are hand cuffed.

Andy

[hrdtail78]

here are some visuals. The first two are the last two runs at normal location/route. Then the last one is using a new route.

I see nothing alarming about these VE changes.  If we look at the lower rpm area.  You have some yellow cells right in the area of some of the bigger changes.  Then you get data in that cell and not next to it.  The one cell goes up which influences the cell around it for the next run.  Looking at the last correction and the smoothness around it, and things don't look bad.  I would suggest starting from a full stop in second gear.  Take off hard, stop and take off slowly, stop first gear, take off hard, med and soft.  Do some parking lot, low speed to fill these cells up with more data.

The higher rpm area where a major change took place.  Was there an EGR adjustment made between these to calibrations?  Looks like this area is blending itself out nicely also.

[a2wheeler]

Thanks for the tips on getting a better coverage. There was no EGR changes applied if comparing the high altitude route with the subsequent run in reply #11. you are correct that I did not get that good of coverage during that high alt run, but the thing I noticed was the cells that I got good coverage on were shifting VE values, and they had been white for several previous runs. When I used mastertune to display the VE tables and do a compare of edits vs baseline it is clear that the shift of VE values goes from right to left .
Even the last run in Reply #11 did not have coverage that went out as far as possible, but it did confirm to me that I was done with VE tuning.

[FLTRI]

Too bad the Sporty guys are hand cuffed.

Andy

To what? Data logging works fine on Sportsters. If you are unable to fine the issue in the data try a bit more or less fuel to see what happens to the run quality. Once you feel you exhausted the rich, lean, happy adjustments with fuel try the same with timing.
If the bike runs better with the manual changes how can we worry about what the data does or doesn't show.
As Steve said, get what you can done with what you have to work with...then move on.
It's all about compromise after all the controllable variables have been eliminated. That's as good as we can get without a laboratory setup.
After all, what we are looking for is a great running bike with minimum effort to get there.
Thank you Steve and the others who have put incredible amounts of hours actually riding their products and improving their products based on actual hands on experiences in addition to the "book".
Bob

[whittlebeast]

The issue is the closed loop algorithm is a mess and makes the bike throb.  All you have to do is look at the PW or DC as you ride down the road.  The only known cure is kick the bike out of closed loop.  The BT do closed loop very different.

Andy

[FLTRI]

When I used mastertune to display the VE tables and do a compare of edits vs baseline it is clear that the shift of VE values goes from right to left.

By how much? .5? 5? Like from 83.5 to 95.5? Or was it more like 83.5 to 84.5?
As stated, changing altitude and other conditions will cause VEs to be in constant flux...it's the nature of the beast and expected...just not huge swings.
Bob

[FLTRI]

The issue is the closed loop algorithm is a mess and makes the bike throb.  All you have to do is look at the PW or DC as you ride down the road.  The only known cure is kick the bike out of closed loop.  The BT do closed loop very different.

Andy

Can you point to the differences specifically? If we know what the differences are we maybe can relate to what you are saying.
Hopefully Steve will address this as I'm positive he knows what the differences are. In fact I'll bet he's addressed issues he's seen. If you can point,him to what you have identified what the actual issue is he may be able to fix it?
Bob

[hrdtail78]

Andy,

Remember the last log you looked at off a XL and your comment?  Maybe the new MT9's are the cuff key?

[a2wheeler]

When I used mastertune to display the VE tables and do a compare of edits vs baseline it is clear that the shift of VE values goes from right to left.

By how much? .5? 5? Like from 83.5 to 95.5? Or was it more like 83.5 to 84.5?
As stated, changing altitude and other conditions will cause VEs to be in constant flux...it's the nature of the beast and expected...just not huge swings.
Bob

2500rpm 40,50,60 kpa  was 82.0, 95.5, 99.5 went to 88.5, 101.0, 103.0
3500rpm 30, 40,50kpa  was 69.5, 87.0, 105.5 went to 75.5, 94.5, 111.0

[whittlebeast]

All you have to do is put a Sporty in closed loop and data log it going down ta flat road a 30 MPH with the throttle steady for about 30 sec.   Look at the pulse with very slowly throb about once a sec.  Now look at the trace Front compared to Rear.

Then toss on a set of o2 eliminators.  The throbbing in the logs and in the seat goes away.

Now the same test with a BT.  Way different results.

Andy

[a2wheeler]

here are the Mastertune compares. each from the same prior vtune, and High is the higher altitude route.

[harleytuner]

Keep in mind you owe all of that PV tuning ability to engineers that were willing to look at the data and figure out the patterns.  They then give the programming logic to the programmers to type up the code.  Then those same engineers verify that the code is doing as designed based at looking at all that data graph stuff.

It all comes down to PV=nRT 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_gas_law

Andy

You mean people like Steve Cole?  Good point. 

[Admiral Akbar]

Keep in mind you owe all of that PV tuning ability to engineers that were willing to look at the data and figure out the patterns.  They then give the programming logic to the programmers to type up the code.  Then those same engineers verify that the code is doing as designed based at looking at all that data graph stuff.

It all comes down to PV=nRT 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_gas_law

Andy

Not really, the process is Adiabatic..  You need to read further down on the Wikipedia Page..

[whittlebeast]

For our purposes the stuff in the intake is a close to pv=nrt

[Admiral Akbar]

here are the Mastertune compares. each from the same prior vtune, and High is the higher altitude route.

While I suspect that Andy's theory on what goes on in the exhaust system is a bit of a wildassedtheory, ambient pressure does have something to do with the tunes coming out differently..  If it were an equal (even semi equal) change across the board with pressure then Steve's idea that the sensors are shifting calibration would make sense.. Since they don't and the regions change are specific locations,, I would suspect that the issue lies in the algorithms the ECU uses to determine fuel requirements...  Speed density probably does the best job of providing open loop fueling over other open loop fuel systems but it it is not infallible..  I could see flow characteristics of the intake and exhaust changing over altitude and the Speed Density system does not have way to assess them..

[HD/Wrench]

all it needs is a MAF unit and the issue would be much less of an issue...

[Admiral Akbar]

For our purposes the stuff in the intake is a close to pv=nrt

No it's not.. That is a static equation.. If you squeeze the gas quickly, it self heats (first law of thermodynamics) .. As the gas expands it absorbs energy.. The chemical reaction in the combustion chamber also changes everthing.. Now you have new gases and a bunch of heat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adiabatic_process

[whittlebeast]

This is all used for the Calcs in the intake.  In  the cylinders is somewhat different.

[Admiral Akbar]

This is all used for the Calcs in the intake.  In  the cylinders is somewhat different.

Ok yeah..    The estimate of the trapped volume..    PV/RT = n..    There is some of that but it doesn't estimate volume very well which is the reason for the VE tables..  So I would guess it is something like

n = P x V x volumetric efficiency / T with some constant thrown in..

[hrdtail78]

here are some visuals. The first two are the last two runs at normal location/route. Then the last one is using a new route.

I see nothing alarming about these VE changes.  If we look at the lower rpm area.  You have some yellow cells right in the area of some of the bigger changes.  Then you get data in that cell and not next to it.  The one cell goes up which influences the cell around it for the next run.  Looking at the last correction and the smoothness around it, and things don't look bad.  I would suggest starting from a full stop in second gear.  Take off hard, stop and take off slowly, stop first gear, take off hard, med and soft.  Do some parking lot, low speed to fill these cells up with more data.

The higher rpm area where a major change took place.  Was there an EGR adjustment made between these to calibrations?  Looks like this area is blending itself out nicely also.

here are the Mastertune compares. each from the same prior vtune, and High is the higher altitude route.

For the upper rpm 10% change.  I would blend.  Are you planning on running this area in closed loop?  This area is slow decel.  60-65 going down light grades?  If real blubbery or popping and smooth at a different kpa or TPS.  Revisit that area?  If it accelerates quickly and smooth out of decel.  You are good, right?

Lower area.  If you plan on running this area in closed loop and trust the new VE's data enough to make the changes?  I would let the LT/STFT do thier thing.

[strokerjlk]

...Attached is a spreadsheet with the parts of the data you left out but are clearly part of the Bosch documents.

What is Ip? Is "Pressure" the manifold pressure? If so, how do you get 2 bar without turbocharging?

Ip is current. The widebands are actually measuring current. Pressure is in the exhaust.

Steve is only quoting the extremes. The 12.8 number is at 2 bar at 10000 feet. The 13.5 is at the other extreme, .5 bar at 0 feet, which is exhaust backpressure. Every wideband controller I've seen explicitly states it will be inaccurate if you have excessive exhaust back pressure. Here is the relevant section from the TwinScan docs:

Excessive exhaust back pressure. Wide-band sensors are affected by back pressure. Excessive back pressure causes exaggerated AFR indications under rich and lean conditions, but has little effect at 14.7 AFR (stoichiometric). Motorcycle exhaust systems are relatively free flowing and problems with exhaust back pressure are not likely.

thanks for always speaking the truth.

[a2wheeler]

hrdtail78,  the high rpm will be open loop. No issues on decel that I know of. I took the VE tables from the results of the last low altitude run and am running a spark tuning runs now. I am using the main lambda table attached.
As for the low rpm , low kpa. I don't notice any issues. If I have some in that area, I can try some of your suggestions to get some better coverage in that area and then apply the cells for just that area. At this time, I think I'm done with VE's.

[hrdtail78]

In the relevant DTT instructions.  It goes on and explains a couple of other exhaust problems.  All seem to do with pressure in the exhaust.  Also states a +- .5 expected accuracy in open loop.

[whittlebeast]

When I am on a dyno, we commonly have 3 widebands involved.  One running the car and ECU.  One running the Dyno and a third that I have as I run the tuning software.  It is not uncommon to see a full AFR difference form the three.  All three will be repeatable, but not the same.

[FLTRI]

When I am on a dyno, we commonly have 3 widebands involved.  One running the car and ECU.  One running the Dyno and a third that I have as I run the tuning software.  It is not uncommon to see a full AFR difference form the three.  All three will be repeatable, but not the same.

So which of the three do you assume is the accurate reading?
This is precisely why I prefer tuning closed loop bikes to what the ECM uses for it's decision making process.
Bob

[whittlebeast]

When I am on a dyno, we commonly have 3 widebands involved.  One running the car and ECU.  One running the Dyno and a third that I have as I run the tuning software.  It is not uncommon to see a full AFR difference form the three.  All three will be repeatable, but not the same.

So which of the three do you assume is the accurate reading?
This is precisely why I prefer tuning closed loop bikes to what the ECM uses for it's decision making process.
Bob

We always try to use the AFR that is running the ECU as that is the one we well later be trusting on the track on race day.

[hrdtail78]

hrdtail78,  the high rpm will be open loop. No issues on decel that I know of. I took the VE tables from the results of the last low altitude run and am running a spark tuning runs now. I am using the main lambda table attached.
As for the low rpm , low kpa. I don't notice any issues. If I have some in that area, I can try some of your suggestions to get some better coverage in that area and then apply the cells for just that area. At this time, I think I'm done with VE's.

Sounds good. 

[FLTRI]

When I am on a dyno, we commonly have 3 widebands involved.  One running the car and ECU.  One running the Dyno and a third that I have as I run the tuning software.  It is not uncommon to see a full AFR difference form the three.  All three will be repeatable, but not the same.

So which of the three do you assume is the accurate reading?
This is precisely why I prefer tuning closed loop bikes to what the ECM uses for it's decision making process.
Bob

We always try to use the AFR that is running the ECU as that is the one we well later be trusting on the track on race day.

But which one is correct in your POV? What on earth would you use the other 2 for if the data is not what you are relying on?
Bob

[whittlebeast]

It all depends how we are tuning the motor.  On the dyno we are normally looking fr dropouts in the torque and use the dyno AFR to determine is this is a fueling issue or some other issue.  I have a wideband on my laptop watching if I need to wave off a pull.  Strange things happen early in a tuning process when we are on a dyno.

The real serious tuning is all done on track in real world conditions.  At that point we typically only have one wideband.  Some guys run two, so if one fails out on track.

[FLTRI]

It all depends how we are tuning the motor.  On the dyno we are normally looking fr dropouts in the torque and use the dyno AFR to determine is this is a fueling issue or some other issue.  I have a wideband on my laptop watching if I need to wave off a pull.  Strange things happen early in a tuning process when we are on a dyno.

The real serious tuning is all done on track in real world conditions.  At that point we typically only have one wideband.  Some guys run two, so if one fails out on track.

Ok got it.
One O2 sensor for the Dyno you use to look for torque drop outs. What is a torque drop out?
Then one sensor is for you to monitor another O2 sensor for safety..albeit not one you rely upon for accurate/tuning data...I assume the Dyno operator would not see a negative/dangerous running issue which why you are needed as another source of AFR?
Then you have a third sensor you use to tune the bike at the track with.
I guess my question is why not simply monitor and rely on the one sensor you use to tune with.
I don't see why anyone would want to rely on data known to be different than the data used for tuning, either on track or on Dyno?
Bob

[whittlebeast]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBG6zzU7SQ8

That is one of the cars we have on the dyno a couple of times a year.  That is him screwing around at a school day.  He is an instructor but was playing around with his race car for fun.

Regarding the torque dropouts, we are looking for a smooth curve with the MAPxRPM vs Duty Cycle looking good in the plots.  Busts in the tune show up fast.

Andy

[Steve Cole]

When I am on a dyno, we commonly have 3 widebands involved.  One running the car and ECU.  One running the Dyno and a third that I have as I run the tuning software.  It is not uncommon to see a full AFR difference form the three.  All three will be repeatable, but not the same.

The truth is you have no way to know if they are accurate at all! All you do know is you have a reading and it goes up and down. Which one is right or wrong may vary between any of them or none of them. If you do not follow what the manufacture of the sensors tells you, you have to do, then all bets are off when it comes to accuracy of the data. With the  charts I post before anyone should be able to now understand how, as the engine RPM moves up and down that the readings from these units can and does get further and further from the truth. If your out riding a bike with these sensors (BroadBands) as they are used today the ECM doesn't have a chance at working correctly. Now if they added the necessary measurements and code to the ECM they would work just fine.

I've got an article that was written sometime back about these systems and how good or bad they did during independent testing. Since this was written things have not gotten any better but they could if they wanted too. It's to big to attach so if anyone wants a copy let me know and I can email to you or if someone wants to put in a drop box account or such I will send it.

If you use them as a tool to show you strictly richer or leaner at a given point, for comparison purposes, they typically work OK. As long as NO exhaust system changes are made! So if your on a dyno and  previously measured the reading at say 2000 RPM at a fixed altitude with no changes made to the exhaust system you could compare that to another reading taken after tuning changes were made at the same RPM. As for the reading being an accurate number all bets are off.

[FLTRI]

Regarding the torque dropouts, we are looking for a smooth curve with the MAPxRPM vs Duty Cycle looking good in the plots.  Busts in the tune show up fast.

Andy

IME, 99% of the time power dips come from AFR not close to target.
A simply peek at the AFR will show the fueling issue. If it isn't fuel I look for something obvious in the timing tables. Usually can see timing issues in a couple mins.
Now if that doesn't fix it I will log a couple runs right where the issues show and then go to the data log to disect the data looking for something not obvious/normal.
Tuning issues are easy to catch without overthinking it. It's just fuel and timing.
Bob

[FLTRI]

That is one of the cars we have on the dyno a couple of times a year.  That is him screwing around at a school day.  He is an instructor but was playing around with his race car for fun.

Andy

Looks like he's going to the store. Lol
I never found driving around a track at 50% speed was useful...just a waste of fuel, tires, brake pads, and engine life.
I always took the attitude you must drive the car at 90%+ in order to learn anything about handling, gear ratios, brake bias, engine tune, and run quality.
Just my way,
Bob
PS- When did tracks start allowing drivers to drive in their PJs? I always wore a proper suit et al anytime I took to the track. Maybe things have slacked off? Maybe he snuck out?

[whittlebeast]

It was a school and he did sneak out.  As I recall, it was a brand new tune and I sent him out to get a big wide sampling.  I may have just installed the MAF.

[FLTRI]

It was a school and he did sneak out.  As I recall, it was a brand new tune and I sent him out to get a big wide sampling.  I may have just installed the MAF.

Since the the car was driven at <50% what good was the recorded data? Unless the normal driver was that slow as to not need WOT/high load tuning?
Bob

[whittlebeast]

On that car the WOT stuff is the easy part.  It was the driving around in the pits and warmup laps that we were fighting.  That car has been on SD, AN and MAF all in the same week.  Eventually we went to a hybrid combination.

The cam idles around 2000 and turns on at about 5500

[FLTRI]

On that car the WOT stuff is the easy part.  It was the driving around in the pits and warmup laps that we were fighting.  That car has been on SD, AN and MAF all in the same week.  Eventually we went to a hybrid combination.

The cam idles around 2000 and turns on at about 5500

So for a race car you are that concerned with driving the car through the pits? Seems it was running smooth at partial throttle and load.
Guess of the driver spends a lot of time at light loads and low rpms as cruising the paddock it would be important to tune is precisely? Frankly I would tell the driver to get out there and stand on it and don't worry how it runs in the paddock/pits. Lol
Bob

[strokerjlk]

I all get out of this is that the afr accuracy of the can vary depending on conditions.  Knowing the issues, the device measuring the AFR can't be stupid.

Add.. Who cares if the variance is +- 0.5 points?? Still better than a carb..

So how does one expect the system to work then? If you tell it to control to a moving target then it will always be moving and never get to a final adjustment. Then experts say it must be xxx number or the tune is no good. You must plot the data and it look like a straight line, and on and on and on. The truth is they have no idea what it really is and have never spent the time to learn what really happens and why it is.  Data is a great thing when you understand what it is and how to use it, properly. Used improperly all you get is pretty pictures that do not mean much of anything.

So is the new rule of thumb going to be that fuel mixture only needs to be +/- 0.5 AFR? So a tuneup can be at anywhere between 13.0 and 14.0 at WOT and it's good enough? The truth is you have no way to know any better! If that's good enough then there is a ton of dyno sheets that got post here on this site that people said we no good and now they are just fine!

tuning advice from someone that cant tune any better than this.
narrow bands 
explains why it looks so bad now.

[lonewolf]

tuning advice from someone that cant tune any better than this.
narrow bands 
explains why it looks so bad now.

Your jokin', right?

[harleytuner]

tuning advice from someone that cant tune any better than this.
narrow bands 
explains why it looks so bad now.

Your jokin', right?

I would hope so....but somehow I doubt it.

[hrdtail78]

I wonder if those injectors were running at 116% IDC in any off those graphed runs?

[whittlebeast]

Hrdtail, it is sad that most people will never know to look, let alone have any idea how dangerous it is to ignore this number.

[FLTRI]

I'll bet lonewolf, hrdtail, Harleytuner, and I have combined over 60 years experience tuning and dealing with these engines (sportster as well as BTs) and their idiosyncracies.
With all that experience we have but a novice's POV compared to the knowledge Steve Cole has garnered from his exposure to Delphi, GM, HD, and a few others over the years.

This guy lives and breathes EFI, turbos, cams, paying incredible attention to details...as many of us have heard for ourselves.
Obstinate? Yes. Sometimes downright irritating, well ya. But to criticize his EFI tuning prowess and/or knowledge about how the stuff works?
NOW THATS FUNNY! 
Bob

[joe_lyons]

I'll bet lonewolf, hrdtail, Harleytuner, and I have combined over 60 years experience tuning and dealing with these engines (sportster as well as BTs) and their idiosyncracies.
With all that experience we have but a novice's POV compared to the knowledge Steve Cole has garnered from his exposure to Delphi, GM, HD, and a few others over the years.

This guy lives and breathes EFI, turbos, cams, paying incredible attention to details...as many of us have heard for ourselves.
Obstinate? Yes. Sometimes downright irritating, well ya. But to criticize his EFI tuning prowess and/or knowledge about how the stuff works?
NOW THATS FUNNY! 
Bob

And he has a mustache.

[whittlebeast]

Some people are driven on the Internet buy trashing and discouraging.  Political blogs are driven by these people.  I am not sure how they sleep at night.

I am driven by sharing and helping people.  Some people simply don't want to learn or even look.

Have fun tuning

Andy

[harleytuner]

I'll bet lonewolf, hrdtail, Harleytuner, and I have combined over 60 years experience tuning and dealing with these engines (sportster as well as BTs) and their idiosyncracies.
With all that experience we have but a novice's POV compared to the knowledge Steve Cole has garnered from his exposure to Delphi, GM, HD, and a few others over the years.
Hi
This guy lives and breathes EFI, turbos, cams, paying incredible attention to details...as many of us have heard for ourselves.
Obstinate? Yes. Sometimes downright irritating, well ya. But to criticize his EFI tuning prowess and/or knowledge about how the stuff works?
NOW THATS FUNNY! 
Bob

People seam to forget that S.C. was at the forefront of flashed based tuning for Harley's.  Who did Harley go to when they wanted to offer the original SERT?  Where would we be if they didn't go to him?  It's funny how one of his biggest critics on here relied pretty heavily on S.C. just a few short years ago to learn the fundementals and get set up Tuning now knows more about it than anyone.

[whittlebeast]

Most of this is really basic efi 101.  At least what is exposed....

[strokerjlk]

tuning advice from someone that cant tune any better than this.
narrow bands 
explains why it looks so bad now.

Your jokin', right?

no not at all. anyone else that tried to pass this type of sheet off ,would be strung up.
amazing to see who  slobbers  over it though.

[FLTRI]

tuning advice from someone that cant tune any better than this.
narrow bands 
explains why it looks so bad now.

Your jokin', right?

no not at all. anyone else that tried to pass this type of sheet off ,would be strung up.
amazing to see who  slobbers  over it though.

Got some of your pulls from 1000-1200 rpm displayed at 3 smoothing to contrast SC's graphs?
Bob

[Admiral Akbar]

I've got an article that was written sometime back about these systems and how good or bad they did during independent testing. Since this was written things have not gotten any better but they could if they wanted too. It's to big to attach so if anyone wants a copy let me know and I can email to you or if someone wants to put in a drop box account or such I will send it.

Steve,, If you could email the report to me.. My addy in in my profile.. I'm always interested in the "analysis of errors" in measurement systems as I used to work in electronics test..

[FLTRI]

Most of this is really basic efi 101.  At least what is exposed....

Yep, you'd think some folks would learn. Some just want and/or need to write their own book and try to make this out to be a lot more difficult and cumbersome than it really is.
K.I.S.S. Goes a long way here to understand what's going on.
Bob

[hrdtail78]

no not at all. anyone else that tried to pass this type of sheet off ,would be strung up.
amazing to see who  slobbers  over it though.

Has nothing to do with slobbering over anything, or anybody.   

For me it is about shooting myself in the foot with the guy that designed the whole thing.  Take this thread.  We are discussing how the Delphi system works with change of altitude.  That TTS cam graph has nothing to do with it.  It is here only for another cheap shot from a "man" that has nothing to bring to the table except to discredit, and personnel attack a guy for years.  Instead of bringing something to the table that resemble anything that could bring anything worth while to the thread. 

I see this thread as an opportunity to learn.  What can be learned.  How the ECM works.  1.  When and how does the ECM know baro of the day.  2.  Does it only get this info before the first start on a non running engine.  3.  Does it take any readings of daily baro while running?  4.  If we tell the ECM the engine isn't going to take any more air in at certain RPM points like 800, 1600, 2400, 3200....... after a certain throttle position.  Does it take that and read baro then?  5.  Does this make correction to the baro?

The guy that knows how all that works in the program is Steve Cole.  He wrote it.  He is the guy that will come on here and explain how it works, and what to do to make a better running bike.

This is Jim's MO.  Continuing to try and discredit SC of his knowledge of the HD Delphi EFI.  If anybody disagree with him trying to discredit.  You get called names or insults are thrown your way.  It is basically a bully mentality.  Problem is, I don't intimidate easily.  I consider the source and laugh. 

Trust the guy that worked directly with HD/ Delphi to get a better EFI system on HD's, or a light bulb maker that tunes part time and continually spreads bad info.  Choice is yours to make.

[strokerjlk]

no not at all. anyone else that tried to pass this type of sheet off ,would be strung up.
amazing to see who  slobbers  over it though.

Has nothing to do with slobbering over anything, or anybody.   

For me it is about shooting myself in the foot with the guy that designed the whole thing.  Take this thread.  We are discussing how the Delphi system works with change of altitude.  That TTS cam graph has nothing to do with it.  It is here only for another cheap shot from a "man" that has nothing to bring to the table except to discredit, and personnel attack a guy for years.  Instead of bringing something to the table that resemble anything that could bring anything worth while to the thread. 

I see this thread as an opportunity to learn.  What can be learned.  How the ECM works.  1.  When and how does the ECM know baro of the day.  2.  Does it only get this info before the first start on a non running engine.  3.  Does it take any readings of daily baro while running?  4.  If we tell the ECM the engine isn't going to take any more air in at certain RPM points like 800, 1600, 2400, 3200....... after a certain throttle position.  Does it take that and read baro then?  5.  Does this make correction to the baro?

The guy that knows how all that works in the program is Steve Cole.  He wrote it.  He is the guy that will come on here and explain how it works, and what to do to make a better running bike.

This is Jim's MO.  Continuing to try and discredit SC of his knowledge of the HD Delphi EFI.  If anybody disagree with him trying to discredit.  You get called names or insults are thrown your way.  It is basically a bully mentality.  Problem is, I don't intimidate easily.  I consider the source and laugh. 

Trust the guy that worked directly with HD/ Delphi to get a better EFI system on HD's, or a light bulb maker that tunes part time and continually spreads bad info.  Choice is yours to make.

i don't discredit his knowledge of his tuner. just his hands on ability.
shooting myself in the foot . i dont give a rats ass. unlike you ,i dont need him or his BS .
the dyno sheet was posted  because... ( keep up now) he's running his mouth about how great ,even superior the narrow bands and his method of using them is.
but the end result looks like "Potty mouth". if that sheet was posted from anyone else ,you guys slobbering  over him now, would be all over the sheet and the worthless tuner.
speaking of laughing . this whole thread is a big laugh just watching some of you go brain dead ..... FWIW if you learned anything from this thread as you so desired ....you really didn't know anything to begin with.
still bothers you that a man works a good paying job with benefits and retirement, i see. thats good.