Target tune closer to coming to market?

[FLTRI]

Bob, this is a serious non loaded question....

What are you personally looking at to identify poor o2 sampling?   Can you post a log where you can "see" it happening?

A serious answer is:
Due to some of the aftermarket exhaust designs, when used on big inch builds with high compression and a lot of cam timing overlap, the low rpm O2 sampling is all but nonexistent.
I have little control of customer supplied configurations but I do have to live with them.
I do realize O2 sampling on mild builds with properly designed exhaust systems with O2 bungs  ideally located, can be left in CL 100% of the calibration.
The easiest way to see poor O2 sampling is when trying to run a Vtune, Autotune, or Smartune. The O2 sensors refuse to come online and continue to go offline and online at steady state light load conditions.
I directly address the issue by hand tuning in open loop and leaving the balance of the calibration in closed loop.
My question was,,,and still is,,,
Can I choose open loop for where I see poor O2 sampling and closed loop for the rest of the calibration?
That way I can leave idle in open loop for steady idling and open loop for the problem area(s). By leaving the rest of the calibration in closed loop I generate a win-win situation for the owner.
Bob
PS - I use the sample tube to verify the onboard sensors. Just another check point rather than strictly relying on sensors that my or may not get good readings.

[whittlebeast]

This is the sort of thing I look for to identify an O2 gone crazy issue.  I have only seen it once.

http://www.nbs-stl.com/MLVDemo/312%20MAPxRPM%20Closed%20Loop%20Gone%20Bad.png

Andy

[whittlebeast]

I can't answer your question as my personal Target Tune is not here yet.  I will be happy to answer your question when I know.

In all fairness, I sure hope it is there......  One of the first tests I do once all "By the Book" tuning is done is knock the closed loop off line and see how well the ECU holds AFR targets.  Then retest with the o2s on line in closed loop.

My Sporty was way better in open loop every time.  I am out to flat fix that.

Andy

[FLTRI]

...I have only seen it once...
Andy

Do you regularly tune big inch Harley VTwins with high compression and high overlap cams that breath through short pipes without baffles?
Mild builds are not tuning challenges with properly designed exhaust systems conservative cam profiles.
Bob

[q1svt]

A serious answer is:
Due to some of the aftermarket exhaust designs, when used on big inch builds with high compression and a lot of cam timing overlap, the low rpm O2 sampling is all but nonexistent.
I have little control of customer supplied configurations but I do have to live with them.
I do realize O2 sampling on mild builds with properly designed exhaust systems with O2 bungs  ideally located, can be left in CL 100% of the calibration.
The easiest way to see poor O2 sampling is when trying to run a Vtune, Autotune, or Smartune. The O2 sensors refuse to come online and continue to go offline and online at steady state light load conditions.
I directly address the issue by hand tuning in open loop and leaving the balance of the calibration in closed loop.
My question was,,,and still is,,,
Can I choose open loop for where I see poor O2 sampling and closed loop for the rest of the calibration?
That way I can leave idle in open loop for steady idling and open loop for the problem area(s). By leaving the rest of the calibration in closed loop I generate a win-win situation for the owner.
Bob
PS - I use the sample tube to verify the onboard sensors. Just another check point rather than strictly relying on sensors that my or may not get good readings.

Can you share the data specific to bad O2 reading for wide bands in the the mentioned areas since the thread is about full time WB tuning?

Question: If, through logs, I see poor O2 sampling in say, the 1750-2250 rpms/ 20-50kpa area.

edited: from the on-board sensors...

[FLTRI]

It makes no difference if poor O2 sampling comes from narrow band or broadband sensors. Poor sampling is poor sampling.
As I stated, I see this live, while using the onboard sensors (narrow or broad) to dial in the system.
I correct the issue on the fly, as I tune.
There has been so many logs posted over the years showing pools O2 readings I'm surprised this issue is not common knowledge.
Seems to me there was a long thread a while back addressing poor O2 bung mountings when the exhaust mfgs first started installing bungs into their products (2007?) that failed to provide good O2 sampling.
After a ton of input from calibrators and tuners from all over the US, most mfgs improved, not all completely fixed, the O2 mounting.
Bob

[q1svt]

It makes no difference if poor O2 sampling comes from narrow band or broadband sensors. Poor sampling is poor sampling.
As I stated, I see this live, while using the onboard sensors (narrow or broad) to dial in the system.
I correct the issue on the fly, as I tune.
There has been so many logs posted over the years showing pools O2 readings I'm surprised this issue is not common knowledge.
Seems to me there was a long thread a while back addressing poor O2 bung mountings when the exhaust mfgs first started installing bungs into their products (2007?) that failed to provide good O2 sampling.
After a ton of input from calibrators and tuners from all over the US, most mfgs improved, not all completely fixed, the O2 mounting.
Bob

Yes you and I have gone back & forth about differences in O2 sensors...  Yes there are a lot of problems with narrow band placement... so far you are the only talking up wide bands and talk about seeing it and having the data...

So then you'll have no problem in providing the specific data you see for on-board WIDE BANDS, so everyone will be able to see it too?

Since you point out on a regular bases to whittlebeast, just how important it is to back up his statements... I can only believe that many here would like to see for themselves what you have 


edited:
As a wise person once stated:

Any way to show this bust? Other than you simply stating it? Lol
Bob

[upnorthbiker]

Scaling is very different than filtering.  Filtering will throw out data as defined by the filter.  Scaling is simply a color thing.

Upnorthbiker can post it here if he wants.

Due to work commitments and the fact I had to work out how to post 1.25mb of data, at last here is the log that Andy got those screenshots from.
Hope the link works.
Jeff

https://www.dropbox.com/s/wnm0y5w7jv3pspc/log0004.csv?dl=0

[FLTRI]

It makes no difference if poor O2 sampling comes from narrow band or broadband sensors. Poor sampling is poor sampling.
As I stated, I see this live, while using the onboard sensors (narrow or broad) to dial in the system.
I correct the issue on the fly, as I tune.
There has been so many logs posted over the years showing pools O2 readings I'm surprised this issue is not common knowledge.
Seems to me there was a long thread a while back addressing poor O2 bung mountings when the exhaust mfgs first started installing bungs into their products (2007?) that failed to provide good O2 sampling.
After a ton of input from calibrators and tuners from all over the US, most mfgs improved, not all completely fixed, the O2 mounting.
Bob

Yes you and I have gone back & forth about differences in O2 sensors...  Yes there are a lot of problems with narrow band placement... so far you are the only talking up wide bands and talk about seeing it and having the data...

So then you'll have no problem in providing the specific data you see for on-board WIDE BANDS, so everyone will be able to see it too?

Since you point out on a regular bases to whittlebeast, just how important it is to back up his statements... I can only believe that many here would like to see for themselves what you have 


edited:
As a wise person once stated:

Any way to show this bust? Other than you simply stating it? Lol
Bob

Actually it really sounds as though you doubt that broadbands can get poor O2 sampling, right?

You may also feel you could place the broadbands virtually anywhere in any exhaust system and, because they're broadbands, they will get good quality, reliable readings?
In other words every exhaust mfg installs the O2 bungs correctly to provide accurate and reliable readings, right?

As I mentioned, I fix tuning issues as related to poor O2 sensing on the fly so I don't need to log data for evaluation later. I watch it live and see it clearly when trying to get Tmax, low rpm/load tunes to stay put without it enrichening fueling based on air reverting to the sensors from the tail pipe.

While I realize I can can limit the system to very little AFR correction?/change IMO that is a bandaid used to keep a bike in tune rather than letting the system pull and/or add fueling as it sees need...unfortunately not always desired or needed.
Should be the same with any fulltime closed loop system, especially as applied to big high performance builds.
Bob

[hrdtail78]

I also see the issue Bob is talking about.  I have seen it with the Vision and AT-100, Techno Research and DTT, PC5 and AT-100's, DTT and MyTune, Dynojet sampling, and TTS with analog inputs.  And I am positive it is going to show up with Target Tune.  It isn't a problem with the tuning device.  It is a problem with sampling.  They all use the same 4.2.  There isn't anything in any of the programs that can ID bad sampling.  It doesn't know or care.  It puts out a voltage.

I will agree that the 4.2's are a bit more forgiving with placement and penetration over the 18mm NB's but that still leaves them far from perfect.  There is a trade off of pros and cons of 18mm NB's and 4.2's.  Still boils down to knowing the difference and having realistic expectations of what the sensor can do and how well it can do it in an application.

[q1svt]

I'm really glad you both see it... Then either one of you can provide the data so we all can see it too...

Hardtail, it might be true that it will show up with TT ...

BUT FLTRI has seen it with his tuning of Autotune, and we all want to look at that data...



FWIW I'm not going to stop asking you over and over again too to put up or  and redirecting the topic, talking around the topic, or any other redirects is not going to work.

Any way to show this bust? Other than you simply stating it? Lol
Bob

[GregOn2Wheels]

Over a month ago in this same topic, I had essentially the same question FLTRI is asking:

Since my understanding is that Target Tune makes closed-loop operation possible for any user-selected lambda value, will open-loop operation still be possible in areas selected by the user and if so, how will these areas be designated?  It seems like the current strategy for selecting open-loop areas wouldn't (and shouldn't) work with TT.  I ordered a TT from Fuel Moto yesterday so I guess I'll find out soon enough.

Target Tune sets the entire AF/Lambda table to closed loop, we do however have the ability to set the thresholds based on MAP.

This "ability to set the thresholds based on MAP." that Jamie mentioned is part of the answer, although end-users don't currently have the ability to set this thresholds.  Hopefully this will be included in a future version of WinPV.  I feel alot better about it if he had said, "ability to set thresholds based on MAP and RPM."
Another trick that will work in some cases involves using the fuel map in an unconventional way.  In areas where o2 sensors are indicating leaner or richer than actual, the target lambda can be set to an artificially hi or low value to offset the error.  If the o2s are reading too lean at idle, offset them by bumping up the lambda values in the idle range to values richer than the true target.  (don't ask me how one would know the amount of offset to use, but I assume that if a tuner knows the O2s are giving false readings in a given area, he should be able to tell by how much the readings are off.) It won't work in every case and it's not a perfect solution, but just another tool in the box until something better comes along.

[rageglide]

I don't really want to get into the middle of this debate, and I am not sure if the few logs collected during the tuning session would tell much... 

Bob tuned my 120 using the narrow bands on PowerVision. 

When I showed up Bob joked about why I was there for a dyno tune since I have PV and AT100 set up.   We talked about what I was seeing, tune drift when adaptive was enabled, also that I was seeing AFR bouncing around quite a bit when monitoring the WB O2s.  His first comment was that O2 sensor placement didn't look good, but then retracted the comment for the most part.  I run a Dragula gen 1 and in my opinion is known for having very good O2 sensor placement (for both NB and WB).

Ran the bike up through the gears on the dyno and showed Bob the discrepency I was seeing with the WB AFR read outs.  Bob saw the AFR bouncing around quite a bit and his comment was "WTF?!".  The map had been autotuned a few sessions with WBs.  When it came to tuning Bob chose to autotune with the NBs vs the WB's.  He ran through the process and afterwards we then checked the resulting tune, tweaked AFR table and VE tables quite a bit.  Fired it up again and checked the Wideband AFR display, the result was MUCH more stable.

We didn't get to actually ride the bike because of the 10 cent bolt... So I'm not able to comment about how stable the tune would be long term.  (at least not until the engine is back together)

I may have .pvv file from the autotune session, but I'm not sure it would be of much help...   I do have a log taken when I rode the bike up to RC Cycles, IMO it's not pretty and it's indicative of what the WBs were showing (adaptive disabled).   I also have a short log taken on the dyno after the initial autotune session and before final tweaks.  It doesn't have the WB output, but it does have NB voltages.   

FWIW

[Jamie Long]

Another trick that will work in some cases involves using the fuel map in an unconventional way.  In areas where o2 sensors are indicating leaner or richer than actual, the target lambda can be set to an artificially hi or low value to offset the error.  If the o2s are reading too lean at idle, offset them by bumping up the lambda values in the idle range to values richer than the true target.  (don't ask me how one would know the amount of offset to use, but I assume that if a tuner knows the O2s are giving false readings in a given area, he should be able to tell by how much the readings are off.) It won't work in every case and it's not a perfect solution, but just another tool in the box until something better comes along.

Would not recommend doing this. Shortcomings or issues with sampling are not linear nor do they typically occur expotentially   

[GregOn2Wheels]

Another trick that will work in some cases involves using the fuel map in an unconventional way.  In areas where o2 sensors are indicating leaner or richer than actual, the target lambda can be set to an artificially hi or low value to offset the error.  If the o2s are reading too lean at idle, offset them by bumping up the lambda values in the idle range to values richer than the true target.  (don't ask me how one would know the amount of offset to use, but I assume that if a tuner knows the O2s are giving false readings in a given area, he should be able to tell by how much the readings are off.) It won't work in every case and it's not a perfect solution, but just another tool in the box until something better comes along.

Would not recommend doing this. Shortcomings or issues with sampling are not linear nor do they typically occur expotentially

I understand Jamie and I'd prefer not to, but if not that then what?

[Jamie Long]

Another trick that will work in some cases involves using the fuel map in an unconventional way.  In areas where o2 sensors are indicating leaner or richer than actual, the target lambda can be set to an artificially hi or low value to offset the error.  If the o2s are reading too lean at idle, offset them by bumping up the lambda values in the idle range to values richer than the true target.  (don't ask me how one would know the amount of offset to use, but I assume that if a tuner knows the O2s are giving false readings in a given area, he should be able to tell by how much the readings are off.) It won't work in every case and it's not a perfect solution, but just another tool in the box until something better comes along.

Would not recommend doing this. Shortcomings or issues with sampling are not linear nor do they typically occur expotentially

I understand Jamie and I'd prefer not to, but if not that then what?

Fix the sampling, fix the tune, or fix the combination. Are you having a problem with your tune? 

[q1svt]

I don't really want to get into the middle of this debate, and I am not sure if the few logs collected during the tuning session would tell much... 

Actually a post of yours kind of open pandora's box so to speak...
http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,85346.0.html

In reply# 247 & others in this thread, jamie outlines the level at which the systems need to be at for PV-TT... Since it's less invasive to ask someone to provide their data in which they identified issues, allows others to help understand whether there is truly issues as described, or is there a different underlying problem...  the other option is to ask the current software/hardware levels that a dyno shop is running.

I don't want to rehash your other post but I think you get the point 

[rbabos]

I don't really want to get into the middle of this debate, and I am not sure if the few logs collected during the tuning session would tell much... 

Bob tuned my 120 using the narrow bands on PowerVision. 

When I showed up Bob joked about why I was there for a dyno tune since I have PV and AT100 set up.   We talked about what I was seeing, tune drift when adaptive was enabled, also that I was seeing AFR bouncing around quite a bit when monitoring the WB O2s.  His first comment was that O2 sensor placement didn't look good, but then retracted the comment for the most part.  I run a Dragula gen 1 and in my opinion is known for having very good O2 sensor placement (for both NB and WB).

Ran the bike up through the gears on the dyno and showed Bob the discrepency I was seeing with the WB AFR read outs.  Bob saw the AFR bouncing around quite a bit and his comment was "WTF?!".  The map had been autotuned a few sessions with WBs.  When it came to tuning Bob chose to autotune with the NBs vs the WB's.  He ran through the process and afterwards we then checked the resulting tune, tweaked AFR table and VE tables quite a bit.  Fired it up again and checked the Wideband AFR display, the result was MUCH more stable.

We didn't get to actually ride the bike because of the 10 cent bolt... So I'm not able to comment about how stable the tune would be long term.  (at least not until the engine is back together)

I may have .pvv file from the autotune session, but I'm not sure it would be of much help...   I do have a log taken when I rode the bike up to RC Cycles, IMO it's not pretty and it's indicative of what the WBs were showing (adaptive disabled).   I also have a short log taken on the dyno after the initial autotune session and before final tweaks.  It doesn't have the WB output, but it does have NB voltages.   

FWIW

Ok, so during the tune were some of these areas placed into open loop? If not, good luck.
Ron

[rageglide]

Ok, so during the tune were some of these areas placed into open loop? If not, good luck.
Ron

No

Confirmed after looking at the AFR table, Closed loop  .973 lambda (14.3afr)

[FLTRI]

I don't really want to get into the middle of this debate, and I am not sure if the few logs collected during the tuning session would tell much... 

Bob tuned my 120 using the narrow bands on PowerVision. 

When I showed up Bob joked about why I was there for a dyno tune since I have PV and AT100 set up.   We talked about what I was seeing, tune drift when adaptive was enabled, also that I was seeing AFR bouncing around quite a bit when monitoring the WB O2s.  His first comment was that O2 sensor placement didn't look good, but then retracted the comment for the most part.  I run a Dragula gen 1 and in my opinion is known for having very good O2 sensor placement (for both NB and WB).

Ran the bike up through the gears on the dyno and showed Bob the discrepency I was seeing with the WB AFR read outs.  Bob saw the AFR bouncing around quite a bit and his comment was "WTF?!".  The map had been autotuned a few sessions with WBs.  When it came to tuning Bob chose to autotune with the NBs vs the WB's.  He ran through the process and afterwards we then checked the resulting tune, tweaked AFR table and VE tables quite a bit.  Fired it up again and checked the Wideband AFR display, the result was MUCH more stable.

We didn't get to actually ride the bike because of the 10 cent bolt... So I'm not able to comment about how stable the tune would be long term.  (at least not until the engine is back together)

I may have .pvv file from the autotune session, but I'm not sure it would be of much help...   I do have a log taken when I rode the bike up to RC Cycles, IMO it's not pretty and it's indicative of what the WBs were showing (adaptive disabled).   I also have a short log taken on the dyno after the initial autotune session and before final tweaks.  It doesn't have the WB output, but it does have NB voltages.   

FWIW

I believe we saw the N/Bs were able to bring in the VEs better than the W/Bs.
This why I suggested to tune with and run the N/B (heated) sensors.
Not sure why the broadbands had so much trouble but didn't spend the time to dianose.
The bike seemed to run very well after hand tuning the high rpm/load area.
Also should have left idle area and decel/low kpa in open loop.
Bob

[rageglide]

I believe we saw the N/Bs were able to bring in the VEs better than the W/Bs.
This why I suggested to tune with and run the N/B (heated) sensors.
Not sure why the broadbands had so much trouble but didn't spend the time to dianose.
The bike seemed to run very well after hand tuning the high rpm/load area.
Also should have left idle area and decel/low kpa in open loop.
Bob

I don't about the first comment.  I do recall that after tuning and the manual changes we saw WBs showing stable values.  Could very well be the case that the NBs worked better, but we didnt try WB AT to know for sure.  That said the VE changes are quite different in a few areas after the NB AT.

And yes, we left the low and idle in open loop, also open loop in 75kPA+ cells.

Anyway... probably not relevent to the thread. 

[Mossy73]

Bump.......... post 357 

[rbabos]

Bump.......... post 357 

Just thinking of you this morning. I'm really interested on how well TT deals with that spastic 20-30 kpa area that pisses the three of us off. Not being able to establish a delta within 6 in that area with NB makes me wonder how in long term it will dial it in. As you know, I picked the highest generated ve's in that area out of many, many log events and went open loop there. It' amazing how much the table can change, same temp, same route and driven the same. No way to know if the ve table in that area is spot on but the lower generated ve's never pan out. So best guess is the higher ve tables are the ticket.  So far , so good. It's also interesting that the idle kpa can range from 27-22 in the same ride. This must play hell with sampling also for these light load inconsistencies when logging for the ve's? Only guessing on that one. Below is an example of how much it can change from one event to another. Obviously Test 1 sucks in the 5% area. Test 2 ve table runs fine and continues to do so with the low end open loop.
Ron

[whittlebeast]

Just a guess here but I bet once we watch TT doing its magic for a wile,  lots of us will get way better at tuning all of these systems.

[hrdtail78]

I'm really glad you both see it... Then either one of you can provide the data so we all can see it too...

Hardtail, it might be true that it will show up with TT ...

BUT FLTRI has seen it with his tuning of Autotune, and we all want to look at that data...



FWIW I'm not going to stop asking you over and over again too to put up or  and redirecting the topic, talking around the topic, or any other redirects is not going to work.

Any way to show this bust? Other than you simply stating it? Lol
Bob

https://app.box.com/s/w5hqbzfqve7mox60d19xqyjxjpv1mm4e

TT log off a Vrod.  Notice the indicated lean areas in the lower KPA areas.  Typical of what I see with reversion and 4.2's.  Sampling problem area's are problem sample areas.  Tuning devices don't fix poor sample quality.