HarleyTechTalk

Mayor the tune you had me correct before was at 13.2, on the AFR table. The new Tune I did was set at 13.0. This would comensate for the higher or additional fuel. Right

Take a look at this tune, should I download this one for Now?

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

Quote from: N-gin on November 14, 2011, 05:21:57 PM
Mayor the tune you had me correct before was at 13.2, on the AFR table. The new Tune I did was set at 13.0. This would comensate for the higher or additional fuel. Right  

no, if you want it richer that's what setting the afr from 13.2 to 13 does.  If your ve's are correct for 13.2, then the sampled results should be close to 13 when the afr table is set to 13 (at least that is the way it is supposed to work    ).   

Quote from: N-gin on November 14, 2011, 05:21:57 PM
Take a look at this tune, should I download this one for Now?

I think that there are parts of your timing tables that are a wee bit optimistic:


I marked where I thought the advance might be too much.  I would have a very hard time believing that your bike can handle that much advance.  I'm not sure your bike will take that much at 2,500 and 2,750 either.  My guess would be you are in the neighborhood of about 5-8 degrees or so of too much advance in the boxed in area. 

Ran the bike tonight.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

I would drop your max timing down to 45* anywhere in the tables. With the fuel you can buy today we have found that to be a good upper limit. Several years ago I would have said 48* but times are a changing. Also one needs to remember that once you make timing changes it's wise to rerun Vtune as it can and will change the rate the fuel burns in the cylinder and give you different results.

Thanks steve I did on this next tune.
Mayor you were right on the money about his spark tables You know your stuff.
I raised some other ares in the lower rpm high map areas. lowered the over 45 degree areas and made some changes were Mayor pointed out.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

N-gin,

I think you are still trying to run too much advance in the 90-100 Kpa columns from 3k and up. I think you should be doing data recordings to test your timing.  I really can't imagine that your bike will take that much timing. 

you should run a regular data recording to see if your knock retard function is pulling any timing.  Here's how you record regular data: click on file, then select record data.



when you click on that, the program will then have you select a location that the recording will be saved at on your hard drive, and data recording control center will pop-up.  In the data recording center, select generic data:

The generic data records at a little less speed (frames/sec) than the generic o2 data, but it also records speed which is helpful in getting a better picture of what is happening during the data run.  When you are riding during the data recording, you want to vary the load and rpm's as much as you can.


before you do your data recording, I think you should reduce your timing to the following values:

3k @ 90-100 kPa:  24 degree's
3.5k @ 90-100 kPa: 25 degree's
4k @ 90-100 kPa: 26 degree's
4.5k @ 90-100 kPa: 27 degree's
5k @90-100 kPa: 28 degree's. 

I personally think those values are too high as well, and if it were me I would start at a degree less than those and let the knock retard events dictate what the ion sensing will allow.  Just remember though, running the most advance you can while keeping the ion sensing happy does not guarantee maximum power. You can easily over advance and end up with less power. 

Here's what you need to do to check timing, find a closed course where you can run the bike at high speeds in 5th gear and do a data recording of the bike at wide open throttle from say 2,500 rpm until you run out of steam (or road or gumshin).

OK. Now maybe get some decent weather so I can get more info.
Here is the tune I will install inthe bike.

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

Your PE mode is still set to 10k RPM.

It's just a tad odd to have timing tables be exactly the same both cylinders, right?  For reference, have a peek at any number of the base calibrations and see if they're like that.

Kind of along the same lines, the front and rear VE tables seem more similar to each other than what I've ever ended up with.

Your 0 TPS column is still obviously weird.  I'd massage that smoother.  I'm supposing it's because you have AE disabled for the v-tune, that you regularly go closed throttle from a higher RPM and open the throttle back up at ~3k, the engine goes lean as you do, closed-loop "corrects" it, and you end up with what you've got as a result because the data is included for the v-tune.  Probably such hits are the predominant ones there.

No, leaving AE and DE enabled for v-tuning won't change a thing regarding the settings required for them to operate normally when you're done.  They'll just function "normally" while you're v-tuning and the software will disregard any data during those moments so you don't get stuff like what's in your 0 TPS column.  I wouldn't be surprised if "regular usage" parts of the VE tables are also similarly influenced if you jack the throttle around much they way you set it to v-tune.  More central areas likely won't be influenced as greatly as the 0 TPS if they have a higher percentages of "good" hits, but there probably is negative influence nonetheless.

Quote from: glens
It's just a tad odd to have timing tables be exactly the same both cylinders, right?  For reference, have a peek at any number of the base calibrations and see if they're like that.

not odd at all. There's hundred's of thousands of bikes that run exactly the same timing on both cylinders.  Besides, unless I'm mistaken N-gin hasn't done any data recordings, so what we he be using to make any timing decisions off of?  coin toss?    

Quote from: glens
Your PE mode is still set to 10k RPM.

I personally leave that set there until doing after data recordings.  I have seen the PE mode turn active with very little provocation, so I would rather be able to see if there are closed loop/open loop transitional knock retard events happening at normal cruise afr before I introduce power enrichment afr's. 

N-gin,

I think you should change your afr's in the 90 kPa column.  Running 14:1 at 90 kPa will likely make some heat, plus that factors in to your heavier throttle too (between 90 and 100 kPa afr's).  I wouldn't go any leaner than 13.5 there.    I also think you are trying to run too much timing in the 15-30 kPa columns from 1,500-2,750 rpm's.  I think before you go too much further.....you better do some data recordings to check your timing.....

Ill do that. Just waiting for better weather. It started to snow flurry over here.

yea, flurried here today too.   

Quote from: mayor on November 17, 2011, 07:19:18 PM

Quote from: glens
It's just a tad odd to have timing tables be exactly the same both cylinders, right?  For reference, have a peek at any number of the base calibrations and see if they're like that.

not odd at all. There's hundred's of thousands of bikes that run exactly the same timing on both cylinders.  Besides, unless I'm mistaken N-gin hasn't done any data recordings, so what we he be using to make any timing decisions off of?  coin toss?    

I've only looked through a relative few of the TTS base calibrations (the only items I'm considering here) but have yet to see one with identical spark timing tables front/rear.  Take, for example, the base calibration in use (at least lately?) in this thread.  Similar, yes.  Identical?  Nope.  Must've been some tossing? 

Have you guys looked at his data?  All the knock retard is happening at WOT / 100 KPA at just one small RPM range. Detonation only happened on the long WOT pull about 8 sec into the pull.   The quick pull in a low gear did not have the issue.  Was the motor fully warmed up?  Why is this motor OK with that much timing?  How cold was the outside temp in this run?

Post an hour or so long Generic 02 data log and we would have lots more data to work with.

Beast

Quote from: whittlebeast on November 17, 2011, 07:51:13 PM
Have you guys looked at his data?

I didn't see any data recordings posted?    what post are you seeing data recordings on?

post 28

  man...how did I miss that, probably cause it said vtune.   

he was running 32 degree's of advance by 3814 rpm, no wonder it pulled.  He only made it about 3 seconds with that much timing before the knock retard pulled it though. 

Mayer

Have you played with the MyTune software to see how they deal with this sort of data log?  What about with the PowerVision stuff?  That would be an interesting bike to test on.

Any more, I almost never ride without the data loggers running just for the fun of learning.  You would not believe the things I have found on the rice bike in the last month.  I can't seem to find any of this stuff has ever been noticed or posted by the tuners in the rice forums.

Beast

Quote from: whittlebeast on November 17, 2011, 07:51:13 PM
Have you guys looked at his data?  All the knock retard is happening at WOT / 100 KPA at just one small RPM range. Detonation only happened on the long WOT pull about 8 sec into the pull.   The quick pull in a low gear did not have the issue.  Was the motor fully warmed up?  Why is this motor OK with that much timing?  How cold was the outside temp in this run?

Post an hour or so long Generic 02 data log and we would have lots more data to work with.

Beast

Engine was fully warmed. I let it idle for 5 minutes in the garage before leaving for the tune, it was hot to say the least.
That engine knock was when I was entering the highway. I was also going uphill. Outside temp was about 47 degrees. I beleieve that was fourth gear too. If this helps my squish is set up at .030-.035

This is the tune I have in now. Should I make changes? Before the generic run??

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

When I go to record data, am I recording under V-tune data or just data?

It is not the v-tune data.  I think it is called "generic 02 data" or something like that.

Beast

Quote from: whittlebeast on November 17, 2011, 08:31:32 PM
mayor

Have you played with the MyTune software to see how they deal with this sort of data log?  What about with the PowerVision stuff?  That would be an interesting bike to test on.

I haven't tried MyTune yet.  I'm debating on it though. 

The PowerVision stuff is just way out of my price range. 

Quote from: N-gin on November 18, 2011, 03:31:39 AM
When I go to record data, am I recording under V-tune data or just data?

see reply #31.  One other note, don't label the data recordings as vtune recordings.  The vtune data is specific to populating the ve's. 

Quote from: N-gin on November 18, 2011, 03:31:39 AM
When I go to record data, am I recording under V-tune data or just data?

For what you're doing, if it were me, I'd first opt for "Record Data..." (recording.png, attached below), then "Spark Data" (selection.png, attached below).

The documentation is very sparse in this area, but being as it's named "Spark Data" I'd assume it only collects data pertinent to that task.  The less data you're requesting from the ECM the faster it's able to gather it.  Well, that's not as true as saying that if you ask for everything possible it'll come out slower.  There's a limit to the speed with which you can gather stuff.  It's usually best to ask for only what you're working with at the time if you want the greatest chance of seeing the most data regarding it.

[edit: put red circles in images and add reminder that when logging data we're only seeing a small sampling of what's going on, so if you limit the data to only what you need, you'll miss less of what it is you're looking for]

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

I prefer the generic data myself, since the spark data does not record VE's, AE's, MPH's, and desired AFR's.  I think that viewing the spark data without being able to correlate the afr data can easily lead to trimming timing to compensate for afr conditions.   If the afr values are known (meaning sampled in the open loop areas), then spark data makes sense....but if the AFR's in the open loop areas are unknown (meaning extrapolated vtune ve's), then I think viewing the timing alone can dangerous to the engines health.