VE tables

[7hogs]

Question is if I want to run richer increase the VE or decrease the VE??

[wurk_truk]

increase

[7hogs]

So to drop .1 AFR how much would you need to drop the VE's to achieve that?

[mayor]

If I'm understanding what hrdail posted in reference to this- 20 increments/decrements equal 1 afr, and 20 increments/decrements equal 10 VE's.  To drop .1afr, drop 2 increments or 1 VE unit. 

[strokerjlk]

careful there. if you just want to fatten a particular area do it with the AFR table. if your tuner was caled correct when tuned, you will be very close to desired AFR.
if this is not the case carry on.

[7hogs]

careful there. if you just want to fatten a particular area do it with the AFR table. if your tuner was caled correct when tuned, you will be very close to desired AFR.
if this is not the case carry on.

Just looking at keeping areas in Closed Loop and tricking it with the tables. Not sure if this would work as for a tuner none worth anything around here so I have been doing my own via butt dyno, drive ability and what the plugs look like and also finding when the motor is happy. Love a happy motor!

[mayor]

Just looking at keeping areas in Closed Loop and tricking it with the tables.

If what you're thinking of doing is to change the VE tables in an attempt to adjust the afr in closed loop, that's not going to work.  You would need to adjust the CLB tables, and perform another v-tune session to dial in the changed areas.  Changing the VE tables will affect the open loop afr though. 

[whittlebeast]

VE is a multiplier in a Pure Speed Density System so a 10% increase in VE will be a 10% increased in sprayed fuel.  If the internal calcs in the code want 10ms of spray the ECU will ground the injectors for 11ms allowing for injector dead time or opening time.  The name changes depending where you are reading.

At a VE of 100 and about 14.7 AFR an increase of about 8 points to 108 will give about 1 AFR richer.

At a VE of 50 and about 14.7 AFR an increase of about 4 points to 54 will give about 1 AFR richer.

Hope this helps

AW

[hrdtail78]

"I'll use a target of 13.0 for simplicity.
A sample of 14.0 needs 20 increment
A sample of 13.5 needs 10 increment.
A sample of 13.25 needs 5 increment.
A sample of 13.1 needs 2 increment. 
A sample of 13.05 needs a 1 increment.

So if you want 13.2 and you are sampling 14.64.  That would be an increment of 20, 4 increments of 2, and a 1.   

The 20 will get you to 13.64. The 4 2's will get you 13.24, and the 1 will set you at 13.19.

Clear as mud?"


I post this for clarity.  I don't know what the VE acually changes, and if it is the same from map to map.

But changing the VE's once they are set is the wrong area to making these changes.

[7hogs]

Does the voltage calculator change the voltage and save it?

[wurk_truk]

Jim, Here's a question...

Was the bike originally tuned on a dyno using conventional methods?  If so... then you can change the CLB all over and back and not have any issues.

But...  if you originally v-tuned the bike, then to change the CLB, one needs to start over and v-tune again.

Here's why:  on a dyno, they sniff the actual exhaust AFR and tune to that first so all cells are correct in the VEs.  THEN the CLBs, etc are applied.

Using v-tune.  One sets their CLB right from the beginning.  SO... for the sake of easy... let's say one v-tuned their bike with a CLB that would be 14.45 instead of the normal 14.6.   BUT... when doing the v-tune, one places every cell, open AND closed loop into 14.6 AFR so that the ECM can learn all the cells, right?  And then, when done, places all the open loop portion of the tune back into open loop and keeps closed loop closed.

When the ECM was learning all the VEs... the ECM was 'fooled' by one having the ECM thinking it was ALL 14.6 when in reality it was ALL 14.45.  See?
The closed loop portion of the finished tune will THINK 14.6 IS 14.6 when in reality it is all 14.45.  The SAME holds true for open loop... since it 'learned' at 14.45 that offset is inherent in the tune after done...  the open loop section has the offset, too.  For example if one has a 12.0 AFR set for a cell in open loop... it REALLY is set for 11.85, because of the offset.  See?

If one changes the CLBs, one needs to v-tune again  to align all of the offsets back up.  Those offsets were involved in the learning of the actual VEs.  Change the offset and the open loop VEs are still affected.  See?  If the original tune was a really good v-tune... it really shouldn't take a lot of effort to re-tune with a new CLB... the bike should dial right back in.  If it won't dial right in after a run or two... then the original tune had issues, too.

Nobody v-tunes this way... but I will from now on and it SHOULD work out great.  When v-tuning a bike... simply have the offset at zero.  NO offset... simply 450mv, right? whatever makes it 14.6.

Do ALL of the v-tuning and when done all the cells are 'learned' at the proper AFR. The VEs ARE correct for actual 14.6 

After v-tuning is complete... THEN change the CLBs.  The CLBs will THEN only affect the areas one has in closed loop... and NOT the open looped areas, like before.  Doing THIS would allow one to change CLBs day in and day out and it won't affect the rest of the tune.  This will also allow one to tune a bike and then place the WHOLE bike in open loop if desired.

Voltage calculator does NOT save the figure.  It just tells the tuner what figure to place as a CLB.

[7hogs]

Bike is dialed in pretty good what I am doing is digging into the TTS and SERT and getting know the product so the info you posted is very helpful.  There is a void in my area so I am trying to do some soul searching to see if this is something I may want to do in the near future.

[7hogs]

Also the bikes I am doing this on is a stock 2010 Flhxi with filter and exhaust change and a 2010 Flhxi 103. 54H, filter and exhaust and these are just SERT only at this point. Both of these are for touring only. They are running to hot for my taste.

[Hilly13]

Wurk I had not thought about the CLB tables like that, sounds totally feasible, my only concern would be that having them as low as possible to vtune would have the engine running in a too lean condition, am I thinking straight here or am I missing something?

[wurk_truk]

There's a void in my area for tuners and if I had some $$$  I would investigate that further.  Get a 2 bike TTS and v-tune both bikes cooler.  At least with v-tune there is some reference points taken for data, sert by SOP goes no where fast.

Yep, Hilly, you have it right, but remember that ALL non v-tune dyno runs work this way, too.  Just like on a dyno with fans... one would have to watch temps.  Bring a laser temp reader AND the v-tune histogram has temp on it.  Lean, in and by itself, won't hurt anything...  Indy cars run like 17-20:1 AFR.  It's the HEAT that lean generates that would be the downfall.

[Hilly13]

Thanks mate, I like the idea, potentially opens up the CLB's for optimizing, a bit more work to achieve on the road but it must be worth the effort as a great many of the CLB tables in the Cals in the file bank show varying offsets in a single table and that would be no accident, food for thought.
Got to get a little monitor, be able to keep an eye on the temps when tuning, another valid reason to buy one 

[blusmbl]

Nobody v-tunes this way... but I will from now on and it SHOULD work out great.  When v-tuning a bike... simply have the offset at zero.  NO offset... simply 450mv, right? whatever makes it 14.6.

I'm no expert but I'm pretty sure this isn't adviseable, you won't get your desired a/f consistently until adaptive fuel has learned the additional fuel required to achieve your new richer CLB a/f setting.