lookforjoe Posted January 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 Thanks Justus & Matt I'll reset the injector constant to stock. I'll have to work on a separate BIN that includes modified MAF scaling and injector constant, using the stock VE/Ign maps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookforjoe Posted January 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 The VE map (from TT) will not work if you don't keep the stock injector constant. TT does not modify the Injector constant, in only modifies the entire VE table at once for injector calibration. At least from my trial and error with TT and the 1700cc injectors. I think there were several controls altered for injector size /type - I'll confirm with Matt to be safe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookforjoe Posted January 15, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 Pouring rain today, but I wanted to try the ECU/Ostrich2. The car wouldn't start and the fans run continuously - so definitely ECU problem. Conversed with Matt, and rechecked all my soldering. Found three ZIF posts with poor contact to the board. Reflowed the joints and tested OK with meter. Reinstall (still raining) and no more fan run on, but no start either. Remove & test COP pinout - lost continuity on A12 (+15). Remove case and wire broke free - from moving the casing so much.. This one is bottom row, so a pita to access Re soldered alongside pin instead of on top, for hopefully better connection - pins are bent back afterward.... Lastly, I re shaped the lock arm to avoid the PLCC connector. The downside to switching ECU back & forth is that the car runs like shit (pegs lean on the AFR) for at least 5min before the adaptive settles down, worse if you try & drive it, I found out recently... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rsterns Posted January 15, 2014 Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 H, It also looks like the what appears to be a voltage regulator on the board which is under your red and green wire, appears to be a rosin / flux connection, I'd recommend reflow and clean to assure a good connection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappo Posted January 15, 2014 Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 The downside to switching ECU back & forth is that the car runs like shit (pegs lean on the AFR) for at least 5min before the adaptive settles down, worse if you try & drive it, I found out recently... Sounds like your injector constant isn't set correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fischmama Posted January 15, 2014 Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 The downside to switching ECU back & forth is that the car runs like shit (pegs lean on the AFR) for at least 5min before the adaptive settles down, worse if you try & drive it, I found out recently... Same on both ECUs? TT and the new one? They should behave virtually identical. Like Zappo said, typically you would need to change the injector constant but it seems like the STFT/LTFT was correct the VE table. You can still work with the stock injector constant, but you can have issues with AE and warm up for example if those settings are not tuned either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookforjoe Posted January 15, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 H, It also looks like the what appears to be a voltage regulator on the board which is under your red and green wire, appears to be a rosin / flux connection, I'd recommend reflow and clean to assure a good connection. Thank you for your observation - I will address that! Sounds like your injector constant isn't set correctly. This is with the TT ECU - no adjustments made there. Same on both ECUs? TT and the new one? They should behave virtually identical. Like Zappo said, typically you would need to change the injector constant but it seems like the STFT/LTFT was correct the VE table. You can still work with the stock injector constant, but you can have issues with AE and warm up for example if those settings are not tuned either. No - with the TT ECU - once I get running with the Ostrich, I will build a different bin with adjusted MAF, Inj values, etc. Right now, I just want to confirm the car will run with the 608bin with my timing & fuel values entered via your XDF modification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simply Volvo Posted January 15, 2014 Report Share Posted January 15, 2014 It probably has to adapt so much because TT doesnt modify the proper scalars and maps and instead it just rescales the fuel map. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookforjoe Posted January 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2014 Tried running on the 608 with modified MAF table (thank you Aaron), and adjustments made to injector parameters (thank you Matt). Runs very rich and idle is unstable: So, I'm going to make some adjustments to the injector calibration suggested by Aaron & see how that goes tomorrow. This time, I'll leave the ECU in place, since I forgot I can just flash the other BIN with the TT-based fuel, ign & WOT maps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookforjoe Posted January 18, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 18, 2014 Rescaled the load Axes as suggested by Aaron, and altered the injector min. Injection time - set to .10 for now . Started and idled much better. Other settings - lowered fan onset to keep coolant temp lower. Quirky that speed 5 has a lower temp value than 1. I have a couple of logs that I will edit and add later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tightmopedman9 Posted January 18, 2014 Report Share Posted January 18, 2014 I would probably leave the load 'group of 8' alone. The only reason to edit the axes is to gain scale in the VE map and Ignition map, nothing to gain performance wise from maps that reference the 'group of 8' load axis. There are a whole litany of maps that aren't in that .xdf that you would have to scale if you edited the axis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookforjoe Posted January 18, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 18, 2014 I would probably leave the load 'group of 8' alone. The only reason to edit the axes is to gain scale in the VE map and Ignition map, nothing to gain performance wise from maps that reference the 'group of 8' load axis. There are a whole litany of maps that aren't in that .xdf that you would have to scale if you edited the axis. Aha - I changed the upper values in those to match the rescaled load values - it was clear which load ranges they dealt with. I can always change them back if need be. Thanks for all your help, Aaron. Looking at the RPM group of 8 - the same situation exists - the values match the alternating. I used compare with stock 608 bin to check the values against the Major RPM scale (in red) Not sure those shouldn't be updated to match the rpm scaling being used? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tightmopedman9 Posted January 18, 2014 Report Share Posted January 18, 2014 (edited) I just don't understand why you would want to change those other axes. Like I said before, the only reason to rescale your axes is to allow for better control up top in the VE map and Ignition map. What other maps would you need to alter up top? If you start changing the other axes then you're going to throw off the scaling in every map in the ECU. You could fix it by rescaling every map, but again, what's the point? Also, you should just remove the lowest two RPM values. When is your car ever operating below 840 RPM? Edited January 18, 2014 by Tightmopedman9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookforjoe Posted January 18, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 18, 2014 I just don't understand why you would want to change those other axes. Like I said before, the only reason to rescale your axes is to allow for better control up top in the VE map and Ignition map. What other maps would you need to alter up top? If you start changing the other axes then you're going to throw off the scaling in every map in the ECU. You could fix it by rescaling every map, but again, what's the point? Also, you should just remove the lowest two RPM values. When is your car ever operating below 840 RPM? Thanks again for your time reviewing my logs & suggestions. I found that removing the lower rpm bins threw off my cranking time when starting - it must reference them somehow when initially turning over. Maybe it's not a problem with cap/rotor setups. I can try a bin with those columns shifted, but it definitely was a problem via the TTusb interface, with COP. I ran the car with the constant raised up to .2831 (after trying .26, .27), felt a tad better at idle. Also did a couple of harder accel pulls, to see how the AFR's looked (not logged) - overall felt pretty good, but definitely needs refining before I do any extende pulls. idle: (had a flaky timing value @ 810rpm in the two early morning logs - somehow I entered a 4 digit timing value & didn't catch it! https://www.dropbox.com/s/x5nia5cbxkaarg8/idleJan181abin.xdl part throttle https://www.dropbox.com/s/4qux0yv67x3pl8f/partthrottlejan18.xdl heavier throttle https://www.dropbox.com/s/b7qb4lcnzzwhp95/wotrunjan18.xdl timing value fixed in this one: https://www.dropbox.com/s/hsxf63mqam06xvk/5thpulljan18pm.xdl I'll add screenshots when I get the files opened on the mac - on the PC it is saving all the logs in Logworks format & I can't open them (tried choosing TPro using prpoperties/'open with', didn't work - but I'm just not PC savy). Getting misfire CEL's - random & assorted individual cylinders on a regular basis at idle, and shortly after startup. Also on both part & heavier throttle runs. Haven't played with the latency table yet, I don't know which gauge relates to injector voltage @ idle. EDIT: using playback, MAF is maxxed out at 800 by just over 4K 3900 RPM (EDIT: This is a gauge restriction, actual recorded flow exceeds this, see screenshots of logs later. Need a revised adx with altered gauge parameters) idling after 810rpm timing fixed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookforjoe Posted January 19, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 19, 2014 Suggested Maf table for 76.5 ID housing, using the Eurodyne flowmeter google doc - which puts my current modded MAF table (thank you Aaron) in the ballpark - just looks like some top end tweaking may be needed Data log - 1263 Kg/H (approx 350 g/s) @ 5300 rpm, 85% throttle - so it records higher than the gauge displays Part throttle run 1001 Kg/H (278g/s) 4290rpm, 30% throttle MAF values maxxed out by 5K rpm, 85% throttle. For comparison, TTusb scaled VE tables maxxed out the MAF around 5.5-5.7K, 100% throttle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.