Jump to content

Ow no another NA build!


itsLeon

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, msitpro said:

That's fine. Others (like myself) like to compare, with all knowledge taken into account.

 

Out of interest, what spec is that bolt ons car, for comparison? :)


Cosworth: 11:1
Eagle rods: 
Cat cams 290 duration 12mm lift (IN) 274 duration 12mm lift (EX)
3.5inch intake
75mm Throttlebody

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, itsLeon said:


Cosworth: 11:1
Eagle rods: 
Cat cams 290 duration 12mm lift (IN) 274 duration 12mm lift (EX)
3.5inch intake
75mm Throttlebody

Sorry I meant the pre-built motor bolt-on mods. Don't worry.

 

Looking forward to more progress!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, msitpro said:

Also, don't suppose you have the WOT AFR traces between those two runs?

well that is optional. My car runs 2 widebands sensors connected to a haltech ECU i didn't see any reason to connect a third just for the dyno graph

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, msitpro said:

Sorry I meant the pre-built motor bolt-on mods. Don't worry.

 

Looking forward to more progress!

Owwww! Didnt even remember just the normal stuff of exhaust, intake, testpipes i think it was

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, itsLeon said:

well that is optional. My car runs 2 widebands sensors connected to a haltech ECU i didn't see any reason to connect a third just for the dyno graph

I see - so you have or could have the logs if you wanted. Do they trace fairly closely with the Haltech map's closed loop AFR targets in your logging?

 

The original bolt-ons spec from everything you've said (corrections for that dyno, temps, etc) and what I've mathematically extrapolated looks very healthy - around 275whp / 317bhp @ 6500rpm. :) ....for those interested.

 

 

I think you're headed for 340-350whp @ 8000rpm when you're fully mapped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, msitpro said:

I see - so you have or could have the logs if you wanted. Do they trace fairly closely with the Haltech map's closed loop AFR targets in your logging?

 

The original bolt-ons spec from everything you've said (corrections for that dyno, temps, etc) and what I've mathematically extrapolated looks very healthy - around 275whp / 317bhp @ 6500rpm. :) ....for those interested.

 

 

I think you're headed for 340-350whp @ 8000rpm when you're fully mapped.


I always log when my car is running so yeah i do have the log files. But i don't understand your question about if the trace closely to the closed loop afr? 

First there is no closed loop afr, you have set the afr targets as you want across different RPM's and engine load, for example my car is targeting an afr of 16.7 at idle because at 14.7 it was way to rich (could smell and see the fuel out of my exhaust)
Second you set the closed loop control as you want. Mine is set to be only in closed loop below 3000 rpm and below x load. 
I can run the car completely at open loop if i want, everything is dialed in to be around 5% of the target AFR i want.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, itsLeon said:


I always log when my car is running so yeah i do have the log files. But i don't understand your question about if the trace closely to the closed loop afr? 

First there is no closed loop afr, you have set the afr targets as you want across different RPM's and engine load, for example my car is targeting an afr of 16.7 at idle because at 14.7 it was way to rich (could smell and see the fuel out of my exhaust)
Second you set the closed loop control as you want. Mine is set to be only in closed loop below 3000 rpm and below x load. 
I can run the car completely at open loop if i want, everything is dialed in to be around 5% of the target AFR i want.  

Ahh that's kinda what I was asking - Sounds like something needs a little calibration. - You're saying the widebands are reading 14.7 back to the ECU but it's clearly richer than that, hence having to compensate by setting the software to target 16.7 ? Do you have some idea of the real AFR then?

 

From convos with Mark at Abbey, UpRev/OEM ECU will not even allow a value higher than 14.7 in software for the AFR target for closed loop. I'm not sure whether the OEM ECU runs closed loop through the whole rev range or whether it goes open loop at a certain point or load/VE or rpm.

 

Do you feel you'd be at a disadvantage running the whole range of load/rpm in closed loop mode? Does it just not respond fast enough? I would say, if you're a little unsure on what AFR you're running, could be dangerous to go open loop?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im only targeting 16.7 at low rpm and load. This is because of the cams, the have a big overlap so the fuel that gets injected some part of it leaves directly into the exhaust. 
Also 14.7 is not some holy number to focus on (its only for emmisions) and with the installed EGT sensors i can monitor if its not getting to hot. 

 

The OEM ecu is only in closed loop when the target is 14.7 after that i goes to open loop. 

 

Once my engine reaches higher rpm/load to numbers are accurate its just for the idle that i target leaner then normal. (when idling i can see my afr move from 15.5 to 17.4 its not steady at all until closed loops kicks in, then is more or less around the targeted afr) 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice nice.

 

So what is the reason why it switches to open loop at 3k? Is that a default for the ECU? A choice you've made?

 

I would guess this is because the closed loop mechanisms cannot react fast enough to the changes in throttle inputs and rpm?

 

Out of interest, do you have a map/grid I can see for your optimal torque of the target AFR for fuel schedule (load) vs rpm? Would like to compare to mine/others.

 

The equivalent table to below for your ECU -

 

308524d1296925007-can-anyone-tell-me-what-data-byte-means-uprev-fuel.jpg.76e8cc704626f26fa5014edb96c04440.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/05/2021 at 01:13, msitpro said:

Nice nice.

 

So what is the reason why it switches to open loop at 3k? Is that a default for the ECU? A choice you've made?

 

I would guess this is because the closed loop mechanisms cannot react fast enough to the changes in throttle inputs and rpm?

 

Out of interest, do you have a map/grid I can see for your optimal torque of the target AFR for fuel schedule (load) vs rpm? Would like to compare to mine/others.

 

The equivalent table to below for your ECU -

 

308524d1296925007-can-anyone-tell-me-what-data-byte-means-uprev-fuel.jpg.76e8cc704626f26fa5014edb96c04440.jpg

 

AFR target: 
LZghfAP.png

Fuel map: 
YZV2mY9.png

Timing: 
rkDF3yx.png

Closed loop settings (o2 control):
HZK5KAT.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/06/2021 at 11:19, msitpro said:

Thanks for that - will analyse a bit later. 🧐 :thumbs:

 

I assume fuel map is fuel compensation for the observed real AFR vs the AFR target?


No it's not. It's a VE (Volumetric efficiency) map, if i leave that blank no fuel would be injected. Uprev uses a different method for delivering fuel (forgot the name) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 3 months later...
  • 2 years later...
  • 3 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...