E85 Tuning Headaches
Moderators: jsmcortina, muythaibxr
-
- Master MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 443
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 3:47 am
Re: E85 Tuning Headaches
I see now where I was wrong and see what the issue is.
apologizes for all the misunderstandings.
apologizes for all the misunderstandings.
MS2extra
Mass Air Flow fuel and spark
Miata 1.6 turbo
TechSalvager is banned for ignoring admin warnings not to link to his childish videos.
Mass Air Flow fuel and spark
Miata 1.6 turbo
TechSalvager is banned for ignoring admin warnings not to link to his childish videos.
Re: E85 Tuning Headaches
Thanks guys. I'm fairy confident at this time that the problem is NOT req fuel... This all started after I updated the firmware to the current 3.2.1 (?). At that time I took it for a quick spin, all seemed ok. Then I drained the gasoline added the E85 and entered the required fuel. Within 5 minutes, I had to start making significant increases to my VE table to compensate.
I'm going to reflash the MS just in case something did not take properly. A few settings that I notice are different from what I had prior to the firmware update. I'm being told they are NOT causing my issue. I guess I'm asking then why were they set that way before and now are not relevant since I made other changes to my squirt!?
I'm going to reflash the MS just in case something did not take properly. A few settings that I notice are different from what I had prior to the firmware update. I'm being told they are NOT causing my issue. I guess I'm asking then why were they set that way before and now are not relevant since I made other changes to my squirt!?
-
- Super MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 1341
- Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:20 pm
Re: E85 Tuning Headaches
Just a thought, are you feeling misfires when it reads lean? A wide band sees all misfires as lean since you didn't consume the O2 in the cylinder that gets pushed to the exhaust and read as lean.
Graduate of EFI University.
I build, repair, install and tune Megasquirt systems in North Dakota and beyond!
I build, repair, install and tune Megasquirt systems in North Dakota and beyond!
Re: E85 Tuning Headaches
No, not really. I'm convinced something occurred when I upgraded the firmware from my old try and trued 2.25/2.1.X code... Some setting possibly was missed.elutionsdesign wrote:Just a thought, are you feeling misfires when it reads lean? A wide band sees all misfires as lean since you didn't consume the O2 in the cylinder that gets pushed to the exhaust and read as lean.
I've since started another thread in the MSextra forum as a general "lean" condition tune. I've verified that all sensors are calibrated and working correctly. I replaced my fuel pump (which only had 2K on it), fuel pressure regulator, filter, etc. and the issue remains the same.
-
- Super MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 6828
- Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:41 am
- Location: Walnut Creek, Calif. USA
Re: E85 Tuning Headaches
Your WUE scheme looks odd to me... you never get out of WU, which is set to cut fueling to "40%". Using WUE for tuning, instead of just the VE, just makes it more confusing.
Re: E85 Tuning Headaches
Though I've been running MS for a few years.. I'm very green with setting. How do I adj and turn off or adj the WUE and yes, I see that it is always running via the light in TS... Sorry to sound like a dumb @$$ but in this environment, I truly am!billr wrote:Your WUE scheme looks odd to me... you never get out of WU, which is set to cut fueling to "40%". Using WUE for tuning, instead of just the VE, just makes it more confusing.
-
- Super MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 6828
- Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:41 am
- Location: Walnut Creek, Calif. USA
Re: E85 Tuning Headaches
To get out of WUE just make the last temperature cell (lowest position in the table) lower than the temp of the engine when warmed up; something like 170-190F. The bigger issue is the low percentages you have set, that last one should be 100% and all above should be higher than 100. If you do that, then your VE map will be all off, but the VE is what should be "tuned", not WUE or req_fuel or MAT.
Re: E85 Tuning Headaches
Are you referring to the %'s in the WUE or....?billr wrote: The bigger issue is the low percentages you have set, that last one should be 100% and all above should be higher than 100. If you do that, then your VE map will be all off, but the VE is what should be "tuned", not WUE or req_fuel or MAT.
Thanks for your help BTW, I will make those changes and any other suggested changes when I get home!
-
- Super MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 6828
- Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:41 am
- Location: Walnut Creek, Calif. USA
Re: E85 Tuning Headaches
Yes, the WUE % values should all be 100 or more; you have values down in the 40s, which causes an "enleanment". Changing the last cell to 100% will make everything richer, so be ready for that! Do you have the "req_fuel" set to the correctly calculated value, no faking it?
Edit: I would also set the MAT values for "real physics"; set the correction table all to 0 and the correction value to 100. There has been discussion about this recently, and I know some will disagree, but I would have to know a real reason for differing from the normal reality of our atmosphere...
Edit: I would also set the MAT values for "real physics"; set the correction table all to 0 and the correction value to 100. There has been discussion about this recently, and I know some will disagree, but I would have to know a real reason for differing from the normal reality of our atmosphere...
Re: E85 Tuning Headaches
billr wrote:Yes, the WUE % values should all be 100 or more; you have values down in the 40s, which causes an "enleanment". Changing the last cell to 100% will make everything richer, so be ready for that! Do you have the "req_fuel" set to the correctly calculated value, no faking it?
Edit: I would also set the MAT values for "real physics"; set the correction table all to 0 and the correction value to 100. There has been discussion about this recently, and I know some will disagree, but I would have to know a real reason for differing from the normal reality of our atmosphere...
OK, I'm a little confused by changing the % to 100 or more. I thought you said I need to have WUE turn off at the last cell. In my fuzzy logic, I'm thinking that number should go to "0", as in warm enough so add no more extra fuel for the purposes of warm up assisted fuel adder... If I increase those %, does it not pull further from the VE, thus creating a leaner VE cell?
Yes, I have the req fuel set accurately (even used the online calculators for the base fuel pressure and injector flow rate (1000cc) and 14.7 for gasoline or 9.7 for E-85.
-
- Super MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 6828
- Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:41 am
- Location: Walnut Creek, Calif. USA
Re: E85 Tuning Headaches
Yeah, it was kind of confusing to me too. WUE is not a value that is added to calculated fuel PW, it is a value that PW (actually the "req_fuel" factor) is multiplied by. So 100% WUE means that factor is 1, no changes for WU; 150% would mean 1.5x as much fuel as after WU. Note that the MAT factor is similar, 100% means multiply MAT correction by 1, but the MAT table values are additive; 0 there means "use measured MAT and real physics". Anything else there adds or subtracts from theoretical MAT corrections and should only be used if there is a problem with the MAT sensor readings that can't be corrected any other way.
Re: E85 Tuning Headaches
billr wrote:Yeah, it was kind of confusing to me too. WUE is not a value that is added to calculated fuel PW, it is a value that PW (actually the "req_fuel" factor) is multiplied by. So 100% WUE means that factor is 1, no changes for WU; 150% would mean 1.5x as much fuel as after WU. Note that the MAT factor is similar, 100% means multiply MAT correction by 1, but the MAT table values are additive; 0 there means "use measured MAT and real physics". Anything else there adds or subtracts from theoretical MAT corrections and should only be used if there is a problem with the MAT sensor readings that can't be corrected any other way.
Bill, I think the changes you suggested and I made, are indeed a large part of the issue. It started up VERY rich and flattened out nicely with a idle AFR of 12.1-13.0, which is a far cry what I had. I didn't get a chance to go out last nite, but hope to do some this evening.
I'll report back with datalogs.