RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
Moderators: jsmcortina, muythaibxr
-
- Helpful MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 9:54 am
- Location: Greater Cincinnati
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
Apparently the total number of injections was too low. Surprised nobody caught that. Well, leave it to me to find what doesn't work.
So that's done, where is that spreadsheet you guys have been using?
Jim
So that's done, where is that spreadsheet you guys have been using?
Jim
-
- Super MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 6828
- Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:41 am
- Location: Walnut Creek, Calif. USA
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
"Apparently the total number of injections was too low. "
Can you elaborate on that a bit? You had 1000 set (in screen-shot), it seems that should have been plenty.
Can you elaborate on that a bit? You had 1000 set (in screen-shot), it seems that should have been plenty.
-
- Helpful MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 9:54 am
- Location: Greater Cincinnati
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
I raised it to 2000 and it worked fine.
Spreadsheet?
Spreadsheet?
-
- Helpful MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 9:54 am
- Location: Greater Cincinnati
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
I've been looking everywhere I can think of for this spreadsheet you guys are using to calculate injector flow, deadtime and voltage compensation. I haven't found it anywhere. Saw a post that said it was in the RTFM(!) but couldn't find it in the one in the link James gave me.
A little help here? You were all VERY insistent that this is how it has to be done. Can't do it without the tools.
Jim
A little help here? You were all VERY insistent that this is how it has to be done. Can't do it without the tools.
Jim
-
- Super MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 6828
- Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:41 am
- Location: Walnut Creek, Calif. USA
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
I don't have a link to that handy, but I'm sure somebody will come up with it; be patient for a bit.
You don't really need the spreadsheet, the video shows how to determine DT with just a paper graph.
How about the flow-rate, were there any surprises there? No need for the spreadsheet for that, and rate has been questioned over-and-over so we can be sure the basic "req_fuel" is finally set correct.
You don't really need the spreadsheet, the video shows how to determine DT with just a paper graph.
How about the flow-rate, were there any surprises there? No need for the spreadsheet for that, and rate has been questioned over-and-over so we can be sure the basic "req_fuel" is finally set correct.
-
- Helpful MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 9:54 am
- Location: Greater Cincinnati
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
OK, well I don't know how to calculate that. Bit of a problem there.
Jim
Jim
-
- Experienced MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 165
- Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2012 10:19 am
- Location: Vancouver, BC
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
Are you using clear vinyl tube at fuel injection pressures ? Is that safe ?Jim_Blackwood wrote:
67 Chevelle, LSX V8 engine, EFI., cuppa 80's TPI projects....I like wires.
-
- Helpful MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 9:54 am
- Location: Greater Cincinnati
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
Maybe I have the wrong set of injectors in the engine. I have 2 sets which are green, it looks like they could have gotten mixed up at some point. Well, it happens. To the best of my figuring, these work out to something around 30-35 lbs/hr depending on which test is used to calculate the rate. Maybe I'm doing that wrong. Actual numbers I get are between 285cc/min at 2ms and 20K pulses (191cc measured) and 372cc/min at 16ms and 2500 pulses (248cc measured) (Do those numbers sound about right to you?) I seem to recall buying a set of 35lb injectors before getting the 42lb ones.
So, I'm secure enough to admit it, I was wrong. Made a mistake and installed the wrong parts. The proper thing to do at this point is to test the other set and if they flow correctly, switch them out.
But I still need the spreadsheet.
Jim
>Are you using clear vinyl tube at fuel injection pressures ? Is that safe ?
Thanks for noticing. No I am not and yes it is unsafe. I switched to a 250psi return line to the FPR. (original setup had the FPR on the rail)
So, I'm secure enough to admit it, I was wrong. Made a mistake and installed the wrong parts. The proper thing to do at this point is to test the other set and if they flow correctly, switch them out.
But I still need the spreadsheet.
Jim
>Are you using clear vinyl tube at fuel injection pressures ? Is that safe ?
Thanks for noticing. No I am not and yes it is unsafe. I switched to a 250psi return line to the FPR. (original setup had the FPR on the rail)
-
- Helpful MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 9:54 am
- Location: Greater Cincinnati
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
The second set are better but vary some. Around 5% at higher flow and near 10% at 2ms. Not ideal but it'll have to do until I can get a better set. At 40psi and 12.5v I'm calculating 38.5lb/hr in the 16ms test.
-
- Super MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 6828
- Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:41 am
- Location: Walnut Creek, Calif. USA
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
To measure rate, just set the PW greater than the Output Interval; the injector will stay powered (open) during the whole test. You can use a stop-watch to check total time of flow, or just multiply the Output Interval by the Number of Injections; really simple to use and accurate.
-
- Helpful MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 9:54 am
- Location: Greater Cincinnati
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
Thanks Bill, that was something I didn't understand because at different pulse rates I was getting a lot of variations in calculated injector capacity and couldn't make much sense of it except to blame it on dead time. What you suggest is how I flow tested the injectors before. So I have that last test to do tomorrow before buttoning up the engine. Seems like it should match my earlier results but who knows? Murphy is alive and well.
I'm still missing something in calculating the voltage offset but have good numbers to work from, and I'm not looking forward to trying to create a graph to get the dead time, but at this point it looks like it will be so much easier than finding a spreadsheet simple enough to do it without spending hours figuring out how to use it so I'll just have to get on with it. I do remember seeing instructions for calculating voltage offset in a video so at least there's that.
Jim
I'm still missing something in calculating the voltage offset but have good numbers to work from, and I'm not looking forward to trying to create a graph to get the dead time, but at this point it looks like it will be so much easier than finding a spreadsheet simple enough to do it without spending hours figuring out how to use it so I'll just have to get on with it. I do remember seeing instructions for calculating voltage offset in a video so at least there's that.
Jim
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 39585
- Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 1:34 am
- Location: Birmingham, UK
- Contact:
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
Attached is the spreadsheet I used in one of my videos.
James
James
I can repair or upgrade Megasquirts in UK. http://www.jamesmurrayengineering.co.uk
My Success story: http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewtopic ... 04&t=34277
MSEXTRA documentation at: http://www.msextra.com/doc/index.html
New users, please read the "Forum Help Page".
My Success story: http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewtopic ... 04&t=34277
MSEXTRA documentation at: http://www.msextra.com/doc/index.html
New users, please read the "Forum Help Page".
-
- Helpful MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 9:54 am
- Location: Greater Cincinnati
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
Thanks James, that helps immensely and is easy to use.
I extrapolated the 6ms value but otherwise it is entirely from the test values.
Question: Do you use the calculated injector full flow value, or do you do a saturated flow test and use that value?
Edit: It does make a difference. My calculated value is 38.5, my tested value is 37.7
Jim
I extrapolated the 6ms value but otherwise it is entirely from the test values.
Question: Do you use the calculated injector full flow value, or do you do a saturated flow test and use that value?
Edit: It does make a difference. My calculated value is 38.5, my tested value is 37.7
Jim
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 39585
- Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 1:34 am
- Location: Birmingham, UK
- Contact:
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
Don't extrapolate, measure.Jim_Blackwood wrote:I extrapolated the 6ms value but otherwise it is entirely from the test values.
James
I can repair or upgrade Megasquirts in UK. http://www.jamesmurrayengineering.co.uk
My Success story: http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewtopic ... 04&t=34277
MSEXTRA documentation at: http://www.msextra.com/doc/index.html
New users, please read the "Forum Help Page".
My Success story: http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewtopic ... 04&t=34277
MSEXTRA documentation at: http://www.msextra.com/doc/index.html
New users, please read the "Forum Help Page".
-
- Helpful MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 9:54 am
- Location: Greater Cincinnati
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
I know, I know. I just wanted to eliminate that point without hosing the spreadsheet. I already had 4 points. It's all good, did you look at it? everything is in a straight line and DT is 0.9-1.0ms just like in the manual. (exactly where depends on how close you read the graph) I just put the 6ms point in line so I could get the DT.
So again: Do I use the calculated flow rate from the spreadsheet of 38.5lb/hr (extrapolated), or the actual numbers from testing of 37.7lb/hr? Just doing my best to follow your lead here. I know it isn't perfect but it'll get redone later anyway with new injectors. When that happens I'll make it a point to get exhaustive data. But it helps me to learn how you guys do things because not everyone does it the same way you do.
Now on that voltage compensation, I'm a little fuzzy on how that is calculated and haven't come out with usable numbers yet. Got a formula please?
Jim
So again: Do I use the calculated flow rate from the spreadsheet of 38.5lb/hr (extrapolated), or the actual numbers from testing of 37.7lb/hr? Just doing my best to follow your lead here. I know it isn't perfect but it'll get redone later anyway with new injectors. When that happens I'll make it a point to get exhaustive data. But it helps me to learn how you guys do things because not everyone does it the same way you do.
Now on that voltage compensation, I'm a little fuzzy on how that is calculated and haven't come out with usable numbers yet. Got a formula please?
Jim
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 39585
- Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 1:34 am
- Location: Birmingham, UK
- Contact:
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
I agree on the 1.0ms deadtime from your numbers. Go with your measured flow. It is within a few percent of the spreadsheet number.
James
James
I can repair or upgrade Megasquirts in UK. http://www.jamesmurrayengineering.co.uk
My Success story: http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewtopic ... 04&t=34277
MSEXTRA documentation at: http://www.msextra.com/doc/index.html
New users, please read the "Forum Help Page".
My Success story: http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewtopic ... 04&t=34277
MSEXTRA documentation at: http://www.msextra.com/doc/index.html
New users, please read the "Forum Help Page".
-
- Helpful MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 9:54 am
- Location: Greater Cincinnati
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
OK thanks. And what about the voltage compensation? I'm having troubles figuring out how to calculate that. I have the raw data. A 0.7vdc variance but where I'm having trouble is converting the difference in my recorded flows to the cc/mv figure needed. I'm not coming out anywhere near 200 so I must be using the wrong formula.(likely since I'm making it up as I go.)
Jim
Jim
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 39585
- Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 1:34 am
- Location: Birmingham, UK
- Contact:
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
It is ms/mv. i.e. change to deadtime, not flow.
James
James
I can repair or upgrade Megasquirts in UK. http://www.jamesmurrayengineering.co.uk
My Success story: http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewtopic ... 04&t=34277
MSEXTRA documentation at: http://www.msextra.com/doc/index.html
New users, please read the "Forum Help Page".
My Success story: http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewtopic ... 04&t=34277
MSEXTRA documentation at: http://www.msextra.com/doc/index.html
New users, please read the "Forum Help Page".
-
- Helpful MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 9:54 am
- Location: Greater Cincinnati
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
So... graph the line to get DT for both voltages and subtract to get the difference then scale?
Re: RPM lags MAP by 0.4 seconds
All that work to confirm that the default DT of 1.0 is an acceptable value?jsmcortina wrote:I agree on the 1.0ms deadtime from your numbers. Go with your measured flow. It is within a few percent of the spreadsheet number...
1988 Mustang GT, 59k miles, Orig Owner
ProCharger 600B I/C, 12psi, FRP Hdrs, Flwmstr F2, 3G Alt, Contour Fan & DCC, 3.55's, Prog Sprg, Subfms, UCA, LCA, FCA, Tokico 5's, Bridgestone RE-71R 245/40R17, Crane HI-6, Kirban FPR, MS2, DIYPNPF60, Spartan 2, C&L76mm blo-thru MAF, 47lb FRP-LU47
ProCharger 600B I/C, 12psi, FRP Hdrs, Flwmstr F2, 3G Alt, Contour Fan & DCC, 3.55's, Prog Sprg, Subfms, UCA, LCA, FCA, Tokico 5's, Bridgestone RE-71R 245/40R17, Crane HI-6, Kirban FPR, MS2, DIYPNPF60, Spartan 2, C&L76mm blo-thru MAF, 47lb FRP-LU47