V11 Ecu diagnostics and reprogramming

[MartyNZ]

So that is what the CO Trim is about..... I did wonder, but viewing it as a global enricher seems a pleasant concept. It does explain the improvement in my 2000rpm misfire (due to insufficient fuel)..snip...Anywaysup, enough of the frivolity, I must now get down to developing my own map. I think if I get it as good as I can, then have a dyno run to get  the AFR across the rev range to determine where adjustments are needed, that should be a reasonable way to proceed? 

Meinolf said some stuff that may help you develop your map:

"The CO trim multiplier in the BIN can range from 0-200%. At 100% a CO trim value of 1 corresponds to a injector pulse width change of 4.76μs". 

"So many factors influence the actual opening time of an injector, a value in the fuel map is but a starting point. It goes like:

((Fuel Map value x Fuel map value factor) + (CO trim value x CO trim value factor)) x trim factor_airtemp x trim factor_enginetemp x trim factor_airpressure x trimfactor_{batteryvoltage} x trim factor_n = injection time".

"CO trim was the only method of changing the injection time prior to the development of Beard's GuzziDiag suite. With the capabilities now available CO trim is obsolete".

I hope that helps you develop your map without being too frivolous.   

http://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=19652&p=214734

[Meinolf]

Hi,

 

Meinolf also explained that the CO trim, as it adds or subtracts a constant value, is NOT a global enricher 

 

A value of 1 in the fuel map equals 64μs injector opening (or more properly voltage applied to the injector). So a CO trim of 1 corresponds to ~7% of a fuel map value. Low load values in the fuel map can be ~25, highest values are >200. An increase of CO trim by 10 equals ~3% (10 x 4.76μs) / (25 x 64μs). At WOT the increase would be ~0.037% (10 x 4.76μs) / (200 x 64μs).

 

So the influence of the CO trim is most noticeable at low fuel map values and lessens quickly as the fuel map values increase.

 

But, if one bothers to measure AFR and adjust the fuel maps accordingly, why do so with an unneccessary influencer like CO trim? Keep it at 0.

 

Cheers

Meinolf

[Gritman]

Ok I stand corrected! But for the purposes of making a quick improvement at lower throttle openings, its a good quick n dirty fix! I hadn't intended to make any further use of it, preferring to exhaust my neurones attempting a custom map.....like Meinolf says, why use CO trim when AFR can identify lean and rich spots..... However, I'm already confused. I sent off a couple of maps, and got a ruck of bins and xdfs back - one of which was for a V11 on a 15M. Trouble is, I don't know which bin file the xdf is derived from  so I'm still on the launch pad until I get some clarification! (just received, thanks Bernd)

 

I'm also looking at buying an AFR meter which may well save me money and time on trips to the dyno centre. Thing is, if you have a rough spot in your map, without a meter, you cannot tell if the adjustment should be up or down. 

 

With Tunerpro, I have been seeing some interesting data..... As I have maps for Centauro and Daytona (thanks again Bernd) which will be useful for comparison with the V11 map, if I load a 16M bin then view a 15M xdf, the data corrupts to either null or random values. It appears to correct itself if you load a consistent bin and xdf. I think I need to spend some more time on the relevant threads here to avoid p*ssing the experts off by asking questions they have already answered! Queries like; why are there separate maps for l & r cylinders and why are they different? As for acceleration enrichment tables and right cylinder offset tables, well, there is much to learn.

 

Its 9/10ths perspiration, 1/10th inspiration! 

 

[swooshdave]

 

But, if one bothers to measure AFR and adjust the fuel maps accordingly, why do so with an unneccessary influencer like CO trim? Keep it at 0.

 

Cheers

Meinolf

 

What is a good option for an amateur to measure the AFR?

[68C]

OK, so you have a system to accurately measure the AFR and have software to adjust the ECU to set the AFR you want.

 

All well and good, your next problem is deciding what AFR you want, 14.7:1 (or Lambda 1.00) often considered the theoretical full burn, or some other figure, add to that the suspicion the infernal combustion engine won't even allow you to use one ratio right across the map.

 

Takes me back to playing with carbs and checking plug colour, then deciding what colour the plug was. All seem to come down to a hunch determined by how long you wanted to play with it. Dyno?, when I were a lad that was a giant lizard.

[swooshdave]

Dyno?, when I were a lad that was a giant lizard.

 

You must be really old if the lizards when you were a kid were dinosaurs.   

[Meinolf]

Hi,

 

...Trouble is, I don't know which bin file the xdf is derived from...

 

the XDF is a translator, which translates addresses and formulas (to translate binary code) to make them comprehensible. The BIN consists of program code and data (tables and scalars). A fuel table might be located at one address (say $B800) in one BIN and at another address (say $B400) in another. Obviously the program must know at which address a table is located. And the binary code of a table is translated into a version which is understandable by the viewer. An example: The formula used in the Start enrichment map is (X*100)/3200. It translates the hex value $23 into 1.09%. Which means that at that breakpoint the injection time is increased by 1.09%.

 

That's why different XDFs are neccessary.

 

Cheers

Meinolf

[Meinolf]

Hi,

 

I'm also looking at buying an AFR meter which may well save me money and time on trips to the dyno centre. Thing is, if you have a rough spot in your map, without a meter, you cannot tell if the adjustment should be up or down. 

 

I started with one and two channel LM2 from Innovate, but moved to ZT2 from Zeitronix as the Innovate products are unreliable and error prone. Logworks, the software from Innovate, is great and we made tools to translate the log files from ZT2 to a format which can be used with Logworks.

 

Cheers

Meinolf

[Meinolf]

Hi,

 

.... As I have maps for Centauro and Daytona (thanks again Bernd) which will be useful for comparison with the V11 map

 

no, it isn't.

 

The tables are just the tip of the iceberg. Comparing a specific table between two different BINs will tell you nothing. The values in a table are but one part of the equation used to calculate injection time (and other stuff). 

 

((Fuel Map value x Fuel map value factor) + (CO trim value x CO trim value factor)) x trim factor_airtemp x trim factor_enginetemp x trim factor_airpressure x trimfactor_{batteryvoltage} x trim factor_n = injection time".

 

Cheers

Meinolf

[Meinolf]

Hi,

 

...Queries like; why are there separate maps for l & r cylinders and why are they different? As for acceleration enrichment tables and right cylinder offset tables, well, there is much to learn.

 

because left and right cylinders have different AFRs at almost any breakpoint. The acceleration table (singular, there's only one) contains values which are added and subtracted to the fuel values depending on the engine temperature and the angular speed at which the throttle is opened. Search for X-Tau model/evaporation/puddle effect to learn about the background.

 

Cheers

Meinolf

[Meinolf]

Hi,

 

All well and good, your next problem is deciding what AFR you want, 14.7:1 (or Lambda 1.00) often considered the theoretical full burn, or some other figure, add to that the suspicion the infernal combustion engine won't even allow you to use one ratio right across the map.

 

it depends. Lamda 0.86 produces the best power and 1.05 the best efficiency. But, an engine must be designed to accommodate lean mixtures. That wasn't state of the art at Guzzi in the 90s. V11/Jackals engines run at absurdely low or high Lambda values, but not well.

 

The V11 and Jackal BINs I made available for many users so far used a constant 0.88 at all breakpoints I could measure in road use. I am now creating BINs where the fuel tables are reflecting the MAP values I am logging. The underlying idea is that going for 0.86/highest power at a breakpoint where the engine is higly throttled (a V11 and Jackal have less than 20% of atmospheric pressure in the manifold at closed throttle/RPM) doesn't make sense and to achieve a combination of fuel economy and ridability and smoothness at the same time.

 

The real challenge is to adjust the ignition timing to each mixture, as lean mixtures take much longer to ignited than rich ones. The difference is ~30% from lean to rich mixure.

 

Cheers

Meinolf

[Meinolf]

Hi,

 

...But for the purposes of making a quick improvement at lower throttle openings

 

not really.

 

The values in the fuel maps reflect the volumetric efficiency of an engine across the board. If you use Tunerpro's graph capability to view a fuel table you'll notice the tremendous ups and downs of the values including peaks which look absurd. But they will, with a decent map, reflect the "breathing" capability of the given setup.

 

Using the CO trim to assuage "felt" problems is a rather crude method. It might! address one bothersome spot but will open several others. Don't use a chisel when a scalpel is needed.

 

Cheers

Meinolf

[Gritman]

Well, it was a very good idea to park the fuelling til the bike was mechanically and dynamically ok. Had I tried to get my head around all this at the beginning, I'd never have started the project, be richer and spending more time in the saddle - but not on a fabulous beast, just another showroom pony! Think I prefer it this way, although I have been tempted by the Tuono Factory R....

 

My strategy from here is modest. Firstly, I want to correct the misfire/fluffiness at certain throttle openings. If this is successful, an AFR meter is next so that I can analyse the ratio across the rev range. With this info (and all the expertise gained of course  ) I can start to develop a proper map. The tables for the Daytona/Centauro you supplied Meinhof will be useful, but I do not expect to just transfer values, rather they give an impression of where the v10 motor differs from the v11 - volumetric efficiency? It is enlightening to read discussions on AFR's and ignition timing. From the outset I was aware that the advance curve for the 2 engines would differ. I was not aware of the significance of the effect that the mixture can have. It does go some way to explaining the peaks and troughs in Tunerpros graph facility that did puzzle me somewhat.... I have much to learn though with this cuddly support network, how can I fail?!! 

 

btw the chisel has done its job and is back in its drawer Meinhof!

[Jazzamoto]

OK, so for us simpletons, if I raise the CO from zero to +10, am I making it richer or leaner? Thought I'd ask.

[docc]

OK, so for us simpletons, if I raise the CO from zero to +10, am I making it richer or leaner? Thought I'd ask.

Richer. But, as Meinolf points out in post #272, primarily at the most closed throttle angles (idle and just off), and insignificant at WOT. 

 

The "richer" part I feel I'm a Qualified Simpleton to reply, but the rest is truly and actually the Rocket Science we've heard so much about . . .