TPS Reset

[docc]

3 hours ago, MartyNZ said:

Yes, I'm running Meinolf's v93, and I'm very happy with it. 

https://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?/topic/22024-meinolfs-v11-bin/&tab=comments#comment-253138

@dbarb3if you use the search function on this site you can find lots of information to help you.

@MartyNZ, do you also use the closed airbypass screws and very loose valve lash with that map?

[MartyNZ]

8 minutes ago, docc said:

@MartyNZ, do you also use the closed airbypass screws and very loose valve lash with that map?

I have a similar configuration to that mentioned in Meinolf's except for the blended throttle body shafts. So I followed his advice given here:

https://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?/topic/21701-ecu-bin-maps/#elControls_233775_menu

Since I loaded his BIN file to the ECU, and set up the tuning as he suggested, and also as Docc suggested here:

https://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?/topic/19610-decent-tune-up/

the bike runs well.

I am puzzled by the frequent complaints of poor running or the "3000rpm snort" in V11s when the permanent cure has been available for years.

[Lucky Phil]

8 minutes ago, MartyNZ said:

I have a similar configuration to that mentioned in Meinolf's except for the blended throttle body shafts. So I followed his advice given here:

https://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?/topic/21701-ecu-bin-maps/#elControls_233775_menu

Since I loaded his BIN file to the ECU, and set up the tuning as he suggested, and also as Docc suggested here:

https://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?/topic/19610-decent-tune-up/

the bike runs well.

I am puzzled by the frequent complaints of poor running or the "3000rpm snort" in V11s when the permanent cure has been available for years.

So that's the feedback I was wanting on the Meinolf map. No hiccup at any time I assume. Anyone else? Anyone with the issue want to do a back to back test and see the results and report back? No other adjustments, just load the Meinolf map and see how it runs?

Ciao 

[docc]

22 minutes ago, MartyNZ said:

I have a similar configuration to that mentioned in Meinolf's except for the blended throttle body shafts. So I followed his advice given here:

https://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?/topic/21701-ecu-bin-maps/#elControls_233775_menu

Since I loaded his BIN file to the ECU, and set up the tuning as he suggested, and also as Docc suggested here:

https://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?/topic/19610-decent-tune-up/

the bike runs well.

I am puzzled by the frequent complaints of poor running or the "3000rpm snort" in V11s when the permanent cure has been available for years.

Just to clarify, @MartyNZ map v.93, but still using the parameters of the "Decent Tune-up" ( valves set 0.006"/0.008" = 0.15mm/0.20mm I/E, and air bypass screws at ~a full turn +/- what it takes to balance at idle)?

[MartyNZ]

33 minutes ago, Lucky Phil said:

So that's the feedback I was wanting on the Meinolf map. No hiccup at any time I assume. Anyone else? Anyone with the issue want to do a back to back test and see the results and report back? No other adjustments, just load the Meinolf map and see how it runs?

Ciao 

I did do all the suggested adjustments given in https://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?/topic/21701-ecu-bin-maps/&do=findComment&comment=233775

The first thing I noticed was the engine would start and idle without needing to touch the throttle. No more waking the neighbors with a fistful of noise before the oil pressure got up.

18 minutes ago, docc said:

Just to clarify, @MartyNZ map v.93, but still using the parameters of the "Decent Tune-up" ( valves set 0.006"/0.008" = 0.15mm/0.20mm I/E, and air bypass screws at ~a full turn +/- what it takes to balance at idle)?

No sorry Docc, I meant to say the basic tuneup is excellent advice, but I used the Meinolf settings if different. Closed screws, 0.3mm clearances, 0.157TPS volts, idle stops used on both sides to balance & set idle speed.

[Lucky Phil]

1 hour ago, MartyNZ said:

I did do all the suggested adjustments given in https://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?/topic/21701-ecu-bin-maps/&do=findComment&comment=233775

The first thing I noticed was the engine would start and idle without needing to touch the throttle. No more waking the neighbors with a fistful of noise before the oil pressure got up.

No sorry Docc, I meant to say the basic tuneup is excellent advice, but I used the Meinolf settings if different. Closed screws, 0.3mm clearances, 0.157TPS volts, idle stops used on both sides to balance & set idle speed.

Meinolf walked back from these clearance numbers to .2/.15 and suggested he'd never used .3. I think it was an honest error on his part and a mix up as I also recall him suggesting .3 and I even went back to research the .3 recommendation and found he had. I remember questioning it at the time from a mechanical perspective. He also normally quotes the exhaust/inlet as well as opposed to the inlet/exhaust as we normally do. maybe that's a language thing, not sure.

Maybe he'll be along and clarify although I'm almost 100% sure he already has in the not to distant past.

Quite frankly to anyone out there I'd just load his map with the current settings and see how it is. It's not like it's going to cause any problems it just may not be optimal at the bottom of the mapping. You could just make sure the TPS is right as thats the most important. Load the map and see how it is and if it's a major improvement which I suspect it will be then consider the air screw and idle adjustment settings and balance.  

Ciao 

[MartyNZ]

2 hours ago, Lucky Phil said:

Meinolf walked back from these clearance numbers to .2/.15

You're right, so I went back and edited the text in that link I gave. 

[Meinolf]

Hi,

allow me to step in and add some comments.

If I mentioned a valve play of 0,3mm for the V11 camshaft, then I made a mistake. The V11 camshaft is well designed and doesn't need any additional play to overcome (too) long slopes. The 0,3mm are recommended for all OEM pre-CARC camshafts, as they have a tremendously long slope. As a result the valves are slightly open for more than 100° CW before the actual opening cycle, with the accompanying loss of pressure in the combustion chamber and increased valve temperature for lack of cooling time with the valves connecting to the seat.

My recommended settings for the bypass screws and CO trim are only intended to simplify the usage of the BIN with different engines than mine. CO trim can be set accurately, but many seem to have problems adjusting it with GuzziDiag while the engine is running. I always choose the easier path of directly modifying the CO trim values in the EEPROM. The bypass screws are more problematical, as my 1/2 turn opening might be your 1/2+1/16 turn opening. They are not graduated.

The impact of CO trim (+/- fuel) and bypass (+/- air) is most pronounced a low TPS settings. So the idea is to avoid this potential pitfall, especially the potential mis-syncing of both cylinders. My BIN is based on AFR measurements and my targeted AFR targets for the respective breakpoints.

(Btw, I've revisited the 15M and to a lesser degree the 15RC code and found that the code contains a calculation which causes CO trim to taper off and disappear at 3000rpm)

Some may remember that the measuring and logging on the V11 was done with highly dissatisfying equipment form Innovate.

I eventually switched to Zeitronix, ZT2 and 3, which are much better, for my efforts with the Jackal and Norge. As this is mostly finished I moved the equipment to the V11 and started re-measuring it. The result is here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nIzV4LkFXJUyDMalLagnWb6c9I_0R0Bt/view?usp=sharing

Changes versus the 93_6 BIN are fuel values (improved AFR synchronicity between the cylinders) and changed ignition values (the engine runs less harshly in the 4-5k rpm/~15-30° TPS area. I will continue to work on the ignition, but since I have no means of measuring the effect except for my seat-of-pants, this is the area where the biggest remaining improvements are hidden.

I've also noticed that, after re-working the butterfly valves and the shafts, there's an much larger than expected discrepancy between fuel values over the first two TPS breakpoint columns. As I intend to open the engine anyway to inspect the valves, I'll revisit the throttle bodies as well. This is mostly a cosmetic issue, the bike runs splendidly.

But first the rebuild of the Mille GT (change to a BMW K100 fork with 41,3mm diameter instead of 35mm, new camshaft, improving the valve timing, ....) and the SPIII rebuild after I was crashed by a young Italian lady in the hills above Genua have to be finished.

Cheers

Meinolf

[Miro Kacur]

On 9/22/2021 at 4:12 PM, docc said:

No, Sir. The TPS is set with a quality voltmeter to 157 mV with the throttle plate completely closed (linkage released, high idle cam released, right idle stop screw backed all the way off, clean bore and plate edge, and perhaps even lightly zip tied closed).  This effectively indexes the map to the throttle angle.

It is a fiddly operation as the TPS is so very sensitive. You will get a feel for how much it changes with the tightening of the fasteners and take this into account until repeated attempts finally produce the desired value.

Changing the fasteners from the factory Torx/star to hex drive and obtaining a Casper's Breakout Harness (or equivalent) are helpful.

So in other words, I cannot rely on GuzziDiag mV reading when physically adjusting the TPS ?
I was getting +8mV higher reading on GuzziDiag vs the voltmeter (521 mV voltmeter / 529mV GuzziDiag)
The question is, which of these two instruments should be taken into account the GuzziDiag (v0.60) reading or the voltmeter ?

Thank you for clarifing.

[docc]

29 minutes ago, Miro Kacur said:

So in other words, I cannot rely on GuzziDiag mV reading when physically adjusting the TPS ?
I was getting +8mV higher reading on GuzziDiag vs the voltmeter (521 mV voltmeter / 529mV GuzziDiag)
The question is, which of these two instruments should be taken into account the GuzziDiag (v0.60) reading or the voltmeter ?

Thank you for clarifing.

Yes, use the voltmeter. Only the fully closed throttle plate voltage is important (157mV). The idle can then be set wherever you, and your V11, like best.

The idle voltage is not critical, but the fully closed throttle plate voltage indexes the throttle opening to the ECU mapping. It is very sensitive.

[audiomick]

2 hours ago, Miro Kacur said:

So in other words, I cannot rely on GuzziDiag mV reading when physically adjusting the TPS ?

Have a look here:

https://www.v11lemans.com/forums/topic/19641-basic-guzzidiag-tutorial-for-v11/?do=findComment&comment=288537

 

Guzzidiag can't measure the mV at fully closed, because the ECU doesn't deliver a reading for it.