ECU

[Cliff]

$2000 for a tuning link's O2 sensor?!!!

How much is the Bosch sensor that you use?

Could you bundle it with an accurate* LED meter that would tell me how lean my bike is running and sell it to me for under US $200?  (*accurate from 12-15:1 ratio at 0.5 increments. So, it would measure 15 or maybe 7 LEDs or 3LEDs and an adustable target range with 0.5 accuracy)

Does the Bosch thread in to our pipes without modification?

41192[/snapback]

Sorry that should have read $2000 analyser not sensor.

 

Not sure what the best value WB sensors are nowadays. Wayne Macdonald mentioned a VW 5 wire sensor that was relatively cheap. I'll ask him to post further details.

 

The bosch cost me about AU$360. Its good in that it doesn't require fancy electronics to drive it like the newer 5 wire ones do.

 

Other than that there's http://www.wbo2.com or the Wideband commander is not a bad looking package. Both depressingly expensive. Hopefully in a few more years they'll start charging realistic prices.

 

Edit: An ebay search on Wide-band Sensor shows some cheaper options including kits.

Here's some interesting info about cheap sensors http://www.megasquirt2.com/PWC/lsupur.htm

 

The standard thread size is 18mm. There are a few smaller sizes , 12mm I think ) but there would be less choice of sensor.

[JuhaV]

$2000 for a tuning link's O2 sensor?!!!

How much is the Bosch sensor that you use?

Could you bundle it with an accurate* LED meter that would tell me how lean my bike is running and sell it to me for under US $200?  (*accurate from 12-15:1 ratio at 0.5 increments. So, it would measure 15 or maybe 7 LEDs or 3LEDs and an adustable target range with 0.5 accuracy)

Does the Bosch thread in to our pipes without modification?

41192[/snapback]

 

Hi,

 

See http://wbo2.com/ and there, for example, "the miniature 2CO sensor".

 

With a wideband lambda probe you need some special electronics to interpret the sensor signal. Coarsely, the cost of the above mentioned system seems to be 250 AUD for the box, 80 AUD for the probe itself and 180 AUD for a digital display. I do not have any experience myself with these Tech Edge products, but have not heard anything bad about them either. I am considering to get one when my budget allows me to do so.

 

Ok, but because we now seem to have the fuel measuring side more or less covered and the debaters have digged deep into their current positions, why not switch to the ignition timing issue ?

 

The basic question is : How do I optimise the ignition timing for a given rpm & load condition ? What shoud I measure ? How is the A/F going to affect my ignition timing and vice versa ?

 

The only very basic adjustment that I have done so far is to back of (retard) the ignition timing in those operation points where I experience pinging. Is the optimal setting close to the pinging limit ?

 

How about knock sensors ? Do you have any experience on those ? It would be nice to have both lambda and knock sensor on the bike to give feedback both the the fuel and ignition map adjustments.

 

br, JuhaV

[dlaing]

Thanks!

The prices are a little steep, but it would be great not to have to rely on a dyno tuner at $200+ per map.

Plus if you use your own O2 sensor you not only can develop a map the way you want it, you can diagnose when things go amiss.

Plus you can tune on the top of the mountain and by the seashore, in the rain, and when the santa anas dry winds hit.

Can I maximize power the way I can with a dyno, not really. It would take a stop watch and a lot of time, or a data logger.

But it would be more fun than sitting in the tuning link dyno waiting room as they lug your baby at WOT at 2500RPM, possibly pinging the engine with their earphones on...

[callison]

$2000 for a tuning link's O2 sensor?!!!

How much is the Bosch sensor that you use?

 

Somewhere between $279 and $400 USD. They used to be cheaper. Now they're not. This is for the Bosch LSM11 like Cliff used. There is a Bosch LSU4 wideband too. About twice as expensive.

 

Could you bundle it with an accurate* LED meter that would tell me how lean my bike is running and sell it to me for under US $200? (*accurate from 12-15:1 ratio at 0.5 increments. So, it would measure 15 or maybe 7 LEDs or 3LEDs and an adustable target range with 0.5 accuracy)

 

Like this?

 

 

www.sdsefi.com

 

For $200? I'd say no, keep smoking. The kit above is hideously expensive. I couldn't find a separate price listing for the wideband doohickey, it may be part of the entire EFI system.

 

Microtech has a kit. $1,149.

 

Does the Bosch thread in to our pipes without modification?

 

No.

 

 

And some really good instructions (for a Ducati) that I've ripped off from http://www.users.waitrose.com/~paso/stlist.htm

 

-------------------------------

Fuel Injection Adjustment by FIM: How does the CO trimmer work and how do I set it? Every model of Weber injected bike has a CO trimming function which allows the idle mixture to be set. In fact the trimmer affects fuel delivery over the entire RPM range, but with a lesser effect at higher RPM. The amount of fuel added or subtracted from the base fuel duration varies from model to model, as it's programmed differently for different models and ECUs. However it is necessary to adjust the CO Trim to obtain optimum performance.

 

How do I set the trimmer correctly? Firstly let's look at the factors involved in the mixture system: The fuel entering the engine is controlled by the injectors, principally by how long they are open for each engine cycle. Typically at idle they are open from about 1mS to about 2mS. The CO trimmer affects this duration as shown in the table above. This change is the same for both cylinders, and cannot affect the CO cylinder balance. The computer measures the butterfly position using the Throttle Position Sensor (TPS). This sensor is precisely aligned on the butterfly shaft and affects not only fuel delivery but ignition advance as well. Many owners are tempted to move this sensor on the shaft, as you can get more fuel delivery from the ECU in this way. But there are several goods reasons not to do this: The Weber TPS sensors are NOT LINEAR. If you change the position from the factory setting, not only do you change the fuel delivery but you change the ignition advance. This means that the bike will have too much advance at partial throttle, leading to detonation (pinging) problems which were not there before. The factory used a specific setting for it's mapping, and we use the same setting for our mapping. So if you want to achieve optimum results with our chips, then you should set the TPS to the factory settings. Then your engine will operate as close as possible to the engine we used for testing. The air entering the engine is controlled by two things, the throttle butterfly and the air-bleed channel. These two factors are interdependent, i.e., you can get the same amount of air with a shut throttle and open airbleed as with an open throttle and shut air-bleed. The difference is that the ECU does not know how the air-bleeds are set, whereas it does know the throttle position. So you can change the air entering the engine either by opening the throttles (which the ECU knows about and makes an adjustment for) or by opening the airbleed. The salient point here is that the butterfly and the airbleed are designed for two different functions. The butterflies are designed to deliver the same amount of air to each cylinder under load conditions. This is achieved by synchronizing the butterflies using a vacuum gauge or 2-channel CO meter. Because the butterflies are not perfect, the airflow will vary between the two, especially at low throttle settings. It is impossible to maintain exact synchronization through the throttle range, so the butterflies are synched where they are most critical, i.e., in the range one-third to one-half throttle. This can be easily achieved on a brake dyno. The designed purpose of the air-bleeds is to achieve cylinder balance at low, or idle, throttle settings, where the butterflies are effectively closed on the stop screw. The bleeds are adjusted to give either matching vacuum or CO for both cylinders. Clearly the idle can be set in a number of ways, since the mixture and balance are interdependent, along with the butterfly synchronization. So unless you are familiar with idle setting then we suggest you leave this to a dealer with the right equipment. To properly set the CO you need a CO meter !! If you don't have one it is very hard to pin down the relationship between the CO trim, the air bleeds, and the butterfly position. So to reiterate the variables: Throttle Position Sensor adjustment. Butterfly synchronization. CO Trimmer setting. Air Bleeds. We use the following sequence to correctly align all parts of the induction system. This sequence is essentially the same as the factory recommended sequence: Set the Throttle Position Sensor on the throttle shaft. To correctly do this you must: Completely back off the idle stop screws on both throttle bodies. Use the Mathesis tester or a Digital MilliVoltMeter to read the throttle sensor voltage. To do this you should tap the butterfly with your finger to ensure that the butterfly is completely closed against the body. Then you turn on the ignition and measure the voltage on the throttle sensor: P7 or P8 ECU: Pins 11 and 17. 1.6M ECU: Pins 16 and 30. 1.5M ECU: Pins 22 and 11. If the sensor does not read 150mV Plus or Minus 2mV then you need to adjust it: Slacken the lock screws on the throttle sensor using a screwdriver or 7mm socket. Carefully move the sensor whilst reading the voltage. Retighten the lock screws a little at a time, each time reading the voltage and adjusting the sensor. Note that you should probably overshoot the reading by about 5mV on slack screws, because when you tighten them the reading will change by about 5mV. Repeat until perfect. This takes a lot of practice. The factory manuals specify +/- 5mV but we feel that this is not accurate enough. many owners will attest to the difference in performance when the sensor is set perfectly. Reset the throttle stop screw (or screws) so that the engine idles at around 1200 rpm. This is not a final setting for the stop screws, merely a step in the procedure. Typically this will produce a voltage of around 300mV on the TPS. This value is completely arbitrary and is not important. Many people misunderstand the factory manual in this regard and will try resetting the TPS until they get 1200 rpm idle and exactly 300mV on the sensor. THIS IS WRONG !!!. The actual voltage on the sensor at idle is irrelevant to correct sensor positioning on the throttle shaft. Trust Me !! Synchronize the Butterflies: Close the airbleed screws completely by adjusting CLOCKWISE. If you don't do this then the throttle vacuum will still reflect any air passing through the bleed channels and the butterflies will not be perfectly synched. Attach vacuum gauges to the manifold port on each cylinder and run the engine. Adjust the throttle butterfly link shaft until vacuum is identical. Rev the engine and confirm that vacuum tracks on both cylinders throughout the throttle and RPM range. Readjust the link shaft until satisfactory results are obtained. Do Not adjust the throttle link shaft after this point.!! Set the IDLE Balance by adjusting the airbleed screws counterclockwise and confirming that the vacuum is identical for both cylinders at idle. You can rev the engine and observe vacuum tracking through the rev range, and then observe idle vacuum restabilising. NOTE Since the airbleeds are designed to iron out any irregularities in the throttle's function, by their nature there is no default setting, unlike the idle screws on a carburetor. If anything the default setting is fully closed. Airbleeds can also be balanced using a 2 channel CO meter. In this case, just adjust the bleeds until both cylinders have the same CO. Adjust the IDLE Mixture. Finally you get to set the CO Trimmer ! This will affect both cylinders by the same amount, so you need to set the airbleeds first. A typical CO figure for idle is 4% to 6%, but automotive regulations usually specify a CO of under 1% to meet emissions standards. A V-twin will idle very poorly if the CO is set below 1%, so if you are really bothered try a setting of about 3%. Note that you may need to finesse the airbleeds at this stage. Adjust the IDLE RPM. Set the idle rpm at the manufacturer's figure (usually 1100 - 1200 rpm) by adjusting the throttle butterfly stop screw (or screws). We recommend 1200 rpm for Ducatis and Guzzis, possibly 1500 rpm for Ducati 996SPS models. Finally, note that the last three steps are usually repeated until an acceptable balance of Idle Balance, Idle Mixture, and Idle RPM are obtained. This is normal. Do Not adjust the throttle synchronization link shaft once it is set in the early stages. If you do this now, you will need to go through the entire sequence again. So hopefully you will have an engine which now idles, accelerates, and delivers full power faultlessly. Again, if you are not confident about all of these steps, then we suggest you use a dealer who has the skills and equipment. It is not worth adjusting the CO trimmer unless the entire sequence is followed without skipping any steps.

 

I'm looking to buy an "affordable" gas analyzer for tuning my bikes, who make one? I've seen some advertised between $100 and $400, but I'm not too sure of their quality. I don't have any experience with gas analyzers, and I don't want to spend over $500. Do you have any recommendations? We specifically do not recommend anything in that price range, as everything we have tested is crap. For a Lambda sensor to read properly it must have temperature compensation, which is essentially an ECU attached which reads voltage and internal resistance and then looks these up in a table to derive lambda for any given voltage and temperature. The CorseTec and Motec that we sell do this. Nothing on the market for $500 does this, they are usually just a bar-graph LED which shows sensor voltage in a tight range. Useless. Absolutely useless. The other factor in Lambda meters is the probe itself. many of the under $500 meters use a common auto probe which is cheap, but only designed to read accurately at a lambda of 1.0. Although this is a useful area, peak power is delivered at a lambda of 0.88 and a linear reading from 0.75 to 1.0 is essential to properly tune an engine. All the cheap probes/meters do is stretch the linearity of the sensor around the 1.0 region to try to derive richer lambdas than the sensor is capable of. Honestly, we have tried 5 different meters in an attempt to offer a cheeper alternative, and they are just no good. As the exhaust temperature changes the LED readout changes, whereas a temp-compensated unit will show lambda only. It's easy to check because CO meters, although slow, are very accurate over a wide temperature range. We did A/B comparisons of our lambda meters with a CO meter and the cheaper alternatives and the results showed that the CO meter tracked closely with the temp. compensated units, but the cheaper units slewed wildly around, to the extent that I have never used them since! We use a Bosch Motorsport probe which is used world-wide by Superbike, Grand Prix, and Formula 1 teams, and costs around USD 290. The probe is wide-range, linear, and withstands leaded fuel, so it is obviously not an common auto type. The part number is 0 258 104 002, or commonly called LSM11. So really you'd be better off with a cheap CO meter which although slower, is far more accurate. The cheapest I have seen is about USD 900, still more than you want to spend, but don't forget that every 2 bit auto shop has a CO meter and they are rarely used. We used to borrow them all the time before we got decent Lambda meters.

[dlaing]

Here is an interesting link:

http://megasquirt.sourceforge.net/MegaTunix/index.html

Looks like it would take me 10 years to figure out, but pretty cool for people like Cliff, who probably already knows about it.

[Guest wmcdonal]

The Bosch LSM11 wide band sensor requires a control box if it is to give accurate results.

The FIM and Motec units that use this type of sensor correct for sensor temp, without this correction the output from the LSM11 cannot be trusted.

[Guest ratchethack]

Thanks for posting the Fuel Admustment by FIM link, Carl. Though it looks like it was written 4 years back, I think this is the best write-up I've seen.

[moto]

2000 rpm range with 5hp difference. Typical driving. You only need enough force to overcome wind resistance, tire friction, and internal friction. Are we really concerned about power here? Will the owner appricate 1 more HP here or 1 more mpg.

41122[/snapback]

This would be a more valid question to ask if the engine was never accelerating at or passing through 12% throttle during acceleration.

Spoken like a true dyno operator. You are behind a rock. No one would pay you to tune their motorcycle to be more effecient, and still offer good performance.We as consumers have been brain washed into more power more power more power. Look at the crap they sell "up to 10 more Horsepower, only $19.95!!!" People only want to see a before and a better after dyno run. It's that HP number that matters!!!!!

True, but how do you propose to measure fuel economy on a dyno? I suppose a flow meter could be used to measure how much fuel was being used at any given time. Is this akin to what you had in mind?

But what take into account the dirty air my engine breathes when plugging along in rush hour traffic, or the bad gas I filled up with, or the dirty air fliter I should have replaced 3 months ago, or the oil that is slipping past my worn valve guides. It is reactive to its inputs, not to how well the engine is actually running.

It will take into account the clogged filter, as the airbox pressure is usually measured on the outlet side of the filter. The Futura ECU monitors the pressure in the airbox on the inlet, or theoretically wrong side of the filter, but also monitors manifold pressure which makes that ok. I think the oil slipping past the guides should mostly be irrelevant unless it's a large quantity, in which case you should be getting it fixed anyway. A closed loop ECU is also reactive to its inputs and not to how well the engine is actually running. You are ignoring the fact that a particular O2 sensor voltage does not automatically equate the best running engine.

I haven't seen this one yet.

Sorry, that should have read "barometric".

[callison]

But what take into account the dirty air my engine breathes when plugging along in rush hour traffic, or the bad gas I filled up with, or the dirty air fliter I should have replaced 3 months ago, or the oil that is slipping past my worn valve guides. It is reactive to its inputs, not to how well the engine is actually running.

 

The 02 sensor is "downstream" from the engine. Therefore, it shouldn't care a whit what condition the engine is in, the rest will be up to the programming of the ECU. Obviously, an ECU that is destined for fuel control is not going to do very much for oil messing up the fuel burn. Throwing that into the equation is tantamount to asking for self stacking firewood.

[moto]

Well those gas charts certainly explain why the common narrow band gas sensor will not work well with A/F below 14/1.

How do they do that?

To dismiss all o2 gas sensors as not workable in the richer range though is to ignore the fact that wide band sensors like the Bosch 0258 104 002, that I use, and the newer 5 wire sensors do exist and work very well in that area. They are the basis of many commercial analysers including RacerX's US$2000 sensor.

41158[/snapback]

Define "work well". If they don't provide data about whether the mixture is leaner or richer than it ought to be vs. close to optimal, then what good are they by themselves? If I can have CO readings that vary from 1.9% all the way to 11.4% with a 0.4% O2 content, how can O2 content be useful for the determination of mixture strength?

It may also be true that a single A/F target will not give maximum power across the board. However just as you could tweak each map point to with 1HP by adjusting the mixture, what is to stop one similarly tweaking each points A/F ratio to do likewise.

Using the term "A/F ratio" is quite misleading in the first place, as it implies that it's relevant to something and that we can measure it. We can't measure it with an O2 sensor, but we might be able to measure it with a mass airflow sensor in conjunction with a fuel flowmeter. Even though this would be interesting data, how the engine is running is what is relevant, not what "A/F ratio" it supposedly has. Just to clarify, the Futura was tuned to within .1 to .2 hp of best power, not to within 1 hp. Assuming O2 content was actually meaningful, you could certainly tune each table position to max power via pulsewidth adjustments on each cylinder individually, then similarly tweak the ignition maps, and then try to use the final resultant O2 content at each table position as the target for the ECU. The problem is that this defeats the major percieved advantage of a closed loop ECU being able to tune itself without lengthy development on a dyno. Unfortunately it's a "garbage in, garbage out" scenario.

No I don't have that capability today. I could have it tomorrow. One thing I would be sure of though. Which system would still be within 1HP six months down the track.

What makes you think that an open loop system will lose 1 hp in six months? In my opinion, just adding an O2 sensor driven closed loop feature to an ECU that has had every fuel and ignition table position tuned to within .2 hp of best power stands to compromise performance more than leaving said ECU untouched for years.

Would I be happy with a 2% drop in power for 5% better economy. You bet.Would I be happy with a 5% drop in power for 20% better economy. You bet.

Do I care that I get 95HP rather than a 100. No

Do I care that the throttle is responsive and there are no misses at. Yes

The good thing is I can have all of those features above, including the 100HP if I want.

How?

If we want to tune for economy rather than power, how do we do that? I suppose we could tune for power to establish where the engine runs best and then subtract a particular percentage of pulsewidth across the board. Or do we look to reduce the CO by some amount, or perhaps increase CO2? How do we then know that what we did is optimal? Can we do this across the board, or do we once again have to work on each table position individually? Wouldn't we also have to refine the ignition map to match our new fuel map? If we do subtract some fuel, we will certainly be loosing power. The rider has the throttle open commensurate with how much power he needs. So now he has less and opens the throttle further. Is he then still using less fuel than before? How much less? I suppose that could be determined on the dyno with a fuel flow meter. A closed loop ECU will not be able to do that by itself.

[Cliff]

From the graphs, the fact that O2 is 0 until the stoiciometric ratio implies that it is not going to be a good measure below that point. Similarly the fact that CO is not produced above that ratio means it is not a good indicator for lean mixtures. The O2 values you quote is just noise around 0.

 

Clearly the wideband sensors are not O2 sensors in the same sense as the narrow band sensors. Their construction and chemistry is completely different. These wideband sensors are used in many commercial and open project gas analysers. They give coverage from 11 to 1 to well over 15 - 1. If as you suggest these wide band sensors are unusable anywhere rich of stioc, then this fact would be public knowledge. We would hear all over the place of this deficiency.

Please provide some links that say these sensors do not work.

 

I don't know how these sensors work or what these sensors measure. I just know that I can set a target voltage and my ECU will produce a mixture ( as measured by injector pulse width ) that is stable ( within 1% of a mean). I can reduce that voltage and produce a stable mixture that is leaner. I can increase that voltage and produce a stable mixture that is richer. I have a monotonic and reproducible relationship between voltage and mixture. I'm at a loss to imagine how a "real sensor" would differ from this behaviour or what more it would provide me.

 

How is you tweaking the mixture for peak power any different to me tweaking the voltage for peak power ( a voltage for each data point not one voltage for all ).

 

If you dynoed mid winter, six months later is totally different climate wise. You are assuming that the ECU has perfect compensation curves. If you are using a power commander, Wayne Mcdonald has already explained how its calculation is going to be in slight error. Add to that a service were you adjust tappets, balance throttle bodies and adjust TPS. You've pretty much invalidated that dyno session. Unless you're proposing another dyno session.

It is also true that these gas sensors age over time but with a life of more than 100,000km on unleaded fuels I think it is pretty stable over a year or 2.

 

How can I have all those features I mentioned? Because I can specify that any part of my map have any target voltage. I can make my 25% to 50% throttle region track lean. I can make my 75%+ throttle rich. I can even go open loop at any point if I want to.

 

As I have mentioned before there is not one type of closed loop controller. As far I know they are all based on an open loop controller and hence have a map that should be adjusted to suit the bike. The gas sensor only gives further hints. Now tts quite possible that you have experience with OEM ECUs that are closed loop. It also would not surprise me to hear that that don't work very well. I however have built my own ECU, if you haven't already picked that up, that has optional closed loop behaviour and it does everything I expect it to do and nothing I don't. Not anymore

 

BTW I would be pleased if you would answer my question on the other thread http://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=4296

[dlaing]

BTW I would be pleased if you would answer my question on the other thread http://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=4296

41405[/snapback]

And some of us may interested in using your dyno services!

Especially if you are open to TuneBoy, TechnoResearch's Direct Link and or DynoJet's PCIII, and can get anywhere near Tuning Link prices, which start at about $200 for a full map, but higher prices are apparently more typical.

[JuhaV]

The basic question is : How do I optimise the ignition timing for a given rpm & load condition ? What shoud I measure ? How is the A/F going to affect my ignition timing and vice versa ?

 

The only very basic adjustment that I have done so far is to back of (retard) the ignition timing in those operation points where I experience pinging.  Is the optimal setting close to the pinging limit ?

 

How about knock sensors ? Do you have any experience on those ?  It would be nice to have both lambda and knock sensor on the bike to give feedback both the the fuel and ignition map adjustments.

41196[/snapback]

 

Any comments to these ignition issues ?

 

br, JuhaV

[Cliff]

I found optimising the ignition advance very difficult to judge. I only tried at the lower RPMS and the power pulsing on the dyno was hard to interpret. The best method is to use Optimiser at the moment. The Spark Advance menu has a square wave modulation of the spark advance. Sometimes seat of the pants you can feel this and move the advance to the stronger direction

[callison]

What a great thread! This is just waaayyyyy too much fun. So, to add to the mystery (misery?), check out Spark-Advance Control by Ion-Sensing and Interpretation. I bet Cliff is going to look at this and start wondering how to incorporate it into his ECU