Focus Fanatics Forum banner

21 - 40 of 79 Posts

·
That Guy
Joined
·
13,634 Posts
Discussion Starter #21
Do you not have the ability to change by spk advance by Cyl , also do you have adjustments for the knock sensor sensitivity settings by Cyl , there is a lot of interesting settings for the knock sensor by cyl you should look into as well as individual spk advance by cyl vs blanket borderline changes , and they really help

Tom
I do have individual cylinder compensation, but as far as l can tell it would be constant and most of the time the cylinder doesn't need it. I glanced at the KS sensitivity and I might play with it in the future beyond the move, but given the ringland failures I don't want to de-sensitize it quite yet.

I think that my biggest issue (aside from the inexperience, obviously) is that I'm working with maps made for better fuel than I'm using and if I would have had started with lower-octane maps it probably would have been easier. 91 just happened to be the lowest stage 3 map, so I'm having to backtrack before I can even get started (if that makes any sense).

There's definitely a lot more to this than I initially imagined. I figure that I'll work on the 89 portion for a couple of tanks before going back to do more on the 93, and hopefully by then it should be decent for normal daily driving.
 

·
C2H5OH
Joined
·
11,867 Posts
Do you not have the ability to change by spk advance by Cyl , also do you have adjustments for the knock sensor sensitivity settings by Cyl , there is a lot of interesting settings for the knock sensor by cyl you should look into as well as individual spk advance by cyl vs blanket borderline changes , and they really help

Tom

Thing he also has to keep in mind is that the ignition timing is linked to the cylinder pressure, which is linked to the cam timing/overlap.
It is possible to run more timing if more overlap is seen. That will lower initial cylinder pressure and keep knock situations at bay, but raise TQ some on the backend. Or could.

When you're not limited by fixed cam timing, there are many doors that open as far as ignition timing is concerned. Bad part is a dyno is the only way you're going to spot trends.
 

·
FF Affiliate
Joined
·
30,679 Posts
Actual dyno is the only way he is going to see a lot of this , he likes playing with the virtual dyno and from what I have seen it isnt going to show it all like sitting on a dyno and controlling things

I didnt want to muddy the waters with the cam base opening and closing for Exh and Int va optimum power open and closing vs duty cycle

Tom
 

·
That Guy
Joined
·
13,634 Posts
Discussion Starter #24
Thing he also has to keep in mind is that the ignition timing is linked to the cylinder pressure, which is linked to the cam timing/overlap.
It is possible to run more timing if more overlap is seen. That will lower initial cylinder pressure and keep knock situations at bay, but raise TQ some on the backend. Or could.

When you're not limited by fixed cam timing, there are many doors that open as far as ignition timing is concerned. Bad part is a dyno is the only way you're going to spot trends.
Actual dyno is the only way he is going to see a lot of this , he likes playing with the virtual dyno and from what I have seen it isnt going to show it all like sitting on a dyno and controlling things

I didnt want to muddy the waters with the cam base opening and closing for Exh and Int va optimum power open and closing vs duty cycle

Tom
I guess I should clarify some things, both learned through either the books or from trial-and-error through the ATR system.

First off, you're both right-the majority of what I'm doing should be done on a dyno. I've found this out both through the books and in practice, and because of the learning curve I really am beginning to not like e-tunes more and more. Trying to establish this information in the ever-changing 'environment' is wreaking havoc on the accumulated data, and that doesn't even include trying to maintain 'x' load by foot. Not that e-tunes/road-tunes are completely horrible, but if someone wants the best and most accurate tune then they need to start on a professional load-bearing dyno and only use the road to help clean up transitions.

Secondy, I've already addressed the cam angles and their relationship as it is directly represented in the HDFX tables. At some point in time I will rent some dyno time to address any corrections that need to be made, but it's already well-known in the ST community that most everything is 'close enough' from OEM through stage 3 bolt-ons and that doing things the most-correct way possible isn't 'necessary' until adding a different turbo and throwing the volumetric efficiency data out of whack. All I'm doing right now is making very slight adjustments and evaluating the resulting data because, like I've already said, I'm learning-it would be a complete waste of time for me to rent a dyno today because I don't know exactly what I'm doing and would essentially be wasting money.

Thirdly, I don't like 'playing' with V-Dyno-it's a well-known and proven system within the ST (and multiple others) community as a way to verify delta gains/losses. I've used it maybe three times since I started tuning; the majority of all of my data analysis is done in either Excel or in Datazap.me because V-Dyno isn't going to show me what cylinder is exhibiting knock at what rpm and load. I've used it once to show where I was at with the 93 tune, once while doing spark-hook tests, and once last night to see where I was with the 89 tune. I shouldn't have to keep stating this, but I'm not interested in power at this exact moment in time-only in ensuring that the tune I'm running won't exhibit knock in daily driving and during our cross-country move. But fwiw there have been multiple people that have confirmed that V-Dyno is within 3% of actual Dynojet charts, and the only real difference that is ever shown is the change in spool time due to the additional load exerted by the road.

Anywho, here's my latest cut/paste-

Well, I finally made the switch to metric gauges. It sure seemed to simplify things.

I'll post a pic of my BL table 7 (because it seems to get the most work) in a minute from my phone, but my timing seems excessively low for some reason. I don't expect it to be through the roof because it's only 89E10, but I was hoping that someone more experienced could weigh in with their thoughts on it. I've basically tuned out most all knock and set the KS max advance to 1 everywhere but above 5k+ at 1.2L+, and if I go much further at all my cyl 4 gets knock-y and pulls it's timing while the others walk away. Part of me thinks that it would be ok to let them walk and try to be all that they can be, but the other part of me thinks that it makes more sense to have them all running closely (even if not optimally) with cyl 4 not knocking.
Edit:


Basically, I've followed two separate tactics along with the occasional WOT-

1.) Set rpm to 2k, 2.5k, or 3k while on cruise and in a certain gear for a hill, allowing the load to change while isolating a certain column.
2.) Managing load via the go-pedal in as close of proximity to a certain row, and trying to keep it there through as much or all of the rpm range. Needless to say there was no .4 load done at 6k and the 1.4 load went significantly faster than the others.

Usually at the end of the day I would log 5-minute increments of normal driving back to the house for some overall evaluation and they seem to be looking pretty good for the most part, though fuel mileage doesn't seem to be quite tops. It's pretty hard to evaluate that with the abuse the car is going through currently, though. What I have noticed, as retarded as this will seem, is that I see more knock on cyl 4 in left turns than right. I know that it has something to do with the 2-2.5k, .6-.8l cells of BL 6&7 (they're very similar), I just haven't figured out why yet.

I've been doing a lot of tail-chasing, and I sometimes wonder if it's from compensations. I have been looking towards the OAR table and was going to drop the advance to zero, but both the advance and retard tables state that the tables aren't used in the tuning tips. I don't know whether to believe that or the tuners that state that they use OAR for tuning because both are more experienced than I, but if I can't use those tables then it seems like it would be a better idea to push the tune until OAR read 0, or as close to zero (preferably on the negative side) as possible?

Using the 91 stage 3 OTS as the base-


Mostly just thinking aloud. Judging by my last 5-minute log everything is doing well, even though the first three cylinders are restricted from making the power that they could be making. I'm ok with that considering the fact that these are just 'fall-back' tunes and would rather leave power on the table for safety. After the car is out of the shop again I will tidy up a few things within the 89 tune and drop it and go back to the 93 tune as I've learned a few new things to try within the switchable maps.
 

·
That Guy
Joined
·
13,634 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
Another cut/paste, relating to my collection/storage process-

Ok, and now some additional thoughts beyond what I've posted in the FoST community-

So far I've really only been messing with timing and evaluating ways to make it easier for me to log and evaluate, and then adjust for. Because the FoST community is already pretty established in their process, I figured I would post my method here and others with ATR can confirm how similar it is/isn't to the FoST. It may/may not be redundant and if it is I apologize; trying to share this data in multiple communities and follow the individual discussion-paths causes me to be more repetitive than I usually am.

First off, my overall process of maintaining data on my laptop. Everyone is going to have their own specific way of organization, but I figured that I would post this as what I'm doing simply because of this one single reason-you're going to collect more data than you would possibly imagine. Especially for those that consider making tunes for multiple fuels, it's very easy to get overwhelmed with the amount of data you're collecting and it becomes even harder to try and remember what was the change in-between this 'datalog1' and that 'datalog1'. If you have tons of time then it may be worthwhile to simply save each log with specific info, but I've literally amassed over 200 datalogs since starting this and that went out the window on Day 1.

First off, here is an image of my desktop. You'll notice that there are three separate sections-programs, data, and supporting data.



Programs and supporting data is pretty self explanatory-one opens up/adjusts/evaluates data while the other is background info for what you're working with. I'm going to focus on the data portion because that's where I created a huge mess initially.

You'll notice that there's the three different fuels plus another folder called Maps. Maps is strictly completed tunes that are ready for upload to the AP3. This usually contains one base (OTS v312) map that I can upload at any moment if I've frustrated myself and want to start from scratch. Everything else is a completed file saved directly from ATR. As of this typing, this is what it looks like inside-



At some point in time I get tired of having a ton of maps in there and distribute them to the related octane folder, which is another system I'll describe....now. The octane folder is where I save data directly from the AP3. Every time I stop to evaluate data and make changes, the AP Manager gets opened up, the datalog files are highlighted to be saved and are placed into a file titled after the tune from which it was evaluated. So this is what it looks like when I open an octane folder-



So you can see that every time I've made a change to a tune, I simply add one to the tune number and save it accordingly. I'll address that shortly because we're kinda working backwards in showing how I store data, which is the opposite of how it's collected. This folder usually only has the datalogs in it until I move the associated tune file into it, but here is one that's complete-



So now I know at any future point in time that if I want to backtrack or re-evaluate some data, I can go to a specific folder and open it to see the tune that was evaluated and the resulting data from that particular tune. It's not often that I do this, but it can mean the difference of going back one or two files as opposed to starting from scratch on the second day. This happens occasionally when you overshoot a target or inadvertently make an adjustment in the wrong direction, and a lot of times I will delete the entire folder in order to avoid picking back up with it on accident.

So basically, the process goes like this, starting with the OTS V312 map-

1. Load V312 into the AP3.
2. Load V312 into the ECU.
3. Datalog V312.
4. Open AP Manager, highlight datalogs and save them in new-folder V312, located in E89 folder.
5. Open ATR, load V312 map.
6. Evaluate V312 datalogs and make appropriate changes in ATR.
7. Save new map as V313 in Maps folder, proceed back to step 1.

At some point in time I get frustrated with the number of maps in the Maps folder and make a bulk transition from there to the appropriate octane folder, and later the individual map files can be moved and stored into the appropriate folder containing the datalogs.

I also keep a notepad with chicken-scratch that briefly outlines what each datalog was for (i.e.-WOT, hills, load, rpm, 5-minute drive) and brief notes on what changes I made in ATR associated with the tune before saving. That may or may not help you if you have to reflect back on something, and a lot of times I feel like it's wasted time because I can pretty clearly see what's being evaluated between logs. In all fairness, sometimes I add an oddball change that may not be related (KS adjustments, etc) or immediately noticeable in a log, so I suppose it could help in the long run.

Anyways, this is just what works for me and where I'm at through trial-and-error, and something different may work for someone else. All I can say is that I ended up having to trash a lot of data because I wasn't this organized initially, so it's worth considering if you're thinking about before trying to learn tuning.

I'll post some more soon with examples of logs, how I collect them, and my process of evaluation.
 

·
That Guy
Joined
·
13,634 Posts
Discussion Starter #26
Oh great, the pictures transferred this time. Here's another-

Ok, I'm going to get a little more in-depth now, though this is still generalized discussion that's not model-specific.

First off, lets discuss using metric gauges. It's difficult at first, but will make things significantly easier for those that are considering going the route of self-tuning. As an example, your wideband O2 could care less what kind of fuel you're using. You may see 14.7 AFR on your gauges, but what your O2 sees is that you're at 1 lambda. That stoichiometric 1 lambda is no different from E0 fuel (14.7:1) than it is from E85 (9.87:1)-it's showing that you've made stoichiometric balance with the fuel you're using, regardless of how little or much fuel it took to get there. All of your changes in ATR are metric, so you may as well get used to seeing it now.

Secondly, get in the habit of datalogging parameters that are only related to one general aspect of engine operation-air, fuel, spark, or turbo. I've spent a lot of time using and looking at datalogs with the default parameters plus all four ignition corrections, but as much as that has helped me learn and get comfortable with the overall datalogging/evaluation process it just doesn't give you as much detail as you want when you're making adjustments of parameters in multiple areas of your tune. The FiST may/may not be similar/different, but this is an example of what I log for making ignition corrections (spark) on the FoST-

Engine RPM
All 15 HDFX Weighted Percentages
All four ignition timing
Load actual
Spark Limit Source
Spark Source

Occasionally there are a few that I might throw in for curiosity of other areas or to ease the evaluation process (ignition corrections), but the more detailed information that you can get about one specific area then the more accurate your decisions can be. Unfortunately, in order to get really accurate information in one area you'll need to forget about the others and move through them all accordingly. And yes, changes in one area can/will affect the others, so it's a continual process as you work each area into a more 'optimal' operating range. Obviously many of those monitors are useless to VE (air), but many are directly applicable and would be logged when evaluating that area as well. Find what is directly applicable/necessary and forget the rest.

Lastly, know and understand from the onset that the most accurate information that you can get would be on a load-bearing dyno. This doesn't mean that road tuning is impossible or that dyno tuning is the only way, but it's much easier to make changes based in a world where environmental conditions are essentially the same as opposed to logging/adjusting information at 100 degrees and then working through throttle-closures when ambient is back at 70. It's a crude example, but an example nonetheless. It's also significantly easier to set the dyno to maintain a certain load or rpm than it is to try and do manually while on different roads, elevations, etc. I intend on using ATR and learning/establishing my processes on the road, scheduling some dyno time when I feel comfortable that I won't be wasting my money with it, and then further fine-tuning back on the road if necessary.

In a while I'll post an example of a datalog used for evaluation, how I personally evaluated it, etc., along with different shots of the log as I moved through one-single process. I should probably eat first, and I think I'm out of beer too so that will need to be rectified first.
 

·
FF Affiliate
Joined
·
30,679 Posts
I dont agree at all , I am guessing your calling "e-dyno" as remote tuning ? , I want to clarify this before I say more

I also 110% do not agree that a "load dyno" is whats needed

I also dont agree that only let the knock advance only do 1 deg

There is a lot of what your saying is your making all of this FAR to complicated on your self , about another 6 months - 1 year at this and you will understand what I am saying , keep it simple , it doesnt have to be as complicated as your making it but that takes time and the results will be the same

Tom
 

·
C2H5OH
Joined
·
11,867 Posts
I've never seen a dyno for the Fi or FoST. I don't even know which we're talking about here. But that dyno is just ugly, LOL.

What boost?
What IAT? (rising with RPM?)


I've asked a couple people before, with other cars, and never did get an answer but; when there is DiVCT present and an undersized turbo, I would think it might be possible to extend that TQ peak further into the RPM range by playing (delaying) the cam advance (reduce overlap). But I've not found anyone who has played with cam timing much if at all. I think many are afraid they'll break something. If I had one I wouldn't be afraid to adjust +/- 10* hear and there just for S&G.
But I fiddle far more than I have to / should.
 

·
That Guy
Joined
·
13,634 Posts
Discussion Starter #29
I dont agree at all , I am guessing your calling "e-dyno" as remote tuning ? , I want to clarify this before I say more

I also 110% do not agree that a "load dyno" is whats needed

I also dont agree that only let the knock advance only do 1 deg

There is a lot of what your saying is your making all of this FAR to complicated on your self , about another 6 months - 1 year at this and you will understand what I am saying , keep it simple , it doesnt have to be as complicated as your making it but that takes time and the results will be the same

Tom
I never said e-dyno, only said a load-bearing dyno was 'recommended', and have explained that the timing strategy that I've chosen is due to the crap fuel and weak cylinder. If I give it any more advance then cyl 4 will knock in every transition and when under load. I could pull 3 degrees out of everything and then take the KS advance back up to four but outside of that I don't want that cylinder advancing anymore. I could also de-sensitize the sensor but again-that goes directly against the reason that I've stated I have created the tune.

Yes, I do over-complicate things because I have to break it down that way in order to understand it and convey it to others. Any and all of my threads are written like that mostly because that's how I was taught to teach. For the most part it's an aviation thing.

I've never seen a dyno for the Fi or FoST. I don't even know which we're talking about here. But that dyno is just ugly, LOL.

What boost?
What IAT? (rising with RPM?)


I've asked a couple people before, with other cars, and never did get an answer but; when there is DiVCT present and an undersized turbo, I would think it might be possible to extend that TQ peak further into the RPM range by playing (delaying) the cam advance (reduce overlap). But I've not found anyone who has played with cam timing much if at all. I think many are afraid they'll break something. If I had one I wouldn't be afraid to adjust +/- 10* hear and there just for S&G.
But I fiddle far more than I have to / should.
It's for the FoST and it's ugly because the road I'm on is not flat and I'm not logging parameters that I would normally log for a V-Dyno. My initial intent with these datalogs wasn't to use V-Dyno so I'm only logging ignition-related parameters and that's why the AFR/boost isn't populated on the bottom-it wasn't logged.

As for boost, I'm only running what came on the Cobb map, which I believe is 22 psi tapering to 15. As for IAT I also don't know, but it's usually within 10 degrees of ambient and CAT is usually within 5.

There are two generally-accepted cam profiles used-the OEM setup and the Cobb setup. The Cobb setup allows earlier spool for a greater midrange while the OEM allows for a little more timing up top. In both directions it's relatively negligible simply because most OEM-turbo owners haven't experimented much with it, mostly because they're already running 100% WGDC from about 5k on. There have only been a couple of people that have messed with it that basically reported that it wasn't a drastic change in either direction.

That's what I've mostly understood, anyways. I haven't fully looked into it because I don't intend on changing any of the VE references, HDFX tables, or turbo settings on either the 87 or 89 tunes because that's not my concern with them. Once I'm back on the 93 octane tune I might, and I might even revisit these fuels with that tune now that I have a better understanding of the added control that I have with the switchable maps.
 

·
FF Affiliate
Joined
·
30,679 Posts
I dont agree at all , I am guessing your calling "e-tune" as remote tuning ? , I want to clarify this before I say more

I also 110% do not agree that a "load dyno" is whats needed

Corrected what I ment to ask , e-tune not e-dyno

Tom
 

·
That Guy
Joined
·
13,634 Posts
Discussion Starter #31
I dont agree at all , I am guessing your calling "e-tune" as remote tuning ? , I want to clarify this before I say more

I also 110% do not agree that a "load dyno" is whats needed

Corrected what I ment to ask , e-tune not e-dyno

Tom
Well I've already tried clarifying a couple of times, but I can take another shot.

Yes, e-tuning is referencing remote tuning, tuning via the internet, road tuning, etc. I'm lumping all of them into the same category for this discussion simply because they all have one thing in common-the inability to have a specific and constant/consistent load applied through a controlled source. Every single professional reference that I've looked at, whether in books, through internet searches, or from talking with experienced tuners has agreed that the absolute best starting point for a custom tune starts on a load-bearing dyno.

That doesn't mean that e-tuning/road tuning doesn't work or can't be done, simply that it's easier and significantly more accurate and consistent to start on a load-bearing dyno. Load-bearing dyno to establish VE, load-bearing dyno to establish accelerator enrichment, load-bearing dyno to spark-hook and establish MBT and timing curves. Once everything is put together and verified on the dyno, a drive on the road should merely be a check on the overall effectiveness of the tune, with very minor polishing-if any at all.

Like I've said, this doesn't mean it's the 'only' or 'needed' way-just the 'preferred' way. Using an inertial dyno or road as the primary means of transmitting load can be done, it's just more difficult and time consuming, and less accurate to-boot. Over-simplified for discussion.
 

·
FF Affiliate
Joined
·
30,679 Posts
Well I've already tried clarifying a couple of times, but I can take another shot.

Yes, e-tuning is referencing remote tuning, tuning via the internet, road tuning, etc. I'm lumping all of them into the same category for this discussion simply because they all have one thing in common-the inability to have a specific and constant/consistent load applied through a controlled source. Every single professional reference that I've looked at, whether in books, through internet searches, or from talking with experienced tuners has agreed that the absolute best starting point for a custom tune starts on a load-bearing dyno.

That doesn't mean that e-tuning/road tuning doesn't work or can't be done, simply that it's easier and significantly more accurate and consistent to start on a load-bearing dyno. Load-bearing dyno to establish VE, load-bearing dyno to establish accelerator enrichment, load-bearing dyno to spark-hook and establish MBT and timing curves. Once everything is put together and verified on the dyno, a drive on the road should merely be a check on the overall effectiveness of the tune, with very minor polishing-if any at all.

Like I've said, this doesn't mean it's the 'only' or 'needed' way-just the 'preferred' way. Using an inertial dyno or road as the primary means of transmitting load can be done, it's just more difficult and time consuming, and less accurate to-boot. Over-simplified for discussion.
We will have to agree to disagree on this point , I spent 1000`s of dollars making mine a load bearing dynojet and it was a total waste as the tune turned out the be the exact same tune as with the STD dynojet or with load turned off

25 year ago this may of held more weight in the tuning world , I have done tuning both ways and I can say this

When on a load bearing dyno in most cases your loading the engine with more load then it would ever see at a given RPM

When your out on the road tuning at a given RPM is exactly that , your load , its the load the YOUR engine/ECU sees , how more perfect of a tuning condition could you get then an exact load reading for that given RPM

You dont need steady state load with your engine unless going up a very steep grade with a 30+ mph head wind all the time

I have spent thousands of hours tuning the Focus , perfecting remote tuning and takes time and a lot of understand how things work , respond , which logs to request for diff issues , etc etc etc

Thats my opinion

Tom
 

·
That Guy
Joined
·
13,634 Posts
Discussion Starter #33
Fair enough. I can recognize that I don't have the experience to fully say in any direction, just realize that you are literally the only person I've heard that disagrees. And again-I've never said that it can't be done on the road.

Anywho, my latest cut/paste-

In the sake of sharing as much information/processes as I can in as much of a detailed manner as possible, I'll post my overall process related to evaluating my datalogs. Before I do that, I'm going to re-cover and expound on some of the things I'm doing and my reasoning behind it. Keep in mind that I'm learning the process as well, so this is the type of information that I hope helps people understand why I make some of the decisions I make before trying to see exactly what data I've collected and how I arrived at a particular change. Always feel free to add to or correct anything I present.

Earlier I described what I've learned of the general tuning process and contrasted it against the Cobb tuning guide. I've since outlined how I've gone in a different direction, and without the car in my presence I have the time to outline why. In short, the general tuning process is applicable to all engines when starting from scratch and the Cobb guide is starting with a known engine and set of calibration and characteristics. Here's a very short breakdown of the important parts of the combustion process data and a few of the main functions/modifiers within-

Volumetric efficiency (VE) is the fundamental building block of the process because all other calibrations are made off of it. If you make a fuel decision under the assumption of a certain mass of air that is wrong, your fuel mixture is going to be too rich or too lean. Because your mixture is too rich or too lean, your spark is going to be either too advanced or retarded. Because your spark is too advanced or retarded, the resulting efficiency of the combustion is not going to be optimal and you're either throwing fuel away or not using enough-and neither of those situations are optimal for your wallet and engine longevity.

Luckily for us, we are in a more advanced era of engine management. Our wideband 02 sensor measures the incorrect AFR and reports back to the ECU that we're either using too much or too little fuel so that the calculations can all be adjusted and keep us safer. This shows up in your long term and short term fuel trims (LTFT/STFT). Using the same VE reference plugged into the HDFX tables combined with the resulting AFR's measured by the 02 sensor, the ECU can now increase/decrease the amount of fuel issued and fall-back on the spark baseline to ensure accurate combustion, and if it has done the math correctly then the resulting AFR should be correct to what is being requested.

We can further complicate that process by understanding the use of the knock sensors (KS), which are constantly monitoring for specific frequencies that the engineers have calibrated as being associated with knock (or even the onset of knock). As the KS is almost continually monitoring, the information that it is/isn't picking up can be fed back into the ECU allowing for advance or retard of the spark to further optimize combustion. With the assistance of the KS's, the system will operate within it's timing base/ceiling to try and keep combustion as close to the knock threshold as possible because that is where the most power (and, in-turn, efficiency) is made.

While typing and reading that the overall scenario seems very simple, and if you break it down as such it kind of is. If we had fixed cams, no turbo, and utilized a mass airflow (MAF) calibration, I can see where this process would be significantly simpler and after using ATR for a couple of weeks I can understand why every experienced tuner that I've spoken with has stated how much more difficult this engine management system is compared to what they've seen or used previously. Conversely, I also understand why they all love it because with the additional complication there is an extended and associated level of control.

That's an extremely simplified explanation, and I'm sure that those with ATR can attest. In short, I don't feel comfortable making VE changes quite yet because I wanted to address my knock issues first. This is mainly due to the fact that I want to make sure the car is safe for a long distance trip at any moment (I understand that that sounds ridiculous) and need the ability to use different fuels because 93 won't always be immediately available. Because of this everything that I have done has been ignition-related, so my logs and method are built around that. There are a multitude of other adjustments and modifiers, and I'll try to cover them as I move along while presenting my data/methods. Some of them are limiting or skewing my data as it is, and I'm going to talk to someone this weekend about the cost of scheduling dyno time and will come up with a plan for making that time efficient. First I obviously need to have the car in my possession and secondly I'll need to play with and understand live datalogging/tracing/flashing. I have a general idea, I just haven't actually used it yet to put ideas into action.

So that's a very brief overview. Because I'm starting with spark my data will be related to that, and I'll try to cover how the parameters logged are used and relate to each other, why I'm logging them, what information it is giving me, and how that factors into my changes/decisions. Once my ignition tables are where I want them and I'm back on 93 octane I will be going back to the beginning and addressing VE, which will obviously affect all of my changes and will cause me to roll through ignition again in the future. My VE on the FoST isn't 'far' off and it's been shown to not be a 'necessary' change up to and including stage 3 upgrades, but it's a process and exercise that I must learn so I'll obviously be working through it-even if the changes are minute.
 

·
That Guy
Joined
·
13,634 Posts
Discussion Starter #34
Ok, I think this link should work. I was hoping to break it down individually as I highlighted each region, but that was going to get ridiculous regarding time and aint nobody got time fo' dat. So I'll try to break it down as best as possible below with a completely highlighted chart.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KlWKjzuGu8L4yGDxOL_FmGzl8Y5YezQwR0wrOz7OPLU/edit?usp=sharing

I haven't been doing much WOT work at all on the 87/89 tunes and the majority of my ignition changes have been below the curve, but I follow basically the exact same process for all-the only difference is that each datalog is taken under a predetermined set of conditions (i.e.-specific rpm, certain load/rpm sweep, WOT, 5-min normal driving). Before doing too much WOT work you should consider making changes to your fuel delivery, mainly in the name of safety. Also worth noting is the fact that all of my timing changes have been done on the actual borderline tables and not within the switchable maps (which I intend on beginning shortly). Finally, my KS advance is turned down to 2 degrees to allow me to walk in corrections slower as opposed to constantly bouncing off of the knock threshold.

Ok, so you're looking at a chart full of colors. I'll break it down based in the order that I highlight them. And yes-I do actually highlight my charts, though I tend to only use the yellow and I only highlight rows/columns as a whole. I ultimately found that I was making incorrect decisions based on sliding up or down a cell from what I needed, and the highlighting corrected that deficiency. This chart has different colors and individual cells simply for discussion.

The first thing that I do is highlight the Ignition Correction (usually all four are logged) and Load Actual columns. The Ignition Correction columns are going to immediately show you the areas that need improvement (if you're logging something other than WOT), and the Load Actual column is one of the axis' on the table that you will need to locate individual cells. I do this on every ignition datalog.

After highlighting those two columns, on a WOT log I go over to the Engine RPM column and scroll down. At every intersection of RPM values that correlate to the borderline tables, I highlight the row. In this particular chart I've only fully highlighted two rows, #4 and #72, because they are the boundaries from which I will be making changes (due to the 100% Accel. Position), but normally those would not be highlighted and every row with the RPM highlighted in green would be fully highlighted instead. Note the fact that the majority of the time you're not going to log a specific RPM, so I pick whatever falls closest to what I'm looking for that correlates with the ignition tables. If you rescale your tables you would obviously pick whatever fits your current resolution.

With those two columns and applicable rows highlighted, you have the information you're going to need. From here you will just read on over into the actual ignition that was recorded for each cylinder and make your change based on what was being delivered at the time. You can half the distance from the base to the lowest cylinder, you can punch in exactly what the lowest cylinder reads, or (in this case) you can completely ignore the lowest cylinder and target something different. Make some changes, save the affected changes across all tables, load it up and go test it out. Depending on your KS strategy and fuel, you could do this a few times before starting to see knock. Conversely, you could see it on the first pull and have to immediately retard.

It is worth noting a few things here-

A) Having multiple logs will assist in making more accurate corrections here. As you can see by this log my #2 cylinder was acting up, but normally it's my #4 that is weak. Not many changes would be made if I went by the #2 cylinder in this instance, but because I'm familiar with the history of my car I would skip that cylinder when making changes. The more you datalog and evaluate the more you'll see trends and have information to base your decisions off of.

B) The red highlighted numbers in column U are the timing ceiling, and you won't advance above that without changing whatever is holding you back there. I prefer not to, but there are many people that raise the ceiling as much as they raise the base. I'm obviously not near it on this crap fuel, but I ride it for the last 1k rpm or so on 93. If you're against the ceiling it will be noted in the Spark Limit Source column (highlighted in AA 75 on down) to identify exactly what table is limiting you.

C) I adjust all of my 1.4 and higher loads to be the same across all 16 HDFX tables. This is common amongst the community and the first 40 rows of data explain why, but from row 41 on you should have a good idea as to why I don't make sweeping changes across the lower load areas of all 16 tables-they're normally not all used at the same time. Collect a log of normal driving with all 15 HDFX Weight monitors and you'll quickly understand. In fact, I would go as far as saying to not even worry about collecting HDFX while doing WOT datalogs simply because it will give you better resolution in your datalog, but for every other type of driving you should.

D) I highlighted a couple of borderline clips in AB4 and AB7. This could be from a poor transition between tables (not likely given the HDFX Weights) or from not having the best fuel transition from punching the throttle or from the sudden cam change messing up the VE model. It's worth looking into when you see them, but you can't always correct for it to my understanding. I'm still looking into more info for that.

So that's basically it, I think. Again, this is strictly for optimizing ignition and if you go back later and make additional VE or fueling changes this most likely will need to be readdressed. There are a multitude of strategies to use when approaching this, and be cognizant of the fact that there are additional timing compensations within ATR that could be skewing your results depending on the environment. When in doubt make smaller corrections than you would like and work up-it's significantly easier than dealing with a datalog that has knock compensation.

I can post examples of the other types of logs if anyone would like, but it basically follows this exact breakdown, just with changes to the data-collection process and what I'm ultimately looking for within each type of log that I collect.
 

·
That Guy
Joined
·
13,634 Posts
Discussion Starter #35
A breakdown of the changes made from the datalog above.

Here is the base table I'll be working with. Again, it doesn't really matter because the changes would be applied across all BL tables from 1.4 load on, and the only cylinder I'm looking at (due to cumulative experience) is cylinder 4-



Due to the log, we're beginning with this area of the table-



This entire section of table was referenced/utilized in one second (rows 2-9), and according to the HDFX weights every single table had some influence, no matter how minor. Because the cylinder ultimately hit the timing asked and because of the borderline clips, my initial assumption is that the issue is going to lie in my fueling-not the timing. I will leave this area alone currently.

Rows 10-21 all show the cylinder hitting the timing asked, without corrections. This is another area that I will leave alone.

Shortly after I pass 3500 rpm in row 21, I begin to see timing additions made in row 22. Due to the resolution of the table we are still in the 1.8+ load, and because we're transitioning up to 4k we can rightfully assume that that cell is low. It's worth noting here that the cylinder is only showing 1.9 degrees advance and that the timing base is 1.4, even though the cell shows that I'm asking for 2 degrees. I'm not currently going to be concerned with what is actually compensating the table because I know the history of the car and the limited amount of correction that I'm allowing with my KS approach, so I'm going to go ahead and add half a degree of timing at 4k.



At this point (where I've made a change) on other logs I might consider blending surrounding rows, but it's only half of a degree of timing and there's plenty more data so I'll hold off on that for now. At row 35 you'll see that half a degree was pulled from the advance. Because of this I'm going to hold off on making a decision at the 5k mark and proceed to 6k, because the timing adjustment made at 4k will affect the next pull in this area as well. At row 48 we can see that we have now begun to fall below the 1.8 load row on the table, so we'll have to take the 1.6l row into account as well.

At row 58 we are now at 6k and almost fully at 1.6l. According to the datalog, we are now at least 1.5 degrees shy of what we could be running in that cell. I say 'at least' simply for the fact that in another roughy 200 rpm the advance adds another half a degree of timing. Because of this, I'm now going to add a full 1.5 degrees to that cell-



Now it's time for blending. Because of the cells that I've altered, this is the area that I'm looking at blending-



We want to see smooth transitions within the table, so I'm simply going to math out the different directions in an attempt to make them flow better. Not every cell has to be adjusted, simply work within what you feel comfortable with. Because I'm using the 1 load area for the math, it would really help to have already made the required changes to the 1 load area of the table by having done a 1-load rpm sweep. Theoretically you would have already established your timing curve in those rows far before having done WOT tuning. Either way, this is how my changes would ultimately look to this table-



Copy/paste the 1.4+ load section across all maps, save the file and load it up to the car, go out and test again to evaluate the data. When I actually get serious about WOT tuning I will rescale my tables, but hopefully this gives a decent idea of my overall thought process and how I use the information to arrive at my decisions.
 

·
FF Affiliate
Joined
·
30,679 Posts
How are you hitting 1.8 load ? what size does he/you have the engine set to ? 1.8 load would be in the 400+HP range , it doesnt really matter just curious why you have your load set so high ?

Tom
 

·
That Guy
Joined
·
13,634 Posts
Discussion Starter #37
I hit well over 2 load because I haven't re-scaled the tables. I have literally only made minor fuel and ignition changes to the OTS maps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
244 Posts
I don't even know where to start...
I don't know how Tom has limited his comments, or even keeps commenting.
I understand you are trying to learn, but you are writing this as you DO know what is going on.
You need to stop writing this a technical dissertation on what to do and more of a description of your experiment.

There are many issues with the way you are doing and your assumptions.
Since you don't know exactly what is going on with HDFX weightings and cylinder spark advance,maybe assume that a large amount of time has gone into creating this production calibration, just open up the knock sensor authority, run premium with Rislone octane boost and be done.

Where did you get the assumptions you are using???
Did you notice the time stamp? You are getting erroneous spark data based on time stamps and the values are taken from each processing loop in the PCM. Basically you will get different values per cylinder as the engine transitions between rpm and loads. You need to find the parameter that is described as Spark Advance Final TOTal...get the hint... This is the final spark value that is scheduled. The knock sensor values are combined before this value is scheduled.

You need to log the individual KS cylinder adder to determine which cylinder(s) are getting more spark, or in a knock condition. Check your reference material and find those parameters.
That will show you which cylinder is getting spark changes based on the knock sensor. You should be able to use that data in a better way than with the inconsistent ignition timing cylinder# parameters you are logging.

Loads of over 2.0 on the turbo motors hold no consequence in this strategy. The non turbo strategies (SVT) are not designed for loads over 2.0!
 

·
FF Affiliate
Joined
·
30,679 Posts
I don't even know where to start...
I don't know how Tom has limited his comments,
Its been very hard not to , but best thing is let him learn on his own , there is many other things I would be logging and doing different but with our previous history I dont think he would listen

I just changed a load file for borderline spark to 500% load in a ST strategy and it took , Interesting and thanks , always willing to learn , I had not changed that before to see if it would go past 200% , I am all the time having to forget pre 2012 tuning for these new ECU strategy's as I am finding many things different

I opened a 2013 non st and they also will go about 200% in the Y norms so I find that interesting , till I try one I wont know what effect it has in NA strategy if any

I still feel is he sets the load in borderline spark closer to the power he is making the loads would more reflect what he is doing and would make tuning the spark a little better , about 1.5 or 1.6 and spread the rest out a little more , I find it a little better any way

Tom
 
21 - 40 of 79 Posts
Top