idle with motron 60#s
10-07-2006, 08:15 AM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Lousiana
Posts: 1,534
Re: idle with motron 60#s
Move all your changes back to where their were.
You just need to decrease the table labeled "low pulse width injector offset adder vs BPW" I would select all the values then choose "decrement". If it's not enough decrement the table again until you see changes. You base pulse width does not need more fuel added to it at low flow since you have large injectors.
JD
You just need to decrease the table labeled "low pulse width injector offset adder vs BPW" I would select all the values then choose "decrement". If it's not enough decrement the table again until you see changes. You base pulse width does not need more fuel added to it at low flow since you have large injectors.
JD
Last edited by PoorMan; 10-07-2006 at 08:19 AM.
10-07-2006, 09:17 AM
#17
Administrator
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Hell was full so they sent me to NJ
Posts: 70,710
Re: idle with motron 60#s
Originally Posted by creed1062002
The INT nor the BLMs move, but datamaster does show it in closed loop and blm enabled, if it would help i can get a datalog.
10-08-2006, 10:06 PM
#18
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 120
10-09-2006, 08:38 AM
#20
Administrator
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Hell was full so they sent me to NJ
Posts: 70,710
Re: idle with motron 60#s
The Cell 16 BLM's are slowly dropping, but the system is not responding the way it should. The INT's are always 128 or below, but they don't succeed in pulling the BLM's down. As a result, the O2 volts which should be averaging 450mV in closed loop, are holding ~650mV which corresponds to your 13.x:1 on the wide-band.
Cell 6 is a disaster.... its down to 114/114 at the end of the log, and still trying to pull fuel, yet the O2 sensors are max'd out at 1101/1097mV - which is what they read virtually any time you open the throttle under any kind of load.
It seems to be running way too much in Cell 18... and that Cell can't control the excessively rich conditions either.
Did you notice when it went into closed loop, the PCM almost immediately showed a "check sum error"?
Has any limit been placed on the long terms or short terms in the program, at least in Cell 16? They never go below 125, but in other cells they drop into the double digits. Have the Cell boundaries been changed significantly to reflect the 2bar sensor programming? I honestly don't know what it does to the system when you tune based on a sensor that puts out only 1/2 the expected volts, but I would assume you have to redefine things like the Cell boundaries and the parameters for PE mode, and juggle your spark tables accordingly. Its almost like its running in PE mode too much. Yes, the "flag" shows closed loop enabled, but much of the time its not accepting the O2 sensor feedback, indicating that its somehow decided to operate in PE.
Cell 6 is a disaster.... its down to 114/114 at the end of the log, and still trying to pull fuel, yet the O2 sensors are max'd out at 1101/1097mV - which is what they read virtually any time you open the throttle under any kind of load.
It seems to be running way too much in Cell 18... and that Cell can't control the excessively rich conditions either.
Did you notice when it went into closed loop, the PCM almost immediately showed a "check sum error"?
Has any limit been placed on the long terms or short terms in the program, at least in Cell 16? They never go below 125, but in other cells they drop into the double digits. Have the Cell boundaries been changed significantly to reflect the 2bar sensor programming? I honestly don't know what it does to the system when you tune based on a sensor that puts out only 1/2 the expected volts, but I would assume you have to redefine things like the Cell boundaries and the parameters for PE mode, and juggle your spark tables accordingly. Its almost like its running in PE mode too much. Yes, the "flag" shows closed loop enabled, but much of the time its not accepting the O2 sensor feedback, indicating that its somehow decided to operate in PE.
Last edited by Injuneer; 10-09-2006 at 08:40 AM.
10-09-2006, 03:13 PM
#21
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 120
Re: idle with motron 60#s
Well most of the drivability issues since that log have been worked out, the short and long terms are alot closer now, that was the only log i had handy, but the idle is still acting the exact same as that log no change at all.
I have not put any limits on anything, but i have tried PE idle, still does the same thing. I took that back out also. Even in PE it wouldn't idle closer to 14.7.
Yes all the cell boundaries have been changed for the 2 bar MAP, scaled by roughly half.
As for the O2 voltage those are simulated from the wideband (F.A.S.T dual sensor) but i would not think that would cause the problem since the wideband data and the simulation data correspond.
I have not put any limits on anything, but i have tried PE idle, still does the same thing. I took that back out also. Even in PE it wouldn't idle closer to 14.7.
Yes all the cell boundaries have been changed for the 2 bar MAP, scaled by roughly half.
As for the O2 voltage those are simulated from the wideband (F.A.S.T dual sensor) but i would not think that would cause the problem since the wideband data and the simulation data correspond.
10-09-2006, 05:08 PM
#22
Administrator
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Hell was full so they sent me to NJ
Posts: 70,710
Re: idle with motron 60#s
The FAST wide-bands are feeding the stock PCM O2 sensor inputs with the 0-1.0V narow-band emulator mode?
Have you ever tried running it only with the stock narrow-band sensors, just to see how the idle A/F ratio would respond? If the wide-band sensor output is not as "fast" as the narrow-band sensor, with respect to its ability to cycle rapidly between the extremes of rich/lean it may not be driving the INT's low enough, which would not drive the BLM's low enough, fast enough. As a reference point, the stock OBD-II PCM sets a code for the response time if the stock narrow-bands exceeds a 100mSec switching time. Does the FAST wide-band controller have a spec for any sort of response time?
Have you ever tried running it only with the stock narrow-band sensors, just to see how the idle A/F ratio would respond? If the wide-band sensor output is not as "fast" as the narrow-band sensor, with respect to its ability to cycle rapidly between the extremes of rich/lean it may not be driving the INT's low enough, which would not drive the BLM's low enough, fast enough. As a reference point, the stock OBD-II PCM sets a code for the response time if the stock narrow-bands exceeds a 100mSec switching time. Does the FAST wide-band controller have a spec for any sort of response time?
10-09-2006, 08:59 PM
#23
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 120
Re: idle with motron 60#s
Yes they are feeding a 0-1.0V narrow band simulation.
As for the response time i don't know i will have to call F.A.S.T
I understand what you are saying, but why wouldn't i be able to force it leaner at idle with PE idle, i have had the WOT charts up to 1200 RPM all the way down to -50, correct me if i'm wrong but that is how you would tune PE idle right?
As for the response time i don't know i will have to call F.A.S.T
I understand what you are saying, but why wouldn't i be able to force it leaner at idle with PE idle, i have had the WOT charts up to 1200 RPM all the way down to -50, correct me if i'm wrong but that is how you would tune PE idle right?
10-12-2006, 02:01 PM
#25
Administrator
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Hell was full so they sent me to NJ
Posts: 70,710
Re: idle with motron 60#s
I don't know anything about PE idle.... I run a MoTeC M48Pro ECU.
The limit may be the minimum possilbe pulse width on the Motrons.... but if the other person who posted above doesn't have a problem, you shouldn't.
The limit may be the minimum possilbe pulse width on the Motrons.... but if the other person who posted above doesn't have a problem, you shouldn't.
12-07-2006, 10:06 AM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Peachtree City, GA
Posts: 2,889
same problem here...cant get the blms to move at idle..stuck at 128/128 but i am at .900s on the 02 =12.5 AFR on my wideband.....tired pe idle junk with not effect..still steady at 12.5 ARRR! any solutions?
12-07-2006, 06:58 PM
#28
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,685
Are you guys running the stock offsets? I know I had increased the offsets when I put my 60# in and it was a big mistake and ran rich, then I cut the offsets down and still rich, so I put the stock offsets in and that got me real close - my wideband is right where it should be.
With large injectors at idle, the offset has a lot of influence as opposed to running under load where the pulsewidth has the major influence. It's possible with big injectors at isle that the pcm ahs taken away a lot of fuel and still too rich because of the offsets. But in the case of 128 trims, I would say your O2 sensor circuit is at fault somehow because the computer thinks it is right where it should be based on what the O2 sensor voltage is. Don't know if I trust the NB emulators that much because the curve is based on a lookup table.
With large injectors at idle, the offset has a lot of influence as opposed to running under load where the pulsewidth has the major influence. It's possible with big injectors at isle that the pcm ahs taken away a lot of fuel and still too rich because of the offsets. But in the case of 128 trims, I would say your O2 sensor circuit is at fault somehow because the computer thinks it is right where it should be based on what the O2 sensor voltage is. Don't know if I trust the NB emulators that much because the curve is based on a lookup table.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
autoxr166
General 1967-2002 F-Body Tech
0
09-25-2015 04:21 PM