AO

John-

Please be careful. With Brian giving us nicknames of "Homo 1" (him) and "Homo 2" (me), "happy ending" has the potential of meaning something entirely different.

John Speake

Keep- your shirt on then - it might be too stimulating for him :-)

auzivision

Well it may not exactly be a happing per se (notice the spelling), but at least I gained some comfort knowing that it should work on my early 87 once that cable arrives… that reminds me, I need to check the status of that order.

Looking forward to learning how to use this tool!

ptuomov

Here's a question to the broader audience, especially to those using a SuperMAF. What cells on the LH and EZK maps are basically never visited in any car, normally aspirated or with any sort of forced induction?

The reason why I am asking this is that I was advised to set the cells that are never visited to safe values, should something unexpected happen (say the ECUs have a minifit). That sounds to me like a very good idea, so I am now trying to figure out what cells will never be visited without an ECU error.

I am looking at my Sharkplotter data for simple usage data, and there are many such cells that I've never visited. But I don't have enough usage data from different enough situations. So I was wondering if people could share their experiences.

John Speake

It could be easier to translate directly to your maps by using the
ST2 datalogging results.

Louie928

Tuomo,
IIRC, the GT I tuned with twin screw SC and MAF normally went to the 180 load row, but not higher. That was at 9.5 psi. You can see where your boost comes in at around 3000 RPM. The two that are in the 236 row at 2000 and 2400 are outliers. The few in the 210 row at 4000, 4800 are probably correct. There is significant flow difference between the 180 and 210 rows with the SMAF.

To get back to the original question, yes put safe values for timing and fuel in these upper rows. Then tune your 210 load cells as needed when you reach them.

ptuomov

Thanks Louie!

These are mostly low boost runs in the road logs, 10-12 psi in the mid range. I will only turn the boost up once everything else is perfect. I know I'll be visiting those bottom two rows after 3000 rpm.

What I am thinking about compromising on for safety is the upper right corner, that is, high rpms and low loads. I don't think I'll really be spending much time 10% throttle opening at 6000 rpm. Also, the bottom left diagonal has some cells that I seem to never get to, as you say, the turbos spool at about 3000.

ptuomov

I though that they were outliers, too, but later learned that I can replicate them. As you know, the MAF signal signifies how much air goes into the cylinder per revolution. Therefore, it's not obviously incorrect to have high numbers at low rpm. If I'd get high MAF [%] values at low rpm, then that would be a clear data error, but these high MAF signal values may not be. To summarize, if they are data errors, they are replicable.

Here's how I can reproduce the log. I cruise at idle or near idle on 5th gear. Then I suddenly floor it as fast and hard as I can. (Now you may ask why would one ever do that, and that would be a very good question. The only answer that I can come up with is "Not that I would, but I want to know that I could.") See below highlighted segment:



Time [s] RPM MAF signal MAF signal [%] A/F ratio Inj PW [ms] Throttle pos (1=idle, 2=cruise, 3=WOT)
209.8 1893 43 3 14.49 1.59 1
209.9 1884 40 3 14.53 1.59 1
210.0 1872 46 3 14.47 1.57 2
210.1 1858 271 18 13.73 4.59 3
210.2 1930 138 10 13.83 4.01 3
210.3 2057 133 10 14.47 3.7 3
210.4 1884 140 9 11.77 3.75 3
210.5 1825 141 9 11.97 3.83 3
210.6 1905 139 10 12.42 3.78 3

As I floor it, the cylinder gets one very high MAF signal at 210.1. After that the MAF signal and the injector pulse width stabilize to about 140 and 3.8. The engine temporarily runs lean, though, because there's initially no fuel on the port walls -- no "tau". As the walls are wetted, the AFR gets to steady state. The exact relative timing is not important here, and may be off by a little bit. But one can see that the AFR gets too lean for a while around there, and that's replicable.

I fixed this tonight by changing the various acceleration enrichment settings.

John Speake

We now Version 6.0.13 available. I have tried to send to updated exe file to all registered users, but some have been bounced back. If you have not received the update, sent to the email address you registered for the Shakplotter program, please contact me off list using my website email link.

The file size is 1.3Mb the file extention was modified for emailing by adding some false trailing letters.

dprantl

This version has definitely fixed the cursor issue for me.

The new fixed idle contol setting is interesting

Dan
'91 928GT S/C 475hp/460lb.ft

John Speake

OK Dan, thanks for the positive feedback :-)

The variable ISV position was intended for stokers where the very quick engine pickup speed was making tuning difficult. But could be useful for other purposes as well, no doubt...

AO

Got the update, can't wait to give it a try. Thanks John.

Idle control setting? Hmmm.... (Need a smiley with hands greedily rubbing together.)

John Speake

Yes, please let us know if it fixes the gremlins....

ptuomov

Anyone running 6.0.13 on Windows 7? I am dealing with a computer situation and am forced to upgrade to Windows 7. I can get the 6.0.10 to run by using the installer, but can't figure out how to get 6.0.13 to run.

EDIT: Got it to run. The explorer version that came with this windows was somehow manhandling the file when I donwloaded it.

jcorenman

Yes, ran 6.0.10 and now 6.0.13 on a Win-7 netbook (Lenovo S10-2) with no problems. There are two things I have done that might make a difference: I always set the options for Windows explorer (View tab) to show everything and not hide anything; for Win7 I also set UAC notifications to the minimum setting (control panel (small-icon view), user accounts, user account control settings,"never notify").

Cheers,