Notices
928 Forum 1978-1995
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: 928 Specialists

LH2.3 MAF input

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-09-2014, 02:16 PM
  #16  
PorKen
Inventor
Rennlist Member

Thread Starter
 
PorKen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 10,099
Received 335 Likes on 199 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by FredR
Presumably this implies one has to check/re-tune the AFR and then attempt to dial in more advance at full load conditions.
The small fix above may help a little below 5400, but it can't/doesn't level out the big spikes much.
You may find your AFRs are a bit more consistent, though.


The smoothing code which flattens it out, what I am making for my S4 chips, is up to 70 bytes and counting (which is a lot in hex coding).

I am also doing other things like disabling the IAC/ICV output at WOT, in hopes of giving more/steadier voltage to the injectors.
(IAC and injectors share the same 12V circuit.)


Originally Posted by Tony
Where is the "if then...goto" line??
You kids and your high level languages.

Old 01-09-2014, 02:44 PM
  #17  
FredR
Rennlist Member
 
FredR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oman
Posts: 9,708
Received 667 Likes on 544 Posts
Default

Ken,

As I understand, these issues you are very cleverly weeding out are probably caused by the lack of computer power relative to what is possible today. Higher sampling frequencies to give more consistent results etc. If this is indeed the case, how difficult would it be to use the same wiring to the LH unit and replace the internals with something more powerful/easy to repair/replace as a bolt in replacement without the problems adapting other systems? Maybe even enable sequential injecton capabilities?

Trust the above might be relevant to the thread development?

Rgds

Fred
Old 01-09-2014, 04:20 PM
  #18  
dprantl
Race Car
 
dprantl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,477
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Just wondering... if this change only has positive implications and no negative ones, why wouldn't the factory ship the LH modules programmed this way?

Dan
'91 928GT S/C 475hp/460lb.ft
Old 01-09-2014, 04:38 PM
  #19  
PorKen
Inventor
Rennlist Member

Thread Starter
 
PorKen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 10,099
Received 335 Likes on 199 Posts
Default

I wonder more why the factory made only a passing effort to tune the engine above ~200 CHP (324 g/sec)?
Old 01-10-2014, 06:45 AM
  #20  
jpitman2
Rennlist Member
 
jpitman2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 5,281
Received 48 Likes on 45 Posts
Default

The "if then..goto " has been replaced by "if then Maybe" and the new "Come From" statements.

jp 83 Euro S, with the simple logic "if air is moving, Inject"
Old 01-10-2014, 04:11 PM
  #21  
PorKen
Inventor
Rennlist Member

Thread Starter
 
PorKen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 10,099
Received 335 Likes on 199 Posts
Default

Tunerpro patch for MAF max rate added in the second post.


For each cycle through the code (many times a second), MAF values are incremented or decremented at a steady rate.

The hope is that sudden high or low values from the A/D chip won't last long enough for the additions or subtractions to catch up.

Last edited by PorKen; 01-11-2014 at 04:00 PM.
Old 01-10-2014, 04:48 PM
  #22  
BC
Rennlist Member
 
BC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 25,132
Received 72 Likes on 53 Posts
Default

Great stuff Ken. Many of us wish to ditch the ECU all together, and will continue to but that is still a small fraction of the population, which are mostly S4s, and that are unwilling to do so. Your code changes can make a big difference.
Old 01-13-2014, 04:25 PM
  #23  
PorKen
Inventor
Rennlist Member

Thread Starter
 
PorKen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 10,099
Received 335 Likes on 199 Posts
Default

Note whereas I have been using g/sec, grams/second, habitually throughout this thread, I should be saying something like MAF units or '-ish', as the MAF scaling numbers used in the code don't quite match actual (K)grams per second airflow.

(G/sec sounds cool. )
Old 01-13-2014, 04:42 PM
  #24  
FredR
Rennlist Member
 
FredR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oman
Posts: 9,708
Received 667 Likes on 544 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by PorKen
...(G/sec sounds cool. )
How about hay bales per fortnight as a working unit? Much more agricultural.

Rgds

Fred
Old 01-14-2014, 03:15 AM
  #25  
daveo90s4
Pro
 
daveo90s4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 665
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Hi Ken,

Would you please be able to offer a comment to my post at #7?

Thanks

Dave
Old 01-14-2014, 06:11 PM
  #26  
PorKen
Inventor
Rennlist Member

Thread Starter
 
PorKen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 10,099
Received 335 Likes on 199 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by daveo90s4
Ken, is this the sort of amendment that could be made by you to otherwise stock EZK / LH PEMs / chips, is it the sort of change that would come with no downside, and is it the sort of change that you would recommend be made for a daily driver S4
That's a tall order.

Yes. ('88 EPROM image or ST file. Different code addresses for '87 and '89-up.)

Maybe. (Likely no ill effect.)

No. (It's probably not going to feel any different without some minor tuning to take advantage of the smoothing.)


With some fuel changes and more ignition timing, it should be noticeably stronger, though.
So far, I have been able to dial in a lot more timing at WOT around max HP with a more predictable AFR.
And, when I advance the timing, the AFR goes lean, indicating it is using that timing. Before, I couldn't tell what was going on.
Old 01-14-2014, 07:06 PM
  #27  
AO
Supercharged
Rennlist Member
 
AO's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Back in Michigan - Full time!
Posts: 18,925
Likes: 0
Received 59 Likes on 33 Posts
Default

Has anyone with a STer tried this modification? Does the STer preserve this change in the code? or will it get reverted when a new image is produced?

John, Jim?

I'm really looking forward to trying this on the dyno.
Old 01-14-2014, 07:40 PM
  #28  
PorKen
Inventor
Rennlist Member

Thread Starter
 
PorKen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 10,099
Received 335 Likes on 199 Posts
Default

The ST software reads the BIN file as-is and will write/read it to/from the disk or device w/o changes.

The patch code is in empty space, AFAIK.



The LH and EZ only reads the upper 16K of a 32K byte file.
The ST writes to both 0-3FFF and 4000-7FFF, 16K banks.
IIRC, it reads the lower bank into the ST software.
(The ST LH BIN is based on a '88 EPROM.)
Old 01-20-2014, 02:45 PM
  #29  
PorKen
Inventor
Rennlist Member

Thread Starter
 
PorKen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 10,099
Received 335 Likes on 199 Posts
Default

FWIW, I would say the stock LH is way oversampling the MAF signal at WOT.

At least for my S4, the plus rate can go all the way down to 1, becoming more stable as it goes down. The minus rate may still be too aggressive at -1.
I theorize that the little lean spikes are being uncovered by smaller rich spikes, so I will be putting in a counter to only subtract every other time (or less)...on my chip.

I think there could be very small spikes (from reversion?) that are undetectable by the WBO2 which may contribute to individual cylinder knocking.


I don't think this will raise peak HP, but it should make a really consistent 310+ (@~6100).
On the dyno, the red line, injector duty, has fairly matched the hp curve in the past, if you turn your head the right way.

It certainly feels nice to drive. A constant thrust up to the limit in each gear.


Last edited by PorKen; 01-20-2014 at 09:33 PM.
Old 01-20-2014, 05:49 PM
  #30  
worf928
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
worf928's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Gone. On the Open Road
Posts: 16,329
Received 1,543 Likes on 1,007 Posts
Default



Quick Reply: LH2.3 MAF input



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 07:29 PM.