Any last ideas before I dive into the world of custom tunes?

[rb70383]

Meh, I'll just richen it up and call it good........

I'm kidding......
lowkey, that is a good idea. I wish there was a little explanation how the accel enrichment works. Basically what all the settings on the enrichment page actually do. Way back when, we had a meet and greet in FL. Xopti, burned the "race" data into my ECM. He also tweaked the accel page. Overall bike ran good, but as it ages, and me swapping things, the map needs some tiding up. I have a 12 header with dual O2 and an innovate DLG-1. Still on the parts shelf.

I want to see if I can log both sensors at the same time.
Adding to that, doing a NB:WB comparo is a great idea.

lowkey, on your MLV pic, the rpm is 2271, and the surrounding cells are showing a weigh in. How do you know exactly which value is being used since the rpm columns are 1900, 2350.

Well I see the table is the AFR, but same applies to fuel maps. If the data sample is between cells, how much are the surrounding cells weighed in on the calculation?

lowkey, tried to pm you.

 

[cossack84]

I think you guys confusing acceleration enrichment and how it works. Its not acceleration of the bike but rather the difference between average throttle position and current position. Its only active when throttle is outside the TPS average.
I had to reread the tuning guide (5.1.4 Acceleration Enrichment) several times.

Here is a link
5.1.4 Acceleration Enrichment
http://www.ecmspy.com/tgv2/guide2.shtml#5.1.4

 

[lowkey]

lowkey, on your MLV pic, the rpm is 2271, and the surrounding cells are showing a weigh in. How do you know exactly which value is being used since the rpm columns are 1900, 2350.

Well I see the table is the AFR, but same applies to fuel maps. If the data sample is between cells, how much are the surrounding cells weighed in on the calculation?

lowkey, tried to pm you.

So the ECM is actually processing the fueling table cell that isn't actually there but implied, in this time stamp RPM is 2271 and we have data column 1900RPM and 2350RPM and TPS value of 169 with TPS data rows 175 and 125. So the ECM calculates the cell value for that TPS and RPM value off of the data in the columns and rows we DO have data, it isn't hard to figure it out as it would be a linear line connecting the left cell and right cell column then weighted by RPM we are at in the time stamp away from either side RPM data column, same goes for TPS. Hope that makes since?

I think you guys confusing acceleration enrichment and how it works. Its not acceleration of the bike but rather the difference between average throttle position and current position. Its only active when throttle is outside the TPS average.
I had to reread the tuning guide (5.1.4 Acceleration Enrichment) several times.

Here is a link
5.1.4 Acceleration Enrichment
http://www.ecmspy.com/tgv2/guide2.shtml#5.1.4

How so?
in layman terms TPS average = steady state cruse ( TPS value relatively constant).
Crack open the throttle and the first sensor data indicating an expectation to accelerate is the TPS sensor, ECM is compensating the rapid fuel requirement needed in this condition with acceleration enrichment... link more or less backs up how I stated it does with my MLV screen shot. How are you interpreting it? Where do I have it wrong?
A rapidly accelerating TPS value (sensor) on its own requires no fuel, a rapidly accelerating bike (engine) does require the extra fuel though. Need to look at the big picture of what is trying to be accomplished with all these tables.

Some corrections to my previously posted MLV screen grab, ACCEL enrichment was 13.7 not 37, I was working quickly to post before work. WB AFR reading trails around 2-3 time tamps behind where it actually was showing (delay = 2 or 3 if running analysis).



Here is the very next time stamp on that log. We can see from TPD (throttle position degrees) we have hit 85 so out of acceleration enrichment threshold. CL/OL/and some of WOT TPS value is below 85 degrees so it CAN and is applied when needed.

 

[lowkey]

To figure out 02 sensor delay I went from the time stamp peak TPS value then tapped the right arrow on keyboard to the TPS value drop point spike, counted how many taps for the 02 sensor lean spike and assume this is the delay required. the 02 drop spike lands between 2-3 taps on the time stamp vertical line of the log.

 

[cossack84]

View attachment 11988

end up with an AFR of 11.38-1 when we want 13.0-1AFR as asked by the AFRbins map at this cell (lots of work to do in this example to remove fuel for target AFR).

lowkey, the reason AFR is at 11.38 instead of 13.0 is because the cell in which you want 13.0 is at steady state throttle application. If you held throttle at 175 and RPM at 2350 for throttle position to average 175 then your afr will be at 13.0. However, in the screen grab above, looks like, throttle was quickly opened, which in turn activated acceleration enrichment. From tuning guide "Acceleration Enrichment is applied when the throttle is opened fast ". Again its doesn't matter what the engine is doing when accel enrichment is applied, only thing that counts is how far away from average throttle position current location of the butterfly is.

So the ECM is actually processing the fueling table cell that isn't actually there but implied, in this time stamp RPM is 2271 and we have data column 1900RPM and 2350RPM and TPS value of 169 with TPS data rows 175 and 125. So the ECM calculates the cell value for that TPS and RPM value off of the data in the columns and rows we DO have data, it isn't hard to figure it out as it would be a linear line connecting the left cell and right cell column then weighted by RPM we are at in the time stamp away from either side RPM data column, same goes for TPS. Hope that makes since?





How so?
in layman terms TPS average = steady state cruse ( TPS value relatively constant).
Crack open the throttle and the first sensor data indicating an expectation to accelerate is the TPS sensor, ECM is compensating the rapid fuel requirement needed in this condition with acceleration enrichment... link more or less backs up how I stated it does with my MLV screen shot. How are you interpreting it? Where do I have it wrong?
A rapidly accelerating TPS value (sensor) on its own requires no fuel, a rapidly accelerating bike (engine) does require the extra fuel though. Need to look at the big picture of what is trying to be accomplished with all these tables.

Some corrections to my previously posted MLV screen grab, ACCEL enrichment was 13.7 not 37, I was working quickly to post before work. WB AFR reading trails around 2-3 time tamps behind where it actually was showing (delay = 2 or 3 if running analysis).


View attachment 11994
Here is the very next time stamp on that log. We can see from TPD (throttle position degrees) we have hit 85 so out of acceleration enrichment threshold. CL/OL/and some of WOT TPS value is below 85 degrees so it CAN and is applied when needed.

I dont think its a steady state cruise, its more like 10 or so revolutions of the engine, so its very quick to respond. Which it has to considering one can crack the throttle rather fast from idle to wide open.
I believe carburetors have similar mechanical feature called accelerator circuit?

 

[lowkey]

lowkey, the reason AFR is at 11.38 instead of 13.0 is because the cell in which you want 13.0 is at steady state throttle application. If you held throttle at 175 and RPM at 2350 for throttle position to average 175 then your afr will be at 13.0.

Totally agree with this and what you are interpreting the screen grab is saying, I also fully understand why it is richer than expected (and at the time of this log is exactly what I wanted to be happening). What can't be seen is the adjustments done to the fuel table corresponding to this log and the time stamp we are discussing. This is an old log, from last year when I was just starting to work on logs within MLV. I first took AFV 105% (from the last ride before disabling 02 sensor and locking AFV EGO to 100%) and applied to the entire map that 5% (AND an additional 3% IIRC?) aside from idle and decel cells, my method when turning OFF the 02 sensor was to have overly rich map to pull fuel with MLV, this way I don't have to worry about a lean condition while logging over and over 02 OFF. So the cell value on the fuel table is already overly rich by my design, then scale them back the cells with analysis until the entire map was dialed in to the AFRbins I set up. Now after this is all done we can go through the log and see just how close to ideal acceleration enrichment does, then work on its scaling secondary.

Again this is an early log and we cannot judge what the multipliers are doing until the AFRbin targets are met, again it isn't a concern at this step of my process as this condition is filtered from analysis in MLV.

However, in the screen grab above, looks like, throttle was quickly opened, which in turn activated acceleration enrichment. From tuning guide "Acceleration Enrichment is applied when the throttle is opened fast ". Again its doesn't matter what the engine is doing when accel enrichment is applied, only thing that counts is how far away from average throttle position current location of the butterfly is.

I really don't know where you are seeing a discrepancy in my explanation??? YES it does matter what the engine is doing when acceleration enrichment is applied, the rider is inputting AND expecting acceleration via the right grip in turn the TPS sensor.

Mechanically the engine is ingesting more air and climbing in RPM rapidly and requires the fueling from acceleration enrichment in this state at that time. There is absolutely no reason for this multiplier to exist without what the engine is actually doing...

 

[cossack84]

Acceleration enrichment only last one revolution of the engine, once the average throttle position is equal to current throttle position acceleration enrichment is zero, but the engine can still be speeding up/revving up even thought accel enrichment is zero.
If you agree with that then I miss read your post.

Edit: you think acceleration in this context is "acceleration of the engine/bike" but its not, its acceleration of the throttle grip it self (throttle butterfly). Its how fast the throttle is changing, not how fast engine is revving up.

 

[lowkey]

Acceleration enrichment only last one revolution of the engine, once the average throttle position is equal to current throttle position acceleration enrichment is zero, but the engine can still be speeding up/revving up even thought accel enrichment is zero.
If you agree with that then I miss read your post.

1.) No you misread your link from the ECMSpy chapter, it is calculated and applied EACH one revolution of the engine. From my original time stamp with acceleration enrichment = 13.7, in the log leading up to this enrichment percentage was as follows:
------0/10.9/22.3/12.7/11.5/13.7/0-------


Given the resolution in the log is much less than each engine revolution and just looking above in the top graph of RPM we can see acceleration enrichment lasts far longer than 1 revolution I think you can agree with my interpretation of the ECMSpy chapter that you linked.

2.) YES and NO, the only situation the engine can still be speeding up/revving without TPS degrees also climbing would be TPD max 85 degrees, this is moot because acceleration enrichment threshold is 80 degrees, but yes max throttle held from idle to redline RPM would be the same TPS value of 255 throughout that experiment.

Edit: you think acceleration in this context is "acceleration of the engine/bike" but its not, its acceleration of the throttle grip it self (throttle butterfly). Its how fast the throttle is changing, not how fast engine is revving up.

1.) Acceleration of TPS degree is directly a request on acceleration of the engine... they are tied together. Can you show one instance TPS is accelerated and the engine does not also accelerate (other than a TPS spike and fall that is to quick for the engine response to follow?)

2.) Never stated anything to do with how fast the engine is revved up being part of the scenario... but IS the byproduct of the butterfly opening and ingesting more air being the reason for this multipliers existence.

I am now done with this subject and it was only brought up in the first place for those that think running off the fuel map cell value is the only thing to consider when there are a TON of multipliers at play. We can discuss over the phone or email further I guess...

cossack84 I thank you for pointing out the 80 in this table referenced TPD, now if I ever get to the point of needing to modify it I can back down this value to the low/mid open loop area where I've already hit the desired AFR no enrichment needed.:up:

 

[lowkey]

I revisited the table and saw it has a TPD 80*at 1200RPM and jump to 85*at 2000RPM, here is what it would look like overlaid on the fuel map, any TPD value below this line can have acceleration enrichment applied.



Sorry my MS paint skills are lacking but from 2000RPM the top TPS (255 row) cells cannot have acceleration enrichment, the line leading up to 1200RPM would fall below this TPS value but above the next lowest TPS value (175 row). Visualize the line dropped down just a bit from where I drew it over the map.

 

[rb70383]

Yes lowkey, that makes perfect sense.

For the timing map request...

I missed a "27" Apparently I don't hit that cell a lot. Also my CSE enrichment. I rode in 30 degree weather and bike started better then 'stock'. YMMV

 

[cossack84]

edit the third LOL, with some better data. (I hope you take this as me being curios and not trying to challenge or undermine anyone) I'm simply talking about acceleration correction and how I think it applies here.

lowkey perhaps you can explain those screen grabs with engine accelerating and acceleration correction at 0?

Here is throttle quickly opened to 255, acceleration correction kicks in.

But instead of acceleration correction following RPM of the motor and increasing with it, its gradually falling off.

Here is a grab showing that acceleration does not follow rmp of the motor at all.

What am I missing here? Again if I read tuning guide correctly, acceleration correction does not care for what engine does, but only follows average position of the throttle. Once average is equal to current, acceleration correction is zeroed out. ?

 

[lowkey]

Yes lowkey, that makes perfect sense.

For the timing map request...

I missed a "27" Apparently I don't hit that cell a lot. Also my CSE enrichment. I rode in 30 degree weather and bike started better then 'stock'. YMMV

Good, glad my rambling came out understandable. Haha

Timing map request? I don't follow, is this a question?

"I missed the 27" again I don't follow what you are asking here? Are you referring to the value at TPS 30 RPM 2000? I would be hitting this cell riding away from a stop light or 3rd gear side street cruising most likely in a log, I'd assume this goes for most too.

"I rode in 30 degree weather and bike started better then 'stock'. YMMV" what is this in reference to? Did you make a change that worked for the better? Did Mike make the changes in those two screen grabs? Care to share your EEPROM? Mike left the buell scene right around when I bought mine, I've tried to read up on all his hard work but with forums going away that he posted in all I have are a handful of screen grabs of his knowledge.

As for making use of 2 02 sensors, sure you can do that in a number of configurations, If you have 2 WB's you will still have to run 02 off in the ECM but you can do as I mentioned and input on one of the unused pins on the ECM as your second input then you will need to set up the software you plan to work with to make use of this second input for 02 data. You could run 2 NB's front and rear too and run CL but the ECM will not adjust the front cylinder or make changes from that input (unless the bike is DDFI3 with BUE2D IIRC? firmware, then front 02 sensor can be activated for feedback within the ECM). Nice that you have these items, why not install them? Would streamline the tuning process greatly!
I actually have 3 bungs welded on my header 1 on the front in the stock location on last year Buell made headers, 1 stock rear location that the NB always lives in and another down stream bung on the rear, I can hot swap the WB back and forth on these 2 I added as they are easy to access. I can also compare NB and WB on the rear once I wire a second input into the ECM, right now I just plug into the stock NB input whatever bung I plan to log out of.

I will clear my inbox if you want to PM me again.

 

[cossack84]

Did a log on a ride home from work. I think I might have found a reason for crappy low throttle jerking in my bike. It looks like deceleration fuel cut off kicks in if load is less then 19 and speed below certain rmp.
Here is a screen grab of deceleration region and percentage of fuel cut. (If someone could post that table from their bike that has smooth low throttle that would be great, lowkey?)

I made changes shown in red below

Here is a log with fuel cut as soon as the load fell below 19

I'll take it for a ride some time ad let you know if that helped my crappy low load throttle.

 

[yugo42]

I finally got up the gumption last week to generate a new map and load it onto the bike thanks to help and advice from you guys! I haven't been able to put much more time into it but did go on a long open-loop ride with that tune, and used that log to generate another new map. It didn't ride any smoother at low load, but I'm too early in the process to get discouraged yet and I did notice the largest cell change value was about half what it was the first time so that's indicating progress!

Here is a log with fuel cut as soon as the load fell below 19

I'll take it for a ride some time ad let you know if that helped my crappy low load throttle.

I didn't notice this in my log the first time around, but I'll have to go back and look for this same effect. Mine is rough into log sections where load is in the 20s and 30s too, so I'm guessing this isn't my issue.

 

[lowkey]

edit the third LOL, with some better data. (I hope you take this as me being curios and not trying to challenge or undermine anyone) I'm simply talking about acceleration correction and how I think it applies here.



lowkey perhaps you can explain those screen grabs with engine accelerating and acceleration correction at 0?

Here is throttle quickly opened to 255, acceleration correction kicks in.

But instead of acceleration correction following RPM of the motor and increasing with it, its gradually falling off.

Here is a grab showing that acceleration does not follow rmp of the motor at all.

What am I missing here? Again if I read tuning guide correctly, acceleration correction does not care for what engine does, but only follows average position of the throttle. Once average is equal to current, acceleration correction is zeroed out. ?

Yellow line TPS? White line RPM? and Red line acceleration enrichment? Correct? First screen grab shows enrichment at 10% TPS 191... falls below TPD 80-85 degree threshold. Second and third show no correction because TPS 255 is above/at threshold TPD 85 degrees no enrichment needed as per the table in the EEPROM.

 

[rb70383]

Someone above asked me to post my timing map, in reference to low rpm stutter...timing map request.

lowkey, yes Mike did my reflash, burned the race EEPROM. I can post my EEPROM if wanted. Only thing is mine is an 03. BUECB 1 year only ECM iirc, well firmware wise.

On my CSE, yes changes did make improvements. Smoothing the wonky timing map helps significantly. At least in my case. I would have to see what changes I made. I added more fuel at colder temps. had the enrichment taper off more slowly as well. This is with a NB. So I did small adjustments then evaluate. The dual WB setup was last winters project. However I decided to disassemble my new EBR instead. :black_eyed:

I have a 12 header with dual bungs as well. That was before I found 9 headers with dual bungs.

I don't think I have any spare pins on my ECM....{flips through internet pages}...I have one. Black connector pin 9. Exhaust valve. That would be my unsed pin, and this would allow a front o2 to be datalogged correct? The ECM wouldnt use it to adjust just log. How would I make sure that the pin is configured correctly?

 

[cossack84]

Yellow line TPS? White line RPM? and Red line acceleration enrichment? Correct? First screen grab shows enrichment at 10% TPS 191... falls below TPD 80-85 degree threshold. Second and third show no correction because TPS 255 is above/at threshold TPD 85 degrees no enrichment needed as per the table in the EEPROM.

I dont think thats it man, here are few shots of TPD below 80-85 degrees and no enrichment.

This is a good one, RPM go from ~2658 to ~4972 and acceleration enrichment cuts out at 3136 RPM. Wonder whats going on here?TPD around 71 to ~65.

 

[cossack84]

Someone above asked me to post my timing map, in reference to low rpm stutter...timing map request.

That was me. Your timing map in idle region doesn't look all that different from mine.