DDFI-3 tuning with stock o2 sensor

[mcaff]

Hi guys here we go again discussing ECM things.

I´ve been researching the tuning procedures on Buells for more than a year maybe to feel safe enough to start tuning mine. By the way I ride a 2008 Ulysses completely stock except for a K&N air filter and the exhaust valve locked open.

I managed to go for a great (dataloged) ride last weekend, about 1 hour riding with AFV locked and after that opened the log on ECMSpy and applied the average EGO corrections to both rear and front maps. The bike improved a lot and now when I run my EGO corrections stay pretty closer to 100 than before.

Well this is the first part of the tuning process I think, as it tuned only the closed loop area of the map, plus learn and idle areas. The ECMSpy EGO maps are populated with values for the closed loop area only, so even if I wanted I couldn´t see what happened when bike entered open loop area.

I always read that narrowband stock o2 sensor will not let us tune the open loop area. However, I have noticed that when I load my log file to MLV/VE Analyze it applies changes to map cels that are on open loop area also. Tunerpro is the same, when I dataloged with the acquisition plug-in from TunerPro it populated the History Table (LOAD_RPM_EGO) with values that looked like EGO corrections in open loop as well. I am aware that the ECM does not make EGO correction in open loop, so where does this data come from?

Recently I read a thread here in this forum from 2014 in which our friend ReadyXB explained to another friend that if AFV was limited to 100%, all EGO corrections shown on TunerPro log could be applied to the whole map including open loop.

I would like to understand this in full because sometimes it makes no sense to me. Should I consider these open-loop-area-EGOs and apply them to my map? Or it is better not to touch the stock open loop area and just have it tuned on the closed loop?

 

[AZmidget91]

From the ECMSpy tuning guide

The EGO and AFV are corrections which are derived from the measurement of oxygen in the exhaust, using the O2 or Lambda sensor. The corrections are derived and applied to compensate for other uncertainties, such as changes in air pressure, engine to engine variations, air filter clogging, exhaust deterioration, engine deterioration and sensor calibration errors.

The EGO is a correction derived and applied during Closed Loop and Closed Loop Learn control regimes.

The AFV is a correction derived in the Closed Loop Learn (and Open Loop Learn) regime(s) and is applied in the Open Loop and Open Loop WOT control regimes.

 

[mcaff]

From the ECMSpy tuning guide

AZ hello.

This part of the manual, which I have already read, just confirms what I have just written. That EGO works only during closed loop, so, how is it possible that the datalog contains EGO correction in open loop cels of the map? It does not answer my doubts, unfortunatelly. :upset:

 

[AZmidget91]

Another quote from the user guide. ECMSpy discards values outside of the closed loop area, where as other tuning programs not made specifically for Buell, can't assume the closed loop areas, therefore they can't discard them.

Only runtime data retrieved in closed loop is taken into account for the averages, all other data will be discarded

 

[mcaff]

Another quote from the user guide. ECMSpy discards values outside of the closed loop area, where as other tuning programs not made specifically for Buell, can't assume the closed loop areas, therefore they can't discard them.

Great, that makes sense to me. ECMspy know what is closed loop what´s open and it just ignores what is not CL.

BUT, the question persists: if there is no EGO correction in open loop, from where do those values come from? It doesnt matter which software it is, if the ECM does not apply EGO to that specific cell because it´s open loop, how does it appear a EGO correction in the datalog? That´s the core of my doubts. Let´s say in numbers as an example. 175 load on the TPS and 6000rpm, this is definetely open-loop region. If I datalog on TunerPro for instance and in my ride I take the engine to 6000rpm with 175 load, after when I play the log it will show as the ECM put a correction in this point of the map. But how? If EGO is absent here, from where does TunerPro (or MLV) retrieve these values?

Doubt is still in the air

 

[AZmidget91]

Once again, other software doesn't know if it is in open loop or not. And the ecm outputs the ego values at all times. The ecm is constantly taking in data, but only uses the data when in certain regions. And just as it takes data in from the sensors, it outputs it and if the software doesn't know to discard those readings it won't.

 

[mcaff]

Once again, other software doesn't know if it is in open loop or not. And the ecm outputs the ego values at all times. The ecm is constantly taking in data, but only uses the data when in certain regions. And just as it takes data in from the sensors, it outputs it and if the software doesn't know to discard those readings it won't.

Now you answered my question. :up:

EGO factor is always presente, it doesn´t matter what region of the map you´re running. The only thing is that when the ECM is out of closed loop it just ignores the EGO. Now I got it. I tought the EGO factor just stoped working, no data related to EGO was made while outside the closed loop.

Thank you for this info and now it gets us back to the second part of the question. Is this EGO correction outside the closed loop reliable to be applied to the maps? I know EGO inside closed loop is reliable and I tuned my closed loop this way. But shall I take open-loop-EGO into account and apply it to the map? Is it reliable information?

 

[AZmidget91]

If that's all you have to go off of, then that will do. I suggest getting a PLX wideband and replace your stock narrow band with that. You can setup one of the outputs to simulate narrowband for the ecm, and the other output to your computer and ECMSpy Mono will log it simultaneously with your datalog and output a Lambda map.

 

[mcaff]

If that's all you have to go off of, then that will do. I suggest getting a PLX wideband and replace your stock narrow band with that. You can setup one of the outputs to simulate narrowband for the ecm, and the other output to your computer and ECMSpy Mono will log it simultaneously with your datalog and output a Lambda map.

Sounds great! I've been doing some research on that matter. LC-2 from Innovate is around 150 usd and it is the replacement for LC-1 which I think is fully supported by EcmSpy also. I would like something that I could install there and use it forever, replacing the stock one. Maybe this is the way to got for a proper tune.

 

[lowkey]

Now you answered my question. :up:

EGO factor is always presente, it doesn´t matter what region of the map you´re running. The only thing is that when the ECM is out of closed loop it just ignores the EGO. Now I got it. I tought the EGO factor just stoped working, no data related to EGO was made while outside the closed loop.

Thank you for this info and now it gets us back to the second part of the question. Is this EGO correction outside the closed loop reliable to be applied to the maps? I know EGO inside closed loop is reliable and I tuned my closed loop this way. But shall I take open-loop-EGO into account and apply it to the map? Is it reliable information?

Take this info with a grain of salt as I haven't tuned a Buell map but quite a few cars...

You can't look at closed loop to open loop as a line in the sand so to speak... ECU references multiple factors to determine when the switch over takes place.

Example 1: WOT at 3k should be referencing open loop feeding a set AFR above 14.7 (cell values uncorrected)
Example 2: Steady state throttle a 3k should be referencing closed loop values shooting for the 14.7 AFR (constant correction to hit target value)

Narrow band can only see a small window at the 14.7 AFR region anything else it will only see as lean or rich but has no idea what the actual values are. EGO values in open loop is probably saying you are rich right? You want to be so don't apply those values or you will be leaning it out. How rich you are is anyones guess without a wide band reading for both the front and rear cylinder separately. Even a dyno AFR reading is going to give you the combined reading of the AFR's mixed from the tailpipe.

 

[AZmidget91]

Sounds great! I've been doing some research on that matter. LC-2 from Innovate is around 150 usd and it is the replacement for LC-1 which I think is fully supported by EcmSpy also. I would like something that I could install there and use it forever, replacing the stock one. Maybe this is the way to got for a proper tune.

Yes, innovate is supported by ECMSpy, but the narrowband simulation doesn't work well with the stock ecm. From what I've heard plx works well with the ecm, and works with ECMSpy.

 

[lowkey]

If that's all you have to go off of, then that will do.

Why would he input data outside the realm of what the sensor is designed to read? Genuinely curious why this would be a good idea. I haven't seen the logs but I'd guess they are reading a rich condition and would have him lean out open loop. The cells were built around a target AFR from the factory.

For the OP going wide band is obviously the way to go, tuning open loop with actual data instead of blind. Have a bung welded to the front header and report back what the spread is between fueling of front and rear for target AFR's, I think the "rule of thumb" being said is 20%.

My worry is for every 1 person willing to install and tune with a wide band there are probably 30-50 unwilling to go that far, adjusting the values in open loop off of data from a narrow band sensor I don't think is a wise decision.

 

[mcaff]

Why would he input data outside the realm of what the sensor is designed to read? Genuinely curious why this would be a good idea. I haven't seen the logs but I'd guess they are reading a rich condition and would have him lean out open loop. The cells were built around a target AFR from the factory.

For the OP going wide band is obviously the way to go, tuning open loop with actual data instead of blind. Have a bung welded to the front header and report back what the spread is between fueling of front and rear for target AFR's, I think the "rule of thumb" being said is 20%.

My worry is for every 1 person willing to install and tune with a wide band there are probably 30-50 unwilling to go that far, adjusting the values in open loop off of data from a narrow band sensor I don't think is a wise decision.

Lowkey, 100% agree with you on that. Just one point, actually my datalogs say I´m running lean in open loop. Megalogviewer usually wants to add fuel to the open loop cels of the map.

 

[mcaff]

I decided to go for a wideband kit, just have to decide if LC2 or PLX. Read that both are very similar, I just want to make sure beforehand that the installation is straight forward as it seems to be, as I´ll have it installed for good, replacing the stock sensor.

 

[lowkey]

Lowkey, 100% agree with you on that. Just one point, actually my datalogs say I´m running lean in open loop. Megalogviewer usually wants to add fuel to the open loop cels of the map.

Interesting! Would like to hear more on the how and why on this...

Is it a consistent value across the cells or all over the place? By how much percentage would you say?

I decided to go for a wideband kit, just have to decide if LC2 or PLX. Read that both are very similar, I just want to make sure beforehand that the installation is straight forward as it seems to be, as I´ll have it installed for good, replacing the stock sensor.

Man, you'd be so close to doing it 100% right by getting a bung on the front and tuning both the front and the rear. Are you planning to just do rear, apply the 20% and call the front good or what?

 

[AZmidget91]

Like I've said, PLX is known to work with the ECM, which means you can leave it in forever. Innovate doesn't work well ebough with the ECM to be used as the narrow band once your tuning is done. Seems like an easy decision

 

[lowkey]

Lowkey, 100% agree with you on that. Just one point, actually my datalogs say I´m running lean in open loop. Megalogviewer usually wants to add fuel to the open loop cels of the map.

I searched and found the XB uses these sensors:

Throttle Position (TP) Sensor
Cam Position (CMP) Sensor
Intake Air Temperature (IAT) Sensor
Engine Temperature (ET) Sensor
Oxygen (O2) Sensor
Bank Angle Sensor (BAS)

Without a knock sensor or wide band I cannot see how any data needed to add fuel in open loop can be achieved. Really curious how Megalogviewer comes up with these "add fuel" conclusions from the data provided in the logs.

 

[mcaff]

I searched and found the XB uses these sensors:

Throttle Position (TP) Sensor
Cam Position (CMP) Sensor
Intake Air Temperature (IAT) Sensor
Engine Temperature (ET) Sensor
Oxygen (O2) Sensor
Bank Angle Sensor (BAS)

Without a knock sensor or wide band I cannot see how any data needed to add fuel in open loop can be achieved. Really curious how Megalogviewer comes up with these "add fuel" conclusions from the data provided in the logs.

Will get it for a logged ride right now! Thinking about logging with TunerPro this time. Will post printscreens when I come back

 

[mcaff]

Like I've said, PLX is known to work with the ECM, which means you can leave it in forever. Innovate doesn't work well ebough with the ECM to be used as the narrow band once your tuning is done. Seems like an easy decision

I am doing some research on this, could not find any complaint on the Innovate. Will go further on this before making the purchase

 

[mcaff]

Interesting! Would like to hear more on the how and why on this...

Is it a consistent value across the cells or all over the place? By how much percentage would you say?



Man, you'd be so close to doing it 100% right by getting a bung on the front and tuning both the front and the rear. Are you planning to just do rear, apply the 20% and call the front good or what?

Really not sure how to do it. Dont feel confortable by just adding 20% blindly. If you analyze the stock maps you see this relationship doesnt hold. There are parts of the stock map in which rear cylinder is richer than fronts and other the contrary is true.

Tought about tuning one cylinder at a time so that I'd need to buy only one WB kit. Is this a OK solution in your opinion?