[KaiserN54]

Hey guys,


In a previous post I had a question about running lean, but I don't think people were really able to help because the info I was able to give them was hard to read- that is, I can't figure out how to make the data from Procede scale to a level that is readable. With that being said, on an e85 map, the car had a flatish- AFR of 14, spiked at 16, pulled timing, and got down to 13.29. The shop said their sniffer (placed in the right hand side exhaust) will typically read leaner than actual by 1, so it was more likely something like 13 to 15 to 12.29.

1) How do I scale the .csv so someone here can actually make sense of it?

2) What AFR's are normal for E85, given the engines propensity to run lean in the first place?

[boostaholic786]

Thats a good question to be answered to tell you the truth. I would like to know as well how to richen AFR's across the board if your running consistent % of E85 all the time. Basically like a custom E85 map almost but without running lean.

[rudypoochris]

I don't know about Procede, maybe its the same as JB4.

Basically the AFR numbers you get out of the JB4 logs are calculated values assuming gasoline stoich = 14.7:1. The ECU itself targets lambda values. Thus 13:1 on an E85 mix really isn't 13:1 its probably something like 10 or 11:1.

To enrich the AFRs beyond the limit of the trims, so far only ECU flashing has worked from what I can tell. In my experience it looks like JB4 is fine for up to 450whp or so before it starts to run out of fuel. I wouldn't worry much before that unless the logs looked funny.

[KaiserN54]

Originally Posted by rudypoochris

I don't know about Procede, maybe its the same as JB4.

Basically the AFR numbers you get out of the JB4 logs are calculated values assuming gasoline stoich = 14.7:1. The ECU itself targets lambda values. Thus 13:1 on an E85 mix really isn't 13:1 its probably something like 10 or 11:1.

To enrich the AFRs beyond the limit of the trims, so far only ECU flashing has worked from what I can tell. In my experience it looks like JB4 is fine for up to 450whp or so before it starts to run out of fuel. I wouldn't worry much before that unless the logs looked funny.

If I could figure out how to get my .csv info into a readable format, I could compare it to the sniffer results from the dyno. These AFR's came from my dyno run, not procede. (which,as I said, I can't figure out how to read)

[Slops]

just open your csv file in excel and create a line graph for the interested areas to compare. There you can read exactly where you are on any given input. If you want i can make it for you on the AFRs if you wanna post your csv file up.

[Joshboody]

Originally Posted by rudypoochris

I don't know about Procede, maybe its the same as JB4.

Basically the AFR numbers you get out of the JB4 logs are calculated values assuming gasoline stoich = 14.7:1. The ECU itself targets lambda values. Thus 13:1 on an E85 mix really isn't 13:1 its probably something like 10 or 11:1.

To enrich the AFRs beyond the limit of the trims, so far only ECU flashing has worked from what I can tell. In my experience it looks like JB4 is fine for up to 450whp or so before it starts to run out of fuel. I wouldn't worry much before that unless the logs looked funny.

FYI: for e85 actual AFR
gas AFR/14.7 x stoich for E85 = E85 AFR (100% E85) mixing fuels you have to account for volume and energy density.

BUT, above doesn't really matter... you can use gasoline AFRs

[uniter]

A good pro-tip for improving the readability of the log viewer is to take the channel setup from the procede UT folder Channel_Data.ini renaming it to chan_setup.ini and overwriting the one in the /data/ folder.

[KaiserN54]

Originally Posted by Sloppy

just open your csv file in excel and create a line graph for the interested areas to compare. There you can read exactly where you are on any given input. If you want i can make it for you on the AFRs if you wanna post your csv file up.

This really helps actually, as I can read the data. I tried making a line chart....but don't know enough about excel to make it any clearer than procede

[ETS Michael]

Post up the .csv file. I'm sure one of us can do it for you.



^^ A graph like this is pretty easy once you get into it.

Thanks!

[cloud_connected]

Originally Posted by ETS Michael

Post up the .csv file. I'm sure one of us can do it for you.



^^ A graph like this is pretty easy once you get into it.

Thanks!

+1
Just save it as a .txt document and then attach it. TBH I've never really understood the default scaling of some of the PROcede data display channels. Why do you need a 0-40 scale for AFRs? lol

[KaiserN54]

Originally Posted by cloud_connected

+1
Just save it as a .txt document and then attach it. TBH I've never really understood the default scaling of some of the PROcede data display channels. Why do you need a 0-40 scale for AFRs? lol

Ok, heres one I did tonight, on the 5-23 stage 3 agressive map. Car is FBO other than catback. Notice that the AFR unexplicitly spikes in the middle of this 3rd gear pull. Definately felt it- lost major power.

[cloud_connected]

WOW that's a scary log

Your fuel trims are maxxed for pretty much the whole pull. You spike at over 18:1AFR and stay there from 4Krpms to 5Krpms You peaked at 20:1 and that was near peak torque. You need to get in touch with Vishnu and get whatever is going on fixed.

[KaiserN54]

Originally Posted by cloud_connected

WOW that's a scary log

Your fuel trims are maxxed for pretty much the whole pull. You spike at over 18:1AFR and stay there from 4Krpms to 5Krpms You peaked at 20:1 and that was near peak torque. You need to get in touch with Vishnu and get whatever is going on fixed.

Vishnu? I will try, but isn't he in Asia right now?


What the hell could be going on here? I think it may be isolated, but it keeps happening. Here are some other short logs I did last night. The other one I attached was one of those "flat on its face" type pulls where I KNEW something was off. THe other pulls felt much better. But this kind of thing keeps happening.

[KaiserN54]

Anyone?

[sickem]

i'm relatively new to tuning myself but if your fuel trims are maxed out you can increase the OL fueling up to 100%, usually start in 5% increments and log to see where you are. vishnu's told me that being in the 20s is good.

[KaiserN54]

Originally Posted by sickem

i'm relatively new to tuning myself but if your fuel trims are maxed out you can increase the OL fueling up to 100%, usually start in 5% increments and log to see where you are. vishnu's told me that being in the 20s is good.

But why would I need to up OL fueling on a 93 octane map? Does this mean something is wrong hardware wise? I need help figuring out what is wrong if so, and Vishnu...is not really available right now it seems.

[sickem]

are you running the 5-23 beta maps? they are not autotuning maps, so some parameters need to be adjusted based on the way each individual car behaves under load, hence why we log data. I suppose it could be a hardware problem (maybe someone else can chime in there) but probably isn't since many folks on here have to manipulate the OL fueling to optimize fuel trims and they don't have any known hardware issues. If these maps were autotune maps, the PROcede would do this for you.

[cloud_connected]

Originally Posted by atomos319

But why would I need to up OL fueling on a 93 octane map? Does this mean something is wrong hardware wise? I need help figuring out what is wrong if so, and Vishnu...is not really available right now it seems.

You need to increase the OL(base map value) to help get the fuel trims where they should be. However, trims normally recover after passing spool mode ceiling and yours didn't. Which suggests that increasing your OL to 100 isn't going to solve your issue, but you should still do it anyway to see if it does help.

You may be having issue with the LPFP, does the PROcede allow you to monitor LPFP requested and actual?

[KaiserN54]

Originally Posted by cloud_connected

You need to increase the OL(base map value) to help get the fuel trims where they should be. However, trims normally recover after passing spool mode ceiling and yours didn't. Which suggests that increasing your OL to 100 isn't going to solve your issue, but you should still do it anyway to see if it does help.

You may be having issue with the LPFP, does the PROcede allow you to monitor LPFP requested and actual?

I don't know if I can track that with the Procede. That being said, this was the 5-23 map, default settings, but I raised the OL fueling to 85= still got this issue.

Car is going to Koala BMW this weekend for a wavetrac + 3.46 gear, wondering if I should throw in a LPFP while they have it. (disclosure- they HATE piggybacks and won't "mess with them", so I am just going to have to go in and tell them what to replace- doubt they'll help diagnose)

[sickem]

Originally Posted by atomos319

I don't know if I can track that with the Procede. That being said, this was the 5-23 map, default settings, but I raised the OL fueling to 85= still got this issue.

Car is going to Koala BMW this weekend for a wavetrac + 3.46 gear, wondering if I should throw in a LPFP while they have it. (disclosure- they HATE piggybacks and won't "mess with them", so I am just going to have to go in and tell them what to replace- doubt they'll help diagnose)

Were the AFRs different between bank 1 and 2? Car's not throwing any codes, right? Limp mode? Reduced power light? If you go under the data logging menu you can look at what data channels are available to log. IIRC u can log LPFP...could be wrong though.

EDIT as for the OL fueling...go up too 100 and see if it improves trims at all...if not, you have your answer...85 mightn't be enough

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

It's perfectly normal to increase OL fueling. Every car functions different which is why that setting is there.
As others suggested increase by 5% increments.