dantt
Full Member
Karma: +0/-1
Offline
Posts: 148
|
|
« Reply #210 on: October 02, 2013, 12:47:23 AM »
|
|
|
Multiply if anything. The more pressure, the longer the injector opens since it has to work against more pressure.
sorry for the spam probably i must multiply for my offset 1.1852 so v 3bar 4bar 7,9552 1,7408 2,06319616 9,9968 1,1392 1,35017984 11,968 0,8096 0,95953792 14,0096 0,5984 0,70922368 15,9808 0,4416 0,52338432 but what mean Yes - That math looks correct. However, after a while of adjusting LTFT's, I ended up with: 3.12 1.35 0.99 0.75 0.63
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
s5fourdoor
|
|
« Reply #212 on: October 02, 2013, 11:36:15 AM »
|
|
|
I've been using the 60 psi values multiplied by 1.02 across the board, changed the axis to reflect [8,10,12,14,16]. The two warmup maps are multiplier by 1.10. Idle torque multiplied 1.25 for both clutch-in & clutch-out maps. No real misfires for me anymore. Cold start still needs refinement.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
dantt
Full Member
Karma: +0/-1
Offline
Posts: 148
|
|
« Reply #213 on: October 03, 2013, 02:13:24 AM »
|
|
|
I've been using the 60 psi values multiplied by 1.02 across the board, changed the axis to reflect [8,10,12,14,16]. The two warmup maps are multiplier by 1.10. Idle torque multiplied 1.25 for both clutch-in & clutch-out maps. No real misfires for me anymore. Cold start still needs refinement.
why 1.02? why you don't use fnpw_offcomp 1.1638 ? the multiplier that results from the calculations (1.1852) seems too high and I'm not sure it is correct. I found this pdf http://www.bosch-motorsport.de/pdf/components/injection_valves/injection_valves_en.pdfalso the values of tuvb that would be out from http://www.boschdealer.com/specsheets/0280158117cs.jpg fnpw_offset seem too high. in my original tvub I can read for about 8v 1.7408 and not 2.184 for about 10v my value is 1.1392 and not 1.1435 and so on .. Am I taking as a reference the wrong document?
|
|
« Last Edit: October 03, 2013, 03:34:42 AM by dantt »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
julex
|
|
« Reply #214 on: October 03, 2013, 06:18:43 AM »
|
|
|
Look at what I posted in my previous post. Stop using the sheet you're referencing (it is totally wrong). The new one, from the same site, works, and doesn't require you to do any crazy calculations.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
dantt
Full Member
Karma: +0/-1
Offline
Posts: 148
|
|
« Reply #215 on: October 03, 2013, 08:12:25 AM »
|
|
|
Look at what I posted in my previous post. Stop using the sheet you're referencing (it is totally wrong). The new one, from the same site, works, and doesn't require you to do any crazy calculations.
thank you very much for your help but I did not understand how to use this spreadsheet. my flow is equivalent to approximately 455cc (original flow is 386cc @ 3bar) your pdf talks with 550cc injectors Could I have solved the problem copying in tvub the first pdf line? thanks Daniele
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
julex
|
|
« Reply #216 on: October 03, 2013, 10:59:55 AM »
|
|
|
thank you very much for your help but I did not understand how to use this spreadsheet. my flow is equivalent to approximately 455cc (original flow is 386cc @ 3bar) your pdf talks with 550cc injectors
Could I have solved the problem copying in tvub the first pdf line?
thanks Daniele
I had to go back to your original thread. I assumed you're asking about ev14 injector, you know, the ones this thread is about... You can only approximate the TVUB by intelligently looking at other injectors and their TVUB differences between different pressures. Once you figure out what multiplier to use, try it and see where it gets you. For example, Ev14 550cc / 52lb injectors when going from 43.5 (3bar) to ~58 (4bar) gain this much TVUB: 8V 2.7 ---> ~3.2 -- x1.185 10V 1.54 --> 1.61 -- x1.05 12V 1.12 --> 1.155 -- x1.03 14V 0.73 --> 0.75 -- x1.03 16V 0.523 --> 0.540 -- x1.03 If you look at other injectors, siemens for example, this will be different. You cannot accurately determine this, just approximate if you have data for different injectors. Getting data for similar tech injectors would work the best as the data would be the most relevant.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
16g-95gsc
Full Member
Karma: +1/-1
Offline
Posts: 73
|
|
« Reply #218 on: November 09, 2013, 09:10:12 AM »
|
|
|
I've been using the 60 psi values multiplied by 1.02 across the board, changed the axis to reflect [8,10,12,14,16]. The two warmup maps are multiplier by 1.10. Idle torque multiplied 1.25 for both clutch-in & clutch-out maps. No real misfires for me anymore. Cold start still needs refinement.
I have read through this entire thread, and am looking for a consensus on starting values for standard EV14 550's (117 Suffix). So to summarize: Using the tech data posted on the first page for latency, and then extrapolating with a simple curve fit I arrive at the following values: KRKTE: 0.05495 Voltage mS 7.04 - 4.36 10.06 - 1.64 12.03 - 1.158 14.08 - 0.751 17.88 - 0.40 And you're saying that KFFWL_0_A and KFFWL_1_A can be increased 10% across the full map. Opinions on whether this summary/these values appear correct? I've had a slight hesitation ever since installing my 550's a while ago and felt it was time to return to my tune and really dial these guys in. The car has always driven just fine, but tends to have a slight hesitation during initial cold start, and sometimes very light cruise. I have returned the intake system to factory so that I can isolate the injectors as the sole variable from factory fuel settings.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
16g-95gsc
Full Member
Karma: +1/-1
Offline
Posts: 73
|
|
« Reply #219 on: November 10, 2013, 10:38:09 AM »
|
|
|
Those settings worked great. I wound up tweaking it just a tad, but trims are fairly well dialed in though. I did find that cold compensation needs to be reduced slightly, reads -13% at idle an d cruise. Once fully warmed it's back to normal. Otherwise it's great.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
16g-95gsc
Full Member
Karma: +1/-1
Offline
Posts: 73
|
|
« Reply #220 on: November 11, 2013, 06:23:45 AM »
|
|
|
Also to clarify, I meant that I left cold compensations stock, and yet they now still appear to require reduction. My original post mentioned increasing them 10% across the board, so I wanted to clarify that the need for reduction was seen without having made this increase. Taking a look at Berttos' posted BIN file it appears that he did the same reduction. Cold compensation is annoying as you only have a small window with which to get the data. Then you have to wait basically a full day to see if any change you made works.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
oldcarguy85
Full Member
Karma: +15/-1
Offline
Posts: 247
|
|
« Reply #221 on: January 20, 2014, 11:31:57 AM »
|
|
|
Hey all, Some great info in this thread. I'm just curious why KFFWL_0_A and KFFWL_1_A need to be touched. Wouldn't warmup perform just as stock if KRKTE and TVUB were dialed in correctly? Am i missing something?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
hipeka
Full Member
Karma: +1/-1
Offline
Posts: 85
|
|
« Reply #222 on: January 28, 2014, 03:40:42 PM »
|
|
|
Can someone advise correct way to tune KFBAKL and KFVAKL?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ABCD
Full Member
Karma: +4/-0
Offline
Posts: 78
|
|
« Reply #223 on: February 10, 2014, 10:53:18 PM »
|
|
|
Can someone advise correct way to tune KFBAKL and KFVAKL?
KFBAKL gives acceleration enrichment,more the KFBAKL more is the enrichment KFVAKL gives deceleration enleanment, more the KFVAKL more is the enleanment
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
hipeka
Full Member
Karma: +1/-1
Offline
Posts: 85
|
|
« Reply #224 on: February 12, 2014, 02:01:09 PM »
|
|
|
KFBAKL gives acceleration enrichment,more the KFBAKL more is the enrichment KFVAKL gives deceleration enleanment, more the KFVAKL more is the enleanment
Yes, thats also said in FR. But what are values that should be look at when adjust these and what are good reference values? Original injectors with original settings or something else?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|