PDA

View Full Version : Accel settings


RGA-1200
March 25th, 2008, 08:44 AM
Now that my laptop is back from it's brush with death, I can get back to what I was doing yesterday, which is fiddling with the accel settings.

Background is - Laverda 3 cylinder 1150cc air cooled 2V engine, approx 8500rpm max, SM4, GSXR throttle bodies etc, GM LS1 coils, first attempt with EFI and this type of engine never before injected so no base settings. Did 3hrs on the dyno at the local dealer to dial in most of the fuel map, using his Autronic analyser. Put out 10hp more than a brand new BMW R1150 on the same dyno, happy with that from a 1971 engine design!! :)

Plenty of revisions from on-road riding and logging later I now have it running pretty smoothly, the only glitch to feel is when doing what I would call a low rpm launch, where you feed out the clutch at say 2krpm but with plenty of throttle. The bike pulls pretty well but gets to about 5-6k and dies.

Due to the lack of electrical capacity and the desire to carry around the minimum of stuff, I remove my Innovate LM-1 for normal use. Yesterday I put it back on to have a look at what was happening during the low rpm launch situation. As I suspected it leans out badly around the time the cough happens at 5-6krpm. See log1.jpg
I was interested to see what I do with the throttle in this situation, I had no idea I fed it in like that while doing a launch like this. So rpm is increasing, and throttle is increasing.

Also, from some higher speed tuning from a few months ago, Log2.jpg shows a log of a normal acceleration where I snap open the throttle after decelerating. You can see the initial leanout, then recovery. The bike pulls fine during this, there is no discernable hesitation. In general terms it's going great on high throttle use, it will pull hard from 1000rpm in top gear which is truly amazing for this type of motor. Only during the launch do I notice any misbehaviour.

The third thing is that when just blipping the throttle from idle there is a audible hesitation before the motor revs up, but I don't have a log of that. To me these all point toward insufficient "acceleration pump" fuel.

I do not fully understand the accel settings, can someone explain them more clearly, or have a look at my cal file and suggest some adjustments perhaps? In fact a general look-over by someone more experienced than I would be appreciated, as this was all done from scratch with very little input other than fuel map by my dealer.

In general it likes to run rich, I tried to run 14-15:1 AFR during low throttle use and it just did not like it. Seems to like to be in the 13's when taking it easy, and 12's under power.

Sorry for the long post, hope I explained it all.

Thanks in advacne
Steve

Chris
March 25th, 2008, 03:02 PM
You may see some improvement from adjusting the injection end angle.

In base settings "primary fuel method" you have set "baro and map". Normally you would then set the "target a/f axis y" to load. I am unsure what the effect will be using your settings, there may be no ill effect.

However "baro and tps" would be the correct setting for your application.

I see you have "i/p baro" "baro update" set to sensor which would indicate you do not have the map sensor reading your intake manifold pressure.

Chris

MRMRacing
March 25th, 2008, 06:46 PM
Buzzard is right here if you have fuel & ignition set to tps, and the baro update to sensor, the normal way is to use "Baro & TPS" the map sensor should not be connected.

RGA-1200
March 26th, 2008, 12:38 PM
Thanks very much for your time, it is much appreciated. Your responses tie in with a comment I made back in this thread:
http://www.idssoftware.co.uk/wyles_hardy/lot_details.asp?lotid=%201414 (http://www.idssoftware.co.uk/wyles_hardy/lot_details.asp?lotid=%201414)

"When getting dynoed for initial setup, my dealer said you need EXTRA volume in the MAP line (he said newer skylines with ITB's have about a 1" rail to give the system some volume) and as such changed ignition axis to throttle % as well (edit- as well as fuel axis), but it is still set to Baro/MAP. I thought it perhaps should have been changed to Baro/TPS for the overall setup. The engine runs really well now, and it would also be more dyno $$$ to go back to square 1 and re-map in Baro/TPS mode, but I wonder whether that would be the better setup for a motor like this and use the SM4 MAP as a baro update?"

When I got it mapped on the dyno the dealer changed all the axes to TPS but left it as Baro/MAP, which even I thought was wrong based on what I had read in the manual. Before Christmas I did a test with it changed to Baro/TPS and with the MAP line disconnected from the ECU and plugged, but the bike was then totally unrideable. It was at that time that I changed the "IP Baro" "Baro Update" to "sensor", and neglected to change it back again. Thanks for picking that up.

As I have a ride planned for this weekend I'll change it back to "table" and check how it goes. It is absolutely good enough to ride, but is clearly not perfectly right. As I suspected earlier, I think I ultimately have to change overall fuelling to Baro/TPS and go back to square one with mapping. Hmmm.

Cheers
Steve

Chris
March 27th, 2008, 02:17 PM
You have the "baro update" set to "sensor" and the map sensor line connected ?

The launch control is set to continuous and appears to be functioning correctly. Disabling launch control may assist in your search for your 5-6k rpm problem.

Chris

RGA-1200
March 27th, 2008, 11:45 PM
You have the "baro update" set to "sensor" and the map sensor line connected ?

The launch control is set to continuous and appears to be functioning correctly. Disabling launch control may assist in your search for your 5-6k rpm problem.

Chris

Hi Chris,

Yes, I did previously have that, due to not changing it back after experimenting with changing the overall fuelling to Baro/TPS (which it should have been set as from the beginning). This morning I rode the bike into work with the "baro update" changed to "table" and it didn't seem to make much difference. On the only chance I got to try what I'm describing as a "low rpm hard launch" (ie not on the launch limiter) it did the same thing, with a cough around 6k. Since boosting the fuel numbers at 50-75% and 5-6k rpm it is less pronounced.

The launch control seems to work in the capacity I've tested it so far, which was to hold the the motor onto the launch limiter at perhaps 60-70% throttle and dump the clutch and get a huge wheelie! :-) I need to get a bit more courage to really hold it wide open and see what the electronics do to limit the motor, but clearly on a bike there is the added variable of the wheelie.

I don't think my 6k cough is launch control related as I seem to recall it happening earlier, before I enabled the launch control. But it's a good point and I'll do a test with LC disabled and see what it does.

Cheers
Steve

Adam
March 28th, 2008, 06:46 AM
Just a thought - I maybe stating the obvious. Have you considered fuel surge in the tank? You say the bike was not originally injected so it probably doesn't have any surge baffling in the tank. The hesitation range you talk of is happening at about the range where maximum G/acceleration occurs. Maybe try it with an absolutely full tank to be sure.

Wroom
March 28th, 2008, 07:08 AM
...Or, implement a surge reservoir after the tank?

RGA-1200
March 28th, 2008, 12:01 PM
Thanks for the excellent feedback, I have not yet done any further testing as I need to go away on the bike tomorrow and have been doing more mundane service items. Will test with launch control disabled to see if it's still there.

The fuel pressure suggestion is a good one. Of all the things I had to do, converting a simple gravity feed fuel system to a high pressure setup within a very limited amount of space represented the most headaches. I ended up using the GSXR pump and integral regulator, mounted horizontally in a small (approx 2lt) tank under the seat. There is gravity feed to this tank and a vent to atmosphere, I had problems earlier on with this tank emptying before I ran a continuous vent to atmosphere. Space issues meant that any other option had serious drawbacks.

What I really should do is get a fuel pressure sensor and plumb it in so I can log fuel pressure during one of these launches and see what it's doing.

Excellent to have this input, I'll now disappear until I have some results from these suggestions.

Thanks and cheers,
Steve

Chris
March 29th, 2008, 06:02 AM
You dont appear at all concerned that the "injector time 1" is 0.000 milliseconds or that the ignition timing is 22 degrees? Please kindly answer my private message.

Chris

RGA-1200
March 30th, 2008, 07:49 AM
You dont appear at all concerned that the "injector time 1" is 0.000 milliseconds or that the ignition timing is 22 degrees? Please kindly answer my private message.

Chris

Sorry, didn't get notification of it. Have PM'd you just now.

I disabled the launch control and the hesitation still occurs. I think I need to take several steps back in order to go forward on this one.

Thanks
Steve