Ronny

iTrader: (1)

how do i know when i need more TPS AE or MAP AE? or when to move one over the other? is my assumption that tps-ae comes on first and map-ae comes in slighly afterward? does the map sensor lag a little behind the tps? it seems they are similar just using diff sensors. i further assume they are added togther rather than offset. IOW 2 + 1 = 3. not either or on net result. what if i zeroed out my map-ae table and just used the tps-ae? what is effect? not all aftermarket efi use a map sensor? reason i am asking is that i tried and tried to get my AE in line. i upped AE 5% per burn tps-map equally from what i believed was a stock bin. finally saw results at 200%-250%. i still need more. but i am closing in. i see the stumble at a wack of throttle wide open when engine under load. somewhat ok when rpms up to 3000 and do same. i plan on adding only TPS AE only at upper % in my TC program and give it a try. now TC added for me the lag filter. i asked the Q once before but i assume that takes the same quantity of AE and spreads it out over a longer time span. is this partly accurate? i see values in lag in TC of like .18. what does that signify? would raising that # spread out effect over more time? or does it lenghten the time effectively providing more gross fuel over more time? like same pressure but longer "on" time. hard to explain. sorry for all the Q's. have not tuned this summer awaiting the phase 2 mods this july. all prior tuning done last year.

Grumpy

That's one of the areas, that's as much art form as any thing else.

**Generally**, you want enough TPS AE on light to moderate brisk acclerations. Then just enough MAP to fill in the top.
Then, enough MAP AE for slight acclerations going up hill.

After doing a 1,000 chips, I still spend alot of time getting it right. And I'm serious about that chip count.

Ronny

iTrader: (1)

i believe i was misinterpreting the AE/TPS. i see after LOOKING at it this evening i see it only goes 3 to 25% TPS. i assume that means a small movement of TPS at any specific position. a 30% movement just uses the values in 25% constant as table only goes to 24%? ? so my statement above on zeroing out the MAP is way off as i would not see the massive amount of AE that i believe i needed as compared to stock(?) tune. so it appears the AETPS is the lessser amounts of pumpshot as you suggested and the AE/MAP is where i need to go as far as more PS to reduce stumble. i am further assuming i can move air easily(r foot) vs atomized fuel mix. i tried a hammer of throttle this AM in second gear at about 20 mph/ about 2400 rpms and the cough was real bad. i think i was barking up wrong tree(BUWT) by looking at the AE/TPS primarily as that is where i added the most PS. I think i will reduce that back to about 150% of stock and go back to MAP and verify that is 250% of stock and add on another 20% and try again. also read a post by demented that was helpful. will reduce the PE invoke to 60%. or should i leave at 70% untill see results with AEMAP so as not to confuse results? spark tables stock to best of my knowledge.

Grumpy

yep

And AE exists to just get you into PE. If you have to run *too* much AE the you'll have to lower the PE TPS enable.
Not to mention with too small of injector, you have to run lots of AE.

RednGold86Z

iTrader: (1)

I'm very sympathetic. On the larger TB engines that I've tuned, they've required tons of acceleration enrichment. Another thing that'll make you chase your tail for ages is the Block Learn. If you are going from a 108 BLF and then smacking the throttle open to an area that needs 128, it'll pop, even with good accel. Block learn updates much too slowly for that.

AE TPS is sampling TPS % change OVER 12.5ms, which is why the %TPS is so low, it's not based on the starting or ending TPS. But other than that, I think you explained it pretty well, in that the TPS is for the first instant, and MAP is the filler after it. If the car falls down and stays down, it's not AE's fault though.

Accel enrichment is BEST calibrated with a wideband though.

ugh, I have to get back to work. Trying to get our Saturn to drive well.
Joy!

Ronny

iTrader: (1)

Innovative WB still in box. bung in though!!

RBob

iTrader: (1)

I need to do a writeup on '7747 AE. . . There is a lot of adjustability in the '747 AE routines. Both the TPS and the MAP terms are lag filtered to provide the delta terms. The lag filter variables are based upon the coolant temperature (two 2d tables).

The delta TPS & MAP terms are then used to lookup the amount of AE to provide. This provides a PW based value. These two values and the IAC opening value are added together and then compensated for coolant temperature.

The result is the amount of async PW for AE.

The biggest problem is that the delta TPS AE PW table only goes to 25% delta TPS. For an engine being fed by 2" bore TBI(s) this table really needs to be doubled in size (to 50% delta TPS).

Else, at a true 25% delta TPS the AE is good, then at a true 50% delta TPS the AE is not enough. Then it can go the other way, rich AE at 25% delta and OK at 50% delta.

The delta MAP AE can be troublesome as on a stick car it is easy to produce a large sudden increase in MAP. Done at low speeds and the engine can be flooded out.

But MAP AE has benefit. First it is important to understand why AE is required. On a wet flow system (TBI) there is a portion of fuel wetting the walls of the manifold. There is also fuel in suspension within the airflow.

A major reason for AE is that when the throttle is opened the manifold pressure increases. This causes fuel to drop out of suspension and add to the fuel on the manifold walls and floor. Without AE the mixture reaching the cylinders would be lean.

The higher the airflow velocity, the less fuel will be on the walls. And, the less fuel will drop out of suspension with an opening throttle.

The TPS AE does not take into account the amount of manifold pressure increase. The MAP AE does. As long as it isn't too much at low engine speeds.

I've found that it is a real balancing act to get the AE all worked out. I ended up doubling the size of the delta TPS% PW AE table (to 50% delta TPS), and adding an AE vs RPM compensation table. From about 1800 RPM down I taper off the total amount of AE.

I then datalogged the WB, the delta TPS, the delta MAP terms, and the AE PWs from the TPS & MAP. With that information I was able to tune in the proper areas of the tables. I also cheated a little on teh VE table. Below 1400 RPM I increased the VE% above 75 KPa. This filled in for the AE that I tapered off in the RPM compensation table.

At this point I can run the engine up to 1800 RPM in first gear and just as fast as I can plant the go pedal to the carpet. No more bog, it just goes.

So, I can hear someone ask, what happens if the engine is at 3,500 RPM and the go pedal is planted? On the surface it would seem like there would be too much AE. The airflow is high, so not much AE is required, even if the MAP increases somewhat.

This gets interesting, as very little of the actual programmed AE is injected. This is because most of the available PW time is already taken up by the normal injection of fuel. And since the AE fuel is async it may or may not overlap the sync fuel pulses.

RBob.

Ronny

iTrader: (1)

so it appears my assumption of not enough AE may be incorrect!
at moderate rpms(2000-2500) and low speeds 25 mph or even at cruise speeds(60mph) possibly what i am experiencing is too much AE coming from high MAP's and subsequent massive PS with my stick car when i floor it. looks like i was going in wrong direction.! as i stated in post i was of opinion i was lacking in AE day one of mods and continuously upped AE in both TPS and MAP by 10% increments. possibly my adding AE at high MAP was not wise as was unwise adding 250% in TPS it is becoming clear the advantage of the Innovate WB. looking forwad to using it. soon. that will tell me what is really going on. i was just given the lag filter(accel enrich tps filter coefficient vs coolant temp) by TC this week and have not looked at it other than to read values (.18 or so @ 75 deg C or 175 F). still dont know what .18 means? should the LF spread out the AE over longer time if coolant cool on temp considering more fuel is wasted on plenum/runner walls? so low values of LF of .10 at low coolant temps is spreading out the time on? i seem to have to be careful(smooth accell/pedal) on open loop driving on low coolant temp in that the car will bog/stumble even more than when closed loop similar moderate driving. sorry still a bit confused.

RBob

iTrader: (1)

By low engine speeds and flooding I am in the 800 to 1200 RPM range.

At 2000 to 2500 RPM a good amount of AE is required.

The TPS lag filter (LF) values is intended to extend the duration of the AE. It can also increase the magnitude of the AE. Same for the MAP LF table values.

If I am correct as to how TC computes the LF values, the smaller the value the greater the duration of AE. A slower LF will create a larger delta TPS which causes it to be extended in duration.

If the AE is OK at normal operating temperatures and not enough while cold then increase the AE vs Coolant table at those coolant areas of trouble.

RBob.

ben73

Ahhhhhh.. This is why my 383 with 2 x 2" TB's (crossfire) shows a lean spike on the WB when I crack it wide open....
I've only had my WB for a week and it has already shown up many little areas that need attention.. Now I just need a "SpeedReader" to implement a bigger TPS AE table.

escort_ford84

With the 7747 ecu, what adresses are the lag filters located for the TPS and MAP AE?

escort_ford84

I have a question. Why is MAP AE after TPS AE? I mean, is MAP AE set up to come in after by Coef Filter? I would think vacuum would drop as soon as throttle blades open. MAP AE is 0 to 80%. My engine idles @ 7" vacuum, im assuming my MAP AE is activating @ 60% off idle. Am i right?

Pre-Tuner

iTrader: (2)

I know this is an old thread, but it has helped me a bunch, I'm finally tuning AE and my first couple of logs gave me interesting results...to me any way. Is it possible to need no MAP based AE at all? I haven't done any detailed AE tuning yet, but since I have a large TBI and am flowing relatively high pressure fuel, I thought I'd try to completely zero out my MAP AE since decreasing it seemed to be where I was headed. I also decreased my TPS AE quite a bit, but changing that to zero didn't work very well, so I have roughly 50% of what I started with. It still ended up dipping the AFR to 12.5 with a small crack of the throttle. I have a VAFPR, so that could have something to do with it. Here's one of my very short logs with an example of what I'm talking about, so please tell me what you think.

Ronny

iTrader: (1)

I would say it is possible to have TPS-AE only with no MAP AE. Reason being the first Ebelbrock TBI conversions I read had no MAP based AE. But AE MAP is helpfull. Grumpy once commented that it is possible to have an AEMAP event with no AE TPS event. Like steady throttle cruise and then approaching and climbing a steep incline. That large increase in load will see the MAP increase significantly and suddenly and may trigger AE MAP. Past week when I swiched over to VAFPR I noticed if I accellerated slowly from say 5% TPS to 50% over a say 1/8 mile on level road my MAP would increase and my A/F shoots to 20/1 and I will say I needed more MAP-AE OR my VE tables in that area are weak. Add to it a 7.4L TB makes MAP -AE more necessary?

Pre-Tuner

iTrader: (2)

I didn't think of it like that. The tuning I was doing was in a flat parking lot, so I should hit some hills. It almost makes more sense to adjust the MAP without having the TPS involved. It might make things easier (?). That should take some of the "art form" out of tuning AE, you think?

lakeffect2

Great thread:

Conversely, If you are just barely adding pressure, touching the gas pedal and your AFR goes to 10.0 and wants to stay there, is this likely to be the result too much or too long of MAP AE. If so, how does it get reduced?
I'm burning way too much fuel there and really not accelerating, just trying to hold rpm, likely on a flat road with little or no hill.

($8d mask with S_AUJP_V4)

Ronny

iTrader: (1)

Wants to stay there? That is a bit odd. It should decay out.

From DynamicEFI:"" The MAP and TPS Filter Tables:

There is two tables of filter values based on the engine coolant temperature. One table for MAP AE and another table for TPS AE.

•"AE - MAP Filter"
•"AE - TPS Filter"
The purpose of the filter tables is to create the delta MAP and delta TPS values. The smaller the filter value the larger the delta. This is important to understand as it affects three areas of AE.

Remember that the smaller the filter value in the table the sooner, larger, and longer lasting the delta MAP/TPS value will be.""


My observation this season of my WB logs is that with a gradual crawl from standing stop(manual trans) I was seeing a serious bog almost a stall. I have a 22.00 inch GM TBI 350CID with a rather cool intake. I do have IAT control. What I was seeing is grams/sec dropped down to near zero. Velocity dropped to nill. NB showed low V. and WB went to 20's. MAP went from 38 to 80's. I think fuel dropped out of suspension as well due to lack of VAC. That tells me I need more MAP AE. also TPS position went from 0% to 25% during bog. . I left TPS AE alone. What I did was increase the idle speed from 750 to 850 adding velocity(grams/sec) and more importantly I added considerable MAP AE bottom to top of table. I think I doubled what was there early this season. Each add of MAP AE it got better. Environmental temps are increasing also due to season.

lakeffect2

Not sure if I follow what wisdom you are trying to impart.
Sounds like "raise the values to limit the amount and duration of AE events". ???

Ronny

iTrader: (1)

The key is here: "Remember that the smaller the filter value in the table the sooner, larger, and longer lasting the delta MAP/TPS value will be.""

Increase that filter value and it wont last as long but will be lessened in A/F. That may work for you.

lakeffect2

GOT IT! Thanks. The ol' boy is out having a little proctology work done on the rear end today.

A posi and 3.42:1 gears being installed. I'll have to keep the beast away from strip joints for a few weeks. but can play with AE related AFR issues in the meantime.

I'll start by trying to double what's there to see what happens. Being conservative ib making changes, I've noticed some past changes as being so small to be meaningless or insignificant. Doubling should make a more dramatic change that should be noticeable, and I can modify from there.

I'll report back soon.

As always, thanks for the support.

Dave

lakeffect2

Been playing with AE TPS and AE MAP issues.
Setting a lower number helped in the AE TPS factors. Started with going higher, from 0.125, went to .200 and .300, and the bog off the line got worse, damn close to stalling at .300. Even taking it easy away from a light, not hammering it off the line got much worse. Going to a lesser number from 0.125 to 0.09 helped rid the bog immediately, with what seems smoother response, but admittedly minimal observation. may need more playing to nail it.

In AE MAP, higher numbers seem to be helping there. The AFR doesn't go immediately to 10.0 like it did before. I see slower progression down to 10.9-10.5 Still working on figuring out how to get it away from that low mark quicker, as I can see it kills mileage. Itt still hangs at those numbers there more than it should with so slight throttle pressure, and with little change in load.

But it seems to be improvement, heade3d in the right direction.

Dave

Ronny

iTrader: (1)

I have always struggled with AE. I think reason is a 350 cid with 7.4LTBI with a relatively large intake(Holley Projection) with larger than stock intalke port in head 180cc Edel RPM heads. I idle rich at 13.0 OL. manual trans. 800 rpms. 1.7 msec. When I crack throttle open gradually from stop I observe a delay in AE fueling. I have I think due to MAP increasing quickly to 70-90 as evident in analysis logs. If I let up on thottle and reapply throttle more quickly it provides another shot of fuel and that helps. I wonder if there is an AE table to invoke AE with lesser TPS movement? I understand AE IAC might do this? Not sure. AE may not be in effect with lazy throttle movement. BLMs are rich 120-125 off idle. The real culprit could be velocity of grams/sec falling to nill as well. Tomorrow I will increase idle speed . That will increase VAC and velocity. This season I have added a lot more in MAP AE(150%) to help and it really has. Muy filter values are about 70% of stock L03 so sooner in effect.

lakeffect2

A couple of thoughts come to mind. Similarly, I have a 58mm TPI throttle body instead of stock 48mm. The difference in the amount of incoming air when the throttle is cracked open is monumental. If nothing else got changed, that alone would require more fuel to match the increased air or you likely to be going lean.

I would think that the first instant of acceleration should be a %TPS change event, and fuel would need to be adjusted there accordingly, but it seems the number entered there is a factor or divider, not a multiplier, a lower figure in the box seems to get you more fuel.

Past that frist instance, I would anticipate it then becomes a MAP event, and the issue changes ( at least for my circumstance) to how long the event lasts. Additionally I believe I have changed a pulse width figure to help change how much.


So if you can work with the points of "how soon , how much and how long". that would seem the basics of it.. The confusing part is out of what seems like 30 variables, which ones actually need mods, and by what name in what program. It 's not easy to comprehend. (at least for me)

Like so many here, that part I'm still trying to get a full grasp on, but at least I feel I'm moving in the right direction.

Any input someone can further render on the how soon, how much, how long stuff in $8d would be greatly appreciated.


Dave

Eric_S

I have the EBL Flash on a Vortec 350/TBI. What should I be targeting for AFR while AE is activated?

RBob

iTrader: (1)

Rich enough to not pop out the intake, but not so rich that it drives the INT down.

RBob.

ULTM8Z

It seems the best results I get are when the AFR dips into the low 11's on AE. Richer than that and I can start to feel a slight stumble.

For my Miniram set up, it seems there are only really two areas that need the special attention. 1.) Initial take off at light throttle from a stand still, and 2.) A WOT take off from a stand still. Once up and running at speed, it seems to much more forgiving on AE.

But overall it's combination of feel plus the WB data for me.

For light throttle AE from a standstill, the crisper the throttle response on a blip of the throttle in neutral, the crisper it seems to be during actual driving. It allows me to basically sit in my drive way with my Ostritch emulator, and iterate around with the AE until the throttle response in neutral is as crisp as can be. Then go out for a drive and do extremely minor tweaks.

For mashing the throttle, it's a little more straightforward. When the tires light up instantaneously, I know I have it right.

Ronny

iTrader: (1)

Don't forget the throttle follower AE values for a smooth transition

Eric_S

Can you please explain what a throttle follower is? Thanks.

Ronny

iTrader: (1)

I believe it to be that on a normal throttle opening there is a slight drop in vac. So some of the atomized fuel charge is lost. To compensate added fuel is added. TF-AE

TF-AE is more important in a wet manifold (TBI)...

ULTM8Z

Yeah, I don't believe that function exists in the TPI (7730). Though I could be wrong...

Eric_S

In the EBL Flash, I don't have "TF - AE" or "TF - *" anything. All I have is "IAC - TF *".

RBob

iTrader: (1)

It is in the AE section:

AE - IAC Opening Fuel

Throttle follower (TF) is when the IAC is opened as the throttle is opened.

RBob.