being as i lack alot of your coding abilitys. im working on it it just takes alot of time. i have this piece of maf table code from the $6e cal. question i have is how would one make this a single table ?? i relize that having one table would free up a bit of code space and having one scaller would work alot better then having 6 and would allows the use of a maf translator to be much much simpler.

heres the code snipet.

;==============================================
; DIGITAL MASS AIR SENSOR
; FREQ RANGE: 34 - 150 hz
; PERIOD: 927 - 437 BIN
; RANGE : 1490 CNT'S
;==============================================

;----------------------------------------------
; MASS AIR FLOW TABLE #1
;
; ARG = GMS/SEC + (256/SCALAR)
;
;----------------------------------------------
LC5B3 FCB 23 ; TABLE SCALAR
;
LC5B4 FCB 8 ; 8 + 1 LINE TABLE
;
; g/Sec BIN VDC #/HR
;----------------------------------
LC5B5 FCB 93 ; 8.4 0 0.00 0
LC5B6 FCB 36 ; 3.2 64 0.18 25
LC5B7 FCB 50 ; 4.5 128 0.37 35
LC5B8 FCB 69 ; 6.2 192 0.55 48
LC5B9 FCB 93 ; 8.4 256 0.73 65
LC5BA FCB 121 ; 10.9 320 0.91 84
LC5BB FCB 155 ; 14.0 384 1.10 108
LC5BC FCB 197 ; 17.7 448 1.28 137
LC5BD FCB 248 ; 22.3 511 1.46 172
;----------------------------------------------


;----------------------------------------------
; MASS AIR FLOW TABLE #2
;
; ARG = GMS/SEC + (256/SCALAR)
;
;----------------------------------------------
LC5BE FCB 48 ; TABLE SCALAR
;
LC5BF: FCB 8 ; 8 + 1 LINE TABLE
;
; gms/SeC BIN VDC #/HR
;----------------------------------
LC5C0 FCB 119 ; 22.3 512 1.46 172
LC5C1 FCB 133 ; 25.0 544 1.55 193
LC5C2 FCB 147 ; 27.6 576 1.65 213
LC5C3 FCB 163 ; 30.6 608 1.74 236
LC5C4 FCB 180 ; 34.1 640 1.83 264
LC5C5 FCB 198 ; 37.1 672 1.92 287
LC5C6 FCB 217 ; 40.7 704 2.01 314
LC5C7 FCB 237 ; 44.5 736 2.10 343
LC5C8 FCB 254 ; 47.7 768 2.19 368
;----------------------------------------------



;----------------------------------------------
; MASS AIR FLOW TABLE #3
;
; ARG = GMS/SEC + (256/SCALAR)
;----------------------------------------------
LC5C9 FCB 83 ; TABLE SCALAR
;
LC5CA FCB 8 ; 8 + 1 LINE TABLE
;
; gms/SeC BIN VDC #/HR
;----------------------------------
LC5CB FCB 147 ; 47.7 768 2.19 368
LC5CC FCB 158 ; 51.2 800 2.29 395
LC5CD FCB 170 ; 55.1 832 2.38 425
LC5CE FCB 182 ; 59.0 864 2.47 455
LC5CF FCB 195 ; 63.2 896 2.56 488
LC5D0 FCB 209 ; 67.8 928 2.65 523
LC5D1 FCB 223 ; 72.3 960 2.74 558
LC5D2 FCB 238 ; 77.2 992 2.83 596
LC5D3 FCB 253 ; 82.0 1024 2.93 633
;----------------------------------------------


;----------------------------------------------
; MASS AIR FLOW TABLE #4
;
; ARG = GMS/SEC + (256/SCALAR)
;----------------------------------------------
LC5D4 FCB 135 ; TABLE SCALAR
;
LC5D5: FCB 8 ; 8 + 1 LINE TABLE
;
; gms/sec BIN VDC #/HR
;----------------------------------
LC5D6 FCB 156 ; 82.3 1024 2.93 635
LC5D7 FCB 166 ; 87.5 1056 3.02 676
LC5D8 FCB 176 ; 92.8 1088 3.11 716
LC5D9 FCB 187 ; 98.6 1120 3.20 761
LC5DA FCB 198 ; 104.4 1152 3.29 806
LC5DB FCB 210 ; 110.7 1184 3.38 855
LC5DC FCB 222 ; 117.1 1216 3.47 903
LC5DD FCB 237 ; 125.0 1248 3.57 965
LC5DE FCB 255 ; 134.5 1280 3.66 1038
;----------------------------------------------


;----------------------------------------------
; MASS AIR FLOW TABLE #5
;
; ARG = GMS/SEC + (256/SCALAR)
;----------------------------------------------
LC5DF: FCB 207 ; TABLE SCALAR
;
LC5E0: FCB 8 ; 8 + 1 LINE TABLE
;
; gms/sec BIN VDC #/HR
;----------------------------------
LC5E1 FCB 166 ; 134.2 1280 3.66 1036
LC5E2 FCB 176 ; 142.3 1312 3.75 1098
LC5E3 FCB 186 ; 150.4 1344 3.84 1161
LC5E4 FCB 196 ; 158.5 1376 3.93 1223
LC5E5 FCB 207 ; 167.4 1408 4.02 1292
LC5E6 FCB 219 ; 177.1 1440 4.11 1367
LC5E7 FCB 230 ; 186.0 1472 4.21 1435
LC5E8 FCB 242 ; 195.7 1504 4.30 1510
LC5E9 FCB 255 ; 206.2 1536 4.39 1591
;----------------------------------------------


;----------------------------------------------
; MASS AIR FLOW TABLE #6
;
; ARG = GMS/SEC + (256/SCALAR)
;
;----------------------------------------------
FCB 255 ; TABLE SCALAR
;
LC5EB: FCB 16 ; 16 = 1 LINES IN TABLE
;
; gms/SeC BIN VDC #/HR
;----------------------------------
LC5EC FCB 207 ; 206.2 1536 4.39 1591
LC5ED FCB 213 ; 212.2 1552 4.43 1637
LC5EE FCB 219 ; 218.1 1568 4.48 1684
LC5EF FCB 226 ; 225.1 1584 4.53 1737
LC5F0 FCB 233 ; 232.1 1600 4.57 1791
LC5F1 FCB 240 ; 239.1 1616 4.62 1845
LC5F2 FCB 248 ; 247.0 1632 4.66 1906
LC5F3 FCB 255 ; 254.0 1648 4.71 1960
LC5F4 FCB 255 ; 254.0 1664 4.75 1960
LC5F5 FCB 255 ; 254.0 1680 4.80 1960
LC5F6 FCB 255 ; 254.0 1696 4.85 1960
LC5F7 FCB 255 ; 254.0 1712 4.89 1960
LC5F8 FCB 255 ; 254.0 1728 4.94 1960
LC5F9 FCB 255 ; 254.0 1744 4.98 1960
LC5FA FCB 255 ; 254.0 1760 5.03 1960
LC5FB FCB 255 ; 254.0 1776 5.07 1960
LC5FC FCB 255 ; 254.0 1792 5.12 1960
;----------------------------------------------

 

Not easy. The current 2D lookup routine can only handle a maximum of a 17 line (byte) table. So a new 2D lookup routine would need to be written. This code would need to be able to handle 16 bit math. Lots of time in development and run time.

The scalar term is used to maximize the resolution of that table. So by placing all of the data into one table would reduce the lower flow resolution to the detriment of driveability.

The only reason OEMs like MAF is due to the reduction in tuning effort. This saves money, lots of money. Once a MAF is calibrated it is a drop in. Changes to the platform no longer require extensive SD recalibration.

Can it be done, sure. Is it worth the effort? Can always go SD.

RBob.

 

ok i here your points all very valid points. is it possiabel then to consoldate some of the tables. reduce the number of tables to say three and by loosing some of those lookup pointers etc we pick up some space fore larger data tables. ?? this is all conjecture. i just think it would be simpler for using something like a translator or larger maf to setup with with fewer tables. im not sure how the 2d tabel look up instructions work thats why im asking. i get the thoery i just dont get the math. make 3 table the same size as table 6 ?? sound feasable i also get what your saying about low speed resolution. so there a need to keep the scaller term smaller for that very purpose.

as for the maf and why oems like it i agree its not to bad to tune if we could just eliminate some of the geuss work and create some hard data.

i had one other thought ive been thinking about a bit lately. would it be possable to make the code see the higher FQ of the later mafs ?? ie LT1 i see that most of the GM v6 ( except the GN uses a FQ based maf. ) i would be inclined they left the option out there its just how do you turn it on. and if my thinkng is straight weed need to create 16bit scaller to use the higher FQ's but i think thats a huge undertaking. im very open to idea thoughts suggestions. throw them out there.

 

Why are you so fixated on a MAF system when there are better & easier to tune systems at hand?

RBob.

 

just something to do and no one else is. i think it could offer driveability advantges over speed density in certian apllications IE large cams etc. just my thoughts.

 

I thought the same thing about the big cam use MAF but then I thought about it further. If you have a large cam and no chance of tuning a SD setup that usually means the cam is ment to have a very high powerband. Now if you use a MAF, don't you think it would be a royal PITA to have such a restriction in the intake? Hence the use of alpha N, or maybe a closed loop WB o2 SD . It would definatly be nice to see GM MAF systems working as well as their SD counter parts but it's a lot of work. If it's what you've got then use it to the best of it's ability. That's why I've still got TBI. That and I think people over-rate MPFI . Good luck.

 

to be fair maf can be very easy to tune. thing that take work is the fine tunning. also it would be good to maybe try to make the code more functional and better suited for todays high output applications. also there are some things in the pipe that might make less restrictive mafs for cheap a reality just have aero idea about the future of such things bascially becuase im not developing any of it. im just tyring to figure out ahead of time how to make the code & hardware get along so when and if it hits the street then it could be very benificial.

just preparing for the future my man. funny thing is i dont even own a v8 3rdgen much less a car with MAF( unless you count my friend scotts mpfi 3.1 v6 running a 1227302 with a ported maf and plenty of modfs). i just think its neat. ive got a honda with a 749 running $58 and im switching to a 727 with $8f and DIS the dizzy is making me pull my hair out.

i know a few folks who said no way thats gonna work ( reffering to the $58 749 swap ) and i know a few who are sekptical about the 727 with dis. take effort and im willing to put the work in but it would be nice to get some help here and there.

enough of my being on a rant. the maf systems are so under developed its not funny. i know bruce has done alot with the 148 $t31 stuff so i know there a future for the 3rd gen stuff just gotta make the hardware affordable and then make the code work with it.

 

You may want to switch to a P4 ECM. A P4 has an enhanced instruction set and runs at twice the speed. This will give you the CPU power to get a lot more accomplished in the same amount of time. Lots more RAM & I/O to boot.

RBob.

 

the 1227165 is a p4 ecm. the 1227730 is going to be tossed for a 727 and a gtp motor. its in an s-10 this will be most fun.

 

Well I'll be, it is. Shows how much I work with MAF stuff . Should be in good shape then.

RBob.

 

thats 1227730 should habe been 1227302 i got ecm brain death today.