Neither TC or LT1 edit have tables for AE vs TPS or AE vs MAP. This can be rather frustrating even though it's and MAF car. Has any one here ever found these tables?


Steve

 

read from MAF and calculated from Ve table.

 

That's a good question. JFYI, $EE doesn't HAVE to be MAF. I've got a buddy running speed density on his 96 impala SS and he loves it. He was going to go back to MAF but decided against it for various reasons.
The latest TC tdf file for the DA3 (93 f-body) has AE tables... not sure why the latest EE doesn't.

 

And what if you're not running a MAF?

 

I'd bet a ton of money that they're in there. It's just that no one has found them, yet

 

Exactly how much are we talking about?.

 

A tank of gas? That's a lot of money these days. Or one better, a track burger and drink

 

your screwed.

 

your wrong. Would you like to try again?

 

*A Tank of Gas* for the truck?.
MAP or MAF, it really doesn't matter which is the primary sensor.

I have to admit to not having worked on the EE code...........
So it's just an educated *guess* on my part, but it did work for me.

 

Wouldn't AE have to happen either way (MAF or SD)? Would straight fueling from MAF or VE be quick enough to respond to transients? Or maybe some form of AE was hard coded in- but that certainly seems like the hard way to go about things. Oh yea, I'll have to retract my bet. I don't really have a Ton of money, just some loose chage sitting in a Mason jar.

 

Ohh, just for get it then....

Look at how low the PE, TPS enables are. No need for AE when you so easily get into PE. Have you noticed how compact the new manifolding is (LT)?, again, no where near as what we were used to seeing, so with that much less *standing* air, no as much AE is needed.

 

maybe i already had this conversation sevral years ago with TC and lt1 edit. there is no AE on the EE and EEB calibrations. the reason is 2 fold.

1 its a fast reacting maf system. maf read surge volume covers Ae.

2. MAP table is referenced.

while you can run speed density you have to cover the AE with the VE table. this comes from the experience of tunning a couple of lt1's.ls1 is the same.

 

1. Except that makes absolutely no sense when in MAP only mode. The determining sensor for PE is the TPS.

2. yes, so that in PE it can calculate the commanded AFR.

Lots of folks develope workable crutches. Once they figure out how the system works, then better answers can be found.

One might note, you can run MAFless, but not MAPless. That in it's self should provide some huge clues as to whats going going on.

 

there are no clues to be had. the AE isnt handled like it used to be in a calibrated form. It is calculated from engine displacemnt.injector size MAF during transients states and the MAP sensor via the Ve table. Its a 16 bit calculation written into the firmware.they use manifold model.

 

You really need to spend more time thinking about what you write.
There is a MAFless mode, how many times do you need to hear that?.

Have you looked at any of the later codes, and seen how much of an effort there is, in reducing the MAF reporting errors?.

And of course AE isn't handled like it used to be, since it isn't used......

Like I said, crutching is one way to get something to work, thinking about it, gives much better answers.

Yes, when one doesn't have the ability to read and understand all the strategies, then one has to use the available clues. The inability of understanding the clues, leaves one with nothing but guessing, and just trying to crutch things into working.

BTW, how's your from scratch code project coming along?.

 

its fiarly obvious you have no idea WTF your talking about.Done much work with LS1 LT1 pcms ? just asking since you seem to have a bounty of unexplainable knowledge gathered from no experience working everyday with these pcms. you have yet to even impress me. and the fact is as far as i can tell you dont have a clue whats going on outside your little tiny world of strategy for your $58.

like i keep telling you i dont have time to finish my scratch code right now. this winter ill get back on it. thats not to say i dont have a very large chunk of it done.

if you really want to know how modern AE works look at the speed of the pids MAF and MAP relative to engine running. and where are these errors you keep talking about. 2 things engineers are concered with stioch and how to keep it. surge volumes during transient states in regard to stioch. there isn't an error per say. its a questionablevolume of fluid and how much of it made it from the duct to the plenum and down the runner.

also may want to ask yourself whats up with electronic throttles. might be some "clues" as to what the OEM's are really doing. but since i do contract work for oems or personally know an *** load of engineers maybe i just shouldnt comment.my info comes straight from the horses mouth wheras yours just comes out of well. your own *** maybe.

 

Hmm, well, how do you explain this snippet of code?, considering
***there isn't an error per say***
There sure seems to be alot of code to account for something you call **isn't much of an error per say**.

Do you have some phone numbers, and names to verify your work claims?. If you want to make a claim, you need to be able to back it up...

So that claim about Beta Testing was what?. You acted like it was just such a simple task to do that from scratch project.

**********************************************
* CALCULATE LOST AIR DUE TO A THROTTLE TIP IN *
**********************************************
BRSET ACTMLF01,B123,LA02
BRSET ACTMLF02,B122,LA02
BRSET ACTMLF03,B101,LA02
LDA A NTRPMX
CMP A KAERPMMX
BHI LA02 BRANCH IF RPM TOO HI FOR LOST AIR
LDA B NTPSLD FORM DELTA TPS FOR LOST AIR LOOKUP
SUB B OLDLATPS
BCS LA02 BRANCH IF NEGATIVE DELTA TPS
CMP B KAETPSMN
BHS LA04 BRANCH IF DELTA TPS >= LOW LIMIT
CLR LOSTAIRT
BRA LA10
LSR B SCALE FOR 12.5% TPS BREAK POINTS
CMP B #64
BLS LA05 LIMIT TPS TO 50%
LDA B #64
LSR A SCALE FOR 800 RPM BREAK POINTS
CMP A #64
BLS LA06 USE 3D TABLE IF < 3200 RPM
TBA ELSE, SET UP FOR 2D LOOKUP
LDX #F9
JSR P4LKUPQ LOOKUP AMOUNT OF AIR DUE TO METER LAG
BRA LA07
LDX #F9 LOOKUP AMOUNT OF AIR DUE TO METER LAG
JSR P4LKUP3D (LOST AIR)
STA A LOSTAIRT SAVE LOST AIR TEMP VALUE
LDA B LARFCNT
SUB B LARFCNT3
STA B LARFCNT4 LARFCNT4 = LARFCNT - LARFCNT3
LDX #F9
ABX
LDA A 0,X LADCAY4 = F9AEDCAY(LARFCNT4)
LDA B LOSTAIR3
MUL
STA A LOSTAIR4 LOSTAIR4 = LOSTAIR3 * LADCAY4
LDA B LARFCNT
SUB B LARFCNT2
STA B LARFCNT3 LARFCNT3 = LARFCNT - LARFCNT2
LDX #F9AEDCAY
ABX
LDA A 0,X LADCAY3 = F9AEDCAY(LARFCNT3)
LDA B LOSTAIR2
MUL
STA A LOSTAIR3 LOSTAIR3 = LOSTAIR2 * LADCAY3
LDA B LARFCNT
SUB B LARFCTLL
STA B LARFCNT2 LARFCNT2 = LARFCNT - LARFCNT1
LDX #F9
ABX
LDA A 0,X LADCAY2 = F9AEDCAY(LARFCNT2)
LDA B LOSTAIR1
MUL
STA A LOSTAIR2 LOSTAIR2 = LOSTAIR1 * LADCAY2
LDA A LOSTAIRT
STA A LOSTAIR1 LOSTAIR1 = LOSTAIRT
ADD A LOSTAIR2
ADD A LOSTAIR3
ADD A LOSTAIR4
STA A LOSTAIR LOSTAIR = SUM OF ALL LOSTAIRS
BNE LA16
CLR A
STA A LARFCNT2
STA A LARFCNT3
STA A LARFCNT4
LDA A NTPSLD
STA A OLDLATPS
LDA A LARFCNT
STA A LARFCTLL
** COMPENSATE LOST AIR FOR LV8 USE **
LDA A LOSTAIR

STA A CLOSTAIR SAVE COMPENSATED LOST AIR VALUE


Oh, I noticed you happened to miss answering the MAFless mode guestion.


BTW, Have a Nice Day

 

this isnt even worth a reply. but ill humour you today since you so love being an ***.

but lets say we stop calling this Lost air. its not lost air the air went in. the question is how much was actually used. no MAF is laminar. and no MAP is perfect. lets say for a second that we know that there are errors in reporting for both.we know by far and by in large that as airflow increases these error get larger in terms of percentage. in fact that tolerance from delphi and hitachi is just around 1.5-2% in the lower flow regions. but even as the error increases its overall effect on total airflow reading is dimished by the shear volume of air. when does this become critical. well lets think paldium reactants in the catalytic converter like stiochemetry.they are most effective at stiochemtry. so to manage nox2 combustion byproducts in spark ignition engines the cat must be at peak efficiency all the time. well without a way to calibrate for errors in both the maf and the map signals and a dithering stregy to equlize them over time you would be farther from your target of high catlyst effiecnecy. this would increase nox2 gas and result in not meeting emission standards.so whats the hardest thing to manage in an engine. OMG that would be transient state operation like during throttle tip in. .

so how do we compensate for this non perfect situation of Manifold filing and cylinder filling vs measured inputs. you create a table to figure in for accumlated error in reporting. its not AE in the sense you would normally think of Ae. the purpose of this table/calculation is not to enrich the mixture. its to maintian the mixture at or as close to stiochemitry as driveability standard will allow.

those tables are simply a way to dither the input from the maf/map input values into coherent output that averages the airflow statistically. its not lost air. its airflow error %

so to add to the comment about ETC. think about it. if you can control the opening rate of the apature into the system you can control the fill rate of the recieving body in a much more stable manner. therby reducing or eliminatng the need for AE and mainting your stiochemitry.the real purpose of AE is to maintian catalyist function across various throttle opening rates. the byproduct is increased driveability.if they had been able 25yrs ago they would have ditched Ae and gone with an airflow model and then just worked the errors for finer tweaking.also dont forget the architecture most of the systems discussed here do not have the tight emission control strategys.the newer pcms actually have many advatages.

and what is there about all this BS with Mafless mode. its like taking half of your windows driver files and delecting them. your attempting to place your ideas on management over the methods designed into the system. fix your MAF and make it work correctly and youd be surprised how well the composite systems actually work.

and in MAFless mode these pcms derive there transient functions directly from the VE table which btw must be recalibrated to function correctly.youll also notice that it is only used directly below 3200rpm. why do you think that is mr smart pants.

 

So rather then use the correct terms, your logic is just making up names as you see fit. It is lost air as far as the reporting error goes.

Of course it's not AE, since it's not AE, it's a reporting error. And this reporting error does need to be accounted for, as evidenced by the snippet of code I proved.

Back up and reread what you posted earlier, you said
**It is calculated from engine displacemnt.injector size MAF during transients states and the MAP sensor via the Ve table.**
The later PCMs can run perfectly well without a MAF, so your statement of fact is bogus, plain and simple.

Care to post the code that supports your claim (about the 3,200 RPM factor)?. No ones alledged that the VE table doesn't need reworking, so that revolation of your's isn't anything new.


**********************
BTW, still waiting for phone numbers, and names to support your claims about doing oem level work.
**********************

 

'


first of all i sign confidentiality/nodisclosure agreements(a standard practice). thats why i cant list names and phone numbers. secondly my first statement was accurate. your miss reading the code. and no im not making up terminology. just acept the fact that your wrong and move on with your life.

 

I don't know what you've been reading but he just proved that there is AE while you've proved nothing.
AE in the old sense used to be called pump shot in the carb days, now with the processing power AE isn't called AE anymore, it's something like "fuel to compensate for unmeasured air through transient." I just call it AE for simplicity. The difference between the later pcm's and the older ecm's are obviously different code for calculating the compensation but BOTH can be modified and BOTH don't require a MAF. So I think you're whole babble about confidentiality is complete . Either that or you just haven't a clue about what happens when in MAP mode with the $EE mask. I've GOT "AE" fuel and they're not from the VE table, can you explain that or am I still "scewed."

 

Now you're really being funny, are you suggesting you can't admit to who it is you even work for?. You make reference to them, and then say you can't say who *they* are. Talk about a credibility gap. BTW, the ones I've signed were just for the materials related to the employers work product, I generated, as well as any of their work product that I have have seen. You'd be the first other then possibly some Black Ops., that I've heard of that bars you from just admitting who it is you work for.

Your original statement was:
**read from MAF and calculated from Ve table.**

That's simply not true. The PE enable is set low enough that there's simply no need for AE. There is the option of not even needing the MAF, so your *arguement*, just falls apart, since when there is no MAF, it can't be read.

I posted code to support my position, and so far you've posted nothing but opinion. Unless, you can post something, other then what you **think** is going on, it's just as meaningful, as your claim to be working for oems, to me (and possibly others).

 

get a clue.

 

Maybe, he should say that he works for an oem. That way he can follow your lead, and just post any ole thing he wants, and then when asked for verification, he can hide behind alleged *confidentiality/nodisclosure agreements*.

Be as nasty as you want, it'll just come back to haunt you.

BTW, still waiting on snippets of code, or phone numbers to verify anything you've said. Or do we just get more excuses?.

 

I'd bet that with changing the %TPS-PE enables, and % AFR change for PE, along with some manipulation of the VE tables, would get things correct for any correctly matched set of components for a given car.

No amount of AE will make up for a mismatched converter/ rear gear/ or driver that doesn't know when to shift a manual tranny, thou. As they tighten up the code, and further optimze things, the more oem like the *hotrodder* is going to have to be, in order to get good results.

Having a properly though out FBW, will go along way towards having the perfect calibration. No excessive richness, and min emissions, with a min lose of HP. The new vettes are evidence of what a proper cal, and combo of parts can get ya (well with a little tweaking that is).

 

The impala isn't hitting PE mode when from a complete stop, he opens the throttle 30%... no hesitation and the pulse width shows more fuel being delivered than at steady flow for the same MAP/RPM... there is AE and we are running MAP mode. The MAF in the trunk is proof of this.
So I'm going to sit here and say again, please, for the love of *** don't tell me there isn't any "AE" or extra fuel being delivered because it is, I just don't have any control over it right now. Is that enough of a clue or do I need to pull something else out of my magic hat?

 

At this stage, I guess, the magic hat is your only option.