Having a hell of a time with AE
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
From: Sacramento
Car: 91 RS
Engine: 350 TBI
Transmission: WC T5
Axle/Gears: 3.42 Posi
Having a hell of a time with AE
It's a stock H/C/I L05, and I for the life of me can't get rid of the rich spike (11 AFR) immediately after a part throttle acceleration followed by a lean spike (Up to 16). I zeroed all my MAP based AE to try and make it easier for me, because I was not even sure which (MAP or TPS) was responsible. I'm talking normal driving here, the TPS is barely breaking 10%.
Since it's going rich, then lean, I want less fuel over a longer duration, right? So I should be lowering the AE TPS PW, and also lowering the TPS filter to drag it out a bit? Or perhaps just leaving the PW where it is, and only lowering the filter coef. to drag it out?
Since it's going rich, then lean, I want less fuel over a longer duration, right? So I should be lowering the AE TPS PW, and also lowering the TPS filter to drag it out a bit? Or perhaps just leaving the PW where it is, and only lowering the filter coef. to drag it out?
Supreme Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,337
Likes: 26
From: Wesley Chapel, Florida
Car: 1991 Camaro Z28
Engine: Dart SHP 406ci T88 turbo
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: QP 35 spline Ford 9" 3.50 gears
Re: Having a hell of a time with AE
It's a stock H/C/I L05, and I for the life of me can't get rid of the rich spike (11 AFR) immediately after a part throttle acceleration followed by a lean spike (Up to 16). I zeroed all my MAP based AE to try and make it easier for me, because I was not even sure which (MAP or TPS) was responsible. I'm talking normal driving here, the TPS is barely breaking 10%.
Since it's going rich, then lean, I want less fuel over a longer duration, right? So I should be lowering the AE TPS PW, and also lowering the TPS filter to drag it out a bit? Or perhaps just leaving the PW where it is, and only lowering the filter coef. to drag it out?
Since it's going rich, then lean, I want less fuel over a longer duration, right? So I should be lowering the AE TPS PW, and also lowering the TPS filter to drag it out a bit? Or perhaps just leaving the PW where it is, and only lowering the filter coef. to drag it out?
Moderator
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 18,432
Likes: 233
From: Chasing Electrons
Car: check
Engine: check
Transmission: check
Re: Having a hell of a time with AE
Since it's going rich, then lean, I want less fuel over a longer duration, right? So I should be lowering the AE TPS PW, and also lowering the TPS filter to drag it out a bit? Or perhaps just leaving the PW where it is, and only lowering the filter coef. to drag it out?
Note that this final value is the two PW's added together then compensated for by the CTS & RPM tables. By looking at the two PW columns (mapAE & tpsAE) you can get an idea of which is contributing when along with how much.
RBob.
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
From: Sacramento
Car: 91 RS
Engine: 350 TBI
Transmission: WC T5
Axle/Gears: 3.42 Posi
Re: Having a hell of a time with AE
About how many tenths of a second does it take for a PW adjustment to make it through the engine and register on the WB?
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,962
Likes: 5
From: Moorestown, NJ
Car: 88 Camaro SC
Engine: SFI'd 350
Transmission: TKO 500
Axle/Gears: 9-bolt w/ 3.23's
Re: Having a hell of a time with AE
During sudden throttle transients or high load, there will only be a couple hundred milliseconds or so for the AFR to register on the WB if its within a foot or two of the exhaust ports.
Also, from my experience, its easier to keep the TPS and MAP AE seperate. The ammount of fuel required from the fuel settling out in the manifold is mainly a function of MAP as the rise in pressure allows the gas to settle out if the manifold temp is below the boiling point of most of the fuel components. A hot intake manifold will typically require no AE at all while a large, cold manifold will take everything you can give it. Basically the MAP AE will typically need to be active for up to a few seconds with the fuel volume determined by the temperature of the intake manifold itself.
The TPS AE is mainly for compensating in delays in fueling. Even the later computers that calculate the pulsewidths for the injectors in real time for each cylinder have some lag due to the sensors and such. The earlier ECMs had the fuel calcs fixed at 80 Hz, so during certain conditions you can experience a decen ammount of lag in the fueling when you slam the throttle down. This will typically appear as a very short lean spike. The engine will very momentarily hesitate and then take off like normal. Giving a few hundered milliseconds of TPS AE is really all thats needed to compensate for this.
Also, from my experience, its easier to keep the TPS and MAP AE seperate. The ammount of fuel required from the fuel settling out in the manifold is mainly a function of MAP as the rise in pressure allows the gas to settle out if the manifold temp is below the boiling point of most of the fuel components. A hot intake manifold will typically require no AE at all while a large, cold manifold will take everything you can give it. Basically the MAP AE will typically need to be active for up to a few seconds with the fuel volume determined by the temperature of the intake manifold itself.
The TPS AE is mainly for compensating in delays in fueling. Even the later computers that calculate the pulsewidths for the injectors in real time for each cylinder have some lag due to the sensors and such. The earlier ECMs had the fuel calcs fixed at 80 Hz, so during certain conditions you can experience a decen ammount of lag in the fueling when you slam the throttle down. This will typically appear as a very short lean spike. The engine will very momentarily hesitate and then take off like normal. Giving a few hundered milliseconds of TPS AE is really all thats needed to compensate for this.
Moderator
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 18,432
Likes: 233
From: Chasing Electrons
Car: check
Engine: check
Transmission: check
Re: Having a hell of a time with AE
With a TBI system an injector fires every time a cylinder fires. This gets tricky as this means that at firing time another cylinder is halfway (90 deg) through the intake stroke. With the next in line at the beginning of the intake stroke (I am ignoring cam timing such as intake opening BTDC and closing ABDC).
The transport delay through the engine is dependent upon RPM. At 1,000 RPM it takes 120 msec from an intake to intake event on a single cylinder. At 2,000 RPM that becomes 60 msec. Usually once over 2,000 RPM the need for AE tapers off (intake velocity reduces wall wetting).
With the engine starting to exhaust prior to the intake stroke, that time can be made at 3/4's of a full cycle. Or 90 msec at 1,000 RPM and 45 msec at 2,000 RPM. With it extending to the full cycle time to complete the exhaust stroke (120 & 60 msec).
A WB sensor can easily lag another 200 to 250 msec. There will also be some lag in the WB controller. This would be dependent upon the level of filtering and the firmware update rate.
There is then the time it takes to travel out the port and down the exhaust pipe.
Worse case at 1,000 RPM for just the values I listed is: 12.5 + 120 + 250 = 382.5 milli-seconds. Or over 1/3 of a second.
RBob.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
mhatfield 14
Tech / General Engine
5
Oct 24, 2015 07:48 AM
novaderrik
Transmissions and Drivetrain
3
Aug 10, 2015 12:44 PM






