Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2? - Third Generation F-Body Message Boards

Go Back  Third Generation F-Body Message Boards > Tech Boards > DIY PROM
Reload this Page >

Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

DIY PROM Do It Yourself PROM chip burning help. No PROM begging. No PROMs for sale. No commercial exchange. Not a referral service.

Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

Reply

Old 10-02-2018, 10:39 PM
  #1  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 137
Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

I am up and running S_AUJP v5 and waiting for ECM pins to arrive to pin F14 to 1227730 ECM with Innovate LM2 Wide Band setup.

Which WB flag choice do I make in the S_AUJP bin?

Thank You
T4Turtle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2018, 09:52 AM
  #2  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 137
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

It appears I need to run this adx file: S_AUJP v5 2030_D_2-WBo2 Innovate LC-1 and it appears the formula is setup correctly for the LM-2 with 0-5 volts and 0V = 7.35 AFR and 5V = 22.39 AFR.

Now looking at the S_AUJP bin it shows other WB options but not the LM2 and the LC1 option shows here but it shows 1 to 2 volts not 0 to 5 Volts. So I assume this will not work and another option should work like the AEM appears to be the same voltage range the there is the Raw data option.
T4Turtle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2018, 11:09 AM
  #3  
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,560
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

I’ll take a look when I get home…
I know I ran into issues trying to set up my AEM WB and ended up having to go through some customization with a lot of help from one of our resident gurus, 84Elky.

And then after that, I had to fine tune the conversion formula a little.

Meantime, you can take a look and see in this link… My stuff is toward the middle-end of the thread along with the resolution.

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/dfi-...-wideband.html
ULTM8Z is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2018, 12:17 PM
  #4  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 137
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

Thanks as always ULTM8Z!

I did find your post in my research, looks like raw data is the way to go and my formula should be (X * 0.05875) + 7.350000 per EagleMark over at gearhead-efi.com. I should be getting the pins for the ECM tomorrow, but am going on a fall cruise tomorrow morning for the weekend so I will not get to this until Sunday night or later. I just wanted to get everything all setup and ready to go.
T4Turtle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2018, 07:25 PM
  #5  
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,560
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

I looked at the S_AUJP v5 that I'm running and yeah, probably would go with the raw data approach like I did...
ULTM8Z is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2018, 09:07 PM
  #6  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 137
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

Thanks.

Good news bad news, good news is the terminals came in the mail today and I started wiring up the output cable then when i put the terminal in the connector it did not click in and would not stay in the connector. Turns out they sent me LT1 style pins instead of TPI.
T4Turtle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 11:03 PM
  #7  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 137
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

I have the ECM pinned to F14 from the LM2 but not getting any WB readings. I have the Raw output flag set and the Input pin flag not set so it reads pin F14 in S_AUJP bin. Then I Edited the definition in to the below settings:




Does this all look correct? I logged it and got nothing from it.
T4Turtle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2018, 04:14 PM
  #8  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 137
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

Also I just connected the ground to the chassis next to ECM along with other grounds using red wire from from output cable and white wire to pin F14. I'll test the output and change to engine ground if needed.
T4Turtle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2018, 08:06 PM
  #9  
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,560
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

Are you sure you're actually getting an output from the O2 sensor on the 0-5V output? Verified with a DMM?


To test the ECM side of the set up, simply get a 1.5V battery and tie the negative end to chassis ground and then the postive end going into pin F14. You should see an AFR readout being generated...

Here's how I have mine set up... it's a AEM 0-5V.



ULTM8Z is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2018, 01:53 PM
  #10  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 137
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

I did not verify I was hoping to just plug n play This helps thank you for the screen shots.
T4Turtle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2018, 02:24 PM
  #11  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 137
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

Do you think I need spaces in my equation? I have it without any so this with spaces: (X * 0.05875) + 7.350000, or this without:
(X *0.05875)+7.350000.
T4Turtle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2018, 03:24 PM
  #12  
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,560
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

not sure if it makes a difference... maybe try both ways and see?
ULTM8Z is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2018, 11:57 AM
  #13  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 137
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

Did not matter it is not seeing the WB and I verified out put and it was showing 5 Volts at 20.8 A/F and 2.7 Volts at 15.7. I adjusted the equation and it changes but it's not change as the A/F change. I added a ground for testing to the ECM ground also. It is acting like the ECM is not seeing this.

Last edited by T4Turtle; 10-14-2018 at 12:31 PM. Reason: spelling
T4Turtle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2018, 08:44 AM
  #14  
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,560
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

can you post a picture of the TP dash screen on the laptop?
ULTM8Z is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2018, 08:52 AM
  #15  
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,560
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

also have you tried pin A3?
ULTM8Z is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2018, 11:44 AM
  #16  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 137
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

Originally Posted by ULTM8Z View Post
can you post a picture of the TP dash screen on the laptop?

TunerProRT dash
T4Turtle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2018, 12:32 PM
  #17  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 137
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

I can try pin A3 tonight after work. Here is a shot of the data in list view. It was showing 7.xx A/F so I added to the equation to get it to match the key on 20.85 A/F but no change when I started it with a different reading.

T4Turtle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2018, 02:48 PM
  #18  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 137
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

Nothing reporting on A3 either. I also tried it with pin set and not on each one as well as another ECM. Maybe this formula is incorrect? I am getting 9.70 for a reading with this equation (X * 0.05875) + 7.35000.

Why would my formula be any different from another if it is a simple linear 1-5 volt reference?
Attached Files
File Type: zip
S_AUJPv5WB.zip (112.4 KB, 3 views)

Last edited by T4Turtle; 10-16-2018 at 06:38 PM. Reason: Added files
T4Turtle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2018, 06:47 PM
  #19  
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,560
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

Can you send me your adx file? I'll run it on mine and see if the ECM picks up the O2 readout. If it works on mine, then it's something up with your hardware setup.
ULTM8Z is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2018, 07:11 PM
  #20  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 137
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

I thought you might ask so I edited my previous post before seeing your post. Also added both bins and xdf.
T4Turtle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2018, 07:27 PM
  #21  
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,560
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

Have you tried having one of the gauges show the raw A/D data? i.e., WB (Raw Data)?

That would at least tell you if the ECM is even seeing the input from the WB. If it is, then it's something in how you set up the coversion for the WB (Gauge).
ULTM8Z is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2018, 08:19 PM
  #22  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 137
Re: Which WB Option choice in S_AUJP for LM2?

I set the raw data a/d output in the bin but nothing specific for the gauge in the bin that I can see. I then setup the adx and see raw data (gauge) in the Values list of the ADX and just adjusted this and tried it, but I do not see this specific as a PID showing as raw data gauge I do see WB AFR gauge and this adjusted with my equation but also did not follow the actual A/F gauge when running, both now show 9.70 A/F now.
T4Turtle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
skiroulertx447
Exhaust
6
10-09-2012 09:42 PM
noff1313
TBI
4
03-02-2011 08:57 AM
badazcj1
DIY PROM
2
11-30-2010 09:46 PM
speedmachine
DIY PROM
8
04-16-2010 11:36 AM
dijock94
Engine/Drivetrain/Suspension Parts for Sale
0
11-16-2009 04:02 PM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Advertising
Featured Sponsors
Vendor Directory
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: