What is the fuel-air value. I think it's the ecm OR datamaster converting mv? to air/fuel ratio. Datamaster says "fuel-air value: units=ratio".

 

How about this idea..... fuel-air value=target a/f ratio. Getting warm??

 

I scan in a registered version of Datamaster but then view the scans in their newest BETA version. The newest BETA version displays the ACTUAL AFR.

For reference, the formula for converting to AFR when using the AFV is:

(6553 / AFV) = AFR

Tim

 

Now I'm confused, I thought it was IMPOSSIBLE to convert a NB O2 output to a/f ratio. Is this a new development? I like the beta version, thanks for the info.

 

It's showing what the computer is asking for, it is not show the actual AFR that the motor is running at.

 

Its one of two things, Crank AFR or Target AFR. Both can be bytes in the ALDL Datastream, depending on the application.

 

The AFR is the TARGET ARF (unless you are running the WB Hack with a real WB O2 installed).

https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...hreadid=214156

Tim

 

I am aware of that thread Datamaster was showing fuel-air value that is why I asked. Your thread didn't mention fuel-air value. The next thing is that I cant find the table target af vs rpm, like the one in your thread. I have the latest tdf and didn't see that table you posted......

 

There is no program out there that has that table. I wrote a custom program to extract that information from the binary based on the ANHT. Since the ECM uses a TARGET percentage ... we should be able to calculate that target and we can (simply by using the stated formulas in the ANHT hac).

I've revised this program recently and have been seriously thinking about whether to distribute it to the public or not. We'll see. IMHO, with this program I created, a 'wanna be for profit' chip guy could make money quick. I've been using the program for awhile and it works like a charm for WOT tuning. WOT tuning is an absolute breeze with my program. There is no guesswork. If the wideband says that you are 1.3 points lean at 4400rpms then you just change the AFR by 1.3 points at that RPM point. I also incorporated Mike Davis' wideband hac so that you can ADD and REMOVE his hac from the $8D quickly and easily. Basically you just drive to the dyno, insert the hac, run, make changes by AFR till you are happy, remove the hac ..... .. and then drive away with your newfound extra RWHP. I might still give it out. Maybe.

Tim

 

Tim I wish you would as it sounds like it would be great help for tuning and I have a lot of tuning to do on my car.

 

Shouldn't Tunercat make it an available table? It seems to be important.I don't think I can change the target wot a/f ratio.

How many guys are on here doing chips primarily for money? You seemed to be very protective of info or programs. The only guy I know that was the big chip seller was SDI. Haven't seen anyone else that has a web page dedicated to their "day with SDI". In fact doesn't ski have a website selling chips? There is another guy here that sells chips and made it known. But I don't think he needs your program. Other than that, why bogart your kewl stuff? Do you think a company is going to use your program? I'm just trying to understand...

 

btw, are you running thw wideband in place of the nb,fulltime?

 

First off - you can't just 'make it available'. It's technically NOT a table in terms of OEM binary code. Rather, this table is based off of two tables that are OEM binary code. These two tables are the WOT modifier tables (the normal % Change to AFR vs RPM and the % Change to AFR vs. Coolant). You can easily go in and change 'percentages' with these tables. However, the percentages don't really make sense to me and they don't really come out to changing the AFR by that exact percentage. I posted about this in 2000 and talked to TC about how the percentages don't really add up. In any case - it CANNOT be added to a TDF or a ECU file because it is technically not a table. It is a calculated table based off of 2 other OEM tables. Now, with that said - you might be able to convince Mangus (Mark Mansur ... ala TunerPro) to do it . But, you might not. Fact is, this calculation is dependent upon the MASK ($8D, $6E, etc.).

I'm still thinking about giving it out. Guys like Mark Mansur inspire me to be more giving of my work. I've been holding on to this program for a couple years now so maybe it is time to give it away. FWIW, the number of 'lurkers' on this board FAR FAR exceeds the number of normal posters. There are tons of lurkers ... and plenty of them program for money.

Tim

 

I guess that I'll just modify the pe adders to command "the right" a/f ratio(displayed in datamaster beta) , then modify the ve tables to get the actual a/f in line with the WB. It doesn't really seem to matter that much what the commanded wot is. I changed the commanded a/f ratio 8 times on the dyno and seen very little/no changes.

I would think the commanded a/f ratio will only "take hold" if the blm is lean going into PE. Maybe that is THE wot fuel correction(based on lean blm) in the code!!..?? Because it was never clearly defined on what/how the ecm compensates at wot...???

I don't use tunerpro that much but I plan on donating what I can. Mark is a cool guy and I like what he's doing. Besides, if some company steals your program then you'll be the one raking in the scrilla.

 

I don't mean this in a negative / personal way:
You are 100% wrong. Maybe it's the program that you are using that has led you to this conclusion? But, that statement is absolutely wrong. The PE modifiers (Coolant and RPM) have a HUGE affect on the actual WOT AFR. I don't know why you would say otherwise (especially after that huge post I made about a month ago that showed how PE BPW is calculated!)? The possible problem is that you have to change them A LOT in order to see an actual change on the Wideband. Maybe you aren't changing them a lot. This is the basis for my initial complaint to tunercat and my initial complaint/advice to members of this board about using those 'percentages' in the "PE % Change to AFR vs. XXX".

Many many many times I have used my program to change the target AFR and the actual AFR always change to a similar extent. Here's a REAL WORLD scenario on the same day when I ran my 11.6@117mph. I did a test run on a side street and the wideband was showing 11.0:1. I opened up my program and changed the target AFR by increasing it 1.5 points. I then did another WOT run and my wideband AFR was 12.5:1. Like I said - changing those tables has huge consequences as long as you know how to change them.

It doesn't matter. I have decided to give my program away for free. I'll be posting it shortly.

Tim

 

Furthermore - I really REALLY REALLY think that you need to reread this post after saying everything you have just said. Everything you have just said is basically wrong ... and I have explained it all in my previous post ...

https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...hreadid=214156

Tim

 

I know that sounded totally off. But I said that because of the car I was tuning didn't respond(enough) to changes I made. So I went into the ve tables and BOOM, instant wot a/f ratio command. So it might go back to what you said bout the PE percentage change to a/f ratio vs rpms. You are saying that it needs moved alot to see changes with a WB, right? Well, I changed it 10% and more, with little actual changes(verified by WB) . Anything under that is minute changes to a/f ratio. It just didn't seem right. I might have speculated on some stuff in the thread but this is what I seen. I'll add that was on one car I tuned. Now that I think about it, the injectors was static.....Uhh... maybe I should shut up now.....

Well, one question When do I get to try your program? You have made the right choice to share it.!!!

 

The injectors being static explains a lot. However - don't underestimate the differences between programs. When TunerCat shows 10% for a particular PE value ... TunerPro and GMEPro show 20%. Those programs give a twofold difference as compared to TunerCat. Thus, you see PE changes easier with those programs. I have no clue why the $8D ECU and EPE are different as compared to TunerCat's $8D TDF for the PE stuff. But, the difference is there. A 5% change in TunerCat will be a 10% change when using GMEPro or the current $8D ECU.

Tim

 

I knew there was something going on...that's gank!