Page 6 of 7

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Fri May 03, 2019 6:44 pm
by ZHoob2004
Take a look at your "Warmup fuel manual Multiplier" and "Intake air temperature fuel Multiplier" tables.

Currently, at 80c coolant and 34c air your base fuel is being multiplied by 1.06 and 1.9 respectively. This means your calculated base fuel pulse, the fuel you would use under ideal conditions, is being multiplied before your dead time is added to give your final pulse width.

0.635ms (base pulse) * 1.06 (80c warmup muliplier) * 1.9 (34c intake air temperature) + 0.85ms (dead time) = 2.12889ms

I estimated the IAT number from the graph, but I think I was pretty close. I'm not really sure why the tables are like that, if that was a default or an artifact of the recent change from percentages to multiplier values (I don't think the underlying values should have changed)

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Fri May 03, 2019 7:03 pm
by AndreyB
ZHoob2004 wrote:
Fri May 03, 2019 6:44 pm
Currently, at 80c coolant and 34c air your base fuel is being multiplied by 1.06 and 1.9 respectively.
I would expect this to be pretty visible on the Formulas pane of rusEfi console?

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Sun May 05, 2019 2:57 am
by filip5
Does anyone know how Rusefi handles sudden engine load increases such as AC engaged or turning the steering wheel during idle or in higher rpms?

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Sun May 05, 2019 3:19 am
by AndreyB
filip5 wrote:
Sun May 05, 2019 2:57 am
Does anyone know how Rusefi handles sudden engine load increases such as AC engaged or turning the steering wheel during idle or in higher rpms?
At the moment it does not respond to those directly.

Technically there is automation idle control which would compensate for load change.

Technically AC engagement should be considered as a reason to bump target idle RPM, but not implemented at the moment.

There is also acceleration enrichment see https://rusefi.com/wiki/index.php?title=Manual:Software:Fuel_Control#Acceleration_Enrichment

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Sun May 05, 2019 8:16 am
by kb1gtt
Could FSIO increase IAC upon digital input? AKA known increased load could automatically increase air flow then the magic increases fuel.

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Sun May 05, 2019 2:50 pm
by AndreyB
kb1gtt wrote:
Sun May 05, 2019 8:16 am
Could FSIO increase IAC upon digital input? AKA known increased load could automatically increase air flow then the magic increases fuel.
You remember it right! FSIO formula #15 could be used to adjust target idle RPM

See https://github.com/rusefi/rusefi_documentation/tree/master/overview/FSIO

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Sat May 18, 2019 2:14 am
by filip5
I had hard time setting up the VE table properly so the engine could work on proper stoichiometric ratio with all temperature and variables changing.

To set this table right this is what I found out so I thought to share these finds.

1- Set the correct engine displacement volume in liters, mine is 1.86 Liters.
2- Set the correct injector dead time as per manufacturers specification, for my injector it is 0.85ms at 14 volts.
3- Set the correct injector flow in cm3/min. The correct value of the injection is not the manufacturers spec, but it is the spec divided by 0.8. My injector manufacturers spec is 440cm3/min but the actual injection as per test that I did was 545cm3/min, so one needs to divide the spec of the manufacturers injector by 0.8.
4- Set the IAt as per table in the picture attached varying as per intake air temperature.
5- Set the coolant temperature as per table in the picture but one can also leave these values at 100.
6- Set the VE values in table all at 100.

These values seem to work well.

Idling issues

Posted: Sun Jun 09, 2019 3:23 am
by filip5
I have Rusefi run on idle on separate Ve, advance ignition and Warmup Idle multiplier. I am doing this because the engine seem to start and run better on idle this way. I have the idle target set at 720 rpm and these 3 tables max rpm set at 725.

I have the normal Ve, ignition advance and the warmup table all start at 750 rpm. The thinking goes that as the rpm's increase Rusefi should take values from idle tables for all rpm's under 750 and then take the values from normal tables for values of over 750. This does not seem to happen. As rpm's increase above 750 , 1000 or more Rusefi still seem to take values from idle tables and not normal tables. The picture shows that ignition advance is stuck at 7.0 degrees for even higher rpm's that 750. 7.0 degrees is the max at idle table.

I can only get the normal tables to work if I set these values of Idle Ve, ignition and warmup to false.

The other issue is that the warmup idle multiplier table does not seem to work or at list not function during engine running. I also have a video which I can post if interested.

Can someone advise what should be done to get these items to work?

Attached are the pictures, the tune and the log files. Thank you

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Sun Jun 09, 2019 4:02 am
by Abricos
for verification purposes ...
your temperature in the tuner studio and on dashboard is it same ? And on engine colant - air temperature is it same ?

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Sun Jun 09, 2019 4:54 am
by filip5
Yes they are the same.

Re: Idling issues

Posted: Sun Jun 09, 2019 5:15 am
by andreika
filip5 wrote:
Sun Jun 09, 2019 3:23 am
The thinking goes that as the rpm's increase Rusefi should take values from idle tables for all rpm's under 750 and then take the values from normal tables for values of over 750. This does not seem to happen. As rpm's increase above 750 , 1000 or more Rusefi still seem to take values from idle tables and not normal tables.
RusEfi takes values from idle tables not because of the rpm but because of the TPS. That is, if the throttle is not pressed, then it's idle. Otherwise it's normal (working) mode. So if you want some different values for different RPMs on idle, it's ok, that's the idle table is for: the X axis is RPM, so you can set any values for any RPMs in those tables. But it will change to normal tables ONLY if the throttle is pressed. And this is good, trust me! ;)

Re: Idling issues

Posted: Sun Jun 09, 2019 5:24 am
by AndreyB
filip5 wrote:
Sun Jun 09, 2019 3:23 am
I have the idle target set at 720 rpm and these 3 tables max rpm set at 725.
Idle target is just what PID regulator is trying to get you. It's not a threshold for any logic. It's not "below 720 is idle, above is not idle".

It's more like "if throttle is not pushed and we run at 900, let's choke this engine - give it less air and try to get RPMs to 720"

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Sun Jun 09, 2019 12:03 pm
by filip5
Okay thank you

What about idle warmup multiplier?

It does not seem to make any difference in fuel injection when adjusting it while the engine is running
Is this graph suppose to perform any function and adjust fuel injection as the engine gets hotter?

Re: Deceleration Settings (91' NA Miata B6ZE)

Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2021 12:54 am
by filip5
Does anyone know how idle valve works on Rusefi?
How does it keep the target rpm? Changing frequency?

Re: Deceleration Settings (91' NA Miata B6ZE)

Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2021 1:51 am
by AndreyB
filip5 wrote:
Tue Feb 16, 2021 12:54 am
How does it keep the target rpm? Changing frequency?
No, frequency is constant but PID regulator changes duty cycle. The drama as always is about having good PID settings.

Re: Deceleration Settings (91' NA Miata B6ZE)

Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2021 3:36 am
by filip5
Thank you. That should work fine too.
Any idea what these numbers should be?

Re: Deceleration Settings (91' NA Miata B6ZE)

Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2021 3:42 am
by filip5
No worries. There is a sample table above. I will try it. Thanks again

Re: Deceleration Settings (91' NA Miata B6ZE)

Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2021 3:44 am
by AndreyB
filip5 wrote:
Tue Feb 16, 2021 3:36 am
Thank you. That should work fine too.
Any idea what these numbers should be?
https://rusefi.com/online/view.php?msq=28&dialog=idleSettings

Re: Deceleration Settings (91' NA Miata B6ZE)

Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2021 4:50 pm
by filip5
Thank you. With these values is attempting to maintain idle but still varies +_30rpms. I also hear the valve somewhat changing frequency but not sure because the frequency is not supposed to change.

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2021 5:02 pm
by AndreyB
Please use https://github.com/rusefi/rusefi/wiki/Support best practices

1) please do not text me. those texts are extremely uncomfortable for me

2) please post your tune and logs see https://github.com/rusefi/rusefi/wiki/Support

3) please consider posting vides on YouTube see https://github.com/rusefi/rusefi/wiki/Support

As of right now, too little information is provided, it's impossible to help you with so little data

I would also recommend hiring @abricos for a on-site visit. For a couple more months I am very busy moving house, there is no change I would be able to dive into this.

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2021 8:12 pm
by filip5
Ok. Thank you. Duly noted. I will advise how to move forward after I do some more testing.

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:33 pm
by filip5
Can someone take a look at this tune? I am truing to use the latest Rusefi hex but there is a conflict on PB8 which is an AUX valve. PB8 does not show as being used on Full pinout but when I program the board a conflict comes up: Pin "PB8" required by "a1" but it is used by "a1" 20201202@source. How can I release PB8 so I can use it?

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:38 pm
by AndreyB
https://github.com/rusefi/rusefi/wiki/HOWTO-upload-tune

At the moment you are not investing time to follow the support protocols. At the moment you are taking the route which is quickest for you while less efficient for people who would be helping you.

rusEFI online was created to make support more efficient. Please use it.

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2021 1:58 pm
by AndreyB
required by "a1" but it is used by "a1" looks like aux valve feature was broken in fresh firmware. I've just made a fix which maybe fixes it - i would be on https://rusefi.com/build_server/ in 20 minutes.

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2021 4:11 am
by filip5
Thanks for the response and trying to fix the issue. After I have tried programming it several times it seems to have fixed the problem.
One thing I want to let you know is that after I programmed board with my tune and as the problem would show as a conflict but
as soon as I hit the push button on controller board the conflict would disappear for as long as I did not make any simple changes such as VE tables
or ignition table or any changes which needed writing to controller which would create the problem again. Attached is the tune, just in case, seems ok now.

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2021 4:46 am
by filip5
Update
I am trying to use your support page and upload the tune but it seems that the problem showed up again as soon as I gave a name to the engine. I am not sure what the tune will show but this is the error again.
image.png
image.png (393.64 KiB) Viewed 16834 times
.

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2021 4:48 am
by AndreyB
it could be that the problem happens if you change settings, and the problem stays until you reset ECU? there is a good chance there is still a problem. you are the only one using those aux valves and as firmware is developed there is constantly a chance to break that functionality

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2021 5:03 am
by filip5
It looks like the issue is that these outputs are used for AUX valves. If I use them as injectors the problem does not persist.
Is there any hope to fix this or do I have to use the older version only?

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2021 2:41 pm
by filip5
I tried your earlier versions last night. It looks like the problem started with the November 27 2020 release, before that it was fine. Do you think this might be resolved in the future as you modify the program?

Re: Nissan on Frankenso #47

Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2021 5:55 pm
by filip5
Both of your updates , the update from yesterday that you did and today's release are working fine. No conflict. I probably made a mistake yesterday when I tested.
I did this test home not at the test bench, I hope is not affecting the operation of valves. I will let you know if there is a problem.
Thanks again for fixing it.