Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Primary VE vs. RPM vs. MAP

  1. #1
    Tuner StarCaller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Cedar Crest, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    112

    Primary VE vs. RPM vs. MAP

    how come in the help file I see two digit numbers in the editor



    & in my editor window they look like this:



    (well, the 3d table looks kinda different, too....)

    should I just follow the help file & deduct/add the percentage numbers (e.g. 2.5%... depending on my scanned numbers) from this real different numbers here or do I miss out big time somewhere here?

  2. #2
    Advanced Tuner TiredGXP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    259
    What you are seeing in your tune file is GM Volumetric Efficiency (GMVE), as opposed to Volumetric Efficiency expressed as a %. Rather than adding of subtracting, you multiply this table by AFR% error.

    If you think this looks wierd, you should see what the stock LS4 table looks like

    2005 Grand Prix GXP - 5.3 LS4 - HP Tuned, MF catback, 1.8 rockers, K&N, Some day I'll finish putting the LS6 intake on

  3. #3
    Senior Tuner
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,579
    The only difference from the table you see in the help file and the table you see in your calibration is the X and Y axis. HPTuners uses the Cylinder Volume to represent the raw VE table (seen in your calibration) as typical Volumetric Efficiency values (0%-100%, upto ~350%) in early LS1 calibrations (pre-2004). You modify both table the same way, using the AFR Error %, or adding and subtracting units to/from it. The values seen in the "GMVE" table are in grams/kelvin. Nothing weird about it, it is still a standard VE table, don't get hung up on the representing values.

  4. #4
    Senior Tuner
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Laurel, MD
    Posts
    1,020
    no, it's not 'still a standard VE table,' not really.
    i like to think of it as a potential or normalized airmass table. it shows you efficiency of your motor, but in a more flexible, generalized way. it's not how efficient it is at SOME particular conditions, but ANY conditions. and because it already takes pressure and temp into consideration, it's one step away from being an airmass table.

    GMVE is not a real name for it, it's just something i came up with before i truly understood it, so it's actually kinda wrong.

    most importantly, adjusting it by AFR%error is wrong. the reason to 'normalize' the airmass is so you know the true breathing capabilities regardless of conditions. if you attribute all airmass changes to VE (or GMVE), your VE will fluctuate as the airmass will change due to conditions. FIRST you must normalize the airflow, THEN see how much change there really is still left, and it's actually due to changes in breathing capabilities.
    GMVE is cool because it's so expressive it's impossible to ignore the subtler points

  5. #5
    Potential Tuner
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ashburn, Va
    Posts
    3
    click on 5 instead of 1 (the numbers at the top of the screen when choosing tables.