idle surging help

[detroit]

get the beta.
then use the compair function and you will see all the changes he made...you are getting some good help...

[gokussx4]

get the beta.
then use the compair function and you will see all the changes he made...you are getting some good help...

Yup getting the beta installed tonight. Don't get me wrong here guys I really do appreciate the help

I just don't like following blind commands, I think most will agree with that

[edcmat-l1]

I appreciate the information you are giving me but not everything you are saying makes sense. If it doesn't make sense I won't do it, period. So do me a favor and explain why you are changing something and how it applies. If you do this I will follow instructions to a T.

There really isn't any reason to get fussy about which parts I have chosen to follow.

BTW the tps % resets it self after you adjust the tb screw. You just have to turn the car from on to off several times. Mike Norris taught me this and it has been proven to be accurate for my model car.

Thanks again.

I don't have time to explain every little detail. If you have a problem making an adjustment I tell you to make, yet you think that VE makes sense, then we have issues.

As for resetting the TPS, you are on the verge of it NOT resetting to zero. The further out the TPS is, the less likely it is to reset to zero, regardless what you do. That is why you have to slot the sensor, or drill the throttle body.

[gokussx4]

I don't have time to explain every little detail. If you have a problem making an adjustment I tell you to make, yet you think that VE makes sense, then we have issues.

As for resetting the TPS, you are on the verge of it NOT resetting to zero. The further out the TPS is, the less likely it is to reset to zero, regardless what you do. That is why you have to slot the sensor, or drill the throttle body.

My understanding of the TPS voltage maximum (before it starts reading greater than 0% all the time) is .75 V. Can anyone verify this information to be true or false?

[gokussx4]

I don't have time to explain every little detail. If you have a problem making an adjustment I tell you to make, yet you think that VE makes sense, then we have issues.

As for resetting the TPS, you are on the verge of it NOT resetting to zero. The further out the TPS is, the less likely it is to reset to zero, regardless what you do. That is why you have to slot the sensor, or drill the throttle body.

From what I am reading, there is no reason to slot the sensor unless you are outside the range of .3V and .9V:

http://www.ls1lt1.com/forum/showthread.php?t=42868

This is one of many posts that claim this to be true. Not saying its true but it seems to be a widely accepted answer. I clearly am within that range.

If anyone has experience with tps voltage and how its applied in the PCM please reply.

Thanks!

[gokussx4]

Thanks for that VE table and pointing out my data entry error on the etc area scalar, big help there.

So on your comment about the commanded being 12.53, I read from dan masic's guide that you should tune ve at a commanded 12.5. Would you mind explaining why you shouldn't tune at a commanded 12.5? Thanks so much edc!

[edcmat-l1]

So on your comment about the commanded being 12.53, I read from dan masic's guide that you should tune ve at a commanded 12.5. Would you mind explaining why you shouldn't tune at a commanded 12.5? Thanks so much edc!

If I need to explain, maybe you should go back and make sure you read right.

From what I am reading, there is no reason to slot the sensor unless you are outside the range of .3V and .9V:

http://www.ls1lt1.com/forum/showthread.php?t=42868

This is one of many posts that claim this to be true. Not saying its true but it seems to be a widely accepted answer. I clearly am within that range.

If anyone has experience with tps voltage and how its applied in the PCM please reply.

Thanks!

If you have all the answers, why are you here asking questions, and why is your tune a mess?

If you look at your data log, your TPS voltage is at about .4-.7% with an IAC count of about 150 or so. So, it is logical that if you crank the blade open some more, you will be pushing the magical 1%. If you insist that you don't need to zero it based on what you've read, I guess you don't need any help with that. You would think though, based off what your tune looks like and all of the problems you're having, you would listen. Guess not......

[gokussx4]

1) The VE is still whacked. You're not logging your A/F right. You're logging it at a commanded 12.53.
2) The ETC scalar is off one decimal. BIG problem there.
3) Your IAC counts are too high. You need to crack the blade and zero the TPS, or crack the blade, remove the TPS and slot the holes, or drill a small hole in the blade. You need to get the IAC counts around 40 when at op temp, in park. Don't do anything else until you get this set properly.

Start with this tune. The fueling should be pretty close, if you're injector flow rate is correct. Check the fueling, and if it's pretty close, first thing you should do is get your IAC counts in line.

Attachment 27784

How else do you tune a ve table? You have yet once again answered my question with a blanket answer that has no supportive detail. I have good supporting information in Dan Maslic's guide that says that is the only way to tune VE.

I don't want a bitching match back and forth here. The reason I posted was to find out what else would be causing a surging issue and etc area scalar was the answer I was looking for.

EDC I wish you the best and I thank you for your time but your attitude could use some improvement.

[edcmat-l1]

How else do you tune a ve table? You have yet once again answered my question with a blanket answer that has no supportive detail. I have good supporting information in Dan Maslic's guide that says that is the only way to tune VE.

I don't want a bitching match back and forth here. The reason I posted was to find out what else would be causing a surging issue and etc area scalar was the answer I was looking for.

EDC I wish you the best and I thank you for your time but your attitude could use some improvement.

MY attitude could use improvement? OKKKAAAYYYYYY.

You tune a VE table to stoich. I don't know where you got 12.5:1 as being stoich for any kind of gasoline based fuel, but whatever.

Maybe the reason I appear to have a bad attitude, is you come on here looking for advice, I give you some, and you choose to ignore it, because you read some information somewhere, that is either flat wrong, or you apparently misunderstood it horribly.

Check your help files in HPtuners. Read the SD tuning by Bill. Then come back and tell me if you should be tuning your VE to 12.5:1.

You can set all of your idle air specifics exactly as they should be, and if your base A/F is 12.5:1 and your VE looks as it does, you will have idle surging issues every time.

Have a good day sir. Good luck with your toon.

[gokussx4]

MY attitude could use improvement? OKKKAAAYYYYYY.

You tune a VE table to stoich. I don't know where you got 12.5:1 as being stoich for any kind of gasoline based fuel, but whatever.

Maybe the reason I appear to have a bad attitude, is you come on here looking for advice, I give you some, and you choose to ignore it, because you read some information somewhere, that is either flat wrong, or you apparently misunderstood it horribly.

Check your help files in HPtuners. Read the SD tuning by Bill. Then come back and tell me if you should be tuning your VE to 12.5:1.

You can set all of your idle air specifics exactly as they should be, and if your base A/F is 12.5:1 and your VE looks as it does, you will have idle surging issues every time.

Have a good day sir. Good luck with your toon.

Dan Maslic's book states you want to command afr to 12.5:1 when tuning VE and MAF. There is no misreading about this. The reason he provides states that logging the ve when you have commanded an afr to 12.5:1 is much easier than having the commanded jump when temperature rises and map changes.

Because Mike Norris told me that Dan Maslic know's what he is doing I assumed that his book also was the right way.

I am just really getting into tuning and want to understand the math behind the VE table. So I hope you can understand why I am asking "why".

This is not a hit against you or your knowledge but honestly there are too many tuner's out there that say do this but can't explain why.

Dan at least tried to explain that determining the Volumetric Efficiency at MAP and RPM are much easier when you have made major changes to your engine than by leaving the stock table in place.

To answer your question as to why I am evening asking questions: isn't it apparent I want to learn more. I think those that want to learn the why will agree.

[Higgs Boson]

Change your OLFA table to 1.0 from 176 to 212 degrees and your commanded AFR will never change from stoich after you warm the car up to operating temp (unless you go into PE but you can adjust that, too)....

When you get your VE tuned, change OLFA table back to stock.

There are some very good guides on this website you should read. The steps are outlined clearly.

The only reason to command 12.5 when tuning is for WOT/PE. When that part of your VE is error free, you use the PE tables to command what you want for WOT and never need to change your VE table again.

For idle, make sure your TB scalar is exact.
Dial in the TB set screw to the correct voltage reading.
Run the RussK idle config (what is that? search and read - it helps tune your RAF/Base Running Airflow)
Tune your VE, as many cells as possible and extrapolate, smooth, etc and then do it three more times
Re-do the Base Running Airflow (RAF)

Redo VE/RAF until it's juuuuussst right.

Then test your results, change Cracker and Follower as necessary, etc.

[axekick]

No one on here has given you bad advice. They answer your question exactly and you don't want to hear it. There are a lot of different guides out there and some might suggest differing methods from the others but the most recent ones agree on the fundamentals. You should read over more of them, especially the ones in the help file of your software and compare, and for God's sake listen to the advice you get on here. If you want to understand why, search it out. You'll be able to find info to support good advice.

[edcmat-l1]

Dan Maslic's book states you want to command afr to 12.5:1 when tuning VE and MAF. There is no misreading about this. The reason he provides states that logging the ve when you have commanded an afr to 12.5:1 is much easier than having the commanded jump when temperature rises and map changes.

Because Mike Norris told me that Dan Maslic know's what he is doing I assumed that his book also was the right way.

I am just really getting into tuning and want to understand the math behind the VE table. So I hope you can understand why I am asking "why".

This is not a hit against you or your knowledge but honestly there are too many tuner's out there that say do this but can't explain why.

Dan at least tried to explain that determining the Volumetric Efficiency at MAP and RPM are much easier when you have made major changes to your engine than by leaving the stock table in place.

To answer your question as to why I am evening asking questions: isn't it apparent I want to learn more. I think those that want to learn the why will agree.

I'm telling you, you are wrong. Go back and read again.

I'm done...........

[edcmat-l1]

Dan Maslic's book states you want to command afr to 12.5:1 when tuning VE and MAF. There is no misreading about this. The reason he provides states that logging the ve when you have commanded an afr to 12.5:1 is much easier than having the commanded jump when temperature rises and map changes. .

You're reading it wrong.

This is not a hit against you or your knowledge but honestly there are too many tuner's out there that say do this but can't explain why.

I can tell you exactly why, but you don't and won't listen.

Dan at least tried to explain that determining the Volumetric Efficiency at MAP and RPM are much easier when you have made major changes to your engine than by leaving the stock table in place.

Nobdy said leave the tables stock. The tune I posted has VE tables that are very close to what you need. I'm regretting even helping at this point. It's rare for me to post a tune for someone.

To answer your question as to why I am evening asking questions: isn't it apparent I want to learn more. I think those that want to learn the why will agree.

It is ironic that you say you want to learn, yet you seem to have all the answers.

Ok...........Now I'm done..........

[gokussx4]

You're reading it wrong.



I can tell you exactly why, but you don't and won't listen.



Nobdy said leave the tables stock. The tune I posted has VE tables that are very close to what you need. I'm regretting even helping at this point. It's rare for me to post a tune for someone.



It is ironic that you say you want to learn, yet you seem to have all the answers.

Ok...........Now I'm done..........

Looks like its rare for you to post at all actually ....

[gokussx4]

No one on here has given you bad advice. They answer your question exactly and you don't want to hear it. There are a lot of different guides out there and some might suggest differing methods from the others but the most recent ones agree on the fundamentals. You should read over more of them, especially the ones in the help file of your software and compare, and for God's sake listen to the advice you get on here. If you want to understand why, search it out. You'll be able to find info to support good advice.

I do understand there are different ways. Some approaches are more manual and some are more calculated. I am looking for a more calculated way. For example VE = Actual Volumetric Flow / Theoretical Volumetric Flow. Essentially with this formula ( if you could figure out how gm calculates these variables ) you could figure out the ve table with one run of data and calculate all the cells.

Thanks for your input.

[gokussx4]

Change your OLFA table to 1.0 from 176 to 212 degrees and your commanded AFR will never change from stoich after you warm the car up to operating temp (unless you go into PE but you can adjust that, too)....

When you get your VE tuned, change OLFA table back to stock.

There are some very good guides on this website you should read. The steps are outlined clearly.

The only reason to command 12.5 when tuning is for WOT/PE. When that part of your VE is error free, you use the PE tables to command what you want for WOT and never need to change your VE table again.

For idle, make sure your TB scalar is exact.
Dial in the TB set screw to the correct voltage reading.
Run the RussK idle config (what is that? search and read - it helps tune your RAF/Base Running Airflow)
Tune your VE, as many cells as possible and extrapolate, smooth, etc and then do it three more times
Re-do the Base Running Airflow (RAF)

Redo VE/RAF until it's juuuuussst right.

Then test your results, change Cracker and Follower as necessary, etc.

Thank you for your response! I actually am doing that exact process now, just takes a while. Just hoped I could find a more formula approached method that doesn't requiring bulk data gathering. I believe it should be possible.

[robbyredneck]

I do understand there are different ways. Some approaches are more manual and some are more calculated. I am looking for a more calculated way. For example VE = Actual Volumetric Flow / Theoretical Volumetric Flow. Essentially with this formula ( if you could figure out how gm calculates these variables ) you could figure out the ve table with one run of data and calculate all the cells.

Thanks for your input.

i think gm probably did model it. but using scientific process proved their theory with actual real world measurement. calculations and prospect are great on paper but at the end of the day all you need is a wideband,repeatable process and some time.

[edcmat-l1]

Looks like its rare for you to post at all actually ....

You're right. I don't post alot

I do understand there are different ways. Some approaches are more manual and some are more calculated. I am looking for a more calculated way. For example VE = Actual Volumetric Flow / Theoretical Volumetric Flow. Essentially with this formula ( if you could figure out how gm calculates these variables ) you could figure out the ve table with one run of data and calculate all the cells.

Thanks for your input.

Regardless of manual or calculated, if you're calculating wrong, your end result will be wrong. You apparently haven't gotten beyond the fact that dialing in your VE at 12.5:1 is wrong. Are you familiar with the term stoichiometry? If your stoich of your fuel is 14.6:1, why on earth would you dial in your entire VE @ 12.5:1? What will happen when you reactivate your trims? Bad info in=bad info out.

[69lt1bird]

I think Masic's book has you set the OLFA table to 12.5 across the board. Then tune to that as if it was stoich. Then when when you reset it to factor specs, it will go to stoich. Kind of a safety in case you F'up your tune and go lean it will be less prone to going boom.