LSJ Turbo Dynamic issues

[eronq9]

Right now on my TVS car I am not having the lean problem at all, I am using RSFS and 80s with a flat IFR table and dynamic switch over at 3600rpm. Be and maf both reasonably dialed in, and both smoothed, especially VE.

My MAF does get a tad bit off as I travel between 2 areas of different elevation, but nothing crazy

I'll try to see if I have a log

[eronq9]

Alright let me post some stuff I got

Pull here in 4th and 5th, both starting below crossover point
4th5th.JPG

The airflow analysis
Airflow_Analysis.JPG

As I can see, my VE table is actually still a bit lean at WOT but the PCM still uses MAF here dominantly, VE seems to be used when airflow changes quickly, I am guessing this is to check for a MAF error as stated earlier.

5th gear pull didn't even pass the crossover so it was completely in dynamic.

AFR was actually a bit rich, its winter blend still around here (E70) so I am okay with a bit rich as it will lean out when the mixture becomes a higher amount ethanol.

EDIT: The first image shows the white line on the right pull but thats not where the current displayed values are, probably zoomed out and glitched it, the second image is where that data is.

Here is the log file

LowRPM.hpl

Here is another with a 3rd gear pull

Thirdstartinglow.hpl

[Area47]

Dynamic can not be limited to only low rpm as once its activation rpm is set low(below idle rpm) in the lsj it forces the system to run dynamic entirely. (MAF tune) This is the "disabled VE referencing" i'm assuming Area47 is speaking of. If the maf is fully active the entire time then the switch over point stumble will not be an issue since the tables do not technically switch(crossover point is eliminated in this method.)
Still would be beneficial to complete the ve tune as a method for sensor fault protection.

I do not think you guys are trying to be maf only tuners, you know more than the people who shoot for that method. Other people are reading in here to so i added it in so the other readers can see what the difference is. I am sorry for the confusion.

As for your lean error i have solved that before by monitoring just prior to activation, activation point, and post activation point. I then use the data to blend the crossover. Unfortunately crossover is not a very clean process, which has to be why Area47 claims he always see's this issue regardless of ve and maf tuned quality. You can limit it by sacrificing rich/lean events on each table at the crossover to blend the result into an acceptable afr result. This can cause a consistent offset error though so its not recommended. I ended up leaving the lean event but just pushed the maf activation up to a higher rpm such as 3500-4000 rpm. By pushing the dynamic blend to above the cruise zone the maf will be calibrated strictly for an rpm accelerating state which caused a reduction in error at crossover. I just tested this on my yukon, since the factory crossover is set to dynamic enable of 3500. by pushing it lower than idle i can fully tune the maf no problem but with the activation set to 1800 i noticed an afr swing as the tables swung between cruise, light acceleration, and deceleration and crossed the crossover point. Have you guys tried pushing the dynamic up to a more mid rpm zone to see if the error reduces? I also have an injector theory behind the higher activation point but i dont feel i should include it as it may cause more confusion. If this works for you guys ill throw it in here as something to ponder on.

it was a constant fight on my LSJ with the dynamic enabled. even with the VE map dialed in to the letter, it never acted right blended. Flipped to dynamic disable at 400 rpms. problems gone. It wasn't part throttle, it was above 5k when the power started to truly come in.

[cobaltssoverbooster]

i wonder if it dips read speed between modes.

[Area47]

it's the exceeding the 205 kpa hardcode mark that triggers 99% of the issues.

[cobaltssoverbooster]

makes sense, temporary dip in read speed as it recalculates

[Speedytec]

it's the exceeding the 205 kpa hardcode mark that triggers 99% of the issues.

Is probably an issue when you're off the VE map, but in our Dynamic problem zone we're just reaching 177kPa...
Will see if we can find differences in logged VE, MAF and Dynamic airmass.

[AP83]

After reading Area and CSSOB's comments, I tried running the car MAF only for the first time in a while today, and it ran smoother than I can remember. Who'd have thunk that not blindly running dynamic because "that's what you're supposed to do" could result in a good running car?

Some little random hiccups that occured with the car running dynamic didn't happen. I can only assume that they were caused by the car trying to decide what data to use.

Anyway, I like it, and plan to keep it this way. The car is still fully tuned VE for cruise, so I can drive home if the MAF fails.

[cobaltssoverbooster]

excellent

[Area47]

i fought it for months on end in my lsj. when HPT released that small table, it all changed and power went up. There is a reason why i have said for years to set it like that. now you know.