Bink

Finally able to get to this !! Wasn't able to log much... snowing here
BUT - I was able to use ChrisB's analyzer. Took me awhile ( till 2 am last nite) to figure out I had the exported headings wrong in EFILive V - should be "Titles" only. Actually, I tried EFILive 6 first - and was able to enter an Exported Log File with "Caption" only heading. But with EFILive 6 the VE table kPas were not correct. The calculated VEs were all less than 35kPa - whereas the logfile contained a complete range of kPa (MAP). Does anyone know how to correct/compensate for EFILive6????Hell, It even makes our Logfiles look better!!!
Thanks ChrisB for a AWESOME Tuning tool.
joel

Bink

Here is a link to the LS1 Analyzer and ChrisB's infoChrisB's LS1 Analyzer .Good Luck to all.
joel

gojo

iTrader: (12)

Joel,
Aren't the EFI Calculated VE's in percent? If we are talking about the same thing, mine read over 100% at times.
Joe

Bink

Hi Joe!! All the times I've seen "gojo" - I didn't realize it was You!

Yes, the Calc VE is in percent.

The EFI 6 Calc VE PID for Edit - ({SAE.MAF.gps}*({SAE.IAT.C}+273.15)/(346*{SAE.RPM}*{SAE.MAP.kPa})*212544))*30 - gave me many " + 100% " VE values when I divided the results by 30 to convert back to percent. When I used the PID without the "*30" I had better, i.e. more consistent results. I can't explain why other than a simple math function variance in the software???

With a nice cam, efficient heads, intake and exhaust isn't it probable to have VEs greater than 100% ?

I emailed ChrisB about the EFILive 6 and entering logfiles. He asked me to forward a logfile - which I did. Hopefully we'll be able to use Version 6 . If not I'll use V5 for VE tuning. I'm amazed how inefficient my setup is at lower RPM ranges.

Have you used this software/Analyzer yet? If I can figure it out...anyone can. Sometimes software doesn't seem very logical to me........I like icons and pictures
joel

Bink

..Frame ..Time ..ms SAE.VSS SAE.RPM SAE.MAP CALC.CYLAIR GM.IBPW1 GM.IBPW2 SAE.SPARKADV SAE.TP SAE.ECT GM.KR SAE.MAF SAE.IAT CALC.VE2 GM.FTC SAE.VSS
3273 27:23.2 339249 93 4758 18 0.06 2 2 34 9.8 76 0 19.78 3 39.18 21 58
3274 27:23.4 339359 92 4610 18 0.06 2 2 34 9.8 76 0 19.78 3 40.44 21 57
3275 27:23.5 339470 92 4568 20 0.26 2 3 40 20 76 0 79.26 3 147.18 21 57
3276 27:23.6 339580 92 4838 45 0.23 6 5 33 30.6 76 0 73.25 3 57.08 22 57

I still have some 100+ VE values...here is one:
In Row 3275 -> 147.18 VE2 .. but is an aberration - and it's FTC = 21, which is Deceleration. We shouldn't include Decel values. FWIW.
joel

deezel

I think you need forced induction to get 'real' VE's above 100%. A N/A engine can only suck as much air as the pistons move, so VE's should be less than 100% due to friction/losses (maybe a good ram air setup could push over 100%... but that is approaching FI).
The VE's calculated from log files usually have values over 100% due to rapid changes in the values used to calculate VE (tip-in, shifts, etc). The most accurate calculated VE's will be when the engine load is constant (at WOT away from shifts).

HumpinSS

iTrader: (1)

Ve's on a NA LS1 should run between 75-80% under load. Anything above that and you are starting to talk about Pro-Stock engines and the likes. Multiplying the value by 30 gives you the values to put into edit for the Main VE tables

Bink

I have some VEs in the 90s??
joel

gojo

iTrader: (12)

So do I and they're not spikes.

HumpinSS

iTrader: (1)

I may be wrong