How the MAF really works
#82
TECH Addict
iTrader: (6)
Originally Posted by TAQuickness
The cube with 0% humidity will have more moles of O2, because the air is 0.4% more dense than the cube with 100% humidity. .
I guess maybe another way to say what i'm trying to say is: humid air requires a different air/fuel ratio than dry air because it has a different air/o2 ratio. That may not be true in practice, but at least for stoichiometric reaction it would be.
As for the maf, i guess the humid air would register as less airflow on the maf, but i'm thinking it would undercompensate because the difference in heat transfer between the humid air and dry air would be less than the difference in o2 content. I could be wrong, but it would be a coincidence if the humidity affected heat transfer exactly the same percentage as o2 content.
Oh and I agree in either case the difference is so small that we're splitting hairs.
#83
Originally Posted by P Mack
As for the maf, i guess the humid air would register as less airflow on the maf, but i'm thinking it would undercompensate because the difference in heat transfer between the humid air and dry air would be less than the difference in o2 content.
H2O molecules have mass too so as far as where the MAF will read more or less mass with more humid air I think it depends on other factors.
#84
TECH Junkie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (28)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Talk about a curve ball - we're suddenly back on topic!
P-Mack - I see your point.
However, I still believe the PCM is making the necessary adjustments for humitidy whether you are in SD or MAF operation. Reason I believe so is because the PCM does sample barometric pressure.
If you have the EFILive scanner, or someone that can let you borrow theirs, I have two logs with similar temperature conditions, on two different days, with very different humidity between those two days. In both logs I was logging gm.baro and there is quite a notable difference.
One of the things the PCM does to adjust fueling is calculate how far off current air density is from the VE tables referenced density. May seem like splitting hairs, which you and I may be, but the PCM has to do this so a car running in Houston, San Antonio, Phoenix, Hawaii, Denver, etc... will run reliably.
P-Mack - I see your point.
However, I still believe the PCM is making the necessary adjustments for humitidy whether you are in SD or MAF operation. Reason I believe so is because the PCM does sample barometric pressure.
If you have the EFILive scanner, or someone that can let you borrow theirs, I have two logs with similar temperature conditions, on two different days, with very different humidity between those two days. In both logs I was logging gm.baro and there is quite a notable difference.
One of the things the PCM does to adjust fueling is calculate how far off current air density is from the VE tables referenced density. May seem like splitting hairs, which you and I may be, but the PCM has to do this so a car running in Houston, San Antonio, Phoenix, Hawaii, Denver, etc... will run reliably.
#85
TECH Junkie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (28)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by leres
It worries me when you guys use the word "airflow" when talking about a MAF. It's really measuring mass flow.
H2O molecules have mass too so as far as where the MAF will read more or less mass with more humid air I think it depends on other factors.
H2O molecules have mass too so as far as where the MAF will read more or less mass with more humid air I think it depends on other factors.
#87
TECH Addict
iTrader: (6)
Originally Posted by leres
It worries me when you guys use the word "airflow" when talking about a MAF. It's really measuring mass flow.
H2O molecules have mass too so as far as where the MAF will read more or less mass with more humid air I think it depends on other factors.
H2O molecules have mass too so as far as where the MAF will read more or less mass with more humid air I think it depends on other factors.
As for airflow vs massflow, i don't see the big deal. I guess i am using "airflow" to be short for "air massflow". Water vapor is a component of air, and "airflow" encompasses massflow of N2, O2, CO2, H20 (vapor), etc. It's just semantics.
#89
Originally Posted by TAQuickness
Agreed, H2O does have mass, but the the molecular weight of dry air is heavier than water.
Water is 1000kg/m^3
1.28kg > 1000kg?
I guess I have to disagree with that (but I doubt that's what you meant).
Originally Posted by TAQuickness
Humid air should register as less mass flow than dry air.
Let's say you stuck an argon tank in your car, plumbed it into the airbox and cranked it open. Pretend 1/2 of the gas passing the MAF is argon. The MAF will report the mass entering the engine, the PCM would think that twice as much O2 is coming in as really is but the O2's will show things are rich as hell.
When the humidity changes, the STFTs change, maybe the LTFTs change a little and everything is ok.
Now if you're saying as far as what the MAF reports, humid air has less O2 than dry air, I agree. But we've established that the difference is small, right?
Originally Posted by P Mack
Although I guess airflow could be taken to mean volume flow, as in cubic feet per minute. In that case I guess it would be better to use "massflow" for clarity.
When I see "airflow" I think of volume per time unit. In that case, you need other information (i.e. air temperature and barometric pressure) to figure out how much O2 your're dealing with.
I think my deal is I had a chemistry teacher in high school who beat UNITS into my head. Which reminds me of my favorite fortune cookie, "An inch of gold is not equal to an inch of time."
(This is a great thread!)
#90
FormerVendor
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TAQuickness
One of the things the PCM does to adjust fueling is calculate how far off current air density is from the VE tables referenced density. May seem like splitting hairs, which you and I may be, but the PCM has to do this so a car running in Houston, San Antonio, Phoenix, Hawaii, Denver, etc... will run reliably.
#91
TECH Senior Member
Originally Posted by leres
Dry air is 1.28kg/m^3
Water is 1000kg/m^3
1.28kg > 1000kg?
I guess I have to disagree with that (but I doubt that's what you meant).
Water is 1000kg/m^3
1.28kg > 1000kg?
I guess I have to disagree with that (but I doubt that's what you meant).
Atomic mass of H is ~1; molecular mass of H2O is ~18;
However...
density of air is ~1.28kg/m^3;
density of liquid water is ~1000kg/m^3;
density of vapour water at STP is....?
(molecular mass does not directly determine density).
Yes, I agree, very interesting thread;
Btw: I do free car work for relatives, friends, and neighbours only; I just have them pay for parts and fluids.
#92
FormerVendor
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
guys, remember the basic construction of the MAF... it is sending out a frequency based on how much the wire is being cooled. The relative cooling of the wire is all that matters.
Neither the MAF or the PCM know what is cooling the wire, they make an assumption. This assumption is reflected in the Frequency(hz) to Airflow(g/sec) lookup.
The two biggest assumptions the MAF makes are:
1. The air that is passing over the wire is representative of all the air passing thru the MAF (laminar flow).
2. the flow is unidirectional
Unfortunately these ideal conditions are not present in the engine intake and are the primary sources of error.
Neither the MAF or the PCM know what is cooling the wire, they make an assumption. This assumption is reflected in the Frequency(hz) to Airflow(g/sec) lookup.
The two biggest assumptions the MAF makes are:
1. The air that is passing over the wire is representative of all the air passing thru the MAF (laminar flow).
2. the flow is unidirectional
Unfortunately these ideal conditions are not present in the engine intake and are the primary sources of error.
#93
TECH Junkie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (28)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by gameover
the LS1 and LS2 PCM does not use a relative VE table like older code did, the main VE table is absolute and is not referenced to any temperature or pressure. It assumes density varies linearly with pressure (MAP) and temperature (manifold air temperature).
What do you mean by "absolute"?
#94
FormerVendor
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TAQuickness
What do you mean by "absolute"?
The VE table stores an absolute (but scaled) reference to the cylinder loading (g/cyl) which is scaled based on the current MAP and temperature.
The native GM units of the table are grams.Kelvin/kPa. If you run all this thru the ideal gas equations you get exactly the same result as if you had used a traditional % based approach, just this way is a much faster calculation for the PCM. Its a non-intuitive approach but many optimizations seem that way.
Chris...
#95
TECH Addict
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Fat Chance Hotel
Posts: 2,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by leres
When I see "airflow" I think of volume per time unit. In that case, you need other information (i.e. air temperature and barometric pressure) to figure out how much O2 your're dealing with.
(This is a great thread!)
(This is a great thread!)
While I argue that the stock MAF calibration should be sufficient for any engine modifications, I don't believe the MAF itself is accurate enough to inform the PCM of exactly how much air is entering the engine.
#96
TECH Junkie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (28)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Staying sidetracked here....
Chris,
It's hard for me to back up my theories having never seen the PCM code, but I do not agree 100% that the PCM is not calculating varients in air density. I draw this conclusion based off what I can see in my tune, barometric pressure update tables & offset factors, and based off my logs.
Barometric pressure isn't sampled as often as temp and MAP. This leads me to believe the barometric offsets would be accounted for else where in the code.
Also, within my logs, I can see significant differences in IPW's when the baro values change from day to day (when comparing logs with similar temperatures (+-2*F), time of day, and route).
Chris,
It's hard for me to back up my theories having never seen the PCM code, but I do not agree 100% that the PCM is not calculating varients in air density. I draw this conclusion based off what I can see in my tune, barometric pressure update tables & offset factors, and based off my logs.
Barometric pressure isn't sampled as often as temp and MAP. This leads me to believe the barometric offsets would be accounted for else where in the code.
Also, within my logs, I can see significant differences in IPW's when the baro values change from day to day (when comparing logs with similar temperatures (+-2*F), time of day, and route).
#97
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Originally Posted by TAQuickness
Staying sidetracked here....
Chris,
It's hard for me to back up my theories having never seen the PCM code, but I do not agree 100% that the PCM is not calculating varients in air density. I draw this conclusion based off what I can see in my tune, barometric pressure update tables & offset factors, and based off my logs.
Barometric pressure isn't sampled as often as temp and MAP. This leads me to believe the barometric offsets would be accounted for else where in the code.
Also, within my logs, I can see significant differences in IPW's when the baro values change from day to day (when comparing logs with similar temperatures (+-2*F), time of day, and route).
Chris,
It's hard for me to back up my theories having never seen the PCM code, but I do not agree 100% that the PCM is not calculating varients in air density. I draw this conclusion based off what I can see in my tune, barometric pressure update tables & offset factors, and based off my logs.
Barometric pressure isn't sampled as often as temp and MAP. This leads me to believe the barometric offsets would be accounted for else where in the code.
Also, within my logs, I can see significant differences in IPW's when the baro values change from day to day (when comparing logs with similar temperatures (+-2*F), time of day, and route).
#98
TECH Addict
iTrader: (6)
Originally Posted by TAQuickness
Staying sidetracked here....
Chris,
It's hard for me to back up my theories having never seen the PCM code, but I do not agree 100% that the PCM is not calculating varients in air density.
Chris,
It's hard for me to back up my theories having never seen the PCM code, but I do not agree 100% that the PCM is not calculating varients in air density.
I think it is possible that ve can change with baro in the form of exhaust back pressure, which isn't taken into account in the ve calculations.