Trying to tune MAF
Originally Posted by LS1curious
Very interesting you think I am bitching some one out.I am bitching at no one. I am making a statement about how the OS works and everybody gets alarmist. Maybe folks here are a bit to touchy.
I did catch your posts on the EFI Live forums however. the point of my post is to say that the original IAT ECT calculations stay intact if you don't run SD. Alot of the Calculations you are reffering to are humidity corrections which are rough to say the least. If you want the entire fueling algorythm in its entirety I will see If i can paste the whole thing together for you with the Math. warning even if you have it most likely it'll be fiarly confusing without all of the various adders and scalars.
How are you with C code ?
I did catch your posts on the EFI Live forums however. the point of my post is to say that the original IAT ECT calculations stay intact if you don't run SD. Alot of the Calculations you are reffering to are humidity corrections which are rough to say the least. If you want the entire fueling algorythm in its entirety I will see If i can paste the whole thing together for you with the Math. warning even if you have it most likely it'll be fiarly confusing without all of the various adders and scalars.
How are you with C code ?
and as for C, i'm getting my masters in computer science this friday. so yes, i'm down with the C-kness
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
there is a ton of stuff to shift through. If you can be patient its honestly gonna take about 2 weeks to dig all of it out. Its sort of all over the place in bit and pieces. . Damn code writers.
As for the smart *** on the EFi live forums saying his Ve values were gonna be over 100%. Your gonna find out that the VE values aren't in percentages. They are Scalar Values
As for the smart *** on the EFi live forums saying his Ve values were gonna be over 100%. Your gonna find out that the VE values aren't in percentages. They are Scalar Values
Originally Posted by RedHardSupra
i define bitching as complaining without providing solutions.
and as for C, i'm getting my masters in computer science this friday. so yes, i'm down with the C-kness
and as for C, i'm getting my masters in computer science this friday. so yes, i'm down with the C-kness
well i just spent four months reading through experimental code that doesn't quite do what it was supposed to, so i don't think you're gonna phase me much please send the code to marcinpohl at gmail dot com
please send the code to marcinpohl at gmail dot com 
11 Second Club
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by LS1curious
As for the smart *** on the EFi live forums saying his Ve values were gonna be over 100%. Your gonna find out that the VE values aren't in percentages. They are Scalar Values
Whether this is because other tables are out of wack or his maf calibration is wrong is something that this discussion could bring a definative answer for.
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Only if you make the promise right now to keep this off list.
Originally Posted by RedHardSupra
well i just spent four months reading through experimental code that doesn't quite do what it was supposed to, so i don't think you're gonna phase me much please send the code to marcinpohl at gmail dot com
please send the code to marcinpohl at gmail dot com
Originally Posted by 5.7 ute
In what way was he being a smartass? In efilive you can have the vetable displayed as a % unit. He was not saying that this meant 100% efficiency just that he had to scale his Vetable that high to bring his trims into line, something he has never had to do with the normal way he tunes.
Whether this is because other tables are out of wack or his maf calibration is wrong is something that this discussion could bring a definative answer for.
Whether this is because other tables are out of wack or his maf calibration is wrong is something that this discussion could bring a definative answer for.
code yes, but the ideas no. i wanna figure out the modeling for it, and make better tools with better understanding. i think i know how it works, but it'd be nice to have farther verification of the process, and be aware of more minute details.
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Yes the code must stay off list and be kept 100% confidential.IE do not share.
Originally Posted by RedHardSupra
code yes, but the ideas no. i wanna figure out the modeling for it, and make better tools with better understanding. i think i know how it works, but it'd be nice to have farther verification of the process, and be aware of more minute details.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo
Originally Posted by LS1curious
rated flow pressure on those is 37.5psi @ 30pph. they are very non linear with pressure rates. Id advise figuring them at almost a 44pph injector @60 psi pressure. I don't have the flow data on those. I will ask around and see if anyone has it.
BTW, this is where I got my numbers from...
https://ls1tech.com/forums/pcm-diagnostics-tuning/326601-ok-settle-svo-injector-ratings.html
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Well yes and no. the flow data for those injector is only done at 45psi where they are 36pph at 14.0v. with a lag of .002 seconds. they are non linear in their response curve.
I would assume they actually act like 42-44pph injectors at 60psi
I would assume they actually act like 42-44pph injectors at 60psi
Originally Posted by SSpdDmon
Any luck on finding that injector data?
BTW, this is where I got my numbers from...
https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=326601
BTW, this is where I got my numbers from...
https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=326601
Originally Posted by LS1curious
Well yes and no. the flow data for those injector is only done at 45psi where they are 36pph at 14.0v. with a lag of .002 seconds. they are non linear in their response curve.
I would assume they actually act like 42-44pph injectors at 60psi
I would assume they actually act like 42-44pph injectors at 60psi
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Only at lower pressures. They really start slowing down once you hit 45+ psi. Thats the info I have been trying to get. Its costs money to have them dynamicly flow tested. I would say its safe to assume they are actually gonna be at 30-40% slower then an LS1 injector at 60psi
Originally Posted by SSpdDmon
So, you're saying they actually operate faster than the stock injectors at 14v, which have an offset of .003 seconds? I thought the SVO's were slower???
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Well that could cuase the richness you said you couldn't understand when you were experimenting with OP MAF tunning. 20% is going to make the injector act 20% larger. I would think a small 2-3% increase in that table would be more then fine.
this should be the rough math
Original value x .70 + orignial value equals new value. a 30% increase was alot more then you thought it was.
this should be the rough math
Original value x .70 + orignial value equals new value. a 30% increase was alot more then you thought it was.
Originally Posted by SSpdDmon
Cool...cause I increased my injector offset (Volts vs MAP) 20% across the board thinking that would be safe.
Last edited by LS1curious; Jun 13, 2007 at 10:48 PM.
Originally Posted by LS1curious
Well that could cuase the richness you said you couldn't understand when you were experimenting with OP MAF tunning. 20% is going to make the injector act 20% larger. I would think a small 2-3% increase in that table would be more then fine.
this should be the rough math
Original value x .70 + orignial value equals new value. a 30% increase was alot more then you thought it was.
this should be the rough math
Original value x .70 + orignial value equals new value. a 30% increase was alot more then you thought it was.
Example:
100 x .7 = 70
70 + 100 = 170
Increase = 70%
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by 405HP_Z06
Am I looking at this incorrectly or would that be a 70% increase?
Example:
100 x .7 = 70
70 + 100 = 170
Increase = 70%
Example:
100 x .7 = 70
70 + 100 = 170
Increase = 70%
Originally Posted by LS1curious
no 100 x .70 = 30 + 100 + 130 although when dealing with precision numbers one should actually do the math correctly. However those injectors shouldn;t need that much extra time.
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,080
Likes: 17
From: So.Cal.
Ok, I write and debug C code (device drivers and kernel code) for a living...
I have a few degrees (Comp Sci, Elec. Eng, Physics)...
I'll take a look at the code and I'll keep the code itself confidential (as Marcin/RHS agreed)...
Edit: pm sent.
I have a few degrees (Comp Sci, Elec. Eng, Physics)...
I'll take a look at the code and I'll keep the code itself confidential (as Marcin/RHS agreed)...
Edit: pm sent.
Last edited by joecar; Jun 14, 2007 at 01:22 AM.