Help & insight on 1st gen 3.5 Ecoboost tuning

hello guys! i want to introduce myself. I've been tuning for 5 years typically during the summer/spring months as i spend my winters trying to educate myself as much as i can from HP academy, The Tuning School programs (Ford 3v/coyote & Hemi platform), and following along on here as much as possible to better myself when I am off work. I've gotten myself my first EB a few weeks ago. It is a 2016 F-150 with the 1st gen 3.5. I've opened up the tune and I've done at best minute changes. The platform is extremely confusing in many aspects and much different then the mopars I typically program, so please do excuse me if I've made any mistakes in this base tune i will be sharing. I'm perfectly OK with any type of input (even if you call me out of a mistake in tune) because I want some insight from you guys and any possible help as things are much easier if someone can look directly with my platform and critique it as a base to make sense of some things for me. Some aspects such as the LI/PI, wastegate DC, control of drivers demand, and tweaking torque tables as I've seen some lower and some raise in controlling boost. Any help with be greatly appreciated as well as links to any post that prehaps I've missed! thanks guys! Also please let me know if any channels are missing from my layout for scanner as well. Attachment 107022Attachment 107023[ATTACH]

Hey guys, I?m just a few moments, I?m going to add my stock tune and catalog from a drive a few minutes ago to help see what I?ve done, where I?m at, and what?s going on.

Attachment 107041Attachment 107042 Alright guys, this is my OEM stock tune, as well as my datalog from a little bit ago on the base tune I've made from some help reading on here, I've started small to make a few changes at a time so any input or advice would be awesome.:worship:

I have already noticed from my log, as you?ll notice I?m hitting insufficient fuel flow at 5k rpm, injector limiter, and wastegate airflow limit. I?ve bumped up fueling 200 on pressures on top end. However what else do I need to bring to light?

Rather surprised that it's getting into injector/insufficient fuel limit on a stock tune... I would think they would have it set up to get up to them, but not ride them.

Given the amount of knock retard you're getting, I'm going to assume this is on 87 octane?

You're still running richer than commanded, so at least you're not running out of fuel (I wouldn't expect it to)...
I would start off changing 7310 (Max DC) and 7306 (DI injector DC vs ECT) all to 1.0, increase 7719 (Max injection angle) to 280 degrees, and probably bump bottom right corner 3x3 cells of 7326 (DI desired fuel rail pressure) to 3200PSI.

See if that gets you off those limiters.

Not sure why it's briefly hitting turbo FMEM torque limit, it's not that close to turbo airflow limit... But the injector limits are a priority.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seishuku

Rather surprised that it's getting into injector/insufficient fuel limit on a stock tune... I would think they would have it set up to get up to them, but not ride them.

Given the amount of knock retard you're getting, I'm going to assume this is on 87 octane?

You're still running richer than commanded, so at least you're not running out of fuel (I wouldn't expect it to)...
I would start off changing 7310 (Max DC) and 7306 (DI injector DC vs ECT) all to 1.0, increase 7719 (Max injection angle) to 280 degrees, and probably bump bottom right corner 3x3 cells of 7326 (DI desired fuel rail pressure) to 3200PSI.

See if that gets you off those limiters.

Not sure why it's briefly hitting turbo FMEM torque limit, it's not that close to turbo airflow limit... But the injector limits are a priority.

---

Okay, great I will start with these suggestions and start from here to remove limiters to start getting a better start to work with. As for the knock, I was unable to get 93, so I filled it up with 89 octane, typically I only run 93 in this truck as it seems to run better anyways with better fuel economy it seems. I will make these changes, re log and see where she is with some octane booster. Also increasing the injection angle, what are the benefits of this change out of curiosity? I've typically never changed these except with new injectors. Does this help with a better combustion or cooling affect? I'm working on these changes now as we speak so that tommorrow I can post the revision and log.

A higher max injection angle will give a bigger window for the ECM to spray fuel.

Unlike port injection, which has basically no injection window, direct injection only has the time between the piston moving down on intake stroke and just before the spark plugs fires.
That's a real rough generalization, but that's the idea anyhow.

okay I gotcha. Also do i need to make changes to the IPC 44343 MAP maximum, demand tables, exhaust temps, or closed loop lamba while I'm in the tune?

Probably wouldn't just yet, though 44553 (exhaust flange temp inverse) could be maxed out now.
Just make one change at a time until you start to get a handle on how things work.

Could also raise 1560 (fuel enrichment rate), probably move it up to 0.5 lambda/sec, so it can correct fueling at WOT faster.

You'll likely be getting into LSPI limit pretty fast after these changes (should show as combustion stability torque limit), which is a pretty easy change via 7713 7714 and 7715.
I would HIGHLY recommend only changing 7713 (LSPI Hi) and 7715 (LSPI nominal) tables, as it will keep an important safety for fuel octane, and only change the load limit in the areas that already have a higher load (so you don't risk LSPI destroying the engine).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seishuku

Probably wouldn't just yet, though 44553 (exhaust flange temp inverse) could be maxed out now.
Just make one change at a time until you start to get a handle on how things work.

Could also raise 1560 (fuel enrichment rate), probably move it up to 0.5 lambda/sec, so it can correct fueling at WOT faster.

You'll likely be getting into LSPI limit pretty fast after these changes (should show as combustion stability torque limit), which is a pretty easy change via 7713 7714 and 7715.
I would HIGHLY recommend only changing 7713 (LSPI Hi) and 7715 (LSPI nominal) tables, as it will keep an important safety for fuel octane, and only change the load limit in the areas that already have a higher load (so you don't risk LSPI destroying the engine).

---

Ok, great. I did just what you've mentioned, catering only to higher limits of LSPI and leaving the low and FMEM alone. I will stick to these changes alone and upload this tune in the morning before I leave. I will also gather some logs as well to post, and fill up with 93 on the way in since I have about 1/4 of a tank left now. Thanks for the insight thus far! it's extremely helpful :DAttachment 107070

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seishuku

Probably wouldn't just yet, though 44553 (exhaust flange temp inverse) could be maxed out now.
Just make one change at a time until you start to get a handle on how things work.

Could also raise 1560 (fuel enrichment rate), probably move it up to 0.5 lambda/sec, so it can correct fueling at WOT faster.

You'll likely be getting into LSPI limit pretty fast after these changes (should show as combustion stability torque limit), which is a pretty easy change via 7713 7714 and 7715.
I would HIGHLY recommend only changing 7713 (LSPI Hi) and 7715 (LSPI nominal) tables, as it will keep an important safety for fuel octane, and only change the load limit in the areas that already have a higher load (so you don't risk LSPI destroying the engine).


Hello sir, I filled the truck up with 93 Oct and drove it for a while to allow it adjust. This is the tune revision and log attached. It appears I'm hitting injector limit though I'm well safe in AFR reading. Also hitting Turbo FMEM now.

---

Attachment 107127Attachment 107128

Everything looks pretty good, though it riding stoich in boost up to around 4400RPM is a little concerning. Though I know DI is more tolerant to running stoich in load.
I do see that this strategy has an enrich delay (2415), might not be a bad idea to zero that out.

I didn't think to look at 7329 (DI fuel rail pressure max), you'll have to increase the last cell in that from 2365PSI to 3200PSI, that *should* get you off the injector torque limit.

Okay gotcha, I will look at that. As soon as I get home I’m posting a new log, after driving a few miles with new tune all knock had went away and actually hit some negative, assuming that is the octane adjustment, but I also handed octane booster as well. I will check 2415 and 7329. However I did change pedal from 90% and adjusted it from 1,000 up and changed in steps from 90-85-75-6-55 down to 45 when commanding wot as well.

Attachment 107158 hey sir, I meant to post this last night, however I got stuck at work untill late so I do apologise. this was the second run I made I mentioned and im adding those changes you requested I made as well right now since im on my laptop.

Should I be looking at any of the torque calculations or inverse yet or wait?

Yeah, you will end up having to add a row in the torque model to support high loads than 1.8.
Right now, it's best to get those changes made and make sure you can get fueling up in the existing load range and not riding the injection load limiter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seishuku

Yeah, you will end up having to add a row in the torque model to support high loads than 1.8.
Right now, it's best to get those changes made and make sure you can get fueling up in the existing load range and not riding the injection load limiter.

---

Hello, sorry for such a late reply. Weather here in KY took a turn for the worst over 2.5 weeks we had 3 ice storms with loss of power at home and work that made things a bit difficult, and because by nature I do HVAC service it got pretty crazy when hospitals were having troubles and what not. So i do apologize. I did get a datalog just before the storms. I will plan on another datalog tommorrow! It appears my biggest issues as of now is increasing torque models, working on driver demand up top as I am hitting limits on it, and it appears I need to raise the temperature further as I'm hitting enrichment for exhaust protection. I am hitting injector limits, however my A/F looks spot on and still within 3-400 psi on pressures, so should I bump it up to 3400 from 3200? Or ignore this and work on the other limits?Attachment 107565

Changing the torque model won't help right now, you're only breifly hitting 1.75 airload tops... It's requesting 1.8, but the torque air limit source is popcorn, which is 2.0 according to the LSPI tables.
It's also hitting Turbo FMEM a little bit during the pulls, but you're not even really close to the turbo airflow max limit.

So I'm not really sure what's going on here, unless there's something about the 3.5 EB ECM that's different than the 2.3 EB, but they should work more or less the same.

You definiftly won't need to change anything with the fuel pressure though, the actual rail pressure vs desired pressure does drop a bit, but your actual lambda is actually richer than commanded, so fuel is doing fine.

Is there anything I can do to work around popcorn and the turbo FMEM? I feel as though it may help to atleast get the load up and maintain. I did add into the tables as suggested for higher load value. Just gotta figure out these two limits that are tripping me out.

Turbo FMEM is usually turbo overspeed or flow limit, which I've only had to modify the airflow limit (ECM 3630) and you've already upped that, but I suppose you could try bumping that up another 10% and see what happens (it wouldn't hurt anything, I have mine WAY oversized).

Popcorn I wouldn't worry a whole lot about, that's it using the LSPI table(s), which is important below 2000RPM.

It's also still hitting cylinder pressure limit for spark, but I don't know the safe limit of the 3.5, so I couldn't make a suggestion on that.
It could just be the octane modifier that's not fully -1.0 yet, so maybe cylinder limits should be left alone.

Edit:
Max load might also be being limited by VCT mapped point max load tables, so might have to go through those and bump loads from 1.2 to 2.0 up by 25%. Do that for all max load mapped points.
Attachment 107616

was such a good thread. sorry to see it stopped...

^ i was thinking the exact same thing. good thread, dead too early lol.

You guys could have left it concluded with one page. With your replies (admittedly now mine too) the 2nd page looks promising like there is more information.. only to have a carrot dangled in front of my nose.(so to speak)