Trying to tune a 2015 Mustang with Roush blower and the car will not goAttachment 89705 the enrichment commanded at wot? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Printable View
Trying to tune a 2015 Mustang with Roush blower and the car will not goAttachment 89705 the enrichment commanded at wot? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Got a log of it happening? It could possibly be a limiter requesting torque reduction via fuel cut
here is a pull up to 4700, then i shut it down. I was asking for .8Attachment 89707
Yeah I can see in your log where its not commanding any kind of enrichment until 4k rpm. You have some PIDs missing that would help diagnose whats going on. Logging Torque source, driver demand limit source, etc... will show us whats going on. Attached is a PID list I use with my MPVI2, dont know how well it will work with the MPVI1
PIDs I'm talking about:
Attachment 89708
My Gen2 Coyote PID list:
Attachment 89709
EDIT: Just realized that PID list does not have EQ commanded, WB EQ or Fuel source so add these to your log
Attachment 89712
Quote:
Originally Posted by D_Met
Thank You so much, I will add those and put it back on the dyno tomorrow and report back.
Here is the log with the added pids.Attachment 89737Quote:
Originally Posted by vortech
Looks like your STFTs are throwing off the commanded lambda. My understanding is commanded lambda moves based on fuel trims to bring measured lambda (Lambda Sensed) closer to your set enrichment value (0.8 in your case). Its a little confusing because it would seem its trying to hit a moving target, but putting it on a chart helps visualize it. Interesting that you can also see catalyst protection still functioning even though its "disabled" in your tune.
Attachment 89745
Also noticed you have a fault p0036 B1S2 o2 heater circuit, that *could* have an effect on your B1S1 reading (on a much longer time scale than in this pull) due to FAOSC ([ECM] 1165 - Fore/Aft Oxygen Sensor Control) being enabled.
I would recommend reworking your speed density and/or your MAF transfer to help get you lambda readings more in-line with expectations.
I would suggest redoing your period axis of your MAF. Not having the resolution between 126u and 107u, and relying on interpolation to determine airmass is going to be hard to get the curve to fit the fuel trim data collected.
What you have now:
Attachment 89754
What I would suggest:
Attachment 89755
Hey murfie
besides experience, what data points would you observe, or what behavior would suggest when you would want to change the resolution. Is there a process for identifying the best way to do this on a particular car?
You want to cover the range your car is making.
The best way I can describe it is axis values should be evenly spaced over the range you will use. If you saw an RPM axis that went 500,900, 1750, 2000, 4000, 4250, 5750, 7000. And not 500,1000,2000,3000,4000,5000,6000,7000 you would probably change it. The spacing doesn't need to be perfectly even, but any large jumps should be avoided unless you know the values will follow close to the interpolation line.
In these logs, a chart comparing period and STFT, between 126u and 107u you see multiple changes to STFT. When you graph the MAF transfer, the cells average all these changes into the nearest cell. Large gaps mean large averages of error.
So I made the changes to MAF period but now it seems the car is going a lot richer than the power enrichment commanded. Attachment 89811
I exported the visable range of that log that has the WOT part. I do this so I can use the view entire in the graph. This allows you to look at the + and - views not just the average.
Max error
Attachment 89819
Min error
Attachment 89820
You can see 156.8 you need to remove 5.5%
at 146 you are going to need to remove 7%
at 137 you will need to remove anywhere from 4.7-7.8% 6.25% is in the middle of that
at 125 you will need to remove anywhere from 4.7% to adding .8%, this is getting close, but 2.25% could be removed to get it right where it needs to be.
Above this which wasn't hit in the log is where I suggested the resolution changes to your transfer.
If you look at the average values of this exported log, you get very close to what the max and min values say. The more these agree, it validates the changes the transfer needs.
Attachment 89821
This is just the part of the transfer WOT touches. You will need to go over the entire transfer. It sounds tedious and like it will take many logs, but a lot can be taken out of one log and applied to correct the transfer. If you say what MAF housing you have, at least the size of it, i'm sure some one will share a transfer that is much closer to what you need.