Tweaking VE Tables on GPEC2A

[Stoopalini]

what are you trying to make it do (or stop doing) by changing 34470

provide a way to target enrichment during closed loop for these lean spikes without causing an issue in another RPM/PRatio location

Here's the log I took this morning. Each misfire count seems to correlate to a time when throttle is being increased, not so much to trigger FA Enrichment though, so still in closed loop .... and AFR goes lean. Misfire then gets recorded, the AFR comes back to normal, and the misfires stop.

TH_Next_Tune-09062024.hpl

And here is the tune which was loaded when that log was taken:TH_Next_Tune-09062024.hpt

[Spray-Cam Hell-Ram]

Yea, Im hopeful that one of those revisions will sort that out for ya. This lean spike is there because it has been tuned to be there. Looking over your tune, I felt it was pretty clear why you have a lean spike between 1225 - 2275 rpm every time, no matter how much or little you hit the throttle. Your Durango is doing exactly what its being told to do. And I imagine that its doing this lean spike bit every single time you are between 1225 - 2275 rpm, being that your previous tuner or whomever wrote this tune, has their tune telling it to do this 3 separate times throughout the tune, and from 3 separate sections of the tune, no less. Def not one of the better tunes that Ive seen, but that's not your fault. The transient tables was actually the third instance I had found for the cause of the lean spike. I saw some other things that could be changed, but we'll save that for another time. Hope it works out for ya!

[Stoopalini]

Thanks, I appreciate that! Now I'm scouring through the tune looking for 1225 and 2275 RPM values LOL!

This is actually the tune Whipple provided to me, which I started making adjustments to. I wonder if the 3 areas you are referencing are in the OEM calibrations and Whipple just left it alone?

I do have two other tunes from two different tuners. One is a VE tune, but it is unstable at idle and off idle and exhibits the misfires during the lean spike. The other is an ANN tune, which is good at idle/off-idle, but it continues to show misfires during that lean spike and also has KR during 7th and 8th gear cruising. That KR will go as high as -4 or -5 degrees at times, so I don't want to run it.

Believe it or not, taking the Whipple tune and starting to make adjustments myself has turned out to be a decent approach for me; as I am learning along the way and it's forcing me to analyze the data. But I'm sure it's severely lacking and has lots of room for improvement. It's tough to justify another tuner though, after spending the type of $$ I already did. I honestly don't blame the two guys I used, as there were other factors at plan which probably caused some of the troubles. It's also tough to know which guys know what they're doing vs. those who are just copying/pasting information from templates and other tunes they have.

[Stoopalini]

Yea, Im hopeful that one of those revisions will sort that out for ya. This lean spike is there because it has been tuned to be there. Looking over your tune, I felt it was pretty clear why you have a lean spike between 1225 - 2275 rpm every time, no matter how much or little you hit the throttle. Your Durango is doing exactly what its being told to do. And I imagine that its doing this lean spike bit every single time you are between 1225 - 2275 rpm, being that your previous tuner or whomever wrote this tune, has their tune telling it to do this 3 separate times throughout the tune, and from 3 separate sections of the tune, no less. Def not one of the better tunes that Ive seen, but that's not your fault. The transient tables was actually the third instance I had found for the cause of the lean spike. I saw some other things that could be changed, but we'll save that for another time. Hope it works out for ya!

So I had a chance to make these changes and test them, here are the logs. I'm posting the tune file with the log file, as I took the changes you made in your revisions and rought them over to my latest tune; which is a little different from the one you based those revisions off of.

The driving feel from the "VE Transients" tune was great! Still some of the lean spike and misfire happening.

Tune: TH_Next_Tune-09072024_Spray-Cam_VE-Transients.hpt
Log: TH_Next_Tune-09072024_Spray-Cam_VE-Transients.hpl


The misfires and lean spike seem to be more controlled with the "Upstream Goals & Limits" tune, but the throttle feel wasn't as good.

Tune: TH_Next_Tune-09072024_Spray-Cam_Upstream-Goal-n-Limit.hpt
Log: TH_Next_Tune-09072024_Spray-Cam_Upstream-Goal-n-Limit.hpl


So I took a stab and combining pieces from each of those two tunes into my tune. I called it "Combo" and tested this as well.

Tune: TH_Next_Tune-09072024_Spray-Cam_Combo.hpt
Log 1:TH_Next_Tune-09072024_Spray-Cam_Combo.hpl
Log 2: TH_Next_Tune-09072024_Spray-Cam_Combo-2.hpl

This combo tune seems like good progress to my amateur eyes although I noticed some knock retard happening in Log 1. The KR pattern is something I've been dealing with as well. Seems to be mainly in 7th or 8th gear, when giving maintenance throttle just to maintain speed. More so when the IAT's get high. An example is at 04:25:832 in Combo Log 1, 7th gear, 19% throttle, maintaining 59 MPH, all of sudden -3.5 degrees of knock retard. Knock Sensor 2 voltage jumped to 3.72v for a split millisecond. Time code 06:27:462 in Combo Log 1 is another example. Although I never really seem to get any KR during WOT events.

The wife was driving during both Combo logs, and at the beginning of Log 2, she laid into it to pull out into traffic. She was turning left off a stop during this and the stabilitrac system kicked in. I think that's why it shows the spike in AFR and drop in timing in the middle of that WOT event ... she also let up on the throttle (not off, just up a bit) when it happened.

Thanks again Spray-Cam, I really appreciate your suggestions on this and interested to hear what you think of the logs.

[Stoopalini]

Yesterday, I checked out the Knock tables and noticed they were still the stock values. I then looked at my 1st tuner's VE tune file, and notice he had increased the knock thresholds a bit. I'm assuming this is what is meant by desensitizing the knock sensors", so I copied his values out and applied them to my tune.

I took another log yesterday after doing that, and the KR was still present but not as much. I didn't clear adaptives though, so there was probably some history still stored in LT Knock.

This morning I cleared adaptives and then took a log for the 1st start and drive of the day, so IAT's were a lot lower.

Looks like the KR isn't happening at these more reasonable IAT levels and the new table values, but the WOT run I made from a standing start doesn't appear to be hitting the target AFR, so it registered quite a few misfire events during that ... And, it looks like it didn't shift to 2nd at the right time which caused the AFR to spike up to 26 when it finally did shift to 2nd?

WOT_Miss-Shift.JPG

Shift schedule 5 was active, and the table has 1055 for the shaft speed shift point. The above screenshot shows 1224, so I think it should have shifted by now. I probably need to look at the torque settings again ....

Trans_TQ_Mgmt.JPG

Lilsick, I assume this is the same issue you ran into at the track ... hopefully I can figure it out


Tune File: TH_Next_Tune-09072024_Spray-Cam_Combo_Knock-Adjust.hpt
Log File: TH_Next_Tune-09072024_Spray-Cam_Combo_Knock-Adjust-4.hpl

Looks like I can't upload the log file. The upload just spins and spins, I assume because the file is over 5mb in size. I tried to export just a region of the log to make the file smaller, but it's only exporting the RPM data for some reason. I need to look into how to do this further.

[LilSick]

dunno, cant see it

put it on a cloud and email me a link

[Stoopalini]

I uploaded the log to Dropbox, and it can be accessed here: TH_Next_Tune-09072024_Spray-Cam_Combo_Knock-Adjust-4.hpl

[LilSick]

5 whole degrees of ignition lead?

thrill seeker ha : )

1100 mg aircharge?

you are never gonna hurt the motor but your trans hates you

[Stoopalini]

I dunno man, this is based on the Whipple provided tune with me making changes to it as I learn more ... so I'm sure there are all sorts of things which can be improved.

The transmission issue is a new development which I may have introduced myself when I adjusted the Trans TqMgmt switches. I was planning to put those back the way they were prior to the issue developing, to test my theory.

Prior to those Trans Tq changes, the trans would shift quick and strong .. now it seems to be slipping through the gear change when going WOT, and of course, it missed the 1->2 shift in that log.


But .... the changes which Spray-am suggested seem to have addressed the tip in lean spike and misfires which were happening during part throttle ... but now I seem to have an issue where the AFR target is not being achieved during WOT, which is resulting in misfires being logged during the WOT ramp up.

[Stoopalini]

So I made a few changes today and it seemed to help.

I put Stoich back to 0.0720, put the Auto Trans TqMgt switches back, adjusted the TB Airflow a bit, and a few other things. One thing I noticed is I had inadvertently flipped the "Part Throttle VVT" -- "VVT Adjustment" flag to "Enabled" in the previous iteration due to a misunderstanding on my part. So I flipped this back to "Disabled" in this iteration.

Tune_Changes.JPG

Tune File: TH_Next_Tune-09092024_Spray-Cam_Combo_Knock-Adjust.hpt
Log File: TH_Next_Tune-09092024_Spray-Cam_Combo_Knock-Adjust.hpl

This data looks better than the last to me. I'm still seeing slight KR at times, mostly during cruise in 7th or 8th gear. IAT was 130 -140 though, as it was heat soaked from the wife running errands earlier.

Is there a way to determine which cylinder is triggering KR?


Another thing I noticed was at one point the AFR didn't respond very quickly after coasting. I was already 20% into the throttle and the AFR was still up at 28. This coincided with -0.5 of KR. Maybe I need to look at the DFCO settings? I don't think so though, considering the RPM's were below the cutoff point. I guess I need to read up on the various controls which allow the AFR to go high during coasting ...

DFCO_Maybe.JPG


WOT AFR seems to be tracking better, but it didn't get all the way down into the 10's like what is being commanded. Not sure why, or even if commanding low 10's is even desirable. During this WOT event, it did log 1 misfire on cylinder 7 and 3 misfires on cylinder 8. No other misfires during the rest of the log.

Misfires.JPG


The transmission shifting at WOT seemed a little better, but not much. Maybe clearing the transmission adaptives and going through the fast and slow relearn processes in VCM Scanner will help with this.

Does changing the Throttle Body Airflow Model have an impact on the shifting?

[N2speed]

10s is to rich, target should be 11.5, to much fuel can cause knock as well and lwith boost and or cam you may always see some misfires as long as the number is low like you posted it is nothing to be concerned about.

[Stoopalini]

10s is to rich, target should be 11.5, to much fuel can cause knock as well and lwith boost and or cam you may always see some misfires as long as the number is low like you posted it is nothing to be concerned about.

Thanks, I appreciate the input.

PE Table is set to "PRatio", so to fix this, I assume I adjust the PRatio table. It looks like it's set to go very rich on the upper end

PE_Table.JPG

With a stoich of .0720, and with 0.0365 up at 6016RPM in this table, this means it would try to target an AFR of 9.21 ... right?

No idea why this table is set this way on the Whipple tune. The tuner who did my VE tune set this table to 0.0209 for all cells. That would be a stable AFR target of 10.76 anytime PE in, if I'm understanding this correctly.

Would it be wise to change anything above 0.0200 to 0.0209 instead, and do so for both the Aircharge and PRatio tables?

PE_Table_New.JPG

I realize this would target an AFR of 10.7 as the maximum enrichment, but would only do so under scenarios where PRatio is above 1.20 and RPM is above 4800. Having it on the "safe side" is desirable for me, rather than trying to maximize power.

[Stoopalini]

So I loaded up the modified PE tables and grabbed a coupe of logs while the wife was driving. The AFR target looks better to me. Still seeing KR though. Still mainly when cruising in 7th or 8th gear with maintenance throttle.

Would love some thoughts on the KR ... fueling, or timing, maybe cam position? Or is this the ANN model and I need to make adjustments there?

The trans is still being lazy. I am going to try clearing adaptives and doing a fast and slow relearn process on it. If that doesn't get the snappy shifting back (and hopefully resolve the issue of the shift blowing past the shaft RPM shift point), then I'll try loading up the Whipple trans tune and see how it does.

Tune: TH_Next_Tune-09092024_Spray-Cam_Combo_Knock-Adjust-2.hpt
Log 1: TH_Next_Tune-09092024_Spray-Cam_Combo_Knock-Adjust-2.hpl
Log 2: TH_Next_Tune-09092024_Spray-Cam_Combo_Knock-Adjust-2-2.hpl

[LilSick]

10s is to rich, target should be 11.5, to much fuel can cause knock as well and lwith boost and or cam you may always see some misfires as long as the number is low like you posted it is nothing to be concerned about.

whipples tunes are horribly fat

they are under the impression that the cat temp calculations are accurate and are scared to death over there

look at dudes above ^^^

what a waste of a blower

one of the cars i am tuning (gen V 3.0 liter whipple) was showing .670 lambda with whipples tune

ballenger afr500v2 brand new always preheated

fat as fuck

scairt

[Chubby Racer]

Makes sense, thanks. I just meant if the LFTF+STFT chart showed a negative %, then I want to reduce the VE by that percentage.

Yes, but if you paste how I mentioned, it'll take care of that for you.

[Stoopalini]

So after reading this article: https://www.hptuners.com/articles/ai...try-explained/, I wonder if I should set stoich to 0.0709

I run 93 octane E10 fuel, and based on that article, the stoich of E10 has an AFR of 14.1 ... which is a FAR of 0.0709.

I made a simple excel tool to help me understand how the different stoich values and PE values impact the target AFR and lambda:

Stoich-PE-Tool.JPG

In that excel, I can adjust the white cells to populate the others; just so I can see the impact different values have. This is helping me to gain a better understanding of how it works.

So if setting stoich to 0.0709 would be reasonable for 93 octane E10, then:

• To target an AFR of 11.5, I would need a PE value of 0.0161. This would be a lambda of 0.82.
• The 0.0209 PE value my 1st tuner used would result in an AFR of 10.89 (lambda of 0.77).

So maybe I leave the top end of the table at the 0.0209 value just as a safety margin and contour the rest of the table around the 0.0161 value?

[LilSick]

So maybe I leave the top end of the table at the 0.0209 value just as a safety margin and contour the rest of the table around the 0.0161 value?

no

you obviously have the coin...

put it on a dyno and tune it to the mixture that makes the most power

and read lambda

you cant read AFR unless you know exactly what is in your fuel tank AND have the controller for the gauge set up for that fuel

[Stoopalini]

Believe me, I've tried. I already have ~$2k or into trying to get this tune sorted by experienced tuners, one of whom is very well known and respected in the industry, and it went on his mustang dyno for the finalization of a VE tune (after 20 remote revisions of trying to work through issues). It came back home afterward with a hunting idle, off idle hesitation (which was especially scary when trying to pull out into traffic), and an intermittent stalling condition when shifting from P to R or visa-versa. It did make 440 all-wheel HP and 420 all-wheel TQ though.

Keep in mind that making the most power is not my primary goal here ... I'd rather have smooth driveability and safe power over max dyno numbers. Of course I'd like it to have proper power levels as a supercharged Hemi should, but more important is for the vehicle to have smooth street manners and be safe enough to last 100K+ miles.

To be fair, there were issue which were unknown at the time when he was tuning it, like the throttle body issue ... these have since been resolved so I contacted a local shop who also comes highly recommended by several guys with built Hemis (even the gear heads who work in the service department at my local dealership recommended him), but when I reached out and asked about hiring his services for a dyno tune ... he declined to take the job after hearing about the history, because the previous tuner (whom he knows and respects) was unable to dial it in so he's concerned he won't be able to either.

So here I am, trying to learn everything I can and make the improvements myself. Starting with the Whipple tune seemed like a safe bet and building off of it, as not to carry anything previous tuners may have done to compensate for the airflow issue the throttle body was causing.

[Stoopalini]

So I gave it a shot, and it seems it may have addressed most of the KR I was seeing. LT and ST fuel trims look good to me. You'd be proud I tracked lambda this time, and things look good to me ... but then again, I don't know what I don't know at this stage.

Log 1 was a casual drive to the gas station ... log 2 was the drive home, with a short WOT stint, but nothing too aggressive.

Tune: TH_Next_Tune-09102024_Spray-Cam_Combo_Knock-Adjust.hpt
Log 1: TH_Next_Tune-09102024_Spray-Cam_Combo_Knock-Adjust.hpl
Log 2: TH_Next_Tune-09102024_Spray-Cam_Combo_Knock-Adjust-2.hpl

I still haven't had time to do a trans relearn yet, hope to do that later this evening to see if it'll address the shifting issue. Then I'll log another standing start to see how it looks.

[Stoopalini]

I'm now starting to look at the cam timing, and it appears that maybe HP Tuners got the NORMAL and MAX TIP tables swapped with each other on this OS?

Here are the stock cam timing settings:

OEM-Cam-Timings.JPG

Here is how Whipple changed them:

Whipple-Cam-Timings.JPG

Am I correct in assuming the PCM will use the NORMAL 36547 table for non-WOT, the WOT 36551 table for WOT, and would only use the MAX TIP 36548 table if the MAX TIP 36059 setting is set to ENABLED?

I was looking over some logs, and reading on the forum about the cam timing, and noticed things like this:

CAM-1.JPG

This is non-WOT, at 1600 RPM, with 0.250g air charge ... so shouldn't the commanded cam position be around 83-84 as shown in the NORMAL table? But it's reporting as 106.5 which seems to align more to the MAX TIP table.

I also found it strange the Whipple calibration seems to have swapped the NORMAL and MAX TIP tables, and then they adjusted the upper end of the resulting MAX TIP table.

I read some stuff posted by Hemituna, where he says for boosted applications, it can be good practice to take the WOT values and just copy them over to all of the PT tables. I was thinking of testing that later today with the WOT values I am using now, just to see how it does ... but I got confused when I started digging into the log data.

I suppose if all 3 tables end up with the same values it probably doesn't matter if they're switched, but I'd like to understand this better before I go making changes.