maftcalibrationbywbo2
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
|
maftcalibrationbywbo2 [2008/01/23 08:08] 76.100.119.159 |
maftcalibrationbywbo2 [2024/03/15 11:16] (current) |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | ====== History ====== | + | ====== MAFT Calibration by Logged WBO2 ====== |
| - | The following has been copied from the DSMLink forums. The original (courtesy of Ron Francis) may be found at in this [[http://www.dsmlink.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3529|user support forum thread]]. The text below has been updated to include 1g-specific info, as well as other minor edits. | + | The following has been copied from the DSMLink forums. The original (courtesy of Ron Francis) may be found at in this [[https://www.ecmtuning.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3529|user support forum thread]] (registered DSMLink users only). The text below has been updated to include 1g-specific info, as well as other minor edits. |
| ====== Assumptions ====== | ====== Assumptions ====== | ||
| Line 55: | Line 55: | ||
| Example: If the fuel trim is at a constant +7%, add +7% to the 250 Hz slider in the airflow table. Repeat until you are happy. | Example: If the fuel trim is at a constant +7%, add +7% to the 250 Hz slider in the airflow table. Repeat until you are happy. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| ====== WOT Tuning (A/F Ratio, WBO2, & MAFRaw) 400hz, 800hz, 1200hz, 1600hz, 2000hz, 2400hz ====== | ====== WOT Tuning (A/F Ratio, WBO2, & MAFRaw) 400hz, 800hz, 1200hz, 1600hz, 2000hz, 2400hz ====== | ||
| Line 64: | Line 68: | ||
| * When A/F Ratio is leaner than WBO2 subtract airflow. OR when A/F Ratio is above WBO2 on the graph, subtract airflow to move A/F Ratio down. OR when you want less fuel, subtract airflow. | * When A/F Ratio is leaner than WBO2 subtract airflow. OR when A/F Ratio is above WBO2 on the graph, subtract airflow to move A/F Ratio down. OR when you want less fuel, subtract airflow. | ||
| * For each 0.10 A/F Ratio is off, adjust by 1% airflow. | * For each 0.10 A/F Ratio is off, adjust by 1% airflow. | ||
| + | |||
| Example: You make a pull and you get the following results: | Example: You make a pull and you get the following results: | ||
| Line 71: | Line 76: | ||
| | WBO2 | 11.0| 12.0| 10.7| 9.6| 9.6| 9.4| | | WBO2 | 11.0| 12.0| 10.7| 9.6| 9.6| 9.4| | ||
| | Adjustment | +17%| +25%| +13%| +4%| +3%| -1%| | | Adjustment | +17%| +25%| +13%| +4%| +3%| -1%| | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Note:** The following calculation method provides a crude approximation of the needed adjustment and depends on the estimated and measured A/F ratio values being somewhere near 10:1. Use ECMLink's correctly calculated WBFactor value instead. | ||
| + | |||
| + | A simple formula for calculating this is:<code> | ||
| + | (est a/f - WB02) * (-10) = airflow adjustment amount. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Example: | ||
| + | MAFRaw (hz) 800 | ||
| + | A/F Ratio 9.5 | ||
| + | WBO2 12.0 | ||
| + | Adjustment + 25% | ||
| + | |||
| + | (9.5 - 12.0) * (- 10) | ||
| + | (-2.5) * (- 10) | ||
| + | = 25% | ||
| + | |||
| + | (submitted by Omar R. "DSMmaniac_Big_O") </code> | ||
| ====== Notes ====== | ====== Notes ====== | ||
| - | *With this method my fuel trims are both with-in 1% of zero and my A/F Ratio are WBO2 shadow each other with-in 1-2% for an entire pull. | + | * With this method my fuel trims are both with-in 1% of zero and my A/F Ratio are WBO2 shadow each other with-in 1-2% for an entire pull. |
| - | *LTFT-Lo tends to be slightly unstable, so do not go crazy trying to get it perfect. With-in 3% of each other and with-in 5% of zero is acceptable. | + | * LTFT-Lo tends to be slightly unstable, so do not go crazy trying to get it perfect. With-in 3% of each other and with-in 5% of zero is acceptable. |
| - | *Some changes to the Airflow Table at the 150 Hz point maybe needed when "cruise tuning." | + | * Some changes to the Airflow Table at the 150 Hz point maybe needed when "cruise tuning." |
| - | *Adjustment to any slider in the airflow table WILL affect the two sliders adjacent to it. | + | * Adjustment to any slider in the airflow table WILL affect the two sliders adjacent to it. |
| - | *For me, getting the 400 Hz point perfect created a nasty dip at the untunable 500-600 Hz range. Tuning the 500 Hz point using the 400 Hz point in the Airflow Table worked much better. | + | * For me, getting the 400 Hz point perfect created a nasty dip at the untunable 500-600 Hz range. Tuning the 500 Hz point using the 400 Hz point in the Airflow Table worked much better. |
| - | *Sometimes tuning using a HZ point 100 more than what you are tuning, works better. So, instead of 1200 Hz sometimes using 1300 Hz works better. | + | * Sometimes tuning using a HZ point 100 more than what you are tuning, works better. So, instead of 1200 Hz sometimes using 1300 Hz works better. |
| - | *This is not the "Ideal, Perfect" way to tune a MAFT, but it was sure easy. As with any tuning the main problem arises with boost leaks and fuel delivery discrepancies. So long as you have no boost leaks and your fuel system is working properly, this is an extremely easy and viable way to tune a MAFT. | + | * This is not the "Ideal, Perfect" way to tune a MAFT, but it was sure easy. As with any tuning the main problem arises with boost leaks and fuel delivery discrepancies. So long as you have no boost leaks and your fuel system is working properly, this is an extremely easy and viable way to tune a MAFT. |
maftcalibrationbywbo2.1201093729.txt.gz · Last modified: 2008/01/23 08:08 by 76.100.119.159
Page Tools
Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: CC Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International
