Close

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 35
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Miami, FL.
    Posts
    1,895
    Rep Points
    771.0
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    8


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No

    Procede Fuel Control

    This was posted by shiv 3 days ago on e90. I thought I'd share it with the guys interested in what he has to say about the whole fueling debacle:

    There's a small group of folks out there who are trying very hard to convince others that only a flash can control fuel properly. I've never agreed with them because actual testing that I'VE ACTUALLY DONE suggested otherwise. We have spent the last 6 months developing the fuel control system on the Procede to outperform every other tuning device we have ever bench tested. This means the Procede isn't just programmed to provide consistent AFR targeting but also FAST targeting.

    Today we put the Procede to the test with what is perhaps the biggest challenge any n54 tune has ever faced: A single turbo set-up making nearly 500whp on pump gas alone. First, here is a graph showing all our runs during the day. Roughly half where on 93oct pump gas alone. The rest were on 93+meth. At power levels ranging from 450whp to 525whp:

    Click here to enlarge

    Earlier in the dyno session, we did a test to see how fast the Procede will target AFR post-shift. To do this, I did a 3rd to 4th gear pull (with a FAST shift) on the dyno running 17psi with NO METH. With dyno smoothing set to 0. I don't recommend running a nearly 480whp car in 3rd gear on the dyno (it gets a bit wiggly) but, in this case, it was in the name of science. Dynojet lambda meter was mounted in the tailpipe (not logged from factory lambda sensors)

    Click here to enlarge

    As you can see, AFR targeting is immediate. No short-term lean spot post-shift. As you would expect AFR is even richer than normal during fast accel and dynamic load conditions.

    I don't mean to present this info to be argumentative. Instead, I hope to be informative. We actually do spend a lot of out time developing and testing engine control systems. While it's a lot easier to play in the internet warrior game, it really doesn't get us anywhere.

    my 2c,
    Shiv
    Click here to enlarge
    2007 335i Coupe
    Mods: Check the Garage

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,057
    Rep Points
    1,149.5
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    12


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I still beleive that 13AFR in the midrange is unintentional. I'm not sure what map this was on though. Either way, its difficult to map out without introducing hiccups on the non-agressive maps.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,738
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    V5 r3 logs posted on e90 a couple days ago shows otherwise
    Click here to enlarge

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,680
    Rep Points
    3,329.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Reputation: Yes | No
    This inconsistency between procede AFR logs and what he shows on dyno wideband traces is weird and keeps lingering
    Click here to enlarge

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,089
    Rep Points
    999.1
    Mentioned
    104 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    On automatics this brief "lean" condition shouldn't pose a major problem at all considering we don't lift off throttle during shifts, but per the example logs we have all seen, it poses a problem on manuals. it's just an inherent limitation of piggybacks, nothing you can do about it other than running a flash map in conjunction. Something shiv will be too proud to do.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,010
    Rep Points
    8,959.7
    Mentioned
    633 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    90


    Reputation: Yes | No
    A few random comments:

    1) Whether using a piggyback or a flash tune the DME is still running the fuel system.
    2) Manipulating the fuel system calibrations via a piggyback is insanely simple. You have two systems. An analog channel for biasing the o2 sensors and another analog channel for biasing the fuel pressure signal. Each of these are mapped on boost and RPM. And the only real mapping involved is ensuring that you are biasing the fuel pressure signal enough to keep the fuel trims within +-34% for the given o2 bias and power output. As long as you do that the DME will work mostly just as well as a reflash in terms of fueling. There are some catches and places to make mistakes but it's beyond the scope of this rant.
    3) You don't need to take my word for how simple this all is. Shiv posts his maps publicly on e90post. Just open one and check for yourself. Checkout this epic six month in the making work of art that he claims will outperform any other tuning system. He's reducing the fuel pressure signal around 61% for most of the power band and tapering that up top. Honestly I'd be embarrassed to make these public grandiose egotistical claims he makes given how little actual work is involved but I guess different strokes for different folks.
    4) This is actually the first time I bothered to open his fuel mapping table. Looks like fuel pressure is altered out of boost to make the car appear to get slightly better gas mileage during cruise than it is actually is. Classic. Click here to enlarge

    Click here to enlarge

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,089
    Rep Points
    999.1
    Mentioned
    104 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    2 out of 2 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Leave it to terry, to simplify shivs propaganda into terms even a moron can understand.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    557
    Rep Points
    785.8
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    8


    Reputation: Yes | No
    1 comment that's off topic but still regarding something posted in OP:

    If you have problems running a 480 whp car on the dyno in 3rd because it gets "wiggly" then your dyno operator needs to reassess his job of strapping the car in. lol

    Obviously 4th is preferable, but 3rd should in no way be scary or unsafe... hahaha
    Click here to enlarge

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    937
    Rep Points
    562.7
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Reputation: Yes | No
    geez looshy, you know that log isn't a true representation... mine don't look anything like that, and neither does anyone else. That guy has some other issue.

    And Terry that's not percentage in the OL table... I don't know the correlation between OL and pressure. I know I stay under 4v at peak, and stock is somewhere around 3v... but not sure. I do know it's not percentage.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,738
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JoshBoody Click here to enlarge
    geez looshy, you know that log isn't a true representation... mine don't look anything like that, and neither does anyone else. That guy has some other issue.

    And Terry that's not percentage in the OL table... I don't know the correlation between OL and pressure. I know I stay under 4v at peak, and stock is somewhere around 3v... but not sure. I do know it's not percentage.
    The guy has bogging issue from tapping the rev limiter. However his fuel response is still typical procede $#@!. You need a manual car see this

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    937
    Rep Points
    562.7
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I have a manual, but this guy's also maxing trims... not typical.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,738
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JoshBoody Click here to enlarge
    I have a manual, but this guy's also maxing trims... not typical.
    Very typical you are just not making the power

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,385
    Rep Points
    375.4
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4


    2 out of 5 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    I find it so funny that Sticky won't let shiv post yet every word the man writes is copied here by others so can criticizes and make claims about his stuff without him being able to respond. And sticky complains about stolen content yet a bunch of the threads on here are started by some copying directly a thread from e90post! Lol it's ironic.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,738
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    3 out of 3 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Whats even more ironic is that if bring these discussions up on e90 you get infracted and banned. So $#@! him.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,010
    Rep Points
    8,959.7
    Mentioned
    633 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    90


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JoshBoody Click here to enlarge
    And Terry that's not percentage in the OL table... I don't know the correlation between OL and pressure. I know I stay under 4v at peak, and stock is somewhere around 3v... but not sure. I do know it's not percentage.
    Sounds like you are confusing fuel pressure input with fuel pressure output. 4v is a typical input value, and also a byproduct of altering the output pressure to fool the DME. It causes the DME to raise the actual pressure as well. So at any given moment if the inlet pressure is 4v for example we might report an outlet pressure of 1.56v. And the factory target might be only 2.2v. RE: The table units being a raw % or a multiplier (like users enter in the JB4) I can't say for sure. I'd have to connect a box here and change the number while watching the fuel pressure output. Actually, I think you can help shed some light on that. Some channel should represent the fuel pressure analog output signal. Care to grab a quick log of say boost, rpm, tps, fuel pressure in and fuel pressure out?

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,385
    Rep Points
    375.4
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I see the same points being brought up here and there, in fact when there not brought up there he posts about it and discusses it like this whole thread that is being copied is in response to questions raised here. I think the problem lies more in how something is brought up (ie confrontational vs a legitimate discussion) frankly it's like political discourse in Washington where the facts are besides the point it's all about making the other side look bad. I get why alot of people dislike him as he may be arrogant(then again if I had a bunch of people who don't know much ?ing me all the time I'd be full of contempt too) but the man clearly knows his $#@! and pretty much every new feature or advance I've seen in the two years I've been watching has come from there so why all the bs?

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    937
    Rep Points
    562.7
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Sounds like you are confusing fuel pressure input with fuel pressure output. 4v is a typical input value, and also a byproduct of altering the output pressure to fool the DME. It causes the DME to raise the actual pressure as well. So at any given moment if the inlet pressure is 4v for example we might report an outlet pressure of 1.56v. And the factory target might be only 2.2v. RE: The table units being a raw % or a multiplier (like users enter in the JB4) I can't say for sure. I'd have to connect a box here and change the number while watching the fuel pressure output. Actually, I think you can help shed some light on that. Some channel should represent the fuel pressure analog output signal. Care to grab a quick log of say boost, rpm, tps, fuel pressure in and fuel pressure out?
    Terry, my understanding is that procede fuel pressure is actual rail voltage… reported to the DME is different taking into account OL… you can see this is fuel correction… they will match depending on the global adjustment. This is NOT a percentage but a value that correlates to voltage bias. I think 3v is pretty typical of stock, but not sure.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,010
    Rep Points
    8,959.7
    Mentioned
    633 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    90


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JoshBoody Click here to enlarge
    Terry, my understanding is that procede fuel pressure is actual rail voltage… reported to the DME is different taking into account OL… you can see this is fuel correction… they will match depending on the global adjustment. This is NOT a percentage but a value that correlates to voltage bias. I think 3v is pretty typical of stock, but not sure.
    I think you still don't fully understand it. I'll give this the college try one more time. Click here to enlarge

    Think of it like a boost sensor. There is the actual boost, and then there is what the DME thinks boost is (becuase we reduce the signal a bit). With the stock tuning they match. With piggyback tuning we fool the DME in to thinking it's making less boost than it actually is. Or in this case, less fuel pressure than it actually is. This changes the DME's IPW calculation, and as a side effect causes the DME to close the fuel return valve more than it would otherwise building higher pressure.

    So my question to you was, grab a log of the input and output of the fuel pressure sensor and based on that I can tell you if the numbers in the OL map are a raw % as I suspect or modifiers like we use on the JB4. The output will probably not be labeled and called "DebugWordX" or something. With the JB4 to log the output you need to set a FutureUseD field to enable it.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    937
    Rep Points
    562.7
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Reputation: Yes | No
    The fuel pressure reported in the log channel is actual voltage from rail pressure. The signal reported to DME is reduced by a value correlating to fuel correction so the DME sees a different rail pressure and alters accordingly. Thus you run a higher pressure, but DME sees target. Nothing changes in the DME calcs. Maybe I'm off in my thinking, but I don't think so.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,010
    Rep Points
    8,959.7
    Mentioned
    633 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    90


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JoshBoody Click here to enlarge
    The fuel pressure reported in the log channel is actual voltage from rail pressure. The signal reported to DME is reduced by a value correlating to fuel correction so the DME sees a different rail pressure and alters accordingly. Thus you run a higher pressure, but DME sees target. Nothing changes in the DME calcs. Maybe I'm off in my thinking, but I don't think so.
    Identify the user logable parameter that represents fuel pressure out voltage and then log that along with the other parameters above, and I'll make you a nice chart to show you what is actually going on. The DME never reaches its fuel pressure target not even close.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,848
    Rep Points
    31,576.4
    Mentioned
    2066 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Jimefam Click here to enlarge
    I find it so funny that Sticky won't let shiv post yet every word the man writes is copied here by others so can criticizes and make claims about his stuff without him being able to respond. And sticky complains about stolen content yet a bunch of the threads on here are started by some copying directly a thread from e90post! Lol it's ironic.
    First of all, I find it absurd Shiv wants to post as a vendor but not pay as a vendor.

    Secondly, what users want to read is up to them. If they want to copy and paste a discussion I have no problem with it. It would seem people want to discuss the topics he posts just not where he posts them. As in, circumventing their moderation. That is why this place exists, to have far more open dialogue without the politics. Shiv wants control, well, too bad. He doesn't have it here.

    Um, a lot of our topics come from other sources. You may have noticed BMW released the new BMW M6 info and I copy and pasted their press release. What, is every topic supposed to originate here? Impossible.

    I complain about stolen original content without the source being cited. I don't see anyone here saying this did not come from E90 or Shiv.

    So, if you are going to attempt to make a point like this try to make a good one next time.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,010
    Rep Points
    8,959.7
    Mentioned
    633 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    90


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Just for kicks went and looked up the specs on the Bosch wideband sensor. Not sure if it's the same model we use, but it at least looks the same in the picture.

    They rate the base of the housing up to 570c, and the exhaust gas itself up to 930c. Apparently the sensor won't become damaged until 1030c, but won't actually function properly between 930c-1030c. To give a little margin for error EGT needs to be kept below 900c and the housing below 500c to have a good chance at lasting in my opinion.

    Depending on the boost levels, meth level, etc, I could see EGT @ WOT falling anywhere from 800c to 1000c. Even if you manage to keep the housing under 500c which will be hard in that location keeping EGT under 900c may prove more difficult. The document doesn't discuss pressure ratings so that would need to be further searched.

    I think finding a way to operate the o2 sensor post turbo (as the factory does) and run a single bank is still the preferable choice.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,680
    Rep Points
    3,329.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Reputation: Yes | No
    pre-turbo is preferrable for me BUT if the hardware allows it obviously...I haven't datalogged EGTs with the 20psi race map from cobb yet but from the earlier maps with cobb+jb4 stacked EGTs were hitting 1750F up top (954 celsius) with meth...stock EGTs were going to 1450F

    This is data collected using the AEM x-wifi and their EGT sensors mounted on the turbo manifolds (pre-turbine)

    By the way, that IS the o2 wideband used on this car (LSU 4.2)

    EDIT: 930C listed as the operating temp is within spec of that sensor so it should be fine...1030C (1886F) is max but that means 1030C (1886F) is also within limits...they should definitely have EGT probes on the exhaust manifold if they already don't but I don't recall seeing them which surprises me given their pushing it
    Last edited by dzenno@PTF; 02-16-2012 at 07:52 PM.
    Click here to enlarge

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,010
    Rep Points
    8,959.7
    Mentioned
    633 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    90


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I read that document like I read the documents for electronic components. The device should provide accurate data within the operating range and should not become permanently damaged until you exceed the maximum range. Between the ranges it will not operate properly but also will not become permanently damaged.

    But if you are seeing 950c already at only 20 (18?) psi with meth flowing it's definitely going to be sketchy IMHO. And when your engine is depending on it (full time closed loop) you want that sensor reliable.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,010
    Rep Points
    8,959.7
    Mentioned
    633 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    90


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Identify the user logable parameter that represents fuel pressure out voltage and then log that along with the other parameters above, and I'll make you a nice chart to show you what is actually going on. The DME never reaches its fuel pressure target not even close.
    PS. Josh have that data yet? Let's overlay the DME reported fuel pressure along with the actual fuel pressure with the the factory target curve, so you have a clear understanding of how this piggyback fuel control actually operates.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •