Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Is closed loop ....o2 feed and active changes?

And open loop means the loop is broken and or uses maps. Loaded maps being wot and high throttle maps tuned in the ecu like an idle map but for when the cars power is under load?

Google closed loop and open loop control systems. 

Get on YouTube if you still can't work out what an open/closed loop control system is. 

It is very clear you do not understand what each term means.

Regarding your 'load map', there are high load areas on the fuel and timing maps, I've never seen a separate map specifically for when the engine is on high load. I hope such a thing doesn't exist because it would be a pain to tune, constantly swapping between multiple maps.

While your googling, Google fuel map and have a look on the images, you'll see the maps cover the entire rpm and load range the engine operates in.

I was serious about the English as a second language question, do you speak another language?

  • Like 1
3 hours ago, Slap said:

Wide band gauge is delayed too much to save a bad leanout that is why it should be monitored by the ecu or other different automatic safegaurds.

So how would the ECU monitor the air to fuel ratio?

"Defining Open Loop and Closed Loop o2

Open loop is when the ECU is not referring to the o2 sensor for feedback. ... Closed loop is when the ECU does refer to the o2 sensor for feedback. Using the o2 sensor the ECU will modify its fuel table based on the readings the o2 sensor is seeing."

5 hours ago, Dose Pipe Sutututu said:

So how would the ECU monitor the air to fuel ratio?

Slap has invented the world's first mechanical air fuel ratio gauge. Think of the cost savings, never having to replace another sensor again

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1

I may have invented load maps but ment load area of the map. Eg....

"Pulling a fifth-wheel camper up the Rocky Mountains at highway speed, for example, puts the engine under a huge load and requires a lot of energy. The ECU gets input from all of the sensors on vehicle speed, air intake, pressure, and temperature and plots a specific point on the imaginary graph. The computer is programmed to tell the fuel injectors what to do at that very point on the fuel map, and it sends out the appropriate message -- without any more input from the driver."

open loop and closed loop is well known i believe and maybe you should do some googling and maybe you will see where my terminology isnt correct. But its the jist.

46 minutes ago, Slap said:

Using the o2 sensor the ECU will modify its fuel table based on the readings the o2 sensor is seeing

That's not actually true. Was clearly written by someone with half an understanding. What really happens is that the ECU leaves the values in the fuel table alone and DOES NOT modify them. It may or may not use them as the base for the calculated fuel qty that it will then apply the feedback factor from the O2 reading, and also apply the long and short term fuel trims if and as they exist.

And how do I know? Well, the Functional Description documents that I have been writing recently for Burner Management Systems for a couple of different rotary kiln systems with fuel-air ratio control WORK IN EXACTLY THE SAME WAY. I even have a CO sensor in the kiln exhaust as a Safety Function.

The capitalised names above are capitalised for a reason. A Safety Function is such a serious thing that we use capitals when writing about it. A Functional Description is what is used by the system integrator and programmer to write the PLC code. All of this is covered by AS 3814 and AS/IEC 61511.

The words that are in all caps are just me shouting.

17 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

That's not actually true. Was clearly written by someone with half an understanding. What really happens is that the ECU leaves the values in the fuel table alone and DOES NOT modify them. It may or may not use them as the base for the calculated fuel qty that it will then apply the feedback factor from the O2 reading, and also apply the long and short term fuel trims if and as they exist.

And how do I know? Well, the Functional Description documents that I have been writing recently for Burner Management Systems for a couple of different rotary kiln systems with fuel-air ratio control WORK IN EXACTLY THE SAME WAY. I even have a CO sensor in the kiln exhaust as a Safety Function.

The capitalised names above are capitalised for a reason. A Safety Function is such a serious thing that we use capitals when writing about it. A Functional Description is what is used by the system integrator and programmer to write the PLC code. All of this is covered by AS 3814 and AS/IEC 61511.

The words that are in all caps are just me shouting.

Is that not what it is saying in laymans terms, "as it MODIFIES" does not represent any one actual change, and is interpreted to myself as basic word usage so that it can be used to cover all different aspects and types of change and ecu's.

It doesn't modify shit, it applies a compensation/trim in either short term and/or long term trim.

The fuel table stays as is. However in aftermarket ECUs it stores the trims and you're able to apply it to the base table. This is the only time it "modifies" the fuel table.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • There's plenty of OEM steering arms that are bolted on. Not in the same fashion/orientation as that one, to be sure, but still. Examples of what I'm thinking of would use holes like the ones that have the downward facing studs on the GTR uprights (down the bottom end, under the driveshaft opening, near the lower balljoint) and bolt a steering arm on using only 2 bolts that would be somewhat similarly in shear as these you're complainig about. I reckon old Holdens did that, and I've never seen a broken one of those.
    • Let's be honest, most of the people designing parts like the above, aren't engineers. Sometimes they come from disciplines that gives them more qualitative feel for design than quantitive, however, plenty of them have just picked up a license to Fusion and started making things. And that's the honest part about the majority of these guys making parts like that, they don't have huge R&D teams and heaps of time or experience working out the numbers on it. Shit, most smaller teams that do have real engineers still roll with "yeah, it should be okay, and does the job, let's make them and just see"...   The smaller guys like KiwiCNC, aren't the likes of Bosch etc with proper engineering procedures, and oversights, and sign off. As such, it's why they can produce a product to market a lot quicker, but it always comes back to, question it all.   I'm still not a fan of that bolt on piece. Why not just machine it all in one go? With the right design it's possible. The only reason I can see is if they want different heights/length for the tie rod to bolt to. And if they have the cncs themselves,they can easily offer that exact feature, and just machine it all in one go. 
    • The roof is wrapped
    • This is how I last did this when I had a master cylinder fail and introduce air. Bleed before first stage, go oh shit through first stage, bleed at end of first stage, go oh shit through second stage, bleed at end of second stage, go oh shit through third stage, bleed at end of third stage, go oh shit through fourth stage, bleed at lunch, go oh shit through fifth stage, bleed at end of fifth stage, go oh shit through sixth stage....you get the idea. It did come good in the end. My Topdon scan tool can bleed the HY51 and V37, but it doesn't have a consult connector and I don't have an R34 to check that on. I think finding a tool in an Australian workshop other than Nissan that can bleed an R34 will be like rocking horse poo. No way will a generic ODB tool do it.
    • Hmm. Perhaps not the same engineers. The OE Nissan engineers did not forsee a future with spacers pushing the tie rod force application further away from the steering arm and creating that torque. The failures are happening since the advent of those things, and some 30 years after they designed the uprights. So latent casting deficiencies, 30+ yrs of wear and tear, + unexpected usage could quite easily = unforeseen failure. Meanwhile, the engineers who are designing the billet CNC or fabricated uprights are also designing, for the same parts makers, the correction tie rod ends. And they are designing and building these with motorsport (or, at the very least, the meth addled antics of drifters) in mind. So I would hope (in fact, I would expect) that their design work included the offset of that steering force. Doesn't mean that it is not totally valid to ask the question of them, before committing $$.
×
×
  • Create New...