Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi guys, on the Datalogit Settings, Page 3 there is configurable table for the 20 map reference points for RPM and the 20 map reference points for Airflow.

The default RPM reference points are in 400 rpm increments from 400 rpm to 8,000 rpm.

The default Airflow reference points are 1446 (load point 2) increasing by 482 up to load point 10 then 964 from load point 10 to load point 15 then 1928 from load point 15 to load point 20. This is determined by the Air Flow Curves (AFM voltage ramp table) which is also on Settings Page 3

Datalogit_Settings_3.jpg

Hope that was of some help :D

sydneykid - Looking at the screenshot are all the white cells user definable? If they are then it certainly looks like fc-datalogit might be the only way around it??

Yep, the whites are input cells.:)

Hi guys, on the Datalogit Settings, Page 3 there is configurable table for the 20 map reference points for RPM and the 20 map reference points for Airflow.

The default RPM reference points are in 400 rpm increments from 400 rpm to 8,000 rpm.

The default Airflow reference points are 1446 (load point 2) increasing by 482 up to load point 10 then 964 from load point 10 to load point 15 then 1928 from load point 15 to load point 20.  This is determined by the Air Flow Curves (AFM voltage ramp table) which is also on Settings Page 3

Datalogit_Settings_3.jpg

Hope that was of some help :)

That looks interesting, SK, so to get more load points out of the PFC, which values need to be changed?

That looks interesting, SK, so to get more load points out of the PFC, which values need to be changed?
I don't believe it's a matter of getting more load points, but taking the 20 you have and "stretching" them out, by increasing the "distance" between points on the AFM axis of your map.

I doubt you need to alter all of them, perhaps the top 5, obviously once something as fundamental the "scale" on you map changes the associated fueling values will need to change also.

I hope i made some sense there, if not, ignore me and wait for SK to ride to the rescue! :)

Hi SK,

After a little investigating it appears the rb20's airflow value at load point 20 is roughly the same as the rb25's airflow value at load point 15.

Oosh, You are spot on, all it does is reduce the resolution, the rb20 map reference with the rb30 is fairly usless as to use load points 5-12 you really have to concentrate to only ever so slightly touch the accelerator.

Bigger motor drawing more air the 2.5ltr reference map suits it much better. :mad:

I've stumbled upon an interestering airflow vs horsepower relation. :mad:

After using the rb25det reference map, the airflow required to make ~200rwkw now uses load point 15-16, previously with the rb20det reference map it was maxing out at load point 20 to make the same power.

Calcs.. It appears that the rb25det reference map has been scaled enough to support ~325rwkw of power on the same dyno and peak RPM as I and Bl4ck32 use.

I find it interesting that I am making ~176rwkw and using load points 18-19, both Bl4ck32's and my power figure is supported by the calc. :lock:

Obviously an rb20det, rb25det or rb26dett may make use of the air supplied a little better or worse, the power figure as a result 'should' vary with different motors and RPM!

Now to find some one that knows the power they make at approx 5000rpm with a PowerFC and see if the calc can 'predict' the load point they will use. :D

If it appears to be fairly accurate, we will be able to weed out those bodged dyno power figures. :D

I haven't really thought about rpm at this stage, I have no idea how it scales its airflow/loadpoints as rpm increases, or if it does at all.

My map trace is horizontal, from 2000rpm it drops to load point 18-19 then sits there all the way to peak power.

As an engine increases RPM its supposed to increases its airflow requirement. :confused:

Just to note, I noticed for example.

A load is placed upon the motor that is inbetween two airflow values. The PFC will do a linear (I assume) calc and determine the value to use for that load.

So providing airflow and ignition timing required is linear between the two load points the pfc will do a pretty damn good job working out the optimal value.

It will only do this where ignition timing or fuel has different values between load point cells.

Hope that makes sense. :mad:

Cubes , have been very interested in this topic . Is there an Apexi PFC for the VG30DET or VG30DETT ? If so it would be interesting to know their reference tables particularly as the airflow would be based around 3 litres .

Also probably impossible but are Z32 ECU's electrically similar to R32's ?

Cheers Adrian .

I've stumbled upon an interestering airflow vs horsepower relation. :D

 

After using the rb25det reference map, the airflow required to make ~200rwkw now uses load point 15-16, previously with the rb20det reference map it was maxing out at load point 20 to make the same power.

 

Calcs.. It appears that the rb25det reference map has been scaled enough to support ~325rwkw of power on the same dyno and peak RPM as I and Bl4ck32 use.

 

I find it interesting that I am making ~176rwkw and using load points 18-19, both Bl4ck32's and my power figure is supported by the calc. :lock:  

 

Obviously an rb20det, rb25det or rb26dett may make use of the air supplied a little better or worse, the power figure as a result 'should' vary with different motors and RPM!

 

Now to find some one that knows the power they make at approx 5000rpm with a PowerFC and see if the calc can 'predict' the load point they will use. :D

If it appears to be fairly accurate, we will be able to weed out those bodged dyno power figures. ;)

 

I haven't really thought about rpm at this stage, I have no idea how it scales its airflow/loadpoints as rpm increases, or if it does at all.

My map trace is horizontal, from 2000rpm it drops to load point 18-19 then sits there all the way to peak power.

As an engine increases RPM its supposed to increases its airflow requirement. :confused:

Interesting, ultimately the engines power would depend on its VE at the various airlfow rates. That can vary by 15% or so at numerous RPM's.

One thing I would add is that the RB25DET AFM (PFC default) is set for 5.1 volts at 10860, which is around 170 rwkw. Yet the load point mapping goes to 21213, this means 5.1 volts (the AFM maximum) of 10860 is around load point 14/15. So a standard RB25DET AFM could never show more than load point 14/15.

You are at load point 18/19, but I can't remember what AFM you have?:mad:

Sounds fairly spot on SK, I was very close to 5v on the std RB20DET afm (which actually was a R33 S1 AFM) before the tune so obviously a few more rev's I may have seen it hitting 5v or slightly over.

I made sure before the tune I wired in the Z32 AFM, it has hit a highest of 4.1v on Load point 18/19.

Where did you grab the R33's Airflow airflow value at 5.1v?

Going by the table below (taken from FC_Pro Apexi Software) R32/R33 at 5.1v has an airflow value of 4423. ;)

It doesn't make sense. Especially when you look the Z32 apparently has a higher airflow per voltage than the VH41?!?!

Discopotato,

The airflow reference map from a VG30 would be very interestering to see.

It appears the FC-Logit doesn't do one for the VG30 nor does the Apexi FC Pro Software.

Both softwares do one for the 2JZGTE, might see if I can grab it from the FC Pro Software.

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...