Meinolf

Hi, Yes, they can be identified. I did change IDs, but not consistently. Look for the "#xx...." or "V11KS Althaus..." https://drive.google.com/open?id=1jen_NO3imIBqqwABNQ8mssmz7F-vm7Cm The easiest way is to compare the values in the Fuel trim air pressure table @ B298. That's one of the trim tables which I corrected right at the beginning of my activities. https://drive.google.com/open?id=17dGUNIqO1JJo1BfWiN1gsCAXFu7GD6Rq Cheers Meinolf

Hi, always glad to share and help. Cheers Meinolf

Hi, it's easy. Instead of changing the CO trim with GuzziDiag connected to the running engine and waiting until the engine temperature has reached 60°C, download the EEPROM content using Beard's software http://www.von-der-salierburg.de/download/GuzziDiag/IAW15xEEPROMTool_V0.04.zip. Then open the EEPROM file with TunerPro and this XDF http://www.von-der-salierburg.de/download/GuzziDiag/xdf/15M_EEPROM_V1.01.zip. Change the CO trim and upload the changed file to the EEPROM. Donate some money to Beard using the PayPal link in GuzziDiag and it's done. Cheers Meinolf

Hi, CO trim adds or subtracts a constant time per value to the overall injector pulse duration. The time is the same across all throttle (TPS) settings and rpms. ((Fuel Map value x Fuel map value factor) + (CO trim value x CO trim value factor)) x trim factorairtemp x trim factorenginetemp x trim factorairpressure x trimfactorbatteryvoltage x trim factorn = injector pulse width Hence the influence on AFR depends on the Fuel map value and CO trim value; - At idle the fuel map value might be 50, corresponding to 3200µs injector pulse width (50 x 64µs). A CO trim value of 50 equals 320µs (=50 x 6,4µs), which is 320 / 3200=0.1%. - At WOT the fuel map value might be 200, corresponding to 12.800µs injector pulse width (200 x 64µs). A same CO trim value would then amount to 1/4th (320 / 12.800 = 0.025%). Consider the CO trim to be the electronic equivalent of the bypass screw openings. Opening the bypass screw will allow more air to be mixed to the air/fuel mixture, the percentage of which diminishes when the air flow through the throttle increases. Both methods are useful ONLY to adjust AFR/CO at one specific loadpoint. CO trim affects both cylinders, the bypass screws each cylinder respectively. An additional problem of the bypass screws is that the setting is difficult to duplicate. How exact is 1/2 turn being duplicated on a different bike? A neater way to get to targeted AFRs at specific loadpoints is to measure AFR at those points and adjust the fuel map values accordingly. Cheers Meinolf

Hi CHuck, thanks for catching the error. Yes, it's 156mV, not 560. Cheers Meinolf

Hi Tomek, ok, here are some tips in no particular order. 1. The average consumption seems to be 5-6l/100km. 8l are definitely too much. 2. Do you have access to the free software Guzzidiag and the required cables (~20€ on Ebay or elsewhere, I can name suppliers if needed) to connect to the ECU? If yes, connect and see -) if and which errors are stored in the ECU -) select diagram view in Guzzidiag and slowly open and close the throttle. The PF3C should show two straight lines intersecting at 30° TPS opening. 3. Are the base settings ok? TPS set to 156 560mV (you must use a DMM to measure the voltage, not GuzziDiag) with "choke" cable and linkage between left/right cylinder disconnected? 4. Check if the engine temp sensor in the right cylinder head has good contact. You can use Guzzidiag as well for a first test. Idle the bike (15min are sufficient) and watch if the shown engine temp is reaching 100°C or mor. 5. Disable the Lambda probe using the software Guzzi-Reader/Writer to read/write the BIN and Tunerpro to set the flag in the BIN before writing the changed BIN back to the ECU. I can send you one of my modified BINs if you so wish. 6. Valve play set to a minimum of 0.25mm for intake and exhaust. 7. Cylinders synced at idle using the throttle stop screws. Cheers Meinolf

Hi Frank, the download link to the reader http://www.von-der-salierburg.de/download/GuzziDiag/IAW15xReader_V0.67.zipworks and the ZIP contains the executable. Rename the *.eep file to *.BIN and select the EEPROM XDF, then you can open and read it in Tunerpro. Cheers Meinolf

Hi, the formulas for the characteristic curves of the PF3C are: 0-30° Degree = (Voltage -0.15) * 1000/105 >30-WOT Degree = (Voltage -2.45) * 3000/85 Cheers Meinolf

Hi Corey, you have a PF3? Send me a PM and I'll send you a lookup table which contains TPS voltage and degree opening values. Cheers Meinolf

Hi, the standard 15M/RC Bins stop injecting fuel at 8398rpms and begin injecting again at 8301rpms. The TI Bin values are 8600/8398rpms. Cheers Meinolf

Hi, not really. The values in the fuel maps reflect the volumetric efficiency of an engine across the board. If you use Tunerpro's graph capability to view a fuel table you'll notice the tremendous ups and downs of the values including peaks which look absurd. But they will, with a decent map, reflect the "breathing" capability of the given setup. Using the CO trim to assuage "felt" problems is a rather crude method. It might! address one bothersome spot but will open several others. Don't use a chisel when a scalpel is needed. Cheers Meinolf

Hi, it depends. Lamda 0.86 produces the best power and 1.05 the best efficiency. But, an engine must be designed to accommodate lean mixtures. That wasn't state of the art at Guzzi in the 90s. V11/Jackals engines run at absurdely low or high Lambda values, but not well. The V11 and Jackal BINs I made available for many users so far used a constant 0.88 at all breakpoints I could measure in road use. I am now creating BINs where the fuel tables are reflecting the MAP values I am logging. The underlying idea is that going for 0.86/highest power at a breakpoint where the engine is higly throttled (a V11 and Jackal have less than 20% of atmospheric pressure in the manifold at closed throttle/RPM) doesn't make sense and to achieve a combination of fuel economy and ridability and smoothness at the same time. The real challenge is to adjust the ignition timing to each mixture, as lean mixtures take much longer to ignited than rich ones. The difference is ~30% from lean to rich mixure. Cheers Meinolf

Hi, because left and right cylinders have different AFRs at almost any breakpoint. The acceleration table (singular, there's only one) contains values which are added and subtracted to the fuel values depending on the engine temperature and the angular speed at which the throttle is opened. Search for X-Tau model/evaporation/puddle effect to learn about the background. Cheers Meinolf

Hi, no, it isn't. The tables are just the tip of the iceberg. Comparing a specific table between two different BINs will tell you nothing. The values in a table are but one part of the equation used to calculate injection time (and other stuff). ((Fuel Map value x Fuel map value factor) + (CO trim value x CO trim value factor)) x trim factorairtemp x trim factorenginetemp x trim factorairpressure x trimfactorbatteryvoltage x trim factorn = injection time". Cheers Meinolf

Hi, I started with one and two channel LM2 from Innovate, but moved to ZT2 from Zeitronix as the Innovate products are unreliable and error prone. Logworks, the software from Innovate, is great and we made tools to translate the log files from ZT2 to a format which can be used with Logworks. Cheers Meinolf

Hi, the XDF is a translator, which translates addresses and formulas (to translate binary code) to make them comprehensible. The BIN consists of program code and data (tables and scalars). A fuel table might be located at one address (say $B800) in one BIN and at another address (say $B400) in another. Obviously the program must know at which address a table is located. And the binary code of a table is translated into a version which is understandable by the viewer. An example: The formula used in the Start enrichment map is (X*100)/3200. It translates the hex value $23 into 1.09%. Which means that at that breakpoint the injection time is increased by 1.09%. That's why different XDFs are neccessary. Cheers Meinolf

Hi, Meinolf also explained that the CO trim, as it adds or subtracts a constant value, is NOT a global enricher A value of 1 in the fuel map equals 64μs injector opening (or more properly voltage applied to the injector). So a CO trim of 1 corresponds to ~7% of a fuel map value. Low load values in the fuel map can be ~25, highest values are >200. An increase of CO trim by 10 equals ~3% (10 x 4.76μs) / (25 x 64μs). At WOT the increase would be ~0.037% (10 x 4.76μs) / (200 x 64μs). So the influence of the CO trim is most noticeable at low fuel map values and lessens quickly as the fuel map values increase. But, if one bothers to measure AFR and adjust the fuel maps accordingly, why do so with an unneccessary influencer like CO trim? Keep it at 0. Cheers Meinolf

Hi Marty, John, Editing, reading and writing the EEPROM content is not different from doing the same with a BIN. - Connect the computer to the ECU - Turn on ignition, but don't start the engine - Start EEPROM Reader/Writer - Press either Read or Write - Done, turn off ignition Editing the .EEP file is just as easy. - Tunerpro doesn't recognize .EEP, so rename to .BIN. - Load the renamed file and the EEPROM XDF into Tunerpro - Change the CO value. - Save the file and rename it to .EEP - Write it to the EEPROM using the procedure above. The 15M program code uses very few parts of the EEPROM data, so there's nothing harmful which can happen. Cheers Meinolf

Hi John, Yes, I meant that the description text was changed. Cheers Meinolf

Hi John, changing the EEPROM to adjust the CO trim is easier and faster than adjusting with GuzziDiag. The EEPROM Reader/Writer and the XDF is available on Beards website. If you see values in GuzziDiag then it has connected to the ECU. The absence of any info just means that the content was edited. Cheers Meinolf

Hi, a short update. I haven't yet received the PF1C I ordered from AliBaba, but Beard already programmed a patch to the 537-BIN which I tested on my ECU test bed over the weekend. He's added code to the BIN which uses an offset to the ADC-values, which are stored in an unused address of the EEPROM. And it, after ironing out a small bug, works. So the proof of concept is done. The basic idea is to use the offset value stored in the EEPROM value, ranging from -127 to +128, to base-line the actual voltage delivered by the PF1C at a given setting to the TPS look-up table. We are still mulling over the setup procedure, though. After receiving the PF1C I'll attach it to a throttle body and see which setup procedure works and is easy to use. The current idea is to measure VActual - VTarget at completely closed throttle and divide the difference by the steps of the 8bit ADC, 0.0196V. The result would be the offset used in the EEPROM value to align the TPS and the look-up table. Cheers Meinolf

Hi, a short update. Concerning the PF4C, Finland comes to the rescue. MotoMatti (https://translate.google.de/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&u=http://www.motomatti.fi/&prev=search) built a contraption to measure angle and voltage. A friend will send him a PF4C, so eventually we will have the curve of the PF4C equation. Jeff, the CEO of CA Cycleworks, replied to my inquiry. Unfortunately he hasn*t measured a PF4C. And, more great news. Beard (the wizard who programmed GuzziDiag) found out which which addresses of the EEPROM need to be changed to adopt a PF1C (that's the TPS with a known linear curve but holes instead of oval openings). I ordered a PF1C on Alibaba (11$ incl. shipping) and will test it on my ECU bench upon arrival. And the TPS lookup table can be taken from most 15RC BINs, as the PF1C is the OEM TPS. So, all is well Cheers Meinolf

Hi Martin, Hubert knows what he's talking about. I'll send an inquiry to CTS. Roy and I had an exchange about the the Hall effect sensor some time ago, but I didn't follow it up. Roy, did you? Cheers Meinolf

Hi Martin, do you know that CTS is the supplier of Magneti Marelli? I won't fish in the dark. I contacted Chris, the owner of CA Cycleworks, and asked if he had data for the PF4C. He made an amazing contraption to check and record the values of TPSs. Really cool stuff! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZK9fVvNaC4 Beard (author of the GuzziDiag suite) made an interesting proposal. Which is to use the PF1C. Because it doesn't have the oval holes necessary for rotation, he would modify the contents of the EEPROM and add an offset. And we could adapt the TPS lookup table to the linear curve of it. The PF1C is available for ~11$ from Alibaba, so I went ahead and ordered one. Cheers Meinolf

Hi, finding the curves is less trival than one might think. I talked with Marelli in Germany, but they have no clue whom to ask in their operation or even which division to ask. The same with two distributors in Germany. And sent an email to Jeff. Alas, the address is not valid. An easier way might be to contact HD's support and ask the question. The HD part # is 27271-95. Does anybody have contacts to Harley and ask? Cheers Meinolf