Cliff

Don't forget the kill switch

As Paul says pin 19 is an output from the ECU that is pulled low to energise the relay that powers fuel pump and coils and injectors. If this were defective you wouldn't get any fuel pump unless the short was made directly to the relay. If they've change ECU, it sounds like a harness issue. They should check continuity from pin 19 on the ECU plug to the relay. Sad when dealers can't diagnose this stuff in a few days.

Isn't the vapour lock problem to do with a hot parked bike. A running bike should have enough airflow to keep things in check.

The power commander should only be used on a working bike. It should not be used to band aid a non functioning bike. Remember the TPS is important not only for mixture, but for spark advance also.

The problem seems to be that a good battery is need for the regulator to do its job. Sounds strange doesn't it. The earlier 16M ECU was susceptible to the resulting voltage surges but I don't know if the later 15M is. When it happened to me the tacho was wandering all other the place before the ECU went. Didn't take long, about 300m at less than 3000RPM with headlights on.

The SkypeOut feature that allows dialling normal phones can be trying especially when calling "local" numbers here in Australia. I think my calls where going to europe via the internet and then coming back here as a phone call. Makes for very long lag. Skype to Skype works much better as it is peer to peer. No servers in beween. I had an 1 hour call to Rob Macfie ( Australia - UK ) and we were both impressed with the quality and minimal lag. And to cap it off - free

The Tuneboy is compatible with Tuning Link also.

13km/l is poor. 50mpg is over 20km/l You don't need a PC you just need something that will allow adjustment. If I was in your boots I'd go for the tuneboy. The PC is a poor second to that in my opinion. In terms of dynoing the tuneboy does have protocols compatible with the dynojet tuning link. That seems to have been missed on the last thread. It should cost no more than a PC to do a dyno session with

The ECU does not see fuel pressure. Its a simple timer in the ECU. It is triggerred on power up and retriggered as the ECU sees engine pulses. As long as the engine is running the pump is energised. If the motor stops for some reason other than ignition or kill switch you will hear the pump run for a few more seconds.

When you block a vacuum cleaner the engine revs up as it is doing LESS work. The speed up increases the back EMF of the motor and reduces the current drawn. A stalled motor however produces not back EMF and will draw a huge current.

I don't think the PC has its own map. How would it do the barometric compensations for altitude? Perhaps it also store the original ECU values so it see the adjustments the ECU makes. I think it is % trimming. The timing issues you mention can be got around simply be using the previous cycles data.

No its more like 6----5 ..X 4----3 You have the numbers for the corners, but the engine operating in between. The left side may be 2000RPM, the right 3000. The bottom 20% throttle, the top 30%. The engine is actually running at 2300 and 23% throttle. What should we use for X

There are probably implementation differences about what cells are. For me the breakpoints define grid lines in the map. The map datapoints (cells?? )correspond to the intersection points of these grids. My base throttle breakpoint is the idle TPS value and my base RPM breakpoint is 1000RPM. So at 1000RPM idle it sits right on entry[0,0] If my next RPM breakpoint is 1500RPM and the bike idled high at say 1250RPM both cells [0,0] and [1,0] would be averaged fairly evenly. At 1050RPM cell [0,0] would predominate. The map is basically a 3D object defined by a set of points. If there is no averaging the map is like a bunch houses of different roof heights ( mediterranean style ). You would have to jump up or down to get from one house to another. This is a discontinuity. The averaging ( interpolation ) is basically the blanket you throw over the points to produce a " "smooth" surface. This surface is not unique and can actually take on many shapes depending on how the interpolation is done. 4 points do not define a plane. I'll be seeing Wayne in a few days. He's testing one of my ECUs on a mate's Duke at the moment. I'll find out about the movable breakpoints for you. Ideally when you move breakpoints around the software should automatically recompute the map by interpolating the original map.

This is not strictly correct. Full throttle is a mechanical limit and would provide a certain signal ( say 4.7V ). Where this sits in the map depends purely on where the breakpoints are set. The top of the map may be set at 4.5V in which case anything above that is only using 2 points. Or the top of the map may be set to 5V in which case it is still doing 4 points averaging. Ideally the top breakpoint would be set to around 4.7 and the bottom breakpoint at the idle value. You don't want to waste those valuable breakpoints on throttle values that are not achievable. Similarly you would spread your RPM breakpoints. No point having RPM in the map going to 10000 if your motor redlines at 8000. If there is a bit of peaking/dipping in the MAP you would bucnh your break points around the peak to get the most accurate modelling. Then you would not be getting significant averaging errors. The ECU is doing a weighted average. This is not a static weighted average but a weighting based on the position in the square. This is the only way you can transition a map and not have discontinuities. If you are near a breakpoint the average would be about 90% from the closest point and 10% from the other 3.

I actually do have an ECU that I made for an Aprillia twin. Couldn't tell you which one as they all look the same to me. Had twin sparks. Got it to the stage where it would run for about 5-10 seconds. When I get some more free time I'll finish it off.

It was a description of how linear interpolation is done/should be done. For obvious reasons this is also the way my ECU does it. I would expect the Sagem to do likewise. Anyway we are not talking about the sagem ECU we are talking about a map for the Futura. A map is a function of the engine not the ECU. Because resonance/wave effect are by definition frequency(RPM) dependent. Exhausts/Inlets tend to have RPMS were they workor don't, not throttle settings ( excluding incorrect mapping ). You can not make a pendumum swing faster by pushing harder. Which is exactly why your zigzag mapping against throttle can't be right. At constant throttle one would expect to see peaks and troughs as you vary RPM due to the tuned pipe resonances of inlet and exhaust. I can see no reason why at constant RPM you would get dips/peaks as you vary throttle apart from erroneous values caused by averaging. If thats the case the map is not optimal except for the exact throttle points you set. I also doubt you would see this error on dyno because you would check by do runs at the throttle values you set. To see this error you would need to hold the RPM constant and vary the throttle. Do you do that for your tests. To illustrate how average can produce invalid results if we don't tune at the breakpoints, lets say we have an array of 10 numbers corresponding to a map and the perfectly tuned values are 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 When you start tuning the map is 4 X X X X X X X X X Now you start to tune midway between the first two. After your first point you have 4 6 X X X X X X X X because 4 and 6 average to 5 If we tune closer to the first number the 2nd number produced is even worse. However assuming tuning midway you will get 4 6 4 6 4 6 4 6 4 6 If you only look at it at the midway you will see 5

It not a straight average of all 4 points. At least it shouldn't be. I have a description it here http://www.jefferies-au.org/My16M/Tuning.htm It should be a weighted average with a greater emphasis on the point you're closest to. Thats why you position as close to a point as possible. That way it predominates and the other 3 are insignificant. The map was doing this at constant RPM so I would not expect it to be any resonance/wave effect. If it is an effect caused by averaging, then the resulting map is not optimal outside of the points you set. The dipping at low throttle/low rpm is quite significant relative to the actual pulse duration.

You have the throttle/rpm breakpoint values from the ECU don't you? What I do is set the RPM/throttle so that you are exactly over a data point. That way there is no averaging issue. What about the query I had regarding decreasing pulse width and increasing throttle. Any explaination for that or is that a symptom of the 4 point averaging.

Taking the rear map, low RPM. What mechanism would require the injector duration to reduce with increasing throttle? These dips then disappear as the RPM increases.

The implementation details can vary. Basically the idea is to be like the carbureter accelerator pump. It squirts extra fuel in as the throttle is opened. One way if doing this is to compare the instantaneous throttle value with an averaged throttle value and use this difference to enrich the mixture. Many variations of how much more and for how long are possible.

Perhaps they are real changes in mixture. Why do you think that have throttle pumps on carbs and emulation on PC. Possibly this ECU doesn't have a throttle pump emulation. There's too much missing data to draw any real conclusions about this graph

I'm still here. In lurk mode now as everything seems to have been said. I haven't been offended, perhaps a little flustered and fustrated but most importantly a little more educated.

Ok I'm thinking of the sport which has a seperate fuse/relay for the ECU. The V11 has just one for the fuel pump and coils. In that case 5A is not enough. The fuel pump itself takes about 5-6A. The injectors don't take much. They're about 30ohm. The coils will take 5-10A but this is only for a few ms. You should be using 10A or 15A

I also think the crowbar circuit is the problem, due to overvoltage. What size is your ECU fuse. Mine is 15A which is crazy. I'd be surprised if it took much more than a 1/4A.

This has only become an option the last couple of weeks with the Tuneboy and the Technoresearch tool. Prior to that there was no practical way of remapping the OEM ECU.