MyECU installed on my 2003 V11

[Cliff]

Are you saying that no one here is interested in what works, what doesn't work and why?

I think the problem is some arguing black and white while other argue shades of grey.

[callison]

I think the problem is some arguing black and white while other argue shades of grey.

62590[/snapback]

 

I'll take the shade of grey approaching perfection without needlessly trying to acheive it.

[Cliff]

I'll take the shade of grey approaching perfection without needlessly trying to acheive it.

62591[/snapback]

 

How about, you can have the perfect white but it will fade from day 1, or you can apply the off white everyday. You'll need a new brush occasionally.

 

Its all so clear. I mean translucent.

 

Sorry, I was amused for a moment.

[dlaing]

moto,Oct 9 2005, 09:55 PM

wrote a bunch of stuff, to which I reply:

 

I guess I forgot alot of what you indicated in the ECU thread.

I suppose I am still skeptical that residual O2 can be all over the place, but your charts do indicate that, like the following:

Futura data including HC and CO2 for 100% throttle with pulsewidths tuned to within ±.1 to ±.2 hp of best power:

Rpm     hp     ft/lbs   CO    HC    CO2   O2
1904 15.97   43.91  4.2     668   11.3   0.5
2353 18.76   41.82  4.2     156   11.4   0.3
2655 24.75   48.90  4.2     182   11.5   0.3
3005 31.54   55.09  2.6     427   12.0   0.7
3306 36.13   57.39  3.3     647   11.4   0.7
3606 39.62   57.68  3.6     618   11.3   0.7
4004 44.01   57.68  3.7     596   11.3   0.8
4407 47.01   55.99  4.0     743   10.9   0.8

4906 55.59   59.48  2.7     459   11.7   1.0

5408 63.17   61.28  4.1     599   11.0   0.8
6007 67.56   59.08  4.7     174   11.0   0.2
6406 75.25   61.68  4.2     189   11.5   0.2
6810 85.08   65.66  3.8     596   11.1   0.4
7108 91.18   67.36  4.1     592   11.0   0.3

7408 95.49   67.66  5.1     599   10.6   0.2

7808 98.69   66.36  4.4     469   11.1   0.1
8309 103.29 65.26  3.2     428   11.7   0.2
8809 105.39 62.86  4.3     435   11.0   0.1
9309 107.60 60.70  3.4     306   11.9   0.3
9807 106.40 56.93  4.3     405   11.4   0.4

 

I use a Factory Pro EC997a.

The most interesting are 4906RPM with 1.0% O2 and 7408RPM with 5.1%CO

There is nothing consistant!?! CO and HC and O2 all seem unrelated, like the chemistry equation was broken.

It would be interesting to see the pulse widths with the rest of that data.

[moto]

I didn't want to say that, but these threads easily become somewhat dogmatic. Readers can get a completely wrong taste of EFI. It needs not to be so cryptic. A wideband probe with controller (so cheap in the meantime), an open ECU like Cliff's and some basic understanding of the main principles can make modern bike technique as understandable as the old bikes were.

I think most Guzzi owners want more than just to be able to check the oil, the tires and polish the plugs every now and then.

 

Hubert

 

I haven't yet found a way to avoid dogma without examining a subject in depth. I don't know if it's possible.

 

Regards,

 

Derek

 

[moto]

I think the problem is some arguing black and white while other argue shades of grey.

62590[/snapback]

I have never stated that looking at O2 content has no legitimate use. If I had, I could understand your criticism a little better. But just to be the devil's advocate, if the emperor was wearing no clothes, should I say he sort of was, just to make sure I wasn't making a black/white statement, and to make sure I was not offending anyone's sensibilities?

 

Regards,

 

Derek

 

[Guest Nogbad]

There is nothing consistant!?! CO and HC and O2 all seem unrelated, like the chemistry equation was broken.

 

62601[/snapback]

 

An IC engine is a non-equilibrium reactor. The combustion process does not go to completion due to the short time available, less than perfect mixing and the chilling effect of the metal at the boundaries of the expanding flame. There is always therefore a degree of "disconnection" from what the equilibrium chemistry would suggest. This is why fuelling (and ignition) needs to be mapped while measuring emissions, power and torque to arrive at the best compromise and why engines of different design run different maps for the same cc and rpm.

[Cliff]

I have never stated that looking at O2 content has no legitimate use. If I had, I could understand your criticism a little better. But just to be the devil's advocate, if the emperor was wearing no clothes, should I say he sort of was, just to make sure I wasn't making a black/white statement, and to make sure I was not offending anyone's sensibilities?

 

Regards,

 

Derek

 

 

I actually agree with you about the o2 content. It's a noise quantity in the richer regions and cannot be used. What annoys me is your insistance that lambda sensors are o2 sensors and hence can not be used in this application. If memory serves, lambda sensors are measuring ionization current, and by inference CO.

 

I also agree with most of the technical info and conclusions you present. The disagreements are more about what the rider needs/requires.

The "before" scenario is a bike, that misses, is unresponsive, guzzles and many of the usual symptoms. The desired "after" a bike that is smooth and reponsive and gives good economy. Sure a dyno session, as you suggest, will provide that, but so will many lesser solutions.

[moto]

I actually agree with you about the o2 content. It's a noise quantity in the richer regions and cannot be used. What annoys me is your insistance that lambda sensors are o2 sensors and hence can not be used in this application. If memory serves, lambda sensors are measuring ionization current, and by inference CO.

We've already established that a narrow band O2 sensor essentially toggles negative/positive on the threshold of zero oxygen content. We also established that a so-called WBO2 sensor measures O2 when it's present, and reacts CO & H2 to make O2 when it's not present. It requires a positive voltage when there is O2 present, and a negative one when there isn't. The relative amount of current that is required is related to how much O2 or CO is present. So, if the mixture is rich enough, you are correct: the sensor is measuring CO and inferring A/F ratio from this. The problem is that for it to measure CO, no O2 can be present. By the time O2 is not present, the engine is likely to be running extremely rich, as I have found that there is always somewhere between .1% to 4% O2 left over when the engine is making best power. To illustrate this point further, a (now retired) CARB (California Air Resources Board) automotive engineer friend of Kenny Augustine's has stated that a narrow-band O2 sensor and cat equipped vehicle typically has a 10% loss of effeciency, specifically because the cat requires extra CO in order to strip the oxygen from of the oxides of nitrogen. The fact is that this rich mixture is provided when the O2 sensor thinks the engine is running a stoichiometric ratio. I'm convinced that a WBO2 sensor reports a stoichiometric ratio under similar conditions.

The disagreements are more about what the rider needs/requires.

I don't presume to know what the customer needs/requires. I think that's really up to the individual. But I think the consumer should be given all of the information necessary to make an informed decision. This involves exploring and revealing the pros & cons of the various strategies rather than just saying,"x will make your bike work great". If you are going to say, "x will make your bike work great" you have to quantify and qualify exactly what "great" means, or else we're back to the dogma people here were trying to avoid.

The "before" scenario is a bike, that misses, is unresponsive, guzzles and many of the usual symptoms. The desired "after" a bike that is smooth and reponsive and gives good economy.

Again, I think it's a matter of degrees and up to the individual. How smooth is smooth? How responsive is responsive? What is good economy?

Sure a dyno session, as you suggest, will provide that, but so will many lesser solutions.

I think that should more properly say "can". I've never said that using a closed loop can never improve a map. I think that under the right conditions, such as if the original map is way off toward the lean side, it probably can. What I am saying is that using closed loop cannot improve upon proper dyno tuning with a 4-gas EGA, and that after this is done closed loop is more likely to hurt than help.

 

Regards,

 

Derek

 

[moto]

An IC engine is a non-equilibrium reactor. The combustion process does not go to completion due to the short time available, less than perfect mixing and the chilling effect of the metal at the boundaries of the expanding flame. There is always therefore a degree of "disconnection" from what the equilibrium chemistry would suggest. This is why fuelling (and ignition) needs to be mapped while measuring emissions, power and torque to arrive at the best compromise and why engines of different design run different maps for the same cc and rpm.

62684[/snapback]

Amen brother! Amen!

 

Regards,

 

Derek

 

[Guest Steve_W]

...Lots of tech stuff...

...Lots of tech stuff...

Ow. My brain hurts.

[Cliff]

Ow.  My brain hurts.

62999[/snapback]

Probably the paint fumes. Just open a few windows.

[moto]

Probably the paint fumes. Just open a few windows.

63002[/snapback]

??

[badmotogoozer]

Probably the paint fumes. Just open a few windows.

63002[/snapback]

 

Doesn't help when you've got a plastic model Spitfire glued to your nose.

 

Rj

[moto]

Cliff,

 

I'm interested to know how you arrive at what the proper "A/F ratio" target should be for a given engine, combination of parts, cylinder, throttle position & rpm. Could you shed some light on this?

 

Regards,

 

Derek