Data Logging for use with EA

[TT331FB]

I want to make sure I have this right. I want to use EA to sugest MAF curve tweaks. I need to data log with KAM cleared before and adaptive off?

What happens if this should be done and it is not?

Thanks,
Eric

[Dale McPeters]

Are you using the WB/Lambse1 & 2 or KAM option to tweak the maf numbers with EA?

[TT331FB]

Are you using the WB/Lambse1 & 2 or KAM option to tweak the maf numbers with EA?

The options are, "Use Fixed LAMBSE" or "Use Datalog". I pick "Use Datalog" which I assume means using my WB output.?

[86GT]

If you choose to use the "Use Datalog" option then it will use the LAMBSE logged and compare that to the WB. The error is then converted to a percentage and applied to the associated MAF point.

If the KAMRF is not cleared then the calculation will still work. The actual AFR is the LAMBSE multiplied by the KAMRF. It takes into account for the KAMRF.

Think of it this way. If the LAMBSE is 14.64 and the KAMRF is 1 then the actual AFR is 14.64. Now say that the LAMBSE is 16.26 and the KAMRF is .9 the actual AFR is still 14.64. The logged WB is compared against the actual (LAMBSE*KAMRF).

[TT331FB]

Thanks, Clint but, I have more for you to learn me!

I understood KAMRF to be applied to the calculated PW not the LAMBSE. For example, my log shows LAMBSE of 14.5, KAMRFof .940, (CL idle). Your explanation gives target A/F ratio of 14.5 *.940 = 13.6 indicating that I am running lean.

My explanation would be that the EEC is calculating a PW that results in a rich condition, (to large): calculated PW * KAMRF = actual PW, the EEC is correcting a rich condition.

Help me out her, plase!
Eric

[86GT]

The 13.6 calculation is the target or actual. If you log HEGO or the WB it will most likley match the 13.6. Lambse is the commanded but when you put KAMRF in the equation it then becomes the target.

The command will normanlly swing from rich to lean to indicate good O2 sensors. When the accel or decel is added to the calculation then the commanded maybe richer or leaner. You may have picked a point in the log that was acceleration? The EEC will also richen the mixture based off of temp, startup and other factors. What does the point you picked in the datalog represent? Steady state, startup or so on? What is the WB rading at this point?

[TT331FB]

Don't you ever sleep? LOL

It was from a 20 second log average, steady state, car not moving.
Eric

[86GT]

Don't you ever sleep?
Eric

when I'm so exhausted that I cant see.


Was this short log during the first two minutes of starting the car? If not it does seem a bit rich. What was the WB reading on the chart recorder.

[TT331FB]

when I'm so exhausted that I cant see.


Was this short log during the first two minutes of starting the car? If not it does seem a bit rich. What was the WB reading on the chart recorder.

No, it was from a log done at a top light, after driving the car about 30 minutes. WB showed a little rich, about 14.2.

[86GT]

This also maybe where the exhaust delay comes into play. When the EEC commands the xx AFR it will take xx time to get to the HEGO or WB. This is why I added the WB shift to the EA.

What I do is let the car idle and stablize. I note the LAMBSE, TP and logged WB. If you are not logging the WB then this will not apply to you. I then will increase the RPM to say 2000 and hold it for a few seconds.

Now looking at the log note where the TP starts to increase. Then note how many rows in the log before the WB sees the richer mixture for the accel. I then count the rows and this determines the WB delay. I also used this to set the HEGO delay in Cal Edit. Mine seems to be about three row or 300ms.

I found that the bigger the RPM jump in the log the easier the WB shift is to detect. You will need to log RPM, TP, WB, LAMBSE1-2 at a minimum.