SEPro/SEStreet Tuner Information Thread
#1811
I suspect that Smart Tune does not rely on O2 sensor voltages to calculate new VE's. Their accuracy just isn't close enough. I'm going to try my own experiment. I suspect, and I may be way off, but I think it's entirely possible that Smart Tune does this for each cell that it has the data for:
First, it sums up the fuel pulses and calculates the number of grams of fuel used in that time slice using information stored with the calibration. The data has to be massaged a little but it's all there.
Next, since it was in closed loop toggeling fuel around a fixed 450mv (14.68 AFR for gasoline) it can compute the total number of grams of air that was most likely used to burn that fuel in that time slice. That's really the actual air flow number in grams. That number should be pretty close. If using E10 fuel the stoic is about 14.1 to get to 450mv. So that calculation might be off slightly.
Now, Smart Tune can also compute the theoretical air flow in grams for that time slice because all the information is available in the downloaded data to do so. The formula is easily available.
So, in conclusion, calculating the ratio of actual to theoretical like I just described will yield a VE value. Is that what Smart Tune is using for VE NEW.
First, it sums up the fuel pulses and calculates the number of grams of fuel used in that time slice using information stored with the calibration. The data has to be massaged a little but it's all there.
Next, since it was in closed loop toggeling fuel around a fixed 450mv (14.68 AFR for gasoline) it can compute the total number of grams of air that was most likely used to burn that fuel in that time slice. That's really the actual air flow number in grams. That number should be pretty close. If using E10 fuel the stoic is about 14.1 to get to 450mv. So that calculation might be off slightly.
Now, Smart Tune can also compute the theoretical air flow in grams for that time slice because all the information is available in the downloaded data to do so. The formula is easily available.
So, in conclusion, calculating the ratio of actual to theoretical like I just described will yield a VE value. Is that what Smart Tune is using for VE NEW.
Oh yes, as described somewhere earlier and just to remind, when you flash with smart tune checked, it not only sets the afr table to closed loop, it also sets the whole clb table to a fixed value (cant remeber what, maybe 700mv, you can check by reading the smarttune flash back from delphi), and retards spark.
#1812
We manually change the VE's. The software shows us the Air fuel line on an RPM scale, then we adjust the VE's to get the line where we want it. In my case I calibrate to 13.0 so I will sample each throttle position and record the air fuel for each then adjust the VE's untill I reach my 13.0 target.
#1814
umm
I suspect that Smart Tune does not rely on O2 sensor voltages to calculate new VE's. If it does not rely on O2 sensors, then why have them there? Their accuracy just isn't close enough. I'm going to try my own experiment. I suspect, and I may be way off, but I think it's entirely possible that Smart Tune does this for each cell that it has the data for:
First, it sums up the fuel pulses and calculates the number of grams of fuel used in that time slice using information stored with the calibration. The data has to be massaged a little but it's all there.
Next, since it was in closed loop doesnt close loop mean O2 sensors are working? toggling fuel around a fixed 450mv (14.68 AFR for gasoline) it can compute the total number of grams of air that was most likely used to burn that fuel in that time slice. That's really the actual air flow number in grams. That number should be pretty close. If using E10 fuel the stoic is about 14.1 to get to 450mv. So that calculation might be off slightly.
Now, Smart Tune can also compute the theoretical air flow in grams for that time slice because all the information is available in the downloaded data to do so. The formula is easily available.
So, in conclusion, calculating the ratio of actual to theoretical like I just described will yield a VE value. Is that what Smart Tune is using for VE NEW.
First, it sums up the fuel pulses and calculates the number of grams of fuel used in that time slice using information stored with the calibration. The data has to be massaged a little but it's all there.
Next, since it was in closed loop doesnt close loop mean O2 sensors are working? toggling fuel around a fixed 450mv (14.68 AFR for gasoline) it can compute the total number of grams of air that was most likely used to burn that fuel in that time slice. That's really the actual air flow number in grams. That number should be pretty close. If using E10 fuel the stoic is about 14.1 to get to 450mv. So that calculation might be off slightly.
Now, Smart Tune can also compute the theoretical air flow in grams for that time slice because all the information is available in the downloaded data to do so. The formula is easily available.
So, in conclusion, calculating the ratio of actual to theoretical like I just described will yield a VE value. Is that what Smart Tune is using for VE NEW.
#1815
#1816
Might want to read this; https://www.hdforums.com/forum/10723929-post1775.html
Last edited by jluvs2ride; 01-10-2013 at 09:05 AM.
#1817
Merlin V;
It was not sarcastic. I was serious. You proposed, (if I interpreted it right), that smart tune does NOT use o2 sensors to evaluate and create VE numbers. Is that right?
Secondly, I made my remarks in RED to distinguish from yours.
I have read all your post tying very hard to understand what you were asking and why. My comments are my conclusions to your posting.
I stand by my questions, right or wrong. <-This is how I learned to do some basic tunes. Many in here have helped and some did answer rather sarcastically. Be that as it may, I merely asked questions with NO malice in mind.
It was not sarcastic. I was serious. You proposed, (if I interpreted it right), that smart tune does NOT use o2 sensors to evaluate and create VE numbers. Is that right?
Secondly, I made my remarks in RED to distinguish from yours.
I have read all your post tying very hard to understand what you were asking and why. My comments are my conclusions to your posting.
I stand by my questions, right or wrong. <-This is how I learned to do some basic tunes. Many in here have helped and some did answer rather sarcastically. Be that as it may, I merely asked questions with NO malice in mind.
#1818
Merlin V;
It was not sarcastic. I was serious. You proposed, (if I interpreted it right), that smart tune does NOT use o2 sensors to evaluate and create VE numbers. Is that right?
Secondly, I made my remarks in RED to distinguish from yours.
I have read all your post tying very hard to understand what you were asking and why. My comments are my conclusions to your posting.
I stand by my questions, right or wrong. <-This is how I learned to do some basic tunes. Many in here have helped and some did answer rather sarcastically. Be that as it may, I merely asked questions with NO malice in mind.
It was not sarcastic. I was serious. You proposed, (if I interpreted it right), that smart tune does NOT use o2 sensors to evaluate and create VE numbers. Is that right?
Secondly, I made my remarks in RED to distinguish from yours.
I have read all your post tying very hard to understand what you were asking and why. My comments are my conclusions to your posting.
I stand by my questions, right or wrong. <-This is how I learned to do some basic tunes. Many in here have helped and some did answer rather sarcastically. Be that as it may, I merely asked questions with NO malice in mind.
#1819
I read his posts as well. I think his only question was how the smart tune feature uses the downloaded data to create the new ve tables. I don't think that question is very hard to understand. Nobody has answered it, because I don't think anybody knows except the guys who wrote or own the software. And they ain't talkin. Trade secret! Anybody who uses smart tune to tune their bikes takes on faith that it's doing the right things. Theorize all you want about O2 data and whatever. But that doesn't make it so.
#1820
don't overthink it
(current VE) x (the average O2 intregrator value/100) = (new VE)
100 x 1.02 = 102
100 x 0.96 = 96
(the average O2 intregrator value/100) at the same intersection of the table (rpm & TP or map)
Go to toolbox and open the data run (any) and move the line to where there is a change to O2 int value and a suggested new VE. multiple hits in the same cell are averaged out so to be **** you would have to find them all, add em up and divide by the number to get the average used by smartune.
The O2 intregrator value is derived from the average voltage of the O2 sensors at that cell (TP or map & rpm). don't forget about interpolation. Unless you get the exact rpm (ie 3000) and exact Tp or map # (ie 30) then the smartune suggested will interpolate from the calculated point to the intersection point.
(current VE) x (the average O2 intregrator value/100) = (new VE)
100 x 1.02 = 102
100 x 0.96 = 96
(the average O2 intregrator value/100) at the same intersection of the table (rpm & TP or map)
Go to toolbox and open the data run (any) and move the line to where there is a change to O2 int value and a suggested new VE. multiple hits in the same cell are averaged out so to be **** you would have to find them all, add em up and divide by the number to get the average used by smartune.
The O2 intregrator value is derived from the average voltage of the O2 sensors at that cell (TP or map & rpm). don't forget about interpolation. Unless you get the exact rpm (ie 3000) and exact Tp or map # (ie 30) then the smartune suggested will interpolate from the calculated point to the intersection point.