Do I really need download???
#21
#23
[QUOTE=glens;3932531]Yes, but to a too-fine degree. Once the butterfly quits being the major choke point, or location of the greater pressure drop, the airbox (if one is used) will show its stuff. Our system still needs to know how much air is flowing, though. Our MAF is effectively done manually with the current parts and hard-coded. At any rpm/TPS point, the amount of air flowing through the system needs to match what's been recorded; either directly, or effectively with a piggyback controller.
Thanks for the explanation. Sounds like the rpm/tps point is a largely weighted factor in fuel demand. A higher flowing air filter will be compensated for some but not enough to fully get the air fuel ratio to the optimum value.
Thanks for the explanation. Sounds like the rpm/tps point is a largely weighted factor in fuel demand. A higher flowing air filter will be compensated for some but not enough to fully get the air fuel ratio to the optimum value.
#24
I "did some time" (haha, "lived in") Craig back in the early '80s. Right around the time the third unit at the "Colorado Ute" station came on line. If Charley Vavak is still a state trooper in that area, say "Howdy" for me He probably wouldn't remember my name but no doubt he'd remember the last time he wrote me a ticket if the circumstances were described to him.
Here's a composite image I created with the new TTS tuner software. http://i36.tinypic.com/emv05.jpg It's for an '08 touring model. The column on the left is "stock" and the column on the right is for mufflers and airbox. The 2nd and 3rd graphs down are the Volumetric Efficiency tables. (I placed the common low and high values in the 0 throttle low and high rpm corners so that the colors all correspond exactly between all four graphs - the colors normally are relative only to the lowest and highest values in an individual graph, thus a casual comparison between graphs can give a false impression without the "correction".)
You'll note that there's not much difference except at the higher-rpm and higher-throttle openings, which would indicate to me that the mufflers have little effect on flow and that the airbox only really has an effect once the butterfly "gets out of the way".
In the top-most graph, the red areas are where the closed-loop operation takes place. But that graph is rpm vs. MAP load, not rpm vs. TPS. It's common to get out of closed-loop at as little as 40% throttle. So the change in the VE tables along their far edges (higher-rpm) would not get "picked up", necessarily, by the self-correction the closed-loop operation will provide. Though there are some complex operations involved which help in this matter, but generally prove to be beyond the scope of this forum.
At any rate, with an '06 touring bike, you don't have closed-loop, so it's really imperative that your VE tables be properly populated if you want your fueling to be correct. I'm of the mindset that the VE tables ought to be proper in any situation anyway.
Here's a composite image I created with the new TTS tuner software. http://i36.tinypic.com/emv05.jpg It's for an '08 touring model. The column on the left is "stock" and the column on the right is for mufflers and airbox. The 2nd and 3rd graphs down are the Volumetric Efficiency tables. (I placed the common low and high values in the 0 throttle low and high rpm corners so that the colors all correspond exactly between all four graphs - the colors normally are relative only to the lowest and highest values in an individual graph, thus a casual comparison between graphs can give a false impression without the "correction".)
You'll note that there's not much difference except at the higher-rpm and higher-throttle openings, which would indicate to me that the mufflers have little effect on flow and that the airbox only really has an effect once the butterfly "gets out of the way".
In the top-most graph, the red areas are where the closed-loop operation takes place. But that graph is rpm vs. MAP load, not rpm vs. TPS. It's common to get out of closed-loop at as little as 40% throttle. So the change in the VE tables along their far edges (higher-rpm) would not get "picked up", necessarily, by the self-correction the closed-loop operation will provide. Though there are some complex operations involved which help in this matter, but generally prove to be beyond the scope of this forum.
At any rate, with an '06 touring bike, you don't have closed-loop, so it's really imperative that your VE tables be properly populated if you want your fueling to be correct. I'm of the mindset that the VE tables ought to be proper in any situation anyway.
#25
[QUOTE=glens;3944213]I "did some time" (haha, "lived in") Craig back in the early '80s. Right around the time the third unit at the "Colorado Ute" station came on line. If Charley Vavak is still a state trooper in that area, say "Howdy" for me He probably wouldn't remember my name but no doubt he'd remember the last time he wrote me a ticket if the circumstances were described to him.
I have not met Charley Vavak. The Colorado Ute power plant is where I work and have for 28 years. Started working there in 1980. Colorado Ute went bankrupt in 1993 and Tri-State Generation acquired the power plant. Thanks for the information on the FI system. View the photo and see if you remember Craig, Colrado.
I have not met Charley Vavak. The Colorado Ute power plant is where I work and have for 28 years. Started working there in 1980. Colorado Ute went bankrupt in 1993 and Tri-State Generation acquired the power plant. Thanks for the information on the FI system. View the photo and see if you remember Craig, Colrado.
#26
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post