Few questions all at once:
1.Just wondering what is the difference between autotune and active fuel tuning??
I can get the autotune to work (control+t), but I can’t get the active fuel tuning to work....I’ve uploaded the calibration file to the vehicle after activating active tuning, then tried to download the active tables from ECU with the download arrrow and drive, but nothing....
**2.Mainly and more importantly this all started from myself wanting to add a slightly leaner section of fuel cells while cruising on the highway, but the vehicle never follows my adjusted lean section I made in the target lambda tables, seems to only follow the closed loop target lambda of 14.7, but it does follow the WOT AFR/tables just fine.
3. I live in a place in Canada where the temp swings are huge (-30°C to 40°C) , so was hoping the auto tune or active fuel tuning would help as the temp changes and correct the fuel needed through all 4 seasons, or would the computer do this on its own still with a FP calibration installed or do I constantly have to re-tune?
I run on MAP not MAF calibration.
Autotune vs active fuel tuning
-
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2021 9:23 pm
Autotune vs active fuel tuning
2006 FG2, DC Sports SRI, TAYLOR Helix Throttle body spacer
Re: Autotune vs active fuel tuning
It should compensate for temps automatically without you having to make changes all the time.
Without more details its hard to say what is happening with the autotuned and active tuning.
Without more details its hard to say what is happening with the autotuned and active tuning.
-
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2021 9:23 pm
Re: Autotune vs active fuel tuning
Id be happy just knowing how to make the vehicle follow the low and high target lambda tables ive adjusted instead of just the set closed loop target 14.7 AFCMD all the time in low fuel (screenshot), it follows the WOT tables no problem when edited but AFCMD never changes until the WOT tables.
Not sure the target high table has the issue, but the low target lambda table definitely doesn't get followed.
How much more, or What info do you need of how to describe to me how to use active fuel tuning or the differences between auto tune and active fuel tuning....?
i have attached the calibration file if that helps.
thanks for the help!
Not sure the target high table has the issue, but the low target lambda table definitely doesn't get followed.
How much more, or What info do you need of how to describe to me how to use active fuel tuning or the differences between auto tune and active fuel tuning....?
i have attached the calibration file if that helps.
thanks for the help!
- Attachments
-
- Screenshot (5)_LI.jpg (1.81 MiB) Viewed 2779 times
-
- Fujita SRI-TEST -AUTOTUNE(ACTIVE)NEW IN PROGRESS.fpcal
- (25.53 KiB) Downloaded 72 times
2006 FG2, DC Sports SRI, TAYLOR Helix Throttle body spacer
Re: Autotune vs active fuel tuning
The lambda tables are the target lambda for the active tuning, not for the ECU. In closed loop the ECU targets the richest of the tables in the 'Closed Loop Target Lambda' area, so 14.7 in your example. If the active tuning target is not the same as what the ECU targets then the trim table is going to add a lot of fuel in places and the ECU will take it back out.
Hondata
-
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2021 9:23 pm
Re: Autotune vs active fuel tuning
So there is no way to trim some fuel at highway speed while cruising??
Can you just run open loop and the ecu will follow the target lambda tables, or is there another way to make it follow a customized AFR table at low speed?
And if so how...?
Can you just run open loop and the ecu will follow the target lambda tables, or is there another way to make it follow a customized AFR table at low speed?
And if so how...?
2006 FG2, DC Sports SRI, TAYLOR Helix Throttle body spacer
-
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2021 9:23 pm
Re: Autotune vs active fuel tuning
Does anyone have some input whether or not you can lean out a specific section (as in picture) of low speed fuel without the ECU compensating or fixing itself at 14.7 AFR?
- Attachments
-
- EFE2B81B-A9BF-4C73-AE36-3A5938940D1E.jpeg (1.87 MiB) Viewed 2758 times
2006 FG2, DC Sports SRI, TAYLOR Helix Throttle body spacer
-
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2021 9:23 pm
Re: Autotune vs active fuel tuning
Will try this again....
I'm trying to get the ecu to follow a modified low fuel table and the only way i could do this was by adding 15.3 in all the closed loop targets(calibration tab-Lambda) , then it followed the target lambda table . I tuned it with STFT's set to 0, then after put back to normal STFT values. Seems to follow the modified AF ratio, but then the trims and fuel change suggestions are way off in the low fuel tables as it still follows the lambda overlay which doesn't match the modified table.
Second I tried lowering the MAP WOT determination to 100mbar, and make it use the WOT adjustment low table AFR's only. Works great, but It still gives fuel changes that are way off the same way as before for low fuel using the lambda overlay. I thought it would've been in open loop this way, and adjusting using the WOT tables only, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
My question; is there a way to keep the vehicle in open loop and make the vehicle follow the WOT tables only, and get the correct suggested fuel changes to match them for low fuel, not from the lambda overlay. Or a way to make it just follow a small leaner section of the low fuel table table for highway cruising ?
Also, If you can run it always in open loop, will the ecu still make adjustments for IAT and engine temp (ex. season changes), as my IAT compensation was all set at 0.
OR Any other suggestions that would work better....???
I'm trying to get the ecu to follow a modified low fuel table and the only way i could do this was by adding 15.3 in all the closed loop targets(calibration tab-Lambda) , then it followed the target lambda table . I tuned it with STFT's set to 0, then after put back to normal STFT values. Seems to follow the modified AF ratio, but then the trims and fuel change suggestions are way off in the low fuel tables as it still follows the lambda overlay which doesn't match the modified table.
Second I tried lowering the MAP WOT determination to 100mbar, and make it use the WOT adjustment low table AFR's only. Works great, but It still gives fuel changes that are way off the same way as before for low fuel using the lambda overlay. I thought it would've been in open loop this way, and adjusting using the WOT tables only, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
My question; is there a way to keep the vehicle in open loop and make the vehicle follow the WOT tables only, and get the correct suggested fuel changes to match them for low fuel, not from the lambda overlay. Or a way to make it just follow a small leaner section of the low fuel table table for highway cruising ?
Also, If you can run it always in open loop, will the ecu still make adjustments for IAT and engine temp (ex. season changes), as my IAT compensation was all set at 0.
OR Any other suggestions that would work better....???
- Attachments
-
- Screenshot (9).png (163.07 KiB) Viewed 2630 times
-
- Screenshot (8).png (122.19 KiB) Viewed 2630 times
-
- Screenshot (7).png (169.59 KiB) Viewed 2630 times
-
- Screenshot (6).png (159.4 KiB) Viewed 2630 times
2006 FG2, DC Sports SRI, TAYLOR Helix Throttle body spacer