Tuning Calc. Load max on NA engine
10-15-2011, 02:09 PM
#51
You've already missed the point right there.
You might have hit the max displayed CalcLOAD for that load cell as you have allocated it by distorting the CalcLOAD maximum, but you haven't, by definition, reached any sort of maximum.
Just because you don't have a big enough page to write down a particular rational number doesn't mean that the number is truncated.
Once again - the CalcLOAD limit table is not a limiter. It just adjusts the edge of the sheet of paper.
I don't blame you for not inherently understanding this concept - even Cobb was a bit sketchy about it when we were discussing the original release of the software back in 2008. Surly the semantics of the table confuse the issue.
Your best place for insight into the CalcLOAD table is probably gonna be in the "CERN Breaks the Universe" thread.
You might have hit the max displayed CalcLOAD for that load cell as you have allocated it by distorting the CalcLOAD maximum, but you haven't, by definition, reached any sort of maximum.
Just because you don't have a big enough page to write down a particular rational number doesn't mean that the number is truncated.
Once again - the CalcLOAD limit table is not a limiter. It just adjusts the edge of the sheet of paper.
I don't blame you for not inherently understanding this concept - even Cobb was a bit sketchy about it when we were discussing the original release of the software back in 2008. Surly the semantics of the table confuse the issue.
Your best place for insight into the CalcLOAD table is probably gonna be in the "CERN Breaks the Universe" thread.
Last edited by MazdaManiac; 10-15-2011 at 02:11 PM.
10-15-2011, 02:41 PM
#55
I'd need to see the entire calibration (at least the fuel tables, MAF table, IAT table, CalcLOAD table and Ve table as well as the injector scaling and, if it exists, the actual injector ratings and fuel pressure) and the logs for idle, cruise and WOT for the gear in question.
10-15-2011, 03:08 PM
#56
I'd need to see the entire calibration (at least the fuel tables, MAF table, IAT table, CalcLOAD table and Ve table as well as the injector scaling and, if it exists, the actual injector ratings and fuel pressure) and the logs for idle, cruise and WOT for the gear in question.
Would it be leaner or not ?
lets assume for the sake of getting an answer :
All cels on fuel table in vicinity of 6000rpm and 200% load are set to 11.3
The calc load table is set up by you and is how you normally set it.
MAF is accurate and matches actual airflow
IAT and Baro tables are set to 1
VE table is set to 1 across the board
All injectors are scaled correctly and there is plenty of injector capacity.
fuel pressure is constant 60 psi
All atmospheric conditions are identical.
Idle cruise and WOT logs indicate there are no mechanical issues
10-15-2011, 03:24 PM
#57
Release the twins.
Sure - all that stuff is important to the outcome and may actually tell you exactly what to expect . I didn't want an exact answer though - just ....
Would it be leaner or not ?
lets assume for the sake of getting an answer :
All cels on fuel table in vicinity of 6000rpm and 200% load are set to 11.3
The calc load table is set up by you and is how you normally set it.
MAF is accurate and matches actual airflow
IAT and Baro tables are set to 1
VE table is set to 1 across the board
All injectors are scaled correctly and there is plenty of injector capacity.
fuel pressure is constant 60 psi
All atmospheric conditions are identical.
Idle cruise and WOT logs indicate there are no mechanical issues
Would it be leaner or not ?
lets assume for the sake of getting an answer :
All cels on fuel table in vicinity of 6000rpm and 200% load are set to 11.3
The calc load table is set up by you and is how you normally set it.
MAF is accurate and matches actual airflow
IAT and Baro tables are set to 1
VE table is set to 1 across the board
All injectors are scaled correctly and there is plenty of injector capacity.
fuel pressure is constant 60 psi
All atmospheric conditions are identical.
Idle cruise and WOT logs indicate there are no mechanical issues
if he'll bite, i'm sure he'll need a scale of G/s from the Maf.
10-15-2011, 03:53 PM
#59
Release the twins.
i think you could setup a threshold of CalcLOAD at something you will surpass and then surpass it over and over again and get different results each time, lean/rich/blown..... but whats the point? experimentation?
10-15-2011, 04:07 PM
#61
I'm just going to put this out there for people to ponder and MM to pull apart if he should wish to ....
Theory on the MAX Calc load table ......
Mazda did exhaustive tests under various conditions to ascertain how much air their engine would flow at various rpms .
For an NA engine in good condition they knew it would always flow within a few % of what their testing told them it would.
They were worried that should some part of their system fail (eg the MAF sensor) that their tune could go outside of the parameters they wanted .
So in the tuning software they added a table ' MAX. calc. load ' .
The table was designed to try ensure fuelling at WOT (and possibly ignition also) stayed consistent even if there was an issue that falsely indicated more air was flowing into the engine than should be possible.
In short - it is a table that was designed to help protect an N/A engine and does not do that job at all well when applied to an FI'd engine because there is one vital variable not included, that can change at the whim of the owner , .... BOOST .
Theory on the MAX Calc load table ......
Mazda did exhaustive tests under various conditions to ascertain how much air their engine would flow at various rpms .
For an NA engine in good condition they knew it would always flow within a few % of what their testing told them it would.
They were worried that should some part of their system fail (eg the MAF sensor) that their tune could go outside of the parameters they wanted .
So in the tuning software they added a table ' MAX. calc. load ' .
The table was designed to try ensure fuelling at WOT (and possibly ignition also) stayed consistent even if there was an issue that falsely indicated more air was flowing into the engine than should be possible.
In short - it is a table that was designed to help protect an N/A engine and does not do that job at all well when applied to an FI'd engine because there is one vital variable not included, that can change at the whim of the owner , .... BOOST .
Last edited by Brettus; 10-15-2011 at 04:20 PM.
10-15-2011, 04:57 PM
#63
Release the twins.
10-15-2011, 05:00 PM
#64
You are still not understanding what the CalcLOAD "limit" does.
Take a breath, stop asking questions and carefully read what I've said on the subject already.
10-15-2011, 05:07 PM
#66
But what happens if you then flow 500 g/s and do nothing else to the tune ? This is my point ..... you actually have to change something in the tune to accommodate higher flow .
10-15-2011, 06:11 PM
#69
I always describe the CalcLOAD table as an elastic ruler. It isn't a limiter.
The CalcLOAD "limit" table does not place a limit on anything.
The "exceeded" value is virtual. The "max" value isn't a max value.
You might have hit the max displayed CalcLOAD for that load cell as you have allocated it by distorting the CalcLOAD maximum, but you haven't, by definition, reached any sort of maximum.
Just because you don't have a big enough page to write down a particular rational number doesn't mean that the number is shortened.
Once again - the CalcLOAD limit table is not a limiter. It simply shapes the response curve of the tables that are based on it.
The CalcLOAD "limit" table does not place a limit on anything.
The "exceeded" value is virtual. The "max" value isn't a max value.
You might have hit the max displayed CalcLOAD for that load cell as you have allocated it by distorting the CalcLOAD maximum, but you haven't, by definition, reached any sort of maximum.
Just because you don't have a big enough page to write down a particular rational number doesn't mean that the number is shortened.
Once again - the CalcLOAD limit table is not a limiter. It simply shapes the response curve of the tables that are based on it.
brettus's understanding is that something negative will result in going over the 200%
Mazdamaniac's understanding is that its just fine to go over the 200%
but to bring it back to a tune, perhaps there is a middle ground? the ruler can only be stretched so far before it becomes unmanageable?
10-15-2011, 07:09 PM
#73
My understanding is that 100% is the 'normal' result that you expect to see from an NA engine at atmospheric pressure and 24degrees C.
When you set the table to 200% you are saying you expect to see double that airflow .
When you set the table to 200% you are saying you expect to see double that airflow .
Last edited by Brettus; 10-15-2011 at 07:12 PM.