Starting to adjust EAE and decel settings please comment
 

My tune felt good, and then I enabled the AEA. It immediately felt better. The power comes on buttery smooth if that makes sense.

The downside is that I notice a slight hesitation between shifts. I thought it was my shifting, but now I think it is cutting a little fuel as I shift. I am removing a couple tenths from "suck from walls" to see if this is the issue.

I also have not turned on lag compensation or overrun fuel cut. Do my starting point settings look ok? I don't want to go backwards turning these on, so if you have a jumping point, please post. MSextra doc is a little vague about the overun fuel cut.

My TPS accel based enrichment seems to work fine, but I thought I would throw it in the mix for review. Thanks.

https://www.miataturbo.net/picture.p...pictureid=1411

I started playing with EAE lately and it's getting better, but still going lean as shit between shifts. I know it's not my overrun settings because A) I have a 1.8 second delay on it and it doesn't take anywhere near that long to shift and B) datalogs don't show my injector PWs totally dropping out.

Notice that the EAE tables only go down to 30 kpa. I know on overrun I will pull 14-15 kpa when in gear, but I'm not exactly sure how low the MAP is going when I clutch in. Needz moar datal0gz. It might be possible that it's below 30 kpa and I might need to add cells below that to the EAE tables. I don't know, but I'm not messing with it for at least the next few days because in this cold weather my car barely even warms up.

There are some threads on msextra that might help. Some people occasionally type "EAE" when they really mean "normal AE" (the old TPSdot/MAPdot type) but you can usually figure out what they mean.
http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewto...?f=101&t=28038 (long)
http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewto...?f=101&t=32000
http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewto...p?f=91&t=35230

Mine only just started going lean when I turned on the "enhanced acceleration enrichment" I think the "sucked from walls is too aggressive" thtinks there is more fuel available than there really is.

I'm going to mess with this, then turn on lag compensation, and then turn on "over rune fuel cut" This way I should be able to pinpoint my trouble areas, and tune the problem. Thanks for the links. I searched this forum for a while last night, but there isn't one particular section where I found what I needed.

You need a good long tuning session on a stretch of open road to tune your EAE, it's nothing we'll be able to look at and say it looks good.

Read the tuning manuals for it: http://msextra.com/doc/ms2extra/MS2-...anual.html#EAE

Thanks. I was reading over this section a lot last night. I'm trying to determine the best method for tuning and reading my logs. At the moment I have lag compensation off, and am adjusting the "sucked from walls" I reduced it across the board and it helped. It feels like I need to reduce it a bit more at the 30kpa are and 60 kpa area. When it is dialed in, the shifts are great.

I just don't want to be too aggressive with the EAE if I should be tuning first with the lag compensation. I've been reading that the EAE is more for fine tuning, which leads me to believe I should turn on lag compensation first and adjust for lean tip in with this.

My lean to recover time is very rapid, which based on the msextra doc, suggests that my ATW and SFW are close to an ideal ratio.

The overrun fuel cut has me a little confused as well. It seems like this could start causing problems during shifting. I guess the kpa needs to be set lower than what it reads between shifts, but above the min. kpa it sees at throttle let up. It asks for rpm ranges and I'm not sure what these should be. I want it to be high enough to recover the idle. What rpm do you guys have the fuel come back on? I was going to try to use the defaults 1500 and 1100.

Ideally I would take a day and tune this. Unfortunately this is not a luxury I have at the moment. I'm logging to and from work and making my adjustments in between. Test, bench adjust, test, repeat. It's slow, but is working, and that is why I want as much input as possible, to help speed the process.

I have fuel cut above 1700 and return below 1600. Delay of 2 seconds.


The problem I was having with the fuel return at 1100 was the delay between when the RPMs hit 1100 and the time it takes for the injector PW to kick back in. It was causing idle droop and I was relaying on a large dashpot value to compensate, but then a hanging idle under normal conditions. I was going over logs and there was a few ms of time that past between when the CL idle was kicking in and there was still no PW. raising the rpm to 1600 solved the issue...fuel kicks in a littler earlier but it allows everything to stabilize as you come to a slow stop. If you have a good tune, there should be little notice of when the fuel even kicks back in if it does when coasting at that low rpm or if you like going uphill in 2nd gear without throttle input.

Here is a piece of my datalog. The good news is that the AFR on all three shifts follows the same pattern. This means that it is tunable and due to my settings.

What I see:

On throttle lift the AFR remains stable, then richens, AE comes on as throttle is applied, AE cuts off and results in huge lean spike.

Keep in mind that this is during warmup so the AFR is going to be richer than normal.

https://www.miataturbo.net/picture.p...pictureid=1412

https://www.miataturbo.net/picture.p...pictureid=1413

Keep in mind that shifts with this tune this morning feel pretty good, but I can feel that there is improvement. the datalog seems to suggest this.

How would you combat this datalog? Lag compensation is off, as well as fuel overrun cutoff.

I see around 16:1 when i stomp on it, for a blink of an eye. I dont feel it at all. Couldn't get much better so that's good enough for me, much better than when I was on ms-I and basic enrichments. Honestly, the on throttle response is much better than both my Altima and Prelude.

My overrun rpm is set for above 1800. You're not saving a lot of fuel by setting it much lower. Kpa below 20 I believe (don't have it in front of me) because it's lower than what I should see with the clutch in for shifts, but higher than the 14-16 kpa I see during overrun. TPS below 0.8%.

I believe the EAE section of the manual says that lag compensation is specifically for cars running sequential injection, so if you're still running batch I'd leave it off. It just adds to the # of squirts while keeping the total amount of fuel the same, to get a little fuel in quicker for cars that normally inject only once per cycle, so the response is a little quicker during sharp blips. That's the theory anyway. I no haz sequential yet so I haven't messed with it.

Tuning while looking at logs... it's helpful to have your AFR Target plotted on the same graph as your WBO2 AFR, so you can see how they differ when you accelerate or lift. The kpa ranges where they start diverging is where you need to adjust ATW or SFW for accel or lift. That's what I've been doing anyway.

Unfortunately I realized I've been doing this shit with normal AE still enabled, so I will get to redo most/all of it.

file > save graph as png or jpeg

knock off that blurry and complicated screen capture BS.

It sounds like I need to tune for "feel" at first, then see what the log looks like

How do I divide the target AFR by 100 so that it shows up as 14.70 instead of 1470?
yes sir. If I ever figure out how to successfully trim the data, or have a log file that is less than the mas allowable files size, then I will include it.

Make a custom field in MLV with the formula "[AFR Target 1]/100"
Remove the quotes but keep the brackets.

you also want to makesure they scale the same, min max at 0-20

i dont think you understood my suggestion... there's a direct way to save an image file of the current graph you're viewing within MLV. it results in this:

http://y8spec.com/megasquirt/images/complog_running.png

...

Incidentally, the "16:1 AFR Spike" is not supposed to be there. I'd look at whatever setting is responsible for low RPM + high MAP + high TPSdot fuel adding.

I'd check first the TPS Based AE and put some significant values (50%?) for TPSdot values that equate to "stomping the pedal".

I see the print feature now in MLV.

I really don't understand what you are saying about the 50% TPSdot values. My TPS AE tableis at the top of the page. I will readily admit that I do not understand how this works, or how to adjust it. I am currently reading the MSextra manual, bur the reference tables seem to be to megatune, and I have never used it.

I have no clue as to what to adjust on the TPS based AE since there is no correlation to kpa or TP on the graph.

Edit: The best I could come up with would be to increase PW adder values by about 11% since this is the % difference between 14.3 and 16 afr

Actually, lag compensation is meant for those *not* running seq, but is not necessary with later firmware revs b/c you can use a little bit of normal AE in the quick-blip situations to compensate for the lag that lag compensation was originally written to compensate for.

The trick to getting EAE working right everywhere is to make sure your VE table covers the areas you don't normally drive very long (all the way down to just above cranking RPM, and all the way into overrun). This is because EAE's purpose is to make sure the amount of fuel specified by the VE table is actually getting into the cylinder during transients. If the VE table is wrong or doesn't go into the operational range you're having an issue with, you won't be able to tune the bad behavior out no matter how much you mess with the EAE settings. The base problem in those cases is the VE table not the EAE settings.

Ken

How do you go about testing and adjusting the TPS base AE. I've read the msextra blurb on it, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Should I keep the current shape of the curve and just increase each point if I need to richen the mixture and decrease to lean it out? OR do you need to increase/decrease only one or two points on the curve?

Hmm, I guess I equated sequential injection with 1 squirt per cycle to a "small number of injections," which is the wording in the EAE manual. So those of us running batch/2 squirts per cycle have a small number of injections but those running sequential/1 per cycle do not. This is not confusing me at all. But if it's not necessary, great, one less thing to mess with.

Sounds like I need to add a 14 kpa row to my VE table.

You calibrated your TPS when you installed MS so it knows where 0% and 100% throttle positions are. TPSdot or "rate (%/s)" is how fast you mash the gas pedal. If you depress it half way and it takes you 1 second to do that, that's 50%/s. If it was 1000% that would be you starting at 0% throttle then mashing it to the floor in 1/10th of a second. It will add whatever amount of PW in milliseconds is specified in the table depending on how hard you press the gas, it will add that PW for the "Accel time" specified (0.2 sec in your pic) and taper the increase away over 0.1 sec after that. If you do not move the throttle faster than 80%/sec it will not enrich. To tune it, if you stomp the gas and it goes too rich, decrease the PW adder for the high %/s cells. You just observe how rich/lean it gets when you press the throttle at different rates, and adjust the PW adder up or down as necessary. You can datalog it if you want but it's easy enough to dial in just by watching what happens on the WBO2 gauge.

When I attempt adjusting EAE again I will put the TPSdot threshold high enough so that normal AE is never triggered. Then once I have EAE pretty good I will add back just a small amount of normal AE to take care of the quick stabs.

Got it, thanks. I think I am trying to tune out some things with EAE that can be handled with AE

Ok, so after a lot of reading in the provided links.

EAE is for mainting afr on throttle lift, and AE is for eliminating the rich or lean spike when the throttle is applied? Yes?

I'm not sure when to start adjusting adhere to walls. I guess when the values for suck from walls get too low or high.

Anyone find a ratio/relationship between the two that seems to be standard despite the setup?

This would make it easier to adjust both curves.

I'm done for the night. I'll see what my bench tuning produces tomorrow.

No, EAE is there to ensure the commanded amount of fuel actually gets into the cylinders.

So your VE for a particular region is 50, but (numbers are all pulled from my ass) '2' is stuck to the walls when acellerating and '1' is sucked from the walls when decellerating.

Once correctly tuned, EAE adds in the extra '2' and removes the '1' to ensure you get the commanded '50' into the cylinder. Which is why it's so important to have your VE table completely perfect before even considering tuning EAE.

AE can be used to complement EAE during sharp throttle transitions as the rate of change in VE is too quick.

ok, great. i have been trying to fix everything with suck from walls. G
The graph is looking a bit like a sawtooth. I think ill make a little more progress. Thanks

no. both are for both. AE is event based. If you surpass your TPSdot threshold the MS will simply increase the pulsewitdh based on the tps rate/rpm table. Likewise when you lift, it will just pull whatever number is in the decel fuel amount.

EAE is constantly running and it's like a ballet dance between the adhere and sucked tables.

Adhere-to-walls values will cause the pulse-widths to increase when opening the throttle. When you tell the MS you have a higher adhere-to-walls value, you are telling it that it needs to inject more fuel because more fuel stuck to the walls and didn't get burnt off.

Sucked-From-Walls values is how much fuel is coming off the "puddle" so it doesn't need to inject as much fuel.

If you widen both tables you might be constantly be in EAE because, like i said, it's constantly running. If poorly tuned you could be telling the MS that the "puddle" of fuel is constantly increasing and never decreasing...or that you are pulling more fuel out of it than you are putting in.


Turn the EAE gauge on when you tune and watch it's behavior. Regular AE is running at the same time as EAE FWIW. Tuning the EAE isnt about stomping on the throttle, you must maniplute the throttle slowly, hold it in place and watch how the EAE gauge reacts. Tuning in 5th gear is a must. When you get it right, driving in 5th you should be able to manipulate the throttle slowly and/or aggressively and see very little change in AFRs.

I turn off TPS based AE altogether to begin with, then get EAE doing what I want for slow-medium speed throttle movements in 5th gear on the highway. Then I tune the RPM curves driving at different RPMs, then I tune the CLT curves based on differences during warmup.

Finally, I tune quick blips by adding a tiny amount of TPS AE until the engine responds quickly. Only enough TPS AE to jumpstart EAE is necessary.

Ken

How mcuh did you guys move your curves fromt the default? Mine is pretty significant at this point. i wonder if I should go back to the default values and start over.

I wasn't too concerned about this because I have a little head work.

mine doesn't look anything like the default.


http://www.boostedmiata.com/gallery2...cked_walls.jpg

http://www.boostedmiata.com/gallery2...1-4/adhere.jpg

Mine is definitely increasing, but not as high as yours. After the tips I received last night I started to re-tweak my curves. They are changing a lot from the default. The default feels good while driving, but my logs tell me it isn't ideal. Would you mind posting a screen cap of your log? I want to see how your AFR is responding to the throttle input. A nice big throttle jab and an easing on of the throttle would be great ;)

Unfortunately I had to take my xterra in for repairs, so I haven't been able to test my current tweaks.

don't have any handy. When I look at logs I still get lean spikes when going from 0% to 100% TPS...but it's no where in the magnitude that I would see them with MS-I and AE only. The way I see it, that will only get so good. You could tell it to dump in 10ms of fuel, but it has to react first, and there will always be a delay.

Otherwise I tuned for feel under regular driving circumstances mostly, and just making sure the AFR pretty much stayed constant when manipulating the throttle. Like for example giving it 30% TPS, holding it there while I build RPMs, then slowing dropping back to 10%. I could probably tune it better, but spent a good week just focusing on it when driving to work and back and said "good enough"

I assume you have ego correction off during this? I think part of my problem is trying to determine what is a delay reaction spike. I may go back to base settings a restart with 5th gear pulls.

Well the MS has to see the throttle change, then react. There's a mechanical delay. I don't believe any car out there in factory form or the best tuned car can stomp on the throttle without lean spikes. When I drive my Altima or my Prelude, it confirms this. Otherwise mines very smooth at really any rate off on/off throttle. And then there's so things you cant tune out like it hovering rich after lifting...it's all mechanical at that point: BOV dumps out air and the MS has to react...even if you cut fuel completely at a lift, the air was already dumped and the MS can only react to the event.

That is true with a regular throttle body, the only thing the EMS can do is respond.

With throttle by wire like the factories are using on all the new cars, when you put your foot down, it knows what you want to do before the throttle is opened and can exactly match the amount of fuel as the transient occurs.

Unfortunately though, I don't want to write code for throttle by wire!

Ken

yeah, you might end up crashing poeple into walls.

How about an autotune for warmup, AE and EAE? You know, nothing big.

he didnt write the autotune code. that's outside the MS.

Yeah, having autotune algorithms active all the time will kill the flash on the chip eventually too.

That's the main reason for not implementing them now.

Also, there's no way for one piece of autotune code to automatically know whether ASE, EAE, VE, etc... are to blame for the AFR not being correct, nor is there any way to know for sure that the wideband is actually accurate at a particular load... As I understand it none of the current wideband controller manufacturers actually account for increased pressure in the exhaust when on boost or at high load, and they don't tell the MS when the sensor gets too hot to be accurate either.

Ken

And the ones that do output some codes (even if not straight to the MS) when the sensor is too cold indicate that widebands generally are too cold in the time the ASE is active in order to send a real signal.

This is why I have a 25 seconds delay for my EGO.

Interesting... Where do you set this delay? Do you set it in decel over run assuming that you are going to be accelerating after you have entered the decel code? This sounds like a good idea.

MS3 has a EGO delay after start(sec) parameter. I've timed how long my LC-1 takes to start taking a reading and it's about 20 seconds. I gave it a little more for good measure...not that it matters as don't use EGO at idle.

I don't think MS2 has back-ported that little one yet.

What do you think about using the delay int eh overrun fuel cut for ego in MS2? This would probably have the same effect most of the time? Any downsides that you can think of?

that's what the clt temp setting is for. I delay it until like 130*F or something.

Wow, I don't have ego come on until 165*F. MAybe I should turn it down. My VE table is pretty good, so with the MAT correction dialed in it rides pretty nice with no EGO.

As I'm editing my EAE profiles while going through my datalog. I remember you (Brain) say ing that you adjust both sucked and adhere settings.

If I want to tune out a rich spot under acceleration at a given MAP reading. Would you increase the sucked from walls AND decrease the adhere to walls at the same time for this MAP reading? Currently I have only been adjusting the sucked from walls. Then I was going to go back and do adhere to walls, then realizing that this seems flawed.

If it's rich on account of EAE, you will need to alter adhere at the same time....you need to watch the gauge and see when it's increasing fueling based on EAE, the initial stab or over time. Otherwise it might just be the fuel map. This is why 5th gear makes this easier to tune, limits a lot of other variables.

If your adhere to walls tells the MS a lot of fuel got stuck, but the sucked from walls tells the MS little is being removed, then it might increase the PW over time after the initial throttle change.

EAE is ALWAYS active.

Ok, I think my tuning technique has been a little flawed. Fortunately it does appear that I was going in the right direction.

When I'm looking at my datalog, the EAE% gives a single value, but it must incorporate the adhere and suck values. How do you determine the percent increase/decrease that it logs into a single value?

I am absolutely useless at tuning this. I can't find the correlation between my EAE% = 105% and how the translated to adjusting my adhere and sucked from tables if my afr is rich by 10% (this is hypothetical situation) and my adhere value is 20% while my sucked from is 8% This makes no sense. I went back to the original table and it feels better with it turned off. I did tune my regular AE last night, and have nice crisp throttle response. yay

Adheres to wall is calculated as a percent of each squirt. Sucked from wall is a percent pulled from the puddle that has collected on the wall...

The size of each squirt is very small compared to what sits in the puddle on the walls of the intake port.

So what you end up with is a larger percentage of a small number (adhere to walls, getting added to the puddle on every squirt) eventually equalizing with a small percentage of a big number (getting sucked off the walls on each intake event). You can see the amount (in usec) that the code thinks is on the walls of the port by looking at the wallfuel variable.

When EAE is at "100%" it means that the amount going into and out of the walls has equalized (wallfuel is not changing) and the algorithm is not increasing or reducing the amount of fuel in a squirt to compensate for anything.

When EAE is over 100% and won't come back down, it means that with your settings, you have told the code that more fuel is getting added to the walls than ever comes off, so it's constantly trying to compensate by squirting more fuel on each squirt. In other words, you've created settings that make it impossible to get back to equalibrium (in this case, wallfuel would be constantly increasing).

The most typical reason for getting into this situation is trying to tune for quick blips before tuning slow throttle movements. You keep changing added to walls to get better response, but it keeps not helping b/c the problem isn't the amount of fuel, it's how quickly the fuel is getting added after the transient starts. The solution there is to get it working right on everything but quick blips, and then add some standard TPS-based AE to handle quick blips.

The second most common problem is that VE is not actually tuned properly yet, and the user is trying to compensate with EAE settings. That won't work because EAE's purpose is to make sure the VE-calculated amount of fuel is actually getting into the cylinder.

Ken

This will help a lot.

Shouldn't adhere-to-walls be pretty universal since it is highly dependent on the surface area of the head that the fuel contacts? Assuming an good VE tune. Even with different injectors the req. fuel scales the actual volume of applied fuel to be the same. 1.6 heads and a 1.8 heads should have very similar adhesion percentage.

The sucked-from-walls seems to be the variable.

It seems like controlling this with two variables is unnecessary since you can add and remove fuel by manipulating either. If you get to zero with your adhere settings, then the VE table is probably too rich??? At the end of the day the values for both tables are probably incorrect if you actually measured these quantities. So we are manipulating two variabls to create a single unknown which is add or subtract fuel. Why couldn't we just have two independent AE tables, one MAP and one TPS. The tps would handle the large AE corrections during big throttle imputs, and the MAP based table would take care of the small corrections. Almost like two damped harmonic oscillators out of phase. I guess that would be like a PID algorithm for AE. I'm not trying to bash the model. My lack of understanding is driving me bonkers, and I want to understand it.

This is exactly what I was doing. I became so frustrated, that I decided to create a new tune and start from the beginnig by retuning the VE.

I have timing injection and seq fuel...so i have less pooling than you.

I disagree, but my evidence is going to be weak.

Due to the nature of how a fluid reacts and bonds to a surface. I think a fairly reproducable quantity of fuel will have to be deposited on the head surface before the quantity getting to teh cylinder stabalizes.

Sure, this will include sucked-from-walls, but regardless of how it is timed you still need a certain quantity of fuel to produce a desired AFR.

This quantity is: fuel to meet desired AFR + fuel adhering to head. I think the fuel adhering to the head is fairly constant.

Sucked-from-walls will change with RPM. Therefore adhere to walls should alwasy be greater than sucked-from-walls because some fuel will always remain adhered to cylinder head walls. You can't remove what isn't there.

Adhesion-to-walls will fluctuate with RPM but should be pretty constant from one setup to the next as long as the surface are that the fuel is flowing through is consistant.

I squirt once per cycle. you squirt twice and have fuel just pool there...

I have seq. fuel as well. I see your point. However, fuel is still being sucked off the wall during the event that there is no ignition. The flow characteristics shouldn't change.

EDIT:OK I rethought about what you just said, and now I agree. On non sequential injection you will get significant pooling. Since now there is more fuel availible than just teh amount that will adhere to the head surface.

Does this mean that dividing the default EAE adhesion values will be a better jump off point for tuning? I think so.

Thanks for humoring this discussion Brain. It's getting the wheels turnign and I'm enjoying it.

Which brings up an unrelated question. Is a non seq injected car running leaner than the AFR suggests due to this raw fuel entering the exhaust?

there's no raw fuel, it gets sucked.

Nevermind, I was thinking there was an extra squirt that entered the exhaust unburnt. I think I am mistaken.

there's an extra squirt in batch on the downward stroke. it just waits for the intake valve to open.

I actually very closely followed the Toyota implementation of it. Toyota had added to walls and sucked from walls. Additionally, you're assuming everyone using this feature is using it on a port-injected piston engine.

On my rotary engine, I tuned EAE with batch injection, and upon switching to properly timed sequential injection, the EAE tune is now completely wrong. When you inject affects how much fuel gets into the puddle and how much comes out. So the ability to change both can GREATLY help tunability. On that particular engine, it runs better if you inject during peak air velocity since there is no hot valve to squirt on for better atomization. This means less fuel is going to go into the walls, and the amount coming out won't change that much percentage wise (But the puddle will be much smaller).

Bruce and Al's original X-tau implementation also had a single variable for what was getting added to the walls, and a 12x12 table of time values for evaporation/sucked from walls time, and very few people could get it working. After I wrote EAE, they looked into why X-tau wasn't working for most people, and it turned out they needed a curve for added to walls, and a curve for what was getting sucked from walls. Their current implementation now has both.



I recommend watching the wallfuel variable closely in the datalogs while tuning, as that can help you see what effects are occurring. I also recommend if you have a stim, get a cheap plastic cooking syringe from the grocery store, and hook it to your MAP sensor, and play with it on the bench to get a clear understanding of how it will work with your configuration.

Finally, using it with sequential injection does make it a lot easier to tune.


Ken

Ken,

Whch direction would you expect to have to adjust the sucked from walls with sequential (assuming a spot on VE table)

I'm starting by reducing the adhere to walls by half since i am running sequential. I think the wallfuel value will be key. I noticed it increasing and decreasing but didn't know the units until you mentioned microseconds. I now should be able to create an approximate percent/microsecond correction scale.

The bad part is that you can't really reproduce a datalog unless tuning on a steady state dyno; so testing is hit and miss.

If given a value in the adhere column, and a value in the suck column. How does it calculate the percent increase? Is there a rule of thumb where ADHERE needs to be at least X amount greater than SUCK.

I would expect to leave that alone and adjust the added to walls down.

I'm not sure it'll make THAT much difference honestly. The EAE code was designed to work best when there is one squirt per injector per cycle, or in other words, the same number of squirts that you get with seq. I'd expect that your injector timing being correct will probably mean a fairly large reduction in added to walls, but not quite by half.

I don't know, I've never had trouble doing it on the street. If someone else is driving and the VE table is close, I can usually get it dialed in pretty quick... 20-30 minutes if there are no other problems.

That's a loaded question. This is how it calculates what the amount of fuel to be squirted:

SQF is the pre-opening time amount to inject, tmp_pw1 is the original VE-calculated PW, SOAtmp is the amount that is calculated to be sucked from the walls based on your settings and what wallfuel currently is, and AWC is the amount calculated to be added to the walls based on your settings.

So the answer is that there's no simple answer for how it calculates how much to inject.

The percent increase is just the amount EAE calculates to inject divided by the original pulse-width.

I also forgot to add ... the amount getting added to the puddle can change based on MAP. Higher air pressure means fuel has a harder time evaporating/atomizing. Another reason to have both adjustable. Both change based on the physics of what is happening.

Ken

I thought I would update this thread since I have once again started tuning this now that I am on the MS3. It still hasn't gone smoothly, but this is due to me not being diligent about checking my settings. IF you are going to tune EAE, then before you start, check the following:

Turn off other accel enrichment and set the EAE rpm/CLT tables to 100%.

I did a 100 mile trip and tuned along the way. I didn't turn off accel enrichment and I didn't zero the rpm table or the CLT table. If you perform the EAE adjustments at 3k rpm in fifth gear, then this really isn't going to be a problem. Just adjust the table so the 3k rpm is 100% on the rpm table and adjust your EAE tables accordingly.

I've read multiple threads that say you don't really need normal AE if EAE is dialed in. I'm finding that this is 100% true. I was amazed this morning at how well my car drove with normal AE off. I didn't miss it at all. Granted, I wasn't stabbing the throttle quickly.

Things I've noticed: Off idle stumble appears to be EAE related and not AE related since you are mostly moving the throttle slow and steady. In the past I would dial out the of idle stumble with AE.

I have not confirmed this next bit, but it looks promising as an indicator if your off idle EAE fuel is dialed in correctly. If you autotune and you see that you are getting large enrichment spikes off idle (i.e. 1200 rpm) there is a good chance that your EAE is not tuned properly.

It's not nearly as difficult as I expected since like the acceleration wizard, the EAE windows show your last throttle movement, so you know where to adjust. A small, quick, lean spike after the accelerator is depressed seems normal.

Make sure your afr table is smooth around the 3k/map area where you are cruising. If you are in an AFR table transition zone, it will be hard to determine if you AFR is fluctuation due to EAE or just trying to get to the afr table value.

I like tuning one table at a time. i.e. adhere to walls since I can focus solely on the afr associated with pressing the throttle, then tune the throttle lift AFR.

I think the EAE has one of the largest impacts on drivability for a DD, other than idle.