Fiat Punto GT

Document your project with images, pictures, etc., and share with others.
Bollah
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 10:15 am
ECU Model: S60 Pro
Firmware Version: 71

Re: Fiat Punto GT

Post by Bollah »

Off Topic, you do know that in Windows 7 there is a tool to allow you selected screen grabs? Search for snipping tool
Page
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 12:06 pm
ECU Model: S60 Pro
Distributor: Local Dealer GR
Firmware Version: 62

Re: Fiat Punto GT

Post by Page »

okey ...

I've noticed after activating the fuel cut, that in the transition from fuel cut to light , very light load/ light press of the pedal throttle, engine is stalling for a brief of moment and then Boom power is back .
Looking my AFR readings, in that particular brief moment, starts from up to 20:1 and then comes to the programmed value in specific cell .
The problem is that engine wobble violently once and then everything is normal, and this is not a comfortable situation .
Searching to find out in which specific row the ECU sees (with trace cell) i saw that in the overrun (with irrelevant AFR) , ecu running down on my 20 Kpa row and with the slight throttle pedal press, it still remain on the 20Kpa row .
No matter what i do to the 20 Kpa row (e.g) increase ms of injector pulse makes the problem worst as this still starts from 20:1 and falls to (e.g) 13,9 :1 .
Even when i made my column with more resolution (e.g) 10 /20 /30 kpa still travels on my 20Kpa row .

So i'm forced to retard ignition a lot on 20 Kpa row and set high AFR as 15,5:1 in order to make the engine make less power and not vibrate so much .
But even if the ecu sees less than 20 kpa doesn't mean that will fall out of the map, it will still work with the last value of the map .
And with this in mind led me to manifold /barometric compensation table where i increase the values lower of 20Kpa

Image

Not that this is the right way, but notice a little difference in transition
(18,5 :1 )
Isn't it odd .
Any Advice ?

Oh ! and these are my transients , couldn't be more than this .

Image
stevieturbo
Posts: 3577
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 12:08 pm
ECU Model: No ECU
Location: Norn Iron

Re: Fiat Punto GT

Post by stevieturbo »

If you are map as load, zet all map related compensations to zero

If overrun cut off is causing problems, turn it off or raise it higher.

Other than that I have little clue what you're trying to say. And once again, uploading the full map and a datalog will be far more useful

screenshots only show a small picture of what you might be doing wrong.
Page
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 12:06 pm
ECU Model: S60 Pro
Distributor: Local Dealer GR
Firmware Version: 62

Re: Fiat Punto GT

Post by Page »

Hi guys,

@ Stevie,
Yes, I understand that it must be zero. But i should adjust from the beginning all over the map fuel and with totally different figures. I will in the future though.
(is that I'm used to round these numbers on specific fields and Most of the time i can understand with a blink of an eye where and what to do.)

And once again, uploading the full map and a datalog will be far more useful
Correctly, but just to remind you that until i found out what the heck is going wrong and i can't log no more than one sec, there isn't going to be any log .
Until then i'm trying hard to make engine work properly by trial and error and with some super help from you. That is .
(I need logs too, you know !)
So, until now i haven't done anything, i was super ill, now things get better and soon as, will find out the log theme .

_______________________________________________

Could please somebody explain to me,
Let say that on the Sequential injection table set the injection Angle at zero and at the bottom of the table select End.
As user manual states very clearly, is the point that injection will end.
So a small injection pulse will end at the same zero point and a large one at the same point . This means that ecu calculate the injection pulse starting from the end of injection pulse, aright ?
Rob Stevens
Posts: 1247
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 4:10 am
ECU Model: S100 Pro
Distributor: None-Coil On Plug :)

Re: Fiat Punto GT

Post by Rob Stevens »

Disable sequential for now!
Disable fuel cut off.
Set compensations to Zero.
Then try again to get it to idle, check that you have the crank trigger in the right place with a timing light. set the throttle blade position so that you get the idle speed you want with around 3 degrees ignition.
stevieturbo
Posts: 3577
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 12:08 pm
ECU Model: No ECU
Location: Norn Iron

Re: Fiat Punto GT

Post by stevieturbo »

4 pages and no mention that the engine doesnt even run ?
Rob Stevens
Posts: 1247
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 4:10 am
ECU Model: S100 Pro
Distributor: None-Coil On Plug :)

Re: Fiat Punto GT

Post by Rob Stevens »

Doesn't run well at all, never will using map as load and using compensations set to standard. Me thinks best to start with the simple things :) he is only logging for 1 second so I assume that's how long it runs for ?
Also turn closed loop fuel off
stevieturbo
Posts: 3577
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 12:08 pm
ECU Model: No ECU
Location: Norn Iron

Re: Fiat Punto GT

Post by stevieturbo »

turn closed loop everything off !!!!

It will actually run ok with the compensations set. Oddly, Motec do a similar thing. It just results in the main fuel table getting vary flat.
I dont like it. I'd much rather see raw PW figures in the table. It just removes any ambiguity as to what is going on.

If only he'd upload the damn map, most of the major issues could be spotted in minutes !

Screenshots are literally a waste of time
Page
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 12:06 pm
ECU Model: S60 Pro
Distributor: Local Dealer GR
Firmware Version: 62

Re: Fiat Punto GT

Post by Page »

:lol: :lol: :lol:
No , no ! aleady made about 700+ Km !
:lol: :lol:

And the funny part is that, engine, fooling me by pulling very strong .
Infact i did my first tests 3 weeks ago or so with boost up to 0,5 bar.
I can estimate that is about 200ish .

But since you ask me and despite that , everything is all set as you write from day one, from first minute . ( i was working with sequential inactive, and was time to go further and activate it, which is today's status .)
Everything has been done except the compensations ( that really didn't knew )
and to work the 3 pin idle bosch valve . It is properly connected (bench tested)and proven working with ecu.
Particularly in the issue of the idle valve, I would like to clarify that for now idle
valve is turned off until i find a way to bypass the throttle body which closes completely . So my hardware needs little work .
Engine idles with the little rest point of the Idle valve at 800rpm . There isn't any leak . ( Has been proven and has been tested .)
Crank trigger is in the right place, checked with a timing light (three times until now). And ecu sees what engine sees .
Also cam sensor trigger works perfectly at -38 deg. (Ecu clarify this at diagnostics and display table without errors).
Throttle stops are set correctly .
Lambda is off (open loop)
So, are we good so far ?

Let's go a little further ...

_____________________________________________________

I made few tests today
Test One, (as you're loud about ) with compensations set to standard , i 've set the 1 Kpa and 10 Kpa to +90% and +70% respectively.
And the issue, with the fuel cut, disappeared ...
Exactly after that I put my foot back to throttle pedal for a slight push (when engine was on overrun ), AFR starts from 15:1 (for half a second) instead
of 20, 21:1 that i had before and causes the engine to stall for that specific half of a second. (I don't know if you understand me now Stevie)
A log would be good idea but as i wrote before, i can't log for now.
So clearly i have to fix the compensations ...
This needs a lot of work so this would be done next week .
But , can i do a dumb question here ?
If compensations are adding or reducing fuel by %, could be possible to change every Kpa column on fuel map as compensations rows ?
E.g Row 4 / 30 Kpa (at compensation table) is set to -70%, So if i shade the
30 kpa column (at fuel map) and press F5 and change the values by % and reduce by 70% and then set row 4 to zero ( doing this for every row) would be a nice trick ?

Test Two .
I've set the injection angle at sequential table at zero as i wrote in previous post.
I couldn't believe of the change . The roughness of engine at idle is disappeared .
idle is far, far more stable thatn before . I can even hear the exhaust, noticeably much more silent .
On the road, engine is also work, noticeably smoother .
Transactions are much better and smooth than harsh as was before .
Also there are some very little AFR variations (pointing to the side of rich mixture). needs of a refinement .
I tend to believe that injection must end around or spot on where the inlet valve opens. (on Sequential mode )
I don't know if this is crucial to make engine to pass emissions but sure, i was able to reduce ignition timing at idle by 3 degrees ( WOW !!!) before the engine speed drops below 750 rpm .
I was at 12 deg, now at 9 deg and 800-850 rpm stable and stronger than before, idle without any help either idle valve or advance idle function .
Fuel is at 13,2 . (Something must keep the engine running ).

asap i find a way of bypassing the throttle body I'll put in Function the idle valve and let the engine of getting more air and optimize it with 14,6 and i 'm sure i could drop the ignition little more .
stevieturbo
Posts: 3577
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 12:08 pm
ECU Model: No ECU
Location: Norn Iron

Re: Fiat Punto GT

Post by stevieturbo »

If the engine runs, you can log, it is always logging....dont understand why you say you cant log ?

In theory yes, you could adjust the main table 50kpa -50% etc etc and that should be the same thing. Then set compensations to zero.

I would agree about injecting against a closed valve, that does seem to be the opinion of what is best. Not sure what actual number this is on the DTA though, or where they reference zero to. Most likely TDC Cyl 1 ?

Just open the throttle blade with the adjustment screw ? Or bend the closed stop a little.

I see no reason to be dropping idle timing much lower than 8-9 deg anyway.

As you lean the mixture from 13.2, idle speed will likely drop anyway
Post Reply