The BIG Dynojet PowerCommander V and AutoTune Q&A topic

[Blue_eyes]

OK, that might explain things.

The Max Enrichment Trim/Max Enleanment Trim— sets the maximum percentage of fuel changes Auto Tune will make during an Auto Tune session.

Eg. If the Target AFR value for a cell is set to e.g. 13.2 and AT measures an actual AFR of 13.6 a 20% value in the Max Enrichment Trim will only allow the AT to generate a trim value of 20% of 13.6 = 2.72

So, in order to reach a value of 17 in the Fuel Map, it would take more than 8 iterations/accept trim values/rides (because the trim values will become increasingly smaller when the actual AFR value reaches the Target AFR value).

So many more rides / accept trims are required in order to reach high values. That is why the best/fastest results are achieved when you initially put your bike on the dyno and have a custom base map made. After that have AT make all the minor adjustments that are a result of environment variables.

Or, when starting from scratch, give it time/have many accept trims iterations and start with 30% Max Enrichment Trim/Max Enleanment Trim values, so the initial changes are bigger and it hones in quicker.

Does that make any sense?

 

[jajpko]

OK, that might explain things.

The Max Enrichment Trim/Max Enleanment Trim— sets the maximum percentage of fuel changes Auto Tune will make during an Auto Tune session.

Eg. If the Target AFR value for a cell is set to e.g. 13.2 and AT measures an actual AFR of 13.6 a 20% value in the Max Enrichment Trim will only allow the AT to generate a trim value of 20% of 13.6 = 2.72

So, in order to reach a value of 17 in the Fuel Map, it would take more than 8 iterations/accept trim values/rides (because the trim values will become increasingly smaller when the actual AFR value reaches the Target AFR value).

So many more rides / accept trims are required in order to reach high values. That is why the best/fastest results are achieved when you initially put your bike on the dyno and have a custom base map made. After that have AT make all the minor adjustments that are a result of environment variables.

Or, when starting from scratch, give it time/have many accept trims iterations and start with 30% Max Enrichment Trim/Max Enleanment Trim values, so the initial changes are bigger and it hones in quicker.

Does that make any sense?

I have done that. 30%, rode and accepted many time over 2 weeks. The values did not change to any great amount.

You seem to be trying to put blame on the operator rather than accepting the test that have been done and the results posted.

If, as you are inferring, that it take months to make a map, that is ridiculous.. If the system is working properly, the system should make the adjustments on a ride from Tx, into Co. That ride could happen in a day, two at the most. With a change in elevation, it should be able to keep up.

As far as putting the bike on a dyno, that is probably the quickest, but you should be able to build a map, and use the Auto Tune to bring the map in much quicker than it is.

 

[Blue_eyes]

I have done that. 30%, rode and accepted many time over 2 weeks. The values did not change to any great amount.

You seem to be trying to put blame on the operator rather than accepting the test that have been done and the results posted.

If, as you are inferring, that it take months to make a map, that is ridiculous.. If the system is working properly, the system should make the adjustments on a ride from Tx, into Co. That ride could happen in a day, two at the most. With a change in elevation, it should be able to keep up.

As far as putting the bike on a dyno, that is probably the quickest, but you should be able to build a map, and use the Auto Tune to bring the map in much quicker than it is.

Hi Jim,

I am not trying to put any blame on the operator what so ever, why would I. I am just trying to determine based on how the PC V and AT etc. should work (or at least how we expect/think it should work) and the settings that are being used, how the results that are being observed could be explained.

But remember the % Max Enrichment Trim/Max Enleanment Trim that is set is the total bandwith that the trim settings are allowed to change PER SESSION (ignition ON/OFF) FOR THAT session. So it doesn't matter how far you drive or how long, or what the altitude change is, or how many sessions you have. It will only allow that % of change PER SESSION FOR THAT SESSION (ignition on/off).

It will not tune a map from e.g. actual values 14,2 to 13,2 in one session. ONLY by doing an "Accept Trims" after a session it wil gradually hone in the Fuel Map with correction values within the marginal boundaries set by the % Max Enrichment Trim/Max Enleanment Trim.

So it will take many/multiple incremental "Accept Trims" to make any major change to the Fuel Map as with each "Accept Trim" the incremental change becomes smaller and smaller.

The % Max Enrichment Trim/Max Enleanment Trim is meant as a safety net/precaution so that when things go wrong (the PC V or AT or O2 sensor are faulty) the bike doesn't run lets say as lean as 18 to 1 and could cause damage. So, NO major AFR changes is the default.

AT is only meant to FINETUNE the map, NOT to make a base map. The base map is best made on the dyno, or is to be used from a bike that has the same setup as a reference/startingpoint. Then AT can be used to hone in the map to subtle differences as a result of fuel, environment, etc.

Again, this is only my reasoning based on what I have learned about the PC V and AT etc. It could very well be that something is faulty, but according to how I understand it is supposed to work, and what is being observed I still think what is happening is what is to be expected. But I can be wrong. Just try to share my thought of mind / thinking process, that's all.

Plz let me make very clear that I have no intention of blaming anyone or anything, I just try to explain how the PC V and AT etc. work to the best of my best knowledge and relate that to the effects that are being observed / expected.

As soon as I have a tuning session with my Dynojet expert, I will ask him about this and hopefully know more by then. I am only interested in factfinding, the rationale behind this.

 

[Tremor38]

Hi Jim,

As soon as I have a tuning session with my Dynojet expert, I will ask him about this and hopefully know more by then. I am only interested in factfinding, the rationale behind this.

This should be very enlightening. ::008::

 

[~TABASCO~]

Blue,

Do you think we could get a more "fine tune" by adding then 5% (or so) instead of the 20/30% most of us have been running. Do you think this would fine tune faster and to within 5% of out target AFR.. Is this your thought ? I was under the impression that even at 20% it would still work towards the target AFR but have a working window of 20% Etc.... PA,, your thoughts? Thanks

 

[jajpko]

Hi Jim,

I am not trying to put any blame on the operator what so ever, why would I. I am just trying to determine based on how the PC V and AT etc. should work (or at least how we expect/think it should work) and the settings that are being used, how the results that are being observed could be explained.

But remember the % Max Enrichment Trim/Max Enleanment Trim that is set is the total bandwith that the trim settings are allowed to change PER SESSION (ignition ON/OFF) FOR THAT session. So it doesn't matter how far you drive or how long, or what the altitude change is, or how many sessions you have. It will only allow that % of change PER SESSION FOR THAT SESSION (ignition on/off).

It will not tune a map from e.g. actual values 14,2 to 13,2 in one session. ONLY by doing an "Accept Trims" after a session it wil gradually hone in the Fuel Map with correction values within the marginal boundaries set by the % Max Enrichment Trim/Max Enleanment Trim.

So it will take many/multiple incremental "Accept Trims" to make any major change to the Fuel Map as with each "Accept Trim" the incremental change becomes smaller and smaller.

The % Max Enrichment Trim/Max Enleanment Trim is meant as a safety net/precaution so that when things go wrong (the PC V or AT or O2 sensor are faulty) the bike doesn't run lets say as lean as 18 to 1 and could cause damage. So, NO major AFR changes is the default.

AT is only meant to FINETUNE the map, NOT to make a base map. The base map is best made on the dyno, or is to be used from a bike that has the same setup as a reference/startingpoint. Then AT can be used to hone in the map to subtle differences as a result of fuel, environment, etc.

Again, this is only my reasoning based on what I have learned about the PC V and AT etc. It could very well be that something is faulty, but according to how I understand it is supposed to work, and what is being observed I still think what is happening is what is to be expected. But I can be wrong. Just try to share my thought of mind / thinking process, that's all.

Plz let me make very clear that I have no intention of blaming anyone or anything, I just try to explain how the PC V and AT etc. work to the best of my best knowledge and relate that to the effects that are being observed / expected.

As soon as I have a tuning session with my Dynojet expert, I will ask him about this and hopefully know more by then. I am only interested in factfinding, the rationale behind this.

Knees, maybe I was too quick to draw that conclusion.. I was tired from over working what little brain I have left.

I understand what you are saying about needing to accept the trims many times to build a map. The points I'm having a problem with, with the % set to 30, that would mean if I have a 13.0 in the open loop and a supposed 13.6 in the closed loop, the auto tune should be able to add fuel to the open loop. As it is, it is subtracting fuel and only doing it, at -1 to -2.

I have done multiple stops to accept the trim values and it does not( sometimes) change the values at all, or by only, again a - 1.

In the 80 and 100% the numbers have changed to a -6 and stayed there, never changing again. So that shows the unit is capable of changing, although it is not in my opinion changing correctly.
I have only had one cup of coffee this morning, so I hope this makes sense..
The other point is about your dyno run. I do not believe your ECU is flashed the same as ours. I have said that before and still hold that idea. I can't prove it yet, but by your numbers of 13.2 and your tuners opinions, helps. For us to make full power we have to run a lower AFR.
Your run will show us some values, but they may not be applicable to our bikes, only the theory. It will be interesting to see what the new flash does,(I would liked to have seen that before the flash also)..

I think the only way I will get the best map, is like you , have a tuner make one. At least if there is a problem, maybe he can figure it out.

Another thing is, I keep going back to Maybert's map and ask why did his make such large positive numbers so quickly.
Does not make sense.

 

[YamaPA]

If you think that Yamaha or any other major manufactuer is off by 20% of more on their fueling in open loop areas, may Mexican Jesus help us. A 20% change in fuel requirements is freaking huge for a non-race engine! The only area where I have any fuel table numbers approaching 20 or 20+ is the 1000 and 1250 rpm cells at 2% throttle......and thats because I "forced" those numbers into the fuel table because well, AT gets whacky down here in some cases...one day I get a plus +15, next a -13, next +18, next -17, etc. This low rpm and low throttle area has been a problem for some...and I am not getting into that conversation now. I fully expect I will be lowering those "forced" cells in the future.

I am pretty confident that most major manufactuers programmed their ECUs to make close to maximum power in the open loop areas and thus, I dont think we are going to, or maybe I should say, I dont think we should see a big (in excess of the number 20 in the fuel table) changes in this area. Yamaha may be found max power for the bike at say 13.2 to 1, while Dynojet found it at 13.0 to 1. I am pretty confident it wont be way different. Thus the theory of having to do many many many rides to get a good map from AT is not acceptable to me....getting enough time at a specific rpm and throttle opening is the hard part. Question...who here has ANY fuel table numbers beyond 20 except at 1000 or 1250 rpms? And if you do, what rpm and what throttle opening and what is your AFR for that cell?

How do you think DynoJet builds their base map? When they can, they use factory O2 bungs (they remove the stock 02 sensors and insert the exact same type of sensor we have for AT in there) and if that is not possible, they use a tailpipe sniffer, maybe a tailpipe sniffer shoved into a copper tube with the copper tube shoved into the exhaust system to the point, or install rivnuts (if they are willing to "damage" a header) or something else. The combination of dyno use, tuning software, and sensores then alk to each other to generate a map "faster" than open road riding does simply because they can hold certain throttle openings and rpms for the necessary periods of time.

 

[Blue_eyes]

Knees, maybe I was too quick to draw that conclusion.. I was tired from over working what little brain I have left.

I understand what you are saying about needing to accept the trims many times to build a map. The points I'm having a problem with, with the % set to 30, that would mean if I have a 13.0 in the open loop and a supposed 13.6 in the closed loop, the auto tune should be able to add fuel to the open loop. As it is, it is subtracting fuel and only doing it, at -1 to -2.

I have done multiple stops to accept the trim values and it does not( sometimes) change the values at all, or by only, again a - 1.

In the 80 and 100% the numbers have changed to a -6 and stayed there, never changing again. So that shows the unit is capable of changing, although it is not in my opinion changing correctly.
I have only had one cup of coffee this morning, so I hope this makes sense..
The other point is about your dyno run. I do not believe your ECU is flashed the same as ours. I have said that before and still hold that idea. I can't prove it yet, but by your numbers of 13.2 and your tuners opinions, helps. For us to make full power we have to run a lower AFR.
Your run will show us some values, but they may not be applicable to our bikes, only the theory. It will be interesting to see what the new flash does,(I would liked to have seen that before the flash also)..

I think the only way I will get the best map, is like you , have a tuner make one. At least if there is a problem, maybe he can figure it out.

Another thing is, I keep going back to Maybert's map and ask why did his make such large positive numbers so quickly.
Does not make sense.

No worries Jim, that sometimes happens to most of us, me too. No offence taken. We are both trying to find answers.

Two founders of the company I work for are very bright men. They once told me that when they are in disagreement on something, their reasoning is as follows:
One of us must know something that the other doesn't know. Because we are both bright men, if we would have the same information, we would come to the same conclusion. So, if we see things differently, there must be something one of us knows that the other one doesn't know of yet. So if we keep talking to eachother and exchanging information, we should in the end both have the same information and thus come to the same conclusion.

I just looked at the PC III map that was made 4 years ago on a dyno for my Yamaha MT-03 (a single cilinder 660 cc equal to the Yamaha XT660), not AutoTune installed on that bike.

This is the original custom map:

Below is my custom Dyno made map for the S10 when I had only the Akra slip-on an K&N. (so no Arrows headers, no AutoTune, no Diapason flash):

 

[jajpko]

@ Kees, Could you also show the AFR from the dyno? I think I understand some of this better.

I was under the impression the AFR in the closed loop was at 13.6, and it is in some places. I have a map in my bike now, with the closed loop at 0 and 13.1 and 13.2 in 95% of the open loop.
I started it up and after letting reach 176 degrees, I began to open the throttle bit by bit, going through the rpms up to 3750 while watching my computer and the rpm and AFR.

The readings first started at idle, with some wandering around 13.6. Then at about 1500 to 1700, the AFR was reaching around 15.0. At about 2000 the AFR started to come down and reached around 12.6 and with some wandering, stayed in that range until I let off the throttle. To do any more rpms it will have to be on a dyno.

It seems that the info given by DynoJet is not correct, and their answers are given with some hesitation about the 13.6.
Saying you need to put some numbers in the closed loop to obtain the 13.6.
This could account for the negative numbers we are seeing. The only map that has had positive numbers is Maybert after using the slider in the Optimizer to put in +4. If I'm not mistaken I think he had 0 in the closed loop. I was under the impression DynoJet had said it would need a number of 20 to achieve a lower AFR in the closed loop. I'm at a loss on that one.

I think the above is why my bike had such good mid range from the start.
I am going to run my new map and see what happens over many runs. It should have negative numbers, but not as great as yours. I'm ok with that as long as it runs.. LOL

 

[Blue_eyes]

Hi Jim,

The dyno map was made using the standard AFR map that Dynojet provides:

 

[jajpko]

Hi Jim,

The dyno map was made using the standard AFR map that Dynojet provides:

Not that map... lol I was referring to the AFR chart at the bottom of the map. It may have a broken red line at 13.6 with your AFR values by rpm in a solid line.

 

[YamaPA]

It seems that the info given by DynoJet is not correct, and their answers are given with some hesitation about the 13.6.
Saying you need to put some numbers in the closed loop to obtain the 13.6.
This could account for the negative numbers we are seeing. The only map that has had positive numbers is Maybert after using the slider in the Optimizer to put in +4. If I'm not mistaken I think he had 0 in the closed loop. I was under the impression DynoJet had said it would need a number of 20 to achieve a lower AFR in the closed loop. I'm at a loss on that one.

As I said above, I have confirmed several times with DynoJet personnel that the Dynojet optomizers in stock, default, as -delivered condition are targeted to achieve a 13.6 to 1 AFR in the closed loop. Part numbers off the optomizer box were provided when such information was confirmed. I have also confirmed the need to put "some value" (and without looking it up again for 100% confirmation I'm saying it is between 8-12) according to their "professional tuner notes" in the closed loop fuel table to achieve that 13.6 to 1 AFR. If someone at DynoJet NOW or in the future says something different, I'm going to be really pissed off.

 

[Blue_eyes]

Not that map... lol I was referring to the AFR chart at the bottom of the map. It may have a broken red line at 13.6 with your AFR values by rpm in a solid line.

The graph as posted is all I have. I have sent out a request if they have the graph including the AFR graph. Should I receive that I will post it here.

 

[DynojetResearch]

Wow, this post is very active!!

My name is Dustin Schaller and I am the Senior Product Manager for Dynojet. Been here 13 years. I am the one that does the development around here (not an engineer) on the PCV related products. Just a gear head that likes to make stuff go fast! I apologize for some of the misinformation you may have received from our techs. Those guys have a very difficult job and with our ever expanding product line it is very difficult to keep track of it all. I will be the first one to state that we do a poor job of keeping all this info for them. Hopefully we can improve on that.

I don't know even where to start to answer all your questions?? After skimming thru all these posts I will touch on what I can remember:
Inconsistent AFR readings - some of this can be the data in, some can be the latency of the sensor (where its located) and some can be from the fact this bike has fly by wire. If you are using a BASIC map depeding on what gear you are in will affect what load you are at and therefore can change the AFR. I would recommend putting this bike in GEAR ADVANCED mapping as it should provide more consistent readings.

We do offer US based maps. Maps 22-041-001 thru 22-041-003 were all done here in Vegas on a US spec bike.

On the dyno we found the best HP at 13.4:1 on the top end. We normally set it up a bit richer than that for safetly sake. It would not be uncommon to have a richer setting in the smaller throttle ranges and midrange for better acceleration.

Currently we do not offer a PCV that does fuel AND timing in 1 box. Quite simply we didn't have enough time with the bike to do so. We have not even checked if this bike has CDI or inductive ignition. If its CDI we currently don't have the capability in the PCV board to handle this signal. We are working on it though.

Anything I missed let me know.

 

[spasm]

Wow, this post is very active!!

My name is Dustin Schaller and I am the Senior Product Manager for Dynojet. Been here 13 years. I am the one that does the development around here (not an engineer) on the PCV related products. Just a gear head that likes to make stuff go fast! I apologize for some of the misinformation you may have received from our techs. Those guys have a very difficult job and with our ever expanding product line it is very difficult to keep track of it all. I will be the first one to state that we do a poor job of keeping all this info for them. Hopefully we can improve on that.

I don't know even where to start to answer all your questions?? After skimming thru all these posts I will touch on what I can remember:
Inconsistent AFR readings - some of this can be the data in, some can be the latency of the sensor (where its located) and some can be from the fact this bike has fly by wire. If you are using a BASIC map depeding on what gear you are in will affect what load you are at and therefore can change the AFR. I would recommend putting this bike in GEAR ADVANCED mapping as it should provide more consistent readings.

We do offer US based maps. Maps 22-041-001 thru 22-041-003 were all done here in Vegas on a US spec bike.

On the dyno we found the best HP at 13.4:1 on the top end. We normally set it up a bit richer than that for safetly sake. It would not be uncommon to have a richer setting in the smaller throttle ranges and midrange for better acceleration.

Currently we do not offer a PCV that does fuel AND timing in 1 box. Quite simply we didn't have enough time with the bike to do so. We have not even checked if this bike has CDI or inductive ignition. If its CDI we currently don't have the capability in the PCV board to handle this signal. We are working on it though.

Anything I missed let me know.

thanks for ur help, its nice to see u showing an interest in our bikes, we need all the help we can get ::008::

 

[jajpko]

Wow, this post is very active!!

My name is Dustin Schaller and I am the Senior Product Manager for Dynojet. Been here 13 years. I am the one that does the development around here (not an engineer) on the PCV related products. Just a gear head that likes to make stuff go fast! I apologize for some of the misinformation you may have received from our techs. Those guys have a very difficult job and with our ever expanding product line it is very difficult to keep track of it all. I will be the first one to state that we do a poor job of keeping all this info for them. Hopefully we can improve on that.

I don't know even where to start to answer all your questions?? After skimming thru all these posts I will touch on what I can remember:
Inconsistent AFR readings - some of this can be the data in, some can be the latency of the sensor (where its located) and some can be from the fact this bike has fly by wire. If you are using a BASIC map depeding on what gear you are in will affect what load you are at and therefore can change the AFR. I would recommend putting this bike in GEAR ADVANCED mapping as it should provide more consistent readings.

We do offer US based maps. Maps 22-041-001 thru 22-041-003 were all done here in Vegas on a US spec bike.

On the dyno we found the best HP at 13.4:1 on the top end. We normally set it up a bit richer than that for safetly sake. It would not be uncommon to have a richer setting in the smaller throttle ranges and midrange for better acceleration.

Currently we do not offer a PCV that does fuel AND timing in 1 box. Quite simply we didn't have enough time with the bike to do so. We have not even checked if this bike has CDI or inductive ignition. If its CDI we currently don't have the capability in the PCV board to handle this signal. We are working on it though.

Anything I missed let me know.

Hello Dustin,
I can't seem to get the maps. When I open the zip file it says I need the upgrade software, which I have. Could be me..

Can you please explain how the optimizer works and what AFR is supposed to be in the closed loop.

Also did you do a Dyno run on a stock bike, and if you did, what was the AFR chart and how did you obtain it.

Another question, in the USA maps, how many runs were done to make the map and how did you arrive at 8 for the closed loop? This also is part of the question about the optimizer.

That's about it for now.. lol. Thanks for coming on the the forum and trying to explain and alleviate some of our concerns..

 

[Blue_eyes]

Hello Dustin,
I can't seem to get the maps. When I open the zip file it says I need the upgrade software, which I have. Could be me..

Can you please explain how the optimizer works and what AFR is supposed to be in the closed loop.

Also did you do a Dyno run on a stock bike, and if you did, what was the AFR chart and how did you obtain it.

That's about it for now.. lol. Thanks for coming on the the forum and trying to explain and alleviate some of our concerns..

I had the same.What works is to use ZIP to unzip the exe file so that you can determine the map you want these files to be saved in.

After using ZIP instead of starting the EXE file it works. I now have the files 001 002 and 003. 001 is stock exhaust, 002 is Akra, 003 is 2 Brothers.

Below is the Akra map. As you can see it has 8 in the CL range.

 

[jajpko]

I had the same.What works is to use ZIP to unzip the exe file so that you can determine the map you want these files to be saved in.

After using ZIP instead of starting the EXE file it works. I now have the files 001 002 and 003. 001 is stock exhaust, 002 is Akra, 003 is 2 Brothers.

Below is the Akra map. As you can see it has 8 in the CL range.

Thanks Kees...

 

[simmons1]

I had the same.What works is to use ZIP to unzip the exe file so that you can determine the map you want these files to be saved in.

After using ZIP instead of starting the EXE file it works. I now have the files 001 002 and 003. 001 is stock exhaust, 002 is Akra, 003 is 2 Brothers.

Below is the Akra map. As you can see it has 8 in the CL range.

Can you attach the AFR Table as well?

 

[DynojetResearch]

"Can you please explain how the optimizer works and what AFR is supposed to be in the closed loop."

This is from an earlier post:
So a stock a narrow band is very accurate but normally to an AFR of arounnd 14.7:1. This AFR is just too lean for good throttle response and performance. We basically offset the voltage to the ECU and it in returns thinks the bike is lean and will trim the base map accordingly. This by itself works well but only at steady state. Once you move to another RPM or TP setting the ECU has to sense the bike is lean, trim, send fuel and read again which all takes time. This is one of the reasons we recommend to add fuel in the closed loop area. so when you accelerate the bike is already rich and the ECU does not have to learn as much. Technically adding a value of 0-10 should not affect the overall outcome of the AFR at steady state but will affect as you transition within the closed loop area. This is something that needs to be playes with and may be up to rider preference.

One thing to remember is that we are a slave to the stock sensor and programming within the ECU. Some bikes are definitely better than others. For example the Ducati 696/1100. The rear cylinder is very consistent, we can make it stay pretty steady at 13.6-13.8 all day. The front cylinder however will swing from 13.2-13.9. If you connect back to stock you will see the front cylinder go from 14.4-15.4 and we don't know why.

To adjust closed loop has been explained fairly well in earlier posts. What you are adjusting is the voltage of the offset of the Optimizer. A +15 would be 15mv higher than our standard settings. In my testing I have found that a +10-15 normally gets you +.3 of a AFR. So it would go from 13.8 to 13.5. Again, this varies from bike to bike.

"Also did you do a Dyno run on a stock bike, and if you did, what was the AFR chart and how did you obtain it."

NOt sure what you mean. Do you want to know what the stock AFR was or what we changed it to? We obtain the AFR by installing an O2 bung in the stock exhaust and using our Wide Band sensor from the dyno.

"Another question, in the USA maps, how many runs were done to make the map and how did you arrive at 8 for the closed loop? This also is part of the question about the optimizer."

As many as needed. We use a piece of software we designed years ago called Tuning Link which makes altering the PCV to obtain a set AFR very easy. We can normally map a bike within 60 minutes. The value of 8 was explained above.

Thanks.