SV Portal banner

1 - 20 of 36 Posts

·
KNEE DRAGGER
Joined
·
5,094 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Have you ever looked at or analyzed some of the maps that either DynoJet gives you as defaults or from a custom tune? I literally have studied hundreds of maps and am confused by them for several reasons. Some maps will go from a -15 to a +40 in just a single RPM interval? I have had a hard time believing this can be optimal settings for a digital fuel injection system. Being a person of numbers and always trying to understand things in a more pure mathematical sense, I figured I would see if I could build a mathematical model that would optimize engine performance with minimal dyno runs. With the help from some sophisticated software I have access to, I have found some really interesting stuff and thought I should share it. This is solid data from my first full tests that were only run at 100% throttle to make sure the model will work. It can then be easily be extrapolated into all throttle positions and RPMs quite easily. This work was done with fuel injection mapping and timing mapping via PCIII usb with a timing box.


The Bike
04 SV1000 (My 32000 mile commuter machine)
Freshly serviced and tuned
Freshly cleaned and oiled BMC air filter
Snorkel in place (Yes, I left it in!)
Fresh oil change and filter with Motorex
M4 full exhaust system
87 octane pump fuel
PCIII usb and timing box

Data collection
The software I am using, with a few input parameters spits out a small series of fuel and timing maps to be run on the dyno from which torque data will collected. These runs include redundancy for prediction of errors including inconsistencies in dyno measurements. The only data needed is the torque values, no AFR requirement because 13.2:1 does not always give best power under certain conditions. If you can tune to give best torque at every interval, who cares what the AFR is. With all the data collected from the dyno runs it is then fitted to a 5th order polynomial equation and can show the relation and interaction between the RPM, throttle position, fuel change and timing. With this data, you can then predict optimal timing and fueling parameters for every position in the fuel and timing maps. Since the software understands the interaction between all the parameters it can often find optimal settings that are far better than the methods of -find best fuel, then tweek timing. The adding of parameters does make it more complicated and time consuming but, it will still cut the total dyno time down and give significantly better results. A full system fuel map (all RPMs and throttle positions) w/o timing can be done in 16-32 dyno runs. You just switch maps quickly, make sure bike is at target temp and make a pull, then repeat. So, after simulating data for quite some time to work out a few kinks, I rolled up the bike on the dyno and had at it. Thanks to my good friend Arlan at LED Performance who lets me use his dyno when needed. Here are my results, I was quite shocked. These numbers do not tell the whole story, but the included graphs do.

-0 Fuel map and 0 timing map
Peak torque 67.5 ft lbs
Average torque 62.2 ft lbs (4500-10000RPM)
Average torque 61.7 ft lbs (4500-7000RPM)
Average torque 63.0 ft lbs (7000-10000RPM)
Peak HP 107.8
Average HP 85.8 (4500-10000RPM)
Average HP 67.6 (4500-7000RPM)
Average HP 101.4 (7000-10000RPM)

-Optimal fuel map and 0 timing map
Peak torque 68.0 ft lbs
Average torque 62.9 ft lbs (4500-10000RPM)
Average torque 62.3 ft lbs (4500-7000RPM)
Average torque 63.8 ft lbs (7000-10000RPM)
Peak HP 109.7
Average HP 86.7 (4500-10000RPM)
Average HP 68.2 (4500-7000RPM)
Average HP 102.6 (7000-10000RPM)

-Optimal fuel map and optimal timing map
Peak torque 68.3 ft lbs
Average torque 63.3 ft lbs (4500-10000RPM)
Average torque 62.9 ft lbs (4500-7000RPM)
Average torque 64.0 ft lbs (7000-10000RPM)
Peak HP 110.0
Average HP 87.3 (4500-10000RPM)
Average HP 68.9 (4500-7000RPM)
Average HP 102.9 (7000-10000RPM)

By displaying the numbers this way I think it displays my philosophy about what makes a bike fast. Peak numbers are often held up as the goal. Pull out the calculus books though and integrate under the torque curves. Two bikes that have the same peak numbers can be wildly different when you get down to real performance. Look for large average numbers, not peak and you will get a winner…
 

Attachments

·
Knowledge is Horsepower
Joined
·
3,259 Posts
Not going to share the optimal map with us? I'd try it!

I suppose that will cost us...$$$$

How does igntion timing effect HP numbers? I'd like to see the optimal timing vs rpm map.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
I'm confused by the RPM numbers in parenthesis. Did you mean to type:
(1000RPM-4500RPM)
(4500RPM-7000RPM)
(7000RPM-10000RPM)
?
Thanks
 

·
KNEE DRAGGER
Joined
·
5,094 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Not going to share the optimal map with us? I'd try it!

I suppose that will cost us...$$$$

How does igntion timing effect HP numbers? I'd like to see the optimal timing vs rpm map.
I am debating whether to share some map data or not, I might be will to share 100% throttle position only, it is the rest of the map that makes the bike a killer bike to ride every where though. A bit of other work involving this, is also showing me an interesting relation between modifications. The fuel curves required to optimize performance might not be that different from bike to bike even with just the common mods done. My full tilt race bike is undergoing a change in cams, and head configuration so I am interested to see where this work puts my curves for comparison sake.

As for timings effect on HP, that is included in the graph I attached in the original post.

-ms
 

·
KNEE DRAGGER
Joined
·
5,094 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I'm confused by the RPM numbers in parenthesis. Did you mean to type:
(1000RPM-4500RPM)
(4500RPM-7000RPM)
(7000RPM-10000RPM)
?
Thanks
Sorry I fixed the original post, cut and paste errors...
(4500-10000RPM) full sweep
(4500-7000RPM) bottom end sweep
(7000-1000RPM) top end sweep
I hope that this helps

-ms
 

·
KNEE DRAGGER
Joined
·
5,094 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I also forgot to add just s a seat of the pants ride report. The improvement was drastic when riding it on the street. When you pin the throttle, it has never jumped as hard or been as smooth. It actually had a rush and a very hurried feel to it like it never has had before.

Just remember, this is my data, it might be right or it might be wrong. I am still working on the modeling to refine it a bit more but it appears to have worked in a couple use cases so far.

-MS
 

·
KNEE DRAGGER
Joined
·
5,094 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Not going to share the optimal map with us? I'd try it!
OK, for those of you who would want to try it I have a request of you.
1. Send me or post a list of modifications to the bike
2. Send me or post the map you were using before or just the 100% TP column
3. Send me or post a seat of the pants ride report. (Remember that this is for the 100% TP only so you will have to pin it!)

If you do try this, do it safe please

5th order 100% TP
RPM Fuel percent
4000 17
4250 16
4500 16
4750 15
5000 15
5250 14
5500 13
5750 13
6000 12
6250 11
6500 10
6750 9
7000 8
7250 8
7500 6
7750 5
8000 4
8250 2
8500 1
8750 -1
9000 -3
9250 -5
9500 -7
9750 -8
10k -9

Just remember I could be smoking crack, and it might slow your bike down. It might be interesting to get some feed back though.

Cheers
-MS
 

·
BANNED!!!!
Joined
·
3,473 Posts
Nice. I wrote something similar that uses a SQL server and a logger, so you can do the same sort of calculations without a dyno.
 

·
Knowledge is Horsepower
Joined
·
3,259 Posts
Is that the zero map modifications schmidt? I'll try it. I liked the Micron Map on the website.

Just like I thought, lean on the bottom and rich up top. I fiddled with my PC3 so much out on the road, it drove me nuts.

I just don't use 100% throttle that much. It would be good for a drag bike though.

This is the Dynojet stocker 100% TP map on the website:
100%

0 - 500 rpm
0
0
0
0
-13 - 1750 rpm
-7
2
5
5
1
10
16
-2
1
6
5
13
4
7
10
2
-5
7
1
-1
2
3
5
1
2
2
-2
3
2
-1
1
-2
-3 - 10000 rpm
0
0
0
0 - 11000 rpm
 

·
KNEE DRAGGER
Joined
·
5,094 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Is that the zero map modifications schmidt? I'll try it. I liked the Micron Map on the website.
The map I showed is the delta from the zero map, so just plug those numbers straight in. I am attaching a couple of other graphs too. One shows the 100TP maps for many of the DJ default maps, and the other is just some straight timing runs. This will show some of the effects of timing, but there is a relation between timing and fuel that this will not show. I have some data, I am still crunching showing the differences between setting the fuel map first, then making timing on top of that. It is showing that they need to be done together to get real optimal tuning. The map I gave you here is the optimal fuel map my program is giving me when running at stock timing figures. The optimal fuel map changes when timing is adjusted. The map I posted was generated in 8 pre defined dyno runs with test maps. The more runs I make does not change the map it spits out for me, it just makes the error bars smaller and smaller which is what I was hoping for.

The map it gave me looks so much different from the other DJ maps I am still a bit skeptical, but the bike runs better and makes more/power and torque in the whole range. The DJ maps are just saw tooth like and that just bothers me, I like smooth curves...

-MS
 

Attachments

·
Knowledge is Horsepower
Joined
·
3,259 Posts
OK, for those of you who would want to try it I have a request of you.
1. Send me or post a list of modifications to the bike
2. Send me or post the map you were using before or just the 100% TP column
3. Send me or post a seat of the pants ride report. (Remember that this is for the 100% TP only so you will have to pin it!)

If you do try this, do it safe please

5th order 100% TP
RPM Fuel percent
4000 17
4250 16
4500 16
4750 15
5000 15
5250 14
5500 13
5750 13
6000 12
6250 11
6500 10
6750 9
7000 8
7250 8
7500 6
7750 5
8000 4
8250 2
8500 1
8750 -1
9000 -3
9250 -5
9500 -7
9750 -8
10k -9

Just remember I could be smoking crack, and it might slow your bike down. It might be interesting to get some feed back though.

Cheers
-MS
I don't think you are smoking crack, at least at work... :lol:

I gave up on sellling my SV and I can't afford a new bike, so I put the PC3 back in and modified the DJ micron map to the above specs, plus a few tweaks around 5k at 5-20% throttle openings (lean spot). I'm going to send the map into the SV this morning.

Is there a way to check if the throttle is actually getting 100% input to the PC? How about if you go WOT and the PC only sees 98% on the input side. Will it go to 100% output settings or (something?) in between?

I'll let you know the seat of the pants results. Hopefully I can wheelie in every gear. If I get a speeding ticket can I send it to you? :pokey: (Just Kidding)

ADDENDUM: Got in about 150 miles today, bike seems to really rip up top. But seat of the pants dyno can't really split hairs. I am happy with my modified map. Not sure about MPG yet though. I need a speedo healer and a Yosh 2-1 Ti system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,250 Posts
Here is a bunch of the data summarized in a nice little write up.

-MS
:bigclap: Very interesting...

I don't think mapping points that are far apart should have much influence to one another - expect maybe in low gears where these points are still pretty close time-wise and we could see some 'left-over' fuel particles in the intake tract?

I just purchased a PC-III for my track bike (a GSX-R750 K5) and will invest in dyno time, so if you need testers and more data, let me know if I can help... ;)


D.
 

·
Just a guy with an SV1K
Joined
·
920 Posts
Thanks for the pdf document to go along with this great thread. I get giddy when I think of how this type of fuel and ignition timing mapping can really bring an SV to life. Pretty much convinces me that a PCIII and PC ignition module are worth it.
 

·
KNEE DRAGGER
Joined
·
5,094 Posts

·
A square wheel rollin' !!
Joined
·
1,598 Posts
Please don't take this post as an insult ,or let it dissuade you from what you are doing. I wouldn't even know where to begin to design a program like this , and it is awesome that you know how to do something like that AND are willing to share it.

That being said, here are some things that came to my attention when I read this :

1.)Page 7 of the PDF "One point of interest is when the new map reached a point of about 0% fuel in the map (around 8500 RPM) it would seem that the engine outputs should nearly match the 0 map runs at this point. They do not."

While the predicted map is at 0% fuel , the DJ map for the stock bike is at about -7% or so. This is a considerable difference , one that can easily explain the difference in engine output. Am I missing something here ?


2.)On page 6 of the PDF, look at the difference in percentages between the predicted map and the DJ map fueling between the band of 6k and 7k rpm. I am looking at about a 10% difference in fueling percentages.

Looking at the torque graph on page 6 and the HP graph on page 7, the corresponding band of 6k to 7k rpm shows NO discernable difference.


3.)On pages 8 and 9 , the torque graph shows a pretty good increase and the HP graph shows a minor increase in the 6k to 7k band, but this is with the timing map in conjunction with the custom fuel map.

In your post ( not in the PDF) , you showed a graph of JUST the timing with a "0" map , and it had similar (if not the same) increases in the 6k-7k rpm band.

It seems as if the addition of 10% more fuel in this band is not contributing to the power output at all , but that the gains between 6k and 7k rpm are attributable to the timing increase.






I understand that the fuel percentages and the graphs can't tell me what it is like to ride the bike , but it seems like a waste of fueling throughout that band. Perhaps it has better throttle response or something that I can't see in the chart.

I believe the reason the DJ maps are not "smooth" is because the flow of the engine system (airbox, TB's , heads, combustion chambers, exhaust) is NOT linear, meaning it flows differently as it responds to different engine pulses/rpm/frequency. So at some rpms the exhaust might be resonant ( flowing well ), but the airbox might not ( perhaps has reversion ), while at some other rpm, their resonances are similar , so there is better overall flow at that point.


As an example, when you are synching the TB's , you may be able to get them VERY close at a certain rpm, but when you raise the rpm, you will see the balance shift to one cylinder. Raise it some more and it may level out, or might even shift to favour the other cylinder.

Perhaps if the heads have been ported and tuned on a flow bench this would be less of an issue. Then again , equal length exhaust would probably make a difference as well.

I like smooth curves , too. Sometimes they aren't very practical.


I do not mean this as an attack , in any way , shape or form. This is just my point of view based on my limited knowledge. If I am not understanding something here, PLEASE let me know.


..........................Blake
 

·
KNEE DRAGGER
Joined
·
5,094 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
<font color="yellow">I am not saying this method is perfect, but I feel it is quite powerful and I am continually trying to collect data to make it better.</font>


1.)Page 7 of the PDF "One point of interest is when the new map reached a point of about 0% fuel in the map (around 8500 RPM) it would seem that the engine outputs should nearly match the 0 map runs at this point. They do not."
While the predicted map is at 0% fuel , the DJ map for the stock bike is at about -7% or so. This is a considerable difference , one that can easily explain the difference in engine output. Am I missing something here ?


<font color="yellow">When the zero fuel map is compared to the new runs you might think that there should be no difference at about 8500rpm because the mapping is the same. This is not a comparison of the DJ map to the predicted model map, it was a comparison of the zero (empty DJ map) and the one the software spit out. This shows that there is another not so obvious relationship in the mapping parameters. I believe it shows that the mapping points are not mutually exclusive, and could have a dependence on the other values surrounding it in the map. This means that changing fueling at 100% throttle position 5000RPM may effect the mapping position at 100% throttle position at 7000rpm.</font>


2.)On page 6 of the PDF, look at the difference in percentages between the predicted map and the DJ map fueling between the band of 6k and 7k rpm. I am looking at about a 10% difference in fueling percentages.

looking at the torque graph on page 6 and the HP graph on page 7, the corresponding band of 6k to 7k rpm shows NO discernable difference.


<font color="yellow">There is a difference but with the scaling of the graph it is difficult to see. I just looked at the raw data. There is actually an average increase over the 6000-7000RPM of just under 0.5ft-lbs</font>



3.)On pages 8 and 9 , the torque graph shows a pretty good increase and the HP graph shows a minor increase in the 6k to 7k band, but this is with the timing map in conjunction with the custom fuel map.

In your post ( not in the PDF) , you showed a graph of JUST the timing with a "0" map , and it had similar (if not the same) increases in the 6k-7k rpm band.

It seems as if the addition of 10% more fuel in this band is not contributing to the power output at all , but that the gains between 6k and 7k rpm are attributable to the timing increase.

I understand that the fuel percentages and the graphs can't tell me what it is like to ride the bike , but it seems like a waste of fueling throughout that band. Perhaps it has better throttle response or something that I can't see in the chart.

<font color="yellow">from the previous answer, there were small gains through this RPM range, and then again a bunch more in timing. I do agree that timing does have more effect here, but the increase in fuel does make a statistical difference in engine output.</font>


I believe the reason the DJ maps are not "smooth" is because the flow of the engine system (airbox, TB's , heads, combustion chambers, exhaust) is NOT linear, meaning it flows differently as it responds to different engine pulses/rpm/frequency. So at some rpms the exhaust might be resonant ( flowing well ), but the airbox might not ( perhaps has reversion ), while at some other rpm, their resonances are similar , so there is better overall flow at that point.

As an example, when you are synching the TB's , you may be able to get them VERY close at a certain rpm, but when you raise the rpm, you will see the balance shift to one cylinder. Raise it some more and it may level out, or might even shift to favour the other cylinder.

Perhaps if the heads have been ported and tuned on a flow bench this would be less of an issue. Then again , equal length exhaust would probably make a difference as well.

I like smooth curves , too. Sometimes they aren't very practical.

<font color="yellow">I do agree that resonance frequency in the system can play a role, but I do not see any convincing evidence that this is the case for the saw toothed nature of the DJ maps. I have also been comparing some maps from street and race bikes that were set up using the Bazzaz auto mapping. When I graph those values from several bikes I see relatively smooth curves that tend to fit the modeling data. More investigation is needed, but the auto mapping data does appear much smoother. All the bikes these maps were taken from, we tuned either on the street or on the track, and maybe this could be factor too.</font>


I do not mean this as an attack , in any way , shape or form. This is just my point of view based on my limited knowledge. If I am not understanding something here, PLEASE let me know.

<font color="yellow">No prob, I have written many other papers for technical journals (Non motorcycle related stuff) and they tend to go through a pretty rough refereeing process. I really am happy you took the time to read it, think about it, and ask good questions.

-MS
</font>
 
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
Top