Siamese Code Trial - Take Four
Turbo Mini Forums

It would help if I read the instructions first !

All working now.

I've got the MS running OK on the JimStim and it accepted a good 4 squirts per cycle .msq from before I changed over to the single pulse.

I've also fitted all four of the Rover Mpi injectors. That about 970cc/min per port.

I'll have some lunch and then try it on the car. Wish me luck.

Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
Stephen Hawking - "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

OK, good luck.

If you want to see your resultant pulses on the scope, email me your final msq....

Schrödinger's cat - so which one am I ???

Good luck, don't let Myles break it!

The initial pain of using TS is that the siamese code is an alpha version and not yet officially supported. So instead of just choosing the correct firmware version, you have to point it to the correct ini. And clicking on Other and the 3 dots is not that intuitive, at least to me.

However, once this is done, it should be better. It will also be easier once there is a stable version of the code fully supported in TS.

Good luck Paul. :)

Jean

http://www.jbperf.com/

Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
Stephen Hawking - "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

Have you reset the VR pots between car and JimStim - I find this the most frustrating bit to get stable running and sych on either - I have it down to an exact 7 turns on one of the pots between the two....

Edited by Rod S on 25th Jun, 2009.

Schrödinger's cat - so which one am I ???

This may be due to code corruption or incompatible msq files. You could start by reloading the previous code and your msq then exporting your VE and ignition tables. Then load the new code and import the tables and set the rest of the parameters by hand.

This way, you are sure there is no incompatibility and you're starting with the same tables. I'm not sure if there are compatibility issue because I'm not sure how TS (or MT) deals with the translation between different code versions. I just know that if there are some, the result may be inconsistent behaviour (and possible code corruption).

Jean

http://www.jbperf.com/

Rod, I've never had to adjust the pots between the car or the jimstim, both seem to work OK with the same settings.

Jean, I think that you are correct.

Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
Stephen Hawking - "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

Interesting - I have always had to adjust the pots between Jimstim and engine, and Jean has confirmed this is quite usual in a previous thread.

I also loaded my last (best) msq straight onto the new code yesterday without issues (as per my posts last night) and then made several adjustmants without problem but, obviously my starting msq will have been very different to yours.

If you get really stuck, email me your last working msq and I'l load it on mine and see what happens (Jimstim only of course, no wheels on the car yet.....)

Schrödinger's cat - so which one am I ???

Rod, have you noticed that on the Jimstim you get TPS Accel without touching the pot?

Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
Stephen Hawking - "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

There shouldn't be issues with loading an old msq onto the new code due to how the data is saved but that's only theory. I have seen issues before due to either the way the tuning software does things or other things happening. And when things start to go wrong, the only solution is to start with a fresh version of the firmware and re-enter most things manually. It may be that when burning as many bytes as a complete msq, there is more possibility of comm errors and if they happen at a wrong place things get screwed up.

So if weird unusual things start happening and nothing seems to fix it, it's always safe to reload the code and re-enter the data. The worse thing that can happen is that it doesn't do anything to fix the problem.

Jean

http://www.jbperf.com/

http://www.jbperf.com/

Actually, it would appear that the TPS gauge was jumping around with the MAP gauge and that was causing the TPS Accel to activate.

Definately a corrupt setup. Anyway, just re-loading the code.

Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
Stephen Hawking - "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

My understanding was that if the data structure changed, then a new .msq was needed.

As Jean has added the Hybrid settings and tables, then I would expect a new .msq, but it was worth trying the old one first.

Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
Stephen Hawking - "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

Schrödinger's cat - so which one am I ???

I've reset the TPS calibration and the gauge reads stable when the engine is not running. Once it runs then the gauge jumps around, the pulse widths are all over the place and I cannot get a decent idle.

Live and learn.

Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
Stephen Hawking - "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

Good point Rod. All the sensor calibrations are lost in an upgrade and even loading an msq won't restore them.

Jean

http://www.jbperf.com/

Schrödinger's cat - so which one am I ???

Edited by Rod S on 25th Jun, 2009.

Schrödinger's cat - so which one am I ???

Sorted.

It's running fine now. Just two injectors.

Time to bring in all four injectors and start a new thread.

EDIT: Now running four injectors.

I'm getting a reasonable idle with AFRs at 11-12:1, but with pulse widths around 1.3mSec. Any leaner, with lower pulse widths and its not a happy bunny.

Edited by Paul S on 25th Jun, 2009.

Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
Stephen Hawking - "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

Good to hear that you've got it sorted.

With those short pulse widths, opening time precision becomes more important. You may need to start playing with it to get better results.

Jean

http://www.jbperf.com/

First what was your initial problem ???

Second, I get pulse widths of about 1.6mS on the Jimstim at a simulated idle (ie, pulling vacuum on the MAP with a syringe) just now....

Pretty similar to an actual run here (part way down the page 2) at 14:1 (860cc injectors)

http://www.turbominis.co.uk/forums/index.p...id=295719&fr=25

Idle was fine here.

I can't run the engine again at the moment despite all this development as I've taken the high pressure fuel system apart because of cutting/grinding/welding in the garage....

Edited by Rod S on 25th Jun, 2009.

Schrödinger's cat - so which one am I ???

Firstly, I think that my problem may have been a corrupt setup due to re-using the old .msq.

However, in compiling the new .msq I noticed that all the default TPS rate values were ten times higher than the original .msq. TPSdot was 200 instead of 20 etc etc.

Now I'm guessing, but I think that maybe the resolution of the TPS rates has changed in the latest code version. The very small change in TPS values due to a very small voltage variation was bringing in Accel Enrichment.

My pulse widths are very low because I'm now using 970cc per port on a 1030cc engine. Plus it was pulling 43kPa MAP.

1.3mSec seems to be the limit for my engine and injectors.

Haven't you finished that welding yet?

Saul Bellow - "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
Stephen Hawking - "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

If there is a logical explanation, that's good, especially if it now works as you expect

Schrödinger's cat - so which one am I ???

There has been a change in TPSdot but it wasn't in the latest update. Which version were you running?

Jean

http://www.jbperf.com/