e-manage vs Soarer

[Hermit]

Just fitted an emanage Ultimate to my Soarer, not mapped it yet, as there a couple of things I'm seeing in the logs that are bothering me

 

 

First off, the pressure reading is fluctuating a lot at max boost (~1.15 bar). It's much the same as Ian C describes in this thread, but this is the stock sensor fed from the stock pulsation damper. It's like the damper has stopped damping - is that possible?

 

Secondly, the injector duration appears to randomly drop to zero when the duty is at 100%. I'm guessing the emanage is having trouble reading the signal sometimes since the off time is so short. I'm pretty damn sure the duration isn't really going to zero! Is this a known thing that the emanage finds difficult?

 

The EMU is fully wired in for +/- fuel etc., all the maps are zeroed, the only thing the EMU's doing so far is clamping the airflow output to the same voltage that my FCD clamped at. The car runs the same as it did before - fine but rich.

 

If I could get a better pressure signal, I could reduce airflow to bring the injectors off 100% (although I was hoping to do that using the injector map). Obviously, either way I need a better pressure signal, so that's the first thing I want to get sorted.

 

Any ideas anyone?

[Tricky-Ricky]

I have tried my PS off both damped and undamped and from what i could see it made no difference, i presume you don't have the Greddy PS? i would be inclined to use that as it will read the higher pressures more accurately, i also scale my maps by it.

[Hermit]

I don't have the greddy sensor, I thought the stock one would be good enough for the boost I'm running?

 

AFAIK, the Soarer sensor has the same range as the stock Supra sensor, quite likely to be identical apart from the casing. Do they get these fluctuations when close to the max they can read?

[mrdsukautos]

Soarer sensor only reads to 1 bar bud

[Swampy442]

So why did Thor map mine to 1.2 with no issues? I even provided the greddy 3bar sensor and was told not required

[Hermit]

Soarer sensor only reads to 1 bar bud

Hi Dean, how's things

 

A Soarer sensor (not mine) has been tested on the bench and found to read linearly up to just over 1.2 bar, giving the same voltages out as a Supra sensor.

[Muffleman]

Surely if it was a TT Soarer the stock MAP sensor would be 2bar or 2.5bar ?

[Hermit]

Surely if it was a TT Soarer the stock MAP sensor would be 2bar or 2.5bar ?

It is a TT, and the sensor is essentially the same as the one on a TT Supra, just in a different package.

I imagine that the spec sheets would call them 2 bar (absolute) sensors, but in fact they can both read up to about 2.2 bar (absolute).

[mrdsukautos]

Hi Dean, how's things

 

A Soarer sensor (not mine) has been tested on the bench and found to read linearly up to just over 1.2 bar, giving the same voltages out as a Supra sensor.

 

thats very interesting indeed

 

i love learning new things :D:D

 

Im good bud busy but good

you?

[Hermit]

thats very interesting indeed

 

i love learning new things :D:D

 

Im good bud busy but good

you?

 

Pretty good, ta. Been really busy but back to more regular hours now so a bit more time to spend on the car I bottled fitting those aussie pipes myself, but they're on now and it's all working, and sounding, great

[Ian C]

That looks exactly like mine did when I wasn't using the pulsation dampened output. I had a piccy on my webspace that is now the sad red x in the thread of mine that was linked to - I must try to find that again as it was a shot of the two datalogs I took back to back testing this.

 

They showed clear as day a big difference in the MAP output at idle when damped and non-damped. The non-damped one was all over the place, the damped one was much smoother. I also have many a datalog that shows the fluctuations get much worse the faster the engine is running and the more boost you are running - again very similar to what you are seeing.

 

And yes, the duration can get confused when you are running 100% duty

 

-Ian

[Hermit]

Thanks Ian. I went to take the pulsation damper off the car to see if I could spot anything amiss with it, but I couldn't get it off. Can't think what could go wrong with it though - presumably it's just a chamber with a small entry hole (the pneumatic equivalent of a low-pass R-C filter)?

 

Swampy's kindly lent me a greddy sensor, so I'll play around with that later and see if it shows the same fluctuations. I'm guessing it will, but at least it will rule out the sensor if so.

 

I take it the signal at idle should be smoother than this?

(Airflow = light blue)

Sure would make testing changes easier

 

That's annoying about the injectors, because it seems to read it ok most of the time

[Swampy442]

No probs Jon, just let me know how you get on. id really love to go to mapping school, and if mine wasnt my daily driver Id have a fiddle myself.

[Tricky-Ricky]

Thats interesting, here is a couple of my logs, with and without, Lt blue is greedy sensor and orange is std PS in both case's, maybe my damper is fooked, but both seem not too noisy.

[Hermit]

Thats interesting, here is a couple of my logs, with and without, Lt blue is greedy sensor and orange is std PS in both case's, maybe my damper is fooked, but both seem not too noisy.

Thanks, that's very useful

Not much difference in the stock sensor trace, but the greddy is definately smoother in the first log (coincidence?). Greddy is notably smoother than the stock sensor in both logs - were both sensors attached to the same point? Your stock sensor looks to be about as un-smooth as mine, at least at idle - what's it like at full chat?

[Tricky-Ricky]

Both my logs are in real time, i don't think yours are, so that may account for it, here is one i did at the weekend, no full chat but, its a bit weired, look at the greddy sensor trace, its like the boost is spiking, but the std one doesn't show any signs, nor do my Innovate logs, which is what i normally use.

[Hermit]

So far I've been doing all my logs using the 20mS setting, if that's what you mean by real-time?

 

I've just done a quick test with a greddy sensor on mine at idle, and it's smoother than the stock sensor. I'll go out for a proper run in a bit.

[Tricky-Ricky]

If you look at your logs in the 20ms setting, you are looking at the time scale in 0.2 second increments, you earlier ones are in something like 3 second increments which will tend to make the traces look more noisy, by real time i mean 100ms = 1 second.

[Hermit]

Oh, I see what you mean. But... time has been transformed into the horizontal spatial dimension on the screen, so there's no such thing as real-time when looking at the traces like that

 

I chose the replay timescales because they're the ones that show the fluctuations most clearly (apart from the first pic, which just gives an overview). Because they're rpm related, the idle one needs to be more compressed in time.

 

Here's my idle log at 100ms/division to allow direct comparison:

 

Looking again, your idle trace has about the same amplitude of noise, but at a higher frequency. Strange...

[Hermit]

Well the greddy sensor is certainly much less affected by fluctuations at high revs, compared to my stock sensor

 

I managed to reduce the fluctuations on the stock sensor a bit, by using a t-piece with a restrictor in it, and hooking the stock sensor up to the connection with the restriction in it. I'm sure a bit more experimenting could get it even smoother.

 

If the signal from the stock sensor was smoothed out with a filter, it would match the greddy sensor's reading pretty well.

 

But both of those feel like work-arounds - if I should be getting a cleaner signal from the stock sensor then it means something is wrong, and could be fixed, no? Or maybe it's just that some stock sensors behave better than others above 1 bar gauge (which is probably what they're specified for)?

 

[Tricky-Ricky]

It may be down to the fact that the Greddy sensor is either 2 or 3 BAR cant remember which, and the stock is somewhat less, 1 or 2BAR??

so presumably the resolution will be better for the greddy at higher boost,

have you tried the restrictor/filter on the stock sensor yet? they obviously need it hence the one in the plenum.

Going back to my earlier comment, thats why i prefer to use and scale my maps on the Greddy sensor.

[Hermit]

It may be down to the fact that the Greddy sensor is either 2 or 3 BAR cant remember which, and the stock is somewhat less, 1 or 2BAR??

so presumably the resolution will be better for the greddy at higher boost,

Well the greddy sensor evidently has some damping built into it, which might be useful, but I don't really need the extra range. (Bigger range tends to mean lower resolution, but either sensor has plenty enough resolution for the job).

 

have you tried the restrictor/filter on the stock sensor yet? they obviously need it hence the one in the plenum.

That last trace is with the t-piece restrictor inline to the stock sensor. I've had the pressure sensor(s) attached to the damper on the plenum all along.

 

Going back to my earlier comment, thats why i prefer to use and scale my maps on the Greddy sensor.

Yes, ok, but you haven't actually said that you've seen fluctuations like I've got - so I'm guessing that you haven't. Maybe you've still got an FCD fitted so the signal is clamped before getting to the emanage (you wouldn't be the first... ).

 

Before putting the extra restriction in, it was varying from 0.9 to 1.2 bar at full boost - exactly how Ian C described in his thread when it wasn't attached to the damper. Unless I find out that such fluctuations are to be expected, then the evidence so far points to there being a problem somewhere, which I'd like to fix regardless of which sensor I end up using.

[Tricky-Ricky]

What i meant by the greddy maybe having better resolution, is that if the std sensor is reading at the limit of its ability's/pressure, then it is likely to be less accurate at that limit, as you observation of it varying from 0.9 to 1.2 bar at full boost, would back up.

No i haven't seen fluctuations like you describe, and also i haven't got FCD, other than the built in one in the EMU, which is another reason why i use and scale the maps by the greddy sensor, as then the std sensor voltage is then clamped at 4.40V so the ECU is only seeing an output from the EMU anyway.

[Hermit]

Sorry, I was pretty sure I knew what you meant, just making sure.

 

I still think though that if I didn't have the fluctuations, the stock sensor would have reasonable accuracy up to 1.2 bar. Since you haven't seen them either, it does look like there's a problem somewhere.

 

I'll try the sensors off an undamped point this evening, see if it's any different.

[Tricky-Ricky]

Its strange that there seems to be no info on just what the limit of the std sensor is, there is nothing in the manual, only a general consensus, it would be interesting to find out for sure,

be interesting to see what results you get, when undamped.