Have been analyzing AE in AUJP $8d, so this is of some interest. Admittedly, not overly knowledgeable of $0d, but some fundamentals are common across all code masks. Some observations and thoughts:
- In $8d and other masks, the following occurs with Decel Enleamnemt (DE) and DFCO. When TPS% goes to 0 from some significantly higher value, DE is first invoked as PW begins to drop to zero. This occurs rapidly (as it does in your log extract below). But then DFCO begins when PW = 0. Your log shows both DE and DFCO occurring simultaneously. That may be the norm with $0d, but unknown without tracing the code hack.
|
|
|
TPS |
IAC |
|
|
BPW |
|
|
MAP |
Sample # |
Secs |
RPM |
% |
Steps |
MPH |
AE |
mSec |
DE |
DFCO |
kPa |
327 |
54.955 |
2450 |
13 |
150 |
58 |
|
2.73 |
|
|
46.88 |
328 |
55.119 |
2450 |
13 |
150 |
59 |
|
2.81 |
|
|
46.15 |
329 |
55.283 |
2400 |
12 |
150 |
58 |
|
2.61 |
|
|
45.41 |
330 |
55.446 |
2450 |
10 |
150 |
58 |
|
2.37 |
|
|
41.35 |
331 |
55.631 |
2475 |
9 |
150 |
59 |
|
2.20 |
|
|
39.14 |
332 |
55.795 |
2450 |
9 |
150 |
58 |
|
2.12 |
|
|
39.14 |
333 |
55.959 |
2425 |
9 |
150 |
58 |
|
2.08 |
|
|
38.03 |
334 |
56.123 |
2450 |
6 |
150 |
58 |
|
1.72 |
|
|
34.71 |
335 |
56.287 |
2425 |
3 |
150 |
58 |
|
2.59 |
|
|
28.07 |
336 |
56.451 |
2450 |
|
150 |
58 |
|
2.01 |
|
|
23.27 |
337 |
56.615 |
2425 |
|
150 |
58 |
|
2.08 |
|
|
23.27 |
338 |
56.779 |
2400 |
|
150 |
57 |
|
0.00 |
YES |
YES |
23.27 |
339 |
56.943 |
2425 |
|
150 |
57 |
|
1.69 |
YES |
YES |
24.74 |
340 |
57.128 |
2375 |
|
150 |
87 |
|
0.00 |
YES |
YES |
24.38 |
341 |
57.292 |
2425 |
|
150 |
64 |
YES |
1.69 |
YES |
YES |
24.74 |
342 |
57.456 |
2350 |
|
150 |
58 |
|
0.00 |
YES |
YES |
24.38 |
343 |
57.62 |
2375 |
|
150 |
57 |
YES |
1.69 |
YES |
YES |
25.11 |
344 |
57.784 |
2375 |
|
150 |
56 |
YES |
0.00 |
YES |
YES |
25.48 |
345 |
57.948 |
2375 |
|
150 |
56 |
|
0.00 |
YES |
YES |
24.01 |
346 |
58.112 |
2325 |
|
150 |
56 |
YES |
1.69 |
YES |
YES |
25.11 |
347 |
58.276 |
2350 |
|
150 |
55 |
|
0.00 |
YES |
YES |
23.27 |
348 |
58.44 |
2300 |
|
150 |
56 |
YES |
1.69 |
YES |
YES |
25.11 |
349 |
58.625 |
2300 |
|
150 |
55 |
|
0.00 |
YES |
YES |
24.38 |
350 |
58.789 |
2300 |
|
150 |
55 |
YES |
1.69 |
YES |
YES |
25.48 |
351 |
58.953 |
2300 |
|
150 |
55 |
|
0.00 |
YES |
YES |
24.74 |
352 |
59.117 |
2300 |
|
150 |
55 |
|
1.69 |
YES |
YES |
24.74 |
353 |
59.281 |
2300 |
|
150 |
55 |
YES |
0.00 |
YES |
YES |
25.85 |
354 |
59.445 |
2275 |
|
150 |
54 |
|
0.00 |
YES |
YES |
22.53 |
355 |
59.608 |
2300 |
|
150 |
54 |
YES |
1.69 |
YES |
YES |
25.85 |
356 |
59.772 |
2225 |
|
150 |
54 |
YES |
0.00 |
YES |
YES |
24.74 |
357 |
59.957 |
2250 |
|
150 |
53 |
YES |
1.69 |
YES |
YES |
25.48 |
358 |
60.121 |
2250 |
|
150 |
54 |
|
0.00 |
YES |
YES |
24.74 |
359 |
60.285 |
2250 |
|
150 |
54 |
YES |
1.69 |
YES |
YES |
25.11 |
- In your bin, the following tables are both all zero:
Decel enlean PW reduction .vs. delta MAP
Decel enlean PW reduction .vs. delta TPS
- Most importantly, the bit that indicates AE is active is (L003D b6 = Byte Offset 19 in the DDS as reported in the TPro Log). That bit is set only when L0005 b7 is set. L0005 b7 is set any time L0261=AE Fuel Mass is > $05 as shown in the code segment below. That would indicate some sensor is telling the code to calcualte an AE Fuel Mass (L0261) believed to be needed, that fuel is in excess of the $05 threshold and therefore AE is flagged as active. Can it be that the MAF sensor is not reporting correctly? Here's the $0d code:
Code:
LSAE08 STAA L0261 ;Save it, AE fuelmass
CMPA L48B5 ; $05 = Fuelmass threshold to flag AE as being active
BLO LSAE09 ;Bra if fuelmass < threshold to flag AE as being active [Set AE NOT Active]
BSET L0005,#$80 ;Status word, set b7, AE in effect
BRA LSAE10 ; Bra to continue
LSAE09 BCLR L0005,#$80 ;Clear b7, AE not active
and then later, if L0005 b7 is set, L003D b6 is set:
Code:
;-Check for sync. AE
BRSET L0005,#$80,L822F ;Status word, bra if b6==1, AE in effect
;
;-No AE needed here
;
BRA L8247 ;Bra to continue
;
;-Flag AE and lock INT for AE active
;
L822F BSET L006E,#$08 ;Status word, set b3, AE in effect
BSET L003D,#$40 ;Status word, set b6, AE active
Finally, the 1.69ms PW consistently shown indicates a constant anomaly. With all the factors determining PW, it would be rare indeed to get a repeatable PW.
Two other PW observations from the log indicating something is not right, possibly with a sensor:
- 1.69ms PW is lower than the lowest PW encountered during idle (not shown)
- When DFCO is completed at sample 422 below, RPM increases from 950 to 2250 whereupon DFCO is again entered -- but all this happens at 0 TPS% but increasing IAC counts. Something clearly not right.
|
|
|
TPS |
IAC |
|
|
BPW |
|
|
MAP |
Sample # |
Secs |
RPM |
% |
Steps |
MPH |
AE |
mSec |
DE |
DFCO |
kPa |
419 |
70.342 |
1625 |
0 |
111 |
53 |
|
0 |
YES |
YES |
25.85 |
420 |
70.527 |
1375 |
0 |
104 |
47 |
YES |
1.69 |
YES |
YES |
28.07 |
421 |
70.691 |
1150 |
0 |
99 |
41 |
YES |
1.69 |
YES |
YES |
31.76 |
422 |
70.855 |
950 |
0 |
96 |
40 |
YES |
2.11 |
|
|
38.4 |
423 |
71.019 |
1125 |
0 |
96 |
40 |
YES |
1.89 |
|
|
36.55 |
424 |
71.204 |
1150 |
0 |
94 |
40 |
|
1.68 |
|
|
32.86 |
425 |
71.368 |
1100 |
0 |
94 |
40 |
|
1.62 |
|
|
33.23 |
426 |
71.532 |
1075 |
0 |
91 |
39 |
|
1.65 |
|
|
33.6 |
427 |
71.695 |
1025 |
0 |
90 |
39 |
YES |
1.74 |
|
|
35.45 |
428 |
71.882 |
1025 |
0 |
89 |
39 |
YES |
1.8 |
|
|
36.18 |
429 |
72.045 |
1175 |
0 |
86 |
39 |
|
1.59 |
|
|
33.6 |
430 |
72.209 |
1400 |
0 |
86 |
39 |
|
2.62 |
|
|
28.07 |
431 |
72.373 |
1600 |
0 |
84 |
39 |
|
2.27 |
|
|
24.74 |
432 |
72.537 |
1825 |
0 |
84 |
38 |
|
1.89 |
|
|
22.53 |
433 |
72.722 |
2050 |
0 |
81 |
37 |
|
1.69 |
YES |
YES |
21.79 |
434 |
72.886 |
2225 |
0 |
106 |
36 |
|
0 |
YES |
YES |
22.9 |
435 |
73.05 |
2425 |
0 |
132 |
35 |
YES |
1.69 |
YES |
YES |
24.01 |
436 |
73.214 |
2525 |
0 |
138 |
35 |
|
0 |
YES |
YES |
23.27 |
Bookmarks