Jump to content
IGNORED

Introduction and O2 Question


roger 04 rt

Recommended Posts

I have had the LC-1 on my 2001 R1150GS for a few months now with good results -- increased torque, improved driveability, and improved mileage in the range of 2-3 mpg.

 

My 2003 K1200GT (brick engine) has the same Motronic (MA 2.4) as the GS, and with Roger's go ahead I installed one of the new AF-XiED kits on it. I've since ridden about a thousand miles with strikingly good results.

 

I've ridden the same 400 mile out and back loop twice - about 250 miles of freeway, and 150 miles of twisties. Overall mileage for the freeway portion (up to 75 mph) was 44 mpg, and for the twisties 38 mpg when I rode them hard 43 when I took a more leisurely pace.

 

This is a striking result for me, since I don't recall getting better than 40 mpg with the K12GT more than once in the 30,000 miles I've ridden it. I can't really say much about increase in torque since the bike is so powerful I never rode it to its limit, but it's still plenty powerful -- lifting the front wheel off the ground under WOT at 6000-7000 rpm in 1st gear. More than I need! I removed the plugs after the first 500 miles with the AF-XiED and they were a nice light tan, indicating the motor was burning cleanly.

 

Thanks again to Roger for inventing this nifty little gadget that improves the performance of our bikes so much while at the same time improving their efficiency!

Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...
mikefigielski
Just got word that we'll be selling the complete R1200 AF-XiED package for $379.95!! Should have units available hopefully late next week or the week of the 23rd at the latest. When we get them they will be posted here:

http://www.beemerboneyard.com/bmwafo2sema.html .

We have just listed an R1100 version (you'll find them at the link above too) that has a universal tap in harness. This is because it may be as long as 6 months before we will have a plug and play harness available for the R1100. It is a simple tie in. Just 2 crimp connections and one tap connection. Eventually we'll have Posi Locks and Posi taps included but for now customers will have to source their own connectors. Soldering is not an option. This was covered in a previous post somewhere and too long of an explanation to put here. We are getting there :D

Thanks!

Mike

 

OK, we finally have versions available for the R1200 Hexhead and Camhead bikes and also an F800 version. You can see and order them from this link:

http://www.beemerboneyard.com/bmwafo2sema.html

Thanks!!

Mike

Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

Here is a report on the installation of a BMW-AF-XIED from the BMWMOA Oilhead forum. The bike is a 2004R1100S.

 

Some of you have no doubt followed Roger's threads on the device he has developed to cure the overly lean fuel programming of oilheads, hexheads, 650/800 twins, etc (and its being developed for more models). The devices are sold by Beemer Boneyard and you can read their comments on the item page on their site.

 

Today I installed one of Roger AF-XiED devices on the SO's R1100S, an 04 model that she uses as a touring and play bike and which I have farkled to make it more suitable for her touring use with comfort, lighting, now performance, and other items.

 

If you do any routine service on an oilhead, this is a silly simply install. Just pull the panels, lift the gas tank to the rear and plug it in, the connect 1 ground wire to a battery terminal- pretty hard to get any easier. For the major connections, one locates the oxygen sensor connector under the fuel tank, opens it up, and plug 1 end of Rogers device cable into each end of the plug, then just put it back on the bike. No hacking into factory wiring needed- this is pure plug and play. Gets positive power from the installed oxygen sensor cable hookup and has a negative wire that can go on a battery post- that's it. AFR can be adjusted through a reasonable range with a single screw if one wishes to experiment.

 

I expect the adaptive features of the Motronic will take a tank or two to fully adapt to the device which I installed with its default setting. Nonethless, I went for about a 50 mile test run after the install for an initial impression and the SO and I are planning a riding day tomorrow so she can comment on her impression- I am telling her none of mine and will wait to hear what she says.

 

I have ridden and serviced this R1100S for several years so am familiar with its factory behavior, now modified. Probably the best way I can summarize the effect of the AF-XiED is to say that it has widened and smoothed the bikes powerband so that it has become pretty similar to the K1200RS that it sits next to in the garage, the latter with a Rhine West chip to enrich fueling and a slip on, the result of which is the most pleasing wide and linear power band of any BMW I've ridden. Not that the R1100S can match the K brick for total power or torque, but qualitatively, with the AF-XiED in place one is no longer conscious of the R bike's former much narrower powerband which kept telling the rider to stay in a narrow rpm range. Now runs to redline are smooth and encouraged. The bike will pull cleanly all the way in 6th from as low as I've checked it which was 1600 rpm- try that with stock programming. Basically, it pulls clean and fast in any gear from any sane rpm, not something the stock bike will do. My brief test run today took the bike to about 110 (we live in a rural area) and I could identify no negative fueling issues.

If I had a dyno I'm sure it would show both the more linear power curve and a bit more power up top.

 

I'll have more comments after we get more miles on the bike but one thing I can tell you- its not going to come out- works way too well to debate. At a fraction of the cost of installing other devices like the Power Commander with only a fraction of the work. Planning to put one on my hexhead when I get time.

 

As you might deduce from my board name, I am no stranger to highly modified fuel injected motors, having owned a variety of such including a turbo'ed Lexus SC300 I use as a street car that makes about 400 rwhp and my former track only RX-7 that made 510 rwhp with its turbo. All of that requires extensive electronics changes- in the old days one had to develop ones own fuel maps from scratch and that took a bunch of dyno time. It was a combo of effort and cost that kept me from addressing the lean programming of the bike sooner- this device cures both issues.

 

The Af-XiED requires only very modest effort to correct the fundamental overly lean fuel mix of BMW bikes and greatly improves ride-ability. Highly recommended..(more to come also)

 

 

Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

Her is another LC-1 installation as an AFR monitor and another way to richen the mixture, carbs!

 

first of all thank you to Roger 04rt for sharing his research and data on this and many other threads ... I have experimented using the innovate Motorsports [lc-1] product and found on my bike that running an air fuel ratio of 13.8 gives a big improvement in "driveability". this is really important to me as I am a courier and am on the bike 50/60 hours over 5 days and the lean running drove me insane.

 

Fuel consumption is vital to me and running 13.8 made little difference overall I think because I changed up the [gear] box quicker in the city negating the maybe 5% loss on the open road. If I had not bought the innovate product, purchasing Roger's [nightrider's AF-xied] is next best thing.

 

I have found that using RS throtlle bodies helps--sorry no data but perhaps this is because of the different butterfly angle. There is another but more expensive fix using carbs ... this certainly gives you more torque almost across the board for a slight increase in fuel consumption once they are set up correctly. I have been using 40mm R100 Bings for the past 15000 miles/3 months and am very happy with them, not cheap but easy to do. ...

 

 

 

 

Link to comment

I thought about 40 mm Bings but they might be a tight fit on an RT. They certainly would simplify the motorcycle as in no fuel pump and no fuel pressure regulator. About the only left to the Motronic would be spark control. Then ditch the ABS and you might just end up with a nice ride.

Link to comment

Here's an example of the benefit of mixture enrichment on a bike that's had some surgery, AF-XIED on modified R1150R.

 

Although there's a lot of enthusiasm, it does answer some questions about the effect of lambda-shifting, whether by using an LC-1 or AF-XIED, on a bike with a more open exhaust.

RB

Edited by roger 04 rt
Link to comment
Here's an example of the benefit of mixture enrichment on a bike that's had some surgery, AF-XIED on modified R1150R.

 

Although there's a lot of enthusiasm, it does answer some questions about the effect of lambda-shifting, whether by using an LC-1 or AF-XIED, on a bike with a more open exhaust.

RB

 

Thank you Rodger for ALL your data and due diligence throughout the project! :thumbsup::thumbsup:

MANY are appreciative of your efforts! I look forward to the installation on a r1200rt soon. Can't wait to feel the difference...

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

There have been a lot of threads/discussions about Mixture Adaption on the R1100, R1150, R1200 and F800. The range of views about Mixture Adaptation, whether it exists, and its affect on Open Loop fueling, is important when considering fueling improvement products. A quick summary is that Mixture Adaptation is real and that it affects ALL fueling, especially Open Loop.

 

Because BMW has kept it secret there are many incomplete Motronic/BMSK operating models on the internet, in forums suggesting that Mixture Adaptation is somewhere between: 1) only for Closed Loop, 2) Only at very small throttle angles, 3) only when the throttle is rock steady, or 5) (in one case) a non-existent Urban Legend, I decided to measure the effect of adaptation and show the results. While I was in the middle of the data collection phase, I came across some original Bosch documentation which makes clear the role of Mixture Adaptation in Bosch ECUs.

 

The bottom line based on the measurements and documents looks like this:

1) Mixture Adaptation is real, it covers all areas of fueling and is necessary for the proper operation of our style of ECUs (Alpha-N, which uses throttle angle as a proxy for air mass/flow). The Alpha-N system is used by the Motronic MA 2.2 and 2.4, as well as all models of the BMSK.

 

2) The primary Mixture Adaptation Range, as measured in my tests, is +/-25% on the 2004 R1150, which I will show in a coming post. This is a large range and means that any sensor error, sensor modification, ethanol mix change, fuel pressure modification, or intake/exhaust modification can will be learned by the ECU and corrected (Bosch calls these ECUs self-learning). In other words the Open and Closed Loop fueling will revert to BMW's design as long as a stock Lambda (O2, Oxygen) sensor is installed and connected.

 

3) It appears that Bosch stores a Lambda Correction Factor for every cell covered by Closed Loop and that it creates three Mixture Adaptation values from this matrix of data. Two of the Mixture Adaptations affect short injection times and small TPS angles, and the other Mixture Adaptation affects all areas of the Open Loop fuel map and is intended to correct sensor errors, fuel ethanol content and fuel pressure, to name a few.

 

4) There are two ways to make permanent changes to fueling: 1) The best is to give the ECU a new reference (LC-1/2 or AF-XIED for BMW) so that the BMSK or Motronic can use Mixture Adaptation to richen fueling automatically, or 2) Disconnect the O2 sensor, with the many perils of that approach--in particular Limp Home mode.

 

That's the summary. In the next post I'm going to quote Bosch, going all the way back to the early Motronic systems, and then after that post some measurements that clearly show the effect of Mixture Adaptation.

 

As a preview to the measurements that will be published, in one of the tests Open Loop AFR was enriched to 12.1:1 using a fuel pressure increase and a Booster Plug. In about half an hour of riding Closed Loop at 13.8:1, the Open Loop mixture had adapted from 12.1:1, all the way to 13.7:1. Mixture adaptation made a 15% correction to the Open Loop fueling.

 

Next Up, Bosch's description of the Motronic fueling strategy.

RB

Link to comment

Although Bosch introduced the Motronic as an integrated fueling and ignition control computer, what follows are their specific comments on fueling, related to Mixture Adaptation. It should be clear from the following excerpts that Mixture Adaptation is a key, integral part of the Motronic operation. Of particular note for me was that Bosch has been using Mixture Adaptation (or you might call it self-learning) since the mid-1980s, nearly a decade before the first Oilheads.

RB

 

Excerpts from Bosch Mono-Jetronic - Motronic Documentation 1985-1998

The Motronic system is based on indirect measurement of air mass, called an Alpha/n ECU system. Alpha represents the throttle angle and "n" is the engine RPM. This system of indirect measurement of air mass operates with Adaptive Mixture control and super-imposed Lambda Closed Loop control to accurately maintain a constant mixture, without any need for direct measurement of air mass.

 

The microprocessor is the heart of the Motronic. It is connected by address and data busses to EPROM (which contains program instructions and data tables such as the fuel map) and to RAM which serves to store the Mixture Adaptation values (adaptation: adapting to changing conditions through self-learning).

 

If the Motronic sees deviations from Lambda=1 in the signals from the oxygen sensor, and as a result is forced to correct the basic injection pulse for an extended duration of time, it generates mixture correction values and stores them in an internal adaptation process. From then on these values are effective for the complete fuel map and are continually updated. This adaptation process ensures consistent compensation for individual tolerances and for permanent changes in the response characteristics of engine and injection components.

 

The mixture adaptation program is designed to compensate for the effects of production tolerances and wear on engine and injection-system components, including sensors. The mixture adaptation system must compensate for three variables: 1) Influences due to air pressure or temperature, fuel stoichiometry (ethanol content), injector flow rate and system fuel pressure. 2) Influences related to vacuum leakage in the intake tract. 3) Influences due to variation in injector turn-on delay. These three factors are applied to three map areas. Factor #1 is applied (by multiplication) to the entire fuel map. Factor #2 is applied additively in the vicinity of idle. Factor #3 is applied additively in fuel map areas of short injection pulses.

 

For mixture adaptation, lambda control factors are evaluated using a weighting factor before being added to the adaptation variables.

 

Limp Home: All sensor signals are continuously monitored for plausibility. If a sensor signal deviates from its defined plausible range, it means that the sensor or its connector is defective. In that case the sensor signal is replaced with a substitute signal that may effect drivability. For example a non plausible air temperature sensor is replaced by the value 20 degrees C. A fault in the lambda sensor results in a shutdown of the complete closed loop adaptive system but will continue to use any past mixture adaptation values if any have been stored. (Editor's note: a shift in the lambda sensor does not cause a fault, but disconnecting the sensor does.)

 

Next posts: Actual measurements of mixture adaptation on a 2004 R1150.

Link to comment

Moving along with some of the measured data on Mixture Adaptation. Below is the first of several charts, showing what the Motronic does when it is in Open Loop.

 

Here are the important things to see in the graphs. First, there are two lines

--The solid line is a test run with the Motronic fully reset, no adaptives, fuel pressure set to 53 psi (+11% richer) and a BoosterPlug (+6% richer, could have been any IAT shift device). I took a six minute warm up ride and measured steady state idle AFR. I show that point because it is one of the first adaptives to accumulate.

 

--The dashed line is a second test run with the Motronic fully reset, no adaptives, fuel pressure is 53 psi but without the BoosterPlug.

 

In the area between times 5:10 and 5:50, both plots are idling with the Fast Idle Lever fully down. The results:

 

FP Increase and BP AFR: 12.1:1 Open Loop

 

FP Increase, no BP AFR: 13.0:1 Open Loop

 

So the above are Open Loop AFRs for my bike, on that day. These are the baseline Open Loop AFRs for comparison a couple posts later after 10-15 miles of riding in Closed Loop.

 

On the chart, you can see where I flip the switch to connect the output of my LC-1 to the Motronic, the target AFR reached in 5-10 seconds is lambda=0.94 which is about 13.8:1. During that 5-10 second period, the Motronic is building something Bosch calls Lambda Correction Factors, amounts added to Open Loop fueling to reach the target AFR. The Motronic quickly ramped the LCFs to 1.06 and 1.15 to reach the target AFR. Later, the LCFs will be converted to Mixture Adaptations by the Motronic.

 

I'll show the Mixture Adaptations later chart, a couple posts from now.

 

adapt.open.loop.test.1.jpg

Link to comment

...

 

2) The primary Mixture Adaptation Range, as measured in my tests, is +/-25% on the 2004 R1150, which I will show in a coming post. This is a large range and means that any sensor error, sensor modification, ethanol mix change, fuel pressure modification, or intake/exhaust modification can will be learned by the ECU and corrected (Bosch calls these ECUs self-learning). In other words the Open and Closed Loop fueling will revert to BMW's design as long as a stock Lambda (O2, Oxygen) sensor is installed and connected.

 

...

 

You can't go back and edit your mistakes in this forum so I've got to admit to having mixed up numerator and denominator in the calculation of LCF range above. Because the Motronic is cutting fuel in the calculation, the paragraph should read:

 

2) The primary Mixture Adaptation Range, as measured in my tests, is +/-20% on the 2004 R1150, which I will show in a coming post. This is a large range and means that any sensor error, sensor modification, ethanol mix change, fuel pressure modification, or intake/exhaust modification can will be learned by the ECU and corrected (Bosch calls these ECUs self-learning). In other words the Open and Closed Loop fueling will revert to BMW's design as long as a stock Lambda (O2, Oxygen) sensor is installed and connected.

RB

Link to comment

After getting the Open Loop AFR test runs made (chart repeated at bottom of this post), something not measured earlier, was the shift between the two curves, one with a BoosterPlug (BP) and one without. I was in a hurry so didn't take the time to locate the BP probe in the intake tract where it belongs and where I usually put it--so the results might be off by a percent. However when you compare the 13.0 AFR of the fuel pressure (FP) increase only to the 12.1 AFR of the FP plus BP, you get an AFR increase of 7% which is acceptably close to the 6% target for the BP.

 

As I started measuring the amount of Mixture Adaptation I got a surprise which I'll show before getting to the final results.

 

The chart below is a zoomed-in version of the dotted-line curve in the bottom chart. On the left of the chart you can see that the Open Loop AFR is 13.0:1. Then at 5:45 on the timeline, the switch on the LC-1 interface is connected, enabling Closed Loop. Closed Loop stays on until 6:15 for a total time in Closed Loop of about 30 seconds.

 

The the LC-1 was then switched to Open Loop at 6:15. My thought was I'd see what level of Mixture Adaptation had occurred in 30 seconds (about 1%). You can see what happened first when I flipped the switch to Open Loop. Because the motor was running at the time, and it was in Closed Loop, just happening to be ramping the fuel from rich to lean, it kept decreasing the fuel until the AFR reached 16.2:1. At that point, which is the limit of its Lambda Correction Factor (LCF) range, it ramped the fuel up until the LCF was at its neutral point of 1.00.

 

If you compare the AFR at its leanest, 16.2:1, with the pre-Closed Loop AFR of 13.0:1, you get a Lambda Correction Factor minimum of 0.80, which is a 20% cut in fueling. For the moment, I believe it is safe to assume that the LCF range is symmetrical at +/-20%.

 

We now know the range of LCF control: 0.80 to 1.20. Another secret of the Motronic MA 2.4 uncovered (and highly likely the MA 2.2).

 

Finally, if you look closely at AFR before and after the 30 second Closed Loop period, you can see a small difference, about 1%, 13.0:1 vs 13.1:1 in the Open Loop AFRs.

 

Next Up: A chart showing Final Adaptation results.

RB

 

P.S. As a side note, this is the same lower limit seen in R1200GS/GSA and F800S/GS data. Suggesting that the Bosch/BMW fueling concepts are fairly similar among all its models.

 

adapt.open.loop.adapt.full.range.jpg

 

Repeated Chart from Earlier

adapt.open.loop.test.1.jpg

Edited by roger 04 rt
Link to comment

Before posting the Mixture Adaptation results tomorrow, i want to discuss a Bosch chart, below, which shows another reason why Mixture Adaptation was designed as an integral part of the Motronic and BMSK fueling/spark ECUs.

 

As has been described, the alpha-n ECU design relies on throttle angle as an indirect measurement of air mass. And looking at the clip from Wikipedia below, you can see that Bosch's adaptive technology significantly predates Motronic and BMSK. The only real surprise is that BMW keeps this information so well hidden.

 

On the chart below, which is specific to the Motronic alpha-n ECU but not specific to Oilheads, you can see graphically adaptations importance:

 

--At low RPMs and small throttle angles a 3% change in throttle angle requires a 34% change in the amount of fuel injected to maintain a constant AFR. That means that a small TPS sensor error, or small change in air flow through the throttle body could result in a significant mixture error, leading to the conclusion that precise Mixture Adaptation is a necessity for accurate fueling at light loads.

 

RB

 

From Bosch Motronic documentation:

volumetricefficiency.jpg

 

Mono-Jetronic (1988?1995)--from Wikipedia

Digital fuel injection. This system features one centrally positioned fuel injection nozzle. In the US, this kind of single-point injection was marketed as 'throttle body injection' (TBI, by GM), or 'central fuel injection' (CFI, by Ford).

Mono-Jetronic is different from all other known single-point systems, in that it only relies on a throttle position sensor for judging the engine load. There are no sensors for air flow, or intake manifold vacuum. Mono-Jetronic always had adaptive closed-loop lambda control, and due to the simple engine load sensing, it is heavily dependent on the lambda sensor for correct functioning.

The ECU uses an Intel 8051 microcontroller, usually with 16 kB of program memory and usually no advanced diagnostics.

Link to comment
Guest Kakugo

Roger, thank you so much for the time and effort you are putting into this.

 

This has more or less answered one of my questions.

When we had the switch to ethanol-laced fuel over here I noticed an immediate increase in fuel consumption. However, after a few months of use, fuel consumption was back to pre-ethanol values.

Apparently the BMS-K (I have a 2009 RT) has "learned" how to make the best of the fuel that's available. But it gets better, and I hope you can help shed light on this.

 

When refueling in Switzerland (which has very high quality, ethanol-free gasoline) I notice an immediate improvement in fuel consumption and throttle response. Apparently the BMS-K is either able to adapt "on the go" to better fuel or stores information in such a way as to make such a switch very rapid.

I also noticed no improvement whatsoever with most 98RON fuels... in fact with most of them fuel consumption and throttle response actually worsen. The only notable exception is Spanish 98RON Repsol fuel which gives even better improvements than Swiss fuel... I know the theory about higher RON, ignition timing, the fact most high octane fuel actually languishes in tanks for months and hence what you get is probably worse than regular gasoline etc but I'd like to hear your take about this.

 

Thank you very much.

Link to comment

Kakugo, Interesting. When you put ethanol in, at first the mixtures were too lean, then over time they got back to wehre they were supposed to be. An explanation (a guess on my part) is that since we all shift by feel for the most part, the "weaker" engine performance before mixture adaptation, led to shifting at higher RPMs. At cruise in 6th, the mileage should have been a couple mpg better.

 

According to early Bosch information, the rate of LCF (lambda correction factor) adjustment is quick and the rate that the mixture adaptations are ratcheted is between 0.1 and 1.0 seconds, with its faster microprocessor perhaps faster on the BMSK.

 

As you suggest Octane and Mixture Adaptation don't go hand in hand UNLESS the Stoichiometric ratio of the fuel changes. That's possible given that oxygenates like ethanol are used to boost octante. Ethanols drop the stoic ratio of the fuel, leaning it out. But I guess gass companies could add other petrochemicals that boost the stoic so, that question's beyond my knowledge.

RB

Link to comment

Hi roger, me again,

That's an interesting observation by Kakugo. I used to have a residence very near the Canadian boarder in northeastern Washington State and I frequently would drive or ride up to Salmo, BC just for a cup of coffee. This was when we could still get non-ethanol fuel both regular and premium grades in Washington which, come to think of it, can still be done. Anyway, I own a Ford Escape with 3.0L V6 and occasionally I would fuel up at an ESSO station near Salmo with regular 87 octane fuel and I would see my fuel economy jump from 27 mpg to 32 mpg and even higher. My '04RT would also perform much better with absolutely no tendency to exhibit a tendency to surge. Like you I have no knowledge pertaining to fuel additive packages and associated effects on engine performance but something was very different where Canadian gas is concerned.

Link to comment

I'll now run through a full sequence of slides that show Mixture Adaptation. These are slides of Open Loop AFR, before and after an adaptation period. It is quite remarkable really and should inform everyone as to what types of fueling modifications actually make permanent changes.

 

The approach I'm going to take with these is that a picture is worth a thousand words. Questions are welcome.

 

Here is the original slide I posted showing Open Loop AFR for two scenarios: a fuel pressure increase, and a fuel pressure plus IAT Shift device increase:

adapt.open.loop.test.1.jpg

 

Here are the before adaptation and after adaptation results for Open Loop fueling with mixture richening caused by a fuel pressure increase. You can see that AFR was 13.0:1 after resetting the Motronic, but after a mixture adaptation period, the Open Loop and Closed Loop AFR were essentially the same: 13.8:1. To the right of the chart is a smaller one that shows the distribution of AFRs. The center is right around 13.8:1.

adapt.before.after.53psi.jpg

 

Next Post will be before and after Open Loop AFRs for the fuel pressure and IAT shift device scenario.

Link to comment
Guest Kakugo

Thank you very much Roger.

 

I had the suspicion there was something I was missing as the RT has been able to adapt to the new fuel while my car (a 2000 Honda) has simply increased fuel consumption and has stayed there ever since.

But the Honda's fueling/ignition module is also considerably "dumber" than the BMS-K.

Link to comment

Below are the charts for Mixture Adaptation for the combination of the 53 psi fuel boost couple with a -20C IAT shift (using a BoosterPlug). In the first chart you can see that the reset, Open Loop AFR for the combined products were 12.1:1, that is a whopping 21% richer than stock (14.7:1). My LC-1 sets a Closed Loop AFR target of 13.8:1 and in this chart I've run Closed Loop for 15 minutes and then remeasured the Open Loop AFR. In that short time, the Open Loop AFR's mixture has been "adapted" to 13.3:1. That's not all the way to 13.8 yet but in 15 minutes adaptation has moved the Open Loop AFR by 10%.

 

adapt.before.after.53psi.bp15.jpg

 

Next I put the bike back into Closed Loop by flipping the switch on my LC-1 and rode another 15 minutes in Closed Loop at 13.8:1. Pulled over, flipped the switch to Open and measure the Open Loop AFR. I hope you're not surprised at this point that the Open Loop AFR is showing 13.7:1, nearly at the final target of 13.8.

 

I also hope it is clear at this point that the Motronic, has essentially fully altered the Open Loop mixture from 12.1:1 to 13.7:1 by Mixture Adaptation, and has "learned and removed" the fueling "errors" caused by the fuel pressure increase and the IAT shift device which dropped the air temperature 20 degrees centigrade. In other words, neither the FP change nor the BP had any effect on long term fueling and that it is the O2 sensor (and any shifts of it, in my case to 13.8:1) that set the Motronic's fueling.

 

adapt.before.after.53psi.bp30.jpg

Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...

BMW AF-XIED Prototype Test 2009 BMW R1200GS w/32k mi

 

Hi Everyone,

 

Just wanted to give feedback on the test AF-XIED I have been running on my BMW listed above. I've had lots of bikes and lots of BMW's in my 53 years of riding and one important thing I've learned is that all BMW's are not created equal. I advise my friends to always ride the BMW they plan to buy before purchase because they can vary so much in engine and transmission drivability. And sometimes you can work yourself silly trying to make them right after purchase only to finally just give up and try another one! My 09 GS is a good one,it runs and shifts really well for a bone stock bike,that's why I bought it and not others when I was searching for one. Even though my bike runs well I know from previous tuning experience on carbs and FI bikes that things can be better. You just hope you don't screw things up trying to make it better as there are lots of misinformation,old wives tales, and dark secrets and proprietary info when it comes to modern electronically controlled bikes.

 

I started out doing a major service on the bike before installing the devices and did before and after Dyno runs just for kicks. I reset the ECU and installed the devices running setting number 7 and took off. It didn't take long for the initial roughness to smooth out and I could really feel the improvement in throttle control. The bike pulled much smoother especially at the bottom end. Controllability at take off and small throttle openings was dramatic. I ran a couple of full tanks of ethanol free premium (I am lucky to have a station close to where I ride frequently and use it most of the time) staying on setting 7. I varied my rpm's and load frequently and ran steady at multiple speeds to give the bike as many variations as possible. Everything from just poking slowly around parking lots to 100mph plus runs. The bike just seemed to get better and better.

 

I finally decided it was as good as it would get on 7 so I switched to setting 8. WOW, I just didn't expect 8 to be THAT much better than 7, but it was almost immediately. It continued to improve over the next couple of tankfuls and I was a happy camper! The smoothness at all rpm's and throttle openings was so wonderful I couldn't believe it. It reminds me of some of my old well tuned carb bikes but with all the additional advantages in comfort,control and power that these new modern bikes have. The sound of the exhaust even has a much more pleasing growl to it now. I do most of my riding solo as my wife has her own bike to ride but I decided to try riding double with her on the back here in the N. GA mountains to see how it did. I rode it hard and fast and slow and pokey and it handled anything I threw at it. I even had it as low as 1500 rpm (not recommended) in 6th gear and it pulled away cleanly!

 

I gave setting 9 a brief try but it seemed a little too rich for me. I went back to 8 as I like the crispness of the throttle response better. I recommend folks try at least these 3 settings as bikes do vary and personal preference as to how a bike feels to the person actually riding it is most important.

 

As far as gas mileage goes I didn't try to precisely calculate it. The BMW computer says I'm still getting around 47mpg, pretty much same as before,but I have been riding the bike more aggressively than normal. I suspect it would get better mileage if ridden at my more normal pace. You can definitely run it in higher gears and lower rpm's than you could before and the power is there ready to go at the twist of the wrist!

 

I did the final Dyno run using setting 8 which was my favorite. Frankly there isn't much difference in top end torque and hp and I wasn't expecting much either. I did see a little more strength from 2500-4500 rpm. The AFR looked to be what we expected but a sniffer up the muffler is nowhere near as precise as a wideband 02 sensor mounted at the header would be. I'm no Dyno expert and Roger is looking over the results too. If we figure out more we'll share it. For what it's worth the old girl pulled 95HP and 75 TQ and sounded like she could do it all day long.

 

Too summarize: I have tuned carbs,powercommanders,techclusions(Dobeck) etc. But I have never had a device work as well as this and be as easy to install and setup on your bike as this is. I really appreciate the way it takes advantage of all the built in advances in engine control that BMW built into the bike. My bike is now the best running bike I have ever owned, and I have had many makes and models through the years. The BMW community owes a huge debt of gratitude to Roger and those who have helped him. He not only literally broke the code of how BMW's system ACTUALLY works but helped develop a product that all of us can use to make our bikes so much more fun to ride. The community will enjoy many years of great riding due to their hard work!

 

I really hated to give these back to Roger, I miss them already, as the old saying goes,"You can't go back". I will have to spend money soon!

 

Roland (pathfinder)

 

Link to comment
...

To summarize: I have tuned carbs,powercommanders,techclusions(Dobeck) etc. But I have never had a device work as well as this and be as easy to install and setup on your bike as this is. I really appreciate the way it takes advantage of all the built in advances in engine control that BMW built into the bike. My bike is now the best running bike I have ever owned, and I have had many makes and models through the years. ...

Roland (Oldpathfinder)

 

Your efforts to log data, get before and after dyno runs, and to have the dyno operator set up loaded, steady-state tests in 4th gear from 40 mph to 100 mph will be eye opening when I can finally digest all the data you've provided. I hope to be able to post some of the charts next week.

 

You asked me earlier in the week if the units you buy from Beemerboneyard can be used on other BMWs. The simple answer is the module is the same for all BMWs and the R1200 cables fit any BMSK powered bike.

 

Many thanks, much appreciated.

Edited by roger 04 rt
Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...

R1100, R1150 and R1200 Alpha-N Fueling and the Dyno: Post #1

 

I've put together a series of fairly detailed charts on BMW Fuel Maps, Bosch Motronic Air Charge, GS-911 Engine Loading Data, and Intertial Dyno Testing. This information will only be useful to a few who read the thread but I've decided to include it because it has been hard to come by.

 

In particular I'd like to review the inertial dyno results from an unmodified R1200GS that was sent to me, during which they ran the GS-911 also, and got some interesting insight into what goes on in the BMSK during a dyno test. My conclusion, which I'll show in a few posts from now, is that the inertial dyno isn't a great tool, but let's park that issue for a moment.

 

I'm going to draw on several sources:

 

--Bosch Motronic Documentation for Alpha-N (RPM/TPS based fueling)

--R1100GS Fuel Table Data taken by John1100GS

--R1150 GS-911 Realtime Motronic MA 2.4 Values

--R1200 GS-911 Realtime BMSK Values

--R1200GS Dyno Data

 

My hope is that those riders working to improve the performance of their motorcycles will be able to review the charts in this post and a few that follow it, and use the previous Mixture Adaptation & Self Learning Cabability from earlier in this thread, to get a good idea of what might or might not be effective improvements for their own motorcycles.

 

The Bosch Motronic Air Charge chart, below is the ratio of actual air charge to theoretical maximum air charge. Although the chart is typical for a Motronic Alpha-N ECU, it is a good representation for the R1100, R1150 and R1200, and is consistent with the fuel table values read from the R1100GS chip. The amount of Air Charge in the cylinder is directly proportional to the Engine Load data we captured with the GS-911 during the dyno run (coming later). Notice that the maximum air charge is at mid-RPMs and is only about 85% of the possible charge. BMW developed this type of data for every motorcycle engine it produces as part of building the Fuel tables. Anyone claiming to have a replacement chip or reflash should have measured this data for themselves (I've yet to see anyone who's done this), which is time-consuming and costly.

 

As an example, to get a 60% Air Charge (Engine Load) at 2000 RPM you open the throttle 14 degrees, whereas to get a 60% charge at 5000 RPM you need the throttle open 35 degrees, twice as much. (I'll come back to this later since the WOT dyno run produced only a 60% load at WOT, not nearly the 80%+ load the engine is capable of.)

 

Air Charge Chart

volumetricefficiency.jpg

 

The bottom chart below shows binary fueling values, read from an R11000GS Motronic Chip by John1100GS (ADVrider). (Although the R1150 and R1200 data will be different by degree, it will be similar in shape.) The surface map chart was produced by entering the data from the fuel table, into an Excel spreadsheet. The fuel table values look correct to me, compared to Bosch documentation for Motronic Alpha-N fuel maps. However, I believe the axis in the table that's labeled Load is for a vehicle with a MAP sensor so I've modified the labeling axis for the Surface Map below with my estimates of TPS position for those Loads using the above Air Charge chart. This data looks consistent also with a stock Bosch Motronic Air Charge diagram.

 

One of the most striking things in this data is that 2/3 of the data points are below 4700 RPM. Later I'll show that most of these values are within the area of Closed Loop operation, so if you were to install a new chip (or Re-flash the R1200), you wouldn't get different fueling since Mixture Adaptation and the Lambda Control Factors would bring you back to lambda=1 (14.7:1) unless you shift the O2 Sensor. Later I'm going to post a chart showing how little of the fuel table is exercised in a typical Dyno "pull" on an Inertial Dyno like the Dynojet 250i.

RB

 

Fuel Surface Map

r1100gsfuelsurfacemap.jpg

 

Fuel Table Values

john1100gsR1100GS%20Fuel%20Map.JPG

Edited by roger 04 rt
Link to comment

R1100, R1150 and R1200 Alpha-N Fueling and the Dyno: Post #2

 

Earlier in the thread, Roland (Oldpathfinder) mentioned that he took his R1200GS to a Dynojet 250i to see what it did in stock condition and we've started to dissect the information from that run. Luckily for all of us, Roland and Terry also logged data during all their dyno runs with a GS-911 and therefore we have actual engine data from that time, in addition to the large set of R1150 data that we also have.

 

I want to point out as I did in the last post that to get a full suite of information I've used R1100GS, R1150RT, and R1200GS data. Even though the data sets come from different bikes, the similarities for this type of analysis are far greater than the differences.

 

Before looking at the Dyno data, take a look at a "scatter plot" of a spirited 25 mile, local & highway trip on my R1150RT (lambda=1) and then after an R1200GSA (lambda=0.94). Every diamond on the chart is an RPM/Throttle Position data point as recorded by a GS-911. Although the throttle range of the R1150 is 0 degrees to about 80 degrees, and the RPM range is 1100 to 7250,

 

--2/3 of the data falls into the 0 - 20 degrees throttle,

--and 2500 to 5000 RPM range (2500-4200 on the GSA after adding LC-1s).

 

That's where a lot of our riding is done and ideally our Dyno tests would measure the points in this range. Unfortunately, that isn't what the Dynojet 250i inertial dyno measures.

 

r1150rttriptpsvsrpm.jpg

 

EDIT: Added chart for R1200, 45 minute local-highway ride

 

r1200gsatriptpsvsrpm.jpg

 

Below is the table of data that was read from the R1100GS by John1100GS (advrider), entered into an Excel spreadsheet (used to create the surface map in Part 1). I've added highlighting to show the area from the chart above and other areas where there's GS-911 data showing the Motronic is in Closed Loop. (Although the table isn't from an R1200GS, that model has a similar Closed Loop range of operation, perhaps larger.)

 

Also of note in the table is the area above 2000 RPM but below 5 degrees throttle that is NOT Closed Loop, which is a leaner area (based on LC-1 measurements) related to deceleration. This is an area prone to surging--light throttle mid RPMs.

 

The table has also been highlighted to show those cells that were measured during the initial R1200GS Dyno test. Of the 288 cells in the fuel matrix, the GS-911 data shows that only 9 of the fuel cells were used by the Dyno run. Only nine! This is the norm for all inertial Dyno runs.

 

In the next post, I'll show the Dyno information and then take a detailed look into what it measures.

 

R1100GSBinaryFuelValues.jpg

Link to comment

Hi Roger,

Interesting data for sure. Reading kind of between the lines I think what you are saying is that an inertial dyno run is not representative of real life over the road performance. Thing is a dyno is only meant to measure actual HP and torque at RPM under load disregarding parameters like TPS angle, AFR, or closed/open loop ECU status. I don't think this means that inertial dyno information is any more or less meaningful as compared to data obtained by GS911 in actual over the road riding. Just different information intended to measure or determine torque and HP at RPM. Can you determine or measure actual HP and engine torque any other way other than on an inertial dyne?

 

I think it counter productive to attempt to directly modify the ECU in any way in an attempt to improve performance. Changing ECU input/output peripheral devices to improve performance is another matter. The wideband O2 sensor comes to mind as an input device and the fuel pressure regulator or TPS would represent an output device. Mods to the Motronic like performance chip installation should be avoided, imo.

Edited by JamesW
Link to comment

Actually that's wrong as the TPS is an input device not an output device. I wish I had inertial dyno run data before and after I changed the fuel pressure regulator and the O2 sensor but alas, too late. True the dyno run only looked at 9 matrix data points but I'm not sure how to interpret that or assume the dyno data has any more or less meaningful data as compared to the 911 info.

Edited by JamesW
Link to comment
Actually that's wrong as the TPS is an input device not an output device. I wish I had inertial dyno run data before and after I changed the fuel pressure regulator and the O2 sensor but alas, too late. True the dyno run only looked at 9 matrix data points but I'm not sure how to interpret that or assume the dyno data has any more or less meaningful data as compared to the 911 info.

 

I think dynos can have a role, but I've got some more stuff to publish here and then some recommendations about how to get the most from a dyno session.

 

As I see it at the moment, there are several issues: a too lean initial start, insufficient engine load, small coverage area of the spark and fuel tables, and all testing outside the areas we normally ride.

 

Still, I think that there are some things that can be done: use 6th gear, apply a load prior to opening the throttle (dyno or rear wheel brake) and limit throttle travel to 20-25 degrees, etc.

 

I've got some more interesting stuff to post so I'm sure they'll be more inputs then.

Link to comment

R1100, R1150 and R1200 Alpha-N Fueling and the Dyno: Post #3

 

It's fortunate to have several dyno runs taken on a 2009 R1200GS. What follows is one of the runs made before adding an AF-XIED. After you get familiar with the chart, have a look at several charts which follow, in this post and the next, which use GS-911 data taken at the same time the bike was on the Dyno.

 

The dynamometer used for this test, a Dynoject 250i, is run by a good quality operation, with a helpful and communicative operator, the shop and equipment are well maintained. It is not my objective to call their competency (which seems high) into question. Rather, I'd like to show some improvements that can be made.

 

The Dynojet 250i is an inertial dyno, which means that the loading of the motorcycle is created by accelerating a weighted roller driven by the rear wheel. If the rear wheel isn't accelerating the engine experiences no load, and the load doesn't change with speed. Under normal riding conditions the engine is always working to overcome the air resistance which rises significantly with speed. I believe the shop has the ability to add a brake-load to the initial conditions but it wasn't done for these runs. The testing was all done in 4th gear, a common setup. Here is one of the measured runs.

 

R1200GSdynamometer.jpg

 

Peak Measured Horsepower is 95 HP

Peak Measured Torque is 74 ft-lbs

 

When you first look at it, it seems that there is a wealth of information on horsepower, torque and AFR (air/fuel ratio). What we found though is that there is a lot going on inside the BMSK engine control unit, that needs to be understood, to make sense of the results, and the GS-911 data shows that only a small fraction of a bike's performance is tested. Thanks again to Terry and Roland for the data.

 

There are several conditions, not apparent in these results that were only evident from the GS-911 data. I'll list them here, and then in the next few posts look at them in detail. Then lastly I'll show the acceleration results from 4 runs without an AF-XIED and then four more with one attached on setting 8 (~13.8:1 AFR).

 

Conditions Measured with GS-911

1. Dynamometer Inertial-Load was only 50% on-road load.

2. Rear Wheel acceleration was twice as fast as on-road acceleration

3. Engine Load (measured by the BMSK) was ~0% at start of Dyno run. On-road engine load is 30% for same conditions.

4. Engine Load was ~60% maximum on the dyno. On-road engine load during a 4th gear WOT acceleration is ~70%.

5. AFR at the start of the dyno run was leaner than 16:1 resulting in a very lean initial acceleration. Due to the lean start, results on the inertial dyno don't reach operating AFR for about 2 seconds which is about 3500 RPM. This is a common inertial dyno starting condition. On-road AFR is 14.7:1 or 13.8:1 at the start of acceleration, depending on AF-XIED setting.

6. Of the 256+ Fuel Table cells in the BMSK, only 9 were stimulated by the dyno test run. None of the cells were in the usual riding area. (See chart in earlier post.) The same limited area of operation is true for the spark table.

 

The next post will show the BMSK data collected by the GS-911 for one of the dyno runs.

Link to comment

R1100, R1150 and R1200 Alpha-N Fueling and the Dyno: Post #4

 

Here's a chart showing measured lambda sensor voltage on the right O2 sensor (the left and right sensors were nearly identical) preceding and during two successive dyno tests. In each case you can see the RPMs coasting down to about 1700 rpm just before the throttle is being cranked fully open.

 

During the coastdown phase, the BMSK sees the deceleration and goes into its Overrun Fuel Cutoff mode. When it does the injectors are shut off, the mixture goes lean and the intake tract dries out. This shows clearly in the very low lambda sensor voltages preceding WOT.

 

Once the throttle is opened you can see that it takes about 2 seconds for the lambda sensor to reach 800 mV, which signals a rich mixture. This delay is caused by the time it takes for the intact tract film to be re-wetted. As a result, the acceleration at the rear wheel is slower than it should be and as a result of that the dyno under-estimates torque and HP between 2000 and 3500 rpm, an area of critical importance to us.

 

A way to avoid this problem would be to have the dyno set to a 15 lb-ft torque load at the engine or a load that resulted in a 30% Engine Load as reported by the GS-911. Then the dyno operator would stabilize at 1700 rpm, wait until the BMSK reported Closed Loop, then fully open the throttle. That static load would result in normal fueling just prior to WOT, and produce a higher indicated torque and HP between 1700 and 3500 RPM.

 

The next post will examine Engine Load (BMSK data) on the dyno vs the road.

 

R1200GSafrstartdyno.jpg

Link to comment

R1100, R1150 and R1200 Alpha-N Fueling and the Dyno: Post #5

 

As I mentioned above, Roland and Terry collected BMSK data with the GS-911 while making 8-10 passes at a dyno lab. One of the items reported by the BMSK to the GS-911 is a parameter called Engine Load. It is reported as a percentage of the maximum torque load that the engine can produce.

 

From the Air Charge chart in Dyno post #1 (essentially the same information as Engine Load) you can see that 80% is typical maximum charge at WOT for our type of engine.

 

In addition to the GS-911 data collected on the dyno, Terry has set me dozens of test-run GS-911 files from his R1200GSA including some where he has accelerated in 4th gear at WOT--same as on the dyno.

 

On the chart below you can see that the max engine load on the dyno was ~63% and the max engine load on the road was ~70%. This is another way to see that the dyno is under-loading the engine due to a lower inertial load than an actual riding load. Also note that on the dyno, the engine load doesn't reach 60% until 3500 to 4000 RPM. This is another indication that less than full HP and torque is being measured.

 

The dyno measured a peak 95HP and 74 lb-ft torque. If you scale up those numbers by 70/63 (road load/dyno load) you get 105 HP and 83 lb-ft torque, which is the R1200GS spec. I don't know if this is coincidence or if the dyno might have gotten the right answer if it had a full riding load but I wanted to point this out.

 

If you look at the engine load before WOT you see that riding down the road in 4th gear, 1800 RPM yields a 35% load. The BMSK senses 0% load in the seconds before WOT on the dyno. This difference has much more bearing on the measurements than the 63 vs 70% load issue. The reason is that the BMSK commands very lean operation at light loads, resulting in an under measurement of torque below 3500 rpm. The solution to the problem is to add a small static load to the dyno (by asking the dyno operator for it ahead of time). You might even be able to apply the rear brake just before WOT, to keep the fueling where it belongs.

 

In the charts in Dyno post #2 you can see that most riding is in the 2000-4500 RPM range. You can get a much better measurement of torque in this range on the Dyno if you properly load the engine during the test.

 

R1200GSengineloaddynoroad.jpg

Link to comment

R1100, R1150 and R1200 Alpha-N Fueling and the Dyno: Post #6

 

R1200GSaccelerationdynoroad.jpg

 

In Posts #3, 4 and 5 we've seen a Dyno chart, and the leanness & low engine loads cause by the Inertial Dyno method. The chart above demonstrates a few more differences between an Inertial Dyno test and On-Road riding. The RED bars are rear-wheel acceration on the Dynamometer during the test run. The BLUE bars are rear-wheel acceleration on a level road, no wind, in 4th gear, the same as the Dyno test. The data presented here was taken by a GS-911 connected to an R1200GS during Inertial Dyno tests on an R1200GS. The Closed Loop AFR preceeding the test had been at approximately 13.8:1 in both cases with time for full Mixture Adaptation. Barometric pressure and Air Temperature were similar and close enough for these purposes.

 

--The first thing to look at is that the Dyno reaches a rate of acceleration at the rear wheel of 24 fpss (feet per second per second). On the road, under the same conditions the acceleration is about 12 fpss. The Dyno test is like accelerating a bike that is about half the weight of an R1200GS.

 

--Due to the leanness caused by deceleration (the red bars pointing downward), the Dyno doesn't reach full fueling and acceleration until 4800 RPM. On-road reaches full acceleration at 3000 RPM because on the road, the engine is fueling to overcome the air and rolling resistances of traveling 20-25 mph and therefore in Closed Loop at 13.8:1.

 

--Looking at the Dyno results, you can see that on the Dyno the rear-wheel acceleration stays fairly flat to 7900 RPM. This is because the resistance of the Dyno is constant at all times--the inertia of the roller. On the road, as the bike accelerates, more of the HP of the engine is used to overcome air resistance and as a result the HP left over for acceleration goes down--above 75-80 mph, it goes down quite quickly. At 6700 RPM, while the rear-wheel keeps accelerating at a high rate on the Dyno, the on-road acceleration has dropped from about 12 fpss at 5500 RPM to about 8 fpss at 6700. On the road, the engine does more work than on the Dyno at high RPMs.

 

The chart at the bottom of the page is the same acceleration information but equalized to 100% of the Dyno's top acceleration for the Dyno data and to 100% of On-Road's top acceleration for the On-Road data. This means both sets of data reach 100%, making them easier to compare. I've added this chart because it becomes very obvious how much better an On-Road test is at finding low-RPM torque and horsepower and also how much added load the bike experiences at high speeds due to air resistance.

 

--At 1950 RPM, on-road acceleration is 80% of peak acceleration. By comparison, due to leanness preceeding the measurements, the Dyno test shows only 30% of its eventual peak. From the beginning, through 4000 RPM the Dyno is underreporting the bikes true torque.

 

--Notice too that at 1700 RPM on-road

 

My next chart will show rate of acceleration for the test interval by comparing four Dyno runs on an R1200GS at 14.7:1 versus four runs at 13.8:1. All runs were on the same bike and same Dyno.

RB

 

R1200GSaccelerationdynoroadpercent.jpg

Link to comment

R1100, R1150 and R1200 Alpha-N Fueling and the Dyno: Post #7

 

Over the prior six posts I've attempted to dissect just what an Intertial Dyno does and what you can expect from the measurements. As I've said a couple of times, thanks go to Roland and Terry for spending the time and money to make several runs on Roland's 2009 R1200GS before installing an AF-XIED and four more runs after. Also thanks to Terry and the very cooperative Dyno operator for taking the time to record a full set BMSK data using the GS-911, which documented every moment of the the dyno testing.

 

The Before tests were made with two stock O2 sensors, which means that the AFR of the motorcycle was 14.7:1 (lambda=1 to be strictly correct). The After tests were made with a pair of Nightrider AF-XIEDs installed, on setting 8 (about 13.8:1, lambda~0.94) and after the bike was ridden enough to allow for Mixture Adaptation.

 

Presented below are the accelerations for the eight dyno tests. Because the BMSK reports the R1200GS's speed, moment by moment, it's straightforward to calculate the acceleration of the rear wheel for the duration of the dyno test. Looking at the data table you can see that the before and after testing conditions were nearly identical. The air temperature varied during the After tests, but it didn't seem to matter, and two tests were with quite warm intake air, a disadvantage. The barometric pressure during the After testing was lower, which implies that the engine's power was slightly reduced compared to the Before testing.

 

The calculation takes the starting speed the instant before the throttle was opened, the starting speed the moment the throttle was closed, and divided the difference by the time (in milliseconds) between those two events. The chart below shows the results.

 

What the numbers show is consistent with my impression of my own bike, it accelerates faster with a richer lambda setting. (As I showed earlier, that richness propagates through the entire fueling map through Mixture Adaptation.) Here are the comparisons from the charts.

 

Average Acceleration: 19% better at 13.8:1

Two Best Accelerations: 14% better

Best Before (lean) to Worst After (richer): 8% better

 

I would not conclude from these dyno numbers that a richer mixture leads to X% better performance, but it seems clear that the acceleration of Roland's R1200GS at WOT is significantly better with the richer mixture that it was with the stock lean fueling, which is what his butt dyno told him right away.

 

RB

 

R1200GSaccelerationbeforeafter.jpg

Link to comment

I've been helping Dave debug a running issue on his R1200GS. As we did that he took several cold-start logs from his R1200GS. After we worked out his issue (coils and right-cable adjustment), I went back and looked over some of the logs.

 

As everyone knows, the Evap Canister vent runs only to the Left TB (throttle body). I think the activity of the BMSK is interesting during the first 6 or 7 minutes after a cold start. Looking at the chart below:

 

The left side O2 sensor goes Closed Loop after only 30 seconds, the right side was Closed Loop in about a minute. One heated up faster than the other most likely, which is normal. But the bike was fully Closed Loop in under 60 seconds.

 

The RPM stabilies quickly at just under 1400 RPM and the BMSK reduces that to 1200 RPM over the seven minutes of the test.

 

On this particular bike the LCFs (lambda control factors, which are short term fuel trims) are running together at about 1.1 (meaning the BMSK is adding 10% to the fuel table value. What's very interesting is that when the Evap Vent opens, the bike seems to get more air and fuel--the Left LCF drops to 0.9 (20% less fuel) and the idle actuator reduces (less air needed because the vent is open). If you study the second opening of the tank vent, there is again a big change in the Left LCF, and an even bigger reduction in the Idle Actuator motor.

 

The lesson is that to Cold Start and Idle well, the Idle Actuators have to be effective over their whole range (0-256); there needs to be a correct amount of free play in the throttle cables with the motors fully retracted; and the left/right throttle cables need to be adjusted for TB balance at a point where both throttles have lifted of the Idle Actuator stops.

 

The BMSK is a very active ECU during starting.

RB

 

R1200GSColdStartDave.jpg

Link to comment
  • 2 months later...
roger 04 rt

A few weeks ago I stumbled on the time required to reset the Motronic when you pull Fuse 5 or remove the battery cable. I use to think it was 15-30 seconds but now realize it is several minutes. 10 minutes is a certain time I believe.

 

So that this little tidbit of knowledge isn't lost, I'm linking it here: Motronic Reset Time 10 Minutes.

Link to comment
  • 2 months later...
roger 04 rt

I've had a Beemer Boneyard version of the EJK on my workbench for several months, planning to check it out. I've been curious about what it does with the O2 sensor and finally got to it this week.

 

Techlusion products work by monitoring one of the fuel injectors, measuring how often the injector is triggered (to calculate engine RPM) and the injector's pulse-width (to calculate Engine Load, wider pulses are delivered when the engine is producing more torque). Injectors have battery voltage on one of their two electrical terminals, and when the Motronic wants the injector to squirt fuel, it grounds the other terminal.

 

What the Techlusion does to add fuel is to lengthen the time the injector is grounded by the Motronic. To do that the EJK has to wait until the Motronic ungrounds the injector, and then instantly re-ground it.

 

The EJK has four control modes:

 

Light cruise (green LEDs): Lengthens short injection pulses

Acceleration (yellow): Lengthens medium injection pulses

WOT (red): Lengthens long injection pulses

“Techlusion Closed Loop” mode (green and blue): The maximum RPM at which Motronic Closed Loop operates properly. Above that RPM the EJK disables normal Closed Loop and enters Techlusion Closed Loop. Techlusion Closed Loop is essentially Open Loop which is what allows settings 1-3 to do their work and add fuel.

 

Although each of the 4 control modes has 15 settings, none of the settings has a specific meaning. Modes 1-3 have settings that range from add “a little” to “a lot”. There is no way to know how much fuel you're adding but Techlusion sends it to you set to their recommended values. (In the Techlusion metaphor, it's like adjusting a carburetor. Tweak it till you like it.) The Techlusion box shows a chart with cruise AFR at 13.4:1 and wot AFR at 12.6:1. The 13.4:1 cruise AFR is very rich.

 

Mode 4 also has many settings but the documentation doesn't tell you at what RPM Closed Loop is disabled for a particular setting. (In fact, the documentation leads you to believe that the EJK is doing something useful with the O2 input.) It comes set on number 1, the lowest RPM which was about 1800 RPM on my bike. This means normal-Closed Loop is working only at idle RPMs.

 

From the tests I ran, I observed that rather than simply disconnecting the O2, the EJK sends the Motronic a “lean” signal. It sets the voltage going to the Motronic to about 100 mV. Then, every 1.5 seconds the EJK briefly pulses the O2 voltage sent to the Motronic to 500 mV. This is supposed to fool the Motronic into believing an O2 is present & functioning, thereby avoiding an error code, but not allowing the normal Closed Loop to change fueling.

 

What I observed was the Motronic, seeing a mostly low (lean) signal, enrichs the mixture slowly to its maximum value of Mixture Adaptation. As a result, after about 30 seconds at steady RPM, I measured an AFR that had adjusted from 14.7:1 (normal Closed Loop) to 11.5:1, way too rich. If you look at the bottom graph on chart below you can see:

 

--the O2 sensor warming up from 450 mV to 800 mV (rich) during a cold start sequence

--then entering normal Closed Loop with an AFR of 14.7:1

--then with the RPM raised entering Techlusion Closed Loop

--then with the RPM back down, normal Closed Loop

 

You can also see the mixture on the top graph. (The two charts were measured at different times so the graphs aren't meant to line up.)

 

So the EJK is the same-old Techlusion with a twist. You can add fuel in steps but with no concrete idea of how much you're adding, and with your ECU operating Open Loop. If what you want is to turn your electronic fuel injection into a carburetor, this product can help you do it. And if you do choose it, it would be best to reset the Motronic and leave the O2 disconnected.

 

RB

 

techlusionclosedloop.jpg

 

Edited by roger 04 rt
Link to comment

Roger

 

Hooked up my unit yesterday. No power.

 

Does it matter which one of the white wires is used for power?

Link to comment
roger 04 rt

Yes, one of the white wires in the O2 cable is switched ground, the other is +12.

 

And one other note, +12 is only on that white wire when the fuel pump is running.

Edited by roger 04 rt
Link to comment
Yes, one of the white wires in the O2 cable is switched ground, the other is +12.

 

And one other note, +12 is only on that white wire when the fuel pump is running.

 

So are you saying only one of the white wires will work for power and if my unit has no power I need to switch the tap to the other white wire????

 

 

Link to comment
roger 04 rt

Yes, that's correct. As further clarification, that white wire is the one on pin4 of the O2 connector.

Link to comment

One other question. Could I attach the RED wire to my fuse block for power instead? It's only hot when the key is on.

Edited by Bud
Link to comment

Since I'm lazy, I took the tank off and pulled the red wire out of the cover so that I could wire it directly to my aux fuse block. It is only on when the key is on as I wired it to a relay.

 

Everything seems to be working now so I will have to ride a little to see how it actually responds.

 

 

Link to comment
roger 04 rt
One other question. Could I attach the RED wire to my fuse block for power instead? It's only hot when the key is on.

 

Yes, that's fine.

Link to comment
roger 04 rt

I've had a Beemer Boneyard version of the EJK on my workbench for several months, planning to check it out. I've been curious about what it does with the O2 sensor and finally got to it this week.

 

Techlusion products work by monitoring one of the fuel injectors, measuring how often the injector is triggered (to calculate engine RPM) and the injector's pulse-width (to calculate Engine Load, wider pulses are delivered when the engine is producing more torque). Injectors have battery voltage on one of their two electrical terminals, and when the Motronic wants the injector to squirt fuel, it grounds the other terminal.

 

What the Techlusion does to add fuel is to lengthen the time the injector is grounded by the Motronic. To do that the EJK has to wait until the Motronic ungrounds the injector, and then instantly re-ground it.

 

The EJK has four control modes:

 

Light cruise (green LEDs): Lengthens short injection pulses

Acceleration (yellow): Lengthens medium injection pulses

WOT (red): Lengthens long injection pulses

“Techlusion Closed Loop” mode (green and blue): The maximum RPM at which Motronic Closed Loop operates properly. Above that RPM the EJK disables normal Closed Loop and enters Techlusion Closed Loop. Techlusion Closed Loop is essentially Open Loop which is what allows settings 1-3 to do their work and add fuel.

 

Although each of the 4 control modes has 15 settings, none of the settings has a specific meaning. Modes 1-3 have settings that range from add “a little” to “a lot”. There is no way to know how much fuel you're adding but Techlusion sends it to you set to their recommended values. (In the Techlusion metaphor, it's like adjusting a carburetor. Tweak it till you like it.) The Techlusion box shows a chart with cruise AFR at 13.4:1 and wot AFR at 12.6:1. The 13.4:1 cruise AFR is very rich.

 

Mode 4 also has many settings but the documentation doesn't tell you at what RPM Closed Loop is disabled for a particular setting. (In fact, the documentation leads you to believe that the EJK is doing something useful with the O2 input.) It comes set on number 1, the lowest RPM which was about 1800 RPM on my bike. This means normal-Closed Loop is working only at idle RPMs.

 

From the tests I ran, I observed that rather than simply disconnecting the O2, the EJK sends the Motronic a “lean” signal. It sets the voltage going to the Motronic to about 100 mV. Then, every 1.5 seconds the EJK briefly pulses the O2 voltage sent to the Motronic to 500 mV. This is supposed to fool the Motronic into believing an O2 is present & functioning, thereby avoiding an error code, but not allowing the normal Closed Loop to change fueling.

 

What I observed was the Motronic, seeing a mostly low (lean) signal, enrichs the mixture slowly to its maximum value of Mixture Adaptation. As a result, after about 30 seconds at steady RPM, I measured an AFR that had adjusted from 14.7:1 (normal Closed Loop) to 11.5:1, way too rich. If you look at the bottom graph on chart below you can see:

 

--the O2 sensor warming up from 450 mV to 800 mV (rich) during a cold start sequence

--then entering normal Closed Loop with an AFR of 14.7:1

--then with the RPM raised entering Techlusion Closed Loop

--then with the RPM back down, normal Closed Loop

 

You can also see the mixture on the top graph. (The two charts were measured at different times so the graphs aren't meant to line up.)

 

So the EJK is the same-old Techlusion with a twist. You can add fuel in steps but with no concrete idea of how much you're adding, and with your ECU operating Open Loop. If what you want is to turn your electronic fuel injection into a carburetor, this product can help you do it. And if you do choose it, it would be best to reset the Motronic and leave the O2 disconnected.

 

RB

 

techlusionclosedloop.jpg

 

Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...

I ran into an interesting problem with my Innovate Motorsports LC-1. My +12 volt lead, which is tapped from the lambda sensor heater became intermittent because I used a cheap fork-style tap. I fixed the problem but notice that the 10 programmed values for voltage, lambda and sampling time had all been reset to default values due to the intermittent. I'd been riding for a week that way and couldn't put my finger on it but knew something was wrong. Fixed the tap and reprogrammed the values.

 

Then I notified that the unit was acting strangely, outputting more voltage than I programmed. I knew from past experience that to fix it I would need to perform a Free-Air Calibration which requires removal of the O2 sensor from the exhaust. That's not quick and can risk damaging the O2 sensor. So ... I tried something different:

 

1) Opened the throttle fully

2) Connected a vacuum cleaner to the exhaust outlet at the back of the bike

3) Bumped the rear wheel in gear until one of the cylinders reached the point where the exhaust and intake valves overlap--air started flowing, left it on. The exhaust and Wideband O2 was now full of fresh air.

4) Powered up the LC-1 by jumping the fuel pump relay and pressing the LC-1 calibration button. 5 seconds later calibration was complete.

 

Free-Air cal is speced for once a year. This made it fast and easy to accomplish.

Edited by roger 04 rt
Link to comment

Hi Roger

 

Great !

 

Being lazy with all the job done last year on my bike, this spring, I hesitated before doing free air calibration. Finally, I didn't do it.

 

if the bike works ok, is there a way to know if it has to be done or not ?

 

Thanks

 

 

Link to comment

That's a good question, it is hard to tell. I was watching my bike on the PC and spotted it in the data. These LC-1s can be great for a long time, then get "upset" by something and lose their mind. I use the GS-911 and Logworks software to monitor it a couple times a year.

 

Now that I have an easy way to do it, I will perform the cal a couple times a year.

Edited by roger 04 rt
Link to comment

Is it easy to know when one of the cylinders reached the point where the exhaust and intake valves overlap without taking out the valve covers or you do it by the sound of the air coming in from the intake tube ? Or by the sound of the vacuum cleaner which is changing when you reach the overlap ?

Link to comment
Is it easy to know when one of the cylinders reached the point where the exhaust and intake valves overlap without taking out the valve covers or you do it by the sound of the air coming in from the intake tube ? Or by the sound of the vacuum cleaner which is changing when you reach the overlap ?

 

I pulled the airbox cover. When the valve overlap occured I could easily hear it in the intake but also the vacuum motor speed changed suddenly.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...