ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Gear > Vendors
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12-26-2012, 09:12 PM   #121
roger 04 rt OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
roger 04 rt's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: Massachusetts
Oddometer: 2,147
In the interest of documenting what the Motronic does under various conditions, I've added a plot of fuel injection time and spark advance logged during the WOT runs I made to produce the torque curve posted above.

(Below the advance/injection plot I've added a summary of the GS-911 data log for anyone interested in what's being collected. A typical test run has several thousand lines of data that gets imported to an excel spreadsheet. The first two columns of time and RPM are used to calculate acceleration, and from that torque and HP.)

The conditions for the WOT runs were: shift the bike into fourth gear; running along at 1500 RPM; and then open the throttle fully until about 7000 RPM.

Looking at the plots below a couple things stand out. On the injection time plot you can see the Motronic fire off 7 mS shots of fuel right away to get the acceleration going—very rich, and keep in mind that each injector fires twice per combustion cycle. Then from 2200 to 4000 RPM, still WOT, the pulses drop to about 5.8 mS—still rich but a little less. From 4000 RPM to 5500 the injection time lengthens to 7.5 mS which is nearly on continuously at 7000 RPM. Between 5500 and 7000 RPM the engine is putting out 70 - 94 HP so the Motronic is keeping the mixture very rich. AFR on my bike is in the low to mid 12s for these WOT runs; by comparison the stock setting is in the 13s.

Looking at the Spark Advance plot, under the Wide Open Throttle conditions of this series of measurements, the Motronic is conservative with Spark Advance, holding it at 20 degrees or less until 5500 RPM. By comparison, under partial throttle cruising conditions the Spark Advance gets as high as 43 degrees.




roger 04 rt screwed with this post 12-28-2012 at 02:03 PM
roger 04 rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2012, 08:57 PM   #122
roger 04 rt OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
roger 04 rt's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: Massachusetts
Oddometer: 2,147
A couple posts ago I showed the GS-911 data which is the source for the Dyno calculations that I've made. If you look at the first column there is a six digit number in milliseconds, and in the second column the RPM reported by the Motronic. By taking any two adjacent RPM differences and dividing it by the difference between the times for those two RPM values, you get a direct measure of acceleration. The formula for calculating the acceleration in feet per second-squared is:

Acceleration = (RPM2-RPM1)/(Time2-Time1)*19.6852 ... ( 19.6852 is equal to 1000 times the 4th gear drivetrain ratio including transmission, final drive and tire diameter) for an 1150GS you would compute a different constant for different tire size and gearing.

In the chart below you can see the actual acceleration I measured for my R1150RT (the Blue Wideband line), five runs in fourth gear. These were 5 Wide Open Throttle runs after the Motronic had adapted itself fully to the Lambda = 0.92 setting (gasoline AFR 13.5:1). This acceleration data was the basis for the Torque curve I showed a few posts back. 12 feet per second-squared means the motorcycle accelerates by 8 MPH each second.

For the stock bike (Red line) I used the torque curves I showed earlier, and boosted them about 5% for the temperature and pressure conditions of the day; then calculated the acceleration that torque curve would produce in fourth gear. If you ignore the red (stock) line altogether, the Wideband acceleration is very good from 2000 RPM on up. And at 2400 RPM (11 fps2) the acceleration is nearly as good as at 5000 RPM (11.8 fps2). The boxer doesn't have to be a bike that only performs well at high RPMs.

Comparing the Red and Blue lines, there is a significant rate of acceleration advantage in favor of the Wideband curve between 2000 and 3000 RPM, which is what I experience while riding.

There's a saying, "There are three great lies ... lies, damned lies and statistics". That said, I'm pretty certain with all the measurements made and data collected, that the Oilheads run better with a bit more fuel. And given the number of comments you can find about bikes with Catalytic Converters running lean and the negative effects of that, it shouldn't be a surprise that a few percent more fuel improves them measureably.

roger 04 rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2013, 08:53 AM   #123
roger 04 rt OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
roger 04 rt's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: Massachusetts
Oddometer: 2,147
I'm thinking of mounting a stock narrowband O2 sensor here (to compare to the wideband) and need to have a bung welded into my exhaust. Does anyone have any thoughts or comments about this location?

roger 04 rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2013, 10:14 AM   #124
KsFolly
Adventurer
 
KsFolly's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2012
Location: Escondido, CA
Oddometer: 64
Roger,

Thanks for this informative thread!!

Do you have any comments on applicability to the 2012 1200?

I'm guessing 100%.

But I'm a noob. So I should ask.

One other question is how you adapted the LC-1 harness to the bikes harness. Did you end up getting a dead O2 sensor and cutting off the connector and splicing?

Thank you again!!!

K
KsFolly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2013, 07:47 PM   #125
roger 04 rt OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
roger 04 rt's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: Massachusetts
Oddometer: 2,147
K,

Here's a link to how I installed it: Wideband Install. The short answer is that I cut the connector off a dead sensor.

In concept since a R1200GS has two O2 sensors you would use two LC-1s. And I believe that it would work just as well. However, the devil is in the details. Some questions that need to be answered:

1) Will the BMS-K log a fault if it doesn't see the heater. The 1150 doesn't which means you didn't need to present an artificial load.

2) What is the resistance and voltage at the low side of each O2 sensor. On the 1150 it is about 150 millicolts and 150 ohms.

3) There are some settings for voltage, lambda spread and averaging that need to be programmed into the LC-1. These need to be checked.

That's not a long list, and everything could be worked out pretty quickly with a volt-ohmmeter and a GS-911. If anyone wants to try it and can make the measurements I'm willing to help.

RB
roger 04 rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 08:47 PM   #126
roger 04 rt OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
roger 04 rt's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: Massachusetts
Oddometer: 2,147
I've added a second O2 bung so that I can use the LC-1 Wideband sensor at the same time that the narrowband stock sensor is installed and feeding the Motronic.

The exhaust is back on with the Wideband sensor in the position near the catalytic converter, and the Narrowband sensor mounted in the new bung near the clamp. By connecting the Narrowband sensor to the Motronic and using the LC-1 as a recorder, I'm already getting data on the Narrowband/Motronic combo.

The first things that jump out at me:

—The stock Narrowband sensor is much slower than the Wideband, no question. That means the Motronic takes a lot longer to make corrections.

—The AFR spread is much larger with the Narrowband sensor. The larger spread plus the slower response shows fueling patterns that take seconds to change direction. Even in the quick data I've taken I've seen the mixture take 4 seconds to go from 15.4 to 14.2 while in closed loop. This is a long time and a fairly large change of mixture. The mixture change is large enough and slow enough that I'm sure it could be felt as su----g.

I'm going to do some riding with it tomorrow if the rain holds off and then post some plots and photos.
roger 04 rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 10:52 PM   #127
def
Ginger th wonder dog
 
def's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Location: The woods and mountains of Alabama
Oddometer: 9,587
Roger,

I follow your posts with fascination and marvel at the work you have done to document everything you have tested and measured.

I have a question however;

Why do you do all this? The science that you are dealing with is complex and takes time and effort.

Don't get me wrong, I am grateful for all the information you have provided as I'm sure, others are as well.
def is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 11:05 PM   #128
Poolside
Syndicated
 
Poolside's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Location: Long Beach, CA
Oddometer: 11,865
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger 04 rt View Post

The AFR [air fuel ratio, aka mixture] spread is much larger with the Narrowband sensor.

The larger spread plus the slower response shows fueling patterns that take seconds to change direction.

The mixture change is large enough and slow enough that I'm sure it could be felt as su----g.
Heh heh, yes the dreaded 'S' word. Caused by the ECU swinging the mixture back and forth since the birth of the 1100. Enjoyable project all round! Cheers.

Here's a couple of things. The spread, or range say, of the mixture with the stock sensor is based on the threshold voltage of the increased slope region of the sensor output. What happens at which voltage is a function of the ECU program not the O2 sensor. The rate-of-change of the mixture is based on the catalyst-control program in the ECU not the O2 sensor.

Also, surging is felt because during closed loop operation the mixture is being moved back and forth in the range between the 'best power' and 'best efficiency' fuel mixtures. Those two fuel ratios have different horsepower outputs, and moving the mixture back and forth between them is similar to moving the throttle back and forth. The surging is felt because of the two different power levels, not because ECU is changing the mixture slowly.



__________________

IICE Air Hotrod your GS  Fuel Injection  Tech Info  Buy  Order List  Installation
Poolside is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 10:45 PM   #129
roger 04 rt OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
roger 04 rt's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: Massachusetts
Oddometer: 2,147
I picked up my exhaust Friday afternoon after a local welder with TIG capability cut a hole an inch and a half in front of the stock bung, and then welded in a stainless steel bung.

Next everything was put back together with the Wideband O2 in the usual bung and a stock Narrowband Bosch O2 in the new location. The Narrowband O2 got connected to the Motronic. In order to return the bike to stock operation the fuel pressure boosting regulator was removed from the fuel return line. While the Wideband O2 was removed from the exhaust and in free-air, the LC-1 was recalibrated—a nice feature it has.

Everything worked and the LC-1 and GS-911 started recording data on the stock setup. The LC-1 is a great tool for analyzing the stock sensor, coupled with the GS-911 you can clearly see what the engine is doing with mixture. Several test rides confirmed what I reported earlier, that the high/low AFR range during closed loop is between the low 14s:1 into fairly lean territory in the low 15s:1. Any injector mismatch would widen the range. The average AFR in Closed Loop was 14.7:1 as expected.

My test rides yesterday did remind me how differently the R1150 runs on the Narrowband sensor. When fully warmed up, with a light load in 1st, 2nd or 3rd gear in the 3000 to 3500 RPM range the motor feels on the edge of stumbling. On a slight downward grade in those gears/RPMs I could feel a light surging. I also found that I was shifting at higher RPMs than with the Wideband connected to the Motronic. Later when I pulled into the garage after the rides I could "smell" a hot-exhaust odor.

The richer mixtures (13.8:1) I had been running with the Wideand O2 connected for most of the past year improved driveability, softened the response to throttle and added muscle between 2000 and 3500 RPM. The richer mixtures were also reducing exhaust temperature. When I have time I will try and measure the temperature difference Wideband vs the stock O2.

Over the next few days I plan to see if the Narrowband sensor can be nudged to several tenths richer AFR—with a first target of 14.2:1. I'll report how that goes.

RB
roger 04 rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 11:09 PM   #130
roger 04 rt OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
roger 04 rt's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: Massachusetts
Oddometer: 2,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by def View Post
Roger,

I follow your posts with fascination and marvel at the work you have done to document everything you have tested and measured.

I have a question however;

Why do you do all this? The science that you are dealing with is complex and takes time and effort.

Don't get me wrong, I am grateful for all the information you have provided as I'm sure, others are as well.
Hi Def,

Why have I gone to the effort? Good question. I guess it's become a rainy-day hobby.

Shortly after purchasing my R1150 last year I realized that it felt "held back" by its leanness. It reminded me of how the aircraft I'd flown for more than a decade felt when its mixture control was set too lean—a piston engine aircraft requires that the pilot constantly be aware of mixture. The big difference was that the R1150 had no provisions for mixture management. Worse yet, it had an O2 sensor that would "enforce" its will and undo most attempts to add more fuel.

In relatively short order I found that an Innovate Motorsports LC-1 would allow me to program mixture much like the mixture control on my plane. That led to all the characterization data that I've reported which let me confirm for myself that slightly richening the mixture that way had a lot of benefits but no downside—possibly 1-2 mpg drop in gas mileage.

Now there's one more thing I'd like to figure out. Can the stock O2 sensor be pulled a bit richer? Probably in a few days I'll know one way or the other. That might benefit riders who don't want to go to the trouble of connecting an LC-1.

RB
roger 04 rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 11:14 PM   #131
GS Addict
Pepperfool
 
GS Addict's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Location: Sunshine Coast B.C.
Oddometer: 3,703
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger 04 rt View Post
Hi Def,

Why have I gone to the effort? Good question. I guess it's become a rainy-day hobby.

Shortly after purchasing my R1150 last year I realized that it felt "held back" by its leanness. It reminded me of how the aircraft I'd flown for more than a decade felt when its mixture control was set too lean—a piston engine aircraft requires that the pilot constantly be aware of mixture. The big difference was that the R1150 had no provisions for mixture management. Worse yet, it had an O2 sensor that would "enforce" its will and undo most attempts to add more fuel.

In relatively short order I found that an Innovate Motorsports LC-1 would allow me to program mixture much like the mixture control on my plane. That led to all the characterization data that I've reported which let me confirm for myself that slightly richening the mixture that way had a lot of benefits but no downside—possibly 1-2 mpg drop in gas mileage.

Now there's one more thing I'd like to figure out. Can the stock O2 sensor be pulled a bit richer? Probably in a few days I'll know one way or the other. That might benefit riders who don't want to go to the trouble of connecting an LC-1.

RB
Keep up the good work!
Thanks for all your efforts.
__________________
Old enough to know better....
Young enough to try it again
GS Addict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 06:48 PM   #132
wjg4
wallyging
 
wjg4's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: Shaker Heights, OH
Oddometer: 16
I’ve been following roger04rt’s posts on enriching R1150 oilhead fueling using the LC-1 by Innovate Motorsports, and I finally installed one on my 2001 R1150GS (72,000 miles). I also installed a 3.5 bar k-bike fuel regulator. On Roger’s advice I programmed the LC-1 at lambda .96, or 14.1:1 afr.

I took the bike out for several test rides of 30-40 miles, and monitored the AFR using the gauge included with the LC-1. Here are my seat-of-the-pants impressions. I don’t have the experience with engines running at different AFRs that Roger has, and I did not do any data logging, so these are my non-technical, subjective impressions.

The best way I can describe the engine is it just feels more “frisky” to me, as if it is breathing easier (or, more correctly, less starved for fuel). It definitely has better torque in the 2500-3500 rpm range, and the on/off throttle is less abrupt. The bike surges less, but that is not completely gone (more on that later).

The bike switched to closed loop right at 3 bars on the RID. Since the 3.5 bar regulator was already producing fueling equivalent to lambda .96 the bike ran at 14.1:1 in closed loop immediately. It looked like the open loop tables had pretty much adapted to the richer closed loop mixture after a half hour of varied riding.
The bike seems to run in closed loop more than open loop. Under steady throttle on the flat and up and down moderate hills it stays in open loop – 14.1:1. I was surprised to find that when slowing down (reduced but not closed throttle) the afr went richer (in the 13’s) rather than leaner. It only goes leaner under closed throttle.

My bike’s surging is most pronounced under steady throttle at 2500 – 3000 rpms in the lower gears, when the engine is transitioning from power to no power (fuel to no fuel) on a level road or very slight downhill. As noted above, the afr during these periods is actually richer than 14.1:1, which suggests the surging is not the result of an overly lean mixture. Rather, it seems to this non-techie guy that the “surging” is the result of the Motronic going from a somewhat abrupt power to no-power, rather than the mixture being so lean that any unevenness in the afr of the two cylinders produces uneven power. I rode an hour this afternoon with lambda .94 (afr 13.8:1) and there was no noticeable change in the surging.

I’d like to thank Roger for doing all of the research and experimentation, and so generously sharing it with us. Roger was also very helpful during installation and tuning of the LC-1.

It has been a fun project! It took me more than a few hours to figure out where to put the LC-1 and the junction box on the GS since it uses the under seat space differently than the RT, and then do the actual installation and wiring, not to mention installing the 3.5 bar fuel regulator. I’m happy I made the modification, however, and I’m looking forward to warmer weather and more experimentation with the LC-1.
__________________
Wally
'10 R1200GS
Shaker Heights, OH
wjg4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 09:39 PM   #133
roger 04 rt OP
Beastly Adventurer
 
roger 04 rt's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: Massachusetts
Oddometer: 2,147
Hey Wally, Thanks for the post. I've been curious to hear how it worked out. And yes it is in closed loop a lot, roughly 50% of the time.

If memory serves me correctly, the 1150GS is different in a number of ways:

--lower compression
--different intake tubes, exhaust, heads, cams
--different coding plug
--and yours is a single-spark model year

It'll be interesting to hear about your longer term experience.

RB
roger 04 rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 08:20 PM   #134
wjg4
wallyging
 
wjg4's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: Shaker Heights, OH
Oddometer: 16
It warmed uo to 40 degrees today so I reset the Motronic, programmed the LC-1 to lambda 1.01, turned on the "choke", started the bike and let it warm up. I have the 3.5 bar fuel regulator installed, so the bike was running about 6% richer than stock during open loop. While the RID was still at 2 bars the Motronic went closed loop, and I noticed an immediate and marked reduction in rpm. At closed loop the afr was right at 14.7:1 or a little leaner. (I am monitoring afr on the gauge included with the LC-1.)

It was dark, so I didn't go for a ride, but I should be able to do that tomorrow. I'll be interested to see if I can replicate this evening's results, and I'll take careful note of actual afrs during warm-up and at the switch to closed loop.
__________________
Wally
'10 R1200GS
Shaker Heights, OH
wjg4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 09:10 AM   #135
wjg4
wallyging
 
wjg4's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: Shaker Heights, OH
Oddometer: 16
I took advantage of our 60 degree weather today and took the GS out for the afternoon to experiment with different lambdas.

Taking Roger's advice I first programmed the LC-1 to lambda = 1.04 to get the bike back to what stock would be with the original O2 narrow band sensor. The engine felt more anemic, and the surging returned in the 3000 – 5000 rpm range and was noticeable during most driving conditions except for WOT. It didn’t take me long to realize I didn’t want to keep it at 1.04.

Next I set lambda = .92, and that did away with most of the surging, although a minor amount of hunting was detectable in the range of 2500 – 3500 under ideal circumstances (steady throttle on level or slight downhill grade on smooth road).

I thought .92 might be a little too rich for the cat and for mileage so I bumped it up to lambda = .94 to see if I could tell much difference. I couldn’t. The bike runs much better at .94 than it did at 1.04 – I guess that is not much of a surprise. But it definitely is more lively – I had to watch it to keep the front wheel on the ground in 1st and 2nd gear!

The Motronic adapted to the new lambda values quite rapidly. Closed loop adaptation was immediate, and open loop values seemed to change somewhat over the first 20 miles or so. It is difficult to tell what exactly what is happening just looking at the gauge.

I noticed a curious thing – when reducing the throttle, but not closing it completely, the bike ran richer. At a steady throttle on slight downhills the mixture would hold steady at the closed loop value, but if it was a steep downhill the mixture got richer – the Motronic wasn’t able to get back to the set lambda value. My only explanation is that the Motronic must not realize the bike is going downhill, and since the engine isn’t pulling as hard and not taking in as much air, the mixture becomes richer. I’ll be interested to hear other opinions on this.

Additional info: valves were adjusted within last 1000 miles, new plugs were installed, and the TB sync is spot on – verified again today. Could the bike possibly have dirty injectors (bike has 70,000 miles), or are GS’s more prone to surging?
__________________
Wally
'10 R1200GS
Shaker Heights, OH
wjg4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 02:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014