BMW S1000RR Forum banner
  • Hey everyone! Enter your ride HERE to be a part of JULY's Ride of the Month Challenge!
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 64 Posts

·
BT Moto
Joined
·
1,263 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The topic of wideband / broadband sensor fuel correction is a known first in the new BMW 2019+ EU or 2020+ US bikes. What does this mean? Put simply it means the bike has a full-time, real-time correction and “autotuner” built into it from the factory that can correct or add fuel on the fly, idle to redline from 25+% to 25-%.

What isn’t new, however, is other tuners and people misunderstanding the potency of a factory wideband and deceitfully diverting the topic from factual information to blatant fear mongering. They’ll say it’s bad because they simply don’t understand it’s value or how it works. That or they have absolutely no control over it’s features with their limited entry-level tuning kit like Race/Titanium/WR. The same people that fear monger are the same people who can’t add our features like the cold start fix, cooling fan temp control, air-flap kit, IAT relocation, custom launch control, the list goes on. They’re simply trying to find ways to misinform the customer why their product is superior with far less features. So we are here to explain why removing these, or not using them correctly is a step in the wrong direction.

Why is wideband tuning excellent? Say you target a 12:8:1 air/fuel ratio on full-load, you go up 4000ft, you go down 4000ft, you tuned in Massachusetts but race in a Texas tunnel or COTA race track on the weekends. The bike is automatically correcting for 12:8:1 in all conditions and adding or subtracting on the fly to hit your fueling (aka lambda target).

The pre 2020 S1000RR’s could not self-tune. People were live tuning bikes on race day. They were pulling their laptops out on the side of the highway with a PC5. Put in race gas with 10% more oxygen, boom 12:8:1. Mix that with tweaking BMW’s automatic ignition map RON adjustment, and you have a live tuning fuel and ignition bike ready. This is because the pre 2020 bikes use an archaic narrowband fueling model, or when deleted a completely open-loop fuel table. It’s fixed off engine RPM and throttle position to tell the bike how much fuel to inject. It’s tuned for the conditions it was live tuned in only! Changes to any of those conditions, even a few percent, exhaust, temperature, old air filter, and the bike could be lean or rich now. It’s a “static” fuel model which is trying to hit a target that is constantly moving, which can be very cumbersome and time consuming to tune for every variable, every day!

The difference in the 2020 is the wideband system is only used in certain criteria and then it is turned on or off into open loop so it does need adjustment. By temperature, rpm, throttle position, air mass etc. This can’t be done without re-writing code to suit it. This will not happen in Race2000 or WR software. We are the only proven solution that is available for 100% closed loop tuning.

What we see written lately is people are advising to remove the sensors (WOW!) and are told that they fail and put the perfectly German engineered wideband equipped bike back into 2003 with an open loop model. It’s almost like putting a carburetor back on a fuel injected bike in the early 2000’s because they don’t understand! This is just ignorance and having a lack of equipment and/or knowledge to fully optimize or understand the system. Remember, if these sensors fail (which we haven’t seen under extremely aggressive testing) the bike has a fallback failsafe mode of open loop anyways built in, a failsafe configuration. Much like a car does when the oxygen sensor goes, or mass air-flow sensor fails. Same idea as if you were to unplug it.

So long story short, don’t bring your state-of-the-art engineered superbike back to a prehistoric fuel model dinosaur era.


214547
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
443 Posts
@BRENTUNING Appreciate the debunking thread.

I reached out to WR about their ability to support closed loop tuning. They are more than happy to sell you their software with the "auto tune" stuff removed. Their software does allow for us to set lambda target and use closed loop (throughout the RPM range) tuning. Also, I believe @BMW_388 's tune also uses closed loop tuning, but only till 9000 RPM (which is the same behavior as the stock bike, AFAIK.)

While I appreciate the boldness of some of the solutions (E85 support, QS optimisation, suppressing error codes so that Flapper/SAS/Exhaust valve can be removed), it has lead to some instability (stalling problem) in my bike which was only resolved by putting the in Intake Flapper back in. I appreciate that you have kept the dialogue open with me throughout the entire ordeal and have promised to continue working with me when I update the bike next.
 

·
BT Moto
Joined
·
1,263 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
@BRENTUNING Appreciate the debunking thread.

I reached out to WR about their ability to support closed loop tuning. They are more than happy to sell you their software with the "auto tune" stuff removed. Their software does allow for us to set lambda target and use closed loop (throughout the RPM range) tuning. Also, I believe @BMW_388 's tune also uses closed loop tuning, but only till 9000 RPM (which is the same behavior as the stock bike, AFAIK.)

While I appreciate the boldness of some of the solutions (E85 support, QS optimization, suppressing error codes so that Flapper/SAS/Exhaust valve can be removed), it has lead to some instability (stalling problem) in my bike which was only resolved by putting the in Intake Flapper back in. I appreciate that you have kept the dialogue open with me throughout the entire ordeal and have promised to continue working with me when I update the bike next.
WR does not support real-time closed loop tuning in any capacity. Let me explain. First you would need to buy their autotune log box to make this work. Currently their autotune log box does not have support for the S1000RR, at least on their website. Though that may change. Once you buy the over $700 log box, you would install it with their own, single aftermarket wideband. Since the factory has one wideband per bank, 2 total (more accurate), you would need to weld your own bung at the end of the exhaust where all 4 primaries merge. This is a single wideband with no redundant failsafe measures to ensure the sensor is always working 100% correctly. The factory setup has 4 sensors total, 2 for actual closed loop changes and 2 sensors to ensure the widebands are working correctly. Once that is installed on the bike and your bike is tuned by either you or your tuner of choice you would start to ride the bike. The bike itself will not make any changes on the fly. Once you complete your ride you would plug the log box into your computer and review the data. The WR software will make suggestions of what to change the tuning to and you would apply those changes yourself. That's the difference between real time closed loop and log box with manual changes through a log box.

@BMW_388 is using the same system as stock which means the only time the bike is actually using closed loop is at partial throttle and never closed loop at wide open throttle. Great for some situations but if you ever race the bike at 100% throttle at the track, the bike is still open loop with static mapping, meaning it will not make any changes.

The issue with stalling on the S1000RR was explained by BMW as a software issue with only a single version of software being the culprit. This stalling was on stock bikes that were not flashed as well. Our flash didn't make changes and was also stalling as a result. This had nothing to do with flappers as 100% stock bikes that were not flashed were also stalling. We have since modified our software to ensure that doesn't happen, even with this software version. Email us anytime and we'll revise your flash to fix this issue. Thanks
 
  • Like
Reactions: vneyer

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
443 Posts
WR does not support real-time closed loop tuning in any capacity.
214552


@BRENTUNING this is straight from the horses mouth. Why would they lie about such a thing to a potential customer? Potential of getting sued is high with this one. It would also do damage to their reputation. It is possible you have not fully evaluated your competitor's option for K67 tuning yet?

Also:

214553


214554


The issue with stalling on the S1000RR was explained by BMW as a software issue with only a single version of software being the culprit. This stalling was on stock bikes that were not flashed as well. Our flash didn't make changes and was also stalling as a result. This had nothing to do with flappers as 100% stock bikes that were not flashed were also stalling. We have since modified our software to ensure that doesn't happen, even with this software version. Email us anytime and we'll revise your flash to fix this issue. Thanks
This is what we observed on my bike:
  • Bike with flapper removed + stock ECU = stall
  • Bike with flapper removed + BT Stage 2 = stall
  • Bike with flapper reinstalled + stock ECU = no stall
  • Bike with flapper reinstalled + BT Stage 2 (either flapper stock behaviour or 100% open) = no stall
This is what I also wrote in my first message. I had to reinstall the flapper and the bike is running smoothly with BT Stage 2 now. The fact that we had physically removed the flappers from the bike was causing the ECU to stall the bike (w/ or wo/ BT Stage 2 flash.) The error codes would not show up when the ECU was flashed of course, but the bike would stall nonetheless.

It is great to hear that you guys found the root cause to be a particular BMW software version and that the problem has since gone away. I will come back to you guys to get this cleaned up once I re update the bike. This is a really good gesture on your part btw.
 

·
BT Moto
Joined
·
1,263 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
View attachment 214552

@BRENTUNING this is straight from the horses mouth. Why would they lie about such a thing to a potential customer? Potential of getting sued is high with this one. It would also do damage to their reputation. It is possible you have not fully evaluated your competitor's option for K67 tuning yet?

Also:

View attachment 214553

View attachment 214554



This is what we observed on my bike:
  • Bike with flapper removed + stock ECU = stall
  • Bike with flapper removed + BT Stage 2 = stall
  • Bike with flapper reinstalled + stock ECU = no stall
  • Bike with flapper reinstalled + BT Stage 2 (either flapper stock behaviour or 100% open) = no stall
This is what I also wrote in my first message. I had to reinstall the flapper and the bike is running smoothly with BT Stage 2 now. The fact that we had physically removed the flappers from the bike was causing the ECU to stall the bike (w/ or wo/ BT Stage 2 flash.) The error codes would not show up when the ECU was flashed of course, but the bike would stall nonetheless.

It is great to hear that you guys found the root cause to be a particular BMW software version and that the problem has since gone away. I will come back to you guys to get this cleaned up once I re update the bike. This is a really good gesture on your part btw.

Perhaps they misunderstood your question? This is from their own website regarding their "autotuner". You can see that it works exactly as we described. This item is not yet available for the S1000RR as of yet, according to their website.

214556


You can also see from our customer provided AFR 4th gear run that the WOT lambda targets are perfect in any condition. Nice and flat AFR graph across the entire RPM range. We have zero customer issues with AFR inconsistencies with this method.

Please email us anytime for your new mapping if this issue is still affecting your bike.

Thanks
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
3,769 Posts
I have some hardware on order for testing and will be happy to get back to you on this in a few weeks. Not like I am avoiding going down this road of debate. Its just better to have the science behind it to back up the talk.



We are dealing with a PRODUCTION release of a motorcycle that needed to past North American Emissions Regulations and European Emissions Regulations. You know what BMWAG did not care about? The performance at a race track in a serious racing type event. The reason is because it has a Catalytic Converter ( CAT ) on it, and it passed regulations to get sold to the consumer. Lets look at a Catalytic Converter ( CAT )


This is an excellent explanation of the CAT and the O2 sensors around it




Now, we have the performance side of us.. we the racers. Now there is variations in this from straight liners to road racers to canyon carvers. IF you are a commuter, you are just riding the bike and feel good because you went to some website and read if you had XYZ flash tune your bike will make XXX HP and no matter you cannot actually use the power, you feel good about it. To me that is the type of people out there.



So we want performance ! The first thing we want to do is make it louder and make it lighter. No problem, Akra, Hindle, M4, Arrow... lots of choices for loud and light. Then the proper flash tune to get rid of the 2nd and 3rd lag if nothing else is accomplished, but, we can have more. BMW Motorrad offered us the Torque Optimization option, but that proves to reduce HP by a lot and very little torque gain overall


K67 New 2020 " Torque Optimization " RetroFit...




There's a few safety's already in place from the factory in case of wideband sensor failure. This is why they put up and down stream sensors in the 2020 (4 sensors total). The down streams ensure the up streams are working correctly at all times. If a failure occurs, a check engine light and error is displayed on the TFT. These are only a couple safety's in place to ensure the bike will not get damaged in case of sensor failure.


This is mostly correct in that the rear O2 sensors are what is called a compare circuit of events. Oxygen Sensors, commonly referred to as O2 sensors, are part of your vehicles emission system. The front sensors are 5 wire pump cell O2 sensors while the rear sensors are the standard be around forever 4 wire narrow band sensors. these upstream oxygen sensor which monitors the exhaust gasses to help the computer adjust your fuel/air ratio ( Lambda ) for maximum gas mileage and power.

The rear sensors ( downstream, after converter, sensors ) are there to mostly make sure the Catalytic Converter ( CAT ) is not plugged up, or in some way contaminated. Its all about emissions and has very little to do with performance in the racing sense.


Now, we remove the CAT and increase flow. Great, but, the rear ( downstream O2 sensors ) are no longer doing anything. They are not a back up to the front ( upstream O2 sensors ) . Sure they will aid in a check engine light, IF, all DTC’s are not turned off in reporting errors. Lets move past this issue of the CAT being remove to a really major issue. You just put a full exhaust on your 2020 and the upstream O2 sensors have moved a lot downstream. That location of the sensors was part of the calibration to heat up ready to read Lambda. So now without and proof of the ECU in closed loop or open loop mode, Troy has is grand posting that here it is, full closed loop mode performance.



So was the code in the ECU already laying dormant ready for someone to hit the check box, enable full O2 closed loop mode running? Is this someone you are going to sit there and say someone rewrote the code for the TriCore 1793 MPU? That is not going to happen 100%. The code for doing this would require 1000’s upon 1000’s of hours of testing. Now, if it was already in the ECU and Bosch wrote the code for testing purposes then that is exactly what It was, TESTING. Obviously if this was a really valid useable feature of even making the K67 get better emissions, or performance without putting the EPA regulations at risk of non approval, they would have enabled it from the factory.



These 5 wire pump cell O2 sensors fail a lot. I have already helped 5 people with failing O2 sensors. The rear downstream are just your basic 4 wire narrow band, but these pump cell are sensitive to fuel and lead. You run any leaded racing fuel I can assure you the O2 will fail faster.



The topic of wideband / broadband sensor fuel correction is a known first in the new BMW 2019+ EU or 2020+ US bikes. What does this mean? Put simply it means the bike has a full-time, real-time correction and “autotuner” built into it from the factory that can correct or add fuel on the fly, idle to redline from 25+% to 25-%.


Really 25% margin of error correction? So lets say you are using BMW target AFR of 13.2… 25% of this is 3.3.. so we are looking at a swing of 9.9 AFR to 16.5 AFR … where Is the difference in an open loop map that does the same thing. It can swing from 9.9 to 16.5 ratio too just like you are saying is the margin of error and correction. If it actually had to be changing the fueling that much at 10000 RPM to 14600 RPM, the engine would likely create knock and burn a piston.



Lets look at the picture of the 12.8 AFR you posted.


214557





You will notice this is Zeitronix Data Logger model ZT-2



Now, if you are going to prove a result, you better be using good equipment to measure the result. Prove the calibration. O2 sensors cannot just be used and used and used .. even mine on my DynoJet has had too much heat up condensation on it and reading was off a month ago. Replace sensor, all good again. I could tell it was off because I have enough experience to know what is the expected result and if you don’t get that result you investigate why.



This Zeitronix Data Logger model ZT-2 does not have very good reviews nor good test results in a head to head comparison run by a Ford Muscle speed shop.



Wideband O2 Sensor Shootout! | FordMuscle Magazine



That is some work those guys put into welding up all those buns in that collector trying to establish a fair reading across all units at one time. The Zeitronix ZT-2 was not in last place at least, but, number 7 out of 8 and the lowest price point should tell you something about its accurate reading or NOT.



214558






@BMW_388 is using the same system as stock which means the only time the bike is actually using closed loop is at partial throttle and never closed loop at wide open throttle. Great for some situations but if you ever race the bike at 100% throttle at the track, the bike is still open loop with static mapping, meaning it will not make any changes.


You know what this also means, it is making the power the way BMW Motorrad intended and mapped on the Dyno. The accusations of BrenTuning and Troy have been that I am pushing and selling the EURO files from STOCK ECU’s and could not be further from the truth. I could care less what people really think in the long run which is why I don’t argue the point. The tune products I sell are labeled V1 and V2 for a reason. They are BMW Motorrad Certified and I am limited in what I can do to the files so that I am recommended by ‘some’ certainly not all BMW dealers. I am happy to say that V1 code has dyno'ed as low as 198HP in Canada to 208HP in South Carolina.. and 203 204HP right here in my shop in TEXAS. I dont see full closed loop making consistent power like a proper open loop map or BMW Motorrad would surely be doing all they can in WSBK to win win win. My V2 code is WSBK level coded.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
443 Posts
I dont see full closed loop making consistent power like a proper open loop map or BMW Motorrad would surely be doing all they can in WSBK to win win win.
I ask this as a potential customer who wants to know more.

Your open loop tuning (post 9000 rpm) may not be suitable to my ambient, humidity and altitude? Would closed loop be a better approximate for these kind of situations?
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
3,769 Posts
I ask this as a potential customer who wants to know more.

Your open loop tuning (post 9000 rpm) may not be suitable to my ambient, humidity and altitude? Would closed loop be a better approximate for these kind of situations?
I am not interested in discussing how closed loop may or may not be helpful. Its not practical in a engine that does not even have a MAF or MAP. This ECU cannot measure air mass nor air pressure in the intake tracts. These are critical for full closed loop mode feedback. If someone is claiming to have full closed loop feedback they better be providing alot of data of where the parameters are coming from to get this magic target AFR.
 

·
BT Moto
Joined
·
1,263 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 · (Edited)
@BMW_388 ok, let's explain a few things.

"Now, we remove the CAT and increase flow. Great, but, the rear ( downstream O2 sensors ) are no longer doing anything. They are not a back up to the front ( upstream O2 sensors ) . Sure they will aid in a check engine light, IF, all DTC’s are not turned off in reporting errors. Lets move past this issue of the CAT being remove to a really major issue. You just put a full exhaust on your 2020 and the upstream O2 sensors have moved a lot downstream. That location of the sensors was part of the calibration to heat up ready to read Lambda. So now without and proof of the ECU in closed loop or open loop mode, Troy has is grand posting that here it is, full closed loop mode performance."

You're contradicting yourself on your post. You're saying the downstream sensors do nothing if the cat is removed but also say they monitor the upstreams in case of failure. Here's what's actually happening. The two wideband lambda sensors are used upstream and are one of the main inputs for fuel control. The downstream narrowband sensors are primarily present for emissions and OBD. Additionally, they also fine tune the inputs for fueling (signals given by upstream sensors) so that a stable and well-controlled closed loop is maintained. This, of course, can be manipulated to be even more precise with our custom flash.

Various combinations of two point lambda and wideband lambda sensor are used by different manufacturers, depending on cost and other relevant parameters.

I'm not sure what to make of your casual assertion of "proof" but if you know the ECU like you say you do, 100% closed loop is an easy task to complete. As far as being verifiable. That 12.8 AFR sent to us by our customer can be duplicated in ALL conditions with no variance. It's 99% accurate 100% of the time. As opposed to open loop tuning which is only accurate in the same exact conditions it was tuned in. Typically the variance in open loop is +-5%.

All you would have to do is go to difference temps, elevations, etc and log with a separate wideband. If the AFR is always the same in any condition and any throttle input, it's FTCL.

"Really 25% margin of error correction? So lets say you are using BMW target AFR of 13.2… 25% of this is 3.3.. so we are looking at a swing of 9.9 AFR to 16.5 AFR … where Is the difference in an open loop map that does the same thing. It can swing from 9.9 to 16.5 ratio too just like you are saying is the margin of error and correction. If it actually had to be changing the fueling that much at 10000 RPM to 14600 RPM, the engine would likely create knock and burn a piston."

We didn't specify what RPM ranges have what correction factor or what that correction factor is in relation to a certain part of the AFR scale. What you're posting is speculative at best. These ECU's aren't like the days when when you were turning wrenches on Fiero's and trying to tune those archaic LS 411 boxes. The changes are extremely fast and a lot of stand alone ECU's use FTCL now for maximum performance. As you should know, FTCL is the same is open loop. Only change is the fact that the bike can actually correct itself with AFR variation rather than the tuner having to correct it manually. And as you should also already know, the RR has redundant failsafe's that ensure your bike won't burn a piston, knock sensor included. The unnecessary and blatantly fabricated fear mongering isn't needed here. Stick to the facts.

"So was the code in the ECU already laying dormant ready for someone to hit the check box, enable full O2 closed loop mode running? Is this someone you are going to sit there and say someone rewrote the code for the TriCore 1793 MPU? That is not going to happen 100%. The code for doing this would require 1000’s upon 1000’s of hours of testing. Now, if it was already in the ECU and Bosch wrote the code for testing purposes then that is exactly what It was, TESTING. Obviously if this was a really valid useable feature of even making the K67 get better emissions, or performance without putting the EPA regulations at risk of non approval, they would have enabled it from the factory."

No, this isn't like just enabling EU features (something we've seen hack tuners do with the 2020+ RR's). This is all custom coding. We define the tables and make the changes in-house to every aspect of our tuning. Absolutely no outsourcing. Our in-depth knowledge of Bosch ECU's and BMW cars has given us a huge leg up with the BMW Motorrad products. This is why we have so many features no one else has with their flashes. This is also why we release in stages. We learn more and add new features, test them thoroughly on our own shop bikes, then test with our dealers, then public release.

Closed loop is already activated for the bike stock. We just adjust it to cover all RPM ranges and throttle inputs. BMW can't make the bike 100% closed loop and still conform to national regulations. Way too time consuming for nothing. Partial throttle changes are fine but to globally scale with regulations in mind at multiple targets, at every throttle input would be A LOT more computing power and millions more in R&D. Easier and cheaper to keep WOT at open loop and fall within regulations with a static map.

"These 5 wire pump cell O2 sensors fail a lot. I have already helped 5 people with failing O2 sensors. The rear downstream are just your basic 4 wire narrow band, but these pump cell are sensitive to fuel and lead. You run any leaded racing fuel I can assure you the O2 will fail faster."

If constantly using race gas, yes. They will eventually fail (though we haven't seen it). This goes for any tuning or even stock. On the dyno we use race gas all the time and every once in a while we take a torch and burn the wideband to cure it. In our shop 2020 RR we have run race gas through it almost the entire time we have owned it. No issues yet. BMW has been doing this since the 2002 E46 cars. They have some good factory equipment.

"This Zeitronix Data Logger model ZT-2 does not have very good reviews nor good test results in a head to head comparison run by a Ford Muscle speed shop."

We haven't had any issues but if you'd like to mail your favorite wideband to our customer, we'll pass along the info so you can send him a wideband that has "good reviews". We'll post results from that too. We'll even get video on the display during the ride if you'd like.

"You know what this also means, it is making the power the way BMW Motorrad intended and mapped on the Dyno. The accusations of BrenTuning and Troy have been that I am pushing and selling the EURO files from STOCK ECU’s and could not be further from the truth. I could care less what people really think in the long run which is why I don’t argue the point. The tune products I sell are labeled V1 and V2 for a reason. They are BMW Motorrad Certified and I am limited in what I can do to the files so that I am recommended by ‘some’ certainly not all BMW dealers. I am happy to say that V1 code has dyno'ed as low as 198HP in Canada to 208HP in South Carolina.. and 203 204HP right here in my shop in TEXAS. I dont see full closed loop making consistent power like a proper open loop map or BMW Motorrad would surely be doing all they can in WSBK to win win win. My V2 code is WSBK level coded."

Yes, making power the way BMW intended it so it can pass US and EURO regulations and legally be sold and ridden on public roads. That's correct. This is why the EURO spec RR performs much better than the US spec RR.

Numbers on the dyno are great but easily manipulated. Track records and world records are even better. Can't manipulate those.

Is there anything official you can provide to show us you're BMW Motorrad Certified with your flash? Or perhaps a person we can call at BMW to verify that information? We haven't been able to find it anywhere on BMW's websites or official postings. Maybe they forget to post it up.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
443 Posts
Closed loop is already activated for the bike stock. We just adjust it to cover all RPM ranges and throttle inputs. BMW can't make the bike 100% closed loop and still conform to national regulations. Way too time consuming for nothing. Partial throttle changes are fine but to globally scale with regulations in mind at multiple targets, at every throttle input would be A LOT more computing power and millions more in R&D. Easier and cheaper to keep WOT at open loop and fall within regulations with a static map.
@BRENTUNING I was able to make sense of everything but this paragraph.

You said, you have just made the already inbuilt closed loop mode operate to cover all RPM ranges and throttle inputs.

Why would BMW Engineering's team not do it from factory already? You have written that doing so would make it harder to "conform to national regulations."

Could you please throw some light on the correlation between the 2? How does having closed loop mode active after 9000 rpm make it harder to confirm to national regulations?

Also, regarding this "Easier and cheaper to keep WOT at open loop and fall within regulations with a static map."

Wont the static map fail to be meet regulations with certain specific environment conditions? To a layperson like me, it would seem that having closed loop mode running would make it easier to be 100% regulation compliant everywhere. Just set the AFR target to 13.2 and call it a day at higher RPMs?
 

·
BT Moto
Joined
·
1,263 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
@BRENTUNING I was able to make sense of everything but this paragraph.

You said, you have just made the already inbuilt closed loop mode operate to cover all RPM ranges and throttle inputs.

Why would BMW Engineering's team not do it from factory already? You have written that doing so would make it harder to "conform to national regulations."

Could you please throw some light on the correlation between the 2? How does having closed loop mode active after 9000 rpm make it harder to confirm to national regulations?

Also, regarding this "Easier and cheaper to keep WOT at open loop and fall within regulations with a static map."

Wont the static map fail to be meet regulations with certain specific environment conditions? To a layperson like me, it would seem that having closed loop mode running would make it easier to be 100% regulation compliant everywhere. Just set the AFR target to 13.2 and call it a day at higher RPMs?
Because the bike wouldn't be legal to sell with more emission output. Think of the FTCL as a moving target, unlike OL which is a fixed target. If the moving target creates more emissions (ie burning more fuel for a specific set lambda value) the bike fails testing. An OL map is tested at a location and if it is a static map, no changes need to be made again because we know the exact emission the bike is producing in every condition. When the target moves and more fuel is added to compensate, testing becomes extremely complex and depending on conditions, may cause the bike to fail. The +-5% varience in OL is acceptable and doesn't require new regulation testing.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
443 Posts
Because the bike wouldn't be legal to sell with more emission output. Think of the FTCL as a moving target, unlike OL which is a fixed target. If the moving target creates more emissions (ie burning more fuel for a specific set lambda value) the bike fails testing. An OL map is tested at a location and if it is a static map, no changes need to be made again because we know the exact emission the bike is producing in every condition. When the target moves and more fuel is added to compensate, testing becomes extremely complex and depending on conditions, may cause the bike to fail. The +-5% varience in OL is acceptable and doesn't require new regulation testing.
Thank you for responding. Fair enough.

However, by that logic, shouldn't the problem you described also exists at < 9000 RPM and not WOT?

PS: This is a educational experience for me. Hence I am genuinely asking these questions to learn and be better educated as a customer.
 

·
BT Moto
Joined
·
1,263 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Thank you for responding. Fair enough.

However, by that logic, shouldn't the problem you described also exists at < 9000 RPM and not WOT?

PS: This is a educational experience for me. Hence I am genuinely asking these questions to learn and be better educated as a customer.
The parameters for CL vary but on factory tuning the bike will not enact CL on WOT at all. Only partial throttle and it's actually more like 8000 RPM when it goes to OL. This way the fuel variance is extremely minimal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
205 Posts
Out of curiosity... don’t you have dyno data for your closed loop system showing A/F data? Why are you relying on customer A/F data??
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
3,769 Posts
The parameters for CL vary but on factory tuning the bike will not enact CL on WOT at all. Only partial throttle and it's actually more like 8000 RPM when it goes to OL. This way the fuel variance is extremely minimal.
Why dont you just explain that what is being attempted here is EGO PID.

The problem as I understand it with EGO PID is when you have cam overlaps it presents a big challenge to get a stable AFR so the target closed loop system isn't going to be chasing huge errors. Anyone want to guess the cam overlap change? Shift Cam. I cant wait to see how the claim is that FTCL is going to get pass the 9000 RPM barrier on a stable AFR target and stay in CL. Sure you can drop out of CL into OL and then back to CL, but even that balance will require a lot of dyno time in a lot of different conditions to meet the needs USA wide.

If we had an engine that didn’t have this shift cam technology then EGO PID can handle up to 15000 RPM. The pump cell O2 sensors don’t know anything about RPM and are not effected by flow. Its the contamination to worry about. Haltech did run a 4 cylinder engine at pikes peak on FTCL. Full time is still not actuate in that start up is not closed loop until the O2 sensor is heated and ready for correct reading. However, it can go closed loop before engine coolant is at operation temps. That is a huge change from the old days of the 411 PCM. Then there is WOT CL. Most people don’t trust the O2 sensor at WOT heat ranges in the headers/ collectors so they drop it out of CL to OL .. which again is not technically FTCL, but it is close.
 

·
BT Moto
Joined
·
1,263 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Out of curiosity... don’t you have dyno data for your closed loop system showing A/F data? Why are you relying on customer A/F data??
We have a lot of that data on our website already. This comes from a customer and completely independent source.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
387 Posts
Another Brentune dyno run with linear AFR near 13 (8 minutes in) although hp numbers seemed a bit low with a full pipe (Stage 1?). They claim more power on a flashed 2018 ZX-10 (shortie, loud can)

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
832 Posts
Another Brentune dyno run with linear AFR near 13 (8 minutes in) although hp numbers seemed a bit low with a full pipe (Stage 1?). They claim more power on a flashed 2018 ZX-10 (shortie, loud can)

I noticed he left TC on when he did the dyno runs, which I think might effect the output
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
443 Posts
So you are saying you cant loose traction at 0 degrees?
I always thought this was possible. What if you are driving in rain?

I remember K67 initial ride videos where folks were driving in rain and a lot of them reported the TC light coming on when accelerating on the straight.
 
1 - 20 of 64 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top