Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 54

Author Topic: O2 Sensor Output (mv) compared to measured AFR  (Read 154017 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

FLTRI

  • Senior CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 418
Re: O2 Sensor Output (mv) compared to measured AFR
« Reply #390 on: July 27, 2013, 11:44:14 AM »

I don't think that Bob, Steve and Co. are suggesting the use of narrow bands for fuel control, but rather using them as a limited method of gauging whether or not the afr is close to the target area based on sensor output.  At the high load areas, the sensor is just reporting information that it is seeing and that data is not tied into fuel control at that point.
You are definitely getting what I've been stating repeatedly.
I also don't think that the target would be as narrow as a specific number like 13.2, but rather a broad range of 13-13.8 or so based on what has been posted so far.
The goal/target is one value and be happy to get +/- .5 of that target.
I think we can all agree that this will never take the place of a skilled tuner using better equipment.  For the average guy that just wants to feel comfortable that his engine isn't going to cook due to too lean of open loop settings on his DIY tune, this should at least be a better alternative than the current ostrich method (head in the sand) that DIY guys have with narrow band tunes. 
Thank you Mayor for stating what I've obviously been incapable to comunicate in open forum.
This IS all about the guy stuck without a good tuner in his/her area getting a safe WOT that will produce equal power based on AFR.
The only purpose to using the NBO2 sensors is for tuning ONLY, not for continuing closed loop operation @ WOT.
Thanks again for helping understand why the thread was started. :2vrolijk_21:
Bob
Logged

mayor

  • Full CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 215
  • just another fictional internet politician
Re: O2 Sensor Output (mv) compared to measured AFR
« Reply #391 on: July 27, 2013, 12:27:25 PM »

See, and all the while some of you fellows only thought I was here to stir up crap.    :coolblue:
Logged

hrdtail78

  • Vendor
  • Elite CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 762
Re: O2 Sensor Output (mv) compared to measured AFR
« Reply #392 on: July 27, 2013, 12:30:32 PM »

Well, yes it is true, hence the name, Narrow Band Sensor. The manufacturer spec and intended application is to sense stoich and a little above or below it. What you are advocating is tricking, or manipulating software to get the sensors to do something they are not designed to do. Not saying your idea or software wont work, but lets call it what it is.

It's time for you to lift your skirt and show us what you have. Tell us about the testing you have done and how the new software (and hardware?) will look and work? What will the DIYer do differently with the new software?



You got to be a bit careful here.  Manufactures intended, and manufactures specs are different.  The terminology and using it properly can make a difference of how it comes out.  A NB sensor, according to the specs, can put out a voltage of 0-1 volts.  862mv does fit into that voltage out put.
Logged

hrdtail78

  • Vendor
  • Elite CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 762
Re: O2 Sensor Output (mv) compared to measured AFR
« Reply #393 on: July 27, 2013, 12:33:13 PM »

What year was the first SERT released that was capable of tuning an 02 equipped bike by making use of the factory fuel trims?

Andy

It hasn't been released yet.  But SE did have something in 06.  Terminology and nomenclature. ;D
Logged

whittlebeast

  • Senior CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 269
Re: O2 Sensor Output (mv) compared to measured AFR
« Reply #394 on: July 27, 2013, 12:49:05 PM »

A few loaded questions...

What is AFR?

How is it measured?

What is the AFR difference from a voltage of 920 mv and 1080 mv?

Andy
Logged

Steve Cole

  • Manufacturer TTS
  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1430
Re: O2 Sensor Output (mv) compared to measured AFR
« Reply #395 on: July 27, 2013, 03:42:23 PM »

Well, yes it is true, hence the name, Narrow Band Sensor. The manufacturer spec and intended application is to sense stoich and a little above or below it. What you are advocating is tricking, or manipulating software to get the sensors to do something they are not designed to do. Not saying your idea or software wont work, but lets call it what it is.

It's time for you to lift your skirt and show us what you have. Tell us about the testing you have done and how the new software (and hardware?) will look and work? What will the DIYer do differently with the new software?



Your still DEAD WRONG. The NARROW BAND sensor with no tricking measures a range and outputs a voltage, no more no less. What the OP asked for was to test the WOT area with Broad Bands and then look to see what voltage came out of the Narrow Bands at the same time. If as you seem to want to mislead people into thinking they were out of spec they would not give a reading.

Since the accepted running range at WOT on a HD is within the range the Narrow Band measures per the manufactures spec. it is perfectly capable of making the measurement. The accuracy at that measurement level is where the real question is.

It has been the normally accepted truth that the Broad Band accurately measures (+/-.01 AFR) 13.1, 13.2, 13.3 ect. which cannot be further from the truth. It has also been the normally accepted truth that a HD engine need to be tuned to 13.2 :1 across the board which again cannot be further from the truth.

So with that in mind and brought up in this very thread the data was provided from the manufacture (Bosch) of the Broad Bands sensor that this accuracy is NOT possible the way the aftermarket is using them today. So if the Broad bands cannot do what has been claim, what is the real measurement needed. In Mayor's last post the old magic number of 13.2:1 has now changed to 13 - 13.8 AFR. So the question has to be can the narrow band sensor get you there. It is certainly NOT real accurate once you get to that range but it just might be good enough.

I do not dislike the Broad Band sensor as Mayor would like you to believe, but I do dislike the way it been twisted around to say it does everything but print money, and some believe it even does that!

Andy

There is no O2 sensor, Broad Band, Narrow Band or Wide Band that measures AFR.
Logged
The Best you know, is the Best you've had........ not necessarily the Best.

cvofbme

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 38
Re: O2 Sensor Output (mv) compared to measured AFR
« Reply #396 on: July 27, 2013, 04:02:33 PM »

Quote
In Mayor's last post the old magic number of 13.2:1 has now changed to 13 - 13.8 AFR.

Phftt and if you looked at what FLTRI has historically posted you would have seen he changed his values also.
Logged

FLTRI

  • Senior CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 418
Re: O2 Sensor Output (mv) compared to measured AFR
« Reply #397 on: July 27, 2013, 04:40:28 PM »

Phftt and if you looked at what FLTRI has historically posted you would have seen he changed his values also.
FWIW, it makes no difference what you use to test with. I threw out a number, that's it.
13.0, 13.2, 13.5, 13.x whatever you wish to use. You are trying to pick the fly out of the chit and are stepping in it in doing so.

Bob
Logged

whittlebeast

  • Senior CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 269
Re: O2 Sensor Output (mv) compared to measured AFR
« Reply #398 on: July 27, 2013, 05:23:08 PM »

There is no O2 sensor, Broad Band, Narrow Band or Wide Band that measures AFR.

And let me guess, scales don't measure weight or mass.  They measure stress in a structure......

I am almost speechless.  This is just like talking logic to a network news reporter or a life long politician.  Everything comes back to what they are trying to sell that day.   :-\

Andy
Logged

Steve Cole

  • Manufacturer TTS
  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1430
Re: O2 Sensor Output (mv) compared to measured AFR
« Reply #399 on: July 27, 2013, 06:26:30 PM »

And let me guess, scales don't measure weight or mass.  They measure stress in a structure......

I am almost speechless.  This is just like talking logic to a network news reporter or a life long politician.  Everything comes back to what they are trying to sell that day.   :-\

Andy


You asked a question and you got the proper answer. There is a lot that needs to be done to take an O2 reading and converter it to AFR. Let's start with knowing the fuel and what's in it for starters. This is just why in the automotive world they switched to expressing things in terms of Lambda back in 1998.

Here's one for you..... What is Stoichometric for gasoline and Alcohol? In terms of Lambda and AFR
Logged
The Best you know, is the Best you've had........ not necessarily the Best.

cvofbme

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 38
Re: O2 Sensor Output (mv) compared to measured AFR
« Reply #400 on: July 27, 2013, 06:53:39 PM »

FWIW, it makes no difference what you use to test with. I threw out a number, that's it.
13.0, 13.2, 13.5, 13.x whatever you wish to use. You are trying to pick the fly out of the chit and are stepping in it in doing so.

Bob


Oh I see, yet Steve Cole decides to point out Mayor changing his numbers.  It's different depending on who makes the post.
Logged

FLTRI

  • Senior CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 418
Re: O2 Sensor Output (mv) compared to measured AFR
« Reply #401 on: July 27, 2013, 07:04:57 PM »

Again you can assume whatever you feel comfortable with and I fully understand perception is reality and nothing but experience can change that.

Different posts from differen individuals with differring agendas.
Mine is to help those who need it not those who already know all the answers...what's yours?

Bob
Logged

hrdtail78

  • Vendor
  • Elite CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 762
Re: O2 Sensor Output (mv) compared to measured AFR
« Reply #402 on: July 27, 2013, 07:09:01 PM »

And let me guess, scales don't measure weight or mass.  They measure stress in a structure......

I am almost speechless.  This is just like talking logic to a network news reporter or a life long politician.  Everything comes back to what they are trying to sell that day.   :-\

Andy


You said loaded question and didn't want a load answer. :oops:
Logged

Buckeye_Tuning

  • Mister Dick
  • Banned
  • Full CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 198
Re: O2 Sensor Output (mv) compared to measured AFR
« Reply #403 on: July 27, 2013, 07:47:12 PM »

Of course... I am always the chit stirrer or whatever.

Here are MY thoughts on this.  Number 1 on MY list is the Broad Bands simply work for what we all do... tune Harleys.  One can say they are incorrect, etc... and... maybe they really are, but is is THE tool we have, we all use them, and they DO get the job done.  We are lucky, in that a HArley does NOT need to be tuned to the Nth degree.  Good enough, after a point, really is good enough.  If I am using my broad bands incorrectly, so what?  I try to get a fuel line down to like 1/2 an AFR, from say 12.6 to 13.1.  We all know that if we can keep WOT anywhere from 12.5 to 13.5...  that is basically all it takes for a nice running bike at WOT.  Am I correct?

Broadbands are simply good enough to use, how we use them, and all of that.  I do NOT care if they are 100% accurate, etc.  Filling any part of this thread with that BS, is simply BS, in MY book.

Broadbands from Bosch ARE the GOLD STANDARD of tuning.  period!  Almost everybody, with a dyno shop, be it car, truck, or bike uses these braodbands and they do NOT tell pressure, not temp while doing so.  End of discussion on THAT!

The ONLY question here, that I see that needs to be addressed is this... can a software company come up with a scheme that can be used for 80-100kpa, while tuning, to be able to use factory stock NB sensors. 

Again...  I do NOT care how folks argue whether the NBs are accurate to what Nth degree and all of that.  For TUNING purposes, they will NOT be used for fuel control, etc...  Simply for TUNING.

Back in the day, when TTS was introduced, folks thought that ANY use of the NB sensors was complete bullchit.  Same with Closed Loop in general.
Here, 5 yeasr later, time has marched on.  Even the most ardent haters and most outspoken of folks AGAINST using NBs to tune with, NOW do so.  Their arguments have morphed from NO closed loop to no closed loop using TTS, all the while using PV is fine for closed loop.

Well...............  that to me validates a whole lot of the early arguments against using the NBs from way back then.  Almost everyone that tunes Harleys sees how NBs have a time and place.  NO ONE says they are not useful anymore.  Folks have used and learned.

What I have learned is if one is going to have closed loop, it IS so much the right thing to use the bike's NB sensors, over some wide bands, it is silly!  All now seem to agree with... if it is going closed loop somewhere, use the bike's sensors, because those will be the sensors whose job it is to keep it in closed loop anyway.  The whole closed loop system uses those sensors, so we really need to use those whenever possible.

This is why the PV, TTS, SEPST and even DL have the abilities to use the bike's sensors.

So, with this thread, folks were trying to make folks, 'see the light' so to speak.  Make 'em think stuff.

OK, fine, we have thought and argued, etc.  SOme HAVE mentally at least now think this is possible to do.

What we need now... is a release of the product at hand.  With a product in hand... all of us can test and compare.  I told Mayor on the phone, that I surely would give this a shot, and tune using this.... along with using my dyno sniffer to verify.   Once I verify that I could tune 100kpa, and have that info come into a finished fuel line that is relatively close to my manually sniffing a bike for AFR?   If I can get this to repeat on like a small handful of bikes?  I will stop sniffing bikes and use this exclusively.

Until I get my hands on one... this is ALL conjecture on our parts, because it looks like Steve and Bob aer the only ones to have really tried and compared.  Until I, myself, try and compare?  I have really nothing more to say on this.  It SOUNDS to me that this could really work... just like back in the day when I purchased TTS v100...  because it all sounded like it would work.  And... it did, and over time it became the tuner to use over any of the rest.

I cannot say this about 100kpa yet, because I do NOT have the software to try it out... even on my old 120r.  I would buy a blue to try this with, if Steve sent me a copy of the software, just like I assume Hilly, for example, would.

I think, in my own heart, the time has come to allow some of us that have been involved in THIS OP... also try this out, Steve.

Let US see if this keeps up with our Gold Standard of Wide Bands?   THAT is the true idea behind of of this... can we tune a bikes 100kpa regions using TTS with NO offboard devices?  Will these tunes fairly match up to ones we sniff?  My personal feeling is the wide bands have a few issues, but none of that stops them from being THE most used tool for tuning.  OK... the NBs have some issues, too.  OK, fine.  BOTH have issues and BOTH are not 100% accurate to the Nth degree...  I 'get' that, OK?

I have been to Missouri....

The time has come.  Give me a BETA and I WILL use it and report back.  Give Mayor, Hilly, Jason, ED Conner, etc all one... so we can ALL try it out.
Logged
Never Ever Forget; Never Ever Forgive

FLTRI

  • Senior CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 418
Re: O2 Sensor Output (mv) compared to measured AFR
« Reply #404 on: July 27, 2013, 08:22:44 PM »

The OP had absolutely nothing to do with a product of any kind to do WOT tuning.
The OP had todo with members helping members.
Some folks insist onmakingthis about broadbands and how accurate stuff is.
Can a DIYer use a target voltage to get to a target AFR?
That is the question...the only question.
If you have a dyno, broadband sniffer, and the time to test...what is the answer?

Lessee, after almost 500 posts in 2 different forums the question still remains unanswered!   :nervous:

Bob
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 54
 

Page created in 0.247 seconds with 25 queries.