Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Friday October 31, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC Technical > Engine Management & Tuning

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-05-2012, 03:01 PM   #251
Evo_Kid
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 100218
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chico, CA
Vehicle:
04 AW STI
04 WW EVO 8 RS

Default

Me and brad are exploring this issue.

The smoothing algorithm was incorrect before and is correct now and what we think happened, is that the incorrect smoothing algorithm forced us to run a higher dyno CF to duplicate dynojet numbers. Now that the smoothing algorithm is correct, the dyno CF is too high and we are reviewing/testing lowering it.

Also, one thing to note, is that the new smoothing algorithm smooths less per setting, so to you will have to run more or double the smoothing you used to run on the old smoothing algorithm.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Evo_Kid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 03:47 PM   #252
dux10
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 235338
Join Date: Jan 2010
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Georgia
Vehicle:
2002 Faggin Wagon
srp

Default

I noticed this as well. I went from 6-12 smoothing and gotta better results. This plus altering the correction factor made it better, but not something I wanna be experimenting with while tuning.... lol
i'm assuming the 32bit results were better due to less data captures per second...
dux10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2012, 03:01 AM   #253
dux10
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 235338
Join Date: Jan 2010
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Georgia
Vehicle:
2002 Faggin Wagon
srp

Default

any more news/updates? i hate to say it, but I've temporarily stopped using it and have been relying more on airboy:-( and I'm one of the biggest advocates for the software....
dux10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2012, 07:59 AM   #254
bbarnhill
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 256281
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Kansas City, KS
Vehicle:
2007 Shelby GT 500
Grey

Default

Im on top of this ... Im trying to analyze the data and the more dyno pulls someone has with logs on the same day ... the better and more accurate I can be. Anyone got any? Dont worry Ill get this looked into asap.
bbarnhill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2012, 11:36 AM   #255
dux10
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 235338
Join Date: Jan 2010
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Georgia
Vehicle:
2002 Faggin Wagon
srp

Default

How many you want? And from different cars or the same car? I can datalog a couple different 16 bit cars this evening.
shoot me an email, brad or evo_kid

boostaddict79@gmail.com
dux10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 01:05 PM   #256
ppayer38
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 234407
Join Date: Jan 2010
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Smithfield, VA
Vehicle:
04 Self-tooned
STi

Default

This has probably been covered already but how can I get my AFR to trace out with Boost?

I know and can use the other separate graphs but even thoughs dont have any other numbers other than RPM and without hitting each data point it makes it complicated to read the data...

Can somebody help me out with this? Log problem or am I just missing something simple haha

Donation will be coming shorty
ppayer38 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 06:01 PM   #257
Black94Snake
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 274499
Join Date: Feb 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: RI
Vehicle:
2007 CGM VF'd WRX
12.70 @ 108.4mph

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ppayer38 View Post
This has probably been covered already but how can I get my AFR to trace out with Boost?
Open Virtual Dyno, Select file> Options.

A "Virtual Dyno Settings" window will appear with three tabs
Graph | Dyno | Columns and Profiles

Select Colums and Profiles
Put check next to AFR

Open your latest datalog and copy the name of the column that shows your WB02, and paste it into the space next to AFR

Example: My computer shows

AFR : AEM UEGO Wideband [9600 baud] (AFR Gasoline)

Hit "SAVE" and load a good datalog!
Black94Snake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 09:03 PM   #258
juanmedina
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 133146
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SC
Vehicle:
07 FPgreen 7.37@95
WRX VF39+E85 12.0, 121mph

Default

yeah I am getting higher number with the latest version
juanmedina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2012, 01:22 AM   #259
bswilmington
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 217563
Join Date: Jul 2009
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Eden NC
Vehicle:
2006 Sti 12.68 @ 108
321WHP 422WTQ dynojet SAE

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by juanmedina
yeah I am getting higher number with the latest version
Atleast you are getting numbers. Mine has quit working. Loads but doesn't show up on screen

Problem has been reported, hopefully he figured it out
bswilmington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2012, 09:17 AM   #260
dux10
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 235338
Join Date: Jan 2010
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Georgia
Vehicle:
2002 Faggin Wagon
srp

Default

^^^ start task manager then right click "virtual dyno" in the task manager and click "maximize"
I have to do this from time to time as well with learning view.
dux10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2012, 09:30 AM   #261
Black94Snake
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 274499
Join Date: Feb 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: RI
Vehicle:
2007 CGM VF'd WRX
12.70 @ 108.4mph

Default

You can right click it on the task bar too....
Black94Snake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2012, 11:13 AM   #262
bswilmington
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 217563
Join Date: Jul 2009
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Eden NC
Vehicle:
2006 Sti 12.68 @ 108
321WHP 422WTQ dynojet SAE

Default

I'll try those shortly. Thanks for input

Edit: screen maximazer in control panel fixed the problem. Thanks for the help

Last edited by bswilmington; 04-20-2012 at 02:53 PM.
bswilmington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2012, 11:00 AM   #263
bbarnhill
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 256281
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Kansas City, KS
Vehicle:
2007 Shelby GT 500
Grey

Default

really? Wonder how I can reproduce this bug. Interesting that you all found a work around. Now to find the problem These are the bugs that haunt me at night.
bbarnhill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2012, 11:02 AM   #264
bbarnhill
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 256281
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Kansas City, KS
Vehicle:
2007 Shelby GT 500
Grey

Default

@juanmedina: yes your numbers will be higher (peak) as the smoothing algorithm was OVER smoothing by compound smoothing more and more as it traversed the graph.

I need some dyno plots from a dynojet and a log from the same car on the street if anyone has any. This will help me compare and reanalyze the correction factors for dyno jet plots.
bbarnhill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2012, 03:11 PM   #265
dux10
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 235338
Join Date: Jan 2010
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Georgia
Vehicle:
2002 Faggin Wagon
srp

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbarnhill View Post
@juanmedina: yes your numbers will be higher (peak) as the smoothing algorithm was OVER smoothing by compound smoothing more and more as it traversed the graph.

I need some dyno plots from a dynojet and a log from the same car on the street if anyone has any. This will help me compare and reanalyze the correction factors for dyno jet plots.

^^^^ somebody get him these please....... lol
dux10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2012, 12:24 PM   #266
xluben
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 261612
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Vehicle:
2002 WRX Sedan
10.9s @ 128mph

Default

I had been e-mailing Brad about the high reading issues, but I never got back to him after getting on the dyno. I seem to have issues even on version 1.1.7. I have found that the older non-fast polling RomRaider logs are very accurate, but the new ones (fast polling) seem to read really high.

Dynojet: 462WHP / 492WTQ



Virtual Dyno: 501WHP / 520WTQ



The shape of the plots looks nearly identical. The numbers are just skewed upwards for the Virtual Dyno. I did the same type of comparison when I was on the stock turbo and E85. Using non-fast polling RomRaider and comparing to the same Dynojet I got the following. Very close.

Dynojet: 340WHP / 369WTQ
Virtual Dyno: 338WHP / 381WTQ
xluben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2012, 12:43 PM   #267
V8 GTFO Lesbic WGN
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 191212
Join Date: Oct 2008
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Nashboringville
Vehicle:
2007 FXT-5MT E85 20G
TD06SL2 TurboTektuning

Default

hope this is sorted out I do not want to go back to Airboy !
V8 GTFO Lesbic WGN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2012, 07:46 PM   #268
bbarnhill
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 256281
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Kansas City, KS
Vehicle:
2007 Shelby GT 500
Grey

Default

You sure thats correct ... cause if any should have an issue 1.1.8 should. 1.1.7 was exactly the same as 1.1.1 even just cosmetic changes. 1.1.8 is the one that I fixed the smoothing algorithm. That 1.1.7 graph would show the same values as 1.1.6 and before. Double check your car choice and make sure the weight is correct.
bbarnhill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2012, 07:47 PM   #269
bbarnhill
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 256281
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Kansas City, KS
Vehicle:
2007 Shelby GT 500
Grey

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by V8 GTFO Lesbic WGN View Post
hope this is sorted out I do not want to go back to Airboy !
dont start a riot yet
bbarnhill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 08:10 AM   #270
xluben
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 261612
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Vehicle:
2002 WRX Sedan
10.9s @ 128mph

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbarnhill View Post
You sure thats correct ... cause if any should have an issue 1.1.8 should. 1.1.7 was exactly the same as 1.1.1 even just cosmetic changes. 1.1.8 is the one that I fixed the smoothing algorithm. That 1.1.7 graph would show the same values as 1.1.6 and before. Double check your car choice and make sure the weight is correct.
I've been e-mailing Brad, but here's what I had sent him a while back:

Quote:
I tried out the Beta (1.1.8). I plotted the logs with the same settings as the 1.1.7 version and got slightly different numbers. Two of the logs went up by about 15-20hp with the beta version (one was fast polling and one wasn't), and one of the logs went down by 5hp (fast polling). I compared them both to plots created with the Airboy spreadsheet. The two Virtual Dyno plots have identical settings between the two (same weight, etc. and smoothing at 6). The Airboy plot uses a smoothing of 6 for the green line (slower data rate) and a smoothing of 16 for the red and blue lines (fast polling). The shape of the curve between all the plots look nearly identical, and they are all reasonably smooth, but the peak numbers just vary quite a bit.

Peak HP Numbers:
Airboy.........VD1.1.7......VD1.1.8.....Dynojet... RomRaider
326HP.........338HP.........351HP........339HP.... ..Non-Fast Polling
366HP.........415HP.........410HP........NA....... ...Fast Polling
438HP.........501HP.........520HP........462HP.... ..Fast Polling

% Difference vs. Airboy:
VD1.1.7......VD1.1.8
3.70%........7.70%
13.40%......12.00%
14.40%......18.70%
As I've mentioned to Brad, I think 1.1.8 does read higher in most cases. But I think the bigger difference seems to be my old logs vs. my newer logs, and I think that is from fast polling on RomRaider. The erratic numbers that RomRaider spits out (rpm's go up and down, etc) throw off the smoothing. Anyone want to try fast polling vs. non-fast polling (and possibly vs. COBB AP)? I would be curious to see how the data rate changes the numbers.
xluben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 08:32 AM   #271
jkopinga
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 220799
Join Date: Aug 2009
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Taiwan
Vehicle:
2006 Impreza WRX
WRC Blue

Default

I don't quite catch the drift with the Normal logging vs. Fast Polling. For sure Fast polling is the way to go.

I'm on a different ECU but also supported by VD and I am running 50 Hz refresh rates which is much faster than Fast Polling on OE ECUs. However I see no differences between running say 25Hz and 50Hz. Hell, next time I'll try 100Hz to see if that makes a difference. I have no Dynojet unfortunately to compare to.

I have a Dynapack and I will do some tests to see how it compares. Perhaps we could get a Dynapack algorythm setup eh?

Cheers,

Jasper.
jkopinga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 08:37 AM   #272
xluben
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 261612
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Vehicle:
2002 WRX Sedan
10.9s @ 128mph

Default

It's not necessarily the rate that the data comes out in, it's the fact that the ECU outputs junk data on fast polling. If you look at the data against time, the RPM's actually go up and sometimes go down. Obviously your RPM's should not be going down during a WOT pull, and this screws up the calculation.

There isn't really any algorithm for the correction factor. You just multiply the "Virtual Dyno" number by a percentage. Dynojet is 9% higher and Mustang is 5% lower.
xluben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 08:38 AM   #273
bbarnhill
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 256281
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Kansas City, KS
Vehicle:
2007 Shelby GT 500
Grey

Default

Oh I know that fast polling is way wrong ... I dont know what they do different with those logs but they have big spikes in the data where the RPM doesnt correlate to the Time very well. Ive posted on their forum about it but they dont answer. Do not use fast polling to get power logs for now.
bbarnhill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 08:44 AM   #274
jkopinga
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 220799
Join Date: Aug 2009
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Taiwan
Vehicle:
2006 Impreza WRX
WRC Blue

Default

You sure that the RPM wobbles are not due to slipping wheels, slack in the drivetrain, etc. ? I sometimes DO see some RPM bounce but have to agree mostly it is very linear. However as I mentioned I am on a Standalone and surely willl be different than OE.

Cheers,

Jasper.
jkopinga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 09:10 AM   #275
juanmedina
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 133146
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SC
Vehicle:
07 FPgreen 7.37@95
WRX VF39+E85 12.0, 121mph

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xluben View Post
It's not necessarily the rate that the data comes out in, it's the fact that the ECU outputs junk data on fast polling. If you look at the data against time, the RPM's actually go up and sometimes go down. Obviously your RPM's should not be going down during a WOT pull, and this screws up the calculation.

There isn't really any algorithm for the correction factor. You just multiply the "Virtual Dyno" number by a percentage. Dynojet is 9% higher and Mustang is 5% lower.
how do you turn off fast polling?

Using the same log I make the following:

VD 1.1.8 525whp dynojet
Airboy 447whp
Ed Eqtuning road dyno 423whp

juanmedina is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
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 Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Log analyzer - check it out jmc9809 Engine Management & Tuning 42 11-04-2007 09:00 AM
New Log-Analyzer program comming soon! NavyBlueSubaru Engine Management & Tuning 69 03-24-2007 03:17 PM
U-LAME -- UTEC Log Analyzer and Map Editor WolfDrive Engine Management & Tuning 14 12-05-2005 11:01 PM
UTECA (new log analyzer software)... need beta testers WolfDrive Engine Management & Tuning 10 05-31-2005 02:42 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.