Hit the dyno this weekend

The boost pressures I’m talking about are both on my guage and the dyno log. On the dyno log I spike to 10.5 psi at just under 4000 rpm, and settle to around 8 psi quickly after that. I don’t think there is anything wrong with the turbo, it has no shaft play and no oil blowing through.

I completely agree about how the operator can control what the power output is. On that day, the correction factors were set at 0.92, which means they were suptracting 8%. However, my friend with the identical setup made 179whp directly after my run with 5* more timing, a leaner AFR, and a steady 9 psi. That number was very acceptable to everybody on that dyno on that day. With better tuning and my boost at 9 psi, I think my power would have been right up where his was. As I originally stated, another friend with a Nissan CA18DET with a GT28RS at 21 psi and good tuning only made 235whp, whereas he made 285 whp on a dyno packs at 18 psi. That dyno on that day was clearly giving low numbers. Another example, a B18C1 with a 14b at 6psi only made 169 whp.

Well…I still think there is something wrong with both your setup (looking at your graph) and the dyno. All of those numbers are very low you posted and just because the operator told you the dyno is “the most accurate” you should…well, make up your own mind I guess.

Dyno’s that are set up correctly will read the correct numbers. This means if you do back to back runs on a Dynapack and a Dynojet and everything else remains equal and the two dynos are operating correctly…ther numbers should be VERY close. I mean…its a calculation. The math is the same no matter what dyno you are on in whatever country…

And like someone else said, fix your spike…

Thanks for posting it. I must agree, something definitly seems wrong. At 10 psi max, or even 8psi, you should be making more power. I’d like to see the A/F Ratio vs power comparison chart.

Good luck figuring out the issue with the set-up–and hopefully there’s no problems with the 14b. If I were you, I’d make a troubleshooting checklist of things which might be robbing the power, and then cross each piece off the list after making sure everything was in order. (I.e., fuel pressure, fouled plugs, slipping clutch, ignition timing, etc…)

Hope this helps.

-Andrew

The dyno dynamics doesn’t work the same way as a dyno jet. It makes it’s calculations based on a brake force, rather than intertia so the math is not the same. An inertia type dyno such as the dyno jet does not directly measuer the force being put to the roller, instead it using F=MA. Where the mass and spinning intertia are known, and the acceleration of the drums is used to give you the force. Torque is then calculated by multiplying that force (F) by the radius of the drum. Power is then calculated by the equation HP=Torque x RPM/5252. The main inaccuracies with this are that the force is not directly measured at the wheels, and changes in spinning masses such as clutches, flywheels, and wheels will change the acceleration of the drums and inflate the power number slightly.

The dyno dynamics dyno has brakes on the rollers that apply a load to the wheels. By making a ration between the engine speed of the vehicle and the force they are applying on the brake, they directly measure the force at the wheels, and then use the last equation from above to calculate HP.

I’m not trying to tell you both that you are wrong, because I know my numbers were low, but I also know why they were low. I can’t hold steady boost, my AFR was way rich, and I have room to run alot more timing advance. The clutch is a copper 6 puck and that and the pressure plate are both rated for near 500hp, so I know it’s not slipping. I was there that day and all 11 cars put down very low numbers, that dyno is always a heartbreaker. Bone stock STi = 226 awhp??

The manufacturer states that their load bearing type dyno is 99.99% accurate, while inertial dynos are somewhere around 95%. Again they could be making this up, but everybody’s numbers are always low on that dyno.

Since I mentioned that I think I have a lot to gain with my timing advance, do you have any strategies you use when tuning for timing advance? We’ve been very cautious and haven’t touched it all that much. My friend that tunes for me isn’t very comfortable with advancing the timing too much without a knock sensor, and I can’t be my J&S safegaurd to work. I’m wondering how you usually tackle this, if you don’t mind sharing.

The following is my understanding of how engine tuning should be carried out. I by no means am a wizard of engine tuning, but here is what I have gathered from 2 years of high school automotive, and discussing engines with my Mechanical Engineering professor about F.I. and N.A. IC engines, as well as the Mechanical Engineering director for the Mini Baja Collegiate racecar team at my local college, and talking with the Roanoke automotive machine shop technicians. A lot of this theory also comes from Jeff Hartman’s book, “Engine Management Systems.” If some of the info seem is elementary, I’m not saying it to insult you, (which is how a lot of people interpret things here at G2ic), but rather I’m just putting it out there because it raises a valid point.

Where I would personally start in configuring the ignition timing, is making sure that I am using gasoline that would give me room for early tuning mistakes. (I.e, 112 octane gasoline. It’s about $6.90 per gallon here at Virginia International Raceway.)
Now, tuning the ignition timing, I believe should be looked at in conjunction with Volumetric Efficiency, the Air/Fuel ratio, boost PSI, elevation, ambient air temperature, a well as other factors. Then computing the values in useful equations is the next step.

Now for a little review: “The most important step in tuning an engine is establishing the required ignition advance. An engine with too much timing will detonate, regardless of how much fuel is thrown at it. An engine with too little timing will perform poorly and overheat the exhaust in short order. If the exhaust headers are glowing, you know there is too little timing; if the engine is knocking, timing late may be too advanced.
A critical overarching requirement, however is to also avoid engine damage by delaying light-off to the degree required to avoid having unburned portions of the charge explode as combustion pressure and heat build during the burn (as the piston may still be compressing the mixture.) The optimal amount if timing varies INVERSLEY with volumetric efficiency because the denser mixtures burn faster and require less lead-time to achieve the 15-degree peak.
Therefore, engines need more advance at low-load, narrow throttle settings when VE is poor. As the throttle opens and the engine speeds up toward peak torque-peak VE, combustion speeds up along with VE, and thus requires LESS spark advance.

If the engine is turbocharged, the onset of boost increases the effective compression ratio, and combustion speeds up dramatically, requiring less timing, and simultaneously increases the risk of detonation. Maximum timing at 1.0 bar boost is typically in the range of 23 degrees at ay engine speed, and 2.0 bar boost might only want 22 or even 21 degrees of timing advance. All things being equal, bigger engines need more timing advance because it takes the flame longer to burn it’s way across a large bore than a smaller one. Engines with small combustion chambers [like the b18] need less timing. (Opposite reason.)

If you were to make a table of optimal spark timing, the advance values will correlate highly to the VE of the engine and take into account time per degrees of engine rotation at various speeds, since denser charge mixtures at points of higher volumetric efficiency burn faster and require less spark timing.”

The high-octane starting point gives the tuner a larger range of settings to play with. The octane rating not only affects the BTU values, but also the fuel burn rate. “Special cameras recording the combustion event through a porthole in a cylinder reveal that flame-front speeds for gasoline-air mixture vary from 20 feet per second to more than 150 feet per second, depending on air/fuel ratio, density, compression ratio, turbulence among the exhaust gases, an combustion chamber design. Flame speed is fastest at rich mixtures near 11.1:1, falling off dramatically in both the rich and lean direction from this point (especially in the rich direction). The slower the flame front, the greater the chance of abnormal combustion.”

“Start with a timing map KNOWN to be safely on the rich side. Even then you want to gradually “sneak up” on boosted conditions, while analyzing the data, and correcting encountered speed loading points, and points beyond them at higher boost you have not yet actually encountered when timing and air/fuel ratios are headed in the wrong direction (one ting you can count on is that higher boost levels will NOT want less fuel and more timing.)” Jeff Hartman, EMS Tuning 101, Ch 13.

I hope that this was a helpful explanation. I definitely recommend the Engine Management Systems book, as a lot of the above material was taken from the Chapter 13, EMS Tuning 101.

I’m sure others might have constructive comments about flame speed and ignition timing curves on FI engines.

Happy Boosting,

-Andrew

That’s some nice general information for everyone. I don’t really agree with the idea of tuning with race gas. What’s the point of tuning with a higher octane gas than you’ll be running on a regular basis? I understand that it gives a bigger cushion, but you may accidentally push the limits further than what pump gas will handle when you switch back.

The hard part about timing is that there isn’t really a known optimal value like there is with AFR. That’s the problem we’re having right now. We want to optimize the timing, but it’s very hard while trying to be safe. I have Kyle(the kid who wrote the article on boost spike vs. creep) working it all out for me though. I have faith in him.

I forgot to mention that you want to dyno the engine with BOTH race gas and 91/93 octane gas. The 112 octane in the beginning helps, so that small mistakes won’t cause detonation. Also, having two different AFR and ignition configurations using 91/93 and 112, allows you to have a set-up for 1/4 mile runs on 112 octane, as well as daily driver configurations on 91/93.
Also, regarding the air/fuel ratio, ideally, the engine should have a varying AFR as engine speed and VE increases. I.e., leaner at idle, and richer at WOT.

See the problem with this is that there ISNT a magic AFR number like you are trying to state. For all intensive low boost Honda/Acura purposes…there are target (safe) AFRs we are all told to look for…but there is no magic number.

The motor likes what it likes best and you cant dispute it. One motor may melt pistons at 11.9 AFRs and another might hold fine to 12.8-13.0.

Its called tuning for a reason…I highly suggest you both take an EFI101 class if you ever get the chance.

And about Dyno’s, I am most familiar with the Dynapack which are a load bearing dyno as well…again, it all depends on how the dyno and software are setup.