Roman

Shiieeeetttt sweet improvement on 1/4 mile time! Nice 60 foot too, must be all that tyre warming Great work poo man / poo woman

Ahhh yep that'll do it! Thanks

Thankfully engine has oil squirters under the pistons which likely helped keep them cool a bit when running lean. But yes not a good scenario, definite potential for damage to pistons etc. If it was a turbo motor it likely would have toasted itself in the process. This makes me definitely want to hook up a fuel pressure sensor though, I would have noticed this issue starting to creep in weeks ago and would have been able to proactively replaced the filter and pump. It's no good when my only tool with which I can diagnose a fuel issue, gets damaged by fuel issues!

I want to have two temperature sensors fitted to some dash 10 lines. So I've got some fittings that have a 1/8 NPT fitting in the side. However the temperature sensors that I have, are too long so they bottom out before the threads get tight. Does anyone know of an AN fitting that would have a larger diameter housing than normal to fit a longer sensor? Or otherwise does anyone know of any 1/8 NPT thread temp sensors that only have a very short nose on them? I am wondering how much of the nose of the temp sensor I could actually grind off, I am assuming it's just a casing that has a resistor or something inside it. Anyone done that before?

This is what screwed me at superlap! Filter bag on the fuel pump looking like a tea bag haha, damnit. Big thanks for Stu to get me a new fuel pump in time for drags, and Dave Sentra for helping me fit the new pump. Cant wait for the weekend!

Looks good man! I'm forever amazed at how clean your car looks haha. It looks like a scale model thats just been taken out of the box.

First round of superlap... Done and dusted! I didnt quite get the result that I was after, but it was a very valuable learning experience this weekend. The first thing I learned about turning up to an event that spans over two days... Looking after yourself is very important! If you're getting dehydrated and sunburned you're not going to drive well on the track. If you bring a whole bunch of crap with you... Put it in boxes that are easy to take out and put back into the car! Also since am running semis where I have to swap the tyres over, including adding/removing spacers. I really need to make this process easier so buying an electric rattle gun is high on my priority list now. There was a single stupid decision I made which really defined how the rest of my weekend panned out. I decided that since I was only going out for two runs on Saturday, I wouldnt bother topping up the fuel tank because it looked to have about 1/3rd of a tank. Well, it didnt! The low fuel level + swishing around from semi slicks grip stirred up the crap in my fuel tank, which blocked the fuel filter. Which then made the car run lean, which from the heat of that blew up my wideband. (or it was otherwise coincidental...) Which then meant that I had no tool to diagnose my fuel issue with! So I had to head home after the first run on saturday. I got home and quickly changed filter, went for a test drive and seemed okay. But I couldnt confirm for sure, as wideband wasnt working. Back at the track on Sunday, the car was doing the same thing. So I'm thinking that the filter bag pre fuel pump is maybe clogged up too. So I had a dissapointing result of a 1.25.0 as my best laptime for the weekend. Looking at the datalogs shows an interesting story though, when comparing it to my previous fastest time (1.21.7) VMax (your top speed in each sector) is roughly an indication of how much power you are making. VMin (Your slowest speed in each sector) is roughly an indication of how much grip you have. If your lowest speed increases, it's because you can carry more speed through the corner. Top speed 20+ kph slower on every lap because I was losing power badly past 6000rpm. Minimum speeds were up, because the car had a lot more grip. Coming into turn 1 I was carrying 15kph higher speed through the turn, on the sweeper before the straight I was carrying 10kph more which is an amazing difference. This is a datalog from the big sweeper heading onto the straight, you can see the cornering speed is great but my power on the straight was a mess compared to previous best (Red line is previous PB) Some interesting results from the thermal camera, tyres were looking pretty even for the better part: The Front left is nice even temps, the front right looks like it could run a lttle less camber and would be happy. In the rear you can see that both of the tyres heat up on the same side, because when a live axle tips, thats just how it works! Not too much I can do about it but on the whole it looks good I think. The car felt great with the stiffer front springs, but now slightly understeery... Not in a bad way, but feels now like fitting the rear swaybar would be good. Which would help give that rear left a bit of respite I think. Interestingly enough, when I went around the pits and took some snaps of some of the really fast cars when they came back in. A lot of them are running a LOT of camber and not heating the tyres very evenly at all. So maybe there's time on the table by running a little less camber, or, maybe its still worth the trade off on the straights in order to have lots of camber on the corners. Here's an example from the rear tyre of a very fast car (Was running under 1:13 if I recall) So pretty tired and sunburned right now, looking forward to just getting some rest! But will hopefully have time to pull the gas tank out this week and hopefully isolate the issue to one thing or the other. Even though the weekend didnt go as planned it was stacks of fun! Really looking forward to the Taupo round, I'm very glad this one was close to home for starters as I made a few silly mistakes in terms of forgetting tools etc.

I reckon just start out with any sort of injector. Then run some basic tests, get some data, try make sense of it. (This is where some excel wizardry etc comes into play) In my case I had three clear goals before I started: -Decide on a fuel pressure at which to run. -Find deadtimes at the fuel pressure I have decided on. -Establish where the non linear portion of injector operation is, and build a compensation table if necessary. If you have different scope for what you are trying to acheive, you might want to run some different types of tests. But I think start simple - come up with a plan for what you want to acheive, get some data and then go from there. There's a lot of complex ideas floating around currently but I think you'll find even a fairly modest setup it will probably raise more questions for you than answers! And might give you some clarity around what direction you want to take it.

Running a drag race etc might be an interesting way to quantify FPR operation / comparisons. Like, I wonder if some react a lot quicker when flow changes a lot (like you've got 6x1000cc injectors at 80% duty cycle, then instantly stoppping) I wonder if you'd get pressure spikes on some FPRs vs others. Would be interesting to see if one "Big" FPR reacted better than two small ones. I reckon for high flow situations it might be an interesting idea to have two FPRs, one set at say 3psi higher than the other. So all the flow goes through one until it gets outflowed then both start working.

Regarding fuel pressure / air pressure in the cylinder etc I guess you need keep your goals in mind - Which is to gett some good data for ECU to work from. So first you need to stop and look at what sort of data you can actually enter into ECUs that are available. Myself and Sentra Dave spent some time testing his injectors but then found that the Link G4 (as opposed to G4+) doesnt have things like short pulsewidth compensation or minimum opening time. (It was still a worthwhile exercise though!) In terms of deadtime changing with fuel pressure / air pressure at different differentials, even if you could measure this in every possible combination I dont think there's any ECU that can accept information that complex. In the Link ECUs at least, you can setup a 3d deadtime table using "Fuel pressure differential" as one of the axes. (generally used in conjunction with fuel pressure sensor) Well, you can setup the deadtime table using any axes you want but Batt Voltage and Fuel Pressure Differential make the most sense. So this means if you have 60psi fuel pressure and 14psi air pressure (Absolute) our fuel pressure differential is 46psi, so that's where you'd need to enter your deadtime info for your 60psi fuel pressure test. If you have 60psi fuel pressure and 14 pounds boost then your fuel pressure differential is down to 32psi. (Where the injector will be garbage, which is why rising rate regulators are needed) So the question here, is does the fuel pressure differential change by a huge amount when boost pressure and fuel pressure rises? As in, is 60-14 the same as 80 - 34. Unless someone is statically running 80-100psi (~75 psi fuel pressure differential) then you might not need to measure that high anyway. As best I know there arent many fuel pumps that can sustainably push a constant 80-100psi+ without eventually causing pumps to fail. Which is why mechanical pump is used for common rail diesel or direct injection petrol engines. Also common when people are running methanol or whatever where the fuel volume is huge. For my engine I was considering running at 75-80psi static fuel pressure. But the problem I found with raising fuel pressure this high was that the minimum opening time to get fuel flow increased as well, especially at low voltages Like at 8 volts you might not even be able to open an injector at all when there's 100psi holding it shut. Also the fuel pump started sounding pretty strained. You can see this on the spec sheet for the Injector Dynamics page, for the ID1000 for example they cant show you deadtime for 75psi onwards at 8 volts because it just wont open. http://injectordynamics.com/injectors/id1000/

Obligatory:

Great news everyone! MSpaint has come on board as a sponsor for my racing season. They will be giving me a lifetime free license to use their suite of software, as well as some free licenses to give out to supporters. PM me for details if you're interested! (Cheers for printing racing numbers for me Archetype)

I can reassure you all that 2JZ burnouts on 275s will be glorious Sheepers we need some pics of the rear end ASAP And some more car pics too please

I've got water temp logs but that's all right now as I dont have any oil temp monitoring currently. I've got the oil pressure gauge in the dash but nothing logging to ECU. I'm running a remote oil filter currently for clearance reasons so first thing I am going to do is just install oil temp sensors on the feed/return lines to the filter. (Which you'd expect to report back roughly the same reading when there's only a filter there) and then see what it shows so I've got some before/after comparison. Water temps were creeping up to 103-104 degrees when they are usually 91-93. Interestingly I've never had it run hot at Hampton so could be the thinner air at Taupo reducing radiator efficiency. Will see how it goes at Hampton this weekend. Rather than calculating the mass of heat I expect it to pull, (where I dont believe you can really account for all the variables) I will just observe it (via temp sensor datalogging and thermal camera) then from there I can setup a table in the ECU for controlling the fan that perhaps relates to cooler inlet temp and RPM. Maybe similar to below but oil temp instead of ECT. Will see what sort of data I get from temp probes first. I'm not expecting any issues with oil being too cool, because I'll still have the factory heat exchanger plumbed in that heats the oil to coolant temp if it's colder.

Sorted now guys. cheers

Essentially its a thinly veiled excuse to add more sensors and things to control with the ECU (To make graphs with)

Last trackday I went to I had some creeping coolant temps by the end of a run, and oil pressure dropping slightly. I think this is probably to do with the increased average rpm that I'm running now, and the car just generally being a bit more sorted so I've got more time with my foot up it. So after some consideration I have decided on some changes. The factory engine does have an oil cooler - it runs a heat exchanger on the engine block that uses coolant from the radiator to cool the oil. What's awesome about this, is that it works both ways - It actually heats the oil up too, if it's too cold. When you're racing around though, the oil cooler is obviously putting a lot of extra heat into the coolant circuit, and when your coolant system reaches saturation point and the temp creeps up, this heats up your oil too and you end up in a downwards spiral where neither the coolant nor oil are drawing heat away from the engine effectively. Now I do think the factory cooler is an elegant solution but there are also benefits to an air>oil cooler that it leaves unaddressed. Generally when people fit oil coolers to cars, an air cooled oil cooler will be plonked somewhere ahead of the radiator panel. Whether this is in the airflow or not, it presents you problems either way - Either it's in a deadzone and receives no airflow which generally means that it does fuck all. Or, it's in a good area of airflow which causes you the problem of overcooling your oil when you're not fanging at 10/10ths... And your cooling rate is at the mercy of vehicle speed. Oil coolers are a highly quantified item, they're not wizard magic... Even looking back on this report from WW2 about aircraft oil coolers it becomes apparent how critical airflow is to making a cooler work. http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a801332.pdf In the above example if you are getting 100lb per minute airflow, your oil cooler is only doing about a QUARTER of the cooling compared to 550lb/min for the same volume of oil through the cooler. Then from there trending downwards towards acheiving fuck all with no airflow. So in my mind it seems like controlling airflow seems like a better method than controlling oil flow with a thermostat and the associated plumbing complexity. So my plan is to fit the cooler somewhere in the engine bay completely out of airflow. Then I will have two temp sensors connected, one each side of the cooler so I can measure how well it's working. Then have a high CFM fan on the cooler that is triggered by the ECU. Maybe with PWM / solid state relay. Maybe. When the fan isnt blowing the cooler will have virtually no airflow over it and sitting in 30-40 deg engine bay temps so it will be doing virtually nothing. Then when the oil temp rises I can turn the fan on to push the cooler efficiency into that higher end of the map to meet demand. The engine bay temp is hotter than ambient temp, so will be working less efficiently however I will still have a temperature differential of 60-90 degrees which is larger than what the coolant radiator receives since oil runs hotter. Another benefit of this setup is that if coolant temps get high I can use the air>oil cooler to negatively charge the water to oil cooler and draw heat out of the cooling circuit. Same idea as turning on your cabin heater when radiator cant cope. Keeping the oil cooler in the engine bay also means that my plumbing becomes a lot shorter and simpler, and there's reduced chance of the cooler getting hit by rocks or whatever. Here's a diagram of existing oil circuit and proposed changes, please keep in mind that I'm at the mercy of available space and also effort/motivation/being a hopeless drunk/etc

Factory Altezza injectors are 440cc with a 6 hole nozzle which would probably give a good misting for a 90 deg placement but nothing's going to be ideal for that. You might find that running a larger injector at a shorter pulsewidth and then playing around with injector timing could help, so you spray all of the fuel while the air is flowing into the cylinder rather than beforehand. But that assumes you're not using batch fired injectors. Spraying at 90 deg onto something that isnt hot is less than ideal, factory injector placement generally fires onto the hot port / hot valves to vaporize the fuel and more favourable angle. It probably wouldnt make too much difference to power with 90 deg orientation but you'll likely get some worse fuel economy / idling / etc than you otherwise would.

Dont worry too much about the fuel heating up. What really heats up the fuel in cars with multi pump setups. Is the hot fuel rail on the engine, and circulating same gas back to a small surge tank and back again. With a normal big metal fuel tank the tank itself is a big heat sink so can dissipate most/all of the heat from the rail when the fuel is circulating. Sometimes people setup surge tanks etc so it goes from fuel rail to little 3 litre container or whatever, round in circles to the rail and back so soaks with heat. Modern direct injection diesel cars where they run crazy high PSI have a fuel cooler on the return line. But that's generally because they're going to 100s of PSI and also because a lot of modern cars have a plastic fuel tank that doesnt dissipate heat like a metal one. In your case your entire test bench works as a heat sink to keep the fuel cold as well so you should get some good consistent results. The only problem you'll have with the FPR being a restriction (Thats its job) is that if you've got a big grunty fuel pump that out flows it. In which case you wont be able to reduce pressure enough, but do you really need to measure at 25psi or whatever anyway.

Sorry if I came across the wrong way. I think what you're doing is awesome. It's so gross that you spend $$$$ on injectors from a company like Sard and then they give you no injector info. wtf. Look forward to seeing what data you get once this is finished, I'll try keep my off topic rambling in check until then.

The reason I dont like this idea is that if you are spraying a lot of fuel through the injector (say 6ms) then the deadtime is only a small portion so you wont get it very accurate deadtime. Then if you spray at a very low amount (say 1ms) then although your deadtime might now be say 50% or more of total spray time you are quite likely in the non linear region of injector flow. So the number you get wont be representative of the actual deadtime at high fuel flow. Like looking at this injector if I exclude the deadtime it's not really linear until 2.2ms which is way above idle. This is where taking the time with a test rig to run all of the different tests really earns its keep.

This looks so good man, I'm excited haha. Those are some big heffa tubes, sorry you may have mentioned but how are you going to measure the fuel? By weight? Or will you etch some marks on the tube for how many CCs. It still doesnt perfectly blend, like if I set a 30/70 injector ratio and get the AFR stable. Then change it to say 70/30. It will not be correct. I think part of the reason for this is the reason why staged injection works at all - The amount of fuel that gets atomized and properly combusted changes depending on injector placement which alters the AFR at the exhaust even if the total volume of fuel delivered was identical. Even just adjusting the injector timing changes the AFR, when you're only spraying for a very small duration with high CC injectors. (440 and 1000cc in my case)

+1 to that! Awesome result on the dyno too! Bet the grin factor is off the charts

I am in the opposite frame of mind, I dont like the term latency at all because it just implies a delay in spraying, rather than "missing fuel" This is why I dont like the idea of people trying to work out deadtimes using an oscilliscope or whatever... Who cares what the injector is doing electrically. A little context for my scenario: I decided to try a staged injection setup for my engine, so that's where it's got primary injectors in normal place down by the head. Then a second set of injectors further up the runners, and the ECU can phase between them. So in other words it crosses over to the outer injectors at high rpm and load. So my problem was that since I did not have accurate enough deadtime info for each set of injectors, phasing between them didnt work particularly well, especially if IAT compensation is applied or whatever. So it was very fiddly to tune. Since this was a single use case for my car only, I tested them at the fuel pressure my car runs at, (Using the exact FPR my car runs, etc) Then used the Injector drivers, power supply, etc that the actual car uses. More information is here, including my dodgy maths excel sheet if you're interested https://www.hpacademy.com/forum/general-tuning-discussion/show/calculating-deadtimes-with-a-link-g4-and-injector-test-bench But the long and short of it is that with a few hours work I found out the deadtimes. Then established where the non linear portion of injector flow is and built a compensation table for it. Including establishing minimum opening times to spray ANY fuel. (This is different to deadtime due to non linearity at low pw) My rig was amazingly ghetto, using a plastic graduated cylinder, the fuel rails from my engine, and extension cord for injector signal and fuel supply/return. Yet it gave very clear results, since completing this the staged injection runs MUCH better, the car started idling a lot better and the auto tune function in the ECU started getting a tune a lot more accurate a lot quicker. It was a very worthwhile exercise.