Notices

Cobb AccessPORT Discussion

Old Mar 30, 2008 | 11:36 PM
  #1101  
zoom44's Avatar
Administrator
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 21,958
Likes: 115
From: portland oregon
Originally Posted by Charles R. Hill
Jeff and I were just talking about formula conversions and we discussed the idea that each g/sec is about 1.23-1.3 h.p. .
hehe i was going to post something about this the other day when looking at some runs of my own and various sources. It seems to me that the Grams per second from the MAF reading is a pretty good indication of the BHP of the motor. Id personally call it closer to 1-1 but (from the stock MAF at least because thats what i have data on) but if someone is seeing 340 grams per second id bet money that their BHP is very close to 340 and even slightly over.

of course this is with the stock calibration of the stock MAF. stick the stock MAF in a different sized housing and its going to be a percentage off high(for a smaller housing) or low(for a larger one) thats why if you buy an aftermarket MAF from a reputable supplier they will have flowed the meter and provide you with the proper calibrations for tuning
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 02:06 AM
  #1102  
joff's Avatar
Registered
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
From: Mesa, Arizona
Originally Posted by MazdaManiac
No, its larger. That is why the numbers are skewed. Think about it.
I know its counter-intuitive.
It is larger, but only by about 1.78%: See https://www.rx8club.com/showthread.p...61#post2337761
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 09:32 AM
  #1103  
jackhain's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
From: Lake County, Illinois
This may be a no-brainer for some, but it had me scratching my head for a while....cause I'm a novice

My LTFT readings were all over the place with each map I tried. On MM's 1_0 map, the LTFT would settle to 22 at idle, and drop to about 6 under load. I tried pretty much all of the "a" series in an attempt to lower the LTFT but nothing worked.

Here's what I did....simple really. I cleaned _ALL_ of the **** out of my intake. I cleaned everything between the throttle body to the VFAD actuator. I picked up a can of MAF Sensor Cleaner and a can of Engine Degreaser from Pep Boys. My MAF sensor was filthy due to lots of construction around here for years. I must have used a third of the can cleaning the MAF sensor before I was satisfied. Oil had collected in the ridges on the rubber air duct, so I degreased it and wiped everything clean. Black residue had accumulated on the two screens before the MAF sensor, so those got a good cleaning as well. To top it off, I had a spare air filter so I threw it in there.

Now on the same tune my idle LTFT is 12.5, and it drops to 1.6 under load. My STFT is stable and doesn't exceed 15 in either direction under normal conditions.
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 09:48 AM
  #1104  
Razz1's Avatar
Mu ha.. ha...
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,361
Likes: 3
From: Cali
Originally Posted by Charles R. Hill
Jeff and I were just talking about formula conversions and we discussed the idea that each g/sec is about 1.23-1.3 h.p. That would bring into question the accuracy of something(either the math, MAF or Cobb) in this case as I doubt your engine is making 460+ h.p. Of course that is the raw h.p. which would include the power needed to move the weight of the engine's parts themselves, so. It'd be cool to get your car on a dyno in 4th gear and look at the data.
Using that calculation I would have 289 poines with a 20% drive train loss or 231 at the wheels.

I think it was ULLOSE who tested the Cobb last year and said he got 222 to the rear wheels.
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 10:01 AM
  #1105  
r0tor's Avatar
Registered
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,754
Likes: 1
From: PA
Originally Posted by FloppinNachos
Depending on the amount of air flowing past a wire it sends a voltage to heat it or something I don't know. I don't make maf sensors...

I guess it measures velocity assuming air density is constant..., but it probably wont be. I worded my previous post poorly. I can like see stuff in my head man, but like I don't know sometimes its like hard to make that picture into words man, you like know what I mean hombre?

I still don't see how you will get higher readings from a larger tube?
read about a hot wire Mass Air Flow sensor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_flow_sensor
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 10:01 AM
  #1106  
dannobre's Avatar
Modulated Moderator
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 13,720
Likes: 344
From: Smallville
Originally Posted by MazdaManiac
No, its larger. That is why the numbers are skewed. Think about it.
I know its counter-intuitive.
Ok...I know I'm on holidays...and Mickey has me kinda reeling from all the hype...but pls explain...

A smaller tube would have higher flow through it than expected...therefore higher MAF readings for total flow IE MAF would think there was more total flow through it

A larger tube would have less flow through it for amount of total flow...


Is there an inverse relationship in there I'm missing??
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 10:22 AM
  #1107  
Celronx's Avatar
Unregistered User
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
From: Spring/The Woodlands
Originally Posted by jackhain
This may be a no-brainer for some, but it had me scratching my head for a while....cause I'm a novice

My LTFT readings were all over the place with each map I tried. On MM's 1_0 map, the LTFT would settle to 22 at idle, and drop to about 6 under load. I tried pretty much all of the "a" series in an attempt to lower the LTFT but nothing worked.

Here's what I did....simple really. I cleaned _ALL_ of the **** out of my intake. I cleaned everything between the throttle body to the VFAD actuator. I picked up a can of MAF Sensor Cleaner and a can of Engine Degreaser from Pep Boys. My MAF sensor was filthy due to lots of construction around here for years. I must have used a third of the can cleaning the MAF sensor before I was satisfied. Oil had collected in the ridges on the rubber air duct, so I degreased it and wiped everything clean. Black residue had accumulated on the two screens before the MAF sensor, so those got a good cleaning as well. To top it off, I had a spare air filter so I threw it in there.

Now on the same tune my idle LTFT is 12.5, and it drops to 1.6 under load. My STFT is stable and doesn't exceed 15 in either direction under normal conditions.

Check for a leak on the intake tract after the MAF. I was having similar problems. My LTFT was hovering around 12-16 at idle and would drop to about 1 or so when I was driving. I found that I had a leak on the intake. I sealed it up and my LTFT immediately dropped to 1 and my STFT has been pretty steady at -1 to -2 on MM1.3a.

Cel

Last edited by Celronx; Mar 31, 2008 at 10:25 AM.
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 10:35 AM
  #1108  
Nemesis8's Avatar
Bigus Rotus
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,573
Likes: 1
From: Missouri
^ Good idea - I'm now sitting at -2 LTFT on MM1.3a after 5 drive cycles. Earlier I was at 0. I think 10 drive cycles is where I don't see anymore movements.
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 10:49 AM
  #1109  
Celronx's Avatar
Unregistered User
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
From: Spring/The Woodlands
Originally Posted by dannobre
Ok...I know I'm on holidays...and Mickey has me kinda reeling from all the hype...but pls explain...

A smaller tube would have higher flow through it than expected...therefore higher MAF readings for total flow IE MAF would think there was more total flow through it

A larger tube would have less flow through it for amount of total flow...


Is there an inverse relationship in there I'm missing??
It would also depend on the scaling that MM gave him for the MAF. Other than that I'm curious how that works also. I was thinking along the same lines as you are.

Cel
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 10:56 AM
  #1110  
Celronx's Avatar
Unregistered User
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
From: Spring/The Woodlands
I think I got it.

Bigger pipe equals higher pressure based on Bernoulli's equation.

Higher pressure means the MAF will see higher density air or less heat in the wire.

Am I close?

Cel
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 10:56 AM
  #1111  
MazdaManiac's Avatar
Thread Starter
Banned
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 16,386
Likes: 28
From: Under my car
Originally Posted by jackhain
. On MM's 1_0 map, the LTFT would settle to 22 at idle, and drop to about 6 under load. I tried pretty much all of the "a" series in an attempt to lower the LTFT but nothing worked.

Now on the same tune my idle LTFT is 12.5, and it drops to 1.6 under load. My STFT is stable and doesn't exceed 15 in either direction under normal conditions.
You should be on 1_5a. Leave it for a couple of days.
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 11:06 AM
  #1112  
dannobre's Avatar
Modulated Moderator
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 13,720
Likes: 344
From: Smallville
Originally Posted by Celronx
I think I got it.

Bigger pipe equals higher pressure based on Bernoulli's equation.

Higher pressure means the MAF will see higher density air or less heat in the wire.

Am I close?

Cel
Has nothing to do with pressure....it has to do with airflow over the wire in the small area that it tests....more flow causes the resistance to drop in the wire...and MAF voltage to go up....
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 11:11 AM
  #1113  
Celronx's Avatar
Unregistered User
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
From: Spring/The Woodlands
I hate quoting Wikipedia, but oh well. This part of the link above is what got me thinking about pressure.

"If air density increases due to pressure increase or temperature drop, but the air volume remains constant, the denser air will remove more heat from the wire indicating a higher mass airflow"

This and the part of Bernoulli's principal that states that the same amount of fluid (air) flow through a larger pipe will have a higher pressure, or a lower pressure through a smaller pipe got me on this path. Volume going into the engine would remain the same, only the pressure would be different.

Cel
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 11:14 AM
  #1114  
dannobre's Avatar
Modulated Moderator
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 13,720
Likes: 344
From: Smallville
The MAF is sitting before the Turbo in most systems.....so no + pressure there.

Still don't get that I'm mistaken??

Jeff...what did you mean??
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 11:18 AM
  #1115  
morkusyambo's Avatar
Dongbag extrordinare
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,090
Likes: 0
From: Away from the fruits of my labor
Mr. Mom.....Hah!
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 11:19 AM
  #1116  
dannobre's Avatar
Modulated Moderator
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 13,720
Likes: 344
From: Smallville
Ah......the relationship works for sure ( Physics FTW )

I gotta go see the Mouse :
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 11:22 AM
  #1117  
morkusyambo's Avatar
Dongbag extrordinare
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,090
Likes: 0
From: Away from the fruits of my labor
touche
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 11:56 AM
  #1118  
Nemesis8's Avatar
Bigus Rotus
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,573
Likes: 1
From: Missouri
Originally Posted by Charles R. Hill
So I guess a given amount of water through a bigger pipe will have higher PSI?
No, the friction loss per hundred feet of pipe will be less, so the TDH or pressure will be lower.

Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 12:15 PM
  #1119  
mysql's Avatar
Doppelgänger
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,192
Likes: 1
From: Florida
Originally Posted by 05rex8
are you gonna powdercoat it black to match? looks nice btw
Local shop just quoted me $50 to ceramic coat the intake pipe (in black). I don't have time right now to leave them the intake piping for a few days, so I plan on wrapping the maf piping up with a reflective thermal blanket and see if it's worthwhile to ceramic coat. I bet it is... so this will hold me off for a week or two till I can get it coated properly.
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 12:44 PM
  #1120  
jackhain's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
From: Lake County, Illinois
Originally Posted by Celronx
Check for a leak on the intake tract after the MAF. I was having similar problems. My LTFT was hovering around 12-16 at idle and would drop to about 1 or so when I was driving. I found that I had a leak on the intake. I sealed it up and my LTFT immediately dropped to 1 and my STFT has been pretty steady at -1 to -2 on MM1.3a.

Cel
Good idea. The clamp on the air duct at the throttle body was loose, but I tightened it when I put everything back together. I can't really get at anything behind there without some major disassembly. All other hoses seem snug tho.

Originally Posted by MazdaManiac
You should be on 1_5a. Leave it for a couple of days.
The numbers I posted are after only one drive cycle. I did some data logging last week before cleaning things up on 1_0. I had changed over to 1_2a on Friday hoping the logs would show me a difference. Then on Sunday I cleaned everything and re-flashed 1_0 so I could compare future logs to my "before cleaning" results from last week.

I'm going to leave this one on till the end of the week and see how much the trims change between "Day 0" and "Day 5". I'll change the map one last time after some more logging on Friday.
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 01:00 PM
  #1121  
MazdaManiac's Avatar
Thread Starter
Banned
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 16,386
Likes: 28
From: Under my car
Because of the way the Pettit works, you scale the MAF way up.
So, the reported value is completely different than the actual value.
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 02:11 PM
  #1122  
FloppinNachos's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
From: Suwanee, GA
how does it work? why does it make the maf read so high? it has to do something to remove more heat from the maf, right?

Last edited by FloppinNachos; Mar 31, 2008 at 02:15 PM.
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 02:41 PM
  #1123  
shaunv74's Avatar
Power!!
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,412
Likes: 3
From: Sunny See attle
I will throw my $0.02 in here and see if I am close.

1st law of Thermo says Mass in=mass out (or garbage whatever you're flowing).

Mass flow rate of an incompressible fluid (which is what we have in the intake tube) is density*cross sectional area*velocity. Rho*A*V (make sure your units are consistent! (inches or feet but not both at the same time)

In this case the MAF "knows" the Density from the temperature and Baro sensors, and it "knows" the size of the pipe (pre-programmed fixed value) so from the cooling effect of the air it can determine the velocity based on some basic heat transfer calculations and the known temp. of the air.

What happens is when you change the diameter of the pipe (the A in Rho*A*V) you affect the velocity inversely and the PCM doesn't know it since there is no "pipe diameter sensor." So the velocity slows down and the PCM should think there is less air going in then there actually is.

Only thing is from the previous posts it sounds like Phil is seeing a higher than actual recorded flow rate rather than lower.

So if that's the case...I dunno
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 02:55 PM
  #1124  
Spin9k's Avatar
Momentum Keeps Me Going
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 5,036
Likes: 5
From: Colorado
Is the temp sensor ambient air or is it temp in the tube? Wouldn't the varing air temp from different intakes make this sensor wrong if it's not 'in the tube temp'?

And if the air is under pressure (boosted) wouldn't the baromentric sensor be useless, or if there is any ram air effect at 100+ like say with the RB duct?
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2008 | 03:08 PM
  #1125  
shaunv74's Avatar
Power!!
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,412
Likes: 3
From: Sunny See attle
Originally Posted by Spin9k
Is the temp sensor ambient air or is it temp in the tube? Wouldn't the varing air temp from different intakes make this sensor wrong if it's not 'in the tube temp'?
I know there is an intake air temp. being recorded by the PCM from my data logging with my canscan tool. If it uses that it should take care of it.

Originally Posted by Spin9k
And if the air is under pressure (boosted) wouldn't the baromentric sensor be useless, or if there is any ram air effect at 100+ like say with the RB duct?
The air is not compressed yet. It has not gone through the compressor correct? If it's a pull through. It is just moving faster due to the increased mass required by the turbo. So Rho*A*V should still apply.

Now if it's a push through and the air has been compressed already then you are right the Rho is now off in the formula since it doesn't have an in tube Baro sensor.
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:
You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:15 PM.