$DA2.. modifying PE fuel adder % vs. coolant has bigger effe

[dizwiz24]

I wanted to see if anyone else on here has noticed this.

If I modifiy the PE fuel adder % vs. coolant temp it has a much bigger effect on WOT AFR than if I modify the PE fuel adder % vs. RPM table.

Example: If I take out 10 % from the PE fuel adder % vs. coolant temp and then try to add 10% back in on the PE fuel adder % vs. RPM table, I will always end up leaner even though you would have thought it would be the same.

Why is that? Or am I crazy.

What does the calculation for WOT fueling look like... is it something like this:

fuel commanded by VE table@current RPM (at 100 kPA; WOT) * % fuel adder @ current coolant temp + % fuel adder @ current RPM = total PE fueling?

I have confirmed this via datalogs of my wideband AFR hooked up to the drivers exhaust bank on my 93 supercharged corvette.

Also, the max fuel adder I can add in the RPM table is 50%. Whereas I can add up to 100% in the PE % fuel adder vs. coolant temp table.

There are reasons why it is beneficial to control the PE % fuel adder more as a function of RPM than coolant temp. (ex. doesnt overload on fuel at low RPM WOT). Especially important for my centrifugal blower car where low RPM fueling can be quite different than high RPM fueling.

any help is appreciated!

[robertisaar]

my first guess would be an incorrectly built XDF.

WOT fueling is a bit more complex than that, but you have the basic idea. it grabs either the stoich AFR or what would be used as the open loop AFR(i haven't looked at the algorithm to confirm), then it uses the coolant and RPM tables to multiply it upwards or downwards to arrive at a PE AFR.