Port Injection 2.0TFSI

[GASBill]

Good afternoon guys, hoping for some direction here.

I just finished 2 very similar 2012 Golf Rs, both running S8 ECUs. One is direct injection only, Precision 6266, upgraded LPFP and HPFP, and upgraded direct injectors on pump gas. That car was no issues to set up and get dialed in (with the normal TFSI low-pressure drop up top due to internal HPFP restrictions).

The second one is where I'm going in circles. This car has a GTX3584R, upgraded direct injectors (roughly 1080cc), ID1300x port injectors, upgraded returnless fuel pressure regulator (set to the factory 5 bar running pressure, also running a boost reference), camshafts, upgrade HPFP and LPFP, and currently running an E50 blend (flex fuel sensor has been installed). I've set up the secondary multiplier for the injectors, secondary opening times as per the ID data sheet, as well as set up the secondary load injection time tables in open-loop mode on the dyno to match my cll targets before enabling closed-loop operation. I'm not running blend tables (yet) and have the secondary load injection blend table set to the default 100% (this car will only see E50 for the time being).

Currently, I'm balancing between 2 issues:
1. When the car is in DI mode only, fpp drops quickly (as expected) and causes an fp limp. This is normal and what I'm hoping to work around with the port injectors. Proper monitoring is also an issue due to the low-pressure sensor being inside the HPFP after the restriction.
2. When I blend in the port injectors, I quickly lean out up top. The more port I add, the faster the lean issue comes in.

This is my first time setting up port injection with Syvecs and I'm clearly missing something. I've gone through the manual multiple times, as well as watched every Syvecs Help video (including setting up port injection twice) and browsed all areas of the forum related to direct injection. Perhaps I've been staring at it for too long. I'll attach the most recent log for review, but if there are any questions the log doesn't answer please let me know! Running sw version 1.699

Regards,

Bill

[RICE RACING]

Maybe this is your problem with the fuel pump duty not being adequate ?
If you cant sort it out you can email me links below from website

screenshot.2.jpg (504.17 KiB) Viewed 34939 times

[GASBill]

That's a bit strange considering I have fuel pump closed loop enabled with a maximum duty of 95% and my target pressures populated to the same pressures I run on the stock MED9, but I will look through limiters maybe and see if I've missed something sneaky, a 20% correction limit or something. Base duty is 25% across the board. I'll also try raising the base duty to 70% and see where that gets me.

Thank you for the insight, it's always helpful to have another eye on this.

EDIT: I had the maximum p component set to 20%, linearized to +/-50% and let's see!

I have also set the secondary load injection blend to 0% since my post and am using the basic injection time maps instead for a bit more flexibility.

[GASBill]

I've got fuel pump DC up to 75% now in the problem area, but seems to be dropping my fuel pressure even faster. Not enough pump? The LPFP in question is a Bar-Tek race pump rated at 800bhp, but not sure now. Lines are -8AN from the pump to the engine and -6 from the reg to rail and -6 as well from reg to hpfp (5 port fpr). New log is attached with increased duty and no split (50% split with this setup triggered a lean limp immediately).

FP Issue Costa 6R.png (167.32 KiB) Viewed 34934 times

[GASBill]

So, as Peter was so kind to point out, the PWM control in Syvecs for the LPFP is inverted. I flipped the p component in reverse (adding up to 50% for positive error and removing up to 50% for negative error) and it's smooth as glass. Until now I didn't find any documentation that stated fuel pump control was flipped, so let the record state!

I've still yet to bring the port injectors back in, but I will update this thread with final notes.

[nmerdan]

It depends on your Fuel Pump 1 PWM Control -> Output Drive Type and what your controller expects. I see a lot of PNP kits have this logic where the Drive Type is set to Low Side (meaning 100% PWM pulls to ground), and then the control is reversed (ie. lower duty, more pump). I don't know why it's done that way.

[drewbinsky]

Check your port injectors' setup once more. Make sure they are sized appropriately for your power objectives and that they are fueling at the anticipated rate. My Singing Monsters

[GASBill]

Thanks Drew, but all of the issues were fixed once the fuel pump control was reversed.

[Lith1986]

One potential issue could be related to the fuel pressure drop you are experiencing in DI mode, which is causing an FP limp. This could be due to a restriction in the fuel system, such as a clogged fuel filter or a damaged fuel line, or it could be related to a problem with the fuel pump itself. It may be worth checking the fuel system components to ensure that everything is functioning properly and there are no clogs or leaks.

sonic exe

[GASBill]

I know this last post is coming up on a year ago, but I just want to address this for anyone who may be tuning the EA113 TFSI engine, with Syvecs or stock ECU. The issue that causes the fuel pressure drop is not a mechanical issue per se, but a defect in the design of the stock system. The internals of the HPFP are tiny, which causes a massive pressure drop during high demand. The low-pressure sensor is located in the HPFP but after the restriction, meaning when DI demand increases and HPFP duty increases, the LPFP can't fill the HPFP fast enough to prevent a pressure drop. This is an issue even when running full AN lines with dual Hellcat fuel pumps. It's simply a design flaw and the main reason these engines need MPI for anything over 450bhp. We've known about this flaw for years and have tuned around it without issue, but the LPFP duty table threw me for a bit of a loop at the time.

Let the record show that with ID1300x injectors and a stock DI system, the car ended up putting down 780awhp on E85 once the LPFP duty issue was sorted. Thanks to Peter on that one.