I recorded a dead stop to 80 mph run in FORScan and saved the log data.

Noticed that my BARO isn't sending any signal. Once I find out where it is I will check the connection, unless it is incorporated in the PCM?

Total newbie when it comes to working with this program and trying to follow the guidelines laid down by others posted on here.

So what do you experienced folks see here?

 

Is the graph from Forscan or some other program?

The results are normally plotted against each other on an appropriate scale to show the values and relationships between various sensors.

Is it possible to zoom into a smaller set of data, maybe 45-80mph? And a zoom of the axis to show what each color line represents?

It's a start and kudos to you for jumping into it

 

FORScan graph.

I wasn't sure if the order was important or not. Here's a blown up version.

 

If that is "large" or "zoomed" I need to retire with some coke bottle glasses, LOL.

It looks like EOT (engine oil temp) is jagged up and down. Should be smooth.

EBP (exhaust back pressure) will change, but also shouldn't be jagged.

BARO must have changed in Torque Pro or something. It used to work in mine, too, but now a few months later doesn't work on mine, either

 

That's from 45 to 80 mph like you asked. Aspect ratio went from 1:2 to 2:1.

Baro has me the most concerned because I am reading that it is integral with the PCM.

EOT reading may be a setting that I have wrong?

EBP should be jagged but EOT should be smooth? I'm getting confused. Remember I don't even have FORScan 101 completed yet.

Now all I need is some help getting this straightened out so we can see what's really going on with my truck.

 

No worries

I was guessing at the 45-80mph range. It isn't a hard range. We try to find interesting sections of data. As you do more of this, you'll start to recognize what is interesting. When @Tugly comes in, he'll have better tips.

EBP looked jagged. it should be smooth and change with engine load, rpms, and other circumstances.

Having these values be jagged can indicate a bad connection on the sensor or something else, but warrants looking at or into.

I wouldn't be too concerned over BARO yet. As I mentioned, I am now suddenly having an issue, too. It may be a PID in TP or multiple PIDs trying to poll the same data or something.

 

Here are your graphs, Jim. Starting at Row 600, 50 datapoints, every 3rd row.






Notes:

1. Baro missing, used 14.7

2. EOT sticks at 302F with occasional dip to 168F for a moment (inaccurate)

3. EBP used 'EBP_A' instead of 'EBP'

4. BOOST used MAP (is it correct or should subtract 14.7 for MAP-BARO?)

5. No MAP (used for BOOST instead)

 

BARO looks to be a bout 12.3, looking at the low MAP. Since Arizona is the home state, I'm guessing high desert... Winslow or the like. Given that number, he attained 16 PSI boost and he had a 13-second run up to 80 MPH... very respectable on a stock truck.

The sampling rate of FORScan looks to be out-pacing the the PCM's data rate, that might explain the data "holes" that leave spikes/valleys on the graph. I would first suggest lightening the load on the PCM to see if that helps - a few fewer PIDs in one hit. Also... make sure FORScan is set to J1850 PWM, and know that we are not OBDII compliant.

That HPOP looks like it's getting the job done... no symptoms of leaky injector O-rings here.

I really dislike the FORScan graphing... it's way to messy, poor background, and no controls to clean it up. At least with AE, it was easy to make a graph one could digest.

 

Thanks for your help.

I did the KOEO test to get readings on the the following:

BARO--Barometric--MAP--Manifold Absolute--and EBP--Exhaust BackPressures: All three should indicate atmospheric pressure (14.7psi at sea level) and read within 0.5 psi of each other.

When I was looking at it I saw the BARO was basically flat lined and receiving zero input. The MAP and EBP were only .1 different in reading.

EXPACAMPER reworked my file and posted his graphs from the data but I am not sure where he got a BOOST reading since my PID selection didn't have that as a choice?


So if I reduce the number of PIDs in my graph what should I group together for analysis purposes?
How do I set FORScan to J1850? The only "J" number I see is J2534.

 

There was nothing wrong with your choice of PIDs, but I'm thinking a test to find out what's going on between FORScan and your PCM.

Removing the non-volatile PIDs like EOT and TFT can help. You know when you hit the throttle, so the Mass Fuel Desired isn't a lot of help to keep in there. Since BARO is a dud, you might as well yank that... and use the PSI calculation for your altitude to determine boost. I wouldn't duplicate anything, like ICP volts and ICP PSI. They are the same information with different outputs... but the PCM is polled twice to get that same answer.

 

Okay, I will do another run today.
My home altitude is 4400' how do I use a PSI calculation for that?

 

About 12.5psi

https://www.sablesys.com/support/tec...ltitude-table/

 

Here's today run.
I changed the background color and deleted some of the duplicate PIDs per Tugly.

 

You're getting there

Your latest graphs of the above data. Row 720, 50 data points, every 4th row.





Notes:

1. BARO missing, used 12.5psi

2. MAP now is actual MAP

3. BOOST is now MAP-BARO

4. No EOT, used 50F

5. LOTS of data, I used every 4th row of data

Please post your vehicle specs and major mods in this thread so we can correlate the data to your graphs

 

As an example, the same data above, but graphing every 6th row. Shows how we pick out data to be representative of the truck's performance.