Forum: WHALER
  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Modern Engine Controllers and Custom Fuel Maps

Post New Topic  Post Reply
search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Modern Engine Controllers and Custom Fuel Maps
jimh posted 05-22-2006 08:38 PM ET (US)   Profile for jimh   Send Email to jimh  
(I brought up this topic some time ago, but allow me to revive it)

Most modern engines, including recreational marine outboard motors, are controlled by pre-programmed instructions contained in their engine control modules (ECM's). Just about all of the operational characteristics of the motor are controlled or influenced by the firmware embedded into the controller. It is my speculation that so far in outboard boats and motors, we have not reached the level of sophisticated integration that has been achieved in vehicles. I am betting that in vehicles, the firmware in an engine is adapted to the vehicle into which it is applied. If an engine is used in a number of vehicles, it seems likely that the firmware might be changed to suit the vehicle. Why not do this with boats, and particularly with boats where the boat builder and the engine maker are part of a corporate family?

Let's look at a engine that is used in several different models of cars. I would not be surprised to learn, indeed I think it is probably standard practice, that the engine control module gets special firmware depending on the vehicle application. If the engine goes into a sedan, a light truck, and an SUV, it might be programmed differently in all three. I know this was true in some cases due to the variation in emission levels required for different classes of vehicle. The truck engine could be tuned for more power and more emission, while the passenger car engine would have to make less emissions which usually meant less power, and get better gas mileage to meet fleet fuel economy standards.

Would there be any advantage in an outboard motor to putting in different firmware based on different applications? I know that some features, like a speed limiter, are often removed for racing applications. But could other parameters be tuned depending on the boat the engine was intended to be used with? For example, could a Verado 250 get a special fuel map for use with a Boston Whaler hull of a certain weight and size? Here I am thinking about changes which might enhance the fuel economy, perhaps at the cost of some other characteristic.

Or are outboard engines just tuned for as much power as possible within the emission limits, and that is that?

What brought this to mind, again, was the recent mention from a colleague who drives a HONDA. He took his Honda Civic in for a tune-up. The dealership technician noticed the car had a lot of mileage on it for its age. He asked my friend if he did a lot of highway driving.

"Yes," my friend told him, "I have a long commute to work everyday and it is all highway driving."

The Honda technician proposed to him that he volunteer to participate in a test program. Honda would replace the engine control module on his car with a new one, programmed especially for vehicles used for mainly highway driving. In return, he'd be asked to record his fuel economy.

"Oh--no problem," my friend told Honda, "I keep accurate records of all my fuel and mileage using a computer spreadsheet." (He is a information-nerd like me, eh?)

So Honda replaced the ECM on his vehicle with a new model. As an incentive to track the mileage, they also gave him a log book. When he completes the logbook he gets the cost of his engine tune up rebated to him.

So far, a few weeks into the test, my friend can already see an improvement in his highway fuel mileage.

Now, back to boats. Why not have something like this for boats? If you are a guy who likes to rocket out to your fishing grounds at 55-MPH, you get one fuel map and computer in your new engine. Put that same engine on a cruising boat, and you get new firmware optimized for best fuel economy at cruise. Or even better, a switch to change from one to the other as you desire. A feature like this would make the integration of engine and boat something more than an advantage to the guy selling them.

bsmotril posted 05-22-2006 11:35 PM ET (US)     Profile for bsmotril  Send Email to bsmotril     
The automotive, truck, and motorcycle aftermarket have many products available to alter the factory fuel mapping settings. They connect or piggyback to the engine control module. Some provide an alternate fuel map that can be switched into place. Others allow for tuning in negative or positive alterations to the fueling rate at specific rpm and load points, they then alter the pulse duration fed to the fuel injectors. Some fool the factory ECM intercepting signals from sensors and altering them to richen the fuel mixture. I wonder if we'll eventually see such products for outboard motors.

To get full advantage of these devices on a bike, truck, or auto, you also need to open up the exhaust and intake to allow better breathing. There's no real easy way to do that on an outboard which run pretty wide open already. I think having different maps available for a motor intended for say a pontoon boat versus the same motor on a bass boat would be beneficial in that it would likely add to the engines longevity and reduce warranty claims. BillS

sosmerc posted 05-23-2006 12:18 AM ET (US)     Profile for sosmerc  Send Email to sosmerc     
For some Mercury EFI outboards, there already are aftermarket adjustable units available. Tony Brucato makes what is called a "PCU" for most Mercury 2.4 and 2.5 litre EFI outboards. The driver can adjust the fuel curve at various rpm's to either lean or enrich the mixture. For best results you need to have a good Exhaust Gas Temperature guage so you can see the results of your "tuning" and also avoid running the engine too lean.
BUT, it is not currently legal to make any changes to 1998 and newer engines that would affect emissions...supposedly there are stiff penalties if one gets caught fiddling with new engines.
But it certainly does make sense that Mercury and Brunswick would work together to develope engine packages that are "tuned" to maximize performance and running quality. The only drawback I can think of is the many hours of dyno time required to develope custom fuel maps for each and every engine/boat package.
Perry posted 05-23-2006 12:41 AM ET (US)     Profile for Perry  Send Email to Perry     
jimh, it interesting that you bring this up. I have a friend who drives a Honda Accord. My outboard is based on the same 2.4 liter motor in his car. He installed a performance chip last year and according to a dynometer, it gained 19 horsepower and 16 ft. lbs of torque.

I did some research and found that there are many chips and performance modules available for Honda vehicles. In one case, a computer module is installed between your vehicle's ECU and engine. It inlcudes a multiple high-speed processor computer module, plug-n-plug wiring harness, and a performance map specifically dyno-tuned to your vehicle. You can switch from stock mode for good fuel economy to performance mode for speed with a flick of a switch. If it is available for a Honda Accord, why wouldn't it work on my Honda outboard (which shares the same motor)?

tombro posted 05-23-2006 08:09 AM ET (US)     Profile for tombro  Send Email to tombro     
As I learned earlier this year from a friend who is both a boat owner and a Harley owner: most motorcycles get "re-mapped" aftermarket for performance.
To help the Verado breath I am envisioning an intake scoop on top, with dual Mufflex mufflers abaft. Would look even more like Darth Vader ~_^
bsmotril posted 05-23-2006 09:13 AM ET (US)     Profile for bsmotril  Send Email to bsmotril     
I wonder how long before someone comes out with a bolt on Nitrous Oxide injection system for the Verado. That should be good for a good 40% temprorary boost in HP. The question is "Why?", what purpose would it serve? The answer....Because you can. Might be useful in the big double or triple outboard powered offshore fishing boats. If you have a motor fail, the nitrous could give you the boost you need to get the boat up on top the water on plane with the remaining good engine(s). BillS
linust posted 05-24-2006 02:44 AM ET (US)     Profile for linust  Send Email to linust     
Jimh, I think your idea is technically sound, but impractical given the tremendous variation in hull designs, condition, gear, sea conditions, etc. What would be more interesting would be to see how much outboard (and I/O) manufacturers would be willing to let their ECUs adapt to changing conditions.

FWIW, "chip tuning" has been around for at least 15 years, if not closer to 20. I had my '91 Audi chipped back in '95, taking power from 217hp stock to 277hp, and torque up a similar amount. The vendor had previously chipped mid-80s Audis to achieve similar gains.

Ultimate gains have always been easier with forced-induction engines vs. normally aspirated engines, as intake and exhaust configs were less critical to power production than air mass and fuel. Even for NA engines, "tuning" fuel and ignition trim values can dramatically affect drivability and perceived (if not real) performance. There are also impacts on emissions and economy to be had from chip tuning. This would be where your idea comes into play, but there is a lot of trial & error to dial it in. Dial it wrong, and you could burn a piston or more.

Should someone crack Mercury's ECU code, the Verado promises tremendous gain potential, assuming there is adequate margin built into the base engine--the gains you could get chipping turbo cars in the mid-80s to mid-90s were silly scary compared to what you can do today: 1, manufacturers are leaving less on the table than before, and 2, designs are much leaner (physically) as technology lets the engineers remove margins they used to build in for confidence/reliability.

All that said, it would be really cool to chip my Opti to get 250hp instead of the stock 225, though I'm not sure I'd make that much use of it with today's fuel prices!

rocket posted 05-24-2006 07:45 PM ET (US)     Profile for rocket  Send Email to rocket     
I have a user programmable fuel injection system on my boat's tow truck engine. I modify/program its running parameters with my lap top, including its actual base fuel map. The lap top is disconnected after the ECU is programmed. The lap top can be left hooked into the ECU and made to record , many times per second, all sensor data for playback at a convenient time and place after its disconnected from the ECU. By use of several sensors the software can/does react in a closed loop fashion (or open loop if so desired) to changing conditions in order to achieve a specific set of goals the user/programmer has in mind. Having this hands on experience I couldn't resist joining this discussion.

Regardless of the work the engine does, spinning a prop or turning a tire, its ECU, if cleverly enough programmed and armed with enough sensors, can achieve optimization, even a prioritized list of items to optimize, against a list of things to sacrifice. Such a control system on an engine, would adapt to the external situation at hand (prop size, changing boat weight etc)to optimize to the list of priorities it was set up for within pragmatic physical limits of items it can control (fuel, timing etc).

Say fuel economy at on plane cruise speed is one of the goals. If the system has an Oxygen sensor (or multiples - say one on each cylinder) and the program allows specific Oxygen level targets based on both RPM and engine Vacuum (load) a stand-alone map is made for the 02 target. This 02 map is then played against the fuel map. At any given setting of RPM and Vacuum the ECU will alter amount of fuel (injector duration), Idle Air Motor opening size, or even timing to achieve the desired 02 setting.

Typically such O2 maps are set to run 10 to 20% rich from optimum at heavy loads to keep the cylinders from getting too hot. At partial to moderate loads this is backed down to 5% to 15%. At idle (oddly enough??) the O2 target is set back to rich and the timing usually fairly advanced if emissions are not a big issue, retarded more for higher Exhaust Gas Temps is emissions are a big deal.

Other multi-dimensional maps are also in play. "Warm up map". Adds extra fuel to the base fuel map value, usually based on engine's cooling water and air intake temps. "Acceleration map". Simulates a carb's "hole shot" plunger spray by watching the rate of change of throttle position & engine vacuum & RPM; the quicker the throttle rate of change the ECU sees the more fuel is added to the base fuel map value by the ECU according the "acceleration map". "Timing map". Based on RPM, vacuum and throttle position this map can be tweaked for maximizing fuel efficiency in a specific region to minimizing fouling of spark plugs in another to maximizing horsepower in another.

1/4 Mile Strip Racers program their ECUs to optimize their performance for consistent run times and fastest speeds (max horsepower) at the expense of pollution and mileage and almost anything else.

In my Whaler's tow truck I optimize for a balance of maximum torque at the lowest possible RPM and lowest Exhaust Gas Temp at the expense of mileage. It takes a little extra gas to keep the EGT somewhat lower but this means the cylinder is well cared for under heavy load.

There is virtually no end to the list of interplay possible; what variables one wants to optimize versus what one tells the ECU to trade off (based on sensor inputs to the ECU) to achieve the desired outcome (also based on sensor inputs to the ECU). Of course, a bad sensor can throw the entire system off balance. But there again, good programming in the ECU can usually detect when a sensor is bad outright or starting to head that way, alert the operator and enter into some sort of "limp home" mode akin to the Optimax Guardian system.

One of the things I wish would be monitored (and perhaps optimized where pollution control law would allow it) on primary powerplant marine engines is EGT of the individual cylinders. Especially on two cycle oil injected motors like the Merc Optimax. I can easily imagine spraying a little more or less oil into a specific cylinder based on its EGT for any given RPM and Vacuum (load) to optimize reliability. In fact, even just having a sensor that watches for high EGT, the same way the ECU watches for high engine cooling water temperatures, could prevent surprise failures related to high EGTs in the same way one would like a hot water warning way before they start seeing steam blow out of their motor. How about instead of an overly high EGT we watch for "appropriate EGT" based on RPM and vacuum and the EGT of a specific cylinder against that of its mates. If cylinder #4 goes cool relative to the rest maybe the plug is starting to foul. If it goes hot maybe the fuel injector is not spraying enough or the oil injection is sluggish. I hope the point is clear.

I am excited by the possible reliability and performance improvements one could achieve if instead of an open loop system 2 cycle engine, one had a closed loop control system. It seems to me that , in general, the large/offshore 2 cycle outboard engines are behind the automotive curve by a decade and they need to move forward along the line you put forth. I think its a "no brainer" on the technical end and more of a "free market" issue; i.e. how much $$ will the consumer spend for an engine that cost less to operate, performs well over a broader range of circumstances and tends to tell you well in advance when things are starting to go South.

The manufacturer would also benefit, I feel, with lower warranty cost and happier customers (more business). Its a lot cheaper to replace a sluggish oil injector or fuel injector detected thru the appropriate sensors by the ECU than it is a blown powerhead. This has to be balanced against the cost of installing all the sensors on the engines that never develop a problem and customer & dealer satisfaction consequences (good and bad).

This won't make up for a bad mechanical design, defective crank with a hair crack from the factory or make a standard gas motor live as long as an equivalent diesel, but it can significantly reduce the number of unexpected engine failures, maintenance cost and fuel cost.

As for Boston Whaler and its sister company under the Brunswick corporation, Merc Marine, I suspect the same group of people who fork over the $$ for a quality boat that can't sink will tend to be the same crowd that would cough up some extra $$ for an engine with the relative benefits stated above.

Regards
Rocket

P.S. I wish I knew how to paste in a fuel map, timing map etc for those who have never actually seen one.


jimh posted 05-24-2006 08:34 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
I'll contact Rocket via email and we can include a fuel map in this discussion.
jimh posted 06-24-2006 04:13 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
[I do have a couple of fuel maps to paste into this discussion. I will get around to that soon--promise.]

Following up on my friend's HONDA vehicle, the custom fuel map turned out to be prone to stalling. He went back to the dealer and the technicians loaded a new fuel map into the car. He's back on the road for more testing of the this new set-up.

[OK--let me go look for that fuel map graphic.]

jimh posted 06-24-2006 04:19 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Here are the fuel maps sent by Rocket:

.

jimh posted 08-03-2006 06:35 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Update on the custom fuel map that Honda supplied for a friend of mine's vehicle:

After a couple of weeks of driving, the new fuel map had some annoying tendencies. It often stalled the engine when decelerating up a freeway ramp. So Honda removed that fuel map and uploaded a new one. The new one has been working better. But we're still waiting on the fuel economy results.

Again, it would be interesting to see if a boat builder/engine integrator like Boston Whaler could come up with custom fuel maps for particular boat applications. Although there is the regulatory hurdle of getting these approved for use by the EPA.

XStech posted 08-03-2006 08:04 PM ET (US)     Profile for XStech  Send Email to XStech     
jimh

You will be glad to know that Mercury is already doing most of what your wishing for in your first post with its Motorola ECU.

Mercruiser, Opti, and Verado all have their own software set.

I also think the Merc ECU is more powerful than most ECU's in cars. (I could be wrong).

One thing I think you may be missing is that cars have transmissions, and outboards have basically one prop load curve.

Also, now speaking of Optis only, They run at a stratified charge in most of the range except for WOT.
So no matter what boat or prop, in the cruise portion of the curve, the motor is running well below lean best torque, so if leaned out would slow down, if richend up would speed up. So there is really nothing to be optimized as can be done in a car to match a driving style.

Also note that Merc DIs, at WOT (homogeneous charge) are already optimized for spark and lean fuel. You would not be able to gain anything by adjusting the cal. Remember, DIs are not the old EFIs that were run rich for more cooling and lube. An Opti gains no cooling or lube from running rich.

Merc is trying to add more hull intigration into their engine software. Shadow mode is the next big improvment for the multi engine crowd.

I am willing to bet you would find no advantage to changeing the cal from boat setup to boat setup.

an86carrera posted 08-03-2006 08:30 PM ET (US)     Profile for an86carrera  Send Email to an86carrera     
During the repair to my EMM at DFI Technologies I asked if they could change mine to a 225hp from a 200hp they answered YES. When I asked them to do it they said NO, they are not allowed because of some contractural aggreement.

My diagnostic software allows small changes in the fuel and timing maps I, as of yet have not messed with it. Costly mistakes could be made I suppose.

Engine runs so nice and has only 400 hours I expect a long life for it left alone being the lower hp rating on the same motor capable of 12% more power.

I could be wrong, but this what I was told by the tech.

Len

Perry posted 08-04-2006 12:17 AM ET (US)     Profile for Perry  Send Email to Perry     
an86carrera , what model 200 HP outboard are you referring to?
an86carrera posted 08-04-2006 07:59 AM ET (US)     Profile for an86carrera  Send Email to an86carrera     
2000 200hp Ficht
Len
jimh posted 08-04-2006 08:24 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
XStech--Thanks for the information. It got me thinking. With an outboard, the propeller represent the final adaptive method to mate the engine and the load. In vehicles they only have so many transmissions, rear axle ratios, and tire sizes to tweak. But with an outboard you can pick from a really wide range of propellers, and match up the load to the motor in rather small increments, for example, just an inch change in pitch with some styles of propeller. So perhaps this eliminates the need to have different fuel maps--just use the one, best, most powerful fuel map and pick the right propeller.

Also, I would not have a problem believing that an outboard's EMM might have a more powerful microprocessor than a vehicle. In vehicle engineering they are always looking for a way to cut costs, and if you can save $5 on a microprocessor for an engine which will be made in quantities in the millions, you can save a lot of money. On an outboard motor--which already costs more than a whole vehicle--another $5 for a better processor probably does not represent an unbearable increase in cost of product, especially when the production volume is more in the range of a few thousand units, not millions.

XStech posted 08-04-2006 12:37 PM ET (US)     Profile for XStech  Send Email to XStech     
jimh

Heres an update for you. I just talked to the "sparks and arcs" group. The Merc ECU is the most powerfull in the industry. The automotive industry is just now looking at the ECU that Merc used 5 years ago.

http://www.mototron.com/home.asp

jimh posted 08-04-2006 08:27 PM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
I know that Brunswick acquired MotoTron a few years ago. It sounds like they have done some good work on the OptiMax outboard motor. I believe that MotoTron is not for sale with the other Brunswick New Technologies companies.
XStech posted 08-04-2006 09:15 PM ET (US)     Profile for XStech  Send Email to XStech     
Actually, Mototron started as a calibration group at Mercury Marine that started the development of the ECU with Motorola. That group then was split off from Mercury to futher develop the ECU in other areas. With the Bruns New Tech sale, Mototron is now back with Mercury. (although they never really left the building)
jimh posted 08-05-2006 08:57 AM ET (US)     Profile for jimh  Send Email to jimh     
Good information--which we always appreciate. If it's the guys at MotoTron who have tweaked the OptiMax into the fuel-efficient machine it is nowadays, then my hat is off to them.
Binkie posted 08-14-2006 11:39 PM ET (US)     Profile for Binkie  Send Email to Binkie     
All this computer tech. on internal combustion engines is both amazing and confusing to me. How long will it be until computers eliminate the internal combustion part of engines, and they are all computer? LOL I better collect more outboards from the sixties and seventys so I have something to work on.

Post New Topic  Post Reply
Hop to:


Contact Us | RETURN to ContinuousWave Top Page

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.