Unfortunately, here in the USA, we sometimes get roped into fixing things with Brand H ECU. This is Brand H manufacturer developed DI Rail control on an engine they claim is fully calibrated and ready to go. There is no access to calibrate any of the DI pump control. That oscillation is 125 bar. LOL
This isn’t a bash Brand H post, its a thank you post. Thank you for developing a product that the end user can actually use!!! Which the bottom of the picture shows.
We saw similar stuff from another manufacturer with a DI solution.
In their software, it appeared to be okay, but when we spliced the pressure sensor signal and logged it at 500 Hz with no filtering, it wasn’t OK.
We knew it should be working better, so we focused on every detail of the direct injection system to have precise control. We also wanted a universal and flexible system that enables users to start new engines by themselves. We are glad our plans were achieved, and you are happy with the product.
Very interesting! How was this data collected? And at what rate?
I’ve got a customer car here in the shop that we’re putting in a GM LT1 with a ZF 8HP70 trans. I’m still undecided which ECU to use.
Many thanks!
@parsonsj This was collected using the manufacturers only logging ability. The speed of capture on that brand varies as it comes from live logging only, 1-30hz if you are lucky.
OK, gotcha, and thanks for the quick response. So you were seeing 125bar oscillations using native (Brand H) data collection which comes in between 1-30Hz. Did this result in any measurable lambda differences? IOW, did this oscillation cause a high amount of “lambda chasing” as the ECU was trying to maintain commanded lambda with the fuel pressure oscillation?
Yes. Lambda was sweeping substantially. The system will be getting replaced soon.
@ProperTuningOG Thanks very much for the additional information.
