aerobod - near CYYC

The maps themselves definitely require an unlocked ECU. I tried all combinations of 4 and 5 digit codes using an automated script against the original 992 Caterham ECU in my R400D, no code would unlock it, I believe it is directly flashed as opposed to being flashed by Easimap. I replaced the 992 ECU with the MBE 9A4 ECU, which is fully plug compatible, these are the maps I'm showing in this thread. The spreadsheet info relating to data logged can be collected from either the 992 or 9A4 ECUs in the same way, using the export function in Easimap (I normally aim for about 50,000 output lines from a data logging session by adjusting the time interval, typically to about 50 milliseconds). The export CSV data is then put into a spreadsheet to build a pivot table of, for example, throttle site vs engine speed for the appropriate logged value such as lambda, injector duty cycle, ignition advance, etc.

"I read the other day that removing the in-flight entertainment kit from the seats from a 777 and replacing them with BYOD reduces the plane's weight by 1500kg" For 777 HD seat configs that saving could exceed 2000kg, on our 168 seat 737-800s we save 700kg (but give back 200kg of the saving by adding USB and 110V AC power at each seat).

Here is the lambda output for data logging at lower revs to mainly verify closed loop operation, although there is one full throttle value at 0.88 lambda that had at least twenty data points to give a stable reading: G The other important quadrant is the high rev/ high load area, the lambda readings are looking quite good here, too, aiming in the 0.85 range under full load: Here is the current base fuel map: http://photoshare.shaw.ca/image/7/b/a/238530/image.jpg?rev=0 The current base ignition map: http://photoshare.shaw.ca/image/7/b/a/238530/image-5.jpg?rev=0 And this is the lambda target map, with a zero target setting the open loop area: http://photoshare.shaw.ca/image/7/b/a/238530/image-6.jpg?rev=0

I did rewire the camshaft sensor as per the MBE pinout. The variability in the alternator output is implied by the Easimap battery voltage readout, which resolves down to about 20 milliseconds, although the min/max hold feature on my decent Fluke multimeter correlates with the Easimap voltage ripple. I think it is now about as stable as can be expected with the extra earthing I have done between the chassis and main electrical components. In terms of ground variability, from information I have gleaned on the Internet, 100mV of ground voltage between components is about the acceptable maximum, I'm now down below 10mV in the worst case and 0.1 to 0.2 Ohms ground resistance between the ECU, engine ground, chassis, firewall and battery. Everything is very good now, after a couple of misleading pointers. I had replaced the TPS due to what seemed to be noise at the lowest throttle openings, but in hindsight it seems to be a benign effect from what I believe to be an inductive source that causes a small ripple in the TPS voltage, but no effect on the car from a smoothness or fuelling perspective. The brand new TPS ended up failing after less than a month, but I didn't realize it was causing problems until after I had loaded a new map and went out for a drive, the car was suffering from severe over fuelling followed by surging, leading me to believe that I had totally messed up the map. A few kilometres from home the car would hardly run, so I pulled a quick u-turn at some traffic lights and headed for home. Unfortunately this u-turn was noticed by the police, leading to me being pulled over. The cop realized that I was having issues with the car when he walked up to me and I hadn't switched it off. After asking me what engine I had in there (my reply was 4-cylinder Ford Duratec with normally 210bhp, but only about 10bhp at the moment), he said that he could see that it wouldn't be easy to put the car on a tow truck, understood why I pulled the illegal u-turn (was good enough to not even mention a ticket or warning) and wished me luck in getting it back home. Back to the tuning woes... I luckily checked the Easimap dashboard while still trying to keep the car running when I got home, with closed throttle I was not at throttle site 0, but typically site 5 or 6, the new TPS had gone bad, not dropping below 2.2V or so at closed throttle. After swapping back to the original TPS, I went out for a couple of hours of data logging, paying attention to part throttle running in general. I dumped a couple of hundred thousand data points at 50ms intervals into a spreadsheet and analyzed the lambda settings from my freshly installed and calibrated wideband oxygen sensor. Based on this data logging I did a bit of fuel reduction from idle to 3500RPM at throttle sites 0-5, fuel addition from 5000-6500RPM at mid throttle sites and set closed loop lambda at 0.95 from 1000-2000RPM when throttle sites are 0-8 and lambda at 1.0 from 2250-5000RPM when throttle sites are 0-8 (beyond 5000RPM and throttle site 8 lambda is open loop). The car now runs brilliantly, idles evenly, pulls linearly at all speeds and trickles away from rest smoothly with virtually no throttle needed. No noticeable fuel smells, flat spots, surges or any other annoying characteristics I have found. I may tweak the cold start fuelling for temperatures below 10C, as I need a slight touch of throttle for it to start immediately when it is between -5C and 10C. I may also put it on a rolling road next spring to confirm the timing is optimally tweaked, but there is no sign of pinking or lack of power across the rev range. I am now very happy with the way the car is running, very good compared with any vehicle I have ever owned and on par with the linear and un-burstable feeling the S54 engine in my old BMW Z4M had.

"Do you offer 'net access on those planes yet? And have you had to scale up the power generation? Thanks Jonathan" We have satellite based Internet access that operates everywhere but above 80 degrees latitude and a few areas around the South Pacific. Typically up to 7Mbps shared on a given aircraft, but new satellites should increase the bandwidth available to about 70Mbps in about 2 years time. This week we have 27 of our 111 jet aircraft installed, adding 5 aircraft a month to the installed list to completion at the end of 2016. Several aircraft at a time come in for new seats, power, satellite antenna and radome, wireless access points, aircraft server and broadband controller fitment. We don't need any power increase as most aircraft had an old live TV seat back system that was power hungry. Each triplet or pair of seats is supplied with the 115V/400Hz 3-phase aircraft power, which is converted to a 5V USB and 110V/60Hz universal socket in each seat back (although only USB in our 767 economy cabin). Typically a maximum draw of about 5kVA draw on the aircraft generators, which are each about 50kVA capacity on a 737NG. We also have BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) for streaming of films and TV programmes (currently about 500 titles) and live satellite news (BBC World, CNN and CNBC at the moment). We run up to 9 5GHz non-overlapping wifi channels and 3 2.4GHz channels on each aircraft, which allows up to 160 concurrent video streams to passenger tablets, smart phones, PCs and MacBooks.

We are in the process of fitting new seats with 5V USB and 110V AC power on our 100 odd Boeing 737s. It is interesting that USB charging is considerably more popular than AC. Often on a 737-800 there will be about 100 people using USB charging on a given flight.

It is highly unlikely all 4 wheels are perfectly balanced, 1 would say about 1 in 20 tyre/wheel combinations I have had are balanced without adding weight. Are there any witness marks (sticky patches or tape remnants) on the inside of the wheels showing where double sided tape existed to hold the weights on, but the weights have since fallen or been knocked off?

In tracking down a slight but persistent rough running with my 2012 R400D, I found what seems to be a mistake in the Caterham wiring loom. The camshaft position sensor uses pin 30 for signal and pin 23 for return in the loom as delivered on my car. Looking at the pinout for the 992/9A4 ECU, MBE show the camshaft sensor return as pin 31, pin 23 is shown as a 0V reference. I can see that using the 0V reference as a return may work, but it may also cause the ECU to ignore the sensor input if it doesn't see the signal between pins 30 and 31. If this is the case, the engine may be running batch fuel injection instead of timed injection relative to the camshaft position. I have also checked all sensor wiring, grounds and voltage inputs and have added some extra and more direct ground bonding from the engine to the chassis to the battery isolator to the ground on the firewall next to the fuse box to my wideband oxygen sensor ground. This has reduced the noise/variability in the alternator supply to about 200mV at 14.2V (from about 400mV before) and the voltage on the ground between the ECU and engine block (where the worst difference was seen) from 15mV to 8mV. I still need to replace my failed oxygen sensor, though (wideband Bosch LSU 4.9), until I can see if I've smoothed out the engine across it's full operating range.

That is the cover, it is a cup on the other side that fits into a hole behind. An 'o' ring on the cup seals against the hole bore. The Allen bolt is only tightened lightly (a few Nm) and really only stops the cover rotating, as the 'o' ring provides enough resistance to stop it coming out as the oil pressure is low with it being in the return path to the tank. As long as your lubricate the 'o' ring, it shouldn't leak after being refitted a number of times, so far I have reused mine 5 times without issue, but will replace soon. Use a thin bladed screwdriver to carefully lever the cover out while working around it's diameter, after the screw is removed. i used to remove the hoses, but found that I can get more out by removing the finger filter cover instead, with no more than a few extra thimbles full when also taking the hoses off. I found it was hard to get the hoses to re-seal without dripping afterwards. I also lift the car on the right side using the lower wishbone jacking point to get any additional oil in the dry sump out.

I don't have a guide, but some tips: 1. Change the oil after just shutting off a warm (not too hot) engine, it will drain quicker and contaminants are more likely to be flushed with the warm oil, than settling to the bottom of the dry sump. 2. Don't over tighten the oil tank drain plug (I use 15Nm torque) and use a new copper crush washer on it. My 2012 R400D has an M10 bolt with a fine thread and uses either a 10mm or 3/8" crush washer. 3. Remove the finger filter cover on the left side of the dry sump, it is the black cover held on by a single Allen bolt. This will drain an additional litre or so of oil. 4. Use a cap style oil filter tool, as opposed to a strap type. I use the plastic Delrin style ones and torque the oil filter to 15Nm after lubricating the 'O' ring. 5. Pour 1 litre of oil into the engine fill cap and 4 litres into the oil tank, then start the engine and bring up to temperature until the cooling fan comes on. While the engine is running top up the tank to 5mm below the top of the middle baffle (should take an additional 1.5 litres or so). It helps if the car is in the shade and you use a torch to see where the oil level is relative to the baffle. 6. Make sure the oil catch container is emptied, if necessary.

When I needed to open the diff to replace the rear cover due to the recall for interference between the cover and the DeDion tube, I confirmed it looked like this: http://www.titan.uk.net/_/uploads/products/21/section_12_lsds_excel.pdf If the original noise before changing the oil was "1" for noisy (not sure what the original oil was, but likely Amsoil, based on the Canadian Caterham distributor's preference), with Redline 75w90 I would rate it as 7 for clunking and 3 for overrun noise. The 75w140 I would rate as 8 for clunking and 5 for overrun noise. Although I had about 7000km on the original oil and 7000km on the 75w90, I have only put 2000km on the 75w140. At this point I would continue using the 75w140, especially after an auto-slalom session and a hard track day this week in 31C temperatures and wearing through half a set of Pirelli slicks in 210km, with no issues at all with diff noise.

After a few months of use, I normally expect to see some darkening of the oil, with a slight greyish tinge. My 2012 R400D has the BMW diff with Titan clutch plate LSD. I used Redline 75w90 GL5 last year, but decided to try 75w140 in it now, it has little whine in 4th gear on the overrun with the thicker oil, with no clunking in either case. Both of these Redline oils have limited slip additive as standard for clutch plate LSDs, unless it has "NS" on the bottle: http://www.redlineoil.com/product.aspx?pid=134

I can't say exactly what config the encrypted Caterham map has for throttle sites in the 992 ECU, but I expect that it is quite similar to the map in my un-encrypted 9A4 ECU. Basically there are voltage values in the map for throttle site 0.0, 1.0, 2.0......14.0,15.0. Any values for sites between the ".0" values are interpolated by the ECU, they are not explicitly stated in the map, but the data logging captures them as values with a throttle site resolved to 0.1, in the range of 0.0 to 15.0 (i.e. 161 distinct values). On the 9A4 ECU it is easy to set the throttle range, as I just set the voltage values at site 0.0 and 15.0 and whether the TPS rotates clockwise or anti-clockwise, together with what the default TPS voltage value should be if an out-of-range voltage is detected. My belief is that Caterham have not paid the most attention to optimizing the throttle site mapping to TPS voltage on the R400D, just leaving the settings as "good enough". Ideally the TPS minimum voltage with the throttle closed should always map to throttle site 0.0 and max throttle against the mechanical stop should map to 15.0, but the TPS used doesn't seem to be aligned with the map very well, perhaps just due to manufacturing tolerances, or maybe due to inaccurate mapping. Any throttle site can be used used to indicate any throttle position, as long as there is a continuous transition from open to closed that reflects the volume of air flowing through the throttle, it is then a matter of having the correct fuel flow values in the fuel map to reach the necessary lambda values at a specific throttle load site for a given number of revs. At idle with the closed loop narrow-band lambda sensor, my data logging indicated an oscillation when at throttle site 1.0 under certain circumstances, probably due to a bit too much fuel (compared with throttle site 0.0) causing the revs to rise above the idle value which then causes the lambda value to be rich, the ECU then tries to adjust to a target lambda which is likely 1.0, the mixture goes lean and the revs drop below the target idle value, more fuel then has to be injected to reach the target lambda again. This oscillation happens about once every 3 seconds (1/3 Hz), the oscillation frequency of the lambda sensor at idle. On my car this oscillation occurred when the engine was well warmed up (needing less fuel for idle due to lower intake air density), with the engine speed typically varying from 850 to 1200 RPM.

My 2012 R400D used the 30L153A until I changed it for an MBE 9A4 ECU, so likely some differences in the map loaded in the different ECUs, but I believe the 38L036A is also the MBE 992 based ECU (in Easimap it will tell you which chip file it is using, if it has 992 in the name, it is a 992 ECU). I believe your ECU may be the part number for use with the roller barrel throttle bodies, whereas mine is for the plenum. My 30L153A ECU does not learn the throttle range at engine start. I think the occasional engine hunting (especially at idle when the engine is warm) is due to the throttle being at throttle site 1.0 when the throttle is closed, the map is expecting the throttle to be slightly open.

The MBE 985 interface is compatible with the R400D 992 ECU. On my car the TPS voltage varies from 1.27V at closed throttle to 4.68V at full throttle. The standard Caterham map seems to assume throttle site 0.0 at about 1.0V and throttle site 15.0 at about 5.0V (implied from data logging, as ECU map is encrypted) so my R400D was running only from throttle site 1.0 to about site 14.0 according to my Easimap data logging on the 992 ECU (probably due to manufacturing tolerances).

It looks like the current Caerbont one, calibration instructions here: http://www.caigauge.com/page28.html Before you change the setting, drive at a constant 30, 50 and 70 mph as indicated on your satnav. Note the indicated speed on the speedometer at each of those speeds. Calculate the ratio between actual and displayed speeds (for example 30 actual, 33 displayed would be 1.10; 50 actual, 54 displayed would be 1.08). Average each of the 3 ratios, then multiply the existing speedometer calibration pulses per mile number by that ratio, to give you the new calibration number.

I would also check that the throttle stop hasn't come loose and backed out.

I was taking the ET0 offset for the rear wheels off the purchase information from when I bought the wheels, unfortunately this is wrong. I took one of the front and rear wheels off and looked at the casting marks and measured the wheels to be certain. The 8-spoke R500 wheels are all ET24 front (6x13) and rear (8x13).

The Caterham 8x13 ET0 rear wheels don't protrude beyond the arches on an S3 DeDion chassis, this is the standard R500 and optional R400 wheel. Any lower (more inset) offset would have the tyre rubbing on the Watts linkage.

Glad to be of help!

(Deleted) Sorry! Wrong Thread!

You will need a 4-pole relay such as this: http://www.halfords.com/motoring-travel/tools-diy/fuses-electricals-fixings/halfords-hef554-relay-12v-30amp-4-pin . Also add an inline 30A fuse to the 12V line from the battery if it doesn't go through the fuseblock. The 4 poles are connected as follows: Pole '85' to ECU output Pole '86' to ground Pole '87' to fused 30A battery supply Pole '30' to fan. I would use a minimum of 14 gauge wiring to the fan and battery and 24 gauge to the ECU and relay ground. Standard insulated spade connectors will fit the relay poles and the relay can be attached with a screw or body mounting tape in a convenient position. The ECU output will need to be a positive voltage of at least 200mA and 5V to trigger the relay.

Bearing in mind that my car is the R400 210bhp Duratec and from what I can tell has the 82C thermostat, the following are my findings: I would suggest the fan certainly comes on at an indicated 96C or so on the Easimap coolant temperature panel, but the issue is that is what the ECU thinks it is. In reality my infrared thermometer can only find temperatures around 80C in the hottest part of the cooling circuit and the radiator is only just starting to cool as the thermostat is only just on the threshold of opening. Interestingly my dash temp gauge also agrees with my infrared thermometer, that the fan comes on at 80C, as others have found (I had always assumed the gauge was inaccurate). I still believe the resistance to temperature correlation curve in the 992 ECU is inaccurate. I also had the same issue with an even more inaccurate sensor curve in the default map I started with in my unlocked 9A4 ECU. After correcting the curve and adjusting the fan limits to start at 90C and stop at 85C, the radiator gets hot after the thermostat opens, the fan only comes on after the car is stationary for a few minutes in ambient temps around 20C and the dash gauge agrees with the Easimap coolant temperature panel.

One area to have them look at is the calibration of the temperature sensor curve stored in the ECU. I can't view the curve in the encrypted map in my Caterham MBE 992 ECU, but the reported temperature via the Easimap dashboard when the fan is running seems to be 15C higher than the temperature sensor is really measuring (that is the ECU is showing 95C when the sensor is measuring 80C, the displayed and measured values both seem to be the same at 10C when the engine is cold), causing the fan to activate at a too low temperature.