Deatschwerks X3 Fuel system

[wingnutt]

Right.

It would be great if you started a new thread, for discussion around all things Vaporworx, PWM, fuel systems etc. I think we have completely derailed OP's Deatchwerks thread at this point.

Sponsored

 

[NGOT8R]

Right.

It would be great if you started a new thread, for discussion around all things Vaporworx, PWM, fuel systems etc. I think we have completely derailed OP's Deatchwerks thread at this point.

No worries. I ain’t mad at anybody. I do want to know which VaporWorx PWM system is compatible with the factory FPDM though, as that is the one I would prefer to run. Hopefully someone will confirm via the test procedure that Carl mentioned earlier.

 

[Angrey]

I'd just like a sure-fire way to protect the motor when one pump decides to check out. Most people on here (with Forced Induction) are running return systems, so it would be great to have a failsafe that doesn't rely on electronics or gauges. Although, if there were some way to monitor the draw/amperage on each pump, that would be better than nothing. Hopefully this PWM controller does help with pump longevity. I haven't seen any difference in fuel temps from when I was using the standard dumb relay "controllers". I think most of the heat in the fuel is just from passing through the hot fuel rails and the heat of the engine in general.

If I had to do it all over again, I would have gone with the KPM system and been done with it, but now can't really justify the cost of scrapping what I have (as I assume most others with return systems would agree)

What I'm going to type is going to hairlip a bunch of people, but as usual, I don't care.

I'm BETTING, that the OEM calibration has features that would allow for a safety stop concerning this phenomenon. But the vast majority of tuners (yes, even the usual suspects that have everyone swinging from their nuts) don't know or use 95% of the Ford calibration and it's capabilities.

I'm betting that there's a way to set a threshold limit for injector pulse width to stop the party entirely. @engineermike or others could chime in.

There's no way to lean out/nuke a motor limping on one pump without first maxing out the injector pulse width.

The MOTEC has much better (or at least it seems that way because again, most tuners don't even scratch the surface of what the Ford PCM can do) nanny/safety features when it comes to stuff like this.

If one of my pumps takes a shit, the computer will try to continue delivering the required amount of fuel on less flow/pressure and the only way that's possible is for it to start leaving the squirters open longer and longer on lower and lower pressure. Once it reaches a certain threshold AND/OR the AFR goes to a certain level given RPM and air load, the motor will shut down the party to protect itself.

The other physical solution that I'd employ prior is to simply go with a brushless pump. You want to NOT have an issue, run pumps that don't shit out on you. Just a suggestion.

 

[SheepDog]

simply go with a brushless pump

What do you recommend? I'd be fine with converting my existing Radium bucket to a single brushless pump, provided I can get clear instruction on how to set it up, what controller to use, and confirmation that tuning it is within the capabilities of our mainstream tuners

Edit: I sent an email to Radium to see if they sell a kit to upgrade my existing hanger to the ELM5 capable hanger, and if they can provide insight as to how to wire up the PWM controller. They state that it needs a 100mhz Square waveform signal (not sure where to get that) but since I already have the Vaporworx MAP sensor, Im wondering if it can use that 0-5v reference to increase duty cycle based on Boost pressure.

 

[CarlC]

The FSCM is positive pulse along with kit options as detailed in an earlier post.

Brushless is becoming more common on new OE cars. When retrofitting a brushless pump into a brushed pump FSCM equipped car the FSCM functions go away. They will not talk to each other.

As far as a new thread, I'm good with that but I'm/Aero is not a paying vendor here, hence not wanting to step on toes. If someone wants to start a new thread and the mods are okay with it then we can continue there.

 

[engineermike]

I'm BETTING, that the OEM calibration has features that would allow for a safety stop concerning this phenomenon. But the vast majority of tuners (yes, even the usual suspects that have everyone swinging from their nuts) don't know or use 95% of the Ford calibration and it's capabilities.

I'm betting that there's a way to set a threshold limit for injector pulse width to stop the party entirely. @engineermike or others could chime in.

The OEM PCM logic is amazingly capable of protecting the engine from going lean, but as you said, many or most tuners delete, disable, or neuter one or all of these protections. In aftermarket tunes, I've seen them disable the logic that adjusts puleswidth to compensate for changes in fuel pressure, disable its ability to cut throttle if it reaches the injector limit, and disable its ability to cut timing if it commands lean at WOT. Most are trying to get max performance and may not even realize the implications of what they are doing.

Ever wonder how all these Roush cars don't blow up when the stock fuel pump doesn't keep up? I actually have logs of this on my Roush truck, but because Roush keeps all the stock protections in place, my truck was closing the throttle when the port injectors reached something like 80% of max PW. [Side note, I'm running +2 psi boost and E85 on the truck using the stock injectors and fuel pump.] I tweaked the safety factor until it would run just under the throttle cut PW, but a lot of tuners just raise the factor way out of the way or switch it off altogether.

The sad part is that most end-users assume their engine blew because their fuel system was inadequate (in fairness, it is) plus their tuner told them it was inadequate (they're not wrong) but they leave out the part that the OEM protections could have prevented it if they were still functional.

 

[engineermike]

...When retrofitting a brushless pump into a brushed pump FSCM equipped car the FSCM functions go away. They will not talk to each other.

My friend (a controls engineer) and I dug pretty deep into this. You can actually retain the Ford fuel pump control logic and control a brushless driver with it. There are two options, one being to use the signal straight from the PCM that is sent to the FPDM, and the other that you can control the brushless driver with the output of the factory FPDM. The problem with deleting the FPDM and using the PCM output is that the max PW for 100% duty cycle is only 48%, so depending on how the brushless driver is configured it may not be enough to get max capacity. However, the output of the FPDM can go to 100% duty cycle so it could potentially be used to drive the brushless pump off the OEM logic. In my opinion, I'd prefer to use the second option because the factory fuel pump control logic is very capable and doesn't require any more add-on sensors and wiring, and the FPDM isolates the PCM from the brushless driver (no need to worry about over-amping the control circuit).

We wound up not doing any of this because along the way we figured out a single DW400 on a 22v BAP will do way more than anyone expected. When you can make 900 or more rwhp there just wasn't a need for all the expense and reconfiguration.

 

[NGOT8R]

My friend (a controls engineer) and I dug pretty deep into this. You can actually retain the Ford fuel pump control logic and control a brushless driver with it. There are two options, one being to use the signal straight from the PCM that is sent to the FPDM, and the other that you can control the brushless driver with the output of the factory FPDM. The problem with deleting the FPDM and using the PCM output is that the max PW for 100% duty cycle is only 48%, so depending on how the brushless driver is configured it may not be enough to get max capacity. However, the output of the FPDM can go to 100% duty cycle so it could potentially be used to drive the brushless pump off the OEM logic. In my opinion, I'd prefer to use the second option because the factory fuel pump control logic is very capable and doesn't require any more add-on sensors and wiring, and the FPDM isolates the PCM from the brushless driver (no need to worry about over-amping the control circuit).

We wound up not doing any of this because along the way we figured out a single DW400 on a 22v BAP will do way more than anyone expected. When you can make 900 or more rwhp there just wasn't a need for all the expense and reconfiguration.

When you and your buddy were digging into this, were you guys able to determine which wire was pulsed using the testing method described by @CarlC in post #201?

 

[svomadness]

When you and your buddy were digging into this, were you guys able to determine which wire was pulsed using the testing method described by @CarlC in post #201?

Our FPCM positive pulses the fuel pump. The square wave form on the power wire I saw with a scope and the 5.4 volts at idle measured with a multimeter double confirmed this. We can purchase a controller from Vaporworx/Aeromotive in the same standard form it is set up for GM or Dodge. Hope this helps

 

[NGOT8R]

Our FPCM positive pulses the fuel pump. The square wave form on the power wire I saw with a scope and the 5.4 volts at idle measured with a multimeter double confirmed this. We can purchase a controller from Vaporworx/Aeromotive in the same standard form it is set up for GM or Dodge. Hope this helps

Right on! Thank you!

 

[svomadness]

Happy to contribute! Honestly, I should have known how to answer this question myself when it was asked months ago. Not sure why it took a tip from Carl on what exactly to look at for it to dawn on me. Better late than never I guess haha!

 

[SheepDog]

The square wave form on the power wire

I wonder if this signal can be used as the input for a Brushless PWM controller....

Ti Automotive BKS1001 Brushless E5LM Pump

810lph in-tank brushless fuel pump w/ 9-1002 install kit + C105 Contro – DeatschWerks

 

[CarlC]

The OEM PCM logic is amazingly capable of protecting the engine from going lean, but as you said, many or most tuners delete, disable, or neuter one or all of these protections. In aftermarket tunes, I've seen them disable the logic that adjusts puleswidth to compensate for changes in fuel pressure, disable its ability to cut throttle if it reaches the injector limit, and disable its ability to cut timing if it commands lean at WOT. Most are trying to get max performance and may not even realize the implications of what they are doing.

Ever wonder how all these Roush cars don't blow up when the stock fuel pump doesn't keep up? I actually have logs of this on my Roush truck, but because Roush keeps all the stock protections in place, my truck was closing the throttle when the port injectors reached something like 80% of max PW. [Side note, I'm running +2 psi boost and E85 on the truck using the stock injectors and fuel pump.] I tweaked the safety factor until it would run just under the throttle cut PW, but a lot of tuners just raise the factor way out of the way or switch it off altogether.

The sad part is that most end-users assume their engine blew because their fuel system was inadequate (in fairness, it is) plus their tuner told them it was inadequate (they're not wrong) but they leave out the part that the OEM protections could have prevented it if they were still functional.

Right on. So-called Tunerz think that they know better than the really smart folks that designed and implemented these systems. Real calibrators know better. I very much encourage the use of the FSCM whenever possible.

I've been very fortunate to deal with some GM folks who understand these systems, and it's enlightening to learn from them. As mentioned, the systems not only go to great lengths to keep things from going BOOM!, they are also programmed to not have MIL's and limp mode kick in unless it's really needed. If the MIL is on, something is for sure not right.

 

[CarlC]

My friend (a controls engineer) and I dug pretty deep into this. You can actually retain the Ford fuel pump control logic and control a brushless driver with it. There are two options, one being to use the signal straight from the PCM that is sent to the FPDM, and the other that you can control the brushless driver with the output of the factory FPDM. The problem with deleting the FPDM and using the PCM output is that the max PW for 100% duty cycle is only 48%, so depending on how the brushless driver is configured it may not be enough to get max capacity. However, the output of the FPDM can go to 100% duty cycle so it could potentially be used to drive the brushless pump off the OEM logic. In my opinion, I'd prefer to use the second option because the factory fuel pump control logic is very capable and doesn't require any more add-on sensors and wiring, and the FPDM isolates the PCM from the brushless driver (no need to worry about over-amping the control circuit).

We wound up not doing any of this because along the way we figured out a single DW400 on a 22v BAP will do way more than anyone expected. When you can make 900 or more rwhp there just wasn't a need for all the expense and reconfiguration.

Agreed. When properly implemented voltage boosting can be an elegant solution. Unfortunately most go for the sledge hammer approach that leads to a host of problems. Many FSCM's will not accept more than 17v before it will MIL code.

Your BL option 2 may be dependent on the level of monitoring and load parameters the FSCM has. For example, without an insufficient and variable load on GM vehicle FSCM's they will over time produce MIL's. Crate engines, since GM does not know what will be attached, tend to have a much wider acceptance range for the attached pump.

 

[engineermike]

...they are also programmed to not have MIL's and limp mode kick in unless it's really needed....

YES! I noticed this along the way, that Ford has an entire FMEM "Failure Modes and Effects Management" system that attempts to protect the engine....everything from liming rpm and load, to even limiting or disabling knock advance, but it prioritizes keeping engine running. I guess they figure it's better to hurt the engine than lose power in the wrong situation.

Sponsored