So the ECM is actually processing the fueling table cell that isn't actually there but implied, in this time stamp RPM is 2271 and we have data column 1900RPM and 2350RPM and TPS value of 169 with TPS data rows 175 and 125. So the ECM calculates the cell value for that TPS and RPM value off of the data in the columns and rows we DO have data, it isn't hard to figure it out as it would be a linear line connecting the left cell and right cell column then weighted by RPM we are at in the time stamp away from either side RPM data column, same goes for TPS. Hope that makes since?
How so?
in layman terms TPS average = steady state cruse ( TPS value relatively constant).
Crack open the throttle and the first sensor data indicating an expectation to accelerate is the TPS sensor, ECM is compensating the rapid fuel requirement needed in this condition with acceleration enrichment... link more or less backs up how I stated it does with my MLV screen shot. How are you interpreting it? Where do I have it wrong?
A rapidly accelerating TPS value (sensor) on its own requires no fuel, a rapidly accelerating bike (engine) does require the extra fuel though. Need to look at the big picture of what is trying to be accomplished with all these tables.
Some corrections to my previously posted MLV screen grab, ACCEL enrichment was 13.7 not 37, I was working quickly to post before work. WB AFR reading trails around 2-3 time tamps behind where it actually was showing (delay = 2 or 3 if running analysis).
Attachment 11994
Here is the very next time stamp on that log. We can see from TPD (throttle position degrees) we have hit 85 so out of acceleration enrichment threshold. CL/OL/and some of WOT TPS value is below 85 degrees so it CAN and is applied when needed.