Nicky Hayden running out of fuel

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bojuhl @ Jul 6 2008, 05:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Try something with a Rotax twin and you will say good by to Harley

+1

or simply,

try anything else and you will say goodbye to harley.

had an sv1000s for 3 years, really fell in love with twins then. currently have a cbr1000rr and a drz400sm. am selling both my bikes for a ktm 950sm. that bike handles like a cat on a rug!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Geonerd @ Jul 5 2008, 06:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It's suppose to be. But, it also makes MORE power, thus requiring more gas....



At a track like Assen, all the bikes are fuel limited. The bikes' electronics vary the mixture from corner to corner, striving to provide the best compromise between smooth power (and lots of it!) and fuel efficiency. Here's what I suspect happened: The ECU's main fuel mapping/delivery loop most likely thinks in terms of injector pulse width. (It is not thinking "I need to inject 0.232 grams this time around.") It looks at engine sensors, throttle position, track position, gear, speed, etc., decides how much gas to squirt, and powers the injector for the appropriate length of time. Now, I'll betcha that another, entirely separate software loop is worried about total fuel consumption. It adds up total pulse time and tries to figure out how much gas as been burned. I'll also bet that the fuel injection system on the new engine is significantly different, and that the MPG tables and values from the springer won't work. It all comes down to fine tuning the fuel consumption parameters, and I think someone at Honda either made a mistake entering values, or was working with bad data of some sort. Or maybe is was a hardware issue; something like the fuel injector rail running a few PSI over spec, resulting in a slightly richer mix? In any case, the computer should never allow the bike to run dry. It was probably doing a fine job of utilizing the remaining fuel, and was as surprised (if Pedrobot can be surprised, so can an embedded u-controller!) as Nicky when the motor went ....-up.

Sound believable?
Interesting post - welcome to the forum mate.

All sounds very believable to me. According to HRC it was a S/W issue rather than H/W, but I agree that a dodgy parameter value or two is the most likely issue, rather than a problem with the actual code.

surprised micro-controller

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Geonerd @ Jul 5 2008, 06:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It's suppose to be. But, it also makes MORE power, thus requiring more gas....

The pneumatic valves can close faster, meaning that when fuel is injected in the induction stroke, less fuel will escape and be wasted through the closing exhaust valve. This should allow the same amount of fuel to be able to power the motor for margianlly longer, or for the same fuel to make more power for an eqaul amount of time. The electronics for the new engine were not ready and HRC had said as much to Nicky when he requested the engine so its hardly a surprise it went wrong, what exactly the problem was we could speculate for ages but i'd bet it was a software issue.

HRC wont be too upset that the bike publically had problems because race testing will provide the engineers with the most applicable data they have to date and the problem should be fixed (and they have promised it will be). Nickies best result since Jerez is also positive.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jul 7 2008, 07:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The pneumatic valves can close faster, meaning that when fuel is injected in the induction stroke, less fuel will escape and be wasted through the closing exhaust valve. This should allow the same amount of fuel to be able to power the motor for margianlly longer, or for the same fuel to make more power for an eqaul amount of time. The electronics for the new engine were not ready and HRC had said as much to Nicky when he requested the engine so its hardly a surprise it went wrong, what exactly the problem was we could speculate for ages but i'd bet it was a software issue.

HRC wont be too upset that the bike publically had problems because race testing will provide the engineers with the most applicable data they have to date and the problem should be fixed (and they have promised it will be). Nickies best result since Jerez is also positive.
yes but it will work better in this area with direct injection. until then i think they will need the valve overlap . the pneumatic valve are for higher rev celings due to eliminating spring surge. i think once the direct injection and air valves are used together there will be a good fuel saving, until then i bet it uses more fuel because of the higher revs and still overlapping the valve timing.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Jul 7 2008, 07:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>yes but it will work better in this area with direct injection. until then i think they will need the valve overlap . the pneumatic valve are for higher rev celings due to eliminating spring surge. i think once the direct injection and air valves are used together there will be a good fuel saving, until then i bet it uses more fuel because of the higher revs and still overlapping the valve timing.

The valve overlap may still exist but it will be reduced, and additional revs may use extra fuel, but they don't necessarily have to use extra revs.

no to get OT, but i was re-reading this thread, an NO ONE EVER WELCOMED ME TO THE FOURM
NOW, back OT

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jul 7 2008, 08:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The valve overlap may still exist but it will be reduced, and additional revs may use extra fuel, but they don't necessarily have to use extra revs.
so how are they going to get more power ?, if there reducing the overlap and using higher revs will also require more fuel.
the only engines i know of that can run with little of no overlap is engines with turbos or superchargers. i believe this direct injection is supposed to be able to give the engine more fuel than its normally aspirated amount without a compressor while reducing waste due to decreased valve overlap.
you say the pneumatic valves can close faster,this may actually allow them to run more overlap but there could be other problems in closing valve to fast. they will have to build in some cushioning effect to prevent the valve damaging the seat

i would love to see the valve timing figures on these bikes, they may publish them in my lifetime if im lucky.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Jul 7 2008, 08:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>so how are they going to get more power ?

well perhaps instead of running a peaky high reving alternative like they are for Nicky right now, HRC intend to build something which uses its fuel to give a fuller powerband with more torque.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jul 7 2008, 08:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>well perhaps instead of running a peaky high reving alternative like they are for Nicky right now, HRC intend to build something which uses its fuel to give a fuller powerband with more torque.
i added a bit more to my post mate, by the time i edited you had posted

well i thought there reason for running The pneumatic valves system was to gain an extra 1000 rpm with the view to getting even more once the system has had more development.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (kngadrok @ Jul 2 2008, 08:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>i've been stuck in these texas ........ forums where they cant tell a GP bike from a cow patty

Yes.

In other states (where people suck at riding) they generally like to talk a big game to differentiate themselves from other riders. Anything to avoid growing some balls and learning to ride.

In Texas we don't waste our younger years on such worthless endeavors. We have our 50s and 60s to study the manuals.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Geonerd @ Jul 6 2008, 03:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It's suppose to be. But, it also makes MORE power, thus requiring more gas....



At a track like Assen, all the bikes are fuel limited. The bikes' electronics vary the mixture from corner to corner, striving to provide the best compromise between smooth power (and lots of it!) and fuel efficiency. Here's what I suspect happened: The ECU's main fuel mapping/delivery loop most likely thinks in terms of injector pulse width. (It is not thinking "I need to inject 0.232 grams this time around.") It looks at engine sensors, throttle position, track position, gear, speed, etc., decides how much gas to squirt, and powers the injector for the appropriate length of time. Now, I'll betcha that another, entirely separate software loop is worried about total fuel consumption. It adds up total pulse time and tries to figure out how much gas as been burned. I'll also bet that the fuel injection system on the new engine is significantly different, and that the MPG tables and values from the springer won't work. It all comes down to fine tuning the fuel consumption parameters, and I think someone at Honda either made a mistake entering values, or was working with bad data of some sort. Or maybe is was a hardware issue; something like the fuel injector rail running a few PSI over spec, resulting in a slightly richer mix? In any case, the computer should never allow the bike to run dry. It was probably doing a fine job of utilizing the remaining fuel, and was as surprised (if Pedrobot can be surprised, so can an embedded u-controller!) as Nicky when the motor went ....-up.

Sound believable?

Hooorah!! a sensible post!!

Only I don't think there was any mistake .... I think, as Honda had warned, Nicky they don't yet have the thing sorted enough to be "knowingly" be able to make the race distance yet.

These things are found out by testing, and obviously Nicky wanted it, tested or not. At the moment all we can say is ........ nicky probably gave it its first full race distance tests, ynder race conditions ........ and it nearly made it


What they will do to fix it lies in exactly what you wrote ..... so they will tweak the power out a bit ..... they will need to widen their safety factor a bit so power will drop ...... hence we will be back to the situation of ...... just how much more power than the spring valve engine is going to be useful?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Jul 7 2008, 08:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yes.

In other states (where people suck at riding) they generally like to talk a big game to differentiate themselves from other riders. Anything to avoid growing some balls and learning to ride.

In Texas we don't waste our younger years on such worthless endeavors. We have our 50s and 60s to study the manuals.
PUUULEEEEZZZE!!......Doin a U-turn on a 500 mile straight road doesn't count as riding......

watch it doc

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BarryMachine @ Jul 7 2008, 07:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Hooorah!! a sensible post!!

Only I don't think there was any mistake .... I think, as Honda had warned, Nicky they don't yet have the thing sorted enough to be "knowingly" be able to make the race distance yet.

These things are found out by testing, and obviously Nicky wanted it, tested or not. At the moment all we can say is ........ nicky probably gave it its first full race distance tests, ynder race conditions ........ and it nearly made it


What they will do to fix it lies in exactly what you wrote ..... so they will tweak the power out a bit ..... they will need to widen their safety factor a bit so power will drop ...... hence we will be back to the situation of ...... just how much more power than the spring valve engine is going to be useful?


I see your up to your lame posts again, oh wait, no change. I heard this idea before, that somehow because Hayden wanted and pushed for the engine, that if something went wrong it would be his fault. They “warned” him you say and "he wanted it tested or not"; what you imply is stupid. Honda engineers are big boys, and if they put something out its intended to perform. Implying that its Nicky's fault is grossly bias. This running out of fuel thing goes squarely on HRC (at least some engineer who ...... up at very least). You try to put it on Nicky is hogwash. The guy pushes for the latest development of engine (something that the other manufactures have done), and of all things it runs out of gas? That isn’t a matter of it NOT being ready; it’s a matter of shady and shoddy mapping. That .... is embarrassing to HRC!

You say if hadn’t been tested a race distance, then try to cover your stupid ignorant statement by the condition, well at least not in a race. Of course not in an actual race moron, but saying it has not been tested for race distance just shows how much of a buffoon you are.

The thing has been test and ‘should’ have been ready enough to finish a race with fuel. There is no way around that. And for God’s sakes, its certainly not Hayden’s fault it ran out of fuel.

Here is another conundrum. We know that fuel mapping can be adjusted on the fly by the team’s computers, if they do put it on conserve mode and Nicky drops back, the first to claim Nicky—the riders doesn’t have the pace would be people like you, yet, it could certainly be a conservation mode not allowing the bike to deliver the power to stay with the front runners. You claim you know a thing or two about telemetry and how it is effected by the electronic package of a bike during a race, but here you show your ..., as usual.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Jul 7 2008, 10:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You say if hadn’t been tested a race distance, then try to cover your stupid ignorant statement by the condition, well at least not in a race. Of course not in an actual race moron, but saying it has not been tested for race distance just shows how much of a buffoon you are.
What about Okada at Mugello? May as well extend that to "race distance at assen" or "race distance with Hayden (well, except Donnington...) Hardly extensively race-tested, but not the first time out either.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (kngadrok @ Jul 7 2008, 11:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>watch it doc
well you texas guys need to leave massachusetts out of that little gem then.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Jul 8 2008, 06:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I see your up to your lame posts again, oh wait, no change. I heard this idea before, that somehow because Hayden wanted and pushed for the engine, that if something went wrong it would be his fault. They “warned” him you say and "he wanted it tested or not"; what you imply is stupid. Honda engineers are big boys, and if they put something out its intended to perform. Implying that its Nicky's fault is grossly bias.

Strange how a person's view changes. Last year Rossi were to blame for using the new pnumatic engine too early. This year Hayden is no way to blame for doing the same. Hummm...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Jul 8 2008, 05:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I see your up to your lame posts again, oh wait, no change. I heard this idea before, that somehow because Hayden wanted and pushed for the engine, that if something went wrong it would be his fault. They “warned” him you say and "he wanted it tested or not"; what you imply is stupid. Honda engineers are big boys, and if they put something out its intended to perform. Implying that its Nicky's fault is grossly bias. This running out of fuel thing goes squarely on HRC (at least some engineer who ...... up at very least). You try to put it on Nicky is hogwash. The guy pushes for the latest development of engine (something that the other manufactures have done), and of all things it runs out of gas? That isn’t a matter of it NOT being ready; it’s a matter of shady and shoddy mapping. That .... is embarrassing to HRC!

I think one of HRC's main concerns was the embarassment of a failure(like Rossi in Misano), hence the reluctance to race the new engine. Nicky may not be directly at fault for the engine iussue as he is not an HRC engineer but he is responsible dor the tace result (not bad luck) because it was a risk that he conciously took (against the teams wishes).

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jul 8 2008, 09:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I think one of HRC's main concerns was the embarassment of a failure(like Rossi in Misano), hence the reluctance to race the new engine. Nicky may not be directly at fault for the engine iussue as he is not an HRC engineer but he is responsible dor the tace result (not bad luck) because it was a risk that he conciously took (against the teams wishes).
have i missed something ? can you direct me to where hrc have said they didn't want hayden to race the new engine at assen please.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Jul 8 2008, 09:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>have i missed something ? can you direct me to where hrc have said they didn't want hayden to race the new engine at assen please.

I remember reading Nicky saying that he had trouble convincing the team to let him run the engine because it wasn't ready. He promised them podiums in return or sometyhing.