relative compression test

Ask any questions about using PicoScope 6 Automotive software here.
tangoman
OneWave
OneWave
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 10:22 am

relative compression test

Post by tangoman »

Hi just like to know if any one knows when I do a relative compression test and use the WPS 500 its always tell me the compression is low but it ok I did one just today on a 2.2 lite Toyota Camry and set up the software and told it was a 2.2 and 9,5 to one compression but it still come up and tell me it low ?
Attachments
Screenshot (108).png
Screenshot (107).png

PicoPhil
Pico Staff Member
Pico Staff Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 11:38 am

Re: relative compression test

Post by PicoPhil »

Good afternoon
Please could you tell me which version of software you are using in PD and which Window operating software you have installed on the PC. I can then tests this software. I am sorry that you have experienced this problem.
Kind regards
Philip

tangoman
OneWave
OneWave
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 10:22 am

Re: relative compression test

Post by tangoman »

Hi I using software version 1.8.4.1692 and windows 10

Thanks for you help

tangoman
OneWave
OneWave
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 10:22 am

Re: relative compression test

Post by tangoman »

Hi Picophil
just see if you came up with anything with the software and why it tells me the compression is low

thanks

User avatar
FioranoCars
TwoWaves
TwoWaves
Posts: 386
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:26 am
Location: London, UK

Re: relative compression test

Post by FioranoCars »

Hi Tangoman
Might be worth checking these settings:
Settings
Settings
Especially sensor volume!

Also from a generic perspective the hose you are using to interface the Pressure Transducer to the spark plug is critical, if not Pico's then suggest you try theirs (the volume of the inside of the hose and it being incredibly resitive to expansion under the cranking cycle), if theirs, then maybe Phil can comment on possible defective units or wear and tear requiring a replacement? Of course it being air tight and done up well is key too :D

Hope that provokes some thoughts, and please let me know what it was, as sadly otherwise I'll be posting the same thing one day myself!

Cheers
Richard

tangoman
OneWave
OneWave
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 10:22 am

Re: relative compression test

Post by tangoman »

Thanks for the info I have play around with the sensor volume . made it worst ! I am using the WPS 500 with the hose that came in the box !

User avatar
FioranoCars
TwoWaves
TwoWaves
Posts: 386
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:26 am
Location: London, UK

Re: relative compression test

Post by FioranoCars »

For my money, and of course Pico will know best, but if the software is "good" then the issue is either
1. a parameter - in this case the volume is key, plus engine size and compression
2. The hose and WPS seals each end
3. The hose
4. The probe location/connection (this is unlikely to be the fault on several tests on different cars!

You have consistent results, just low, hence the hose and value for volume seem most likely. Sorry but you best check the manual for the volume figures as I'm not near my kit.

If changing the volume made it worse, then changing the other way will make it better! (if you decreased the volume it would make it worse, if you increased it, it should compensate more and make it better!!)

Have a play, and let us know what the number was in the volume field

Best
Richard

User avatar
FioranoCars
TwoWaves
TwoWaves
Posts: 386
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:26 am
Location: London, UK

Re: relative compression test

Post by FioranoCars »

Hi
This might also be a potential issue, if you have serviced, or not, your sensor's bleed valve, of which there are 3 styles:
WPS500 different bleed valves
WPS500 different bleed valves
There may be a leak/Loose screw! (I think the early ones have a service kit available or O ring?) Or maybe some other defect there abouts?

I'm sure there was once a number stated for the compression hoses volume for use in the compensation dialog box, but I can only assume that the 5.0ml is correct for the Pico supplied hoses, as I can't find anything, here or in my kit? (Steve/Alan/Phil/Mike ... anyone able to confirm this?)

Just a further thought...

Richard

victor2k
TwoWaves
TwoWaves
Posts: 337
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:17 am

Re: relative compression test

Post by victor2k »

pico wps500 bleed valves.png
There may be a leak/Loose screw! (I think the early ones have a service kit available or O ring?) Or maybe some other defect there abouts?

I'm sure there was once a number stated for the compression hoses volume for use in the compensation dialog box, but I can only assume that the 5.0ml is correct for the Pico supplied hoses, as I can't find anything, here or in my kit? (Steve/Alan/Phil/Mike ... anyone able to confirm this?)

Just a further thought...

Richard
Hello,
Let's talk about numbers:
198 psi means 13.65 bar.
In the repair manual the car manufacturer will require for more than 11 bar so the software can't tell nothing about low compression in this case.
Even if you will have 300-400!PSI the software will warn you about the low compression on a engine with a compression ratio at 10(tested by me on w7/64 bits with a non-pico pressure sensor with 6.11.12 software version).
I think is a bug related to the compresssion ratio in Pico Diagnostics :|
About the compensation for hose +adapters volume...can be measured in 20 seconds(5ml is a big compensation volume for a 1.4l engine with a compression ratio at 18-19 so if I can measure then I will not use a default/presumed compensation value).
Regards
-->
FioranoCars wrote:Hi
This might also be a potential issue, if you have serviced, or not, your sensor's bleed valve, of which there are 3 styles:
pico wps500 bleed valves.png
There may be a leak/Loose screw! (I think the early ones have a service kit available or O ring?) Or maybe some other defect there abouts?

I'm sure there was once a number stated for the compression hoses volume for use in the compensation dialog box, but I can only assume that the 5.0ml is correct for the Pico supplied hoses, as I can't find anything, here or in my kit? (Steve/Alan/Phil/Mike ... anyone able to confirm this?)

Just a further thought...

Richard
Hello,
Let's talk about numbers:
198 psi means 13.65 bar.
In the repair manual the car manufacturer will require for more than 11 bar so the software can't tell nothing about low compression in this case.
Even if you will have 300-400!PSI the software will warn you about the low compression on a engine with a compression ratio at 10(tested by me on w7/64 bits with a non-pico pressure sensor with 6.11.12 software version).
I think is a bug related to the compresssion ratio in Pico Diagnostics :|
About the compensation for hose +adapters volume...can be measured in 20 seconds(5ml is a big compensation volume for a 1.4l engine with a compression ratio at 18-19 so if I can measure then I will not use a default/presumed compensation value).
Regards