Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Author Topic: Severe timing oscillations  (Read 40071 times)
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12233


WWW
« on: August 08, 2011, 09:49:28 AM »

In the e85 thread, I asked bob about these timing oscillations:



His response:

The oscillating timing might also be a torque intervention through ignition angle out of torque coordination.   
I haven't looked at the calibration and usually you don't allow this on full load, but with all the scaling and stuff you never know.
If anyone wants to dig a bit deeper I would recommend to have a look at MDKOG and MDZW.

ZUE says:



And MDZW is:



comments?
Logged

ME7.1 tuning guide (READ FIRST)
ECUx Plot
ME7Sum checksum checker/corrrector for ME7.x

Please do not ask me for tunes. I'm here to help people make their own.

Do not PM me technical questions! Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your experience.
lulu2003
Full Member
***

Karma: +11/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 242



« Reply #1 on: August 08, 2011, 10:14:05 AM »

simply:
Die Werte in DMAUFN sind so vorzubelegen, daß sich für alle Drehzahlen eine Steigung von ca. 5%/sec ergibt.

 Grin
Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12233


WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 08, 2011, 10:27:04 AM »

simply:
Die Werte in DMAUFN sind so vorzubelegen, daß sich für alle Drehzahlen eine Steigung von ca. 5%/sec ergibt.

 Grin

Apologies, but my german is terrible..

Let me try

The values in DMAUFN are set such that for all RPMs, there is a slope of 5%/sec?
Logged

ME7.1 tuning guide (READ FIRST)
ECUx Plot
ME7Sum checksum checker/corrrector for ME7.x

Please do not ask me for tunes. I'm here to help people make their own.

Do not PM me technical questions! Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your experience.
silentbob
Full Member
***

Karma: +30/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


« Reply #3 on: August 08, 2011, 12:18:28 PM »

Don't get too lost in this. Log the two variables that I have mentioned in the other thread first before wasting time for nothing.

I have seen this situation if you have more air than requested for the requested torque and the ECU tries to reduce torque with ignition angle. As I have already said this interventions on the fast path are usually not allowed on full load.
Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12233


WWW
« Reply #4 on: August 08, 2011, 12:30:10 PM »

Bob, thanks for the info. This isn't for a current car; this is just behavior i've seen in many, many other cars that nobody has ever been able to explain (across many forums). If I see it again, I will log.

Out of curiosity, what was the fix? Reduce MAF readings (via MLHFM or KFKHFM)? or something else? Also, what do you mean by full load?
« Last Edit: August 08, 2011, 12:34:45 PM by nyet » Logged

ME7.1 tuning guide (READ FIRST)
ECUx Plot
ME7Sum checksum checker/corrrector for ME7.x

Please do not ask me for tunes. I'm here to help people make their own.

Do not PM me technical questions! Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your experience.
lulu2003
Full Member
***

Karma: +11/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 242



« Reply #5 on: August 08, 2011, 01:14:27 PM »


Apologies, but my german is terrible..
Let me try
The values in DMAUFN are set such that for all RPMs, there is a slope of 5%/sec?

my german is perfect but my me7 knowledge should be better Wink

I think it will not make too much sense to analyze a jumping ignition log when there is so much going wrong with the air and fuel path.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2011, 01:22:20 PM by lulu2003 » Logged
silentbob
Full Member
***

Karma: +30/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


« Reply #6 on: August 08, 2011, 01:19:10 PM »

I haven't had this problem on my S4, but I have seen this on other cars I have calibrated.
General fix is that the actual values meet the requested and not to allow ignition interventions in that situations  Wink

To describe the situation in a few words:

The ECU has a driver requested torque value it wants to meet. It sets a torque setpoint for the slow (air) and fast (ignition) path. If air is too much, because of poor boost control calibration for example, the ECU tries to reduce torque on a other way (ignition angle) if it's allowed to. But these interventions through ignition angle are liked to certain enable conditions (BBMDEIN).

The key to understand what the ECU is doing, is to understand the torque structure.
Start from section MSF in the Funktionsrahmen and elaborate from there. Grin
As I've said I will do a short write up as well.

Logged
phila_dot
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +171/-11
Offline Offline

Posts: 1709


« Reply #7 on: August 08, 2011, 01:20:35 PM »

Also, what do you mean by full load?

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that I saw a condition byte for "full load" that could be logged.
Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12233


WWW
« Reply #8 on: August 08, 2011, 02:31:53 PM »

I know how frustrating it is to explain the *general* case w/o discussing a specific problem/log, but please bear with me! I appreciate your help.

IIf air is too much, because of poor boost control calibration for example

I.E. large neg deviation? (req<actual ps)

What about incorrect MAF calibration (e.g. MAF readings higher than actual air)?

Quote
the ECU tries to reduce torque on a other way (ignition angle) if it's allowed to. But these interventions through ignition angle are liked to certain enable conditions (BBMDEIN).

Got it. Question is, what rules of thumb do you follow when you decide when to fix the REASON for the intervention, or whether or not to allow intervention. Again, I realize this is a general question, but bear with me Smiley

Quote
The key to understand what the ECU is doing, is to understand the torque structure.
Start from section MSF in the Funktionsrahmen and elaborate from there.

Got it. I have been trying to, but my German (especially technical) isn't so hot, so you'll have to be patient if I ask very dumb questions.

Quote
As I've said I will do a short write up as well.

Thanks in advance Smiley

Keep in mind my goal is to continue to elaborate on the s4 tuning wiki page, which is far too simplistic and is missing many many important troubleshooting tips. So I would also appreciate some honest criticism of that information. I know a lot (most?) of it is probably misleading or incorrect, but I am committed to making it right, since it is the only single, open, easily accessible place that i know of for a top level summary of the most critical maps.
Logged

ME7.1 tuning guide (READ FIRST)
ECUx Plot
ME7Sum checksum checker/corrrector for ME7.x

Please do not ask me for tunes. I'm here to help people make their own.

Do not PM me technical questions! Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your experience.
robin
Full Member
***

Karma: +20/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 139


« Reply #9 on: August 08, 2011, 04:16:54 PM »

I've seen this if optimal torque is too far off of actual.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2011, 07:03:12 PM by robin » Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12233


WWW
« Reply #10 on: August 08, 2011, 04:30:41 PM »

By off, do you mean higher, or lower.

Seems to me requested is almost always below opt... or should be?
Logged

ME7.1 tuning guide (READ FIRST)
ECUx Plot
ME7Sum checksum checker/corrrector for ME7.x

Please do not ask me for tunes. I'm here to help people make their own.

Do not PM me technical questions! Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your experience.
DonSupreme
Newbie
*

Karma: +3/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 22


« Reply #11 on: August 11, 2011, 07:37:48 AM »

In 3rd my timing logs look pretty smooth, but in second gear starting from low rpm (like 2k), my timing is crazy!! up and down, essentially the same path as in 3rd, but the variation is amplified 3x...

Not sure why, especially since load values are essentially the same from 5k RPM and up.
Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12233


WWW
« Reply #12 on: August 11, 2011, 10:12:53 AM »

Yea, it seems to be "rate of change" related, either to MAF or RPM
Logged

ME7.1 tuning guide (READ FIRST)
ECUx Plot
ME7Sum checksum checker/corrrector for ME7.x

Please do not ask me for tunes. I'm here to help people make their own.

Do not PM me technical questions! Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your experience.
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12233


WWW
« Reply #13 on: August 13, 2011, 11:42:46 PM »

I'll take another stab: if KFMIRL is modified, but KFMIOP is not set up properly to reflect those changes, is the result timing oscillations?
Logged

ME7.1 tuning guide (READ FIRST)
ECUx Plot
ME7Sum checksum checker/corrrector for ME7.x

Please do not ask me for tunes. I'm here to help people make their own.

Do not PM me technical questions! Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your experience.
gremlin
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +180/-7
Offline Offline

Posts: 572


« Reply #14 on: August 14, 2011, 07:23:22 PM »

I'll take another stab: if KFMIRL is modified, but KFMIOP is not set up properly to reflect those changes, is the result timing oscillations?

Why not to test it?
Just reset both to stock values...
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.04 seconds with 16 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0s, 0q)