lulu2003
Full Member
Karma: +11/-1
 Offline
Posts: 242
|
 |
« Reply #360 on: May 14, 2012, 02:14:40 PM »
|
|
|
what are the experiences using LAMFA as WOT fuel-enrichment. can it accelerate building boost in low rpms?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #361 on: May 14, 2012, 03:04:53 PM »
|
|
|
Generally, you are trying to use AFR to control knock, not change spool characteristics.
What problem are you looking to solve?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
lulu2003
Full Member
Karma: +11/-1
Offline
Posts: 242
|
|
« Reply #362 on: May 14, 2012, 03:55:32 PM »
|
|
|
I want earlier spool of course  and I think Lambda <1 will help before rl is reaching values >100. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #363 on: May 14, 2012, 04:17:18 PM »
|
|
|
yes, but you will have to pull a lot of timing to get decent results... and you may lose some torque in the process...
in any case, the short answer is yes: you can absolutely use LAMFA to get very early enrichment, far more selectively (e.g. based on pedal position) than KR or BTS fueling.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 14, 2012, 04:18:53 PM by nyet »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #364 on: May 14, 2012, 04:20:27 PM »
|
|
|
2nd I do not like the idea of fooling the ECU to be in BTS to inforce a certain function. You always lose a bit of build-in security, don't you?
at the AFRs i'm running (10.8-11.4) it is unlikely that additional BTS fueling is going to save anything  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
lulu2003
Full Member
Karma: +11/-1
Offline
Posts: 242
|
|
« Reply #365 on: May 14, 2012, 11:16:39 PM »
|
|
|
is there a way to alter timing during that enrichment? based on pedal and not on rl?
do I find some logs in the forum where someone made some spooling tests with lambda and late ignition?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #366 on: May 27, 2012, 07:23:19 AM »
|
|
|
Wanted to add a little bit to the thread...
1. Why set KFLAMKRL first axis value to 0 instead of -2.25? It is my understanding, that due to the way maps are looked up, it will always read the first row anyway, when the retard is -2.25 or less. I don't think setting it to 0 is in any way a pre-req for enrichment happening. At least this is the way every Motronic ECU I've worked on has worked so far. Also, you want to constantly run around -1.5 retard anyway, so that you are getting maximum performance at all times.
2. Setting TABGBTS and TABGSS really close does not make sense to me. You don't want to run 900+C EGT's if you can help it...
I find that there is not much difference in performance between about 12.2 AFR and 11.3 AFR, if the timing is advanced properly. The EGT's are smaller with higher enrichment though.
I think the 750C for TABGBTS set in the RS4 is exactly right. At that point you want to move fueling to the richer side of things, but without severely hurting performance.
The limit set in TABGSS, is the "oh shit" limit, where you want to dump fuel and protect the engine components from destruction...
FBSTABGM can be used to progressively enrich the mixture towards the "oh shit" point.
3. It is a pretty good idea to use LAMFA as WOT fuel enrichment, but not at low RPM's, otherwise you'll hurt economy quite badly.
Obviously there is no "right way" to do things, and opinions are just opinions, but I thought I'd just throw my thoughts into the mix...
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 27, 2012, 07:26:26 AM by prj »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #367 on: May 27, 2012, 09:39:33 AM »
|
|
|
Btw, those that use KFLAMKRL, what do you guys do with KFDLBTS?
These basically duplicate each other.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ottomatic612
Newbie
Karma: +0/-0
Offline
Posts: 10
|
|
« Reply #368 on: May 28, 2012, 11:01:27 AM »
|
|
|
I cant control WOT Fuel. Can someone tell me if I am doing something wrong. I've attached a screen shot of the tables edited & a log.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #369 on: May 28, 2012, 11:26:39 AM »
|
|
|
Set KFLAMKR to 1.00
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ottomatic612
Newbie
Karma: +0/-0
Offline
Posts: 10
|
|
« Reply #370 on: May 28, 2012, 11:35:21 AM »
|
|
|
Set KFLAMKR to 1.00
The whole map? Its set to 1 on high load & rpm. I used Tonys values |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
julex
|
|
« Reply #371 on: May 29, 2012, 08:32:01 AM »
|
|
|
The whole map? Its set to 1 on high load & rpm. I used Tonys values
nvm |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ottomatic612
Newbie
Karma: +0/-0
Offline
Posts: 10
|
|
« Reply #372 on: May 29, 2012, 11:09:05 AM »
|
|
|
nvm
Julex can you please help me understand this? Im confused. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ottomatic612
Newbie
Karma: +0/-0
Offline
Posts: 10
|
|
« Reply #373 on: May 29, 2012, 11:12:14 AM »
|
|
|
Does the axis on KFLAMKR need to be changed too? Or is it just KFLAMKRL?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #374 on: May 29, 2012, 01:14:40 PM »
|
|
|
Some notes regarding FBSTABGM.
My KFLBTS is basically flat RPM wise.
Meaning I just select a lambda based on load.
And that lambda matches what my KFLAMKRL table sees.
Now I want to use FBSTABGM for mixture enrichment, instead of mapping it manually via RPM.
As I understand it, the way it is calculated is:
Lambda = ((KFLBTS - 1) + LAMBTSZW)*FBSTABGM + 1
So this means that FBSTABGM is not exactly a multiplier for KFLBTS alone, but until LAMBTSZW kicks in, it is technically a multiplier for (KFLBTS-1).
So let's say if you wanted a 0.8 lambda to start with, and then you would like it to be 0.75 at 900 rpm, then to calculate FBSTABGM, you have to do like this:
(0.8-1) = (0.75-1)*FBSTABGM
-0.2 = -0.25*FBSTABGM
FBSTABGM = 1.25
So this is pretty far from simply a percentage, as rather high values are required to make a difference.
I will log this tomorrow and confirm...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
