NefMoto

Hi there, I have been logging my stage 1 file (attached to this post) which is pretty aggressive (probably more like stage 2) and would like to make some changes to the file.

Mainly AFR as seems to be running too lean given boost. However the desired AFR from the logs doesn't seem to be following the map in practice, and only goes down to 0.95. EGT is up at 935 degrees! The LAMFA table from the map I read has it at 0.83 for high demands so not sure why I am not running richer in practice? 

The log I attach is one hard pull in 3rd gear. I have stage 2 mods including: 80mm TIP, 3" Downpipe, large FMIC, induction and up-rated ko4 cartridge.

Boost Desired vs Actual are often also out of sync. Any pointers help would be really appreciated as would like to start improving and tweaking this map. Thanks in advance. 

If you didn't write this file, don't bother modifying it. Revert to stock, go from there.

Also, don't post modified csvs, or they can't be plotted with ecuxplot.

I did pay the file before I knew much about tuning, dyno tuning etc. The car feels way faster and seems to run well so ideally I would like to just make a few tweaks to this file, including modifying it for the 550cc injectors I have yet to install (I've got all the TVUB and KRKTE values to do this ready, but want to get fueling right with the stock injectors first). I've also compared this to the original stock file but don't know enough yet to be able to get a similar result from stock file.

Apologies, I rearrange to make reading a bit easier for me when i was trying to analyse. Here's the unedited orginal file below. Thanks

If you insist on using this file, don't make any modifications until you know what every single change does.

Please get a WOT log, or ECUxPlot filters won't work.

log with wide open throttle

Yes totally agree. Seems a bit of a minefield of interdependences. But to start with I want to ensure that this file is a healthy map I can revert back to if I make any mistakes etc. All of the columns are labelled and standard columns I think from MELogger, which I managed to get working today for the first time :-)

Sorry ensure that throttle is 100% entire time?

Sorry ensure that throttle is 100% entire time? Think was for some of time but not 100%.

3rd gear, 1500rpm press the pedal all the way down until redline

Yes.

1) that is how ecuxplot knows you are doing a run
2) to get first pass boost control/fueling/timing WOT is where 99% of finding safe maximums etc are.

OK tried again, still not perfect (it's a public road  :'( Throttle plate angle not 100% all of time and was only able to take to 6K rpm which is really all I want to do, but I did try and properly hoon it. The file I posted previously, I also gave it 100%, but not straight from start as wasn't possible. I edited the file so that the hard pull was as near from the beginning as possible and attached. Sorry if it doesn't work in ECUplot, but if someone could just look at the data?

The main thing is "AFR Desired" hardly moves down from 1, "AFR Current" does move lower, but only very briefly when EGTs get over 900 (one data point of AFR Current =0.75, probably component protection measures from what I understand).

The LAMFA table (tried pasting image of it below) seems to be completely ignored in practice which is annoying me, as no point adjusting it to make richer if something else is over-riding it?? The table shows last two lines (85% plus) below 0.9 across entire rev range, 0.83 to 0.8 for 99% (last line). How can I get Desired AFR below 0.9 on a run??

(http://)

Here's a lovely graph in Excel of AFR actual vs. current (right axis), and EGT plus engine load (shared left axis) by RPM. Max Boost is 2,500 mbar. AFR only really gets lower once egt soars over 900c and not before as requested by map in Lamfa (table posted below)

I would like to lower the Lamfa values to ensure better fueling under load but see little point if its not actually going to change AFR??

(http://)

(http://)

 ???

all of this is useless and a waste of time if you dont push your pedal to the metal

this is #14th posting without correct logs

i had my foot to the floor. I know its not perfect but I don't have access to a private runway / race track!! Surely we can conclude sometime from what I have posted?? Revs are 6K, EGTs over 900c. Boost at 2,500 mbar? Any more and I'm likely to do long term damage??

i had my foot to the floor. I know its not perfect but I don't have access to a private runway / race track!! Surely we can conclude sometime from what I have posted?? Revs are 6K, EGTs over 900c. Boost at 2,500 mbar, engine load max? Any more and I'm likely to do long term damage??

its only 140kmh on 3rd gear
you done need a tune if you cannot use your car

all of the me7 logic is based on driver request and kfped
as long as you not request 100% = useless waste of everyones time

dont discuss here, go out and log your car like it was requested here from people trying to help you

I can't go that fast where I live. 140 kmph is dangerous to me, other people and the car. I don't want to red-line it either. I'll have to try again in and do a 2nd gear pull at max throttle and hope that someone can help. I'm quite new to all this and I am trying. Sorry it wasn't perfect before

OK 3rd time lucky hopefully. Attached is a 100% throttle (with no drivers side matt this time, which may have been hampering previous efforts  :D). Started logger at 1,500 rpm but didn't start recording until 4,500. But went up to 6,500 rpm. 2nd gear pull as only option

maybe its me with my limited english but what dont you understand when i am talking about 100% pedal?
pedal != throttle

maybe its dangerous because you are at the keyboard while driving.

start your logger in the driveway and use your right foot finally

I'm sorry but I am really confused. My peddal is at 100% until redline, then obviously I back off. Why can't someone look at the actual data. I can edit the original file so that it contains no data after 100% peddal if it helps you put it into ecuplot etc?

there must be something wrong with my pedal sensor or something, cos you seem to be implying from your graph that it is only at 70%?

then deep dive into vcds and check your pedalsensor within the measurement blocks

you can doo this in the driveway with ignition turned on

noone is looking in your actual data because they are wrong without pedal = 100

please check out other "rate my logs" posts to get a feeling

best of luck

OK that explains the discrepencies and frustrations!  :'( :'( Throttle Position Sensors seems ok as it is at 100% but pedal postition sensor is knackered, as only goes up to 70, need to take pedal apart and have a look. No fault codes in vcds. Wonder if that explains why hgher load AFR values not being triggered?? Man what a waste of time :-(

You can log pedal position with the engine off iirc. Start with that.

Dont be afraid to rev your engine as long as its mechanically decent. at 6k your cams are only spinning at 3k for example, yes it might sound loud or scary if you are used to diesels or have an exhaust leak or something ( for example on my car my 3 inch DP is banging against the chassis so after 4k its basically unbearable so I am not revving above that until i get it fixed) but its what it was made for really.

DBW me7 pedal uses 2 sensors in the pedal , and they are crosschecked against eachother, if one fails you'll be limited if I remember right and if both fail you'll be in limp( could be wrong though, find the correct SSP for it )

You can check both of these values in VCDS measuring group 62 ( if I remember right lol).And yes can do it with engine off too, at pedal to the floor.

OK cheers bud, that's really useful info. Definitely not in limp mode, so at most only 1 sensor gone.  Unfortunately don't have full version of VCDS so can't check those banks. But will log again with pedal to floor in driveway, pretty sure only 70% max though which is not right.

Can get a used pedal with intack sensors pretty cheap so may be best option. I've also got an issue where seems like accel. pedal sticks so carries on revving after I press clutch for few moments if i do a hard pull, which is really annoying. Also quite jerky at times so something needs sorting.

Btw my 3" DP is touching the subframe also, just not much space down, there so makes horrible vibrating noise, particularly in reverse or low revs lol.

OK I'm there now, 100% pedal angle and hopefully a better log. Disconnected battery overnight, took pedal off, fiddled with some wires, put it back and tested in driveway and was 100% now and took out for another attempt. Attached is 2nd gear pull from 2K revs up to over 7K (propperly red-lined it  :D)

Seems like AFR is much better now, both current and desired going down together to 0.8. Egt south of 900 also. Have I got a healthy map? thanks in advance :-)

I'm no expert but looks I'm getting over-boost, then struggles to hold boost, then get stupid spike boost as I press clutch (sticky pedal problem so revs go up). See chart I did below.

N75 value problem? I replaced with cheap ebay one before as was it sending car into limp mode during high boost, which did fix the limp mode problem? Also I could try a stock DV valve instead? My forge one is nearly as tight as it goes. Cheers

Yes, you're overboosting, then underboosting, but the rest of your post makes zero sense.

Not sure what you're graphing with, but its mostly useless.

In any case, it is pretty clear from this what is amiss. In any case, your boost request makes zero sense. No idea what you think it is supposed to accomplish. You're actually lucky you can't boost more, you're out of fuel up top.

OK well I'm here to learn, thats kind of helpful (hope you noticed having fixed my pedal I'm at WOT now  :) ) So I was just looking at AFR and thinking fueling is fine, but that was wrong, as not considering FuelInjectorDutyCycle, which is practically at 100% after 5.2K rpm! Got ECUplot working now, see below:

Questions:
1) So ignoring everything else I wrote, Requested boost /  Engine load (LDRXN map?) needs to be lowered up high to be more (realistic?) in line with actual boost so not demanded too much?

2)Ideally I'd like to be able to hold over 20 psi for longer, and get more pull higher in revvs, so interested in advice on how I might achieve that? Is that unrealistic given wastegate at 95% already?

3) Still on stock injectors, does that mean they are basically maxed out already?  I have 550cc injectors ready to put on (and map them in) is that likely to give me more fueling to play with or is there likely to be a problem with my map somewhere? I guess I could put them on and just see if FuelInjectorDutyCycle is less maxed?

Thanks. 

1 tune ldrpid to eliminate overshoot
2 check for air leaks and turbo health, iirc k04 should hold a little longer but not much. Generally a bigger turbo solve this
3 check injector duty cycle. Check fueling if its more than 100% but stock 370cc should be enough for k04

Also what kind of turbo is this, spooling very late like a t3/t4 or something.. Also rev hang is a common failure of the clutch switch, log the switch bit to see what is up.

yeah its a ko4 with turbo-rebuild uprated CHRA (11 blades etc). Feels like it spools up quicker than stock tbh, loads of pull from 3K rpm. Having said that, bit dissapointed its not holding boost for longer.

Cheers for the heads-up on clutch switch, I'll check / replace the clutch switch (heard before that can play up).

Kind of unfair to say that w/o specifying your wastegate configuration.

Do you mean the Wastegate map settings or the actual Wastegate itself (e.g. could the spring need tightneing)?  TLVDMX limit currently set at stock 94%. Also KFLDIMX and KFLDRL settings attached.

So to correct for Over-boost the S4Wiki page says to try decreasing KFLDIMX first. Attached screenshot my current KFLDIMX and KFLDRL settings if anyone could comment - should lower the last line of KFLDIMX at appropriate rpm? Probably got this completely wrong  :-[

My proposed changes so far.
1) Get LDXRN to match actual better (see proposed change below)
2) In terms of fueling, attached is my current LAMFA map. Wondering if I could run a bit leener in last line before say 4.5K revs to help a bit with boost as starting at 0.84 from the outset seems a bit rich?

Thanks in advanced.

actual wastegate spring and pre-tension.

congrats for fixing your pedal

If its upgraded chra with other compressor you should be careful if your rods are not upgraded.
Go buy a DW65v/clone pump first.

I would not change anything on the map based on 2nd gear logs.
3rd gear will be very different i guess.
Go and log on night time when road is safe...

Log also with N75 unplugged to get base boost and a feeling for pre-tension of your wastegate.

Did a 3rd gear pull with N75 unplugged. Boost climbs very slowly, peaking around 11 psi at 6,500 rpm. Does this mean my wastegate preload is all good? Thanks

with logs

Just been digging out some of my old AUQ stuff and noticed this pic, you're not using that dodgy looking file are you? Seems a lot to req at low revs!

Fortunately its not. Mines a lot less agressive lower down but obviously requesting way too much at the top. It was a local driveway tuner / map though, hence why I'm trying to get fully to grips with it in order to improve it and learn on the way.

is this file modified afterwards or just recorded and uploaded?

i cant open it in ecuxplorer with xaxis sample without filter

you have to floor it @ 1500rpm in 3rd gear to see what your turbo is able to do...

right now it looks like very very laggi for a k04 size turbo

Not changed ECU file yet. Just recorded it with N75 unplugged. Wonder why turbo is laggy? Maybe a boost leak around FMIC? Had a lot of issues with pipes keep popping off. Need to get some decent T-Clamp clips, but thought is was ok now. Will try another run tonight

In all honesty mate, revert back to stock, build it up off that! If you're using other's tunes then you don't know if the Nef edu stuff is a help or a hindrance in tuning.

Will add info on why if you need it, different strategies etc if you need but I'd start with that, you can get base's fairly easily, you seem to know the basics tbh!

OK man might do that. makes sense. I'm slowly piecing it all together. Seem to be pretty much at limit of hardware atm. Wil take turbo off and inspect at some point. Probably needs uprated wastgate and fuel pump for starters. Also my FMIC pipes aren't great.

Agree 100% with always starting from stock. You never know what you are starting with. At minimum, you should know what each change made by somebody does. If you don't, DO NOT USE THAT FILE.

It really is that simple.

Account for every change. If you don't know what it does, revert it to stock.

One final good log in 3rd gear, (probably best yet) to check difference of mapping in larger injectors in (adjusting KRTE and TVUB), which I was planning to do anyways, as well map out 02 sensors (no EML now  ;D). Made some adjustments to LDRXN (basically tailing off lower at high rpm). Interestingly, due to larger injectors injection duty cycle now peaks at 70% rather than almost 100% as before. Hopefully will fit Uprated fuel pump this weekend and plot again as seems old oem fuel pump is still stuggling based on plateau after 5,7500 rpm.

Car feels great, its fast but obviously still not holding boost that well over 5K rpm (which isn't a massive issue considering how I drive but a niggle I will want to fix). May try to tighten actuator arm, one turn (if I can) or buy new oem one. Wastegate only managing 90% now in higher revs?? Also need to check for boost leaks as suggested already. Any further insights or observations on my attached log very interested in feedback.

This looks MUCH better.

I'd bring up LDRXN to match where your actual boost is or bring IMX down to get actual down closer to req.

You don't want a lot of deviation or eventually you may throw a code.

haha, tune looks good

interesting how much difference a correct log will make here  ;D

add wnwi_w and tmot to your logger please

is this the same file like before because logfile is called newmap...

OK will do. Cheers.

This is the new log file after I made some changes to the map.I will add wnwi_w and tmot also next time.

Hey quick question, been trying to get to the bottom of this for like 4 hours or more! I want to try and dial in my 550cc injectors right. Car runs well but understand needs to be calibrated.  I have 3 bar fuel pressure and intially set the KRTKE value as 0.61 and TVUB off the Bosch injector sheet but this seems inconsistent accross the net. I settled on 2.0, 1.3495, 1, 0.78, 0.62 (8, 10, 12, 14 and 16 volts) for TVUB but trying to understand whether correct looking at partial idle and idle adaptations.  Problem is my ECU map doesn't have rkat2_w and fra2_w so can't calculate LTFT's etc.

Currently I am roughly 1.5% AdaptationPartial (therefore KRKTE * 0.985?) and about -1.5% AdaptationIdle (TVUB * 1.some scalar?) . Does this mean I'm pretty close or is it meaningless without rkat2_w and fra2_w? Don't have full VCDS unfortunately. Thanks.
 

http://nefariousmotorsports.com/forum/index.php?topic=6670.msg67239#msg67239

OK thanks, so 10V=> 1.43 ; 12V=> 1.04 16v => probably slightly higher...so overall mine probably need raising a little. And this is 3 bar right? I think my 8v should be 2.7 also, not 2.0, but depends which datasheet you look at. Thanks

Today I installed uprated 265/h fuel pump (horrible job  :'(, surprise I got it right  ;D), increased LDRXN about 8% and last two columns of KFMIRL, changed TUVB and KrKTE slightly so that AdaptationPartial ( fra_w) now averaging around 0.996 and AdaptationIdle ( rkat_w) bang on 0.

However, had a little fiddle with actuator the other day and shortened a tiny bit but now almost at 95% all the time?? Surely that's not good? Is it just not dipping lower to try and hit my target boost?

Only plus side car feels really fast now and getting probably over 24 psi now (must be right on rod bending limit methinks - no more power!)

Any advice on the wastegate, does it look ok or shall I try and adjust KFLDIMX?? Many Thanks
 
 

I think you should lower the desired boost, if the wastegate is working properly, you're turbo is running at maximum now.

I don't know how many times I can say this.

Don't request boost near the goddamn sensor limit. It belies a severely dangerous lack of understanding of PIDs. There is a direct link between this and your maxed WG.

You are going to break something.

OK moved boost down a bit, you're right I need a better understanding of PID (I'll try to find some discussions as tbh don't really understand it so not touched it). Looks like I have a lot of headroom to hopefully do something with timing advances and knock retardation as all my timing maps are identical to stock and don't have any knock. Starting to understand this better now...hopefully

Let me make a thermostat analogy (since a thermostat is an example of the most simple PID there is)

Let's say your thermostat temperature sensor can read up to 105F

Due to poor Boeing airplane type design, the thermostat can be set to 110F

What happens when you set the thermostat to 106F?

So if temp goes higher than 105, the sensor will just read 105 and the 110 trigger will never be met so there is no safety intervention, temps can climb indefinitely? Hopefully I'm right  :)

Right bear with me in this, I'm trying to understand...

In the boost situation, given then we know the rough shape of boost curve, from previous runs below 22.5psi requsted boost (the sensor limit), if we see a flat line at 22.5 psi for x length of rpm (due to sensor max being exceeded), then we could extrapolate roughly where the actual boost would be (although its always a guess and we can't be 100% certain, and thus 100% safe). In my case, given gradient before and after straight line and duration of line, I'm guessing probably around 24 to 25 psi max, so in theory I'm only slightly over max, but only around 10%.

My uprated Turbo k04 CHR is rated to 28 psi max, but given blades are still same diameter as stock CHRA the only real advantage of having it is is that it can spin a little faster than stock, so as long as I am below 28 psi  I'm likely to realise more benefit no?  If I don't raise the boost request over what a stock CHRA can deliever I may as well have stuck with the stock CHRA. Is it likely that the turbo will exceed 28 psi with no safety intervention. I guess that's the risk I'm trying to estimate.

I'm trying to understand how I can increase torque and HP with current mods, and other than timing, the only thing I can do is play with boost request right? I've got the larger injectors and uprated fuel pump so I want to get more air going in so I can burn more fuel. Surely the only way to do this is getting the blades to spin faster and thus request more boost, but not too much??

What happens when you req 1.7 and act stays at 1.55? Yes pid maxes out n75 trying to met them. Boost rising uncontrolable until you stock rods or turbo dies
You can handle it with kfldrl limits but it's a poor way to tune
And iirc no reason to push k04 more than 1.4. Timing gives you more

The extrapolation effort is going to be wildly inaccurate.

Do not request any boost near the sensor max. A real PID is more complex than a thermostat, and you really should give a pretty good margin (say 200-300 mbar) of headroom.

If you want more boost, you're going to want a sensor with a larger range (and the many associated ASM patches). It really is that simple. All of this is covered in the wiki.

Finally, just because a turbo can do 28psi doesn't mean it makes more power at 28psi than it does at 20psi.

Your last sentence worries me greatly.

Update: After reducing Boost back down as suggested, until I get larger MAF, some timing changes:

Retard:

-Reduced KRFKLN - Ignition retard per knock event from -3 to -0.75;
-DWKRMSN - Delta angle offset for average retard from -4.5 to -1.5

(bit of guess work as can't find any worked examples anywhere, would be nice if there were  :)):
-KFZW - Ignition angle map : Increased timing for 100% load by 2 degrees for entire rev range. 
Didn't touch KFZW2 - should I have done?

Overall car feels like its pulling a bit more across rev range so pretty happy with the timing change (less acceleration drop in higher revs), so far. Doesn't look like I've increased HP looking at numbers, MAF peaking only around 204, which suggests around 260 bhp, must be more than this cos was 262 on dyno on basic stage 1 around 10% less boost!? Car feels around the 280 to 290 mark?

Any observations on logs? Don't appear to have any adverse retard (obviously I reduced this so less than before), or evidence of increased knock? Had misfire on cylinder 2 and 3, but think I had that before so hopefully no biggy.

Interested in peoples thoughts advice? Could go an extra 1 degree in timing but no more as before I increase by 5 and car was suffering...Thanks

with logs (added more variables now)

Modifying DWKRMSN is not safe unless you have det cans and know how to use them.

A safer way to reduce KR is to simply pull requested timing.

OK thanks for that, so just to check: KRFKLN= 0 and reset DWKRMSN back to stock? Thanks.

Leave both stock unless you know what you are doing.

Well I'm trying to reduce the amount of retard, so KRFKLN seems the most obviously place to start. Would be good to have some worked examples (with caveats) in the wiki; people generally learn by example rather than just theory, not that I'm knocking what you've you done as its an essential and excellent resource for us DIY tuners, just some example tuning strategies (A, B etc.) would be the icing on the cake

If by "reducing knock retard" you mean "increase the odds of knock" you're taking the wrong approach. Reduce requested timing until your KR is zero.

Wait for worst case conditions (very high IAT) and make sure they stay zero.

Add a bit of timing until you see one cyl start to correct. Stop there.

People may "learn by example" but they should know theory FIRST. If they do not, they have no choice but to trust other's advice blindly and take their word for it, unfortunately.

ok Cheers for that. given that I have knock retard kicking in I guess that means can't do anything timing wise  >:(

I did laugh at the way you said that 1st sentence if I'm being honest!"