NefMoto

Could someone explain me why LAMFA map in 06A906032T ecu is so strange? Most values from 50% are ~1,99. How to play with it?

I attach ori .bin and .kp


EDIT: in my sencod post there are another questions

It looks strange to me.. But I think they choose to use  LAMBTS for fueling..  If you look into LAMBTS > TABGTBS the limit is 400C EGT wich is very low... If your EGT goes higher thatn that 400C you ECU will jump into a map called KFLBTS located in folder LAMBTS.. I think they use LAMBTS for fueling. LAMBTS looks very modyfied.

What does you log say about Lambda/AFR under high load? What car is this ?

It´s Ok... a bunch of other narrowband 1.8 has LAMFA this way...

if you do a WOT it will enrich by LAMFA and as Jim stated go soon in KFLBTS...

Look at KFLBTS and KFLDLBTS... above 4500RPM it will allways enrich more than LAMFA just by KFLBTS... in mid range KFLDLBTS enrich (notice KFLBTS values) if needed.

You can change all FF´s values to 80´s in LAMFA and nothing will happen

Ok, so I don't care for LAMFA and will play with maps you wrote.

But there is another question- what is max air flow with stock maf housing for this ECU? With stock MLMAX map (550g/h)  when MAF hits 170g/s ecu is closing throttle. I change MLMAX to 900g/h and now the same thing happens when MAF value is ~180g/s. Is it max for 2,5" MAF housing? BTW. Stock MNMAX value is also strange for me- 550g/h is ~152g/s, but car with stock .bin runs well when MAF reads up to 170g/s. I also increased KFMLDMX, but still 180g/s is max.

And the last question- Which map can limit requested boost if I changed IRL, IOP, LDRXN(ZK), KFLDHBN, KFLDRL and still requested boost is lower than I want.

Thanks

You can modify LAMFA too and increase TABGBTS value to make it go BTS later, will probably improve your milleage.

If you raise KFMLDMX enough, than MAF is not your issue...

Hmm, values in KFMLDMX are above 800 from 4000RPM, MLHFM max value is 944kg/h (bosch maf with 200 offset), so MAF should read up to ~205g/s

IAT is no higher than 35*C
Boost deviation less than 150mbar, while KFDLULS almost whole map is 400

So what throttle cut can be caused by?

Look for engine torque monitor, look kfmiop, kfmirl and all watchdog related maps

IDC>90% for some ME7 variants. Please post logs with all diag requests.

Car runs on bosch 430cc, and injection time is about 16ms@6000rpm

groups 004, 114, 115 (http://vaglog.pl/log_270349.html)
groups 020, 003 (http://vaglog.pl/log_270350.html)
groups 001, 002 (http://vaglog.pl/log_270351.html)

I made those logs on little smaller boost, with n75 duty cycle near 95% I can get about 190-195 g/s from MAF so I think its not a problem. Maybe to big difference between requested and actual load? Throttle cut near 6200rpm, but not alwayes, few first runs it can reach about 6400-6500rmp

Yes, I know, spool is horrible but this is very experimental hybrid turbo



EDIT: maybe this fact can be important to: after throttle cut and instatnt gear upshift throttle is still closed and car won't accelerate. I have to lift pedal for a second and after than car can again accelerate.

Post me7logger logs.
VCDS is useless.

I made some other runs with gas pedal fully pressed for few seconds afte"throttle cut" and I saw there is actually no throttle cut but load suddenly drops off.

I attach logs from me7logger (I choose variables from basic 4cyl template, if you need some others variables please write which or I can also make logs with all variables)

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LhGjE2wn8rmwcHPvVw_x3fMHmnIq0Wf6DlAu1O88rJo/edit?usp=sharing

even at 90% WGDC you aren't meeting req boost, which is causing limp.

Either boost leak (log ps_w) or you have wastegate/turbo issues.

also log pvdkds_w (BoostPressureActual) so ECUxPlot can see it.

Your pvdk_w doesn't have an alias, so ECUxPlot doesn't know it is a boost variable.

Here is log with additional variables. I reduced a bit LDRXN(ZK) and raised KFLDIMX and KFLDRL to get about 95% WGDC and also raised KFDLULS to about 600, but I think now its not needed becuase request boost is silmiliar to actual.


But still load drops off. When engine get about 90deg it revs up to 6800rpm by first run, second run and max rpm was ~6600, each next run is max 6000 rpm.

What is the difference between ps_w, pvdk_w and pvdkds_w?

EDIT: I realized that DV was faulty (forge clone hybrid DV... was OK before testing, probably after few runs got faulty) and I make a run with OEM DV, a little bit better, log saved by first run so it revs up to about 6700 but after few runs again- but now max is about 6400. I made a leak test and I cant find any leaks. Second log attached is with new DV.

ps_w is modeled manifold pressure (POST throttle plate) based on MAF, RPM, air temp, VE etc.

If it is very different from pvkdkds (pressure PRE throttle plate) at 100% open throttle, it indicates a boost leak or DV failure (where is the missing metered air going if not to pressurize the intake at the pressure sensor?)

The difference between pvdk and pvdkds is left to the reader. Consult the FR.

For the purposes of logging, the difference isn't technically relevant, but the .ecu file is missing an alias for pvdk so pvdkds is preferred.

Load is dropping because MAF isn't rising as fast as RPM, since pressure is tapering. There is no reason to expect load to continue increasing unless your turbo is keeping up with RPM, which it clearly can't. Please review the definition of load.

Can it be caused eg. by dirty MAF sensor which reads less airflow than in fact flowing through maf housing?

Small differences are not relevant. Looking for a very very big disparity. ps_w is never that accurate.