NefMoto

Hi,

Im right now abit confused about how to give my 24V 3.2T more fuel when at partial throttle and higher load. I have been reading the wiki and some threads about this but only makes me confused. My MAF and injectors are now properly dialed in and the car feels stable and smooth but i want more fuel at partial throttle. Im running E85 and engine is around lambda 1.0 - 0.94 @ 50% throttle and 0.5bar. I want to be more safe.

KFLF map is flat.
FKKVS map is flat
KFKMH map is calibrated in some areas to correct as much as possible to be close to 0% fueltrim.

Where do i set the new offset for adding fuel for partial load area?

http://s4wiki.com/wiki/Tuning#Open_loop_AFR
LAMFAWKR path (specifically, KFLAMKRL) is probably what you want to tune.

EDIT: I have absolutely no experience with E85, but from what I know - why would you want to enrich your AFR? What "safety" is there to get?

Why do you think rich is safer on E85?

Wait, you are suggesting knock based enrichment for part throttle fueling?  c'mon.

LAMBTS it has an EGT model behind it, but you can still adjust fueling based on load.  At minimum you will have probably have to modify FBSTABGM and TABGBTS to make it work the way you want it to.

See the wiki on LAMBTS.

I´ll follow PRJ´s method that snOOk tested on E85...  I have set KFLAMKR to 1.0 over all and mapped my desired lamba target in KFLAMKRL..

Going for a testride..

What's so "c'mon"-ish here?
Scale the "load" axis accordingly and adjust zero CF table cells - bam, you just got a load dependent lambda map.
It will achieve the goal OP requested. Whether that's completely unnecessary - is completely different story.

Personally, I'd use LAMBTS too, but you can use KRL to determine fueling in the "no knock" operating region as well.

More of a skin a cat thing. The question really is of purpose.

What I don't know is how accurate the stock EGT model is on E85.

Thats a method i could try.. im flashing KR fuel method right now :)

Well I think it did the thing.. I added richer target lambda in KFLAMKRL and it now looks like it runs alot richer in my logs.. stupid me forgot to log pedal position though..

My CWLAMFAW is now set to 110000 and KFLAMKR is 1 all over and KFLAMKRL is going from around lambda 0.90 to 0.85

shaky video but anyway.. :)  (has no function)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eROAafzZgj0

And what, exactly, is that doing for you?

Honestly I didn't ever think of using this table for 0 knock.  Sorry.  +1 for you.

to log throttle? It enables me to orientate in my logs. Problem was to lean mixture at around 30% throttle. The boost climbs uncontrolled and at the same time load increased. Since lamfaw dont activates in that area i was running lean.. If thats what you were thinkin about?

No, I mean the video, sans log, and the bigger question: enriching part throttle.


Too lean, how?

Request? Actual not meeting request?

Why would you be requesting leaner than lambda 1?

The video was just "digifun" (it has no function... its like dancing drunk). We need more multimedia in this forum :) 

No it WAS to lean mixture at part throttle.. lambda was around 0.98 at 0.5bar boost.. I want to enrich more.. Im running stock compression and it seem like these VR6 24 engines need lots of fueling when running on E85. (they are thursty it seems). dont know why or if its just an misconception.

actual vs requested.. you know what.. have not bothered to check that ;D. I know i should.. but for now i just want the mixture I say I want.. Let me log some tomorrow and se how far off actual is from requested. If thats the case.. I need to study Me7 for an additional year and make annoying questions in this forum :)

PS.
Please explain CF cells?

Exactly, but you've drawn the wrong conclusion from that statement.

The solution isn't to fuck with requested.

Don't touch requested until actual meets requested - "the mixture you say you want".

Still unclear why you want to be rich part throttle; I can't see any good reason for it whatsoever.


If you'll notice, this is the FIRST thing you need to get right in the tuning guide.

Not sure why it took you this look to get to it :P

I know Nyet.. but I do things my way to understand it..(which means backwards).  And why it took me long time? I have had 100 other problems to deal with.. finally I got the time to proceed with this project.  :)  its been 1 year now since i started.

I want to run rich at part throttle because i have high load (boost) there and i want to enrich to be cool and stable. Imagine pushing down the pedal just about 30% and the turbo starts to build upp boost and the boost creeps. I want to meet that boost with more fuel to be cool when this occurs. One could argue why i dont control this via boost control..

tomorrow i´ll log req vs actual.. and after that i have to investigate... I might have to rethink my whole fueling.

Are you worried about EGT?


You're fine with lambda 1 part throttle.


You don't control EGTs with boost control.


I still haven't figured out what your original thinking was.  There is so much consistently wrong with what you're saying I'm having trouble keeping up :/

Im not worried about EGT. BTS maps takes care of that. Im NOT fine with lambda 1 in this case.. The car needs more fuel when we are speaking E85, I have tested several E85 tunes where tuners fail in this case. you have to enrich like crazy.. KFBAKL for example need ALOT more. I can really feel the difference. This how i experience it today... I could be wrong.. if thats the case i´ll eat my hat..

My original thinking was "enrich" load based. And KR fueling seems to do the trick.

None of that makes any sense. If you want best torque, it makes the most sense to only enrich wot so your mileage doesn't suck everywhere else. If you want part throttle to make more power for a given pedal position, adjust kfped or kfmirl.

If you want safe, you're either talking EGT or knock. It can't be knock, its freaking E85.

So what is it? You just seem to be making up stuff randomly as you go.

I explained to you what im after...and I reached my goal. If you dont understand it thats not my problem anymore. I think have explained. Im not making things randomly up. I just wanted moret fuel when im not in WOT. What part is it that you dont understand. Im not after more torque. And KFMIRL is ok


And yes E85 dont knock.. but try run lean or near lean on E85 when you have even slight boost. I prefer to stay close to lambda 0.93. Poor milage yes. But much more stable engine. At WOT i go down to 0.80 @ 1.5bar. This is what i will run for now. But im open to other ideas. Im going to make a more detailed log.

Ps. I get the feeling that some engines just want more in some areas than other engines.

First you say:

Then you say:

What do you mean by "want"? Or "stable", for that matter?

Look, you clearly want to learn about tuning. To that extent, part of tuning is understanding exactly what you are trying to accomplish. If you can't explain something, it generally means you don't understand it. If you're just going to make changes based on hunches and feelings, you're not doing yourself (or anyone else, if they are reading this and want to learn) any favors.

1. True im not after more torque.. im after more fuel.. again

2. Diffrent engines have diffent caracters. I know u know

3. More stable i mean stable in sense of not feel that the engine hesitates or stalls. This can be due to flame speeds/ign tuning/rpm aswell. But in this case im just focusing on the fuel and more fuel helped out in this case. car "feels" great!. (what the log says is another story for now) Me7logger don work with these ECUs so i stick to VCDS.

4. In the end the result of the car is the feeling and driveability. I dont drive numbers.

5. I hope people are reading this so that they also know one day that we all work in different ways and never give up.

Go a head.. I'll give you the last words in this thread. :)

I know of no reason why running richer than lambda 1 should help misfires (or you are down on torque for other reasons), if that is what you are experiencing. Just going rich to "fix" it is hiding other issues, IMO


That isn't how ME7 works, that isn't how any tuner works. They drive by numbers FIRST (i.e. they understand everything that is going on before making guesses), then by feel. You don't get to drive by "feel" until you fully understand exactly what it is you are trying to accomplish, and you've exhausted every other (objective) option.


Which is why I am asking YOU questions: so the next person actually thinks about their problems in a objective, meaningful way, and not because they read some voodoo on some forum someplace.


Look, I'm only trying to be helpful. If you can't see that your methodology has issues I don't know what to say. You need to properly explain the root cause of the instability you are seeing at lambda 1 before even considering your options.

Now you might say, "by adding fuel, I can try to narrow down the reasons why I'm seeing the problem" - that's fine.

But "hey I added fuel, and it is better, I have no idea why - there I fixed it" is not good tuning methodology.

If you expect to succeed at tuning, you really have to be able to drill down and figure out what is really happening, and not just guessing then moving on.

If you had a long track record of success, I'd say sure, everyone has their own way of doing things, but as long as you are LEARNING, this method will get you nowhere in the long run.

Not only that, but if you have a long track record of success, if you can't explain WHY something works, it helps no one; it just leads to more random voodoo bs you see on every given board on any given day.

btw I should add that flame front issues in part throttle might be timing related. It could be stock KFZW doesn't have enough timing for the upper end of part throttle loads.

Exactly and read my post then.. i said im going to do a more detailed log today. And suck now my flash tool is broken aswell. But i can still log actual vs requested. If the deviation is to big I will try to look into what to do. Will be intressting.

Timing could be an issue as i mentioned... Im starting to suspect something like ignition after reading some more about E85 flame speed att diffrent loads.

Stay tuned for another digi fun movie :)

Looked into DZWOLA map ritght now... hmm.. and my map retards ignition in a certain area when enriching the mixture up to - 3.75 degrees @ 0.79 lambda hmm.. @ lambda 1.0 retard in DZWOLA is "0.0"... Maybe this is ignition related after all..  "BIG hmmm"..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XF2ayWcJfxo

Would this be by the VVT which don't work as it should with the turbo. In this: http://www.volkspage.net/technik/ssp/ssp/SSP_246.pdf the Torque and the Exhaust gas recirculation camshafts timings probably don't work as it should because exhaust does not flow because the turbo. My poor turbo build I run inlet cam hall sensor disconnected so in this fault situation the inlet cam is retardet max and valve overlap is zero -> much more driveable at 1500-3000rpm.

Umm, if you want 0 overlap, why not just change the VVT mapping instead of disconnecting your hall sensor?????

Jim

You are taking the wrong approach to E85.
MKR fueling will not do anything for you mostly as there is no knock on e85 ofcourse if something is not really wrong.
There is no reason running richer at partthorrtle on e85 at all than lambda 1.

What makes you think you're so special and he'll listen to you?  ;D :D

Coz i am 10th telling him the same thing as 9 before and maybe, just mybe bc i have been running e85 summer n winter for 5 yeras now. But that a is long shot
I think it is the first thing :)

I think what needs to be clarified is:

1) is the OP talking about enrichment during part throttle load changes?

or

2) running richer at steady state part throttle?

My read is that he's talking about enrichment during part throttle load changes (i.e. not WOT, but transitional throttle inputs)

If it's the case that he's asking about adding fuel during transitional load changes, then I think it's a valid question as the engine torque output during transitional throttle can be enhanced (i.e. making the throttle response 'crisper') by adding the appropriate amount of fuel as you tip in the throttle.

Personally, I can say that I've found that simply adding 5% fuel on increasing load via Unisettings on my 4.2 V8 made a noticeable improvement in how my car responds to throttle inputs.

In my case, the improved throttle response resulted in lambda dropping to 0.82 (only for a tenth of a second or so) following part throttle input. How, that's on E10 94 octane fuel. In the OP's case, he's running E85, so a very brief period of enrichment (say lambda 0.75 or so) following a part throttle input could enhance throttle response on his setup.

Jim, can you clarify that point?

The question is if he's using enrichment to fix a *hesitation* problem, or to enhance throttle response... big difference.

Yes Mister t that is correct.. spot on!  enrichment during part throttle load changes is what I have in mind. But also as Nyet says I had hesitations in the engine so i draw the concluson that i needed more fuel. I Have now managed to get slightly more fuel AND increased DWELL time and hesitations is almost gone. It much more stable. But im also starting to be suspicious about the ingition on E85. But mister T when you say Throttle response.. Do you mean by editing KFPED and increas KFMIRL? Or give it a bit more fuel iwch resulted in that?

One thing that came to my mind today was... Spark Plugs!!!!!!.. so i bought new ones and going to try them tomorrow. Shame on me if its just a spark plug problem :P
When this is solved its BOOST raising time :P !!!!


Mikhail I will soon work on the camshafts.. But thats a diffrent topic for now. ;)

make sure to log injector idc as well to make sure you don't run out.

I changed plugs but the old ones were OK. I Disabled KR fueling and adjusted LAMFA a bit intstead and increased KFBAKL (Accel Enrichment).. I also increased MDGAT+KFZOUFIL_UM+KFZPU+some other toque maps. And re:tuned KFMIRL. Im now thinking that it coud have been torque intervention...? Im not satisfyed yet but its one step in the right direction i think.

that makes no sense at all, especially since

1) you didn't post any logs to back up your "theory"
2) just fiddling with things randomly and declaring something "fixed" doesn't mean anything.

So one of the members (Mikhail) PM'ed me asking if I had a definition file for a 022906032CB ECU in order to alter his cam timing instead of disconnecting the hall sensor to get full retard.

As I didn't have a definition file, I took a crack at defining the VVT maps and this is what I came up with. (.kp posted below).

I'll admit, I'm not 100% certain that I've got them right as I've never seen a set of ME7.1.1 VVT maps like the ones in the .kp below.

What's really odd is the two 16x16 maps that I came up with.

Every other ME7.1.1 file I've ever seen has one or two main cam timing maps (usually 16x18) depending on whether or not it has VVT on intake or intake/exhaust and the remainder are 16x8.

That said, I tried just about every combination and configuration I could to get a 'normal' set of 16x8 maps and none of it worked. So I'm fairly confident that what I came up with below is correct.

The only real guess that I took was with respect to the 16 number long RPM axis. I took my best educated guess based on the where the axes were located relative to the other definitions I have, but without someone logging their 022906032CB equipped car and confirming the cam timing values relative to RPM, I can't say for certain that my definition is correct.

In any event, hope this helps :)

Mods, if you want, feel free to move my .kp to a separate 022906032CB definition file thread if you think it appropriate (as I may expand my map pack for this file if time allows since no one seems to have a definition file for it.)

Thank you  :)

Makes no sense?  So you mean it makes no sense if you change parameters in the ECU you will not get the car run good? And if no logs the car can not run better?  Whos the "makes no sense" here man. As i remember you said my logs were crap last time i posted VCDS log? Me7 Logger dont run with this ECU. ;D

But you here have the chance.. Give me something that you want me to logg that will make sense. And also explain to me what you mean by fiddling: here it goes:  KLMIMAX_UM KFMDBGRGA KFMDBGRGR KFMDHDRBG MDGAT KFMOF KFPZU KFRLMXPSK KFMOF_UM KFPZU0_UM KFPZU1_UM.. I think i missed some nut i can post all if intressted. these are the maps I fiddled with to get rid of the part throttle problem. They are all explained in the FR for MED9. And if you read there i tells you what they do... I adjusted them and got better result for partial throttle(LOAD)..  I admit its abit reverse engineering. But atleast I think im moving forward.
 

Thanks ill take a look at this !!

So, had a chance to try and play with the cam phasing?

In case you didn't read my last tutorial (on another thread) on cam phasing, I'll re-post it here:

Depending on whether you have cam timing on the intake or intake/exhaust there will be 1 or 2 sets of maps that I will describe below.

The first type will usually be a 16x18 where the map axes are included right above (i.e. a Bosch type) Consider this a 'Main' map (this map will be a 8x12 on a 3.0 AVK V6)

Then you have 2 more sets (4 total) of 8x16 maps it appears that they're 12x16 in your case which are the ones that actually shape the curves (they are 'warm-up' and 'knocking inlet' respectively).

In order to shape the cam timing, ALL 5 MAPS IN EACH SET NEED TO HAVE SIMILAR CURVES. You cannot change the cam timing by just changing the 'main' 16x18 map. It will have a minor effect, but the 12x16 maps are the ones that actually form the curve, I suspect that the 16x18 map is only there for the 12x16 map values to be interpolated through and smoothed out.

Also, the axes for the 16x8 maps are not in the same location, they are in another location with a bunch of other 16 bit axes. You WILL need a DAMOS to figure out the locations. Even if you have a similar DAMOS, you can super-impose them and the map axes locations will be similar for all ME 7.1.1 vehicles.

Hope that makes some sense. Basically, just make all the respective intake or exhaust cam phasing maps the same shape.