NefMoto

Im not sure if im allowed to bring up such a old thread, but oh well here goes...

I got a stack of info from this thread now, so im pretty excited about that!

I just did a audi 3.2 vr6 turbo conversion, and now im also in the noob pit for tuning...GT-innovations helped me out with some definitions for my file, and lots of extra info but im still struggling. Way too many grey areas! So  i think i need to give him a break with all my questions and see if i can find some extra help here.

My build thread:

https://www.vwclub.co.za/forum/viewtopic.php?f=93&t=202227&sid=f5020b518155e11d19d63893d2207d04

Anyways im not sure what was going on with regards to the fueling of the R32 in this thread, definitely a mechanical issue. Mine seems to fuel okay at WOT. Stock LAMFA requests 13.2, and thats where it goes and stays. That is actually my first issue and question, hoping someone can point me in the right direction here.

Obviously starting with the fueling, i have 550cc injectors running @ 4 bar. So Ive scaled them in via krkte, and did the voltage corrections in TVUB. I also set RLFS map all to 1, as i put a return line on my fuel system. ONLY changing those maps, i wrote the file to the ecu and ran some logs to see what changed. Fueling was a bit spikier but that was it, still hit requested afr's.

Then i went ahead, and only changed my lamfa map, where it was requesting 13.2 afr at full load i changed the values to 11.6 to see if it would actually request those AFR's. Did some logs, it requested 11.6 afr, but the actual afr didnt follow it AT ALL, it dropped the afr's below 10, and was still adding more fuel via STFT's. So now when ever i change my lamfa map, even just by a little bit, my actual afr's get completely lost and the car just dumps fuel.

So from there i decided to see what happens if i try use KFLBTS to fuel under load, just to test what it does. So i set TABGBTS, TKABTS, TIKABTS all to 450 degrees. KFLBTS and KFLBTS2, i set the AFR to 11.6 from 3000 rpm, and load of 90 up. No luck. Still only requesting 13.2 afr :D...Im ready to blow my mind, i cant be struggling with the most simple part of the tuning already! lol

I also logged actual EGT, of which it runs up to 800 degrees, and my actual EGT guage shows around 900 degrees.
Load sits at 120.
Max timing pull of 2 degrees in a 5th gear pull.
injector pulse sits at 7ms.
MAF readings around 270 g/s, and getting maf limit error.

I have a 100mm maf which im going to put on, but for now i want to get the basic fueling strategy working!

Any help will really be appreciated!!

Nick

It doesn't even remotely fit into that thread. Split.

Converting an N/A ECU into an FI ECU is not easy. Not even remotely a job for a noob.

Expect to not ever have a car that runs right.

Thanks for splitting it then, And sorry about that!

Its fine, I will do my best to get it as close to right as i can! I don't really have a choice, as there are no tuners here that can tune my ecu anyway! Im obviously willing to pay a proffessional for the parts that are really above me!

So uhm, any advice as to why my car isn't fueling via KFLBTS? ::)

Have you put 1 (if I remember correctly) to the map by which corrects the returnless system things (I dont remember what its called).

Yeah i set all values in RLFS to 1, thanks!

Funny how you posted in your other thread about how easy and straightforward it was to turbo your 3.2

Not sure which post you are refering to, but it wasnt hard at all to turbo it. For a NA to FI conversion it was quite straight forward. The tuning is obviously proving to be another story.

Don't be intentionally oblivious, he was referring to the mechanical conversion.

Did you convert to single lambda and patch the asm code in the file to allow for it?

I guess not?

Hey man, no i didnt, but my lambdas are situated on opposite ends from eachother. So it doesnt seem to be an issue yet.

I just did a log of my buddies stock 3.2, logs were interesting as it also has the initial drop in afr when initially hitting WOT, but then his afr nicely drops into the 11's, where mine just stays at 13.2 lol

Theres a small update in my build thread with dyno in the link above if you interested in checking it out.

99% of failed builds start and end here.

Somebody says "oh hey, welding on a turbo will be ez", but don't bother to think about what they are going to do about the ECU until it is too late.

Its fine, i will get there in time. Anychance you can reply with a bit of help? Specifically, why i cant get my car to fuel via lambts? Ive got my loads a lot more in check, just need to clean up my timing. I just really need help with the fueling. Please.

I agree with you, I was pointing out that Nick mentioning the conversion was easy was referring to the mechanical aspect.  Clearly he doesn't think the tuning is easy.

Any fueling at much over 100% load conditions is going to be problematic, since the ECU fueling path isn't designed for it.

I have a 24v vr6 turbo file set up for 630s cc injectors and 4 in maf , would you be interested in looking at it, I believe it would help get you in the right direction

That would be REALLY amazing, yes please!!

I have my MAF scaled down by 25% and fueling scaled accordingly. When the turbo starts spooling my actual load peaks at 110, and then drops to around 94, excuse the spikey timing advance, that will be smoothed out in next map.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/722/31922081980_96a4332dde_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/QCR1PN)IMG_20170113_211550 (https://flic.kr/p/QCR1PN) by Nicholas Tolken (https://www.flickr.com/photos/129072306@N07/), on Flickr

Im just confused from the IOP and IRL map as the desired load goes way above 100.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/383/31476373214_8dd0f6d001_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/PXsD8U)load defs (https://flic.kr/p/PXsD8U) by Nicholas Tolken (https://www.flickr.com/photos/129072306@N07/), on Flickr

Take a look in this thread:
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?6858294-Let-s-talk-KFMIRL-aka-Target-Filling-Torque-maps

KFPED 111% = Stepdown function. You can make it 100% all at the top.

What ECU software and hardware versions do you have?

Shot Jim! Will have a look at it now!

Howsit James, Im not sure what u mean by hardware version but my ecu number is 022906032GK

Just a hint, your lambda sensors will die very soon, they will nearly melt where they are installed. And they will not work correct under pressure, 0,5bar -> 10% deviation! I don´t know how much pressure you will have in manifold, but this is really not the best position.

I have had mine there for 2 years. no problem yet. but i have only boosted mildly so far. I havent bothered to separate them yet. But the best way is to use one in down pipe...  But for the moment its ok to have them in manifold until you have sorted out the fueling..

Can't really sort the fueling with them not reading right, can you?

Thanks for the headsup cherry! Ive seen the bigger turbo companies actually fitting them like that, hence why I copied them. Il stick a wideband in my DP next week and compare the two. Will let u guys know the results. Worst case il go mono lambda in my dp. No biggie.

Jim how much have you been boosting so far?

Also a lot of big o2 sensor manufacturers recommend to place the sensor at least 20 inches after the turbo. I dont understand why you would want to install anything other than egt sensors before a turbo, when in doubt: copy OEM design!

Shot for the new info! Its really not a big deal to change it, other than the mono lambda mod.

You can still use your bungs to fit egt sensors (maybe weld an insert to fit). I understand you want to have accurate data by measuring both sides of the bank, but as mentioned above, you are better off with 1 good reading sensor.

Hmm. Let's look into it a bit;

The best place to measure the air/fuel as an accurate interpretation of lambda post combustion, is pretty much in the port or just entering the runner, obvious downside being the temperature of the gas and additional coking which would subsequently lead to maladjustments due to incorrect readings. There's also turbulent over laminar flow to consider and sensors being used, strategy taken etc.
First point then would be that on these conversions. Do you have your sensors nearer the ports than factory locations?

So turbulent v laminar flow and sensor location. Well, main thing is to understand that you want the best reading from 3 cylinders and as the oem ones, so first port of call is making sure that the sensor location is getting the full read of all cylinders it is supposed to, 2 front 1 back and vice versa, obv dep on manifold and that the location is sound. If you get turbulent flow at the collector location or any location which is the sampling point - well, nothing likes turbulent flow!
Thirdly, temp and coking. Well, simply put, you'll get more coking in the manifold so I'd check them more frequently so you don't get maladjustments happening due to bad readings.

Temp then, the bane of which people speak!
According to the 4.2 LSU documentation, the sensors can run sustained 930*C temps with a 1030*C max for short periods. I'm not sure of sensor differences but I'm inclined to believe these are applicable, at least for this example, for the mk5 R32, as the manifold lambda correction/BTS maps have a 900C limit;
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/270/32044896620_fbbd788043_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/QPGtkA)mk5 R32 Stationary manifold exhaust gas correction (https://flic.kr/p/QPGtkA) by Rick B (https://www.flickr.com/photos/146155164@N03/), on Flickr

Plenty of correction aspects you can play with in the later ecu's, can also do similar BTS in older ones, just not quite as detailed - Audi tend to get things 1st in their ecu's so age dep. really on yours on what maps are in, I've not turned it into a def file yet.
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/707/32422882815_e18b45fbf3_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Rp6KsX)mk5 R32 Manifold exhaust gas 2 (https://flic.kr/p/Rp6KsX) by Rick B (https://www.flickr.com/photos/146155164@N03/), on Flickr

What is interesting to note also is the "hex temp" of 570C in that Bosch LSU doc and lo and behold there's a little sneaky map in the mk5's that accounts for that component protection too!
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/575/32422885725_fe63c9249a_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Rp6Lk8)mk5 R32 Lam exh comp protection (https://flic.kr/p/Rp6Lk8) by Rick B (https://www.flickr.com/photos/146155164@N03/), on Flickr

BUT.....you needn't piddle about with these things for a simple base map set up! Back on track;

When you underscaled your hfm did you check/make sure any representative maps were changed accordingly, check any possible MIL problems?
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/580/32232803851_c72e6d298e_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/R7ixBr)MLHFM & Min mass V6 R32 mk4 mk5 (https://flic.kr/p/R7ixBr) by Rick B (https://www.flickr.com/photos/146155164@N03/), on Flickr

As any bendy intake VR6 12V owner will tell you, "these maf's don't like turbulent flow!" - which is why Bosch upgraded to the glass/ceramic substrate HFM 5 versions (if you're just looking into these things there's a guide I did from Bosch info in the noobs guides section, which explains how they started to upgrade things for evolutions from VR6 12V to R32 and the tuning basics) -so check your pulsations maps if you haven't done so already.

Let's see, what else - ignition is obviously different NA/FI and if anyone's reading is just setting out, I'd suggest looking at the ignition maps between various NA/FI vehicles of a similar nature to get an understanding. Main maps and, importantly, limit's as you are going to meet them at some point. I'd try and get a list of the min/max and representative values together as you'll need to change some of them at some point both at the start and as you tune - not just in ignition but every area really - a good def file will make things a lot easier!

Main thing with these is formulating a strategy and sticking to it. WDKSOM tells you about how it's all tied together somewhat, so you have DK (throttle angle), torque and idle - you're adding air, so look at all the luft/air maps to see what may or may not be applicable. I and others have mentioned above aspects to consider like the 02 sensor (ATM aspects), the usual injection but as you're essentially modelling this additional air/density what compensation aspects and BTS tuning do you need to think about? Ultimately anything sort of SY_TURBO based in the FS - just, do you need to do something when you can compensate for it?

I'm trying to get you into the habit of "systems thinking" so how are things connected, what do you have, what is missing, what build mods have you made over original, how can you compensate for those things etc?

So good def, ES/BTS/KR/ZU/LLR/DK - once you get your head around that, then what about part additions/delete's etc and what effect will they have?

After the simple flash side in those ways, then it's then onto choosing a different strategy, iop and hfm sensor extensions, patches if/as/when required (don't mix the strategies up, what seemed to be happening here) - then if you have a coding background, further reverse engineering/dissasembly and patching;
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/706/31510509004_876f0a9ea8_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Q1tAw1)mk4 r32 pwm sfr registers (https://flic.kr/p/Q1tAw1) by Rick B (https://www.flickr.com/photos/146155164@N03/), on Flickr

I think what should be mentioned also as I have found, is the interaction between flashing/data modding tools and the various ecu's. There's 8 C167 revisions, 3 used on the 2.8-3.2 that I am aware of and tools seem to act differently in terms of data transferral, probably a crc thing, but some seem to be able to sort that out and transfer data and some would end up bypassing.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/495/32217353022_6749edac05_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/R5WmBQ)C167 CPU Layout (https://flic.kr/p/R5WmBQ) by Rick B (https://www.flickr.com/photos/146155164@N03/), on Flickr

 I put a "cheap tools" thread up in flashing area to try and see how the data takes a hold with them but most haven't gone this far, however I think testing things with max limit's like ignition angle, would give a good indication of flashing compatibility plus it's something needed. I'm interested in the electronic whizzes and those trying things with the cheaper tools and their turbo home brews to chip in.

Oh and P.S. - if you're rocking 2.8 24VT set ups, I'd look into a lot on flow, those little throttle body blades and smaller hfm's can cause limit problems far sooner than the R32's with their bigger set ups, take a look at flow across tb for example;
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/378/31478005133_0404759518_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/PXB1fr)Flow across TB 032CP v BDE (https://flic.kr/p/PXB1fr) by Rick B (https://www.flickr.com/photos/146155164@N03/), on Flickr

Anyway, my 2p, hope it helps!

RBPE...You are a flipping champion, thank you so much for actually putting in so much effort to help! It actually made me realize how many maps im really missing in my map pack! Definitely not going to be making lots of power with the maps that i have available, but nevertheless i will hunt them down and if i dont come right, i will just have to pay someone else again for more map definitions.

So far i have done the bare minimal, but the car is actually pulling really well, and idle and part throttle is fine. Plenty minor tweaks still needed, but nothing that prevents me from driving the car, as its also my daily work car. So i load a new map in the morning, drive and log it for the day, and then do a new revision that evening. So i try change as few maps as i can, so i can see what affects it actually has.

So far the maps that i have changed:

KRKTE, scaled that to my 100mm maf housing.
TVUB
RLFS, i made all 1's as i put a fuel return line in.
KFKHFM, they are all still 1's, i havent started dialing the corrections in yet.
FKKVS, i made them all 1's.
MLHFM, i scaled down before i put the larger maf housing in, to get my load lower.
KFZW maps, ive dropped the advance in full load etc
KFMLDMX, increased limits

I dont have all my LAMFA maps, so ive resorted to BTS fueling for now.

TABGBTS, TKABTS, TIKABTS, dropped to 550 degrees.
KFLBTS
FBSTABGM
KFFDLBTS - I havent changed yet as i cant find the map, will try again tonight, so my AFR's are not exactly what im requesting obviously, but they aren't far off.

Ive also done a few deletes, tried to increase my rpm limiter with no success yet. The only definitions that I have are these:

NMAXOG
NMAXF
NAMXGA
NMAXOGGA

Under WOT the advance is average of 21 BTDC, zero timing pull, 12.2 afr, load peaks to 100 at spool and drops to 90.

Loving the car lol

I will update, going to start playing the load maps now to see what happens ::)

Thanks again!

The NA BTS maps are completely irrelevant once you turbo it.
The problem is pressure affecting the reading.

Howsit PRJ, are you refering to all the bts maps? If so why do you say that? Also, is there any possibility that someone can point out exactly what needs to be changed in the ASM coding for forced induction? And to go with that, if there is anyone that is interested in doing those ASM coding mods for me, please email me a price. Not tuning, just the mods. (including the mono lambda patch).

I think PRJ means, that vw has tested NA engine exhaust temperatures and put those maps. Now with turbo those temperatures are something else.

I don't have afr gauge so I don't know how much lambda reads wrong under boost. But if someone has afr gauge then should be easy to shift desired lambda a bit to get it ok.

Thanks Mikhail! Im getting a wideband gauge this evening! I saw on another thread that you asked about the initial rich afr when first going WOT. Did u manage to fix the issue?

Also ignore my previous questions about the asm patches, found what I was looking for in this thread:

http://nefariousmotorsports.com/forum/index.php?topic=8459.75

Thanks

I was predominantly referencing the who-hah about "they'll melt!" when evidently people have run them like this for years. Give the info, let the people make their minds up!

In layman's terms yes, they should be aware of lambda limit's as there are NA to FI differences - kind of the point I was getting at with the ignition - no good setting something to 0.7 if the limit is 0.75 in BTS!

Also, with reference to the actual question being asked by the OP and those looking into it, PRJ's basically trying to get you to look into the differences between NA and FI in terms of SY_TURBO/SY_EGFE.

I've added info here but you can also reference the FS' in the BGSZS/BGSRM areas, although the point I was getting at earlier is that there are different ways to go about modelling/compensating for these changes. I'll have to go into detail some other time although I've mentioned a few things and you should probably read the 2nd/3rd post down in my noob guide evolution post which explains the basics.

I've added some info on it here too Nick/others, plus a mk5 file (don't flash it without cs) and the maps/functions for it in csv form which should all/90%+ be correct. I'll let you translate though, I can read most of them in German nowadays!

Whoops, timed out about 5 times with the file for some reason???

Link;

https://app.box.com/s/3q1bzdz7ny5yb71k45jiznwied0csoz4

NIck_T  You said to me you master Arduino. I have biuld my own AFR/EGT Rpm based logger with a Java logging system that i run on my 3.2T.  What I do is that I logg Lamda and EGTs and adjust fuel accordingly. I have also disabled alot of safety functions in my ECU to get rid of things that will prevent me from get more power. I have lost all the benefits of this ECU but if i buy a standalone I would not have had them anyway. I have plans to extend this arduino platform to be able to control boost and cut boost if EGTs and AFR goes of limits under certain circumstances. VEMS.hu sells an already assebled unit that also can be used..

Took me a long time to get it all right though.. First i had problems with hesitation and jerks and other myterious stuff but now the respones is awsome.. But it took me weeks to get the fueling right due to not be able to tune in realtime.

A tips is too look at a FI car in WinOLS and se how the strategy there is.. I look into Porsch 997T OLS file.. I found some intressting things there.

RBPE, you have helped me out a tremendous amount! Thank you very much!! Really appreciated!! Woke up at 4.30am to go through what you shared!! Crap excited! I see the R32 file is quite a lot different with regards to the map locations, I thought they would have been similar.

And Jim shot for the info, thats actually a awsome strat! Im  a master of nothing lol My wideband has a analog output too, so il use that with egt probe...and i'll probably just steal the signal straight from the crank sensor again, atleast in that way i'll have insane sample rate! Definitely going to give it a go! Off topic, if you want to use a REALLY easy to use TFT, google nextion displays. Very very simple for graphing etc. And then i bought a obd reader from freematics, and log straight to graph on TFT. I'll post some vids tomorrow night of it.

Back on track! Can you possibly be more specific on you disabled? Have you still got knock control atleast lol I agree with you with  the stanalone management though, I have that option here but its not an option  ;D I only have hesitation now with the bigger maf, not too entirely sure just yet. When i simply just underscaled the stock maf it ran absolutely great, gear changes were so quick! I will have a look for a 997T file on here! Shot for that! How much power are you making now?

The reason they fail is they are not really supposed to be pressurized to 40+ psi... That combined with seeing 1000C pretty often severely reduces the service life.
Also the temperatures in that map are irrelevant. The map is filled by running lambda 1 on engine dyno steady state. You can see top end is not fully calibrated.
In reality because there is at least some enrichment way before that, on a NA application the temps never reach that high...

Anyhow, there are no ways to compensate in code for stuff like the lack of KFVPDKSD... This absolutely destroys part throttle, because the ECU is always fighting you.
Not a problem on a supercharged car, but a big problem on a turbocharged car. This is further compounded by the lack of pre-throttle pressure correction when calculating throttle control. So you can try to encode this information into the tables, but it sucks during transients.

Never mind the hardcoded load limits on some of the ECU's. Lack of boost control - which can be added, but it's all custom code. And so on.
Don't get me started on the DSG<->ECU interaction and maintaining proper idle control when doing it right. Oh and asm code mods anyone on tricore DSG controllers?

My point is - none of the people on this forum who are hobbyists will EVER get this done right.
In fact, most of the "pro" tuners on this forum will never get this done right.

It's like the hardest job on the ME7 that you can do. It requires intimate knowledge of the ecu including coding knowledge.

How about the DSG<->ECU interaction  ???

You see PRJ, thats why we have you! ;D Kidding, completely understand where you coming from. Thanks for some extra info! And for pointing out again that i need to pay someone to do the job :D

Anyways, we all know we wont have a car feeling like its from the factory! Im fine with that, all i want is for it to pull like a train when i put my foot down. Thats about it, im sure you know from experience that you actually learn ways to drive a car smoother when it doesnt offer a smooth drive! ;D

Driving without boost control is quite a irritation, il definitely agree there, especially at higher boost levels! At 0.7 bar it still feels fine, i can work around the part throttle spool. 1 bar is probably going to be way different. I should probably put my goal out here, im aiming for 350kw on the fly, if im lucky maybe 400kw but no more. Thank goodness i have a manual haha!

Stupid question here, how will i know if im hitting a hard limit? Timing retard at a certain hp/nm?

Also, PRJ, you by anychance keen on doing ONLY a ASM mod? Limit removal?

At the moment, not too keen... have too much stuff to do already. Mid-february should be better.

It's also expensive $$$ wise. Because these custom code jobs take obscene amounts of time. I am not talking about the first time when it can take a week to do it (and it never pays off), but even the subsequent modifications where you have most of the code and have to slightly mod/recompile it for another binary.
Because I do this for work, and not as a hobby after work, for me time = money. It is very likely I can remap 2-3 different cars in the time it takes me to do those code mods for you...
With those prices the people who buy this stuff from me, are those who will tune a bunch of these cars in the future, not just their own car, as it's just not really economically feasible otherwise.

Btw as for the topic at hand - to sort the boost fueling you don't need to do anything special. Actually NA ME7 does not care about boost in any special way when it comes to basic timing and fueling.
The issues are with torque control and target load. Actual load it has no problem to calculate because it comes from MAF.

If you want to just drive in a straight line, flip some APPL bits. Make the throttle opening be fixed to the pedal based on RPM.
Kill all torque management. Basically make the ECU like a cable throttle ECU that can only react to what is happening, and not control the airpath.
This of course will not work with an automatic gearbox, but with manual gearbox it will work just fine. Of course you will lose all "smoothness" of the car and it will drive more like a traditional cable throttle car.
But if you only use the car for weekend fun car there is really nothing wrong with that. It will also allow you to bypass all of the load control shenanigans and focus on tuning fuel, spark and camshaft overlap.
From the torque failsafes keep only the ones that are pedal % vs throttle %. So if your throttle for some reason jams open the car will still cut out and not drive you through a wall.
Traction control obviously won't work either.

Ok sweet! Look the car is my daily, but like i said im not toooo fussed about the part throttle driving. With that being said, maybe i haven't experienced a true crappy drive yet haha

Look il get in contact with you mid feb then and see what the damage is, makes plenty sense about the $$$. I didnt realize it would take so long, can see im a full blown noob.

Im going to go the route that you just suggested, see how it goes. Flipping awsome info, so thanks a lot!

Nick you can also get RPM from an Arud shield with CAN bus onit.. There is free code out there aswell for that.. :)   But thats another topic.. :)

Really helpful and pretty interesting.

This all makes a lot of sense (obviously)... but one has to think that at this point if it were me I would make a PnP stand alone and fit that to the car and just keep the stock ECU to swap in for emissions testing (if that is needed where you are).  As neutering the stock ECU like that, plus lack of boost control, protections, etc. to me it's not worth it at all.

As you said, there are VERY few people that know what to do to get an NA ECU working right under boost.. I've driven and looked at some commercial tuner's BT R32 file because after driving it I couldn't believe how horrible the car drove.  It was mind blowing that people were paying big money for these tunes and just dealing with that kinda stuff.

Not every standalone can drive the clocks and other canbus stuff in the car.
But yes, it is much easier to fit one and map that instead.

What I suggested is far from ideal, but for someone who is new to mapping in general, it seems better to spend more time actually tuning the engine and less time making the ECU do something it was not designed to.

Unfortunately you're right... having a fully functioning car these days w/ CAN is a lot of work but as you say making an ECU do something it was never designed to do is what you're left with. 

Generally, one has to be realistic with their goals as well IMO.. These days with the information on the internet its too easy to get lost in numbers and what other people do.  Plus rarely do you get the whole story just part of it and possibly the end result at the time shown to you and many forget that it probably took a lot of trial and error, sweat and tears and beer to get there.

But really, starting with less then ideal circumstances like what's outlined in this thread means you need to really have a handle on what you're going to require/expect at the end and contract the jobs to the right people to make it happen (Motronic or Stand alone).

IME most of the stand alone systems are intended to provide quick and easy AFR/ Ign. control unlike ME7 which is designed to allow OEMs and others who are properly trained to write code that can control every aspect of engine operation including emissions, regardless of the SI engine design and operation short of DI engines which would use later Bosch MEx systems. The ME7 system was meant to be everything to everyone (at the time of it's introduction in the late 90's), wanting a sophisticate EFI engine management system. That is why it is so complex and comprehensive. The broad capability of the ME7 is a blessing and a curse. Without knowing all of the ME7 system architecture and the specific strategy employed by a mfg. using the ME7 or similar ECU, it's challenging to get everything right when making major changes in engine configuration or operation.

ME7 is far easier for ARF than stand alone. Hard part is allready calibrated at factory, just program correct MAF and injectors and AFR is good at all rpm/load.
Most standalone ecu's need to be calibrated at all rpm and load to get AFR right.

You can get a plug and play Syvecs ECU for this type of car/engine, which will make everything inside the car work like stock. Then you only have to tune it, which is dead straightforward.

For a good 2000+ euro if you are not a dealer..That price i got for a 2008 subi which nothing was stock on the engine(mafless - different heads and much more).

Yes, I am sure none of those things help - you're overlooking the bit where I said it was for knowing the info on the components, blasé statements that give no real information and some things for people to think about hence the laminar/turbulent, banks read and heat statements. You're dwelling on it in that it is fundamental to doing this tuning which I have already said it isn't.
Actually, Bosch add "and/or through driving" as opposed to merely on a dyno - probably also a fundamental point in terms of pedal feel with the mods if people do compensate for KFVPDKSD via DK/LLR type tuning. (Throttle and idle control acronyms to the noobs).



Well, no, although I agree in that emulating Bosch's FI vehicles as best possible would be the best route for some, it's not always a practical solution for many. As for the ecu fighting you statement - well, you can negate such things to a degree and have it bypass maps completely if it affects the tune. Not saying it is necessarily best to go down that route or that it even makes tuning easier, just an option people should be made aware of.


I agree that it is the hardest thing to learn in this field but no, it's not exactly difficult is it? Quantum Mechanics is a hard field to learn, not this, this is just time consuming learning the system interconnectivity and the electronics side (if you are new to those things). This difficulty of which you speak though can be hugely negated too, people can learn anything, they just need a good teacher! I would prefer it if you helped them in that respect instead of showing general disdain for those that set out to do it as I have seen you do.

Anyway - Nick, start at 1097C on your file and reference it with regards to either the file I posted up or this one, I forget what's in what. I'd suggest looking at the file marked "FI throttle" in DK LLR control which is (probably more aimed at noobs) - info I have taken from the English FS in terms of KFVPDKSD. There should be plenty for the noobs to get their heads around in that one for that.
I've also added a bit of patent info on it as well as some of the other systems and I have added some general misc info and info on the electronics side too which should all help.

https://app.box.com/s/2red8vinrhsuz54zt7sh88tf9x9q5287

60MB file so couldn't add it here.

There are different tools for different people and their individual objectives. ME7 can be run as a load based, a speed density or Alpha-N system depending on people's desires. In fact Bosch sells motorsport ECUs built off of the basic ME7 architecture. These systems eliminate a lot of the maps offered in ME7 as they are unneeded for motorsports use.

There are numerous aftermarket stand alone ECU systems and some offer pre-populated maps for a given application that typically need minor adjustments to obtain a satisfactory performing engine. Regardless of the system chosen the ECUs are tools to obtain an acceptable EFI/Ign. management system for a given application. The ME7 just happens to offer everything to everyone.

With the ME7 however there is a much steeper learning curve - especially when only the pros who do engine calibration for a living typically have access to all of the ME7 documentation. With thousands of maps available in the ME7 ECU and the numerous subsystems that enter into the final calibration value, the ME7 can be a wonderful engine management system or a real challenge to get correct - especially when making significant alterations to an existing engine configuration.

If you are just looking to make minor tweaks on an existing engine that uses ME7, then it may be very practical to stick with the ME7 system. If you're making major engine alterations that require big changes to the ME7 then an aftermarket stand alone system may be more appealing to some folks who don't want to deal with the complexity of the ME7. Engines have run perfectly fine on speed-density and Alpha-N systems for decades.

What makes a standalone ECU great is that it is straigt foward.. Fuel+Ign+Boost control.. 

I have experimented on this on my TT 3.2T E85 for a while now..  My route is Disable everything that can be disabled. I have disabled every damn thing i could find..  gaaaaarrhhggghghg... trail and error rules..  Just give med the damn fuel and ign and keep me at desired Lambda and nit to high EGTs is my philosophy. I dont care about stupid limiters :)  I dont bother to read for years to understand safety functions and limiters you dont have them in a standalone anyway "sort of". Well i keep BTS maps stock with raised TAGBTS limit.. its a nice little function to have..

I dont see whats the problem? But i shall admit there´s some strange things going on in this ECU if you dont bother to study it in the correct way.

If I was selling tunes i would NOT go down this route though....

I think Nicks question is easier to answer than he thinks :)  But dont trust me im an idiot that just boosts and see what happens. :)  Just look at my posts vs Karma  <---- hahah :)

Thanks for all the help and info guys! Especially RBPE!! Its next level help lol ;D

So far im flipping happy with the car! Pulling like a monster!!! And part throttle is not bad at all! Maybe its just because of my massive exhaust housing lol ::)

I cant push for anymore power as my clutch has said its had enough, so now im backing the boost down a little and start working on the finer tuning! Trying to source a place to cut me a SMF at the moment, and then find a sexy clutch kit!

So far my current tuning issues:

I couldnt get a nice ride with the 100mm maf housing, I had it adding fuel at idle and part throttle, and removing fuel at WOT. Was a nightmare. So as the stock maf is still perfect for my current power, i went back to it and did a few tweaks.

Hitting 110 load with no torque intervention. 

Firstly, im still struggling on getting my proper requested AFR in my BTS fueling as i still cant find my KFFLDBTS map. I see in other maps its usually just before the KFLBTS map, but now i have KFLBTS1 and KFLBTS2.
On the same note, if i come to a stop pushing my clutch in quick after a pull the car dies, but if i coast to a stop its perfect, rpm doesnt drop at all.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/457/32571724766_043697761e_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/RCfAZu)KFLBTS (https://flic.kr/p/RCfAZu) by Nicholas Tolken (https://www.flickr.com/photos/129072306@N07/), on Flickr

4th gear pull, requested and actual AFR. You can see the flipping AFR climbing lol Hoping that its just the factors in the KFFLDBTS map that im missing! I havent done any KFKHFM corrections yet!

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/521/32571860526_2db188f33c_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/RCgimb)IMG_20170130_183522 (https://flic.kr/p/RCgimb) by Nicholas Tolken (https://www.flickr.com/photos/129072306@N07/), on Flickr

The next issue i have is the timing advance, it likes to give a random spike in the high rpm! 4th and 5th gear pull. BTDC and LOAD.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/519/32571867176_4c3633ae67_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/RCgkjQ)IMG_20170130_183556 (https://flic.kr/p/RCgkjQ) by Nicholas Tolken (https://www.flickr.com/photos/129072306@N07/), on Flickr

Now from that I have another question, it cant be normal for the load to drop so much right? From my understanding, I have the BOOST constant, BTDC is fairly constant, AFR is not running rich, so i can only think that its the actual flow thats becoming a restriction now? Or am i mistaken? My torque curve follows that pattern, and my torque should not be dropping at all!

My next issue, I still cant get my RPM limit increased. I've done a search through my map looking for any 6700 values, yet all the values that I found are in my definitions already and changed? What am i missing -.-

Its irritating because on the quarter mile i have to change to 5th gear lol I'm hoping that upping the limit will help prevent me from having to change to 5th gear before the line!

Jim how does your cars ride feel with disabling everything? 'just boost and see what happens' LOOOOL pretty much me!

It feels good, more can be done... its a bit more rough and aggressive than stock. It jerks and jumps a bit lol.. It feels more like it was running on a standalone.  Im logging with VCDS and analyzing my logs with LogView.. I had to buy that program.. But the resolution in logs SUCK BIG TIME.. im open for any tips to speed it up..  My fuelling is almost where i want it now. I have been fine tuning for a long time now. Im sure there is lots of stuff to do there still... I get O2 sensor B1 S1 code for lean condition when driving it at partial throttle when i drive it  calm on the highway.. I have to look into that.. The AFR looks ok but i might have missed something.. hmm

Next step for me now is to squeeze out everything that possible out of that god forsaken DSG...  A new clutch would be nice but im broke as a joke now.

I will resume this Project maybe i in spring late April.. Right now im focusing on learning tuning my Me7.5 1.8.T "China GT28 snowracer". Its a chapter that i have missed. I can learn stuff from there to use on the 3.2. (I did everything in reverse lol).. So i hope to hear what you can push this 3.2T to.. There is always something to learn..

Do you log EGT´s if so what temps? And what fuel are you using?

"im broke as a joke now" lol lol story of my life! Boost is too addictive!

Thats awsome though, well done! Im borrowing a friends vcds15.15 cable. Has a decent sample rate when i use the turbo function! Thats a tricky one with only one sensor giving that error, did you check your fuel trims? And do you have a external afr gauge too? Like 3rd lambda in the DP?

Flipping cool with your 1.8t! I had the agu which i did a me7 conversion on, and used eurodyne software! Made a very smooth 260kw @1.5 bar (t3t4 50 trim, .48ar). Was fun!

Anyways, back to some 3.2T. Ive decided that im changing my manifold, found a flipping easy design online, So i will do that within the next two weeks!

something like one of these, atleast then I know my lambdas will be perfect, and i can actually make use of my twin scroll then! Also need to get a new intake mani built up, lost 30 g/s from the thing i made haha

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/774/31790304064_8175be4b48_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/QrcBQL)2012-08-08 21.17.10 (https://flic.kr/p/QrcBQL) by Nicholas Tolken (https://www.flickr.com/photos/129072306@N07/), on Flickr

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/772/31790312944_99204a40a6_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/QrcEtS)IMG-20120826-00112 (https://flic.kr/p/QrcEtS) by Nicholas Tolken (https://www.flickr.com/photos/129072306@N07/), on Flickr

I haven't made a logger for egts yet, for my external one. But it was reaching 920 degrees with a 5th gear pull, so thats fine. That was with afr in the high 12's. Running in the 11's will be better, but no need to really run such low afr right now as i have no knock anyway and egts are okayish for now. Im using our crappy 93 octane that we get here.

Any chance you can tell me how you found your NMAX location? and KFFLDBTS lol

Link to my file and some definitions

http://nefariousmotorsports.com/forum/index.php?topic=12071.0title=

Not everyone's mind is built to reverse engineer assembly code.
Some things you need natural intelligence to become good at, an ability to see patterns, an analytical mind.

To tune this correctly you need to rewrite portions of the ECU code.
If you are a computer programmer doing cars this is not difficult. If you are a car guy trying to do computer programming then it is extremely difficult.

Bosch had a whole team of developers write this ECU code.
You're not even writing code. You are reverse engineering it. Alone.

Apparently RBPE is obtaining good results by using the charge air path strategy and SY_TURBO for FI conversions. The charge air path approach can provide the basis for proper engine management for long term increased torque requirements. The crankshaft synchronous path can control the short term torque demands.

I don't think you understand that SY_TURBO is a compile time constant.

Haha true story!

Sooo still no help on pointing out where those maps might be that im looking for? or how to go around finding them....The map definitions that i have say that KFLBTS1 is  my KFFDLBTS, but it cant be....

Have you changed the FBSTABGM to allow the BTS to work?

About exhaust manifold pics, that does the large diameter and long secondary runners spoil the (twin scroll) spool? Or is the goal to get good flush with some overlap which that design might work?

Yeah running fine on BTS fueling, its just not exactly what i set it too because of the KFFDLBTS factors. I actually have no idea! Need to do some more research!

Yes I do understand that SY_TURBO is a compile time constant.

 https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/771/32232809381_35d215cf2e_b.jpg

In this case what you said makes zero sense. I don't think you get what a compile time constant is in that case or how a compiler works.
Simply put the code isn't there on a NA ECU. It compiles only the code that is specified by the compile time constant. It is not something you can change without having the full source code and recompiling the firmware.

Not to worry it's already been done and works just fine.  :)

You have the source code and the compiler?

Nope, not my work.

Still no help to my questions :-\

Post their work then.

Sorry
But I don't think RBPE's is enough skilled at C16x programming, nor has he claimed to be. But he is rather active in finding info about the various VR6 24v files and hunting offsets in Winols. I can't see the need to talk more about sy_turbo in this thread, or any thread really.  :)

What is probably referred to is the factory R32 MK4 Turbo file that was made for a big name tuner by Bosch back in the days. Some people have it.
The problem with that is, it only covers the Mk4 R32 ECU. If you are using a newer platform and want CAN/DSG to work it's a no-go.
Don't even ask me to post it.

It's also not exactly a big secret that Bosch can make pretty much any file. Attributing that to random people on forums however is fucked up.

Sad that the only work required for Bosch is to simply recompile the code with a different set of #defines... yet here everyone else is, scrambling for crumbs.

I suppose everyone here is too young to remember that AT&T/BSD/USL mess.

These types of comments are totally inappropriate, condescending and disrespectful speculation with zero basis for your conclusion. How could anyone know what another person is capable of be it coding or anything else?

The point of my comment was there are more than one means to achieve a goal with ME7 and people are free to follow the road less traveled including the OP who desires a viable solution for his specific needs.

One problem many people are talking about when it comes to stand alone is DSG/CAN signals..  What signals does DSG need to work without the OEM ECU.... I could program an Arduino and a CAN shield to FAKE or emulate these signals.. But i dont know what signals and what the addresses are so forth and so on...  IF that were possible I would go for a standalone.  I could make my own VEMS Plug n Play ECU.

Who here have opened the source code from the St10 R32? Has it even been done? I haven't even bothered yet thats why im asking..  Are you using IDA PRO? Im not a pro ASM programmer but I want to check it out.. Any tutorials on disassemble ECUs and what is in that processor..?

Really wasting my time on here. The guys that have the most knowledge, and can answer a question so quickly, rather choose to tell a person how they wasting their time, and try prove others wrong. From the posts ive read back in 2012 etc, everyone tried to help. Now its a matter of arguing, and then paying for help.

The only thing you have posted in this thread is mindless technobabble, bullshit and asskissing. You are not contributing in the least to it.
Feel free to be offended and call me rude. I don't care.

As I said before. R32 turbo is the most difficult project you can undertake on the ME7 ecu.
There are very few people in the world who can do it right and these people do this stuff for a living.

Why would I or anyone else for that matter work for free?

That said - this thread has deteriorated far beyond the original question.
Your original question is fueling under boost. This is the same as ANY other ME7 ECU. This is detailed in the FR and also on nyet's wiki.
Fueling and timing is NOT handled in any special way by a NA ME7 compared to a turbo ME7.

So really, your question should be "how to tune fueling on ME7". Because the fact that it is a R32 ecu and that it is boosted makes zero difference on the fueling side of things.

With the boosted R32 to do the tuning right is:
1. Locate the lambda post turbo and copy the fuel trims from bank 1 to bank 2 in the code.
2. Add some code to emulate the function of KFVPDKSE. Can be simply if pssol_w > KL(nmot_w) go WOT.
3. Add a pre-throttle sensor and multiply the incoming air by the pressure difference over the throttle plate. Alternatively model it, by specifying a factor based on KF(nmot_w, ps_w) calibrated empirically.
4. Add code for boost control, so ECU has some means of targeting and maintaining pssol_w apart from closing the throttle. I have controlled pressure off of the MAF (ps_w) so it works like M3.8.3/M5.9.2 and also by replacing the MAF by a manifold pressure sensor.
5. If you need more than 1.5 bar boost, then the 5120 mod.

But none of these things have anything to do with fueling per se. If you are not running more than 1.5 bar and you have pre-turbo lambdas then the rest is load/throttle control only.

The reason your fueling is bad is because:
1) Request - are you requesting correct lambda? This is as simple as changing LAMFA and rescaling KFLBTS to accomodate the higher load points + adjust the BTS triggers a little. But for lower boost you can just target 0.8 with LAMFA and it'll get you 95% of the way there.

2) Actual:
* Hardware - is your fuel pressure alright? Do you have a returnable fuel system? Do you have a vacuum controlled FPR? Does your pump provide enough pressure?
* Software - is your MAF scaled right? Are your injectors scaled right? What about correction maps such as FKKVS? KFLF? KFKHFM?

Remember - you are entitled to nothing. No one has to answer any of your questions. If you can't figure stuff out from the FR, then forget doing this, fit a standalone ecu and save yourself all the hassle. If you just want to get it done, then I am sure in every corner of a world there is at least one specialist who can get this done. Dump the car there, pay money, pick it up when it's done. You have been so far asking about really basic things. Things that are very easy to figure out from looking at the fr for lamfa_w, lambts_w and lamsbg_w paths.

Also this thread is lacking proper logs. Without correct logging you can forget doing this.

Howsit PRJ, shot for some laka info!

Look i didnt mean that im entitled to info at all, and as you can see im asking the most basic of things, I didnt ask how to tune this ecu. Further on in the thread, I said that i have it fueling on BTS maps, but it wasnt requesting what I wanted.

eg. if i have my KFLBTS maps set to 0.8, most the time it would request values around it.

I eventually found that im missing the KFFDLBTS map, so all i actually ended up asking for was some help on locating that map in my file.

As for tuning with lamfa, (my stock map calls for 13.2 @ WOT). If i change that 13.2 value even slightly, my car just dumps fuel, requests under 10 afr ><...Hence why im trying to tune with BTS maps for now.

Also just to add a few things,

I do have a return fuel line, with a rising rate FPR, with a bosch044 pump and surge tank. MAF and injectors are scaled in.

So to summarize my question, is there anyone willing to help locate my KFFDLBTS map/s please lol

You should have BEFORE you started this project...

27BAA KFDLBTS
27BDC KFDLBTSGRL

I noticed on my 3.2T that i had to raise the TAGBTS a bit to not run into that.. I raised the limit 200 degrees. The ECU went into BTS map to soon in my opinion. I calibrated LAMFA and KFBAKL(Accelereation enrichment) to land on target.. Im running E85 on mine so thats a bit diffrent. E85 is not that sensitive when running rich it seems.. but to rich I feel power loss due to flame speed. I tried to balance it to keep the engine cool and not to rich.. I wanted to keep TAGBTS at a safe level it a nice safety net.

My FKKVS is flat and im using a return line with a custom fuel rail with 4bar FPR from A4 1.8T. I logged my fuel trims aswell and adjusted KFKMH.. I logged long term fuel trims and reduces/increased KFKMH in the areas where it was needed.. I only focused at partial throttle.

The worst problems for me have been the lack of log tools.. I log in VCDS (Turbo Mode) But i think this sample rate is to slow to see what happens.. bugs me..

Thanks so much turbojohan!!!! Finally can start making some progress again lol

Driving me nuts with all the maps that im actually missing! I dont have KFBAKL neither, does that map eliminate the initial 'bog' when going WOT at low rpm? If E85 was easy to get down here  i would move over to it so fast! I also started with my KFKHFM map now, i rate vcds in turbo mode works ok!

I put my stock manifold back on, what a difference ::) AFR running around 11.5, around 18 advance with water injection, and 0.6bar...Almost 40kw and 70nm difference! Now at 280kw and 570nm. Trying to get a decent base map before i start upping the boost. Probably going to take atleast 10 years to get that right haha

I dont mean to be dumb, but what is KFDLBTSGRL? google doesnt give me anything :/

Gear depending bts


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

PRJ you mentioned make the throttle valve follow the pedal. What maps are involved here. As i understand we cant get the requested torque correct if we dont have added code to the ECU. Im running dsg, is it possible to make the throttle follow the pedalrequest more lite a cable car?  I can sense the car like it wont give me what i request.

KFPED and variants; "Relative Driver Demand Torque From Accelerator Pedal"  Search the site; plenty of references.

KFPED and variants (There are variants of this map yes Sport mode and so on).. That map doesn't control throttle plate it requests throttle opening. You go search forum yer self m8. I already have searched. Didnt find anything otherwise i wouldn't have asked that question.

Question is still active... Someone else?

No map directly controls the throttle plate.  KFPED sets the response you get depending on accelerator panel by translating wped into mrfa.  Based on what you said "I can sense the car like it wont give me what i request" that's the obvious thing to try.

maybe prj means CWMDAPP bit 1 (B_fpwdkap) and FPWDKAPP ?

No.


Did you bother reading any of the s4 wiki yet? Or even glance at the FR?

https://s4wiki.com/wiki/Tuning#Requested_load_limiting

    KFPED translates pedal position (wped_w) into mrfa (torque request)
    KFMIOP translates max load (rlmax_w) to max torque (mimax, which caps mrfa, which results in mifa/milsol/misopl1)
    KFMIRL translates torque request (mifa/milsol/misopl1) to spec load (rlsol)

rlmax_w is applied again to limit rlsol!

Yes but is there any thing you can do to just simply make the pedal just open the throttle without any damn requests and so on.. just open the throttle when i say..
And keep that damn throttle open han pedal says.. no restrictions.. Like a cable car.

Dont start have you read the wiki bla bla..  If someone know just say.. others please just dont answer if ya dont know.

Don't be an ass... How do you expect to do anything without reading?  It sounds like you want someone to tune the car for you.

Who said i didnt read FR and Wiki? Eyy back in 2011 there are tons of threads from you guys asking question.. why didnt you read the Wiki? Because there where other ppl here back then helping you guys..

LoL so now im an ass for asking a question.. what is this North Korea tuning? If i search in this forum i find alot of threads from you guys when you to where lost back in the days. you just became to BIG and now you just sit here makin money on tunes and gets involved in every thread someone makes :)
Ppl couldnt even point Nick_T who started this thread to sort fuel in a simple way....

The pattern here is if someone post something make them so confused they wont even bother tune it... but it instead lol.. great marketing idea guys. Also greate that you have all those noob hangarounds that randomly posts and agrees lol..

You can tell me im an ass now it ok ;0)

North Korea Tuning haha I just had a laugh..
Over n Out

Come on, behave.

To make throttle = pedal you simply need to alter a CWMDAPP bit.

But if the car has DSG you will destroy the gearbox with this. Probably after first WOT shift you will have broken shafts or no clutch.

Sorry for being rude. Ahhh I love u man :)   I searched the wiki but didnt have clue CWMDAPP/KFLDRAPP had to do with this...  I was lost but this is exactly what i was looking for couldnt find it.. I was reading about the DK maps an other stuff.

Break shafts and destroy gearbox..  Thats sounds like something in my taste.. I must try :)

Then i found this link in the wiki..
http://nefariousmotorsports.com/forum/index.php?topic=517.msg4028#msg4028

Now there is a chance to control BOOST from N80 valve output.. That would be awesome if that works..  Im gonna check the Tankluftung maps.
It could work as a DUMB controller..

It has nothing to do with KFLDRAPP. And I am serious the gearbox will not shift.

CWMDAPP has more than one bit. They each do something very different.

Again, READ THE DAMN FR already

Yes I am reading about that and around that.. My german is very slow though..

Understood, but thankfully the diagrams are 99% of what you need, and there isn't much german there as long as you can figure out what the variables and maps are..

 B_fpwdkap = CWMDAPP Bit1  Throttle control directly via the throttle pedal.. Does this mean that plate will follow the 2D map FPWDKAPP? (Forces the Pedal for calbration)

PRJ will the DSG not shift because of problems will occur in in calculations sending the target load to gearbox or is it simply disabled?

it won't shift because it needs a torque reduction to do so

Makes alot of sense :) 

Earlier on in this thread, CAN between ECU and DSG was mentioned.

I thought I would just add, I went down this path and it got out of hand very fast. I wrote a CAN proxy and intercepted all messages between ECU and DSG and modified them on the fly.

The relationship between torque demand, actual torque, is very tight between the DSG and ECU. Needless to say, I was unsuccessful in my efforts to get the DSG to behave differently. If anyone wants to expand where I left off, I will happily discuss more elsewhere or in private.

And yes, a torque reduction is indeed required. I got it to hold the torque high till the end and it would never shift without the reduction!