NefMoto

Hi everyone
I have   Problem with KFLBTS / Lamfa run too rich at high rpm on 06A906032HJ  on stock hardware turbo injectors etc  only mods are TIP  + decat  albo sai/ vvt/ o2 post cat is disabled.

I set TABGBTS to 800 . Lamfa and KFLBTS are set like in screen shoots

after ca 5000rpm am running  very rich req 0.73-0.78 lambda  however  EGT calc in 34 block didn't passed 800C so it souldn't trigger KFLBTS ?

Where i've made mistake ?

i read nore and also try to set kffdlbts to all 0 and set desired afr to kflbts like prj said in some post here.
fbstabgm i set like in screenshoot  and tabgts 700C - 800 C
but i didn't work too


where is the problem now ? could you give me some hint please  ?

You need to log what the the output of LAMFA and KFLBTS etc is to see what function is richening things up. 

Something triggers it.
Cat & SAI are removed correctly?
Any DTCs?
More logs will throw some light.

Rick- taks for any thoughts
Professor - yes i have four dtc
no communication with air bag / cluster/ abs + relay 271 ( i have 1.8T AQA dbw it is AJQ/ATC  + changed wideband ECU + WidebandO2+ maf )  but on 125 block there is normal communication with ABS - it works good  only dtc appers  Could it trigger me7 selffail mode ?


I make log - use me7l if i am good thinking
Kflbts hits after 5700rpm when tabgbts_w  {EGTForPartProtection} is passing 920C so i think it simply trigers FBSTABGm  which is now set stock on 920C and after higher value to enrich fuel..
also after 5700rpm tabgm EGTModelBeforeCat is only 740C so i don't know how to set properly the TABGTS and FBSTABGm ?

Rick and Professor  - What should I do now ? Should I worry about tabgts_w ?  920C is quite high temp i think ? It is reliable ?

It is possible to get such high EGT on k03 and afr 11.9 @5700rpm ? maybe i screw sth during postcat02/vvt/sai delate ? how do you think what should i do now ?

I don't see anything obviously wrong here. It's pretty much doing exactly what you are telling it to do.

As nyet says only it goes 0.75 instant after 5750rpm.
This 0.75 is legendary  :)

Nyet - nice graph !
Professor- jest 0.75 it is legeNdary but how to set AFR properly without risk of to much temp /engine damage?
i set tabgts to 800C because most people set like this
no one told that tabgts_w go so fast and high - to 940C on nearly stock car and triggers FBSTABGm.

everyone said that egt on 034 block is calc EGT model and is used to trigger KFLBTS  and i saw 780C max on mine  so set it to 800C
but as i see calc EGT on 034 block  is useless kflbts is triggered by 'other' EGT model.

What would you do now ?

Something triggers components protection.
Perhaps boost/torque maps are not quite good modified, since fueling as you say its stock.

I say that turbo/injectors/are stock but fueling is tuned - lamfa and kflbts as set like in first screenshoot
lamfa 0.836 from 3000 to 0.8126 to redline. kflbts map are little leaner than stock 180hp map.
tabgts set to 800  FBSTABGm stock.

Could you download au.bin and look into ? def is here http://nefariousmotorsports.com/forum/index.php?topic=401.0

Sorry you meant everything inside file is stock except fueling maps you ve changed?
Also SAI/VVT/decat you mention, what have you done for those?

I mean car is almost stock :D file isn't stock.

Attach ori file and modyfied file + screenshot what i have changed in modified file in compare to stock file.


What is making tabgbts_w to calculate EGTForPartProtection so high ?  could it be bad scaling load axis in kflbts map ?

Where I've made mistake ?

professor - i did some reserch - maybe CATR, CDATR and CDATS  needs to be set to zero 0 - you have similar problem ? but 32HJ ecu doesn't have egt probe so what you think ?

Lamfa:  1CEAC use this (told you one byte difference).

FKLDOBG_1_A, VWPMBBR, NWPMBBR : Why changed these?

After 5750rpm component protection is activated since it follows your BTS table. Something triggers it.
All these lambda bank 1 you zeroed are necessary for your setup?
SAI is totally removed from your car?
Other DTCs that the ones you ve mentioned already?

CWLAMBTS bit2

Yes i used like you said Lamfa:  1CEAC  (instead of wrong 1CEAB in Argdub  damos)


changed VWPMBBR, NWPMBBR to unlock left foot braking - set it for stock ?

FKLDOBG_1_A - I copied it from Hn box....... so i set it like in stock HJ file.


yes because i haven't SAI/POST 02 sensor/VVT in my car. 

(I tested also on friend stock 180hp 032HN box with changed only load from stock 132% to 152% + fuel +rest stock with all sai post 02 / vvt stock and fully working but it ALSO enrich fuel to lambda 0.75 @ 6000rpm like mine )

So i think the problem is what makes TABGBTS_W to calculate so High 920-940C ?  look in log  you will see +920C and starting enriching from FBSTABGm

I will set FKLDOBG_1_A back to stock but what to change else to make TABGBTS_W readings lower ?
 

Yes.
Also as Bische correct noticed:

CWLAMBTS bit2 loc@19246

setting CWLAMBTS bit2 loc@19246 as Bische said  to zero I would disable KFLBTS I think ? So i wouldn't have componentprotection right ? it won't be the safe setup or maybe i am wrong... ?

what would you do on my place ? should i worry to see 920-940C calc comp protect.EGT  ?

Why dont you just program BTS to do what you want rather than disable it?

nyet - i think is good thinking  but what to do with FBSTABGm - how to set it 

during WOT i hit 938C so slightly enrich KFLBTS (factor above 1.015 @940C ) 

when i set KFLBTS leaner - to 0.8 5000 - 0.78 redline i think the CALC EGT for component protection (tabgbts_w) would rise higher than 940C and then we have even nore enrichnent because FBSTABGm factor for above + 940C  are growing too so the circle is closing and probably also hit 0.75 lambda ?

I make this - look what are you think about this settings ?

in log i hit 900C tabgts_w during Wot 3 gear  @ 5000rpm on standard KFLBTS.

i set tabgts now to 890C (so probably hits 4500rpm) with 0.836lambda load 152% (max on my setup)
fbstabgm set 0.91@920C  1.015@950  1.25@960C    1.5@1000C

would be safe ? or not ?

what tabgts_w did you hit on yours cars ?

Set it to 700°C and BTS to 0.78 as is, just fine.

Ok so i correct TABGBTS to 700. but it wouldn't be to low ? in  log i hit 700C @ 2300rpm....  look on tabgts_w in log - it is little strange i think ?

Professor - from yours experience -  what egt logging tabgts_w   achieve  1.8T 180hp chipped ?

could you post some logs to compare with mine setup ?

Good point. That is crazy high for 2300rpm.

Decat? No logs, with stock exhaust only ecu flashed:
1.3-1bar (TT225) (2nd,3rd and a bit 4th gear on log) around 830-880max on max speed.

Yes i think someting is screwed. but what ?

professor - it is quite low egt in compare to mine  EGT ! i get 700 C calc EGT @  2300rpm and 938C @6700 @ 0.75bar k03 (nearly stock boost)  ?

What could  make EGT so High ? I have new Bosch maf  . absolutly no leaks so what is wrong here ?

Post log of EGTs that you saying is not possible under normal conditions.

here is nice graph - thanks to nyet

And where it shows 900°C at 2300rpm?
Max 755°C@6750rpm i see.

I mean 700C @ 2300rpm....  look on tabgts_w -  EGT for component protection and triggers tabgbts kflbts and FBSTABGm

I know the calc EGT before Cat is low - but it doesn't matter because it doesn't trigger tabgbts/kflbts/fbstabgm

Only EGT for parts protection act to KFLBTS FBSTABGm TABGBTS  and i have over 700C @2300rpm look on graph - when i pass 5750rp tabgts_w (egt for part protect.) rise to ~940C and triggers FBSTABGm = AFR fall to 10.9-11

Or maybe it is normal what you think ?

Tabgm_w measures EGT (calculated) so yours are normal.

Now as long for this prior enrichment, you may either disable it as Bische says and model your BTS close to lamfa, or set TABGSS (loc@1D078) to 1100°C and log.
Again this shall work if something else does not trigger prior enrichment, the way you look into it.
Just my 0.01$.
 
edit: ok i re-read your post and made some changes.

ok so if 950C tabgbts_w is nornal you calm me down :)

I plan to flash HJbox with this last flash on screen shots and log.
if will work i will be glad

but if still egt enrich hits strong - what about setting FBSTABGm like this ?

950C @ 1 .0
970C@1.05
1000C@1.2
1100@1.5 ?

in this way i will have still working comp protection because fbstabgm is based om tabgbts_w ? Am i right ?

btw - TABGSS (loc@1D078) - factory i have 0 value ? could you check i looking right  ?

Actually for a 3rd gear pull it is definitely not normal.
Measure your real EGT so you at least know what is going on.

yes it was   3rd gear pull 
i don't have egt gauge :(

prj - what tabgts_w did you achieve on stock 1.8t 180hp with simple file like mine ?

egt before cat on 34 block never exceed 790C@rev limiter- but when i easure tabgbts_w i read 920-950C@rev limit 3rd gear pull  what to think about it ? what makes to egt calc tabgbts_w so high ?

Just check your real EGT.
tabgbts_w should be set to TABGKRM_W in your case, which is temperature in exhaust manifold.
But in 3rd gear pull it is not really normal to have 950C in the exhaust manifold either.

I think the problem here is that the EGT model is out of calibration. But you won't know this until you log your real pre-turbo EGT.
You have two options - fix the EGT model so that it corresponds better to actual conditions, or set FSTABGM and TABGBTS unnaturally high.

Both will work, but I'd verify the actual EGT's just in case.

i can't figure out what could possibly have gone wrong with the stock EGT model. There isn't much there to fix unless his MAF is scaled very wrong or he's using a very different exhaust/o2 setup than stock.

It is my impression that a VVT ecu is used on a non-VVT engine.
I might be wrong though.

Yes you are right i use VVT ECU HJbox fron 1.8t Aum 150hp on non VVT engine - AQA stock 150hp narrowband non VVT no sai no o2postcat with changed maf and changed to wideband lambda probe.
But friend has 1.8t AUQ (ori) with VVt stock SAI Stock O2Post Cat stock VVT ECU  and he also achieve high egt and switch very fast on kflbts and FBSTABGm (lambda 0.75) same like mine. So i think problem is stock EGT tabgbts_w modell i think ?

So measure the real EGT is only reliable solution ?

did you ever measure tabgbts_w on 1.8T 150/180 with chip ? did they also  go so high like in my case   ?

How was this done? Simulated narrow band output?

He is using a wideband ECU on an engine that originally ran a narrowband ECU.


You don't have to measure anything, but then you won't know anything either.
I would measure the EGT to know how far off the model is.

That said, if you have a small K03 on there, then revving beyond 6500 rpm or so is completely pointless anyway.

no no no :)
i changed all necessary electronic to make conversion from narrowband to wideband ecu
simply i bought wideband ecu /wideband labda /new maf (wideband ecu require different maf  number ) put together on car and work like a charm.
narroband ecu is very strange and difficult unit also it tells nothing about real AFR.... so i go to wideband :)


Yes i know - i have k03-035 (something between k03-052 (can make max 250PS) and k03-011 (max 205PS) .

But i want to have properly adjusted fueling you know what i mean ?  what afr do you suggest to set ?  12.3 @3000rp - 12@6000 - 11.8 @6800 ?

You should log more things also...
Log boost presssure - desired and actual, ti_w (injector pulsewidth) to see duty cycle and so on, some timing variables.

From looking at your log, you are requesting too much load after 6000 rpm.
The 150hp K03 cars I have tuned run out of injector there, but maybe yours are bigger (you never seem to reach your request at the end though).

I looked at your logs, and actually your indicated EGT for part protection seems okay for what you are doing.
I think you should look at what your timing and fueling is doing.

Here is a pic of a 1.8T 150hp narrowband:
(http://gm.mainframe.no/pics/1.8t.png)

This is the max boost it could run with the injectors and BTS active. You can also see the notch at 5200 RPM in duty cycle, as that is where the EGT enrichment kicks in on my tune.
Over all peak boost is reached at 3000-3100 rpm. On stock tune peak boost (0.6 bar) is reached at 2500 rpm.

HI!
Thanks to You prj,professor,nyet,Rick i solve problem with lambda - problem was in fbstabgm now kflbts map work like a charm !!!
car run better , on high rpms engine is stronger i think. i noticed also that fuel consumption decrease.



I manage to make smooth torque - i was overboosting 1.3-1.35b and then settle to 1bar and 0,7b to the redline.
I change the KFLDIMX  3000@72% to 3000% to 69%, now overboost decrese and torque are much smooth Than i increase LDRXN from ca 150% 3000- 5500rpm
to 164% 3000-4500 rpm
156%  @5000rpm
150% 5500rpm



EDIT ?
OR maby all is right with boost and load ?

Hi
Lately i was working with fueling, i also add 3' maf hausing from S3,  and i scaled it as stock - fuel trims idle -0.6% , partial -0.8%, so i am pretty satisfied with that changes, turbo holds boost much longer than before, and spool is better than before.

But I have still problem with LOAD

So probably i have to rise 3 last columns in KFMIOP and KFMIRL and then my actual load should match desired ?

No. That won't do what you want.

Your load is low because your MAF is underscaled.

On stock maf 3 days ago  i have the same load values. is the stock maf underscaled too ?

Probably a boost leak sucking in unmetered air?

I am 100% sure that is no leaks ( pressure test ).

My fuel trims as i said are -0.2%idle , and -0.8% partial load, my fuel trims during driving are oscilating +-3% in all rpms. so i think that maf is scaled properly. also on stock maf actual load was also lower than desired..

What else could make that my actual load is so low ?

It doesn't look that off to me...


can you post the actual csvs, or output from ECUxPlot?

I have done today test - unplug maf, and watch the load. boost desired match to actual , but actual load was still lower than desired.

I start to think about KFLBTS - because some time ago i sort out fueling - and i change load axis in this map , could it cause issue with low load ?

Please post the actual .csv, or output from ECUxPlot

1) I don't see req load
2) Load will be even more inaccurate in speed density.
3) Actual load doesn't look that far off


No.

I still don't think your actual load is that low.

boost @load

In according to boost which is peak 1.25bar , from my estimate we should get 195%load (195+30 give 1.25bar @3250rpm boost in peak)  and then we get about 1.05bar boost 3500-4700rpm which could give load about 175%

But as you can see ecu indicate only 165% peak @3250rpm and about 152% from 3500-4500rpm

I try to unplug maf, but there is no changes in boost or load readings


Where is the problem with indicating so low load readings?

Any help ?

Boost leak, pressure drop over Fmic or possibly bad map sensor?

Your asking for 175 load.. 175*10+300 = 2050 mbar equals 15psi assuming 1000mbar atmosphere..

Your boost though is saying 2200mb which is 17-18psi assuming 1000mbar standard atmosphere.. You therefore have a 2-3 psi loss

The actual load is 160 which is taken off the maf.. Now assuming your maf is working well then what your Ecu is actually seeing as boost and what is actually going through aren't the same..

Do you have a boost gauge to see if you actually getting the same boost level the Ecu is reporting?

Thanks for inpust littico. So I will install Boost gauge and check what is going on with boost in real.
Actually i  have new maf sensor , new lambda and no boost leaks... smic is stock.

I noticed one odd think. On my old setup (from factory) AJQ engine 180hp @ 235Nm my boost was about 0.7bar to redline, ii have forge tip + decats , and maf reads about 160g/s  everythink was fine , and car run very strong.
Then i go wideband conversion,  changed maf to newer (from AUQ/AUM engine 06a906461L) , instal wideband lambda, disable sai , disable post cat lambda + disable vvt in flash (because my car doesn't have vvt sai and post o2 ).
I found strange think - on the newer setup wideband (with stock ldrxn from 180auq) maf(genuine bosch) read only 148g/s @ 0.7bar @6000rpm
It is quite strange for me. On the actual boost 0.8bar@6000rpm maf reads only 152g/s.
I have no idea what is going on ? For test i change ecu to narrowband and old maf type, and reads same as before 160g/s @0.7bar boost @6000rpm (163g/s peak on 2nd gear). Switch to new setup and still 152g/s @0.8bar boost @ 6000rpm.

What you think about it ?

If the MAF reads differently you should be able to see it in the fuel trims

Yes nyet, but on both ecu (narrowband + old type maf + narrowband lambda) and wideband + new type maf +wideband lambda fuel trims was +-2% ! very very strange for me.
maybe it is my imagination but on the new wideband setup with stock 180hp map i feel thah car runs weaker in comparision to narrowband 180hp....

Don't mean to be critical, but it is kinda pointless tuning car if you have no meaningful way to measure what is going on, either with a dyno, or logs, or even a g-tech.

BTW ECUxPlot can estimate HP from just RPM vs time.

yeah you are right, but it is so weak setup , that i think dyno measure is pointless and waste money.

i log flow and niutonometers from 120block, new 180wideband is weaker - lower maf readings (147g/s stock vs 160g/s narrowband stock) , albo from calculating power  120block narrowband has 200hp (stock) , wideband 177hp(stock) , after remap about flow 154g/s , and 120block calculations 190hp...