NefMoto

Hi Guys,

Ive seen a bit of chat around regarding this but no solid information supporting it so thought id start something.

HPFP
When a bigger pump is used we bump up the rail pressures under HDRPSOL. There are rail pressure maps for Homogenous Operation, Knock Protection, Lean Protection, Cat heating.There is also a maximum rail pressure limit map. X axis is RPM and Y axis is 'indexed Driver torque limit before change" which i dont fully understand but it seems to work like most other load vs rpm scaled maps.

There is also VHDP which is pump volume. For example the OEM on a 2.0tfsi is 251mm^3. Many tuners change this map when the HPFP is upgraded. Ive heard of 300mm^3 for an APR pump. Whats the formula behind this?

LPFP
Generally you dont need to touch this but once you're using bigger turbos you have 2 choices. Either change the hardware to something that is hardwired to flow more or change the software. It seems the hardware option is easier.
Maps i have found are:

KFNTBKS "Target pressure as a function of temperature HDP"
KLPSKRMX "Characteristic set pressure fuel low pressure system maximum"

I am about to do some testing on these maps and will report back my findings.

So if anyone is using the OEM LPFP module on a bigger turbo (2867, 3071, 3076) you will see your lpfp drop to 2.5bar once you start making half decent power. The question is how can we demand more fuel? Im confused in how the above to maps will help that as they're not requesting a certain pressure. I will however report back when i have more info, or if someone else does. Feel free to chime in.

Cheers

Your stock controller of mk5 gti and similar will usually overheat if you demand much out of a pump.

You must hardwire or upgrade to a better lpfp controller of the TTRS maybe.

I'm running an rs4 lpfp controller on my a4, with stock pump and so far it has been way more than enough. When I installed it I did nothing to the lpfp maps, and I was seeing 6.1bar at idle, high 5's even at WOT. Then I adjusted the target pressure maps, now I Idle at 4.1bar and at WOT at 6000 RPM I am around 3.3-3.4bar. Not sure if you can use it. Otherwise the Boost Manager plus is also a cool solution, my friend had it on his car and you can program the lpfp maps, manage boost profiles, and control meth all from one device.

I currently use a TTRS HPFP on smaller turbo cars. Say GTX2867. It seems to hold well at 25psi to 7000rpm. Even after requesting higher pressures through the correct maps the TTRS pump is ok for 30psi on GTX3071.
I use the RS4 controller and TTRS pump but i believe you do not need to controller and it can be done through the correct maps. Has anyone done this?

BenR -

Controller is needed for upgrade, it will overheat on road race or high speed runs for sure at high duty.  I have done this on multiple setups and had to use an uprated rs4/ttrs lpfp controller to resolve the issues.

Rarak,

Thank you for the response. This is why i havent overheated yet. I will make sure the other cars use the module also.

I am yet to re flash my car but i was getting fault codes from this module. "Out of specified limit" I think after adjusting some maps i can get rid of this. Or maybe turn off the diagnostics/fault codes for the LPFP?

I use stock controler with TTRS/RS3 pumps.

The only need is to recalibrate the controler's DC.
I did a GTX3071R last days and at 8200RPM I had 3.6bar @ 2bar boost with 84%DC
If you don't recalibrate well the controler then you will face an engine shut off at high speeds...

About the HPFP there are more maps like piston diameter, piston surface etc

MED is so complicated ,but its worth it !

Thanks Fotis

I dont like using the modules from different cars, too many other problems like waking it up when you open the door etc.

Ive found all the DC tables so should be able to get the OEM module to behave at high power with just the TTRS pump.

Hi Fotis

I am trying to figure this out as well. Are you talking about RQUAHDPK and VHDP? I am reading through the same pages in the FR over and over again without any luck. ???

you got it. Some of the maps are these... try to fingure more maps

I think I have figured out a bit more tonight.

I guess that these are the maps:

Map: RQUAHDPK SKHDPMX VHDP

Description: HPFP piston radius/area Maximum compression limit of the HPFP piston Total volume of the HPFP

Stock value: 16.0 mm2 5.0 mm 251.2 mm3

The calculation for VHDP seems to be: RQUAHDPK * pi * SKHDPMX (I wonder why VHDP it is actually defined as a map)

If the information I have found on the internet for aftermarket pumps are correct (assuming all have the same piston surface!), RQUAHDPK is changed to 24.0 mm2. If I input that into the formula above VHDP now = 376.8 mm3.

Is all this correct? I am only talking about calibration here - not changing the rail pressure.

Still trying to figure this out. ??? ;D

Is VGESAPP the last map that I need?

VGESAPP is only used on application mode, not in the normal calculations.

For the rest you are on the right way...

Thanks! I see about the application mode after reading closer.

How many maps am I missing? Just a hint would be nice... :)

Practical approach:
Well, log a stock HPFP on a stock file/car and compare to your modded file with bigger pump ;-)

Hints?
Personally I just changed the radius and volume. Works well enough for me.
Pressure regulation as well as adaption close enough to a stock car.

Without very dedicated logging you can't do much better imho.

Thanks a lot! Really helpfull!

I am ready for logging as soon as the file is ready, will see if everything looks fine by then.

I however still have to define the maps (RQUAHDPK and VHDP) and this is not an easy job when we are talking about 1x1 maps. ??? Have been looking for two nights now without result. ???

Send me the MED9 file you are working on, I'll take a look and define them.

Great work Beaviz and good info. This will be very helpful to people.  :)

I have some doubts about VHDP ... does I need to change that ?
When Yes , why it's not changed in CDLA or CDLB engines ?

CDLA/CDLB use the same pump as all other and hence have the same piston size and volume.

RQUAHDPK and VHDP should only be changed when changing to aftermarket pump/internals (APR, HPFPupgrade.com, Autotech etc.).

Ok piston size is the same (RQUAHDPK) but stroke is 0.4mm bigger.And from my equations VHDP should be 16mm^2*3,14*5,4=271,43cm^3 and not 251cm^3. What You think ?

What makes you think that SKHDPMX would be .4mm more?

I don't think ... check Yourself at 1D96E8 , this is file from Audi TTS with CDLB engine.

PWM duty cycle pulse of the lpfp is at KFFLAF.
You may also want to check KFNTBKS

Has anyone managed to get the correct technical data from the pump manufactures?

What data ?

Pistion area size and stroke

you can either check them on software or measure them by removing the HPFP!

it is the same as KRKTE. If you don't know what injectors has an engine from stock, then go to KRKTE!

here some info  ;D
Mazda MPS has the same HPFP pump as VAG cars .
http://www.corksport.com/blog/fuel-pump-comparison-part-2/ (http://www.corksport.com/blog/fuel-pump-comparison-part-2/)

Great info there! Thanks!

This gives me the following calculation for my APR pump:
RQUAHDPK = ( 9.5 / 2 ) ^ 2 = 22.5625

Which inserted in the previous equation gives the following for VHDP:
22.5625 * 3,14 * 5 = 354.23

or
22.5625 * 3,14 * 5,4 = 382,57
if you have CDLx engine :)

I can confirm that after changing the values to the above posted, the logged rail pressure is spot on with my APR pump.

Autotech HPFP :

RQUAHDPK = ( 9.8 / 2 ) ^ 2 = 24,01

VHDP : 24,01 * pi* 5 = 377,1481980634546782774403381627

VHDP ( CDLx ) : 24,01 * pi * 5,4 = 407,32005390853105253963556521572

( referred to the article on the website )

It was said in this topic that with TTRS/RS3 lpfp it is not necessary to change the pwm controller but only changing duty cycle in KFFLAF.
Seen that i don't know which dutycycle to apply i can use the OEM values of rs3 KFFLAF or i am completely wrong??
Thanks

Ive not actually changed KFFLAF as there is another 1x1 map that will give you a higher DC.

Its abit strange as TTRS and RS3 have same VHDP as 2.0TFSI with OEM pump, but TTRS/RS3 pump have diffrent area and stroke on its OEM pump.

With the calculations used her OEM VHDP should be 25x3,14x4,5=353,25 but it is in OEM sw 251.00 same as 2.0TFSI with smaller pump?

I agree! That does seem strange.

The same goes for the files _mumin_ has been looking at.

It could be interesting to take a look at the assembler code for this area to see if VHDP is actually used or what it is used for. I guess that sometimes the FR is not 100% correct.

What are the values for RQUAHDPK and SKHDPMX in the TTRS/RS3 files?

factory cal shit!

Its same in 5.0 TFSI software.

Its 25 and 4.5 on TTRS/RS3

Thanks for the answer Ben, can you indicate the name of this single value? just to understand what are you talking about...

LEPWMMX

So Ben basically you are saying that there is no need to modify KFFLAF but only to decrease the maximum dutycycle value (by LEPWMMX) until your PWM module won't go in overheating and the car won't shut down. Is it correct my thought??

Do any of you have the stock values from PRNL1 and PGBDVHDO from an RS4 4.2 FSI?

I can read elsewhere that the RS4 PRV should open at 136bar/13.6MPa.

In the stock 2.0 TFSI file the values are 12.0MPa (PRNL1) and 11.8MPa (PGBDVHDO). According to the FR, PGBDVHDO is the "pressure limit in the high pressure rail where the pressure regulating valve opens". So I guess that this should be set to 13.6MPa when installing an RS4 PRV?

The FR says that PRNL1 is the "opening pressure of the pressure regulating valve". My guess would also be that this value should be 13.6MPa. But I sense that I misunderstood something here (my german is getting a bit rusty).

What are the difference between PRNL1 and PGBDVHDO? Is PRNL1 only used for diagnose and should hence be a little higher than the actual value where the PRV opens?

PRNL1 don't exist in RS4 4.2FSI file. PGBDVHDO is zero.

Thanks man! :) Even though I did not get much wiser. ;)

One issue I am seeing on higher hp setups with upgrade HPFP is the pressure creeps above the requested pressure at higher rpm 6200rpm onwards.   One car I have in now running 155bar release valve and requests 140bar, by 7000rpm this pressure creeps to 150bar.   Another one is a hybrid setup 414hp with rs4 valve with rail pressure at  131bar , this one at 6500rpm creeps into 136bar and open u the valve at which point the lpfp %dc maxes out.  keep the pressure below the valve break of point and lpfp rail %dc is around 20% lower.  
Has anyone seen this before?  I notice it more on the CDL engine with cams with the extra .4 mm on the lobe.

I am thinking KLNEHDP could be the issue?  This seems to be the relation to the lobe position v stoke of the piston and is used for the N276 needle control, 3 cycles of 120deg for each full cam rotation

http://www.volkspage.net/technik/ssp/ssp/SSP_334_d1.pdf


I have the logs on my other laptop I will try to post them up, but for now its similar to the logs below

(http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/4301/110bod.jpg)
  
(http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i15/cruizin01/GTI/more230.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/QoGVW4G.png)

This is a good find for MED9.1. Ive had mostly good luck with just changing the KFPR maps but i have had times on some cars where changing these maps resulted on the specified not being what i set it to. PRNL1 and PGBDVHDO may be the answer. We need to also consider the mode the car is currently in.

Hi guys i have an issue. Basically i installed on 2.0 tfsi BWA with gtx2867 an RS3 lpfp with stock bwa pwm controller. But the problem is that the car shuts down at idle after 20-30 minutes. I expected the car could shut down at high loads like in 4th gear at wot or similar and in this way i could act on the duty cycle of lpfp. But at idle?? someone has had the same problem? any solution for this issue? thank you very much to everybody

Ive had the same problem. You need to look at your DC maps for the LPFP control and make sure they dont go over 95% ;)

The BWA LPFP controller is not made to run the RS3 pump. There is a reson the TTRS/RS3 have a complete diffrent LPFP controller.

But have you seen what Hummersword wrote??
Theoretically there is the possibility to use the stock controller with RS3/TTRS low pressure pump without swapping PWM controller that anyway interferes with the gateway.
Adding to this this issue it is very strange because the car doesn't shut down at high speeds but at idle after 20 minutes...probably there is another single value to set because I changed the dutycycle and nothing happened. Any idea?

I am tuning and installing TTRS/RS3 LPFP since 3 years ago when in Greece and in Europe wrote that "TTRS pump doesn't work on 2.0TFSi, lets install a Walbro255 and an ON/OFF button"

You can control the TTRS/RS3 LPFP with stock PWM controller of Golf 5 or S3 etc, the only need is a new recalibration of the PWM map and of course not only values but axis also...

Never had or have any problem and then your LPFP system is capable up to 650hp (tested on S3 GTX3071R that I have made and running 580hp at 2.35bar ct)
Actual inj time 6ms @ 160bar HPFP @ 8000RPM
Actual LPFP pressure 4.8bar @ 8000RPM @ 76%DC

all answers are in the software and FR doc, no need to install RS4 PWM or make patends or extra lines with external pumps etc...

cheers,
Fotis

Hammersword thanks for the answer your contribution is really precious.
In past I remember i swapped RS3 duty cycle and nothing happened i still had the same issues. So probably  i assume we also need to change single values like maximum, minum and initializing duty cycle values?
Thanks

Did I understand correctly that the stock LPFP controller overheats when the duty cycle increases beyond certain point?

In that case the controller could probably be strengthened by improving the cooling.
The current draw of the fuel pump increases at higher duty cycle so the heat caused by the increased currents would logically be the background of the issue.

I assume (and hope) the control unit doesn't have a LDO inside it but uses PWM modulation from start to end?

Based on ELSA the fuel pumps should flow as follows (minimum):

200-265hp (1K0919051AS) pump:

992cm³/min @ 10V
1240cm³/min @ 11V
1520cm³/min @ 12V

RS3/TT-RS pump (8J0919051D / E):

1600cm³/min @ 10V
1840cm³/min @ 11V
2120cm³/min @ 12V

So at 12V (~88% effective duty) the non-RS pump would be able to flow fuel only worth of 220g/s of air at 0.8 AFR (((1520/60)*0,741)*11,76)
Likewise the RS-pump would flow fuel worth of 308g/s of air per second at the same duty cycle.

Therefore at 100% duty cycle the absolute maximum flow for the non-RS pump would be around 355hp (crank)?

0.741 = Fuel weight (grams per cubic centimeter)
11.76 = 0.8 AFR

Maybe I'll source a broken stock controller and pop it open.
I got some background in VRM and PWM circuit design anyways ;D

Personally i found the stock LPFP controller with the RS3/TTRS LPFP worked ok but beyond 500HP the RS3 controller worked a bit better, allowed more fuel. Im not familiar with the electronics though, the only downside of the RS3 controller is it stays on after you turn the car off and you need to cycle the key again to turn it off. Not sure if there is a software change needed to stop this...

This is why the TTRS/RS3 LPFP controller has cooling finns and are placed under the car and also the cables is bigger.

The controller is totaly seald and is flash able with software.

Its should be possible to recode the car to make the RS3 controller to work (I have done this on a Mk6 GTI but its MED17) I will test this on a Golf R to.

This would be awesome, ive had a quick look at the RS3 file but cant really find any differences but havent looked to hard yet.

You need to stop looking in the Engine ECU sw  ;)

Hi guys I have a question for you
I was looking at these fuel rail maps: FWPHDR and FWIHDR. Can someone explain me how they work? There is the need to change them in a stage3? I have seen that, changing the values in these maps, the injection time changes in the logs.
Thanks to everybody

the whole game on LPFP calibration is the DC map calibration axis. RS3/TTRS LPFP flows double more than BWA LPFP!
Let the ECU know that the car has installed a double size LPFP and don't just cut Duty Cycle

No need for TTRS/RS3 PWM, the BWA or BHZ is more than enough to control the big LPFP

KFFLAF is the main map for this?
What about the maximum flow values (PEKP), are they required?

Hy guys I wonder why when you log your LPFP at WOT the duty cycle you see by log doesn't match never the duty cycle in the dump. Basically it is all the time the maximum allowable duty cycle value, for istance 92%. If you look at fuel pressure in the log at wot at high rpms it will be around 3,5 or 4 bar. But for such fuel pressure doesn't correspond maximum duty cycle in KFFLAF but for istance 60%. It is normal this mismatching? in the meaning it is normal to see all the time maximum duty at WOT?
Thanks

Sounds like your pump is on its way out, the controller is pushing higher DC to try to get it to meet demanded pressure, but its not able to so DC stays pegged at 92%

It is strange because i have seen this behaviour on the most cars i logged. The last one a scirocco R with HPFP loba, 76 skat exhaust, and evoms intake. Duty cycle was 92% and fuel pressure around 4 or 4.5 bar something like that. I'd like to understand if it is normal such behaviour or not.

Friends I have read the whole thread but I still have some doubts that I will like to ask . Sorry if my question is no so intelligent or dumb.
Ok about LPFP control I have read some times about PWM controller and fuel pump itself have a basic variable applied, fuel pump DC (duty cycle) based in the  low pressure fuel system, "pressure".

Then my big "dumb" question is how is controlled this pressure:
1) by fixed or static map? or
2) it is variable or has an adaptative logic system based in high pressure fuel system, requested AFRs, actual AFRs, etc.... something like a PID control?

2

I believe its a variable map that works of the requested and actual pressure, and in cases where the LPFP is weak or fault then the DC has to rise in order to compensate for the low pressures, this then requires higher PW and causes the controller to over heat and shut off, and why some people get that "fuel cut" until it cools down, replacing the pump fixes the issue.

Also if you fit the larger TTRS LPFP and don't amend the map accordingly then again it over heats.

Nice answer littco, I supposed that too.


But here is where I have the big doubt, if the previous thinking is right why should we need to change LPFP DC map for a different fuel pump or PWM controller? . I mean if the LPFP DC map is basically based in a requested and actual pressure with some other added variables, why we need to tweak related fuel pump maps?

KFFLAF is a basic duty cycle map that runs up to 92%. If you try and run the higher current pump off the stock pwm controller at those duty cycles, it overheats. There is no PID for the pressure, it runs very basic.

I think the previous post answered it, the current on the 2 pumps is different so the larger draw causes the controller to over heat and hence why you must lower the map to stop this..

Ok got it........ ;)

Just for note on the fueling

Regarding the LPFP with increase in RPM

"The assignment is done via the map KFNTBKS.  At high speeds,
and average fuel temperatures, it is necessary to increase the set pressure on the low pressure side, because otherwise the
Volumetric efficiency of the HDP may be inadmissible small. In hot start case is connected to the set in PSNHSLL target pressure."

High pressure pump info..

The AMSV function is used to control the HDP2. The HDP2 is a high-pressure fuel pump with adjustable
F¨ordermenge. It works on the principle of a cam-driven single-cylinder piston pump.
The piston compresses during his Aufw¨artstbewegung the enclosed space in the cylinder fuel, as long as a
controllable valve, the quantity control valve MSV called, which connects the pump chamber with the low pressure chamber,
closed is. Once the pressure in the pump ¨uberschreitet the pressure in the high pressure chamber, the fuel is against
a R¨uckschlagventil the high-pressure chamber toward ejected. If the MSV opened before finishing the F¨orderhubs breaks
the pressure in the pump chamber together, the R¨uckschlagventil includes the high-pressure chamber and the fuel flows back
in the low-pressure chamber.
For setting the F¨ordermenge the MSV is closed from UT the pump cam to a certain stroke.
In the AMSV function of the closing time of the MSV as angle dwmsvs_w in degrees crankshaft before BDC pump
calculated. The angle dwmsvs_w resulting from conversion of Anzugsverz¨ogerung TANMSV about the speed in a
Angle. The dependence of Anzugsverz¨ogerung of the battery voltage is ftamsvub_w by Einrechung Factor
considered. ftamsvub_w arises dependent on ubsqf from the map KLAMSVUB.
The ¨Offnungszeitpunkt the MSV is in AMSV function as angle dwmsvo_w ABDC pump in degrees of crankshaft
provided. The angle dwmsvo_w calculated from a pilot control component dwmsvvst_w from the function% VSTMSV,
in which the demand control is calculated, and a proportion of the control loop prdr_w (% HDR). The proportion of
Controller is implemented via the factor FDWMSVRDR in angle. The addition of both components is the maximum
F¨orderbereich - e.g. from 0 to 180 degrees of crankshaft (Two cam pump) - limited, with 180 degree full F¨orderhub
and 0 degrees no stroke mean. In practice, the pump still calls at high speeds even at dwmsvo_w = 0◦ a
small amount. To display the minimum quantity is therefore negative at dwmsvo_w the entire drive to | dwmsvo_w |
moved forward. The maximum F¨orderbereich is applied by the characteristic KLDWMSVMN and DWMSVMX.
In addition to the control start dwmsvs_w and dwmsvo_w the control end a condition triggering active B_msvact
formed in block BBMSV. During the start-up or if the required F¨ordermenge falls below the minimum F¨ordermenge,
is interrupted, the control of the pump. At the same time about the condition B_hdrres the scheme in a
neutral state added. is in systems without pressure reduction function for CWDAF = 0 at Schubabschaltbereitschaft
(B_sabte) or for CWDAF = 2 at Schubabschalten (B_sa) controlling MSV and the rail pressure control is deactivated
(B_msvact = 0, B_hdrres = 1). In systems with pressure reduction function (CWDAF must be set to 1) is the rail pressure control
and Anteuerung the MSV in coasting mode active.
By B_msvoff can from the diagnostic function% DKVBDE the control of the pump to be interrupted, if this result
special Notlaufanforderungen is necessary.
If the adjusted maximum F¨orderbereich ¨uberschritten is the bit B_hdrba an anti-wind-up functionality
ausgel¨ost in the controller in the function% HDR, that is the integrator is stopped at the value at which it is currently located.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cit56QE5UHo

Here's a video on the Lpfp and upgrading and reasoning behind it .

Maybe of help

Trick for translating from the FR is paste the text into Notepad, press CTRL+H (Search and replace), in the "Find what" box paste in the umlaut (¨) and leave the "Replace with" box empty. Press Replace All. Paste newly umlaut free text into Google translate and score and extra 10-15% words.

I watched this earlier and it was painful to watch. He keeps mixing his words up and generally talking mince.

anyone can find PRNL1 this file?

Pretty much sums up every instructional youtube video there is.

2008 B7 A4. I took a stab at a TT-RS Fuel pump on a stock controller. My car began to run lean around 4800 rpm with a MAF reading of 326 grams/sec. I adjusted the axis and the duty cycle to compensate for the fuel pressure loss, it appears to worked but when I get up to 6500+ rpms the fuel pressure dips down to 2.7 bar and the throttle body starts to close. I plan on modifying the axis again to reflect higher maf readings and changing the fuel filter because it is original. I'll let you guys know of the outcome.

Your interpretation of the map axis data is wrong. The g/min axis is fuel through the injectors, not MAF. The kPa axis is desired low pressure as specified in KFNTBKS.

Just edit KFFLAF so that the maximum duty cycle it'll ever use is 80%.

Thank you for the correction.

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk

Hi , i m running out of fuel(i also use the fuel pump from tt-rs) and i have made the changes above . I got it correct or i understand it the wrong way?With my changes i estimate that i demand the LPFP to follow the line to 600kpa value .

Going by your KFNTBKS, you'll spend most of your time in the 500-580kPa range for which you don't appear to be running enough duty cycle. I hold 5.7bar at the red line in block 231 with the following attached.

Also, you'll need to limit your duty cycle. I've found values above 82% will cause controller cut. 77% has enough safety margin and the pump has no problem supplying the required fuel.

Thanks for your info!
When you are saying to limit my duty cycle you mean to lower LEPWMMX ?

Yes, set that too. Mine is called at 81.9%, but my KFFLAF is adjusted as per attachment (5% lower than where I've found the controllers critical limit).

Sort related to the hpfp.

Looking at fuel pressure sensors and running the 200bar in a k03 car for an upgraded turbo.
According to FR the fuel pressure calibration map is KLKDSBKS which on all the ols files I have is a 4x1 map with voltage 0 -4.9v which is the max voltage as per the scalar and a scale.

Now this is a scaled map and different sensors ie 150 and 200 should have different scaling however all the KLKDSBKS maps I've seen are all the same 0-1300, regardless is its the 150 or 200 bar sensor or map. So am.i looking at the wrong map? As I'd expect to find different values for the different maps/sensors.

I had a conversation with Beavis, and he was under the impression  the maps on older versions where 2x1 and newer ones 1x4 and 14mpa and 20mpa respectively which in my mind would make sense.

Any ideas please.

KLKDSBKS is the scaling for the low pressure sensor. The data is kPa, and 1300kPa is 13bar. KLPRAIL is the voltage scale for the high pressure sensor in the rail. This map differs between the K03 and K04 cars.

Thank you , That's exactly what I was looking for,

To add the early ones where 2 columns and the later ones are 3 columns so if you want to add a 200 bar to the earlier cars the you just need 0 and 20 in the cells

The 3x1 maps just have a reference for 0bar. Acts like a sort of "pull down" resistor I suppose for rail voltage. 2x1 just gives values for 2.5v and 4.5v

Can anyone help me with this?
I have already adjusted the KFPRSOLHOM, KFPRSOLHMM, KFPRSOLSCH, KFPRSOLKH and KFPRSOLHKS maps to request 13MPa but by logging the requested pressure does not exceed 109.99Bar.

Anyone have any tips?

8P0907115T

KLPRMAX?

Yes

Enviado de meu XT1033 usando Tapatalk

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170306/79968ccfbc2113b20a30ed49a747809e.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170306/1be47dbcfb82753a4bfaece73f1bb587.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170306/eca18497735ca34d27c5e1872b180dda.jpg)

Enviado de meu XT1033 usando Tapatalk

You've defined that wrong. Change the address fro 1D9AA9 to 1D9AA8

Many thanks for this, now the table makes sense!

I changed the values from 11 to 13, even so the pressure is limited by 109.99 in the log ...

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170307/965d08cc5d0f1e041c2c9b2dda2aee57.jpg)

Enviado de meu XT1033 usando Tapatalk

when you log your HPFP what is the request you get? Is it 130 bar?Are you running an updated HPFP intermals ?

In my records the requested pressure does not exceed 109,99Bar.
My HPFP is OEM.

That's wrong, the correct address for the map is 1D9AAA not A8, and it's exactly that last value that's not defined in his map anymore that makes it limit to 110 bar.

:o

I've found that incorrect definition is usually because the map address is a single byte higher than it should be.

Attached is taken from my Golf R - 1037510589. Top map 1DA822, bottom 1DA823.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170307/ae4136fc90937976181ab76e84987b44.jpg)

Enviado de meu XT1033 usando Tapatalk

Now explain my limitation ....

IamwhoIam was right with your address. Looks like you've still limited fuel to 110bar when the engine at 10 degrees C or above ....

I'm going through the same issue, Ill see if my definition is off as well. I would have never found this, thanks alot guys!

Bingo!

Now the requested pressure sets at 129.99Bar.

Thanks friends, now I will move on to the next step of tuning.

LOL you guys are funny

Mine works too! I am running 150 bar and I am not outspooling my HPFP anymore. Thanks guys

150 bar???
I thought the mechanical valve would open with 130 Bar ...

You can get custom valves up to 200 bar i think.

Are there any infos about KLLFPRSG, what does the values means in detail and how they coheres with other maps, especially with FNGPRS?

Hi Guys

Great topic. Also struggling to find RQUAHDPK and VHDP on my Seat TFSi file. I am currently running a Autotech hpfp. Any help is appreciated.

Thank you

Guys is there a way to keep the rail up to 175 also at high rpm ? I have this problem... till 6800-7000 the rail is ok 175 bar but over those rpm LPFP and Rail went down to much...and car is lean, inj timing raise up ...etc....

This are some logs to see this strange behaviour... what i miss?

1D90DE=RQUAHDPK

 1D932E= VHDP

Post full logs. 001. 032, 230, 231.

For uprated hpfp what do you change map VHDP to and what do you change RQUAHDPK I use vis motorsport

If i remember well there were 3 stepof vis... but now only stage 1 and 2.
Which one have you hot?

It's basically physical dimensions of the HPFP piston and chamber, you can measure the piston if you open it up.
Or just a "ballpark" percentage change of the piston area and then volume re-calculation will do, if you don't want to open it. Adjust later if control looks wonky.

I got the stage 1 kit

I guess vis motorsports is 10mm is piston size inside how would you do the conversion to edit the map?

Just calculate it, like everyone does

is this the right way for the  calculation
RQUAHDPK = ( 10 / 2 ) ^ 2  what dose the ^ mean when doing the calculation i tried but i didn't get close to what it should be


 for VHDP it would  be what RQUAHDPK =  then x 3.14 x 5?

^ means for example  2 ^ 2 = 4

X ^ n = multiply X with X self for n time ...    4 ^ 5 = 4*4*4*4*4

In your example ( 10 / 2 ) ^ 2 =  5 ^ 2 = 5 * 5 = 25

The  for VHDP would be 25x3.14x5= 392.5 dose that sound correct

Would SKHDPMX stay stock since it uses stock spring?

Is it CDL engine ? If yes SKHDPMX is different...and also VHDP result :)

I suspect my posts have went "missing". I did post that SKHDPMX isn't anything to do with spring, it's the stroke of the inlet cam.

CDLs have 0.4mm more stroke than A and B series EA113s.

My engine is BPY so I'd say mine is B series ea113 and I dont touch SKHDPMX

Unless you fit a CDL cam, leave it stock

no i didn't change the cam i left it as a BPY cam
When using a uprated HPFP its a must to Change map RQUAHDPK and VHDP is that correct?
im waiting on my RS4 to show up to up my fuel from 130 bars to maybe 140 bar.

Indeed what i said... if it is CDL engine...the formula is different :)

Tha is guys I not touch that 3rd map since i am.not running CDL cam's I'll do some logs and see if my request and actual hits around I think 129.5 is when the stock fprv opens up, I'm having high ltft around 10-13% and stft sits around -2 to -3%

Your trims have nothing to do with your pump control whatsoever.

I didnt think so, but I'm still new at learning, sorry

The pump control you can see if you log requested vs actual rail pressure. If it's tracking quite well, you're good.
Fuel trims can be for example injector settings, maf settings or fkkvs depending on how much your car is modified.

I didnt touch my injectors setting or maf settings  or fkkvs and I have 3" catless downpipe,  axle back exhaust K&N typhoon cold air in take, gfb dv+ and a godspeed twin inner cooler, stage 1 vis motorsports hpfp stock lpfp

That intake is gonna skew maf readings that's why you have issues with the fuel trims.

FKKVS Top left zone...is the solution to the trim ?

FKKVS is injection correction. KFKHFM is MAF correction.

Since the trims seem to be thrown out by the intake, I'd say working on KFKHFM would be the best start.

Clear fault codes, do a 4th gear run from as low RPM as possible to red line and log Lambda control. Stick 5-7% across KFKHFM and repeat and observe the difference. From there, you should be able to figure out where needs less or more correction and dial in more accurately. Alternatively, install a better intake.

Fuel wise it makes little difference on how to do it.

However...

Check if when actual boost = requested boost your actual load is not higher than requested load.
If your actual load is higher than requested load and your fuel is rich then do it through KFKHFM, because that will bring your load down, help with torque intervention and get your timing maps reading correctly again (vice versa if your trim is positive).

However, if it the load looks alright (more or less on target, or slightly below), then fkkvs is the way to go.

... if the car is MAFLESS ? Only through FKKVS?

i run a MAF and here are some logs my timing is quite high of -9% :(

gman86 on map KFKHFM would you minus on the number or add exp load 95.3 @ 2000 RPM is 1.0001 would i go down to 0.**** or 1.****

If your car is running alpha-n then god help you. You will never ever get it to run right in vacuum, because it's running in a limp mode designed to get you to the closest service point - there is no way to measure the intake air with the throttle not wide open, so do whatever.
If you have a TT-RS, RS3 or RS6 (no MAF from factory), then to adjust load you need to edit the VE maps, and for fueling you can use FKKVS.

I added some logs to take a look at and tell me what you thing please,  I dont think I have a vaccum lake but maybe a boost leak at around 4000 you can hear, I'm going to do a leak down test today.

so i added 5-7% on the map KFKHFM now i see LTFT around 4-6%  also done more logs, they look at bit better

Hey guys,

Does anyone know the characteristics of LOBA HP25 for 2.5TFSI ? (pistons size ? FP size ? )

I think it´s the same size like the autotech kit (11,5mm piston diameter).

Few day ago, Loba said me 12.1mm.

Hello,

HPFP from LOBA received and installed on my 2.5TFSI.  Loba said me piston size is 12.1mm, so i use  these values :
first :
- RQUAHDPK : 36,6mm²
- SKHDPMX : 4,5mm
- VHDP : 368cm3
=> actual pressure rail > requeted

then :
- RQUAHDPK : 36,6mm²
- SKHDPMX : 4,5mm
- VHDP : 348cm3
=> same result, actual pressure rail > requeted

Ori values are :
- RQUAHDPK : 25mm²
- SKHDPMX : 4,5mm
- VHDP : 251cm3

Do I need to reduce SKHDPMX  ?

I try SKHDPMX =5 (Loba said to me), but same behaviour  ???

any updates in here?

i´m also actually thinking about an upgrade hpfp for an rs3, but want to buy one where measurements are clear.

i asked autotech for dimensions but got no answer, anything new to the loba hpfp?

or any other advices whitch manufacturer to use?

Vis motorsport makes a good hpfp

hm, everything out of stock in their shop, so not really an option.

VIS doesn't seem to be always good quality.

I’ve fitted quite a few now with no problems


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Hi! have you solved problem?

I have also bought loba hpfp and see same problem
But if loba said that piston size is 12.1mm
math have to be

RQUAHDPK : (12.1/2)square=36.6025
- SKHDPMX : 4,5mm(it could be change just in case if you changed your camshaft sprocket(which drives hpfp))
- VHDP : 36.6025*pi*4,5=517,4568

Now, with more boost, more fuel (ethanol), I have put a specified rail pressure of 140bar, actual is around 130.

Is there a solution for the rail pressure problem?

Just another question: does it make sence to raise pressure >130bar (with aftermarket PRV)?

HW
engine CDLF
IE HPFP upgrade kit (9.8mm piston)
HPFP upgraded with roller kit
LPFP+controller TTRS
PRV RS4
injectors stock CDL
SW
KFPRSOLHKS = 132bar
KFPRSOLHMM = 132bar
KFPRSOLHOM = 132bar
KFPRSOLKH = 132bar
KFPRSOLOFF = 132bar
KFPRSOLSCH = 132bar
KLLFPRSG = 140bar = 0,540155
KLPRMAX = 132
VHDP = 407,3
RQUAHDPK = 24
SKHDPMX=5,4

PGBDVHDO = 140bar
KFFLAF= stock from TTRS
KFNTBKS =stock from TTRS

KRKTE=0,02880

Has anyone managed to solve this problem?
After updating the HPFP I have the same problem, at high rotations the pressure rises to the point of shutting off the engine due to excess pressure.

In your case it shoud be the LPFP controller!

Why not log low pressure?

My LPFP is OEM and the pressure on the bearish line remains stable between 4.5 to 4.8Bar
When upgrading the HPFP does it need to reduce the pressure in the LPFP? This does not make sense to me ...

No! You don`t understand the fueling system. In case of the controler shut down, it is overheated. Log LP @ time of your problem an see by yourself ;) 

Before I draw conclusions see the problem I posted, I reported that I am having problems with high pressure excess, at no time did I say that my LPFP to, I know very well how the supply system works but it seems to me that you do not understand it .
I do not understand why I would overheat the low controller being that I own LPFP OEM and the power of the car is still OEM.
I am injected RS4 and HPFP updated, only after calibrating this step will follow in the other calibrations.

Moving on to leave feedback on my problem.

I was able to solve my problem by studying the VSTMSV, AMSV and HDR functions.
Now my actual pressure follows the requested even at high rotations.

 I didn't read the entire thread but has anyone tried the low pressure pump  upgrade from torquebyte

 https://torqbyte.com/products/vag-pm4-high-power-fuel-pump-control-module

It's $700 USD but it allows up to 36 amps of draw at the low pressure end so you can run a significantly upgraded low pressure pump which allows for more at the high pressure end

There`s no need for this crap, just buy an TT-RS-controller+Pump or an other upgrade pump (IIRC ~240€, bar-tek).

 If you are having issues with the lpfp controller cutting out then you just need to setup the hardware to cope with the extra demand, on the hpfp there is a little brass fitting for the lpfp feed. just drill this out to 5mm and your lpfp controller will be working a lot less effort to make the required power.

Did you test it in real?

Can anyone share experience, how much difference is requesting 3/4/5/5.8 bar on  LPFP to have influence on performance of HPFP?

Here it is.  :o

Is it reaction on me?   I cant read anything about what i asked, on this log. Little more info/data?

Yes it is. It shows that the car don`t turn off, but there is a diff > 4bar.

It depends on more than one factor, take a look in any 115xx damos @BKS or FR. ;)

Im curious, if its important to maintain 5 or 5.8bar constantly on LPFP to have best output of HPFP or 3-4bar is enought.   You posted log, where car with 1bar LPFP and car still goes, but we cannot see railpressure and which powerlevel it is ect.
Meet a cars where lowpressure drop to flag DTC, but car still goes with stable highpressure.

So lowpressure can be as low just until highpressure starts to fall from target, in theory?
Is there benefit of higher lowpressure then needed(i understand for some headroom for stability at all conditions...)

Let us think about your question: do you know why the OEM rise up the pressure with rising temperature?


On principle counts: as long as the HP follow requested, all is fine. So it dosen`t matter if the system running 3...4...5 oder 6bar. The problem is another: the effect is called steam bubbles. ;)

Rising LP with temperature, i dont exactly why, doubt it is just due cold fuel is more dense, because its enginetemp axis in target table. And HP target is same no matter of enginetemp, if im right(except subzero temp). Can you tell me?


So, maybe answer question will make more clear, but why, i just cant set target for example on 3bar at high rpm,  where in example instance LPFP dropping pressure say 3,5bar and flagging DTC.  With lower target will be all ok, or?

I see some tuned files(even APR), most of it rising LP pressure target at working engine temp a bit.

Here i gave you the general answer.


According to FR (FB DBKS 3.10.4)

The ECU compare pbkist_w and pbksoll. If (pbksoll - Druckschwelle) > pbkist_w it coud be possible that there steam bubbles.

For better understanding according to the english sheet, so it explain it better then i could it ever do. ;)

People don't seem to get problems from bubbles with hard use on hot days on port injected systems running 3 bar differential, less than 4 bar from the factory with boost. I'm curious what low pressure is best for VAG HPFP with drilled out restrictor, because if it is sensible to run 3-4 bar instead of 5-6 bar, we would get more out of the low pressure pumps on ethanol, and at this level with 11.5mm plungers, the high pressure side does seem happy when a deficient low pressure side is over 2 bar down.

The fuel temperature should be lower by running at 3 bar instead of 5.5 bar too shouldn't it? Also E85 should make less bubbles than gasoline, and that is where we need the extra flow.

Also has anyone boosted J538 supply voltage? Great results on other platforms from increasing to 17.5V to the fuel control modules.

Stock controllers like to overheat very easily on these as it is. Adding another 3v is going to cause the module to switch another ~3A or so at high duty and will likely die out earlier. The pump is probably happy taking that sort of increase but with the likes of a PM3 or an OEM controller with a beefier switching capability.

PM5 is out imminently, although this is an MED9 thread, I'm an MED17 interloper, our targets have brushless pumps and PM5 is driving them well at 24V apparently.

It seems the brushless J538 do fail too, disappointing since you might expect less current.

Running less low fuel pressure works really well on E85 in initial tests.

Friend, checking. I think you left this map ...


KLPROV = 140bar


and I don't understand what sense it makes in the off-set map to add 132bar(KFPRSOLOFF) ... ??

This is my final config for a demand of 130bar (with internal integrated engineering 155bar kit for safety + latest hitachi HPFP ref) and RS4 rail valve.
Engine CDLD.

KFPRSOLHKS = 130bar
KFPRSOLHMM = 130bar
KFPRSOLHOM = 130bar
KFPRSOLKH = 130bar
KFPRSOLOFF = 0bar
KFPRSOLSCH = 130bar
KLLFPRSG = 130bar = 0,509716
KLPRMAX = 130bar
VHDP = 407,32
RQUAHDPK = 24,01
SKHDPMX = 5,4
PGBDVHDO = 136bar
KLPROV = 136bar
PRNL1 = 130bar

What do mates think? something more to touch up?

KFPRSOL* maps aren't single value, so depends what they look like. If you've replaced all the 110bar values with 130 then that's probably fine. You might want to massage the other values so the ramp of the pump isn't so hard when interpolating between cells.

all the KFRSOL maps from 2500rpm to maximum and 55% load, it was where I put everything at 130bar, it is the right thing so that what you say between maps does not happen, right?

I attach an example.

I still have doubts about exactly how they work: PRNL1 and PGBDVHDO. would you explain ?? I understand that both at 136bar would be fine for rs4 rail valve, right?

gman89 what lpfp and injectors do u have on the golf R and would it not be beneficial to run with a large LPFP than 1.5mm nozzle on the HPFP?

Hi Guys
If the LPFP is upgraded to a large flow pump and the LPFP feed nozzle on the HPFP is drilled a little bigger but not to much to influence the pressure of the LPFP to the HPFP it would increase the flow to the HPFP. Would this not put less strain on the LPFP controller and HPFP components?

This would be interesting to know exactly. there are people who affirm that opening that entrance mouth in HPLP, 5mm. The LPFP works more comfortably(With OEM LPFP or higher flow.).

Yes it is a common mod to drill out the low pressure feed into the HPFP to 5mm. I do this on all cars that present to me for stage 2+ or above tuning. I've noticed low pressure setups struggling to maintain 4bar that will happily maintain 5-5.5bar with the fitting drilled.

very good contribution to the post @gman86. thanks.

great post i love reading full topics like this.

are these infos about the IE hpfp kit valid?

i don´t get any feedback from IE directly for piston size, 9,8 seems not really much to me compared to the autotech and VIS kits...  ???

Do you realy read the hole content of this topic?

of course it is correct. but you have to take into account if your engine code is CDL or earlier to make the calculation. change the diameter of the cam.

i know the calculations, thats not the thing, i was talking about the mechanical part.

inbetween i got an reply from IE directly, they´re saying the piston size is 22,225mm...

22.25 is similar to the piston that uses APR about 9.5mm. The rest of brands autotech, kmd, vis, integrateed ... use piston of 9.8mm = 24.01mm.

IE info HPFP:

https://performancebyie.com/products/ie-hpfp-vw-audi-20t-fsi

It is the bomb that I carry.

"Our pump will be perfectly calibrated with any ECU calibration which is tuned for a 9.8MM diameter HPFP piston, which is commonly available."

Hi gman86. So these to maps are targeted maps for the lpfp?

Yes. KFNTBKS and KFFLAF are LPFP maps.

Deleted

I use 3.6 BWS engine with stock tiguan LPFP controller and pump (same as RSQ3 controller and pump). Here are two KFFLAF maps, tiguan map is above and 3.6BWS is below. Do I need to change number in the field or change axis too?

And I opened three KFNTBKS maps: my 3.6 BWS MED 9.1, 3.6 touareg MED 9.1, Tiguan MED17.5.2 (from up to down). There are different number of columns in two similar maps (bws and touareg). Is it normal? Do I need just to transfer numbers from tiguan map to my one?

Hi to all. So the HPFP map is it also a target map then? Can some maybe share there RS4 injector maps and explain the axis function for example x amount fuel pressure at spesific rpm and load points?

It isn`t the same. ;)

So what maps needs to be adjust to fits the TTRS LPFP in 2.0 tfsi ?
I am having fuel cuts now at high rpm and error on lpfp.

It depends on what the code is your throwing... Provide more insight into your issue and we may be able to help.

It'll be low pressure regulation because low pressure drops off when the controller does its thermal cut.

KFFLAF needs adjusted to rework the pump duty cycle. You need to limit RS3 pump duty cycle to 82% to avoid thermal cut at high load.

RSQ3 and RS3 are different cars with different controllers and pumps.

Is this only applicable for when actual boost is higher than requested boost?

Also what parentage difference between actual and requested boost is acceptable?

U mention the TTRS HPFP is it not the LPFP u referring to?

Guyz what maps should be adjusted when changing FPRV to 160-170b ones ? Im sure i saw it on this forum but cant find now.

You'll find answer in this topic in previous pages (KFPRSOLXXX, KLPROV, PRLN1 ....)  ;)

I had the same problem and find that the controller was overheating.

Jip you are correct. I find mine to be at 98%.

Have u done the test on the Golf R and if done can u please share your findings?

gman86 did u use these changes in the maps with Golf R pump and controller or with TTRS pump and controller?

RS pump, stock controller.

ΤΤRS lfp with stock controller works ok if you limit your currents and even with that fuel is enough for most normal setups. Depending on the fuel request of your setup, controller safe cut will occur easier especially if you do high speed runs.  The best way is to calibrate  whole KFFLAF & axis along with LEPWMMX. Gman is right that under 77-78% max duty it will be ok on most cases.   

hello
I am looking for addresses for golf gti mk5 BWA 1k0907115j
LPFP Max Duty Cycle (LEPWMMX)
LPFP Duty Cycle (KFFLAF)
LPFP Target Pressure (KFNTBKS)
thanks
my file
https://www.transfernow.net/dl/20220914Wk4TZi30

does anyone know the addresses?

I emailed vis about stage 1 pump.
It's 10mm piston.
So
10/2 = 5
5 x 5 = 25
25 x pi x 5 = 392.66
25 x pi x 5.4 = 424.11

RIP to your VIS pump

Why would you say that..
New values inside maps should be
424.11
And 25 for other map
Based on having a CDLx engine code

I emailed vis it's a 10mm piston not 9.8mm. on their stage 1 pump.

For those who don't know VIS stage 1 pump can handle up to 175 bar..
It's 10mm piston
So go out and get your 175 bar relief valves while your at it.

Which injectors have you tested @ 175bar actual rail pressure? and how long they can last?
Also, what do you think the MSV will say about your approach, i`m very curious.

I got RS4 injectors. I only want to run them at 140 bar though. I've noticed after 6k rpms no matter what the fuel rail pressure spikes to 175 even if command is only 140. It's like n276 valve can't bleeding off the excess pressure. I wanted to tune it for 500 crank hp for now and later on when I get an even bigger turbo go for more power and do water meth.

Hey guys

Just installed the Autotech HPFP.

I am struggling to adjust the VHDP label, since TunerPro via my .xdf file says the "total volume of the HPFP" (german: Hubvolumen HDP) is 95.36 mm3. I guess my .xdf file is pointing towards something else since the stock volume is 251 mm3.... :-( I am running 1k0907115L.

Could someone adjust that label in my file for me?

Thanks ahead :-)

Hey again, forgot to say, i am running 1k0907115L with software version 0030. got a 0010 file but they dont match up.

Found to different adresses to the VHDP label and checked my bin file,used a hex-editor, but could not understand/find anything useful in that hex-editor :-(

Hi guys,
BTW there is a major difference between the FR and the stock value of FKMAMSV...
It should be 1.5 for 3 cam lobes, but there is 3.0 in the ECU... that is a huge difference while calculating the fuel volume.
I already changed it, but don't see a difference, however the bit2 is set in CWVSTMSV.
Any thoughts?

Well my problem two posts ago is fixed :-)

I am just wondering, all the maps for running with 130bar fuel pressure, how have you guys calibrated/set them?
Just replaced all the 110bar values with 130bar ( and smoothend/interpolated them nice to the other values less than „130“) or only all 110 bar values along the y-axis at value 55…?  :-\

Thanks ahead

bro,
the below are the values of the oem pump present on 2.5t ?
could you confirm me please?

Ori values are :
- RQUAHDPK : 25mm²
- SKHDPMX : 4,5mm
- VHDP : 251cm3

You are right

Guys just got VIS STG1 HPFP upgrad iternals for my BWA engine. So after installing new HPFP itenrals i`d like to konw is it my calculation right befor i`m going to reflash ECU.
 
VIS Motosport STG1 HPFP Iternals

RQUAHDPK: 25mm²
SKHDPMX:   5mm
VHDP:         392.5 mm^3

RQUAHDPK= (10/2)^2 = 25mm²
VHDP = 25*3.14*5 = 392.500mm^3


(https://dodaj.rs/images/HPFP.png)

Yes, its right. But VHDP is 392,7.  ;D

Hi guys!
I'm worried with some HPFP modification I saw last weekend, and I'm asking for some advise from you.

The car is Euro A4 B8 1.8TFSI (Bosch closed style HPFP - not upgradable with different internals).

Two years ago I made for this friend moderated tune for K04-064 and it was working ok on the stock HPFP.
However it seems power is never sufficient, so now the car have proper BIG turbo, and because I mentioned to him fueling will be an issue they decide to put on the car HPFP from 2017 RS3 DAZA engine.
He told me this pump is good for over 700HP, our target is not more than 500, so should be enough.

Good thing is that control signal to HPFP should be the same like his old HPFP - car idles well (beside fuel pressure too high DTC error) - let's say that is fixable.

I start to look for parameters (piston diameter, cylinder volume) of this DAZA HPFP and unfortunately I can't find anything to starts with.

What really bothers me is that 1.8/2.0TSI EA888 gen2 HPFP have cam lobe with 3.5mm lift and I can see this in KLNEHDP in his original file.
However RS3 pump have 4.7mm and it is defined as such in KLNEHDP in every RS3 original file I could find.

It seems driving lobe of those two cars is totally different. Now I'm afraid RS3 HPFP will not make enough pressure with 1.2mm less push when paired with 1.8TSI driving lobe.
Am I right this will not end well paired with capable turbocharger?
Is there a way to use vacuum pump from different car, so we can get bigger stroke, more close to standard 4.7mm of RS3?

Is it possible to find KLNEHDP like curve in SIMOS18 ECUs?

It seems vacuum pump from gen3 EA888 could be mounted on gen2 EA888 - at least gasket is with same part number between both engines.
If gen3 vacuum pump have HPFP driving lobe with greater stroke - then could be an option to be retrofit it on gen2 engine while copying KLNEHDP from SIMOS ECU.

It turns out I'm right to be afraid of fuel starvation.

I colored in the attached logs when the rail pressure is dropping - it is bellow 300g/s hfm reading - easy task for stock fuel system.
Fuel temperature is normal (below 80C degrees), and for this temperature duty cycle for LPFP in KFFLAF is 81%, but because of not enough fuel it is driven to the max allowed 90%.

Is there a easy way to rule out LPFP system for this problem?
I'm pretty sure it is "upgraded" DAZA  HPFP, because now I have dropping rail pressure with les boost and less airflow, than previous setup of this car.

I'm a little bit confused now.
In order to rule out HPFP upgrade we decide to return stock high pressure pump - with stock pump result was even worse, obvious even with 0% DC on WG and charge pressure roughly 1bar.
Than I was thinking maybe it is LPFP that failed meanwhile.

I hooked pressure meter on the low pressure side right before HPFP and it seems there is no problem there - It is catching up quite well, until Rail pressure can't be maintained anymore, B_ebks is set and LPFP duty cycle goes to crazy high 90% (stock calibration of FLAFEBKS). In this moment pressure meter hooked to Low pressure side goes to max, and I don't know how much over 7 bar there is in the low pressure system.

It seems it is not a problem with delivery from LPFP.

Ok next I was thinking while they put CATCAMS, exhaust camshaft is not correctly aligned and now difference from TDC on cyl 1 to TDC of HPFP is no longer stock one.
So I was trying with different settings of MFDD_phiOTZ1OTP_CA and it seems there is really some 8 degree discrepancy - not much but definitely better overall results with -10 degrees, instead of stock -18.

However rail pressure drops like a rock! It is not slow pressure degradation, but really huge drop!
I can't believe this is only because of HPFP limit is reached.
My thinking is that when HPFP can't keep up with rail pressure requirements it will start to degrade much slower.

In the three log files, I colored the problematic areas.
One file is with stock 1.8TFSI HPFP, another two are with RS3 DAZA HPFP and -12 degrees MFDD_phiOTZ1OTP_CA (maybe a little bit worse than -10, but not so sure about that).
Two of the files are with fixed 40% DC of N75, another one is with manifold pressure directly inside wastegate chamber (0%DC).

With DAZA pump it is a little bit better, but still not enough.
With 1bar charge pressure (0% DC) it is possible to go to redline, but after 6000rpm again rail pressure drops a lot.

Any opinion what could be wrong with the fuel system is welcome.

bosch hpfp same as cawb engine ?
this hpfp working different
replace new version same desing like ccz hpfp overheating
control different

Didn't get that  :o

This car have as standard Bosch closed type HPFP, very different than more common Hitachi HDP on 2.0 engines.

Yeah I know Bosch and Hitachi HDP have inverse control of MSV but DAZA RS3 HPFP is also Bosch, so the same MSV control like original one on the car.

Is it possible to change somehow SY_MSVKOMP, so to make this ECU collaborate with HITACHI HDP with upgraded internals?

In the attached excel file - pin conversion in order to switch from 1.8TFSI MED17.5 -> 2.0TFSI MED17.1 ECU.
I tried to order them in a way it is easier to rearrange wiring harness.

So T60 is smaller connector, and you need to:
    1) move brown/grey wire (should be 0.5 cross section) from pin 1 -> pin 45, and pin45 should be already empty;
    2) After that you should move brown/black wire from pin17 -> pin 1. We already free it up on the previous step;
    3) You should check and be sure there is nothing on Pin 2, 4, 18, because MED17.1 outputs there control for AVS system on exhaust valve, which is missing on 1.8TFSI.
    4) move blue/grey wire from pin 53 -> pin 54 (54 should be empty).
...
...

It is tested and worked for me - with Immo off 2.0TFSI ECU.
Car starts, and I have bunch of errors for AVS solenoids, but let's say it is expected behavior.

hello

do you have the address for klrpmax for audi s3 8p?

8p0907115H

thanks

up  ;D

Seat Leon BWJ MED9.1
Can anyone tell me why when you take your foot off the accelerator pedal, the high fuel pressure increases to 200 bar?

read the FR, log everything NOT with VCDS but rather vehical instead and you should be able to figure it out. or not

My English is very poor and my German even more so.
I have to use a translator.
It is difficult to understand the FR language.


Can you direct me more?

Ever heard of Google translate? Or you are THAT lazy?

I don't understand why you're speaking up if you're just screaming.

If you have any complexes, go for a run and leave the Internet alone.

Why does this forum exist? Following your way of thinking, such forums should not exist.

Go study.... Go read... You're lazy...

What envious people!!!!

What you fail to understand is that if you don't do the ground work yourself you'll never understand what you're doing. You are just sitting here behind your computer screen asking for people to do shit for you. Do it yourself, there is more than enough documentation available on here for FREE that you should be able to, unless your IQ is the 2 digit type.

You need to take a look on VSTMSV, AMSV and HDR functions like HDPRSOL. Good Luck :)

Also there's some additional info from user littco on post #77 in this topic, page 6. May help.

Also some tips here - https://nefariousmotorsports.com/forum/index.php?topic=10172.0

Drill your HPFP to 4-5mm
If your hpfp is banjo conection, drill the IN gas tube

See this post:

https://www.golfmkv.com/forums/index.php?threads/drilling-the-hpfp-bamboo-fitting-to-5mm.382982/

is this same ''go read, don't let motronic beat you'' or mechanical failure? non-cdl, vis upgrade, open fuel feed. with brain in the end, thank You

Hi,
I have a very odd problem with the autotech upgrade kit:

Although all paramters in mapping are changed according to the data found here in the forums (and some more) the railpressure keeps spiking up to 170-180bar in rmp range above ~5800_min under WOT and part throttle.

Since a few weeks I've done nothing else than logging (With vehical logger) and testing different mapping changes, but no luck so far.

I logged a lot of HPFP PID parameters, and from the point where the railpressure exceeds the requested pressure, the delta angle of the MSV (Quantity regulator valve) drops to 0 and the "I" part of the PID controller freezes. So basically, with 0 duty cycle the for the MSV, the bypass inside the pump should be fully open to "bleed" the excessive fuel into the low pressure side.

So far, I would say this is a "correct" behavior, as the ECU tries to lower the exceeding railpressure, but for some reason the hardware does not respond accordingly.

Fo testing purposes, and to go sure the pump itself is not at fault, I bought a genuine new Hitachi HPFP, and installed it "as is" in stock form.

Immediately the railpressure is regulated correctly. Then I installed the autotech kit in the new pump, and the problems are back immediately.

A new RS4 pressure limiting valve is also part of the setup plus a upgrade intank fuel pump.

For some reason I cant wrap my head around how it is even possible to have (at max) 180bar railpressure with a 130bar pressure limiting valve except for one thing:

What if the 1.5mm restriction in the "T" piece which redirects the overflow from the PLV to the low pressure fuel supply is causing this issue?

But then, there would be heaps of others having this same problem as soon as the autotech kit is installed...?

Maybe someone has a bright idea for a solution, or even first hand experience with this situation?

BR
Alex

Vis motorsport says that is normal. the fuel relief valve cracks open after 140 bar for RS4. So im thinking you either need to request higher fuel pressure sooner so it cracks sooner and bleeds off sooner. so the spike isnt as bad to tune. I don't really know of any other options.  

I also am now running 155 bar fuel relief valve with a big turbo thats plenty of fuel for my application. I could probably take the RS4 injectors off the car and use stock S3/R injectors and still be okay. im in the process of rebuilding a engine and waiting on a few last pieces to put it back together.

Hi Adrian,

I have now heard several times, that this is kind of normal, and most common "fix" is, just to eliminate the error code detection for exceeding railpressure.

I find this to be a lumpy solution, so its not an option for me at all.

The same effect is occuring also at part throttle, starting at an rpm range of about 5500-5800rpm. In fact, in part throttle the effect is even worse, as less fuel is requested and used by the injectors.

For me there are 2 possible sources for the issue:

1. The above mentioned 1.5mm restricor in the "T" or "Y" piece from the pressure relief valve to the low pressure pump inlet - assuming it is there....it is mentioned in the self study programs, but there seem to be more versions of this fuel line. Some WITH restrictor, some WITHOUT.
The restrictor in the barb fitting from the pump feed is already drilled out to 5mm in my case...

2. The Quantity Control valve on top of the pump is not fast enough to accuratly operate the bypass in higher rpm ranges with the added fuel quantity from the autotech pump, resulting in very short delta-angles...

You can see this in the logsdata, even when the requested deltaangle is 0, due to the delay parameter data in the ECU mapping the REAL deltaangle is still somewhere around 50 degrees....
So my second guess is, that the inertia of the coil/magnetic system is to high to meet the requested railpressure.

(Working on a solution....)

BR
Alex

Alex

You have any picture of this 1.5mm restriciton in T piece?

To I can understand waht piece is this, and can hel you in a solution

;)

I got an Arashi turbo setup now and i'm in the process of putting the car back together. its a GTX2867R gen1 turbo. I had to order some extra things like a 5 bolt to 4 bolt adapter so I can just bolt it up to my exsisting downpipe. reused an oil feed line and coolant line but had to modify. im looking to have this running soon here in the next few days.