NefMoto

Has anyone noted the differences between the ME7.5 and ME7.1 regarding tuning?
for example
the ME7.5 225hp wideband
1.) Does not have over boost protection.
2.) Going from 3bar to 4bar with the fuel pressure regulator will have no idle issues or starting issues what so ever. I have been driving the car for a week with the 4bar and no misfires, no differences in timing before or after raising fuel pressure, no codes, and best of all the injector on time is much less at max power.

I've worked quite a bit with LDRXN to find a happy spot between low MPH / low RPM boost and high MPH / low RPM boost since obviously the engine will not catch up as quickly at high MPH heavy load.

Okay move on to requested load KFMIRL. I have spent a lot of time working with this map and I have to be missing something. I can adjust it to go to max boost before 50% no problem and I can adjust it to go to max boost after 50% no problem. Everything I try with anticipation of a result has given me exactly what I expected.

Absolute air pressure is 980mbar and I hit 2550mbar and carry it towards 64k RPM. But with a strange thing happening to load as the RPM approaches 64k.

What I don't understand is if I put the pedal to the floor, my car will feel like it is limiting the power but as I lift the pedal my car will increase power and accelleraton as I am lifting down to 65% pedal. I can drive around all day only pressing this far down and my car just hauls a#$. There has to be a different map that has an effect on load.

Here is a log when I am holding the pedal to the floor starting at 2120RPM and lifting at 6280RPM:

RPM   Load   Absolute Pres.   Absolute Pres.   Load   Inj. On Time    Mass Flow
2120   93.2   1910                1230       101.5       8.5            49.14
2480   120.3   2340                1540       131.6      10.54            73.78
2960   170.7   2480                2130       191.7      15.98           135.36
3640   191.7   2490                2550       191.7      18.02           158.94
4320   191.7   2480                2520       191.7      16.32           168.03
4920   189.5   2460                2320       184.2      17.34           176.81
5440   178.9   2360                2140       172.9      18.02           180.67
5920   169.9   2220                2080       158.6      13.94           185.14
6280   163.9   2170                1990       145.9      12.92           188.17
6080   11.3   980                1520       9.8      0           6.19

I am going to take a look at my adaptation and throttle body to verify the pedal. I will let it do an auto adaptation by disconnecting the battery to see if this can be it.












Feel free to download the maps and notes that I have been keeping while working on my own car. It is more than enough info to chiptune a 225hp TT.

Just get map editing and flashing software with checksum correction.

I use other stuff, but I'm pretty sure nefmoto can help with the software for a ME7.5 and is probably far less than what I paid.  ;)

1. You have not found the maps in regards to overboost protection yet, they do exist in me7.5
2. Have you looked at your trim's, you ecu adapted to the FPR , you get a +-20% adaptation.  So yes thats why its working fine for you i would assume.

Your log doesnt look so wrong to me?  Those are values id expect to see, however ive never worked with a TT 225 wideband before.  Im not sure i follow the issue you state, if you have it 100% to the floor in car, it lacks power in higher rpm, but if you back it down or only hit pedal 65% it pulls better? its load based, physical pedal position doesnt mean a whole lot.  Pedal % logs to load would help if you have an issue somewhere in your file.

I found the problem and it is related to two things but as far as overboost protection. Am I wrong assuming overboost protection goes to limp mode? I have not hit limp mode and I have hit and held 2550mbar Actual fine at lower RPM's.

Also to raise the requested load at higher RPM's I found KFLDHBN  "LDR height limit (maximum compressor pressure ratio)" tapered down quite a bit from 3k RPMs to 64k RPMs.  By making the map the same from 3k up, I have close to 2550 request from 3k up and my pedal related power loss seemed to be much less. I then started getting "not meeting requested load" codes and took a look for leaks only to find if I went five clicks higher on my forge DV I would get even better power and no pedal related power loss.

I am suspecting the Split R DV itself or maybe an ECU map for the grey control valve upstream of the DV is related to not meeting requested boost. I need to find what controls the DV and if for some reason does it allow boost pressure to keep the DV closed or is it all spring?

I see that if the N75 ever failed, the boost could still be limited by the DV and this may be my problem, can this be the overboost protection with no limp mode.

STFT = 0 LTFT = -9.4 was -3, yes it adapted

Latest Log
RPM   Load  Absolute Pres.  Absolute Pres.  Inj. On Time  Mass Flow
2000   53.4    980                  1040        3.4                14
2520   94    2360                  1240       5.78                30.92
3360   157.9    2500                 1970      8.84                67.53
4600   191.7    2520                 2420      14.96                154.22
5600   172.9    2520                 2150      15.3                171.81
6480   153.4    2510                 1960      13.26                183.03
5960   9.8    980                 1300      13.6                157

n75 fails open i believe.  in other words it doesn't bleed any boost away from the wg line.

Correct :)

What maps control the DV? Something is bleeding boost and more spring pressure on the DV helped my car in many ways including stopping a hissing noise under extreme load and high boost. This bleeping DV does not even hold with a vacuum tester. No diaphragm or o-rings.

More than a few.

In short, the PID maps, and the linearization map

See my sig for me7.1 information. I am pretty sure 7.5 is similar.

Man I knew about the N75 but never suspected the DV more than open on vac. There seems to be a vac storage chaimber so this puppy can be opened pretty much any time I take it. Ill take a look at your site again it has helped me a lot so far.

Whoa. I didn't know that that DV was vac operated?

He he.. suppose my terminology is different than UK. But FWIW the DV or BOV on this is HKS and its vacuum operated. Dyson and never looses suction..

(http://home.comcast.net/~weracemo/MyTurboProject/4240008.JPG)

So what maps control the BOV if you may? ;D

I only know ME7.1, not ME7.5, so I don't want to give you misinformation...

Here are screen shots of my maps and a screen shot of my latest log. The blue after 2550mbar is what I am working on. I suspect the BOV is leaking or told to open from the ECU and as the motor spins higher RPM the actual boost goes down but the request stays up.

KFLDRQ2 is not tested yet but will be later today.

Apologies for the software I used. nefmoto software is better ;)

Rayce,

I only wish I could help solve your issues, but I can't. However, I noticed an error on your Excel screen dump.

Bhp is approximately MAF / 0.8

not MAF x 0.8. So your 185 g/sec equates to about 231 bhp which is not much more than stock. Most TT 225 PS pro tunes aim for 210 to 215 g/sec peak.

I'm surprised the fuel trim adaptation is sufficient to deal with 15% overfuel across the board from the 4 bar FPR with no apparent ill-effects. It will show on your gas mileage though, so it's worth scaling KRKTE down if not just to avoid unanticipated complications down the line.


I know you're just starting with this and I haven't tuned a car myself but I respect your efforts. I would like to be in a position to compare my pro tune with stock when Tony adapts his flashing software for Windows XP. If I can flash it off the ECU and it's not encrypted, I'll compare, analyse and report the findings so we can all learn from it. Our engines are essentially the same so the calibration should be comparable to what you could achieve.

Regards.

Doug

the bov opens on protection....just like the S4 would.  Its controlled only for protection.  If something is not proper, it will open.  Such conditions like overboost, you get the dv open, and throttle body closes on you.

Its reallly hard to say anything without your tune being available here, or at least a full description of what maps you changed, and screenshots of the values so we can see if you are doing something wrong.

EDIT: Nevermind saw you posted that!!!!! sorry  Ill have a look

Here's a good sanity check for the status of your MAF. Do a full-throttle run all the way to
redline in a single gear (second works fine). Group 002 shows air mass in g/s. Your peak
airflow should be roughly 0.80 times your horsepower. So, if you have a stock 150hp 1.8T,
expect around 120g/s. If you have a 225hp 1.8T remapped to 265hp, expect around 200g/s.
If you see significantly less than that, you MAF may be on the way out. This also works if you
are chipped, but "race" programs may make more power through timing, rather than airflow.
Therefore, take all readings with a grain of salt. Also remember that the MAF can be
knackered even if all values look reasonable!

Quote from TTweakers Guide....
Further if this is only five horsepower lol, I can't wait until I make 35 more... I have an easy ten MPH faster in the quarter mile.

Okay, I found a lot of related maps. Using English to germen translated keywords like "charge pressure = Ladedruck" and a searching the damos. It will take a bit but I will update the maps I find and keep this thread updated.

Load related to speed, max map voltage and so on.

I suspected speed over time and pedal position would be the best way to determine load and a substitute for vehicle speed could be air flow increase over time.

Anyway, finding/crossing these maps takes a bit but I'm on it....

Wait, so you haven't checked the s4wiki tuning guide yet?

rayce.

I understand the material you've quoted from the TTweakers' Guide, thanks. I was trying to be diplomatic while pointing out your approach. I'm concerned from what you're reporting that you're trying to tune without fully appreciating the structure of ME7.x.

Changing the injectors and/or FPR without recalibrating KRKTE is generally regarded as a fundamental issue and there has been plenty of discussion on Nefmoto about the topic recently. You incorrectly reported that bhp = MAF x 0.8 in your screen dump of your VCDS log when you do know which way round it's supposed to be.

You've looked at a 225 PS definition file I've posted and commented, so it's fairly clear we all know where all the maps and constants are to within a few lines of hex code already. Surely you have enough info to tune your TT successfully if you've been tuning for 20 years.

I'm not trying to trash your efforts, just cautioning that you need to take care. Pro tuners I've talked to have been asked to correct a lot of dodgy 'pro' tunes, never mind amateur attempts.

Doug

Yes that is why DSLOFS is zeroed. TTweakers guide does not show this. I have more time than you would believe in the research regarding the 7.5 including IDA pro disassembly following a tutorial everyone knows about and I don’t consider myself to be an expert but I am actually getting excellent results so far.

Change Injectors? My injectors are OEM...

The 7.5 is not the same as the 7.1 and after following the s4wiki guide only to find my ME7.5 does not have KFDLULS, I began to try various setups to figure it out on my own.  Apparently I have a regulated BOV that just brings the boost down evenly when calculated load goes down. I am not convinced the way the 7.1 calculates load is the same as the 7.5 but that is what I am working on.

Also 2550mbar is not just five horsepower. Stop it with fueling and attacking me. I will get to fueling after I figure out boost. My car will be fine until I do. My car can trim to 25% either way so I am fine for now.

 I really don’t care what opinions you may have regarding what I know or don’t know and for what it is worth, I have given more to this site regarding the 7.5 than I have found.

TTQS yes I used your damos file and it is not for my car so I had to find every map and if you are suggesting that what I have done was easy you are wrong. The experts you speak of did not go to class to learn how to hack an Automotive CPU and I’m sure they spent plenty of time testing to get to the level you consider to be an expert. I don’t mind doing the testing also and again I am not an expert but I have actually achieved results with my work. I am also providing my hard work for anyone to show my thanks to everyone who did the same with making information available for me. This work is the beginning of something and you can choose to be or not be a part of it but stop attacking me and sending my posts off topic. I’m sure there are a lot of people who want to learn and develop more performance with the 7.5 and it is funny that you have actually never tuned and I bet even built a high performance engine but you are the first to tell me that what I am doing is wrong.  It would be more productive if you would help me find the maps or talk about anything related to how the 7.5 calculates what it considers to be load.

Actual load, or requested load?

Actual

MAF/rpm * constant..


http://s4wiki.com/wiki/Load

Thanks nyet.

I take it the MAF and RPM curves are used with more than just load calculation so the constant must be the key. I found a "translated" discharge curve that had 501 points KLAF. I suspect it to be related to the BOV.

I suppose the calculation is the best way to do this without disrupting other functionality of the system.

Is this a single constant or group of constants as a member of a function generator?

I will plot it out as a single constant on my graphing calculator to compare to vag com. The problem with logging with vag com is it has a millisecond delay between writes. You can see it when you lift throttle. I may have to video a test live to get higher fps and more accuracy. I have a virtual machine that will record my desktop session but I am not sure if it is fast enough.

Thanks again...

You need to be logging more than you are.

You need to be logging throttle position against pedal position.  The DV is only used to dump boost in case of emergency.  Have you edited the mapfor maximum airflow through the MAF?  Also don't forget that load will drop with high rpm - it is related to airflow, not boost.  As the engine VE drops, so will load.  Requesting too much boost at high rpm will also mean requested load will not meet actual.

Rick

I agree. IMO you are barking up the wrong tree and not logging the appropriate data.

I suspect you are getting throttle cut (http://s4wiki.com/wiki/Throttle_cut).

Log throttle plate angle, boost, and wgdc.

Does setzi's logger work with 7.5?

Yes. Bottom line: RPM goes up faster than MAF, so load will drop after peak torque.


I don't think i've ever seen any tuned ME7.1 file where req load meets actual at WOT.

"he 7.5 is not the same as the 7.1 and after following the s4wiki guide only to find my ME7.5 does not have KFDLULS, I began to try various setups to figure it out on my own."

Some do some dont, find KLDLUL

Here are the logs and two versions of tune. Logs 1 and 2 are a mild feel and logs 3 and 4 are aggressive feel. Logs 1 and 3 are just pressing the pedal to the floor without the engine running. I do not have a lbl file for my car and it took a bit to find logs that gave me the data I needed. The 117 and 119 seem to be what they are supposed to be but 206 is the one I am not sure about but seems to be Mass flow corrected and actual.

I am going to edit the lbl file manually today.

Please post original .csvs.

ECUxPlot will not read .xls's since everybody outputs them differently.

Sure

need requested boost, actual boost, throttle plate angle and WGDC

if setzi's logger works with your ECU, use that, and not VCDS

Today with better lbl file. It took a little bit to make the lbl file so I could log advanced measuring values and individually select items.

In order, RPM, Boost Requested, Boost Actual, Accell Pedal, Throttle Position, WGDC, MAF, MAF. One MAF is corrected the other is actual, not enough time to figure out which.
 

Holy shitty sampling rate. Also, can those turbos not hold boost with that much WG?

(edited the axis a bit so ecuxplot could read them properly)

(http://nyet.org/cars/vag/LOG-01-011-115C-1176-1184-2063.png)


Your labeling conventions make no sense.

Label RPM as "RPM" alone, and every axis different (boost and boost? WTF?) and you can use ECUxPlot.

Also, your sample rate is so low it is almost impossible to determine what is going on.

Consider using setzi's logger.

The good news is, I dont see throttle cut in this log, but there is no way of really knowing since the sample rate is so bad. Notice you have a lot of boost overshoot. That could easily trigger throttle cut.

An example of a proper log (using setzi's logger)

(http://nyet.org/cars/vag/8D0907551M_20110818_191102.png)

409.1 KKL cable on the way. vag com cable does not have com port with rt drivers. vag k+can commander cable com3 almost worked using port and ftdi method both different errors. Eeesh....

2 other cables I can try but heck, why not get another one....

Any way to speed up vag com until kkl gets here? I read a guy can get more than ten samples a second. How the heck can he pull that off? Are there settings for sample speed?

how fast will setzi62's logger be able to read kwp1281, only my abs controller is kwp2000? Maybe this is why it is not working and I just need different settings...

I am not familiar with ME7.5, but there may be settings in VCDS that you can change to get better performance. On ME7.1, the ONLY thing you can do (in VCDS anyway) is log fewer blocks :(

I routinely get >20 samples/sec with setzi's logger.. but this is ME7.1

Again I have no experience with ME7.5 :(

Thanks for helping nyet, I'm making some good progress in the mean time I've hit 197MAF and other pretty good numbers. I'm holding 2550 request from 3k up to 64k and 100WGDC except for shifting. My BOV has to be leaking or my K04 is max. Do you have access to a compressor map for the K04? 


Oh and fwiw I have fuel multiplicative almost back to stock numbers after.going to the 4 bar...... just a little rich but adapted fine. There are a lot of tricks and maps I will be showing after I'm happy with the results but seems like it never ends with the testing.

s4wiki has a bunch of compressor maps

I figured out my BOV......... friggen thing was installed backwards from previous owner. I kept wondering how the spring inside could hold so much boost.  ::)

The KKL cable arrived and I gave it a shot. Clicked on the shortcut I made and the logger fired right up and I am blown away....just completely blown away. I just can't believe how good setzi's logger works. This morning I gave ECUxPlot a try after scratching my head over how I'm going to cover all of this data and it rocks also. Hats off to you guys for an exceptional job with this software.

I have a lot to cover but first glance at the CSV shows my EGT going to the moon and fueling under boost is pretty far out of wack.

Here is a log from yesterday. My car is stock in every way including the air filter. FWIW, I got higher MAF readings when I took my air filter out for a highway on ramp off ramp run and then put it back in. I do not have a log of it and really don't want to do it again. I just wanted to see if there were any restrictions. I will look for a K&N today.

I'll look for a compressor map for my car but best guess, the K04 can not carry 2550mbar of boot all the way to redline on this car. If it can, it must be with modifications like air intake and exhaust.

Are there any 225HP 1.8T configs for ECUxPlot, I already switched to one turbo and 386cc injectors but they are more like 514cc at 58psi. The ECU sees 52.75psi and 468cc according to the .07293 KRKTE setting.
 

All I see is calc EGT (not real EGT), and it looks fine.


Yes. You're req AFR is completely wrong. On pump fuel, req AFR should be ~12 (if not lower) LONG before peak boost


Unfortunately, I don't know much about 1.8 tuning... so I dont know if what you are seeing is normal. I need to tweak ECUxPlot to be able to plot flow vs PR for you with your log. Not sure why it won't.

Also, there is something VERY wrong with your WGDC (unless there is something I'm missing).

Why is WGDC not 100% during ramp?

Also, you have MAJOR overshoot, which is causing throttle cut:

(http://nyet.org/cars/images/my_log_20110908_211713.png)

You need to log ambient pressure to plot compressor map. I've hacked my copy of ECUxPlot to just use 1013

(http://nyet.org/cars/images/my_log_20110908_211713-comp.png)

Looks fine to me. You should be able flow that much at that PR, unless your MAF readings need to be scaled.

(http://s4wiki.com/images/4/47/K04-0025.jpg)

Then again, I am unfamiliar with 1.8 tuning.

I did not scale the MAF assuming it is not needed since the MAF is stock. My logger didn't work today I started get error code 0x4. Everything is the same as yesterday. I took out my vag com cable to make sure that the fuse was okay. Maybe the KKL died. Ill look in to it more at home....

I figured out the KKL cable, the two boards are held together with only 4 strips of solder. Two of them cracked so a few minutes to re-solder and all is good for logging.

 I have made a few tuning adjustments and experimented with the logger. I’m only recording single gear pulls. ECUxPlot loads correctly so here is a CSV to look at. I don’t think I’m getting fuel cut and looks like boost is going over the max capable readings and still tapering down. I may need to drive around a bit to let it adapt but I really don’t see how my car is going to hold 2550mbar of boost in to the 6k range. I will move on to more work with fuel and maybe timing.

Regarding fuel, my air flow meter is stock so do I need to scale it anyway? If so what is the reason and will it actually show false readings when logging?

My MAF notes are….


MAF
Size is 2.75” 69.85mm
Stock Scale 4.9904V = 1253kg/hr (348.05g/s)
Stock Scale 3.0079V = 377.100kg/hr (104.75g/s)
Stock Scale (approx) 4.V = 687.6kg/hr (191g/s)
Range used is approx 54.88%

WGDC is still not being logged correctly. Grab setzi's latest version and regenerate your config. Something is VERY wrong with that ram location. Also log the PID outputs lditv, ldptv,ldrdtv and both WGDC variables ldtvm, ldtvr


Also, your req AFR is completely nuts. Something is very very wrong with your fueling maps (unrelated to injector or MAF setup, this is purely map related)

Your MAF readings look fine, however, you are maxing out your load, no clue why.

Update:
Well my MAF is consistently over 200g/s now and I've been over and over with boost. I'm going in for exploratory surgery after the max boost test I performed last night failed miserably. I’ve been going over the compressor map and reading about boost with the K04 and it should hold 22psi through all gears. Mine tapers down to 16lbs at 6000rpm and even pinching shut the waste gate line produces the same result. I floored it after 4500rpm for this test just to make sure boost across the whole run did not exceed 2550mbar and my throttle plate held perfect 100% at 20 samples a second logging.

One thing is for sure, no tune can overcome a mechanical issue.  ::)

I pulled the metal tubing elbow from the turbo to the front pass side headlight and rubber tube going in to the throttle body and pressure tested the tubing and intercoolers between the turbo and throttle body with no leaks. I tested the waste gate by simply holding it open and putting my finger over the bottom port of the n75 to keep it open, the spring could not close it until I let go . So the waste gate diaphram is okay. I put everything back and started looking at the BOV again. Just to verify a second time I checked the waste gate to make sure the spring is holding it all the way closed and it is. Okay back to the BOV, I went full adjustment 52 clicks installed backwards and still not above 16psi at 6k but no problem holding above 2550mbar between 3200rpm and 4700rpm. Boost just tapers down as rpm goes up. WTF

FYI:
Sorry to say that but it´s impossible to run a K04 (020/022/023) at 2550mbar boost up to redline or at 6k rpm and above.
The K04 is not capable to get these boost figures at higher rpm rates. The maximim boost levels can get up to 1,7 bar at 3k and at 6k 1,3bar (at a known good turbo with uprated forge boost actuator, i only knew one mate who drive these boost figures on BAM Engine but is was a special application only on hits own request, the tuner (MTM) normally did not program these boost levels because they are out of specification of the max (safe) values) but the turbo will not last long at this boost rates.
If we were able to measure the T/C shaft rpm it will be way beyond the safe limits of this turbo.
Also K04 hybrid turbos (larger compression and turbine wheels, uprated bearings) are not able to hold 1,55bar boost onto redline!
They can hold 1,3bar safer onto redline than a OEM K04 but that´s it.
Common settings of boost levels for K04´s are up to 1,5-1,6bar at 3k and 1,1-1,2bar at 6k (approx. 270bhp and up to or above 290-300lbft).
Save setting will be 1,3-1,35bar at 3k and 1,0bar at 6k. (aprox 250bhp, don´t know torque figures).
bhp and torque figures can vary by additional modifications e.g. decat, 3"downpipe, fmic (highly recommend for tuned 1,8t, the OEM SMICs are crap!), exhaust manifold,......so see them as a known (minimum) value for these boost levels.
Standard setting of boost level for k04 220bhp is 0,9bar w/o overboost and about 180-190g/s MAF.
MAF readings on "chipped" 1,8T 225PS are (as stated before) beyond 200g/s up to 220g/s depending in airfilter/open cone/tip configuration.

I will have a look into your logs within the next days...
In which gear were the logs done?
The RPM reading is not detailed enough. Normally you should have 20-40values between 2500-6800 rpm for detailed investigation.
The VCDS readings are quite good if you use only 2 measuring blocks or if possible up to 6 or 8 single values.

Sorry i´m not very frequent in this forum due to limited time...

Okay ill send shortly.... gettiing my ears lowered

I'm sorry to be pedantic, but I understand 2550 mbar to be an absolute pressure, not a boost pressure as you have stated, i.e. 1550 mbar boost + ca. 1013 mbar atmospheric.

Please elaborate on 'crap'. I have never seen this word used in Audi or Bosch literature, or any automotive engineering, fluid mechanics, or technical assessment I have ever reviewed.

FMICs are certainly popular aftermarket modifications, but I have not seen any objective comparison of cooling duty with the OEM SMICs. Please provide a link to such. When I have assessed this, I will consider paying out ~€800 for one.

What I did find odd for the TT 8N was that owners were having FMICs fitted which had approximately one third of the frontal area blocked by the crash bar. They must be incredibly efficient if 2/3 of a FMIC is still better than two SMICs which serve me well up to ~275 bhp/300 lbft.

Doug

Okay thanks to you both for your input but let’s figure this out but just for the record, I don’t plan to change my intercooler setup regardless of weather it is good or bad. I just want to test my car to find the best performance with what I have. The only mod I did over stock is fuel pressure because my calculations didn’t show results that I would be personally satisfied with and raising pressure put me in the ball park.  

RRRS, it sounds like you know quite a bit about the K04 and your explanation seems to be exactly what I am finding with my own testing but it would be great to have something to compare it to.

TTQS can you log your boost curve, with your current tune to compare to mine with setzi62’s logger or can you verify what boost you show at 6k RPM with a vag com log?

I’m not sure what is defining maximum boost. I can set up a tune that never goes above 2550mbar and peaks at lets say 2540 dead load e.g. 6th gear 2500rpm. (minus ambient which is 980-995mbar for me) Now take that setting and go to the drag strip and you will be lucky to get over 2100mbar logged the whole run at 20 samples a second because you will never load the motor in that manner during the entire run as you will keep the motor in its peak output. Inversely I can set up a tune that goes considerably over 2550mbar 6th gear 2500rpm but that same drag race just never goes over 2550mbar. So it is odd to say X is the most boost or Y is the most boost because what are we talking about relative to loading the engine and acceleration?

Here is a log that will easily go over 2550mbar if I floor it at 2500rpm in 6th gear but never came close to 2550mbar when running through a few gears in a normal fashion and this is not even close to how hard I would drive it if it were a true drag race so boost would show even lower.

Also an image using ECUxPlot

I wanted to note more regarding MAF. I program combustion control for industrial boilers and to trim the boiler with our oxygen analyzers, we lie to the air flow transmitter signal. A function generator that simply multiplies .85 to 1.15 to the air flow transmitter over a 0 to 100% span so 50% equals a multiplier of 1. Regarding air flow, it is relative to the span of the differential pressure transmitter with square root multiplier and we span the air flow for minimum and maximum flow of each and every startup we do. There are simply too many variables to calculate the exact flow (SCFH) of the ductwork, pre-heater, FGR, boiler, stack optional scrubber and anything else I missed. I know a car that is produced in duplicate is a different story and I understand that. I also understand mass air flow is different than delta p but either type of measurement input can be lied to in the program.

Following this with tuning, I go in to the program and see the MAF can and often is scaled for what I am assuming is similar reasons. I know this is simply lying to the signal but it reflects on the reading you are going to get when you log. Perhaps this is why some say to take the readings with a grain of salt because you do not know how the program was tuned. I chose to go to the fuel tables and another may go to the mass air flow. Another may use both. Regardless, the best way to estimate horsepower is to measure acceleration and compare to the weight of your car. This will give you the work over time figures. A truck stop or drag strip will usually have scales and setzi62’s logger is pretty darn fast compared to vag com. Another way is to take a look at fuel. Find the B.S.F.C efficiency for the car you drive and do calculations with injector flow and you will be in the ball park.

ECUxPlot has HP/TQ calcs that do as you suggest. You need to enter weight, frontal area, cd, and gearing information.

Scratching my head….

It was an interesting trip home today and I think I can’t see the forest because of the trees. I’m rolling along and ended up in and swapping lanes with three cars. I got up behind the guy in the biggest hurry and noticed he would punch his car and try to leave me behind. I would just step in to it around 3k rpm 6th gear and buzz right up to him no problem. He got a little upset and a hole opened up so he just flat nailed it. I took this as an opportunity to get up beside him and wave hello, then I put it to the floor and just flat embarrassed him. I let up at 130mph and I was easily fifteen cars in front of him and I was waiving bye bye the whole time around him so he naturally didn’t have a very good look on his face. I was wondering if his car had a top speed limiter on it for how bad I blew him away. It looked like a brand new car and when I was buzzing up behind him I noticed the exhaust pipes were pretty big. The model was Infiniti M56x. It sure looked like a nice car.

I got home and looked it up to find out it is 420hp 420ft/lbs torque.

Whaaat there is no way. I am convinced my car can’t be over 250hp. I know he was all the way in it by the way the back end of his car squatted down and the exhaust was blowing water. We were both driving pretty crazy and he pulled a dirty move making a quick left lane change while coming up on a car real fast. I shot to the right lane, passed the slow car, then came back over and ended up back on his bumper.

Maybe I’ve been spending so much time tuning I’m not paying attention to how fast my car already is. It’s kind of deceiving. My corvette used to just break the back end loose even at 70mph. The TT just grips and goes.

I will update my map spreadsheet with all the maps I used for my tune and maybe some screen shots to help out anyone else interested in giving it a go. I may even post my tune… well see but more testing first because I’m having a hard time believing my car could be this fast. One thing is for sure, I have so much time working on this, and my tune involves over thirty map edits. That may be a bit over the top but I’ve been trying to rule out some of the edits only to find I loose power. I’ve flashed my car over seventy times to get to this point with at least three logs minimum for each flash.

BIG Thanks to: Nefmoto, Tony, nyet setzi62 and TTQS (mostly for pissing me off). You guys have been a real big help and I’m having a lot of fun with all of this.

Unfortunately I wish my wife had the same opinion, she misses me….

I'm sure it's not faster than a M56x but not bad...

I'm keeping my word...
zip includes....
x2 - OLS map packs, only changed maps & all maps
x2 - logs, single in 2nd gear & standing to 100mph
8N0906018CJ - r00 ..my tune so far as shown in image

feedback is welcome....

btw there is a menu option in ECUxPlot to "export" your graph to .png

can't see much from your screen shot, it got resized to something stupid.

Also, ECUxPlot's filter will do much better if you include accelerator pedal position..

.ping export will save some time, thx. full size jpegs are in the zip.. ill get pedal angle in some logs when I get a chance. I'm working on the wgdc some and smoothing out the a/f at 6k to 7k and other minor stuff. egt is staying lower and it seems to rev out better. From what I can tell egt (DLBTS) changes a/f and timing if too high so I must be staying in the LAMFA map. I had to scale the MAF after running off the tables with timing and this forced me to review a lot of previous adjustments.

Tuning is following s4wiki for the most part.

 The main difference unique to my ecu is lack of KFDLULS. I zeroed TLDOBAN, maxed GWPLDOB, maxed SDLDRL, and most important set entire KFVPDKLD to a value of 3. Any input to a better way of turning off over boost is welcome.

I am seeing your req AFR is almost always lambda 1? That can't be right.

Also, I think you need to recheck your wastegate and N75 - you should have no trouble holding 20psi to redline.

Stock LAMFA image...

Please tell me you have a log of a K04 showing higher than mine. If you see a few replies back, I've been over every part of my car and even purchased a new N75 that was supposed to be an updated part. Pressure tested from metal elbow to throttle body and waste gate spring is fine. No leaks and different N75 as well as bypassing ECU control of my BOV and went straight to intake manifold. I even completely disabled the waste gate which gave 100% boost and map is still the same. I’ve been smoothing it out by working on timing which led to scaling the MAF as I stated before.
There is supposed to be I believe three different K04 models. If I knew for shure that it is suppost to hold higher boost, I would replace it but I can't justify replacing such an expensive part if It won't help.
 

Why is one of your axis' messed up in LAMFA?

Also, i'll try to get you a 1.8t log. I don't tune 1.8t, but I know few guys who do, and they all tell me 20psi should be no problem.

ETA: Turns out, I'm wrong. I guess that is expected for your setup...

So, lets forget about boost for a moment, and fix your fueling :)

BTW you might want to lower rlmax if you are on the ragged edge of your turbos.

The whole map is 1.0001 except for that edge which was .98. I made an edit to bring it down to .86. I felt it was too high at max load.

I know there may be a chance of damaging the turbo but isn't it the same as lower boost but higher rpm? E.g max the boost but stock rpm = bad same as lower boost but 1k more rpm

No, your axis data is screwed up.

I can't really make it out because whatever you used to resize the photo really fucked up badly.

The .csv logs are in the zip, I can send you the link to download ECUxPLOT if you need it.;-)

No, i mean your LAMFA table axis values in WinOLS.

Here is my LAMFA and the damos to compare...

Look at the last row. its '0' on one. I can't see the other, you have a up over it.

They both have zero, I'm not sure if the distribution points are correct, I can shift them one digit hex and get a much better range but the damos is the same. I agree, they don't make sense like this but I copied the damos regarding the locations which is basically saying if mine is wrong, so is the damos.
X Distribution Points Range Shifted is: 50, 60, 90, 95, 98, 100 with 50 in the place of the zero you noticed.

Damos files often have many, many errors.

In any case, you'll need to figure out why your req afr isn't following lamfa..

Most of the Damos files that I have have something messed up in them. I don't think I've ran across one yet that hasn't, at least not for a 1.8t. At first I thought maybe it's just different in some, but no, some are just plain off. I try to open a few at a time to look at. Just my 2 cents.

try to double click the load axis of LAMFA to go into its properties and change from 16bit(LoHi) to 16bit(HiLo) then the load axis of the map will be ok  ;)

I gave that a shot and have a question, is load axis of the map the same thing as Alt B?

I also found the reason my lambda was so high. It got colder here and my coolant sensor was dipping below 92C when my motor would rev up. I assume that sends me to open loop. I got the green top sensor and also replaced the thermostat, now it holds 96C solid all the way up. I have a tune that makes much more power and has very little individual cylinder retard. Actually no individual cylinder retard until the last two gears near peak RPM. I'll post all of my stuff and my original bin for comparison when I get a chance. Lambda requested dips to .86 and rises to .96 just before it hits the rev limit. I see my actual lambda rise with the boost and then dip down and try to follow the rest of the way. Is there any way to adjust actual lambda so it can follow requested closer. It seems to swing each way like the loop integral is responding to error way too fast.

I have to questions to make you. First the load axis is ok now? Second the requested lambda is ok?try to log channel 33 (i think) witch shows the lambda correction aplyied. Is is more than +20% you need to adjust basic fuelling. Regards

From what i understand you must raise a little bit your KRKTE. You have a injector calliration error or you just maximized your injectors flow limit (rather inpropable). What are your fuel trims?

Setpoints do not move due to PID feedback.

Your BTS and/or LAMFA are still screwed up.

Here are two log screen shots, one is multiple shifts and the other is a second gear pull.

My fuel pressure is 4bar and I reach 86% duty cycle with stock 386cc injectors on the multiple shift log.

The second gear pull shows my fuel requested and actual. The logs are in the zip file.

I've put my focus on A/F and timing following nyet's advice. This is the best progress I've made tuning. Requested A/F is .86, MAF is up ten points. Car is almost one second faster when ran to 100mph.

If there is anything you guys see that may need some changes, I'll do it but I really like this one. Last check, fuel trim is .8 additive and .0 multiplicative. I'm waiting for rediness to finish so I can make some more logs assuming adaptation is complete when rediness is finished.

Looking better, but why is your AFR request leaning out up top?

I'll see what I can do.

How is this one?

YES. Now you are cooking with Pam. Can't wait to see a full log with this fueling/boost/timing.

Okay here are two logs...

First is smooth run second, third, fourth shifts. Log looks like single gear pull...
Second is a single gear pull in second gear. Not enough load to bring up MAF.

I have no individual cylinder retard so I think I can safely go up a bit with timing.

I gave it a go full out from standing still and had a hell of a time keeping control in first gear. Tires spun and I shifted in just two seconds. Lost a lot of time but pulled a easy 14 seconds to just under 100mph. Car feels nice but has a little more to go. Got a ticket a few weeks ago so I'm slowing down some....

Regarding cam timing, can I increase overlap from 3k RPM up to redline? I don't recall anyone working with the cams but my experience is that I can move around quite a bit of power if I retard the exhaust cam in linear span up to maximum RPM. I tuned and raced sportbikes for a while and It was not uncommon to move up to 15 horsepower on a 129hp motorcycle from 13k RPM to 8k RPM by advancing/retarding the exhaust cam.

nice going  :D

Is it possible already to make 1.8t me7.5 launch control and NLS-antilag?

I'm not sure about launch control, I have a six speed and I'm pretty impressed with the clutch feel compared to my drag car.

Here are the logs if anyone is interested in checking them out with ECUxPlot.

I will post my original ECU bin as well as my tune up to this point along with identified maps and all maps but I want to try a few more things first.
 
My tune is factory lambda settings all the time except when the throttle is pressed past 80% so it provides pretty good gas mileage when driven day to day.

Hopefully without starting arguments I have the turbo at max boost over the whole rpm range. I bumped the rev limiter up to 7k rpm and see some go way above this range. I personally don't understand the need as all of my logging shows peak power falls off too early with the stock k04. This does make me question exhaust camshaft retard/advance. 

Most injection shops recommend keeping duty cycle 80% or lower. I think going to a 4bar regulator is a wise decision and my tune creeps over 80% but stays under 90%. The stock pressure regulator will not work with this tune. It is so damn easy to change and a very cheap part. A K&N air filter will help a tiny bit but only if you do not put too much oil on it. The oil can get on the temp sensor and MAF element and also restrict air flow. Stock filter or K&N will show very little if any difference with this tune. All other parts of my car including exhaust are stock 2004 US model Audi TT 225hp 6spd with BEA engine code.

If this tune is to radical, I can think of quite a few ways it can be calmed down. If anyone decides to try it out, please give me feedback and if there are any requests for a different setup, I will be glad to give it a shot and I don't want anything in return.

I will keep testing and I drive my car every day so any issue will surely be noticed. I have had no problems with any of the normal functionality of my car and I regularly check all of the systems rediness with vag-com.

In my experience it is not the cams that make the turbo lower the max presure although you request max all the time but the k04 turbocharger itself witch is rather small for this engine. It is part of german point of view to have a good low to mid range accelaration for driving in smaller european roads with fast spool to help on overtakes. But all 1.8t after changing the turbo are completelly different engines. So your results are tipical for such an engine.

Understood, well ill focus on timing some and then consider it finished up to this point.

Is there a popular turbo direct fit that can hold say 22-24psi to 7500 rpm?

There are many turbochargers availale but 7500rpm is too high for the stock valvetrain. 7200 is a safe limit. Here in Greece a very popular turbo upgrate for this engine is garrett gt3071 along with a FMIC 3" full exhaust and bigger injectors you will see 320ps+ without any problems.

No. The only type of variable cam timing on the 1.8T is two position.

TTQS.

I suppose it could be called switchable cam timing. Do you have the lobe center angles for each position?

Man it sure gets expensive for more hp. That's going to have to be after I win the lottery.

Yes it's like that thats why almost all of us try to squise every last of horse power without throwing serius money, out of that small turbo and this small engine. :D :D Sorry for the offtopic

Keeping my word, here are my bins, original read and latest tune. Tune is maxed boost, 4bar regulator, upped rev limit 500 RPM, .86 AFR when 80% to 100% throttle, timing advanced over stock at peak RPM but car still has zero individual cylinder retard on Mobile 94 octane.

All stock parts except for regulator. Logs and csv's are a few replys back.

Best Regards