NefMoto

I noticed in me7logger there is a "component protection" log. And it's either 0 or 1.   

What does it mean that it is always 1?
I assume its always active.

But what is it causing?

Did you check out the tool tip? or what variable it is an alias for? Did you look up the variable in the FR?

I believe it is B_lambts condlambdapartprotectionactive

i'll look for the tooltip as well.

Also after reading around, maybe it's this thing?
Could it be I need to set this catr to 0 ?
 http://nefariousmotorsports.com/forum/index.php?topic=2568.msg24360#msg24360

Any one out there still?

Yes. I asked if you looked at the conditions which enable BTS in the FR, or, even better, traced the ASM.

For some ECUs, BTS is always enabled.

And in other files like BAM is active but fuel never follow KFLBTS , remaining on LAMFA.
See attached log! Condition is active from 510 degree
I tried with CWLAMBTS 0 and 4, nothing change!
TABGBTS is set to 510

FBSTABGM
450 500 550 700
0    1     1    1

TVLBTS = 0
KFDLBTS is setted 11.0 , lower than LAMFA 11.8 , nothing, FUEL follow LAMFA.
So.....this BTS - component protection is not work in 018H BAM file. I tried same settings in 032HS-AUQ and 032HN-AUQ and there works ok.

You will have to do disassessembly to know the entire path and suggest ram locations to log

BAM 8n0906018h 0003 and 0004

condlambdapartprotectionactive is on the whole time in this log.

Strange ......., who understand this code????

Vladvlad, yes strange things!
DT many thanks for the picture!
YES is active all time but fuel not follow ever KFLBTS , it goes to LAMFA.
NYET I don't know dissambly/ASM. I will try to understand what DT put in the picture, but .....
In stock 018H the BTS is bullshit from start, the maps are setted with strange values.

Today after hard drive on highway fuel followed KFLBTS not lamfa.
Tabgbts was defined at 600degree and condition was active from than but fuel goes to KFLBTS not LAMFA after tabgbts_w was 830degree
FBSTABGM is 1 from 500 degree, so is not a problem from here.
DTBTS and TVLBTS are 0.
I will try to add some variables in log from DT screenshoot but if somebody cand tell me the factor, bitmask and size for them
ETAZWIM
ETAZWIST
flbts_w

I had similar issue.
Not sure if this is the solution, but making other values properly (pid, maf) seemed to help.
At least for now.

Anyone have any more ideas about this?
I'm actually still having the issue where fuel follows kflbts and not lamfa

actually it looks like it's "trying" to follow lamfa. but something forces it down into kflbts territory.

It's really easy to tell.  I have kflbts set to 11afr, and lamfa set to 11.4
Whenever it goes to kflbts it holds 11 perfectly flat for a while.

tabgts is set to 850, and egts never get close. So what's causing this?

Set tabgts super high.  Like 1300.  And now afr are following lamfa.

Latest update:
still working on boost spike afr. and high boost request at high rpm.

Boost spike: 
Is this high afr normal? I was getting nasty boost spikes from my tiny ko4, and i've already done a lot to try and fix it.
but the engine afr doesn't like it at all. Basically if I mash the throttle at low rpm, then the boost quickly spikes up high then settles.
Immediately at/after that intitial spike there will be a big AFR increase.  like from 12 to 13,  or 11.5 to 12.5,  something like that.
I have toned down the physical spike itself a lot by lowering IMX a ton, then raising DRL to flatten it back out. I also loosened the wg screw just a bit.   But even so, the AFR issue still persists.   

Boost request:
I'll attach a screenshot of my ldrxn compared to my boost request.  I've no clue why it should ignore ldrxn so much up top.
Also as I do pulls/runs the requested starts to get higher and higher.  all the way up to 18psi range.  max should be 15.
Wikis4 mentioned this phenomenon as LDEIAP and TLDIAPN.  I'm not sure how much I can lower LDEIAP ??
I'm going to try and read the FR on the subject.

logs?

logs

What kind of k04 is this? Because your mass air flow is good up top for a k04. Have you faked the mlhfm or something?

the spike in afr can be massaged by fkkvs. there is a fixer tool available for this. the goal with this is to calm down lambdacontrol fr_w.

log more load variables and dont forget that ldrxn is just the upper limit, its not what you requesting
rl               ;{EngineLoad rl}                     
rl_w             ;{EngineLoad rl_w}
rlmax_w          ;{EngineLoadCorrected}           
rlmx_w           ;{EngineLoadSpecified}       
rlsol_w          ;{EngineLoadRequested} 

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

what is your goal with the boost?

Oooohhh that explains a lot.
I was actually trying to massage the spike via kfkhfm. Because the s4wiki said to use kfkhfm
For intake nonlinearities (ive a huge tip/cone).   Ill try fkkvs instead.

Its stock amu ko4(ko4 023 i think) I pulled all the charge piping restrictions out which saw massive reduction in wg duty cycle up top.  Maybe that is causing the good g readings?

My goal with the boos is actually a big one. I want see how powerful the ko4 can be fully maxed out. And with as much assistance as possible towards reducing its heat and overspinning.  So at least 20psi up top. Might just stop before the map limit.

But im also running a converted file for maf settings.  Imported the stock maf settings from the amu file into a bam file for wideband purposes.   I suppose it is “plausible” that mlfhm is incorrect.   But the car drives perfectly smoothly.  And ltft are only 0-1%
Krkte and tvub are more likely to be off because i have a 4bar also.  But that wont effect g readings.

Okay so amu is narrow band?! and you did a wideband conversion with bam ecu and wideband sensor?

What about vvt and egt sensor? Turbo ist K04-022 without sensor hole i guess.
Your maf reading is way to high i guess. you have mlhfm from aum untouched copied to bam file?
kfkhfm all 1's?
fkkvs all 1's?

attached is a amk log (euro k04 wideband). its not perfect but you can see what the turbo is capable of. I would aim for 1.4-1.5bar during spoolup and see what you can squeeze out at top end.

 

yep exactly.
egt/vvt delete via tunerpro (though not perfect. I had to raise bts threshold over 1000 because bts fueling kept on taking over from lamfa). No codes.

my mlhfm is untouched original copied from the amu file.

kfkhfm and fkks are NOT all 1's however.
they are also untouched copies from the amu file.

would all 1's be better? I can try that and see how it goes.
i'm going to try the fkkvs fixer right now also.

Thanks for that amk log. that is good info. I think my maf readings are might still be accurate though.
the amk looks like it's low up top because its very low boost up there.  only 13psi.  I'm getting 15-16psi up top. So more maf g.
Also I have very very good intake and exhaust.
Full 80mm intake tube all the way to turbo.  10" cone filter.
full 3" downpipe, exhaust, decatted.
2.5" charge piping from throttle body to turbocharger.
FMIC

I will log per your request also!
rl               ;{EngineLoad rl}                     
rl_w             ;{EngineLoad rl_w}
rlmax_w          ;{EngineLoadCorrected}           
rlmx_w           ;{EngineLoadSpecified}       
rlsol_w          ;{EngineLoadRequested}

ok lots of little tweaks and here is an updated log.
any thoughts?
I added the logging values you recommended.
I noticed that requested engine load is matching ldrxn.  about 170
but then actual load is higher  about 190 . I suppose it's not a critical error or problem. 
I'm wondering if maybe it's actually just suppposed to be that way?

looks like the boost spike and afr spike is somewhat under control now.
tweaked imx down,  then drl up,  then tldiapn up,  then fkkvs up.

still not sure how you adjust kfkhfm based on lambdacontrol though.

Okay not bad

read this
your rlmax and rlmx drift apart
https://s4wiki.com/wiki/Tuning#Boost_.28rlsol.29_intervention_via_rlmax

you should overthing your desired lambda. its rich and will have a negative effect on turbo spool up. do you have a type-k temp sensor in the turbo or manifold?

add the following vars to your logger to start tune timing:
zwbas
zwgru
zwist
zwopt
zwout
zwsol

I'd lean it put gladly. I read somewhere that 11.5-12 was best for wot ?    How lean can I go?

I very much appreciate all this advice.
I'll log those ignition variables too.

I was simply going to set timing to the maximum before correction factors go too high(maybe -4)

Here is my latest iteration.
I decided to try out 100oct and max it out.
so I'm running boost just under the 22 max.
I can still add more timing however.
What do you think?

I'm having an issue with boost up top. No matter how high I set LDRXN , I keep getting only 17-18lbs.
I dont get it. logs clearly show load specified as 225, but actual engine load is only 190 .  what gives?

(p.s. the bin I have added has a couple edits to try and fix this, like higher kfldhbn for example.  This has not been flashed and isn't in the log however)

I checked your log

Lambda is not following your request and your fueling is maxed out
Your boost is building very slowly, is your turbo damaged?
I heard more than 95% duty will fry your n75 because the valve will burn inside.
A k04 is a small turbo and it is just not capable to keep boost up top

stock rods?

Oh right i forgot to mention.  I so have 630cc inj that i need to install. The stockers are maxxed.

And i do wonder about that turbo.  Something is up with it.  It never made the boost it should.
But i cant find anything when inspecting it.

The afr has the same lean spike i get at boost onset aleays.  Never could figure out how to get rid of it.

Ill turn down the duty cycle.

Request is the important bit when changing LDRXN, not actual. Are you confusing the two?

Nah.  Im just looking at the area above 5k. I have adjusted ldrxn up again and again, but requested doesnt change at all.  It keeps tapering downward. Its as if i could tell ldrxn to request 40lbs and it would still end up with the same 18lb request.

Kfmirl and kflhbn are both set much higher. So i dont know whats limiting it.

Could it be kfmiop?  S4wiki says not to touch this though?

You set kfmirl much higher, but left kfmiop stock?

No clue. You literally didn't log any of the load limiters - ldrlms, ldrlts or torque requests misopl1, milsol

Yep. I literally haven't read anywhere saying that you should raise kfmiop.  S4wiki literally says not to touch it.

It doesn't say you shouldn't touch it. It says you shouldn't alter the max values of iop

The rest is here https://s4wiki.com/wiki/Tuning#Tuning_KFMIOP_and_KFMIZUFIL

KFMIOP - inverse map of KFMIRL. If you touch KFMIRL(for high power levels, i set only 2-3 last rows), you should set new KFMIOP axis, and interpolate KFMIOP map. This how i understand, this how it works for me. After that, you need to log, and maybe adjust some areas. Anyway, it's very good start for tweaking these maps

Yeah i'm having trouble understanding how to adjust kfmiop.
If I adjust kfmiop down to match the ammount kfmirl went up, then how do I do that? kfmirl is load # and kfmiop is  a %.
I mean I can guess it, but would be nice to be accurate.

So far, I upped kfmirl to 225 (for the map limit), and the kfmiop top axis to 225.  But the kfmiop values are stock.
SO then doesn't that mean that the top row of kfmiop is naturally lowered because the top axis is bigger so the top value is lower?

Also I saw in the community 1.8t stage1+ file, the kfmirl and kfmiop were both raised UP.  ??  So the community proj is in error?


is it "milsol" or "misol"  I couldn't find any milsol in my melogr but I did find misol.
I added all those to my logs from now on.

milsol, but you'll need to disassemble to find it, since me7info won't extract it. sadly, me7info is abandonware. Someday someone will make a drop in replacement for it and other vars can be added.

You'll also want the other items mentioned in that section.

Ahhhhhhh i got it!!!
I'm a total dummy.
It was kfdhbn the whole time.
I had changed the top row like other maps not thinking that its temperature based not load based.

Oops. Haha. Ok my boost request is controlled now

Thanks!

Can anyone confirm that I did the kfmiop, kfzwop, and kfmirl correctly?

I increased the last row in kfmirl 20%, then increased the last row axis by 20%,  then decreased the last row kfmiop by 20%.
i did not touch kfzwop, but the changed axis effects kfzwop as well.

Not sure if i'm supposed to adjust zwop somehow.

bin and xdf

Your maps looks like crap. Did you read my post above?

im lost as to how to "interpolate kfmiop". so I simply did the inverse operation of what I did to kfmirl.
not saying it's right. That's why I posted. Trying to figure it out here, but I've found zero documentation explaining exactly how you're supposed to adjust kfmiop in regards to kfmirl changes.

Perhaps you can explain. Or at least elaborate on what "your maps look like crap" means.

Ok. Do you know that interpolate means and how to interpolate? If no,google should help-it's just a math,so you didnt find info about that in this forum. While you didint undestand interpolation,you shouldnt change these maps. Besides,you must to interpolate others maps when rescaling axis.Dont miss this step. It's not easy for first time, but worth to learn.

Stop messing about and use prj's excel file for IOP interpolation. It's the best and only one I've seen so far that generates values within 1% of stock files. Also inverse does not mean mathematical inverse, they are 2 different things.

You can find it in one of the threads he started ages ago.

Example on what it does vs OEM BAM IOP:

Ok thanks to both of you.
I will use the excel sheet. 
But in the meantime I think It's important for my growth in tuning that I learn how the process actually works.
I'll look up how interpolate works mathematically.

Also I did not know that "inverse" was not mathematically inverse.

It is an inverse lookup. But if you don't know what linear interpolation is, then it makes me scratch my head.
Over here this stuff is learned in primary school. It's on the curriculum, as it's used in basic geometry, you take two points, determine the linear function and then solve f(x) = y for the x that you need.

In the US, primary school is utterly useless, combined with the fact that the consensus is "oh math, i'll never use that".

It's both infuriating and totally unsurprising in equal parts.

it's very true.  unless you have some specific reason to study math as a major, like becoming a math professor, or go into engineering or something like that, then you can pretty much skip the subject entirely!!!

The point is, no, you can't.

You should not skip it, you should fucking learn it. Only total fucking losers (and future fry cooks) think "oh math, i'll never use it". You aren't a math prof, and you absolutely should know what interpolation is before going anywhere near an ECU.

well.. that's exactly why I haven't used the spreadsheet yet

Your response should have been "I should not have touched my ECU until i understood interpolation"

Isn't that a little severe? Or are you just joking?
 I've been able to do everything else.
Just the kfmirl last row limits my maximum boost.

Heck i been literally running a stage 2+ tune done all by myself, with a full wideband conversion. nonstock maf, nonstock injectors, 4bar fpr upgrade, 19-21lbs of boost. advanced timing.  really good mafg readings.
And the car runs smooth on it. I've even done two track days on the engine with zero issues.

It's simply going well enough that I want to try the 5120hack out. But i'll need to go higher than stock kfmirl.