Pages: [1]
Author Topic: PID tuning vs KFMIRL?  (Read 5334 times)
dozer103
Jr. Member
**

Karma: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 26


« on: March 08, 2015, 11:12:51 AM »

Just getting my head around PID variables. I'm curious in that all the IRL maps I've seen have an unreachable load request at low RPMs that would seem to be a factor in boost overshoot once actual nears request. Why would it not make sense to set lowest RPM load request values in IRL at closer to achievable targets in order to let PID do it's job with less tendency to overshoot?
Logged
prj
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +1072/-481
Offline Offline

Posts: 6035


« Reply #1 on: March 08, 2015, 11:28:29 AM »

Because everything you have said in this thread after the 1st half of the 2nd sentence is wrong.
Logged

PM's will not be answered, so don't even try.
Log your car properly - WinOLS database - Tools/patches
Lost
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +21/-14
Offline Offline

Posts: 556


« Reply #2 on: March 08, 2015, 12:06:08 PM »

Hahaha.
Logged
dozer103
Jr. Member
**

Karma: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 26


« Reply #3 on: March 08, 2015, 12:18:26 PM »

Well then - no answer, more reading!
Logged
daniel2345
Full Member
***

Karma: +11/-7
Offline Offline

Posts: 197


« Reply #4 on: March 08, 2015, 02:24:15 PM »

KFMIRL is not a boost request map.

LDRXN is more or like what you could look at.
It limits RL.
And usualy it has low and therefor reachable values for lower rpms.

But thats not all regarding boost and PID, just a startup hint. Wink
Logged
dozer103
Jr. Member
**

Karma: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 26


« Reply #5 on: March 08, 2015, 06:24:27 PM »

Of course - my bad. Trying to understand how wastegate duty cycle is controlled. There's enough material on PID tuning that I can get a better grasp by reading but haven't comprehended basics yet I think. Was getting boost undershoot and was able to get to my target by adjusting IMX, but duty cycle is really ragged - looks like it's riding the differential adjustment of PID and I need to understand and smooth it before I move on.
Logged
turdburglar44
Full Member
***

Karma: +5/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 110



« Reply #6 on: March 11, 2015, 10:45:11 AM »

Your goal is a proportional term of zero and your integral term should be just under your dimx at max load. Derivative term is pretty difficult to tune but is only active during rough correction. Increasing derivative will help a bit buy I'd sort out proportional and integral first. What's happening there is you're seeing  your max integral term based on dimx but it is being linearized to come up with wgdc. Sorry if you already knew all that though.
Logged

Tuning is the easy part...
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +607/-168
Offline Offline

Posts: 12270


WWW
« Reply #7 on: March 11, 2015, 10:51:24 AM »

Ignore the wiggles.

D and P are gain scheduled out when lde is low enough... you are way undershooting (riding I-limit), so lde is still very large and D and P are active, causing the wiggle.

Once you get lde under control you won't see the small wiggles like that any more.

Logged

ME7.1 tuning guide
ECUx Plot
ME7Sum checksum
Trim heatmap tool

Please do not ask me for tunes. I'm here to help people make their own.

Do not PM me technical questions! Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your ex
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.021 seconds with 17 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.001s, 0q)