Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 24
Author Topic: ME7.9.10 - Understanding the torque model  (Read 60977 times)
woj
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +33/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 456


« Reply #60 on: August 24, 2017, 02:01:29 PM »

What has the desired boost to do with the MAP sensor? If anything, you should be looking at the actual boost and see if RL follows that.
Logged
woj
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +33/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 456


« Reply #61 on: August 24, 2017, 02:28:48 PM »

I briefly looked at these last files that you posted, don't have the correct definition for this one either, but I managed to check the obvious. I'd set the PVDXABS higher than 305 kPa just to be sure, but that's probably not it (it is the sensor's max anyhow).

More importantly, at 0xB6B2A you have a 4x4 map that you left untouched which is limiting RL to 220 all over (or so I think looking at my other esseesse file and definition). Try raising that. I called this map in the previous posts "MAXRL dep air density", because I could not find the right Bosch name for it. This is a word map with conversion X*1536/65535.

I am actually curious if that is it...
Logged
woj
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +33/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 456


« Reply #62 on: August 24, 2017, 02:46:14 PM »

You do have this map raised in your 500 Abarth bin though...
Logged
overspeed
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +17/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 324



« Reply #63 on: August 25, 2017, 06:05:52 AM »

You have a compressor map inside this ECU...look in that section, there is the answer to your question, not only this map, but the main reason why you are not able to request more boost
Logged
woj
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +33/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 456


« Reply #64 on: August 25, 2017, 11:13:09 AM »

You have a compressor map inside this ECU...look in that section, there is the answer to your question, not only this map, but the main reason why you are not able to request more boost

Can you give more hint why? From what I see in the code the maps in that section are used to calculate hldstr, the required stroke of the boost pressure plate, and to my understanding this is used for boost regulation / dc value. What you say would mean that then this value is used to calculate what is the maximal regulatable boost and the desired one is capped based on that? And then, I am still guessing, assuming the EBC valve is connected inlet-wg through when shut down, at the maximal DC there is still enough air passing through to WG to keep it open and limiting the boost. How far off am I?
Logged
overspeed
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +17/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 324



« Reply #65 on: August 25, 2017, 03:59:00 PM »

Just raise efficiency and see what happens
Logged
woj
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +33/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 456


« Reply #66 on: September 13, 2017, 10:58:58 AM »

Now, I do not yet know if that holds for all ME7.9.10 versions, so far I only looked at the Abarth and family program code, perhaps the weak 120 hp version of the code have this done differently. Will see with time, to be continued...

So I continued. So far there is nothing in the Abarth code that would make me believe that there is any program limit to work with boost pressures above 2560hPa. The mentioned 120hp / non-Abarth code (in an ECU that actually sits in my car) is a different story. It is surely 5120hPa ready, but things are purposely capped. In particular, the end of the procedure that calculated pvds_max limit for the target boost pressure says:

Code:
        flash_085A70:[F2,F6,4E,A5]      mov     r6, xram2_word_0F254E
        flash_085A74:[7C,16]            shr     r6, #1
        flash_085A76:[E0,07]            mov     r7, #0x0
        flash_085A78:[00,86]            add     r8, r6
        flash_085A7A:[10,97]            addc    r9, r7
        flash_085A7C:[F0,68]            mov     r6, r8
        flash_085A7E:[F0,C9]            mov     r12, r9
        flash_085A80:[26,F6,FF,7F]      sub     r6, #0x7FFF
        flash_085A84:[38,C0]            subc    r12, #0
        flash_085A86:[FD,03]            jmpr    cc_ULE, loc_085A8E
loc_085A88:
        flash_085A88:[E6,F6,FF,7F]      mov     r6, #0x7FFF
        flash_085A8C:[0D,01]            jmpr    cc_UC, loc_085A90
loc_085A8E:
        flash_085A8E:[F0,68]            mov     r6, r8
loc_085A90:
        flash_085A90:[5C,16]            shl     r6, #1
        flash_085A92:[D7,40,3D,00]      extp    #0x3D, #1
        flash_085A96:[F6,F6,64,07]      mov     xram2_word_0F4764, r6
        flash_085A9A:[7C,16]            shr     r6, #1
        flash_085A9C:[D7,40,3D,00]      extp    #0x3D, #1
        flash_085AA0:[F6,F6,68,07]      mov     pvds_max_0F4768, r6
        flash_085AA4:[98,60]            mov     r6, [r0+]
        flash_085AA6:[98,70]            mov     r7, [r0+]
        flash_085AA8:[98,80]            mov     r8, [r0+]
        flash_085AAA:[98,90]            mov     r9, [r0+]
        flash_085AAC:[DB,00]            rets

0F254E is one of the pbrints, F4764 is a low range (2560 hPa) target boost pressure limiter, but this one is not used anywhere. pvds_max is the full range capable (5160 hPa) limiter that is used, but as you can see from this code, it is purposely cut down to 2560hPa. This is easily fixable by changing 7FFF to FFFF and shifting the assignments and bit-shifts a bit, and from further looking into the code this should do the trick.

For pvds that is. Because I found this, now the load calculation based on the intake pressure has to analysed to see if similar stupidity has been introduced somewhere there (with the hope that even if it had, a fix would be equally simple). To be continued again...
Logged
IamwhoIam
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +30/-48
Offline Offline

Posts: 823


« Reply #67 on: September 13, 2017, 11:24:15 AM »

Good job there! Check the code for psrs_w!
Logged

I have no logs because I have a boost gauge (makes things easier)
woj
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +33/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 456


« Reply #68 on: September 13, 2017, 11:34:14 AM »

psrs stands for what? I do not have FR for this ECU (if I did all my puzzles would be solved long time ago) and none of FR-s I do have mention psrs...
Logged
woj
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +33/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 456


« Reply #69 on: September 13, 2017, 12:56:13 PM »

OK, so this is how it looks from what I can see, RL is calculated with:

Code:
        flash_05FE6E:[F2,F9,B4,97]      mov     r9, xram2_word_0F17B4
 ...
        flash_05FE9C:[F0,C9]            mov     r12, r9
        flash_05FE9E:[F2,FD,AC,FB]      mov     r13, iram_word_FBAC
        flash_05FEA2:[DA,00,D8,4C]      calls   add_4CD8
        flash_05FEA6:[F0,84]            mov     r8, r4
        flash_05FEA8:[F6,F8,96,F8]      mov     rl_w_F896, r8

FBAC is some margin / delta thing that I do not care to look into, the default value somewhere is 5%, irrelevant. F17B4 is the base load to get rl_w, calculated here:

Code:
        flash_05D970:[F2,F9,58,A5]      mov     r9, xram2_word_0F2558
        flash_05D974:[7C,19]            shr     r9, #1
        flash_05D976:[F2,F8,3C,A5]      mov     r8, xram2_word_0F253C
...
        flash_05D990:[F2,FC,9A,97]      mov     r12, pssds_w_FULL_intake_MAP_read_0F179A
        flash_05D994:[F0,D9]            mov     r13, r9
        flash_05D996:[DA,00,20,4E]      calls   subtract_4E20
        flash_05D99A:[F0,D4]            mov     r13, r4
        flash_05D99C:[F0,C8]            mov     r12, r8
        flash_05D99E:[DA,00,4E,4F]      calls   multiply_4F4E
 ...
        flash_05D9A6:[F6,F4,B4,97]      mov     xram2_word_0F17B4, r4

F2558/r9 is PBRINT related, F253C/r8 is essentially fupsrl. I can only guess that F179A which is full range intake pressure read from the sensor is what you meant with psrs.

It seems all is good here, which was my suspicion, mostly because if pvds is allowed to go up to 2560 hPa then an overshot has to be taken into account which will certainly cause over 2560hPa conditions in the intake and consequently higher loads.

Please tell me if I got something wrong here.

Logged
woj
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +33/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 456


« Reply #70 on: September 16, 2017, 02:47:38 PM »

Just raise efficiency and see what happens

After looking at the code for a while now, I really cannot see how turbo efficiency maps limit the *requested* boost pressure, actually I am almost certain they don't. They may indeed limit the actual boost pressure, in that they define and limit the wastegate operation. But that's a different story.

But, what I can see, is that knocking would limit the requested boost / load.
Logged
mister t
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +65/-18
Offline Offline

Posts: 344


« Reply #71 on: September 19, 2017, 08:07:01 PM »

psrs stands for what? I do not have FR for this ECU (if I did all my puzzles would be solved long time ago) and none of FR-s I do have mention psrs...

I have what looks to be a complete DAMOS for your engine.

It comes up as a 37390745001 which cross references to a 1.4 Fiat. Let me know if it's what you're looking for Smiley
Logged
woj
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +33/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 456


« Reply #72 on: September 20, 2017, 12:18:43 AM »

Thanks for sharing, always appreciated! But this is an N/A version of this ECU, and yes I have this map pack somewhere.
Logged
IamwhoIam
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +30/-48
Offline Offline

Posts: 823


« Reply #73 on: September 20, 2017, 05:16:28 AM »

most of the maps in this line up with the turbo variants, so while not being a straight shot, it will be helpful.

psrs_w=requested manifold pressure, psr_w=actual manifold pressure. Depending on the boost control algorithm, they might come into play for pvds_w
Logged

I have no logs because I have a boost gauge (makes things easier)
mister t
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +65/-18
Offline Offline

Posts: 344


« Reply #74 on: September 20, 2017, 07:00:35 AM »

Thanks for sharing, always appreciated! But this is an N/A version of this ECU, and yes I have this map pack somewhere.

Well, I have a DAMOS for a 2008 1.4 T-Jet Turbo ME7.9.1

Maybe this is what you're looking for.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 24
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.021 seconds with 18 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0s, 0q)