Hi,

Can't really give you a straight answer, and I am also not a very active member of this forum (any questions I had so far were not answered). But at least you get a friendly soul, because I also try to understand the workings of this ECU and I studied the same WinOLS definition as you did I believe (there is only one out there). And I was also looking for corresponding maps in other bins to compare.

First thing to note, this ME7.9.10 definition has unfortunately mistakes, so you have to take everything you see there with a grain of salt.

Second, yes, to me it also seems that raising MDMAXNMOT should do the trick in most part. (BTW, I do own a 120 hp t-jet, but I am nowhere near being able to play with it live), but there is a couple of other torque and pressure watchers and limiters that may interfere with this. And yes, there is no maps similar to ones mentioned here a lot for the older ME-s.

If I come up with a good candidate what blocks your boost at higher revs I will let you know here. But in the meantime you could try to share your findings since June

Cheers

If I may ask politely - what does this answer bring to the subject? This is already given in the title. The question of the OP is very valid, because this ECU is newer than the commonly known ME 7.1 / 7.3 around here, it is similar to MED9, but in many ways different, and in particular in the fact there is *really no load* in a sense - Fiat chose in most of their gasoline engines not to employ a MAF, so this ECU is based solely on two MAP sensors on the two sides of the throttle for load estimation. And a very detailed intake manifold and valve duration model.

One Mr. Revlimit a.k.a. hammersword known on another forum (perhaps he is around here too) tries to convince everybody that this ECU is very complex, and in a way he might be right - the factory maps and parameters that upgrade the 155hp version of Fiat Grande Punto to the 180hp Abarth go way over 400 items. On the other hand, looking at the map definitions and comparing it to the available ME documents, the general principle of this ECU and basic tuning does not seem to be that complex as the above mentioned person would try to make you believe. I think he just might be protecting his business.

In any case, there is little information about this ECU out there we are trying to get the basic understanding of how this particular ECU differs from the better known ME instances, and where the fine points are. Yes, we know it is torque model kind

I am quite sure that I understand it more than you think I only probably do not explain myself so well, I tend to get problems of building things in my head in a different way than others.

Yes, I got the part where pressure is converted to load and vice versa, my impression so far was that this is to be able to establish how much air pumping from the turbo should be there, because pressure is the only controllable thing on a turbo. As for the load, it is indeed "fake" in a way, and from what I see mostly used as an intermediate index to other tables. The actual load getting into the cylinders is calculated in the BGLWM module (which BTW is not present in the MED, probably there is a counter part of some sort). But then, there is BGRLP module for predicted load that calculates mass flow depending on throttle angle and pressure delta across the throttle. Probably has nothing to do with the the actual load calculation (does it?), but it so much different in two versions of the same factory program for this ECU, that it has to have some serious influence on something somewhere. These are the kind of things that I want to understand, and I am not there yet.

This ECU has no BGSRM, but I looked it up briefly in MED and I see what you are getting at. The module that this is mentioned in is BGFKMS and the only thing that changes in this module in this ECU is the total mass-flow leakage parameter MSLG, everything else stays the same on all engine / turbo versions in the factory calibrations.

Yes, there is a counterpart of LDRXN, I believe this is the MDMAXNMOT that the OP mentioned. But for him something else limited the boost / torque, and it is really not obvious what. (For me might as well be the calculated EGT). Yes, I know, to find out things should be logged and analysed. I am not yet at the stage of being ready to play with my engine, and the OP seems not to want to share / participate anymore

I will look into this, some things still bother me about this - if the two factors are additive, then there I need to look up exactly what is going on there, because in the map definition that I have they certainly look like a multiplicative factor (probably they multiply some something additive first), I know that the mult one works directly on fupsrl.

This does sound simple, but then what are all the maps like turbine and compressor efficiency used for, or cam shaft duration? These are all calibrated between the different engine setups (the bare engine being the same, differing only in cams and turbos) and the total amount of these things goes to over 400 items in factory calibrations. What I am after is understanding which ones are crucial, which ones are not, for DIY tune.

MDRLMX looks simple enough but it surely is not the only thing that controls the end torque / load / boost. For one, there is a map that limits the compression ratio of the turbo to maintain low enough charge temperature. These the kind of "small things" I am after understanding

I really appreciate the spoon And believe me, I do spend time on this, and it is not the first ECU I am studying, previous studies went flawless, but admittedly these were much simpler ECUs (but without documentation whatsoever). But now there are lots of obstacles, severe lack of time for starters, poor knowledge of German is the other (yes, I know there are and I have seen the translations of the crucial modules). And last couple of months I spent solely on matching the maps in the different bins that I have based on a definition for just one that is out there. I only got back on FR reading last couple of days once having all the maps I want to look at in place and in the only program I know how to use efficiently, TunerPro that is, written up a TP checksum plugin for this ECU, these kinds of things. Getting back on FR made me end up here, hence the sudden activity

Thanks again for the pointers, and as for "walls of text" - nothing to do with my approach to things, I am just keyboard happy I'll try to constrain myself and be more concise (surely not with this post yet ).

 

You have FR from this ECU ?

Well, the basis seems to be, in the different bins that I have, 100% torque is engine output at some fixed maximum load. In one version 100% torque is the torque that the engine would have at 240% RL, regardless of RPM it seems in one particular case, in another bin this relation varies across the RPM range. BTW, this floating torque figure across the different maps sets for essentially the same engine makes understanding what is really going on even harder.