|
armageddon
|
 |
« Reply #120 on: August 29, 2017, 11:26:14 AM »
|
|
|
Now I am a little confused... My understanding is that IMX axis is pressure above wastegate pressure (KFVPLGU) at least this is how I tuned mine with good results. If I´m not wrong, that IMX axis makes no sense to me. If your KFVPLGU is stock, 70% in KFLDRL should be ~1750mbar above wastegate(~1550mbar) but that duty is to low for your requests  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #121 on: August 29, 2017, 11:48:39 AM »
|
|
|
Now I am a little confused... My understanding is that IMX axis is pressure above wastegate pressure (KFVPLGU) at least this is how I tuned mine with good results. If I´m not wrong, that IMX axis makes no sense to me. If your KFVPLGU is stock, 70% in KFLDRL should be ~1750mbar above wastegate(~1550mbar) but that duty is to low for your requests And that explains why I had to add a percentage to my KFLDIMX axis after the fact. I knew there was something else at play here. I think the tool needs to also take plgrus_w into account to calculate everything, or ask for an offset if not available, to be spot on. I just went through the FR on this to better understand input of the KFLDIMX axis. I will be logging and investigating tonight. Thanks for pointing this out. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
rnagy86
|
|
« Reply #122 on: August 30, 2017, 12:10:08 AM »
|
|
|
Just as a note, here is a 4th gear pull where the PID actually has to do something.
I think I will install a 1.2bar springs in the gates instead of the 0.9 ones, just to make
things happier.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #123 on: August 30, 2017, 06:40:22 AM »
|
|
|
Just as a note, here is a 4th gear pull where the PID actually has to do something.
I think I will install a 1.2bar springs in the gates instead of the 0.9 ones, just to make
things happier.
Don't be fooled by how ECUxPlot auto sets the axis range. While it looks like it might be doing something, it's only dropping from 95% to 90%. If the scale was 0-100% you'd barely notice a blip in WGDC. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #124 on: August 30, 2017, 06:47:45 AM »
|
|
|
After logging last night, I notice that plgrus_w is almost always pu_w (atmospheric) and plsolr_w (input to KFLDIMX) is what I expected it to be... desired boost pressure - atmospheric pressure, therefore the tool should work as I expected it to.
This is on a 1.8t 032LP.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
dragon187
Full Member
Karma: +13/-15
 Offline
Posts: 106
|
|
« Reply #125 on: August 30, 2017, 06:56:37 AM »
|
|
|
For me tool is perfect. @SB_GLI Can you please add some kind of info button where it display what variables should be in the logfile? That will be perfect. Thank you for great work  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
rnagy86
|
|
« Reply #126 on: August 30, 2017, 07:03:35 AM »
|
|
|
Don't be fooled by how ECUxPlot auto sets the axis range. While it looks like it might be doing something, it's only dropping from 95% to 90%. If the scale was 0-100% you'd barely notice a blip in WGDC.
I am not fooled I know the axis range can trick you, there is not much difference between 90 and 95% so that's the reason I am switching to 1.2bar springs  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #127 on: August 30, 2017, 07:22:53 AM »
|
|
|
Can you please add some kind of info button where it display what variables should be in the logfile?
throttlePlateAngle = wdkba OR accelPedal = wped or wped_w dc = ldtvm rpm = nmot or nmot_w pressure = pvdks_w or pvdkds_w baroPressure = pu or pu_w or pus_w or override value in program |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #128 on: August 31, 2017, 02:51:27 AM »
|
|
|
After logging last night, I notice that plgrus_w is almost always pu_w (atmospheric) and plsolr_w (input to KFLDIMX) is what I expected it to be... desired boost pressure - atmospheric pressure, therefore the tool should work as I expected it to.
This is on a 1.8t 032LP.
It depends on the car. On 1.8T it's settable whether plsolr_w comes from plsol_w - pu_w or plgrus_w. On 2.7TT it is not and needs to be changed in asm. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #129 on: August 31, 2017, 11:35:37 AM »
|
|
|
It depends on the car. On 1.8T it's settable whether plsolr_w comes from plsol_w - pu_w or plgrus_w.
On 2.7TT it is not and needs to be changed in asm.
Wait, I'm confused, do you mean settable between plgrus_w (which is plsol_w-pu_w) or just pu_w (2.7t)? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
ME7.1 tuning guideECUx PlotME7Sum checksumTrim heatmap toolPlease 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
|
|
|
|
armageddon
|
|
« Reply #130 on: September 01, 2017, 11:36:02 AM »
|
|
|
After logging last night, I notice that plgrus_w is almost always pu_w (atmospheric) and plsolr_w (input to KFLDIMX) is what I expected it to be... desired boost pressure - atmospheric pressure, therefore the tool should work as I expected it to.
This is on a 1.8t 032LP.
I assume rnagy86 does not have it on stock form cause he has it the same as your 1.8t, but this is RS4 whithout any modification to code:  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #131 on: September 01, 2017, 01:05:21 PM »
|
|
|
Bug fix Friday!
1) Corrected an issue in the way data was interpolated if DC's in KFLDIMX didn't match the values of the KFLDRL axis, or KFLDIMX was not perfectly linear.
2) Added help text along with version information
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 03, 2017, 04:59:44 PM by SB_GLI »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
dragon187
Full Member
Karma: +13/-15
Offline
Posts: 106
|
|
« Reply #132 on: September 01, 2017, 01:10:29 PM »
|
|
|
Thanks man
Like that work
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #133 on: September 05, 2017, 07:40:23 AM »
|
|
|
I've moved on to working on my allroad. It's a 2003, using 551R.
The tool does not even come close with this binary because unlike my 1.8t, plgrus_w != pu_w. This results is significant underboost.
plgrus_w follows base boost. How should the tool work in the scenario? Could it take a 0% WGDC run and subtract those values from the rest of the runs to be able to generate maps that work? I am struggling to understand the correct approach on this one.
Edit: Seems this way will require input of KFDPLGU for it to correctly generate a proper KFLDRL, either that or an ASM hack would be required to make plgrus_s == pu_w like it is on my 1.8t.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 05, 2017, 08:40:52 AM by SB_GLI »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
armageddon
|
|
« Reply #134 on: September 05, 2017, 10:53:56 AM »
|
|
|
Don´t see why it does not work as it is, you should only need to change the axis on the actual file.
Use the tool the same way(assume plgrus_w = pu_w), but then add pu_w and remove plgrus_w to imx axis.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
