|
airtite
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: December 19, 2011, 07:37:45 AM »
|
|
|
Secondly, FF the entire KFLDHBN to disable this limiter totally. The reason you want
to do this is that need to avoid interferance whilst calibrating LDRXN.
I would strongly suggest that you keep LDRXN at a maximum of 190 intially in the midrange
and decrease it towards 150-160 at high revs during evaluation. If you need a complete
LDRXN curve to start from, I'd be happy to suggest one.
any help would be great, if you could post your suggested LDRXN curve that would be greatly appreciated! I am having an issue trying to figure out how too FF the table, I have the demo winols which wont let me save the bin, I cant figure out how too find the hex address in tunerpro hex editor either and my other linux based hex editor hexer cant seem to find the starting hex address of KFLDHBN either... suggestions on what you guys use? Also, there is another limiter that might be necessary to adjust and that is for maximum
allowed flow through the air mass meter. You will see a fault code for this when you push
the boost pressure but this limiter is of course adjustable as well if you need it.
Thanks I posted just before you and it looks like I have run into that exact issue, which table do I need to adjust for the MAF? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
fredrik_a
Full Member
Karma: +25/-0
 Offline
Posts: 221
|
|
« Reply #16 on: December 19, 2011, 07:58:02 AM »
|
|
|
I am having an issue trying to figure out how too FF the table, I have the demo winols which wont let me save the bin, I cant figure out how too find the hex address in tunerpro hex editor either and my other linux based hex editor hexer cant seem to find the starting hex address of KFLDHBN either... suggestions on what you guys use? There is seldom a real need for a full version of WinOLS as you can change what you want to change in your file in the "demo version" and then just "copy and paste" the changes (found in the "text window" of the WinOLS working space) into any freeware HEX-editor where you have the stock file (overwriting the stock values for any given area) and thereby acheive basically the "same thing" as working with a full version of WinOLS. It just takes an extra minute to copy the changes into the right positions in your file in the HEX-editor. No big deal. I'll get back to you regarding the MAF-limiter. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
fredrik_a
Full Member
Karma: +25/-0
Offline
Posts: 221
|
|
« Reply #17 on: December 19, 2011, 11:44:23 AM »
|
|
|
The scaling for the MAF is called MLHFM and in this map you will see when the MAF saturates. Re-scaling the MAF-curve won't help you one bit if the MAF is really saturated. If it is saturated it is saturated and you need a bigger one. On the other hand, if it's "only" the MAF-limiter and not the MAF-hardware per say (hard limit) then you just need to adjust the limiter (sof limit).
The MAF-limiter is called KFMLDMX and here you can set an absolute maximum rating for the MAF vs engine speed and %DK as a safety feature. It doesn't have to have anything to do at all with when the MAF actually saturates, but is rather used as a warning when higher MAF-flows than expected are recorded (as a safety function for a broken hose to the wastegate actuator among other things).
Increasing this map to suit your new driving conditions (where you have issues with MAF-warning) will most likely solve your issues. As for instance LDRXN works as an overall limiter for WOT, the KFMLDMX handles other driving scenarios than WOT.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 19, 2011, 01:00:29 PM by fredrik_a »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
airtite
|
|
« Reply #18 on: December 20, 2011, 12:27:45 AM »
|
|
|
once again thank you for the assistance fredrik_a I appreciate it!
Ok so here is my new KFLDHBN which has been FF'ed
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
fredrik_a
Full Member
Karma: +25/-0
Offline
Posts: 221
|
|
« Reply #19 on: December 20, 2011, 12:52:45 AM »
|
|
|
Ok, next step would now be to recalibrate LDRXN and possibly adjust KFMLDMX as well.
Do you still need a suggestion for your LDRXN setting? Also, running at a desired 1.2 bars
of boost, I strongly suggest that you use a wideband AFR measuring unit to log fuel and
adjust it accordingly.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
airtite
|
|
« Reply #20 on: December 20, 2011, 01:02:09 AM »
|
|
|
Ok, next step would now be to recalibrate LDRXN and possibly adjust KFMLDMX as well.
Do you still need a suggestion for your LDRXN setting? Also, running at a desired 1.2 bars
of boost, I strongly suggest that you use a wideband AFR measuring unit to log fuel and
adjust it accordingly.
OK I am busy flashing the new file, I adjusted LDRXN/KFMIRL right down as well. I havent touched KFMLDMX yet |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
airtite
|
|
« Reply #21 on: December 20, 2011, 01:50:45 AM »
|
|
|
logs from a quick run I did now (not sure why I logged coolant temp instead of iat) car is much smooother but doesnt feel as strong as it did last night, actual boost is usually a little higher than requested so I assume I can increase requested slightly. I did see my EGT's spike too a little over 950degrees whats a safe limit for EGT's?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
fredrik_a
Full Member
Karma: +25/-0
Offline
Posts: 221
|
|
« Reply #22 on: December 20, 2011, 02:01:36 AM »
|
|
|
There are few things in your LDRXN I am a bit concerned about. for instance, why do you request 194.82@1.750 rpm? Is it reasonable to beleive that you will be able to run the equivalent of about 1.2 bars of boost at that engine speed? There is no need to request something the engine can never give you. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
airtite
|
|
« Reply #23 on: December 20, 2011, 02:03:25 AM »
|
|
|
looking at a graph of requested/actual boost I see actual boost gets a little lumpy up in the RPM. Would this be because KFMIRL and LDRXN are not lining up at that point in the RPM axis?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
airtite
|
|
« Reply #24 on: December 20, 2011, 02:13:11 AM »
|
|
|
There are few things in your LDRXN I am a bit concerned about. for instance, why do you request 194.82@1.750 rpm? Is it reasonable to beleive that you will be able to run the equivalent of about 1.2 bars of boost at that engine speed? There is no need to request something the engine can never give you. Could you post your suggested LDRXN please? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
airtite
|
|
« Reply #25 on: December 20, 2011, 04:51:48 AM »
|
|
|
new ldrxn comments?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
fredrik_a
Full Member
Karma: +25/-0
Offline
Posts: 221
|
|
« Reply #26 on: December 20, 2011, 05:43:54 AM »
|
|
|
new ldrxn comments?
Looks better low-end, will produce a shitload of boost midrange and will probably throw a MIL for MAF-flow. ;-) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
airtite
|
|
« Reply #27 on: December 20, 2011, 05:47:08 AM »
|
|
|
please could you post your suggested LDRXN, i dont really like the way the car feels with it like this. if i put my foot down WOT then it sort of waits and then goes feels weird.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
fredrik_a
Full Member
Karma: +25/-0
Offline
Posts: 221
|
|
« Reply #28 on: December 20, 2011, 11:57:43 AM »
|
|
|
I see actual boost gets a little lumpy up in the RPM. This is probably because you run KFLDRL stock which in many stock files suggest 95% dc at high loads which is usually problematic. Try decreasing it to 85% midrange and 80% top end. As for the LDRXN, after having tuned quite a few cars, I tend to have it more powerful in midrange as backpressure is horrific top end, so I'd suggest something along the lines of the following... 100 120 130 140 160 170 185 190 195 190 186 177 170 167 161 155 This will give a healthy curve for you to start from. Also, make sure that LDRXNZK is changed accordingly. ZK is used during knock but as pulling boost is not commonly used as knock prevention (sompared to ignition retard and fuel enrichment) you can usually use LDRXNZK as a copy of LDRXN, perhaps if prefered you can decrease it somewhat. Regarding your EGT question... If you are logging calculated EGT (not using a separate EGT sensor) then you need to keep in mind that this ME7 calculation is quite coarse. 950°C calculated can easily be well over 1.000°C actual so proceed with caution if you have no true EGT measurement values. Changing the hardware of the car (turbo, exhaust etc.) will affect the EGT model to make it more and more inaccurate and nothing beats true measurements. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 20, 2011, 12:08:19 PM by fredrik_a »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
