Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 31
Author Topic: Opinions: using KFLBTS vs LAMFA for fuel all the time?  (Read 350675 times)
prj
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +915/-427
Offline Offline

Posts: 5839


« Reply #120 on: February 01, 2012, 05:42:39 AM »

This is what I dont get: how does going super rich protect the turbos Smiley
Let's talk a little bit about EGT in an engine, look at how the engine operates from factory and why LAMBTS is used to protect the turbos.
EGT is highly dependent on two things - spark timing and air fuel ratio.

Stock, the car spends most of it's operating time at Lambda=1, to produce the least possible emissions.
As it happens, peak EGT also occurs at lambda=1.
I already talked about flame front speed before. A faster burn while maintaining the same ignition timing is pretty much equivalent to advancing timing.

LAMBTS in a stock RS4 tune enriches roughly to lean best torque or 13.3.
This enrichment has the following consequences:
1. The flame speed increases (same as advancing timing a little)
2. We get further away from EGT peak (going both leaner and richer than 14.7 gives you lower EGT's, but richer is more effective).
3. We also can further advance timing because the additional fuel provides a cooling effect for the cylinder inhibiting knock.
4. Cooling the cylinder charge with additional fuel also means cooler combustion.

So, the way it is implemented stock, it is incredibly effective at lowering EGT when compared to operating at Lambda=1.
Think how the ECU is calibrated from factory. Emissions are king, so it is calibrated for Lambda = 1, thus what it does with BTS is protecting the turbos first and foremost.
Logged

PM's will not be answered, so don't even try.
Log your car properly.
s5fourdoor
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +33/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 617


« Reply #121 on: February 01, 2012, 11:45:38 AM »

KFLBTS, the component protection afr table, is on the standard m-box.  However, I can't find it on the RS4 F-box that I have.  Any thoughts?
Logged
prj
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +915/-427
Offline Offline

Posts: 5839


« Reply #122 on: February 02, 2012, 07:37:45 AM »

0x19327 in F-box. The F-box map pack posted on here is missing about 200-300 maps.
Logged

PM's will not be answered, so don't even try.
Log your car properly.
New2Tune
Full Member
***

Karma: +3/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 55


« Reply #123 on: February 02, 2012, 09:37:35 AM »

I believe the peak EGT occurs under slightly lean conditions.  One of the reasons the factory aims for stoich is that while going leaner can increase gas mileage/efficiency the excess heat favors the formation of NOx and is an emissions no no.

A big effect of going rich as you pointed out is the large quantity of "cold" fuel being pumped into the system, and I think that is largely why it is so effective (conceptually for cooling/protection) because you have all those liquid droplets evaporating and that phase change takes a good bit of energy out of the process.
Logged
prj
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +915/-427
Offline Offline

Posts: 5839


« Reply #124 on: February 03, 2012, 12:28:35 PM »

I believe the peak EGT occurs under slightly lean conditions.  One of the reasons the factory aims for stoich is that while going leaner can increase gas mileage/efficiency the excess heat favors the formation of NOx and is an emissions no no.
Actually EGT gets lower as you get away from Stoich...
Logged

PM's will not be answered, so don't even try.
Log your car properly.
julex
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +78/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #125 on: February 07, 2012, 03:39:46 PM »

I am following Tony's strategy by attempting to tune AFRs by using knock lambda control KFLAMKRL and KFLAMKR (kinda, don't have address for this table for mbox) and I run into interesting "problem".

First, I adjusted the table axis for different loads (higher range) and different knock amounts (first row is now 0.0).

It seems that regardless of  knock severity (run into -6.0 on dwkrz_ variables), it never follows any other than "0.0" row path regardless of retardation amount.

This makes me think that the table is not what we think it is... and he only way to control the LAMBDA is on 0.0 knock path but at least we then have load at out disposition unlike LAMFA.

Any clarification on this?

Logged
Tony@NefMoto
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +130/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1389


2001.5 Audi S4 Stage 3


« Reply #126 on: February 07, 2012, 04:05:42 PM »

Lambda target from knock system is calculated as: (KFLAMKRL + DLAMTANS) * KFLAMKR

If I recall correctly KFLAMKR is only non-zero in a small range in its stock form.
Logged

Remember you have to log in if you want to see the file attachments!
Info or questions, please add to the wiki: http://www.nefariousmotorsports.com/wiki
Follow NefMoto developments on Twitter: http://twitter.com/nefmoto
julex
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +78/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #127 on: February 07, 2012, 04:31:19 PM »

are you tuning using this strategy or is this old news?

what is the kflamkr map address then? is there any way to force the ecu to amp the input kr values (I will log it tomorrow to see what wkrma shows)?
« Last Edit: February 07, 2012, 06:46:27 PM by julex » Logged
Tony@NefMoto
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +130/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1389


2001.5 Audi S4 Stage 3


« Reply #128 on: February 07, 2012, 08:16:35 PM »

are you tuning using this strategy or is this old news?

what is the kflamkr map address then? is there any way to force the ecu to amp the input kr values (I will log it tomorrow to see what wkrma shows)?

Posted map address here: http://nefariousmotorsports.com/forum/index.php?topic=200.0

The NefMoto Stage 3 Base tune uses this strategy, and it is what I run in my car.
Logged

Remember you have to log in if you want to see the file attachments!
Info or questions, please add to the wiki: http://www.nefariousmotorsports.com/wiki
Follow NefMoto developments on Twitter: http://twitter.com/nefmoto
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12233


WWW
« Reply #129 on: February 07, 2012, 09:52:44 PM »

Stupid question (KR enrich is a new topic to me)

Is KR enrich multiplicative to LAMFA, or is it just a matter of the lower one wins (like LAMFA vs BTS)?
Logged

ME7.1 tuning guide (READ FIRST)
ECUx Plot
ME7Sum checksum checker/corrrector for ME7.x

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 experience.
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12233


WWW
« Reply #130 on: February 07, 2012, 10:03:33 PM »

Hrm. My reading of the FR is that lamfa = MIN(lamfaws,lamfawkr) (among other mins)...
Logged

ME7.1 tuning guide (READ FIRST)
ECUx Plot
ME7Sum checksum checker/corrrector for ME7.x

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 experience.
Tony@NefMoto
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +130/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1389


2001.5 Audi S4 Stage 3


« Reply #131 on: February 07, 2012, 10:39:31 PM »

Stupid question (KR enrich is a new topic to me)

Is KR enrich multiplicative to LAMFA, or is it just a matter of the lower one wins (like LAMFA vs BTS)?

The richest lambda target is what is used.
Logged

Remember you have to log in if you want to see the file attachments!
Info or questions, please add to the wiki: http://www.nefariousmotorsports.com/wiki
Follow NefMoto developments on Twitter: http://twitter.com/nefmoto
julex
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +78/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #132 on: February 08, 2012, 07:17:08 AM »

I did some logging last night to figure out why KFLAMKRL follows only 0.0 knock path regardless of what is really happening in the engine (knocking) and I found out the below:

dwkrz_0   dwkrz_1   dwkrz_2   dwkrz_3   dwkrz_4   dwkrz_5   zwout   wkrm   wkrma   dzwlamfaw   lamsbg_w
-2.25      -2.25         -2.25      -4.5         -3.75      -2.25         12         -2.25   -2.25      0            0.833253


As you can see, with the fair amount of knock, the ECU outputs wkrma=2.25 but then dzwlamfaw used for knock regulated lambda is 0...

I look at Funktionsrahmen and it looks like diagram on page 1022, specifically second diagram from bottom, shows how dzwlamfaw is calculated. The last Min(0, wkrma) calculation leaves no doubt that the dzwlamfaw will always be zero since it is a positive value in ECU?

This function also adds dzwwl to wkrma before the MIN(0,wkrma) but isn't dzwwl a warmup related variable?

I have a feeling that this path only applies to LAMBDA knock regulation during warmup and is otherwise inactive... But please correct as I am always wrong Smiley
Logged
phila_dot
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +171/-11
Offline Offline

Posts: 1709


« Reply #133 on: February 08, 2012, 07:50:07 AM »

IIRC dzwwl is calculated from two maps, one based on RPM and coolant temp (warm up), and one based on RPM and IAT. It is not only active during warm up.
Logged
julex
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +78/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #134 on: February 08, 2012, 08:27:25 AM »

This bit might explain what's going on:

CWLAMFAW Bit0:
0: dzwlamfaw = min ( 0, dzwwl)
1: dzwlamfaw = min ( 0, (dzwwl + wkrma) )

Defaultwert = 0.

I think I stumbled upon the reason why it doesn't work the way it should work. I appears that in all the tunes I have OLS files for (someobyd get m-box OLS finally!), the CWLAMFAW is set to "0000000000010000" or ""0000000000000000" which means that bit0 is set to "0".

This forces the dzwwl ONLY path. If we can find where CWLAMFAW sits in M-box (assembly gurus to rescue here please!) and flip bit0 to 1, the actual average knock will now we taken under consideration and perhaps map utilized to its full potential.



« Last Edit: February 08, 2012, 08:33:37 AM by julex » Logged
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 31
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.025 seconds with 16 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.001s, 0q)