Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 31
Author Topic: Opinions: using KFLBTS vs LAMFA for fuel all the time?  (Read 341144 times)
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12232


WWW
« Reply #135 on: February 08, 2012, 09:48:51 AM »

In Mbox, it appears to be the same as Gbox - 18ecb

but... its 01 not 00 Smiley
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: 12232


WWW
« Reply #136 on: February 08, 2012, 09:51:00 AM »

Also, its 8 bit, not 16...
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.
julex
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +78/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #137 on: February 08, 2012, 09:56:00 AM »

Allright, you looked at assembly to confirm?

I compared the maps and "found" that region to be identical to G-box in hex editor but that doesn't mean all that much. I don't know if G-box is correct Smiley to begin with as it doesn't add up in my mind.

If it is indeed "1" from factory, then there is a problem here as the function never outputs anything but 0 regardless of conditions, it would appear, which renders the mechanism useless, or pretty close to it (you can still control lambda if you change knock axis and have 0.0 as a row and it will follow that path).

Another question is why the function would use MIN (0, "positive value of retardation") if the output will always be ZERO. Unless, of course, retardation is indeed kept as negative value in which case it would make sense. I am still getting zero in logs and LAMBDA follows "0.0" knock path.

Edit: Also,  I cannot log dzwwl as it is not listed in ECU definitions I generated. Anybody has that?

« Last Edit: February 08, 2012, 10:01:16 AM by julex » Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12232


WWW
« Reply #138 on: February 08, 2012, 09:58:55 AM »

Allright, you looked at assembly to confirm?

No I did what you did. Looked at hex.

Quote
If it is indeed "1" from factory, then there is a problem here as the function never outputs anything but 0 regardless of conditions, it would appear, which renders the mechanism useless, or pretty close to it (you can still control lambda if you change knock axis and have 0.0 as a row and it will follow that path).

stupid question: have you tried a negative knock axis?
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.
julex
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +78/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #139 on: February 08, 2012, 10:05:43 AM »

Can't. Knock is unsigned byte with formula of "0.75 * x" which starts at 0 for "0.00" knock. It is not possible to use negative values.

Sign.

Any idea what the address for dzwwl? It might shed some light but it is not listed in auto generated list.
Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12232


WWW
« Reply #140 on: February 08, 2012, 10:08:47 AM »

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

I'm not seeing that at all in the diagram... i'm seeing

0: dzwlamfaw = min (0, min (0, dzwwl) + wkrma)
1: dzwlamfaw = min (0, dzwwl + wkrma)
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.
julex
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +78/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #141 on: February 08, 2012, 10:18:12 AM »

That's when you look at the diagram, I agree.

Notes on page 1026 say though:

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


So we have a discrepancy between diagram and notes...


Help me understand:

For positive values of both dzwwl and wkrma (which is how they are stored in ECU?), both paths will always return zero...right?

It just doesn't make sense from logical point of view  Angry


Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12232


WWW
« Reply #142 on: February 08, 2012, 10:22:39 AM »

For positive values of both dzwwl and wkrma (which is how they are stored in ECU?), both paths will always return zero...right?

yea Sad

we need setzi or tony to look at this; i don't know jack about disassembly Sad
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 #143 on: February 08, 2012, 11:55:38 AM »

I will try to double check the assembly for this tonight. But this is the system I am using in my car, so I'm not sure why it would work differently for you.
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 #144 on: February 08, 2012, 12:00:43 PM »

I have a conclusion to the whole dzwlamfaw problem. Stick it in your WIKI nyet.

Facts:

1. Location CWLAMFAW  is right for mbox, it is 0x18ECB. I logged with "1" and "0" and got the results I expected. More on this below.
2. It is set to "1" (bit0 = 1) on M-box from factory.
3. No other boxes (RS4, A6, allroad, other S4) have this set to "1". It is "0" on other boxes.
4. Documentation states this should/is set to "0" by default.

This leads to a conclusion that Bosch/Audi released the m-box with CWLAMFAW set to "1" by accident (call it a bug), essentially DISABLING fuel enrichment on knock. The only residual lambda corrections I noticed came from dzwwl, which mean there is enrichment only from knock correction due to temps etc.

I set CWLAMFAW  = 0 and magic happened - dzwlamfaw  started following wkrma to a tee albeit it might actually exceed it if dzwwl would become positive.


Logs with CWLAMFAW  = 0 (set to what other audis have):

dwkrz_0   dwkrz_1   dwkrz_2   dwkrz_3   dwkrz_4   dwkrz_5   wkrma   dzwlamfaw   lamsbg_w  
-6         -4.5      -6.75   -6.75      -6.75      -6      -6      -5.25         0.801759
-6         -4.5      -6.75   -6.75      -6.75      -6      -6      -6            0.791505


Logs with CWLAMFAW  = 1 (Stock):

dwkrz_0   dwkrz_1   dwkrz_2   dwkrz_3   dwkrz_4   dwkrz_5   wkrma   dzwlamfaw   lamsbg_w  
-5.25         -3.75      -6   -6         -6      -5.25      -5.25      -0.75      0.818361
-5.25         -3.75      -6   -6         -6      -7.5      -5.25      -1.5         0.813966



My conclusion is that leaving CWLAMFAW  = 1 is not suitable to knock based lambda tuning since you will never get real knock values passed to function. Setting it to CWLAMFAW  = 0 will pass proper ignition retard values due to knock and with properly matched KFLAMKR table, you can essentially have self-balancing system where you run at some equilibrium between knock and lambda, as per that amp.

I find this method very intriguing since it might actually allow to have universal tune for different octane fuels and meth-no meth systems. As knock develops the ECU enriches more and more until a satisfactory state is reached where no further retardation of ignition angle occurs and you're at your maximum power point with given fuel/meth set up.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2012, 12:05:48 PM by julex » Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12232


WWW
« Reply #145 on: February 08, 2012, 12:10:22 PM »

I'm confused now ..

dzwlamfaw = f(CWLAMFAW, dzwwl, wkrma)

... now please express f() for me based on your logging.

I am having a tough time figuring out what the actual path is because im dense Sad

is it NEITHER of the ones in the FR (text and diagram)?
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.
julex
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +78/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #146 on: February 08, 2012, 12:17:08 PM »

You're not dense. Document is obviously wrong either on the diagram or description below it. This fact alone suggests that formula might be anything in between... Couple that with butchered set up of the CWLAMFAW bit0 in PRODUCTION car and you really shouldn't wonder it could be anything...

If I had a crack at it, I would say that the formula in notes is accurate, not the diagram. We can tell for sure once we learn dzwwl's location and log it.

Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12232


WWW
« Reply #147 on: February 08, 2012, 12:21:32 PM »

If I had a crack at it, I would say that the formula in notes is accurate, not the diagram.

See, thats what I don't get, because that would mean that CWLAMFAW bit 0 = 0 would result in a dzwlamfaw that doesn't follow wkrma
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.
julex
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +78/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #148 on: February 08, 2012, 12:51:53 PM »

Right. In that case the diagram might be right. Assuming the retardation is considered negative, min function would return wkrma adjusted by dzwwl.

I hope tony or setzi can find address for dzwwl.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2012, 12:54:31 PM by julex » Logged
s5fourdoor
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +33/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 617


« Reply #149 on: February 08, 2012, 01:28:30 PM »

damn julex, if you are right - which from what you've written i think you are, this is a major major find bro...
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 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 0s, 0q)