I was wondering whether all this is valid for 1.8t engines. Please validate my understanding of fueling as follows.
IN my stock hj ecu  say if I floor the pedal at say at 1000rpm, then immediately lambda goes to about .95 from the lamfa map for acceleration enrichment .
And if there is any degradation in timing (onset of knock I guess)  then KFFdlbts and KFdlbts starts enriching.

And as the EGT's go above  900 (FBSTABGM is set to 0 at 900,0.5 at 920 , 1.0 at 940 and above) extra fuel is added for component protection by kflbts.
I dont understand how the fueling based on KFLAMKR and KFLAMKRL is any better. On my car CWLAMFAW bit zero is set to 0. And I am attaching my   KFLAMKR and KFLAMKRL to me it looks all disabled, please confirm that.
What I dont understand is the difference between Knock enrichment by KFFdlbts/KFdlbts and KFLAMKR/ KFLAMKRL.
Hope somebody can help me understand this As I have been struggling with this concept for quite some time.


 

Plainly, as I understand it:

Lamfa = Fueling based on pedal position. Does not relate to actual loads.

Kflbts = Forced fueling based on egt. If set at stock egt or raised threshold levels then it will be your component protection by dumping fuel, your set lambda, once threshold is reached. Forced fueling by low egt disables this component protection. Kffdlbts is factored in to Kflbts as lambts = KFLBTS + ([KF]DLBTS * KFFDLBTS)

Kflamkr = Fueling based on knock recognition, it is preemptive. With CWLAMFAW set at zero, which not all ecu's are, KR fueling is enabled. You make the car follow kflamkrl based on knock. If you don't knock you are following the 0 column. The values in the table are lambda; use a calculator to convert to AFR if you tune based on AFR. The values on the left side are load. Change these to represent your assumed load values or follow julex's on page 12 of this thread where you max at 191.250. Your car will now adjust AFR based on load vs knock recognition value. However if there is knock recognized you are now able to fuel based on degrees of knock beyond the first 0 column.

Fueling within the entire system will follow the richest set point where ever you may have set it within any of these variables.

Someone correct me if I am wrong.

If you still use BTS for fueling, you run into a couple problems. Either you dont get it because you have not reached temperature threshold. You reach temperature threshold, but now that you have your BTS fueling you have no component protection. (irratic in my case) It is better to have, in my opinon, fueling from kflamkrl while still having bts for component protection.

I have been working all kind of tuning methods for fuel for the last 10 months. KR fueling is the best I have come by as my car is nearly spot on and is 100% better. I do of course have the others tailored to where I want them for a few tweaks.

Can someone show a 2d image of KFLAMKR and KFLAMKRL

you'd have to check CWLAMFAW to see if it is really disabled or not. Having "1"s everywhere though ensures that even if CWLAMFAW is "0" (which enables KR based fueling), the output lambda from the table will always be "1" which in practical terms means "disabled".

having load at 90 max only means that beyond 90% load, regardless if it is 90 or 190, that value will be used for whatever the table is used for. That's why we frequently re-define column header values to different load values to get more control in high load scenarios.

just one of the ways to skin a cat I guess.

Bit 0 of CWLAMFAW does not enable or disable this function. It only changes how dzwwl and wkrma are evaluated.

In the tune I posted, I altered KFLAMKR relative to stock. In stock form KFLAMKR is mostly useless.

I'm glad this thread is still going. I think it has grown by four pages since the last time I checked.