MasterJJ406
Jr. Member
Karma: +1/-0
 Offline
Posts: 35
|
 |
« on: January 03, 2019, 10:28:01 AM »
|
|
|
Hi, at first my car hasn't MAF from factory. Prehaps, it's related to this earlier topic: http://nefariousmotorsports.com/forum/index.php?topic=7824.msg71674#msg71674It's other story but when I changed camshaft, headers and so on I had troubles. But I handled my fueling via FKKVS, LAMFA. KFLBTS... and idle speed and timing etc. from good info from this forum. Now I put in my car supercharger (roots type) it's very linear and very small doping (about 5 PSI) Now I have trouble with Part throttle. There is a lot more of air charge with low Throttle body angle. There is more air charge compare to MAP sensor because there is different Pressure ratio between intake plenum and before throttle body. Enough of theory. I want to ask you for advice which tune strategy and maps choose to get ECU right to calculate aircharge, load …? Without MAF It's so hard. I thought about KLAF and KFMSNWDK. But it doesnt look like core where to start. Thanks for advices. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
MasterJJ406
Jr. Member
Karma: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 35
|
|
« Reply #1 on: January 06, 2019, 02:29:10 PM »
|
|
|
So I start with my idea...what's going on in my head.
KLAF - I've seen other files like 1.8T and KLAF looks similiar to mine. I think it's only discharge characteristic by Saint-Venant for calculating purpose. Nothing to adjust.
KFMSNWDK, KFWDKMSN - I think it's more for throttle body control. Tune needed to not get unrestricted area too early.
WDKUGDN - Decrease values little bit because of blow through setup.
KFPRGE - Decrease pressure values in higher RPM and increase in lower RPM. (Optimazation for different Camshaft and headers)
KFURLE - If I am correct - It's factor for calculating actual load from intake plenum pressure (ps->rl). So if the pressure drop from intake ducting does not exists due to supercharger then I need increase faktor to getting correct actual load. (same pressure, more load)
KFMDS - Increase values due to supercharger.
KFMIRL - I think I need request more LOAD. I am not sure but I think I have bigger actual load than requested.
KFMIOP - Change it to not get limited
KFPSDMX - Increase absolute pressure values. It looks like pressure limit.
I am not sure with obtaining actual load through KFURLE.
I want to be clear with that because rl_w is described in BGSRM as a key to fueling.
So I think I need to have my Load correct.
Any suggestion?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
MasterJJ406
Jr. Member
Karma: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 35
|
|
« Reply #2 on: January 08, 2019, 03:35:31 PM »
|
|
|
It's me again.
I read a bit more. Especially BGSRM.... I suppose I need to make HW changes.
- Firstly, Bigger Bypass valve with softer spring to deal with pressure ratio troubles in part throttle area. (710N BOV->MINI JCW BPV)
- Secondly, MAP sensor with higher range (2.5bar) that can measure above atmosferic pressure to get right Load reading consequently fueling at WOT.
- yesterday I finally found location of DSLGRAD and DSLOFS in my ECU and I am really happy that I can do that.
I will try to assemble new components at the weekend.
anybody knows if calculation of Load is working normally above atmosferic pressure in N/A engine ECUs? Or is there some limit, change needed?
Documentation says FPVMXN,FPVDKMX...
thx
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #3 on: January 08, 2019, 03:42:44 PM »
|
|
|
You're on the right track. I doubt you need to worry much about KFURLE fwiw. It really is just what pressure 100% of ref atmospheric is. Namely, ~1bar
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
MasterJJ406
Jr. Member
Karma: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 35
|
|
« Reply #4 on: January 17, 2019, 03:45:44 PM »
|
|
|
Thanks for the responce Nyet.
definetly you're right, it doesn't need to be changed due to Supercharger.
I think It's more related to bigger cam because it will affect right Load calculation during WOT, right?
BTW One thing… I have my Axis for KFPRGE and KFURLE from 0to100 for cam overlap angle. Does Anybody know the right factor to get real numbers?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Blazius
|
|
« Reply #5 on: January 17, 2019, 09:08:00 PM »
|
|
|
Thanks for the responce Nyet.
definetly you're right, it doesn't need to be changed due to Supercharger.
I think It's more related to bigger cam because it will affect right Load calculation during WOT, right?
BTW One thing… I have my Axis for KFPRGE and KFURLE from 0to100 for cam overlap angle. Does Anybody know the right factor to get real numbers?
Thanks
Try checking out a similar, hopefully fully defined ecu for factor. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
MasterJJ406
Jr. Member
Karma: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 35
|
|
« Reply #6 on: January 25, 2019, 04:05:22 PM »
|
|
|
After some welding troubles resp. broken helmet, I've changed BPV and MAP sensor finally. I've rescaled DSLGRAD and DSLOFS successfuly. ECU reads same pressure numbers like before.  I've started with revision of my old tune and I decided to restore FKKVS to stock. Now, I have to start with fixing Idle. I have -25% fueltrims. Original Camshaft generate 0,35 Bar at 650RPM and 10° of timing advance. I have raised rpm to 750RPM but Sport Camshaft generate only 0,6 Bar and my timing badly oscilating from 12 to -1,5° I guess it could be due to bigger actual load calculation so there is a lot of more fuel and timing/throttle control. So Iam thinking about increasing pressure number in KFPRGE in low RPM region to get actual load lower and fuel trims to zero at idle. What do you think ? ps I know it would be best to log all possible loads and compare, but at this moment I don't know how to find this PIDs. So I am using Peugeot software and Torque Pro with limited values.  Thanks a lot |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
MasterJJ406
Jr. Member
Karma: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 35
|
|
« Reply #7 on: January 26, 2019, 04:52:04 AM »
|
|
|
So I made some physical measurement of stock camshaft with these result:
Overlap 1mm 0°
Overlap 1mm VTC 0°
Overlap 0mm 14°
Overlap 0mm VTC 44°
Compare to other files I have... It's correct that Axis is 0 to 43. I don't know reason why axis start with 0 when the smallest physical value is 14°.
Sport CAM measurement:
Overlap 1mm 0°
Overlap 1mm VTC 17,5°
Overlap 0mm 33,5°
Overlap 0mm VTC 63,5°
So I think I should start with values from stock KFPRGE at 35° and we will see.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
MasterJJ406
Jr. Member
Karma: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 35
|
|
« Reply #8 on: January 26, 2019, 08:11:15 AM »
|
|
|
Tested and it works well FuelTrims near to zero at Idle and lower Load reading. car runs better. Ign adv goes little up but it still too low about zero and oscilating. any idea? Perhaps, I should lower Ign adv in KFZW because it's not possible to maintain too big advance or KFZW has nothing to do with idle? KFMRES. KFMRESK already raised. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
MasterJJ406
Jr. Member
Karma: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 35
|
|
« Reply #9 on: January 27, 2019, 11:18:23 AM »
|
|
|
Little tune in KFZW and lowerinq KFMRES, KFMRESK.
Now I have 5° of advance at idle and better vacuum. Idle +- ok.
First exprerience from test drive:
Cruise fine until I press pedal more than 25% (RPM dependent) then I get immediately boost like super quick spooling turbo and it starts making trouble, super lean condition and misfiring and my MAP sensor reading log freeze at 1010 mBar for all of the rest time engine is on.
it's related to intake vaccum and it happens near atmo pressure when BPV closing I think there is too big throttle blade opening and so early boost.
Should I start calibrating KFMRIL/KFMIOP for good load at given torque request or with throttle ange KFMSNWDK,KFWDKMSN?
What do you think guys?
thx
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #10 on: January 27, 2019, 02:35:07 PM »
|
|
|
Should I start calibrating KFMRIL/KFMIOP for good load at given torque request or with throttle ange KFMSNWDK,KFWDKMSN?
Ridiculous to even TOUCH those until you have a useful log to tell you what, exactly, needs to be changed. |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
MasterJJ406
Jr. Member
Karma: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 35
|
|
« Reply #11 on: January 27, 2019, 03:10:28 PM »
|
|
|
100% agreement.
I have only basic log with Load, Trims, throttle angle, etc. nothing exact for good tuning.
I am not sure If there is a way to find PIDs for my ECU. I can't find more info about this.
Do you know any kind of tool like autosearch or method to compare with existing?
Thanks for tips
I hope there is better way to log but If not I will have to continue with trying/thinking.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #12 on: January 27, 2019, 03:35:09 PM »
|
|
|
Unfortunately, no, I don't know how to handle these older ECUs with no real logging capabilities.
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #13 on: January 27, 2019, 05:53:35 PM »
|
|
|
You need to log or a dyno.
PIRG is not what I would touch...
KFURL is your main VE map which will need adjusting... and then KFPBRK.
What you are trying to do is nearly impossible without correct logging.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
MasterJJ406
Jr. Member
Karma: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 35
|
|
« Reply #14 on: January 28, 2019, 02:08:55 PM »
|
|
|
Thanks for advice guys
I definetly need more data like better log with exact variables not just result values.
I think I can't change VE calculation more because it will mess low load calculation too, which is actualy fine. Up to 25-40% depends on RPM
I am just thinking about charging too early effect now and I have to say that there is nothing special about this it's just standard characteristic of forced induction car. I made some log from my second stock turbo car...
What I think so far... I need request more load from the certain torque request depends on RPM but in throttle control tables I need to input less angle for bigger mass flow to not open throtlle too much.
But I doubt a little about throttle angle because troubles becomes pressure ratio >95.
I am going to try this at narrow RPM range to see the trends.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
