|
nyet
|
 |
« Reply #30 on: July 29, 2019, 08:50:59 PM »
|
|
|
Initial lean spike and subsequent enrich is likely from boost leak (see MAF readings, which spike)... I might start there.
Might have triggered something.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
stuartdean
Full Member
Karma: +1/-8
 Offline
Posts: 78
|
|
« Reply #31 on: August 02, 2019, 11:42:22 AM »
|
|
|
hmmm just lost my post...  too many attachments or too big Essentially.. Thanks nyet for taking the time to look at this. I do have a new Forge FMDV008 fitted now and have done a new log on the way home, I upped the KRKTE a touch as the morning starts were pretty difficult. what I have found is when under the map sensor the AFR follows desired. Is this purely because when going up over 24 psi the leak is causing an issue or is it because the map sensor is being used to derive the fuelling? should I be getting an air compressor onto the TIP to find if I have a leak, I do have a phenolic spacer too now, all of these introduce possible leaks. also will try and reset WGDC again this weekend to try and get the turbosmart IWG75 to be less than 16.5psi at 0% WGDC Have a good weekend, Thanks |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #32 on: August 02, 2019, 06:21:01 PM »
|
|
|
Its not the map sensor. When you max ps_w (modeled pressure based on MAF) fueling goes wonky.
DO NOT GO OVER 24PSI
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #33 on: August 04, 2019, 05:57:20 AM »
|
|
|
To be specific, rl_w goes wonky, causing too lean fuel and too much advance. Boom.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
stuartdean
Full Member
Karma: +1/-8
Offline
Posts: 78
|
|
« Reply #34 on: August 04, 2019, 07:51:44 AM »
|
|
|
Hi, thanks so what are the options to go over the map sensor limit? My AET turbo is rated to 370bhp, but within the map sensor limit is around 235g/s
Is the correct next step 5120 hack? Or should I be considering an ignitron ECU?
S4wiki mentions 'open loop' boost, I thought setting dslofs to 0 was literally for a tiny bit extra but wonder if it supports more control.?
Is the only true open loop using a fixed waste gate map?
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 04, 2019, 07:55:23 AM by stuartdean »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #35 on: August 04, 2019, 10:04:17 AM »
|
|
|
Hi, thanks so what are the options to go over the map sensor limit? My AET turbo is rated to 370bhp, but within the map sensor limit is around 235g/s
Is the correct next step 5120 hack? Or should I be considering an ignitron ECU?
S4wiki mentions 'open loop' boost, I thought setting dslofs to 0 was literally for a tiny bit extra but wonder if it supports more control.?
Is the only true open loop using a fixed waste gate map?
MAP is NOT MAF There is literally no reason to go over the pressure limit with your set up. Yes you can use the 5120 hack but you need to walk before you run. Stop screwing around. Fix one thing at a time. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
stuartdean
Full Member
Karma: +1/-8
Offline
Posts: 78
|
|
« Reply #36 on: August 12, 2019, 11:53:45 AM »
|
|
|
Hi,
So to refresh - I think the fuelling is correct reviewing LTFT and under the MAP Sensor limit of 2559 the Actual AFR follow the desired AFR
I reset the actuator to now only one turn of pre-load - in order to try and run the exercise to set up real pre-control with the PID and I have only gained a tiny bit more adjustment.
I have attached 3 logs running codeword =8 and Fixed WGDC
0% WGDC which looks like the actuator is 1bar and the actuator is relatively close
10% WGDC
20% WGDC <-- this is just under the MAP Sensor Limit
I set it to 30% and didn't go over 3K RPM as I could tell this was far too much - I have also uploaded a snippet of the log
With this in mind.. should I simply try the pre-control PID exercise between 0 and 22% Fixed WGDC? (22% will probably be the MAP Sensor limit)
these turbosmart IWG75 - are not cheap - and I am sure the actuator is what is causing the easy overshooting. I am probably misunderstanding how to get the PID set up properly, Other people seem to get their waste gate duty cycle range going to 94% - I would say that is far too high for this engine and pipes would just keep blowing off (lucky probably)
Thanks for some direction to go to next.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #37 on: August 12, 2019, 01:06:38 PM »
|
|
|
these turbosmart IWG75 - are not cheap - and I am sure the actuator is what is causing the easy overshooting. I am probably misunderstanding how to get the PID set up properly
Nope, you aren't misunderstanding anything. If 20% wgdc is too much, the PID is not going to be able to control this turbo at all, You're better off with a MBC in parallel or a locked WGDC, which will end up with crap part throttle drivability, but what else can you do? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #38 on: August 12, 2019, 01:58:12 PM »
|
|
|
1. What solenoid are you using? Frequency can be wrong.
2. 1 bar actuator is way too much if you want just 1.5 bar boost. 1 bar actuator I'd use for something like 2-2.5 bar boost. Is it adjustable? Can you reduce the preload? Can you change actuator?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
stuartdean
Full Member
Karma: +1/-8
Offline
Posts: 78
|
|
« Reply #39 on: August 13, 2019, 05:07:46 AM »
|
|
|
every time I looked at whether it is adjustable - I am just pointed to a site about fitting a 10psi spring to them, I will have a look again - as the N75 connector does rotate and I turned it around to fit the existing pipe - unless under higher boost the N75 isn't controlling the amount going to the actuator? I just tried 22% and it is way too much causing knock at 4000 rpm - far too risking. it's this turbo - https://www.aetmotorsport.com/products/aet-turbos-hybrid-k04-1-8t-20v-bam-370bhp (but without the optional 10psi actuator) it seemed so much easier to get the max out of a stock turbo what I will do is limit the max waste gate to 20% and put on the conservative map and have a rethink. lots of people run 2bar - but usually from big turbos create 450bhp. I think the issue is the back pressure, I have Inconel exhaust valves but stock exhaust valve springs. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Aardschok
Full Member
Karma: +6/-0
Offline
Posts: 64
|
|
« Reply #40 on: August 13, 2019, 09:18:30 AM »
|
|
|
Thoughts on using the pre-control LDR hack with TVLDMX set to 22%? It's not optimal but the best of a bad situation?
As in.. treat 22% as your 95%, scale KFLDRL & KFLDIMX up to 22% maximum and do fixed DC runs for each DRL column. Would this even work? It's disgusting hackery but I think it might. The biggest drawback is the fact that the tool will only accept integer values for IMX and DRL so you might need to make some tweaks.
Also, check CWPLGU - I'm pretty sure it's 0 in your file so it's a bit more involved than copy/pasting tables.
Edit: or 20% even
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 13, 2019, 09:20:38 AM by Aardschok »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Blazius
|
|
« Reply #41 on: August 13, 2019, 11:20:23 AM »
|
|
|
Why not just ditch the whole crap and use proper springs and setup to get a decent resolution good wgdc / boost graph instead?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Aardschok
Full Member
Karma: +6/-0
Offline
Posts: 64
|
|
« Reply #42 on: August 13, 2019, 11:49:12 AM »
|
|
|
Was going for the 'make do with what you got' approach.. SW changes are free (.. mostly  ) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #43 on: August 14, 2019, 10:27:44 AM »
|
|
|
Get a proper spring. If your hardware is bad then trying to bodge it somehow with SW hacks is really the wrong approach.
ECU will be constantly fighting with throttle plate against the boost, there will be high boost pre-TB, lots of dump valve actuations and just shitty off-boost behavior.
Absolutely no reason to do it this way.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #44 on: August 14, 2019, 01:16:08 PM »
|
|
|
Get a proper spring. If your hardware is bad then trying to bodge it somehow with SW hacks is really the wrong approach.
ECU will be constantly fighting with throttle plate against the boost, there will be high boost pre-TB, lots of dump valve actuations and just shitty off-boost behavior.
Absolutely no reason to do it this way.
Obviously I'm 100% in agreement with prj on this matter. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
