Pages: [1]
Author Topic: MED9 LDRLMX  (Read 579 times)
dgpb
Full Member
***

Karma: +1/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 171


« on: February 19, 2021, 05:39:51 PM »

Hello after a long time.

I'm now a 1p cupra happy owner. I read its flash with MPPS some days ago and was preparing my definition (1P0907115C) from a well defined 1K0907115S from this forum. I'm totally open to share it once it's more or less ok.

Good. I come from me7 and I know pretty well the algorythm from the title. However, in MED9 it's more different than I would've expected... I guess it follows the same principle though:



At first sight, as LDORXN is lower than LDRXN (from rlmx_w), both go to the minimum selector and LDORXN (Absurdly low in my opinion, something like load 30) becomes plxs_w (by pressure transformation).

Obviously, this is not what happens without E_lde (overboost error).

So I assume the explanation is in the [IF] block working mode. For sure it has something to do with the arrow numeration, but I don't understand it's behaviour. I even tried to look at the begining of FR but nah... not clear enough.

Could someone explain to me how/why this works and wtf is LDORXN so stupid low?

Thanks a lot for your time mates

Ps: My presumption is that the latest option from the active [IF] becomes directly the last variable affected by any present [IF], no matter what's up/downwards. But even so, I couldn't find E_tnl so I don't know what it means. What's more, what should happen in the event of no E_xxx, aka, no errors? The [ELSE] from the only [IF] that has one? (then, ignoring LDPNB)
« Last Edit: February 19, 2021, 06:06:09 PM by dgpb » Logged
dgpb
Full Member
***

Karma: +1/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 171


« Reply #1 on: February 20, 2021, 10:21:35 AM »

Any help guys?
Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +514/-109
Offline Offline

Posts: 11369


WWW
« Reply #2 on: February 21, 2021, 09:39:02 PM »

Not quite sure but this is my guess:

lets ignore E_tnl for the moment:

call the minimum of rlmx_w (corrected), ldrlts_w, ldrlms_w, and LDORXN some variable "foo"

Now, the purpose of that flip flop is to inhibit updating plxs_w from foo while B_ll

As long as B_ll is false or E_lde is true, plxs_w is updated by "foo" on the 50ms raster

As soon as B_ll goes true and E_lde goes false, the flip flop resets to false, NOT IF is triggered and plxs_w stops being updated by "foo", until E_lde becomes true again, and plxs_w starts getting updated by "foo" again.

Do the same for E_tnl, roughly, to add it back in with respect to the raster update.

I could be wrong, of course.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2021, 09:42:38 PM by nyet » 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.
prj
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +373/-94
Offline Offline

Posts: 4011


« Reply #3 on: February 22, 2021, 06:14:35 AM »

This is the clusterfuck in the FR that is the hardest to understand.

But how you should read it, is that this minimum is evaluated only in case B_emxldr or E_lde are set.
Otherwise this minimum is not evaluated.

LDORXN is so stupid low because it's basically for limp mode.
Logged
dgpb
Full Member
***

Karma: +1/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 171


« Reply #4 on: February 22, 2021, 06:12:18 PM »

I think we understand more or less the same from the diagram...

This would've been a lot clearer if bosch used triggerable selectors (in my humble opinion) as they usually do in many other algorythms

And regarding LDORXN, from what I remember from me7, it is much higher there... Isn't it? But well, that's secondary

Thank you both guys
« Last Edit: February 22, 2021, 06:19:37 PM by dgpb » Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +514/-109
Offline Offline

Posts: 11369


WWW
« Reply #5 on: February 22, 2021, 10:26:04 PM »

I think we understand more or less the same from the diagram...

This would've been a lot clearer if bosch used triggerable selectors (in my humble opinion) as they usually do in many other algorythms

And regarding LDORXN, from what I remember from me7, it is much higher there... Isn't it? But well, that's secondary

No. The description is also pretty clear: "Maximalfuellung LDR bei E_ldo (Ɯberladefehler)"
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.
dgpb
Full Member
***

Karma: +1/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 171


« Reply #6 on: February 23, 2021, 04:23:31 AM »

No. The description is also pretty clear: "Maximalfuellung LDR bei E_ldo (Ɯberladefehler)"

The description is in fact the same, but values are much lower:

Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +514/-109
Offline Offline

Posts: 11369


WWW
« Reply #7 on: February 23, 2021, 05:00:35 PM »

I thought you meant higher than LDRXN
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.
prj
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +373/-94
Offline Offline

Posts: 4011


« Reply #8 on: February 23, 2021, 05:13:13 PM »

So they just limited it harder.
What's so special? Nothing Smiley
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.02 seconds with 18 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0s, 0q)