Combustion chamber temperature and EGT are heavily driven by engine speed. For a given load, as engine speed increases the time between combustion events decreases and so does the time for the cylinder to transfer heat to the head/block/etc. This is kind of the idea i was talking about before where we must not separate our considerations for "engine time" (crank angle) and the "physical time" at which chemical reactions and heat transfer occur. Because of this heavy relationship between RPM and EGT/combustion chamber temp, it makes sense that a model and mapping strategy would be based on both load and RPM where EGT is the driving factor (ie you are using these things: speed, load, thermal mass, lambda, efficiency, etc to predict EGT because it is heavily dependent on them).

You are correct though that if you can map directly off of EGT, that is the way to go as that is what all these load/speed/etc based strategies are trying to predict. It sounded like you were saying there was no physical relationship between the two, but if I understand you correctly now you are actually saying that the influence doesn't matter because you have direct access to the EGT measurement which is the critical measurement here. With that I can certainly agree...and also wish that all 1.8T's came with an EGT sensor. 

Based on your statements about LAMBTS here I think you didn't fully understand how this is ment to work.

Also there are a lot of situations were you want pre-emptive enrichment to stabilize the combustion just like nyet uses it.

Don't know why you take it this way but I have no such intentions whatsoever.



So in other words you say that the enrichment to reach a certain EGT is the same on all RPMs. This is obviously not the case like already described a few times here.

KFLBTS (together with dlambts) is the enrichment you need in steady state to limit the EGTs to a certain goal. All the dynamic stuff you described is handled with the enable conditions and the EGT modelling. This is how the function is intended to work when you use it only for component protection.

Bosch component protection is not a controller like other ECU systems that control lambda to reach a certain limit, it's all based on precontrolled lambda 

Not to derail the discussion, but I dont have the FBSTABGM map defined in my m box XDF     .  Could someone please post the info so I can have the map and follow along with you guys.  Sorry...

Thanks. I'll add it to my next mappack release

This is where understanding the hardware plays a huge part, If you know the turbo setup is going to be prone to raised EGTs and you want BTS to play a big part to keep the engine safe, then you will need to recalibrate the simulated egt maps buy using and external EGT system and lots of logging and graphing data.   

Or you can just offset TABGBTS to a temp you know and have recorded that works.  This is the way I work, its handy when you have a braked dyno and you can load the turbo upto the max and monitor the elevated egts under the most extream conditions.

With Me7.5 tuning you can try to go too much into detail thinking you have to do it right or a way eveyone says.  IMO just find your own method of tuning me7 which works and is safe.

If you want a accurate EGT model you have to calibrate it for you specific hardware. Backpressure, ignition calibration s.o. all have a big influence.