|
eliotroyano
|
 |
« Reply #30 on: August 29, 2013, 05:32:08 AM »
|
|
|
Sweet, thanks for that. I honestly don't even have a M3.8x car, but an M4.4 car, mainly curious about the similarities, learn and share a little bit in the process  MCS-96 ASM looks interesting too. Cheers! Do you have some pics of the M4.4 Ecu? Can M4.3 & M4.4 ECUs be read & write through OBD2? I have read something about that. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
mercuric
Newbie
Karma: +1/-0
 Offline
Posts: 23
|
|
« Reply #31 on: August 29, 2013, 09:10:28 AM »
|
|
|
Some pics @ http://volvospeed.com/vs_forum/topic/159506-tuners-rejoice-free-tuning-for-m44/page-3 -- I can take some additional ones if those are not sufficient to get part numbers off. - Both M4.3 and M4.4 must be in boot loader mode to read/write the flash, for both, applying voltage to pin B8 before powering up the ECU accomplishes this - Both M4.3 and M4.4 are programmed via 9600 baud K-line, however M4.3 uses pin B5 and M4.4 uses pin B36 (the later shared with OBD-II). On M4.3 cars, pin B5 connects to pin 3 of the OBD-II port. On M4.4 cars, B36 connects to OBD-II pin 7, the normal pin for OBD-II K-line data, and provides both the programming interface as well as OBD-II and proprietary diagnostics protocols (VST, McMess) - M4.4 has a split address flash arrangement (128kbye flash chip on a 16-bit address bus, a GPIO pin is used to toggle the MSB) and can't be read via serial as there's no way to toggle the GPIO pin while in bootloader mode - M4.3 uses a 64kbyte flash chip and can be read completely across the serial interface. - To program in-car via the OBD-II port, one has to somehow get voltage to pin B8. For M4.3, the OBD-II cable needs to be wired to use pin 3 instead of pin 7 for data. For M4.4, voltage must be at least 14v, for whatever reason, so most people connect a battery charger when flashing to raise the voltage on M4.4 cars. Personally I just program them on the bench. It's less trouble, IMHO. M4.3/M4.4 cars have the ECU in a basket under the hood and it's very easy to remove/reinstall, unlike some cars which have the ECUs in difficult to access locations, such as tucked behind the dash, etc. I have two ECUs and simply alternate, pulling one to replace with the other and bringing the other one back to the bench for the next round of tweaks. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
hammersword
Full Member
Karma: +31/-2
Offline
Posts: 136
Revlimit ECU tuning
|
|
« Reply #32 on: August 29, 2013, 04:23:58 PM »
|
|
|
Use this factor on this map - 10,24 and precision - 2 It will show you values in absolute pressure in mbars It works fine,as requested and actual, ONLY IF the MAF is well calibrated in bigger applications. No doubt that it works excellent in Stage 1 files  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
eliotroyano
|
|
« Reply #33 on: January 26, 2014, 12:48:01 PM »
|
|
|
Use this factor on this map - 10,24 and precision - 2 It will show you values in absolute pressure in mbars It works fine,as requested and actual, ONLY IF the MAF is well calibrated in bigger applications. No doubt that it works excellent in Stage 1 files Hi sorry to take this thread from dead, but I was reading and studying and found this info. Hammersword do you mean that we can use a factor of 10.24 to convert any ms/Umdr Load axis to absolute pressure in "mbars"? X, Y or Z axis??? Also does it can be used for any map, I mean ignition, fueling or boost or just boost maps? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
overspeed
|
|
« Reply #34 on: January 27, 2014, 04:18:19 AM »
|
|
|
Load is directly related to torque, not pressure...
That´s the same "load/4,266+300 = pressure" in ME7 systems, in normal conditions it´s mathematical next enough for a guess, but is not the real thing.
It will be afected by IAT, ambient pressure, compressor eficiency, ignition timing, and so over...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
eliotroyano
|
|
« Reply #35 on: January 27, 2014, 07:11:30 AM »
|
|
|
Load is directly related to torque, not pressure...
That´s the same "load/4,266+300 = pressure" in ME7 systems, in normal conditions it´s mathematical next enough for a guess, but is not the real thing.
It will be afected by IAT, ambient pressure, compressor eficiency, ignition timing, and so over...
Thanks a lot for elaborate that. I understand your comment. Then for older Motronic M38x & M59x, that Load (ms/Umdr) is directly related to engine torque, but is it the same measure that we can log using VAGCOM as Load (ms)  ?? Finally many people try to find a relationship between Load (ms) and Load (%) or Load (pressure) as a comparation for tuning purposes. That is reason of my previous question about convert or just transform Load (ms/Umdr) in other unit like pressure for the typical RPM/MAP Relative Pressure/AFR table. That give me to my other question, what is the difference as torque, boost or engine load itself found as X or Y axis or as a result in a Z axis table? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
overspeed
|
|
« Reply #36 on: January 27, 2014, 01:07:54 PM »
|
|
|
Yes, "ms" is actually "ms/umdr" But you have to be carefull as you have another things thar are measured ins "ms"
The rigth to say is, dont´try to simplify what bosch did, start thinking in load values... they are by definition "injection time for lambda =1", if you enrich (and you will in WOT) the correlation will decay... the same thing if you decrease advance.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #37 on: January 27, 2014, 03:41:32 PM »
|
|
|
The rigth to say is, dont´try to simplify what bosch did, start thinking in load values... they are by definition "injection time for lambda =1", if you enrich (and you will in WOT) the correlation will decay... the same thing if you decrease advance. Could you care to tell a little more about how decreasing or increasing advance is going to affect load being injection time to reach lambda 1? Don't overcomplicate things. In this ECU: LOAD = MAFLIN(MAF_VOLTAGE)/RPM*K Done. None of your ignition advance or torque yadda yadda has anything to do with it. As for pressure - this ECU does not know what pressure is. It pulses the N75 valve to reach req. filling, it uses feedback control from the MAF instead of using a pressure sensor. Really damn simple system, works great as long as your MAF is big enough, not so great if you exceed it's size. Anything decent power you have to decalibrate load anyway, as it just goes to FF. This ECU is best treated with the "garbage in, garbage out" method. Never fails to work, and not any different from tuning any other old motronic. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 27, 2014, 03:45:57 PM by prj »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
overspeed
|
|
« Reply #38 on: January 27, 2014, 06:43:40 PM »
|
|
|
Could you care to tell a little more about how decreasing or increasing advance is going to affect load being injection time to reach lambda 1?
Don't overcomplicate things. In this ECU: LOAD = MAFLIN(MAF_VOLTAGE)/RPM*K
Done. None of your ignition advance or torque yadda yadda has anything to do with it.
Excuse me, english is not my first language, let me explain again in other way... Advance will have not to do with load requested and it´s correlation with MAF readings, but when you decrease advance of its ideal point (what was made by bosch in OEM calibration) you have less torque, that´s what I said, the correlation load<=>torque will no remain constant as long as you change advance and AFR. Try lowering advance and you´ll get less torque evem with same load... try enrich more than 0,75 lambda and you have decaying troque too... thas what I was saying. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #39 on: January 28, 2014, 01:07:55 PM »
|
|
|
Excuse me, english is not my first language, let me explain again in other way...
Advance will have not to do with load requested and it´s correlation with MAF readings, but when you decrease advance of its ideal point (what was made by bosch in OEM calibration) you have less torque, that´s what I said, the correlation load<=>torque will no remain constant as long as you change advance and AFR.
Try lowering advance and you´ll get less torque evem with same load... try enrich more than 0,75 lambda and you have decaying troque too... thas what I was saying. Yes, I know all this, but this has nothing to do with this ECU. The torque model, effective ignition angle and all that came in ME7. M3.8 and older have no notion of torque, there is only cylinder filling (load). What you do with that cylinder filling is up to you. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IamwhoIam
|
|
« Reply #40 on: January 28, 2014, 01:28:09 PM »
|
|
|
M3.8 and older have no notion of torque
Motormoment beim optimaler zündwinkel und hochdruckphase does exist however |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I have no logs because I have a boost gauge (makes things easier)
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #41 on: January 28, 2014, 02:49:29 PM »
|
|
|
Motormoment beim optimaler zündwinkel und hochdruckphase does exist however Not used for anything really important. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
overspeed
|
|
« Reply #42 on: January 29, 2014, 06:36:05 AM »
|
|
|
read again the topic in order to get what I was saying:
First I said load => torque ( to make him know that you can´t mess with factors in WinOLS and "think" in boost)
second I said load = K x torque in one specific condition (lambda =1, and obviously advance in MBT)
I just advice him that He can´t keep the correlation if he change too much AFR and/or advance.
To make it more clear:
one example: Passat 4B0907557B soft version 359157
in KFLDS.0 TPS = 94% RPM = 2000 you have load 7,45ms if you change it to 9ms you´ll raise torque ABOUT 21%
If you know the torque in this condition (WOT at 2.000RPM) you can get a round value for convert load in torque, BUT will be afected for lambda and advance (because you will be in another point in fuel and advance tables).
that was just my point.
Why say it ? I Live in Brasil, and here we have 25% ethanol in fuel, it make the AFR raise a bit and make the engine suport more advance without detonation... an 100% stock A3 150AGU will reach here even with all the heat about 160c~165v in dinamometers
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
overspeed
|
|
« Reply #43 on: January 29, 2014, 06:40:32 AM »
|
|
|
allmost forget !! Indeed ECU did´t translate load to torque, and the cause is just what you said (there is no torque model as ME7)...ECU can´t know what is the detrimental loss with lower/higher advance, AFR... or even with elevation or IAT (there is correction load tables, correct requested load to keep the same torque output).
We are agreeing in everything...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
overspeed
|
|
« Reply #44 on: January 29, 2014, 06:45:34 AM »
|
|
|
IN my other post I said:
"in KFLDS.0 TPS = 94% RPM = 2000 you have load 7,45ms if you change it to 9ms you´ll raise torque ABOUT 21%"
torque will raise about 21% IF K03 would give pressure for this ( I would have picked a higher RPM to keep it clear, but the idea is the same)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
