|
Bische
|
 |
« on: January 08, 2013, 11:43:22 AM »
|
|
|
As we all know there is a pressure cap in ME7.x at 2560mBar absolute pressure, this has in the past prevented us from installing a higher reading MAP sensor than the stock 2.5bar sensor. This hack is based around scaling EVERY pressure variable down by 50%, this puts the pressure cap at double stock, 5120mBar absolute pressure. This allows us to install a MAP sensor capabable of reading up to 5bar absolute pressure. There is one known downside of doing this, it cuts resolution in half. The stock resolution is at 0.01bar or 10mBar, after scaling all pressures by -50% we end up with a resolution of 0.02bar or 20mBar. As you can tell the loss is minimal since the stock resolution was as high. Im attaching an .ols file with my stock ME7.5 8E0909518M bin, one version with the scaling implemented + definitions for those maps/ASM divisions. Im also attaching a .txt list of the maps changed(both .txt and .ols are sorted by %module), and last a graph from my car showing this hack in action.  A BIG thank you to all people involved to make this happen! Progress up to this point, can be viewed here: http://nefariousmotorsports.com/forum/index.php?topic=2747.0title=I will update this first post as we go, when my 4bar sensor arrives etc. Update 2013-02-07: BT contributes with 551M files --> http://nefariousmotorsports.com/forum/index.php?topic=3027.msg31965#msg31965Update 2013-02-26: List updated. Update 2013-04-04: Graph showing 26psi being PID controlled. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 15, 2014, 11:32:39 AM by Tony@NefMoto »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bische
|
 |
« Reply #2 on: January 08, 2013, 11:58:18 AM »
|
|
|
HERO POST!
Thank you bische!
Thank you guys on here for this forum! I want to add this, the changes I made is made to fit my 1.8t '02 Audi, there is more maps that could be needed to scale in other applications that were not in use in binary - these maps are NOT on the list or in the .ols. And this: WARNING!
Before attempting any pressure scaling you must check if your car uses brake force amplifier(%GGPBKV)!
I just became aware of this, and if this function is in use it must be scaled. I dont really know what would happen if not scaled, but I dont want anyone to have their brakes messed up!
In the 1.8t and S4 2.7 binarys I have with this bit defined, it is CWGGPBKV = 6dec. 6dec = Brake amplifier function turned off.
Please verify your CWGGPBKV in %GGPBKV if you are going to scale the file. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #3 on: January 08, 2013, 12:02:24 PM »
|
|
|
BTW i've been meaning to post this but forgot
It's a dump of the S4 g-box damos, converted to csv, and searching for references to pressure.
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
phila_dot
|
|
« Reply #4 on: January 08, 2013, 07:38:59 PM »
|
|
|
I just started digging in tonight.
I'm pretty sure I have all of the ATM constants for the M box. Now to start tracking variables.
Everyone that says that they want to help can contribute by compiling a list of all of the pressure variables.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Bische
|
|
« Reply #5 on: January 10, 2013, 12:28:31 PM »
|
|
|
BTW i've been meaning to post this but forgot
It's a dump of the S4 g-box damos, converted to csv, and searching for references to pressure.
I have taken a look at this list, there is alot of maps from the brake amplifier module %GGPBKV, if those need scaling or not is different between applications. You will have to check in your binary if this module is use to determine if scaling is needed --> http://nefariousmotorsports.com/forum/index.php?topic=3027.msg29820#msg29820I also did trace the pus_w(PUSMAX/MIN in nyet's .csv), it is used for EVAP Leak detection pump, it goes like this: pus_w -> %BGPUK (to determine if ambient pressure is sane), out comes pukor_w and pukorv_w -> %DLDP, which is diagnosis for LDP. My file does not diagnose LDP (CDLDP = 0), so I did not follow up what impact the scaled pus_w would have. But if one have %DLDP active, you might want to follow it up  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
k0mpresd
|
|
« Reply #6 on: January 12, 2013, 09:20:11 AM »
|
|
|
i believe you have a typo in your ols project. Positive limit for pssol gradient (PSSOLNGRD)
should be Positive limit for pssol gradient (PSSOLPGRD) im assuming.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Bische
|
|
« Reply #7 on: January 13, 2013, 08:32:25 PM »
|
|
|
i believe you have a typo in your ols project. Positive limit for pssol gradient (PSSOLNGRD)
should be Positive limit for pssol gradient (PSSOLPGRD) im assuming.
You are right, I can fix that after work |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
k0mpresd
|
|
« Reply #8 on: January 13, 2013, 11:14:52 PM »
|
|
|
yea, well, not to split hairs but pretty sure you have a few maps in the text file that are not listed in the ols. only reason i mention is because im going through the ols, txt, and my 018ch file. maybe i just missed them. ill check more. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Bische
|
|
« Reply #9 on: January 15, 2013, 08:29:35 PM »
|
|
|
yea, well, not to split hairs but pretty sure you have a few maps in the text file that are not listed in the ols. only reason i mention is because im going through the ols, txt, and my 018ch file. maybe i just missed them. ill check more. No you are right, I have just forgotten to mention that. The maps regarding the DV operation I have not scaled, I did spend an amount of time to find those stubborn bastards and had some resistance, so I moved on through the list. I have not gotten back to those maps, when I do I will update the .ols with the definitions and changes. I updated the typo in the current .ols btw |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
k0mpresd
|
|
« Reply #10 on: January 15, 2013, 08:33:04 PM »
|
|
|
ok, thanks for the clarification. just making sure i wasnt going blind.
so, there are maps that are ok to leave out and not scale?
im assuming all the ones you have not added to the ols?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Bische
|
|
« Reply #11 on: January 16, 2013, 10:55:32 AM »
|
|
|
ok, thanks for the clarification. just making sure i wasnt going blind.
so, there are maps that are ok to leave out and not scale?
im assuming all the ones you have not added to the ols?
NP man Well it is up to the user to decide which maps he/she want to scale, some of them are not "needed" for this work, but if not scaled the driving experience can be greatly compromised lol The maps I have not scaled is those n249 DV related maps, not scaling them down will make threshold for DV actuation from the vac reservoir less responsive on paper. I viewed my logs and didnt see any signs of boost blow-off being "slow", so I skipped them going after the negative turbo load maps instead(which gave me some awkward jerkiness). And I have not gone back to get those maps, when I do, I will update the .ols. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
lulu2003
Full Member
Karma: +11/-1
 Offline
Posts: 242
|
|
« Reply #12 on: January 18, 2013, 08:00:00 AM »
|
|
|
great work!
what about the next limits like load(?) that were already discussed?
Cannot find the thread in a hurry.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Bische
|
|
« Reply #13 on: January 18, 2013, 10:54:22 AM »
|
|
|
It was ps_w, that variable is also scaled with this hack. If your file already have 16bit load axes in your timing maps, I cant come to think of any more limits ...aaaand I have a 4bar TDI MAP sensor on the kitchen counter, but I must not touch it.. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
britishturbo
|
|
« Reply #14 on: January 21, 2013, 09:48:35 AM »
|
|
|
Do I have to offer up a bounty for the first person to get the mods documented for the M Box? Haha :-P
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
