|
julex
|
 |
« on: January 09, 2013, 05:18:23 PM »
|
|
|
So how do you exactly force ECU into locked WGDC mode with scaled MAF to keep load under threshold for accurate fueling?
I was able to force it into WGDC with high load but it appears that over load 191 the fueling just bombs out, it doesn't add any more fuel resulting in leaner and leaner mixture as maf flow increases... or that is my observation.
With load under 191, I just cannot hop over boost regulation and get locked in sub 23psi WGDC.
Help please... solid info or actual tune file that works on any GT turbo would be greatly appreciated.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 31, 2013, 09:03:28 PM by julex »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #1 on: January 09, 2013, 05:35:31 PM »
|
|
|
Look at the LDRPID module for the first answer.
And 2nd answer, it goes lean because you probably max out ps_w. Log ps_w.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
julex
|
|
« Reply #2 on: January 09, 2013, 05:49:09 PM »
|
|
|
Let me rephrase it. All the limiters have proper high values to hump over the 23psi limit, KFLDRL table proper caps, KFLDIMX values that are way too high for tial 770 anyway... It just looks like the ECU requests the load but it doesn't want to go over some boost limit... I am at a loss.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #3 on: January 09, 2013, 06:11:30 PM »
|
|
|
Log ps_w
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
julex
|
|
« Reply #4 on: January 09, 2013, 07:53:15 PM »
|
|
|
ok, I figured it out. My KFMIRL was funky and I would never hit 100%. Thanks all.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #5 on: January 09, 2013, 07:55:51 PM »
|
|
|
That wont fix your fuel issues..
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
julex
|
|
« Reply #6 on: January 10, 2013, 01:52:48 PM »
|
|
|
That wont fix your fuel issues..
I don't have fuel issues nyet. I just illustrated in my original post that using some of my old tunes I was able to run over 23psi but it had another problem which is ps_w/load going over the edge. ps_w is safely under 2550 on my underscaled maf now (1.5 factor so far). AFRs are exactly what I tell ECU to use, to the dot. Which is amazing. Now I am fighting wild timing oscillations which ride 15 -> 0 -> 18 -> -3 and so on killing whole performance. It must be ARMD based and I just made modifications to KFDMDAROS and upgraded my me7 defs and cfgs to log all of these obscure things to show me where the timing intervention comes from. One thing for certain, 770s can really punch at 32psi even with screwed up timing and small meth nozzles running windshield washer fluid [  ]. Already ordered 10gallon nozzles (I have 5 gallon ones in now) and will fill in proper mix as I was battling bad bumper washer coupling that was leaking like a sieve. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
phila_dot
|
|
« Reply #7 on: January 10, 2013, 02:35:23 PM »
|
|
|
Boost issue is fixed?
Possible, but unlikely that the torque intervention is from ARMD.
When I get home, I can give you a handful of condition bits to log that will narrow down the source if you would like.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
s5fourdoor
|
|
« Reply #8 on: January 10, 2013, 03:20:02 PM »
|
|
|
Boost issue is fixed?
Possible, but unlikely that the torque intervention is from ARMD.
When I get home, I can give you a handful of condition bits to log that will narrow down the source if you would like.
OMFG. can you summarize that? I f'n hate the timing interventions so much. They are wickedly difficult to understand, let alone track. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #9 on: January 10, 2013, 03:41:34 PM »
|
|
|
Possible, but unlikely that the torque intervention is from ARMD.
Agreed for big turbo/laggy setups. When I get home, I can give you a handful of condition bits to log that will narrow down the source if you would like.
I will be sure to add that list to the s4wiki |
|
|
|
|
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 #10 on: January 10, 2013, 06:47:41 PM »
|
|
|
These bits should help identify the root of the intervention.
The torque variables that I added summarize the torque fast path.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 11, 2013, 04:10:53 PM by phila_dot »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #11 on: January 10, 2013, 07:14:52 PM »
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
julex
|
|
« Reply #12 on: January 10, 2013, 08:18:04 PM »
|
|
|
Thanks! I will log tomorrow to see what makes for a bumpy ride. I am getting quite a roller coaster for timing.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
julex
|
|
« Reply #13 on: January 11, 2013, 09:58:16 AM »
|
|
|
ok, now I could use expert opinion.
Car got faster, but I am still seeing it falling on its face timing wise very frequently (see jpg).
Please look at row 87, first timing drop. It shows b_zwvs set to 1 which means fast torque path intervention? How to circumvent this if I am otherwise requesting far more torque and have no limits that are even near load 180 (where the drop took place)?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
masterj
|
|
« Reply #14 on: January 11, 2013, 10:04:12 AM »
|
|
|
ok, now I could use expert opinion.
Car got faster, but I am still seeing it falling on its face timing wise very frequently (see jpg).
Please look at row 87, first timing drop. It shows b_zwvs set to 1 which means fast torque path intervention? How to circumvent this if I am otherwise requesting far more torque and have no limits that are even near load 180 (where the drop took place)?
Kill ARMD --> dmar_w is intervening... Set TMAR map to FF and it will never start  Also check B_zwvz and tell me if it is set to 1, because there are more things that could set b_zwvs=1 |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 11, 2013, 10:08:03 AM by masterj »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
