Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9]
Author Topic: (Renamed): ARMD inerventions (anti-bucking) final solution for WOT  (Read 88176 times)
littco
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +52/-7
Offline Offline

Posts: 903


« Reply #120 on: February 01, 2013, 02:02:42 AM »

Can you please clarify your details on DMARMX too?



I am running a different flash version namely the 018CB

but here's a copy of the stock DMARMX from the file and the tunerpro definition

DMARMX has the axis TMOT,

Also WPEDU is the lower threshold limit for Bucking. This is set to 100% on mine. Have you tried setting it to 90% so WOT the bucking isn't active?
Logged
julex
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +79/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #121 on: February 01, 2013, 07:30:22 AM »

Interesting. I've always had the right value. Not sure where the wrong value came from

"KFDMDADP","0x1de1c","Upper threshold for torque intervention under dashpot","8x6","16 Bit (LoHi)","-","%","%","-","0.001526","0.003052","1.0","1.001056","20.002808","0x290","0x3334"
"KFDMDARO","0x1de7c","Upper threshold for torque intervention","8x6","16 Bit (LoHi)","-","%","%","-","0.001526","0.003052","1.0","1.001056","20.002808","0x290","0x3334"


I am not sure, It was either inherited from a very old XDF pack or I picked it from PRJ's auto generated XDF which has wrong location since KFDMDARO and KFDMDADP are identical and what his auto generator hit first and marked as table's location.

Anyway, I am happy this enigma (on my end) is sorted out after all the time I spent trying to fix hardware problems which are still there.
Logged
s5fourdoor
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +33/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 617


« Reply #122 on: February 01, 2013, 12:26:50 PM »

Here's the XDF reflecting all of the changes including the suggestions above.
Has KIFZGHG, DMARMX, KFDMDADP, KFDMDARO, KFDMDAROS, and most of the relevant axis tables.
Please look in section ARMD:  10.50 Antiruckel of this tunerpro xdf.

Logged
julex
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +79/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #123 on: April 01, 2014, 10:27:29 AM »

Back from dead just to point out one thing.

Albeit my ARMD interventions went away after fixing harness, I still have large RPM/S fluctuations as pointed out earlier in the thread... I thought it is not normal so I grabbed several third party logs from forum and what do you know... Looks like everyone has wild fluctuations in RPM/S graph so it is just the way ECU calculates this stuff that is not very accurate. That puts and end to my OCD on this subject.


My chart (mbox_large) actually looks pretty good considering how other do.



« Last Edit: April 01, 2014, 10:29:56 AM by julex » Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +607/-168
Offline Offline

Posts: 12256


WWW
« Reply #124 on: April 01, 2014, 11:05:31 AM »

rpm/sec has noise because of time data quantization jitter..

a HUGE problem when numerically differentiating... which is why ecuxplot has such a heavy rpm and rpm/sec filter...
Logged

ME7.1 tuning guide
ECUx Plot
ME7Sum checksum
Trim heatmap tool

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 ex
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.036 seconds with 17 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0s, 0q)