omniscient
Newbie
Karma: +0/-0
 Offline
Posts: 8
|
 |
« on: August 29, 2013, 11:05:58 PM »
|
|
|
I've been reading and playing with OLS for two days now with some ME7 files, I've started to get a grasp on the way it works. I'm used to the late 80's - mid 90's Motronics found on BMWs with a low and high MAF table and a separate WOT column. Perhaps I'm just over thinking it? Do KFLBTS and LAMFA just control low - high load and WOT is based solely on MAF readings and injector constant or are those two tables responsible for fueling from 0-100% throttle? I'm not looking for easy answers, I'm just driving myself nuts.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #1 on: August 29, 2013, 11:08:02 PM »
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
omniscient
Newbie
Karma: +0/-0
Offline
Posts: 8
|
|
« Reply #2 on: August 29, 2013, 11:44:21 PM »
|
|
|
Right on! Thank you! I notice on different DME's it looks like LAMFA has less of a priority than BTS. Does this mean that particular DME pretty much relies on the BTS tables since the threshold is a mere 400c?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #3 on: August 29, 2013, 11:52:03 PM »
|
|
|
ME7 has no "priority" for open loop fueling. Lowest target lambda always wins.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ddillenger
|
|
« Reply #4 on: August 30, 2013, 12:02:14 AM »
|
|
|
Right on! Thank you! I notice on different DME's it looks like LAMFA has less of a priority than BTS. Does this mean that particular DME pretty much relies on the BTS tables since the threshold is a mere 400c?
Check out the M-box (S4 8D0907551M), LAMFA is disabled via the axis scaling. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
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 experience!
Email/Google chat:
DDillenger84(at)gmail(dot)com
Email>PM
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #5 on: August 30, 2013, 12:09:32 AM »
|
|
|
http://s4wiki.com/wiki/Tuning#LAMFAW"LAMFA - requested lambda. Not very flexible for high load enrichment, uses requested load instead of actual load. Also, the stock LAMFA load axis is (incorrectly) restricted to 0.5%-1.0%. You will have to change it to full range (50%-100%) to use LAMFA, otherwise, the 1% column will be used at ALL requested load points!"
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
omniscient
Newbie
Karma: +0/-0
Offline
Posts: 8
|
|
« Reply #6 on: September 01, 2013, 07:30:59 PM »
|
|
|
Thanks, guys! I really appreciate the input! So far this stuff doesn't seem much more difficult than the older stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
omniscient
Newbie
Karma: +0/-0
Offline
Posts: 8
|
|
« Reply #7 on: September 01, 2013, 11:07:42 PM »
|
|
|
So with optimum crank angle, that map is used when lambda = 1 and then it switches to the other timing map for any <1 conditions?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ddillenger
|
|
« Reply #8 on: September 01, 2013, 11:19:45 PM »
|
|
|
So with optimum crank angle, that map is used when lambda = 1 and then it switches to the other timing map for any <1 conditions?
KFZWOP/2 are used in the torque model, not actual timing. Current timing is compared against optimum (the values in KFZWOP) to determine ignition angle efficiency. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
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 experience!
Email/Google chat:
DDillenger84(at)gmail(dot)com
Email>PM
|
|
|
omniscient
Newbie
Karma: +0/-0
Offline
Posts: 8
|
|
« Reply #9 on: September 01, 2013, 11:56:55 PM »
|
|
|
Confusion sets in. So is KFZWOP the theoretical angle for optimum torque, which isn't possible due to physics of a turbo engine? I'm reading about "KFZWOP/KFMDS - Re-interpolate if you alter the KFMIOP load axis" trying to figure out it's relation to KFMIOP.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ddillenger
|
|
« Reply #10 on: September 02, 2013, 12:09:52 AM »
|
|
|
You have it correct.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
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 experience!
Email/Google chat:
DDillenger84(at)gmail(dot)com
Email>PM
|
|
|
omniscient
Newbie
Karma: +0/-0
Offline
Posts: 8
|
|
« Reply #11 on: September 02, 2013, 08:06:35 AM »
|
|
|
So what is KWZFOP's weight in the calculation? If I wanted to change the timing would I alter KFZW and KFZWOP?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #12 on: September 02, 2013, 10:24:58 AM »
|
|
|
So what is KWZFOP's weight in the calculation? If I wanted to change the timing would I alter KFZW and KFZWOP?
short answer, KFZW long answer, you need to read up on torque based EFI systems  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
omniscient
Newbie
Karma: +0/-0
Offline
Posts: 8
|
|
« Reply #13 on: September 02, 2013, 10:07:44 PM »
|
|
|
That's what I'm doing now. It's really a personal goal but I'd also like to be able to offer my customers an option other than standard re-flashing with the newer Motronic stuff. I'm not a fan at all of off the shelf tunes and chips, I'd eventually like to be able to tune these cars like I would any other.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
