|
Rick
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: September 16, 2013, 11:01:33 PM »
|
|
|
rescale tables for the load you want, use a boost controller for the turbo, patch code for single Lambda sensor.
Rick
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #16 on: September 17, 2013, 12:41:35 AM »
|
|
|
not my car, but i will look into the hardware and do some logging.
what i dont understand is how this is supposed to work when KFMIRL and KFMIOP are set up the way them are..
can i just increase KFMIRL to represent the reality, and then extend/adjust KFMIOP load axis accordingly? (beyond 100% as in other FI ME7.x)
atm the KFMIRL in this guys file requests ~125, BUT, the KFMIOP only stretches as far as 100 in the axis, which would cause major torque interventions.. which would explain things.
LAMFA/BTS should be the desired fueling strategy.. will search for more maps.. =)
How does this relate to the topic title of "boost fueling"? This has absolutely nothing to do with it, now you are talking about the torque model... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
sn00k
|
|
« Reply #17 on: September 17, 2013, 05:48:48 AM »
|
|
|
How does this relate to the topic title of "boost fueling"?
This has absolutely nothing to do with it, now you are talking about the torque model...
not everyone can be at your level of me7-knowledge prj, you need to try and think backwards ~10 years and go from that standpoint..  sure, the fueling works just fine running a MONSTER turbo and three s/c at the same time, without even touching the software, but as soon as you reach even 0.1bar boost everything falls flat and goes to crappers, missfiring, lambda skyrockets, throttlecut etc. with "sort the boost fueling" i was asking for the most BASIC ways to make sure the engine still have fuel at 0.1bar boost and above. i wasnt talking ASM coding, specific systems/paths in the ECU/code etc.. i.e why wont it add fuel once the load goes past 100%, and why is everything setup the way it is in the n/a ecus, could it be altered? and yes, so it seems.. even tho most major software developers for R32-turbo kits DONT do it this way. so, back to the questions.. what kind of power will the R32 MAF support? and how do i go about to underscale it? (if i need to do this..) |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 17, 2013, 05:58:42 AM by sn00k »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #18 on: September 17, 2013, 06:14:04 AM »
|
|
|
not everyone can be at your level of me7-knowledge prj, you need to try and think backwards ~10 years and go from that standpoint.. sure, the fueling works just fine running a MONSTER turbo and three s/c at the same time, without even touching the software, but as soon as you reach even 0.1bar boost everything falls flat and goes to crappers, missfiring, lambda skyrockets, throttlecut etc. Absolutely nothing happens to fueling as long as you don't max ps_w, the MAF and have injectors dialed in right. i.e why wont it add fuel once the load goes past 100% It does. You're wrong, fix the hardware problems. Log the car instead of just typing and typing and typing and typing. What kind of power your MAF supports - boost it and see where uhfm_w hits 5V, then you know it's time for a bigger one... So much incorrect theory and pointless yadda yadda... tuning a car is not writing fantasy fiction, it is a game of hard mathematical numbers, so start providing concrete numbers and logs. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 17, 2013, 06:15:36 AM by prj »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
sn00k
|
|
« Reply #19 on: September 17, 2013, 08:01:28 AM »
|
|
|
Absolutely nothing happens to fueling as long as you don't max ps_w, the MAF and have injectors dialed in right.It does. You're wrong, fix the hardware problems. Log the car instead of just typing and typing and typing and typing.
What kind of power your MAF supports - boost it and see where uhfm_w hits 5V, then you know it's time for a bigger one...
So much incorrect theory and pointless yadda yadda... tuning a car is not writing fantasy fiction, it is a game of hard mathematical numbers, so start providing concrete numbers and logs.
Trying to sort things in my head before i even approach the car in question, this based on the very little info i have from the project. dunno if ps_w is involved in this at all? since theres a lack of map-sensor, pressure maps, pid and other boost-related stuff. MAF should support the flow, and injectors are dialed in the same as in a few others cars that runs spot on. ofc ill take a look at the hardware first chance i get, and start logging. ill take your word for it that fueling works above 100% load, im sure it does. so i will have to tune KFMIRL/KFMIOP to allow more then 100% load to begin with.. since it looks like thats the problem atm. this is no fantasy fiction, gathering other peoples opinions/experiences before approaching, troubleshooting and tuning a vehicle is called preparation anyone with info on how to underscale the MAF? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ddillenger
|
|
« Reply #20 on: September 17, 2013, 09:00:42 AM »
|
|
|
Use a larger MAF housing, or decrease MLHFM proportionately to the amount you wish to underscale. Ideally, try to find an application that uses the same sensor part number in a smaller housings and steal the transfer from that file for a true underscale.
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
sn00k
|
|
« Reply #21 on: September 17, 2013, 09:20:18 AM »
|
|
|
Use a larger MAF housing, or decrease MLHFM proportionately to the amount you wish to underscale. Ideally, try to find an application that uses the same sensor part number in a smaller housings and steal the transfer from that file for a true underscale.
ah, ok, thanks  then the fueling need to be scaled up by the same amount? KRKTE? (and ofc timing maps etc calibrated for the new load) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ddillenger
|
|
« Reply #22 on: September 17, 2013, 11:01:20 AM »
|
|
|
ah, ok, thanks then the fueling need to be scaled up by the same amount? KRKTE? (and ofc timing maps etc calibrated for the new load) In a nutshell, yes. |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Brumbassen
Newbie
Karma: +1/-0
 Offline
Posts: 18
|
|
« Reply #23 on: September 17, 2013, 11:14:08 AM »
|
|
|
ah, ok, thanks then the fueling need to be scaled up by the same amount? KRKTE? (and ofc timing maps etc calibrated for the new load) the file i sent you is with std MAF and it is running around 470bhp in my other file iam running this maf 0 280 218 015, 750cc injectors running the HGP manifold with split wall for running 2 lambda sensors before the turbo and 2 after the cat`s |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #24 on: September 17, 2013, 03:52:53 PM »
|
|
|
Trying to sort things in my head before i even approach the car in question, this based on the very little info i have from the project.
dunno if ps_w is involved in this at all? since theres a lack of map-sensor, pressure maps, pid and other boost-related stuff.
MAF should support the flow, and injectors are dialed in the same as in a few others cars that runs spot on. What does ps_w have to do with a MAP sensor? The answer is - nothing. You have a long long way to go, you need to look at how filling and fueling works in ME7, and then you will understand why what you posted earlier is ridiculous and why I called you on it. anyone with info on how to underscale the MAF? There is abslutely no need to underscale the MAF. Not until you hit ps_w limit anyway. As for torque management - IRL and IOP works the same way as on any ME7. On some implementations there is a hard cap at 100% load which will need a code change though, on others there is none... MDMAX and MDFUE is where you need to look. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 17, 2013, 03:55:59 PM by prj »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
sn00k
|
|
« Reply #25 on: September 17, 2013, 04:40:28 PM »
|
|
|
What does ps_w have to do with a MAP sensor? The answer is - nothing.
You have a long long way to go, you need to look at how filling and fueling works in ME7, and then you will understand why what you posted earlier is ridiculous and why I called you on it.
There is abslutely no need to underscale the MAF. Not until you hit ps_w limit anyway.
As for torque management - IRL and IOP works the same way as on any ME7. On some implementations there is a hard cap at 100% load which will need a code change though, on others there is none...
MDMAX and MDFUE is where you need to look.
so, there is indeed a hard cap in some cases.. perhaps thats why HGP never touched the IRL/IOP tables.. and scaled the MAF. yeah, i know i have a long way to go with understanding all this, as of now i feel quite confident i can tune most "stage 1-3" on the ME7s by manipulating things, but thats it. making this n/a ECU work with boost is perhaps the next step, and its indeed time to do some more reading into how the filling/fueling/load works in the ME7. i was under the impression PS_W referred to 'absolute intake manifold pressure', which is why i thought it might have nothing to do with this since the engine is "blind" to manifold pressure. So, time to find an english FR and do some reading. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #26 on: September 17, 2013, 06:25:04 PM »
|
|
|
i was under the impression PS_W referred to 'absolute intake manifold pressure', which is why i thought it might have nothing to do with this since the engine is "blind" to manifold pressure. ps_w is indeed absolute manifold pressure, and all ME7 works based on pressure. The charge pressure sensor you are on about is not a MAP - it is only used for charge pressure control, not for calculating fuel outside of limp mode. As I said before, less talk, more facts. Read, read, read and figure out how things really are, not what gets regurgitated on the forums over and over again often with no other base than "someone at some point said so" |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
NOTORIOUS VR
Administrator
Hero Member
Karma: +58/-7
Offline
Posts: 1056
|
|
« Reply #27 on: September 19, 2013, 10:15:45 AM »
|
|
|
Well without even asking any specific questions I just got a ton of info as usual from prj.. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
NOTORIOUS VR
Administrator
Hero Member
Karma: +58/-7
Offline
Posts: 1056
|
|
« Reply #28 on: September 23, 2013, 09:34:06 AM »
|
|
|
Actually I do have a question... Is it right to assume that KFWDKMSN should be carefully looked at as well in this situation?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #29 on: September 24, 2013, 06:43:14 AM »
|
|
|
Actually I do have a question... Is it right to assume that KFWDKMSN should be carefully looked at as well in this situation? Yes, and not only that, entire throttle control needs to be looked at. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
