Beaviz
Full Member
Karma: +8/-4
 Offline
Posts: 190
|
 |
« Reply #30 on: February 07, 2014, 02:22:51 PM »
|
|
|
Great info there! Thanks! This gives me the following calculation for my APR pump: RQUAHDPK = ( 9.5 / 2 ) ^ 2 = 22.5625 Which inserted in the previous equation gives the following for VHDP: 22.5625 * 3,14 * 5 = 354.23 |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 07, 2014, 02:24:30 PM by Beaviz »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
_mumin_
Jr. Member
Karma: +2/-0
Offline
Posts: 46
|
|
« Reply #31 on: February 10, 2014, 01:33:16 PM »
|
|
|
Which inserted in the previous equation gives the following for VHDP:
22.5625 * 3,14 * 5 = 354.23
or 22.5625 * 3,14 * 5,4 = 382,57 if you have CDLx engine  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Beaviz
Full Member
Karma: +8/-4
Offline
Posts: 190
|
|
« Reply #32 on: February 13, 2014, 01:02:39 PM »
|
|
|
I can confirm that after changing the values to the above posted, the logged rail pressure is spot on with my APR pump.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
msundercober
Jr. Member
Karma: +3/-0
Offline
Posts: 46
|
|
« Reply #33 on: February 28, 2014, 03:38:17 PM »
|
|
|
Autotech HPFP :
RQUAHDPK = ( 9.8 / 2 ) ^ 2 = 24,01
VHDP : 24,01 * pi* 5 = 377,1481980634546782774403381627
VHDP ( CDLx ) : 24,01 * pi * 5,4 = 407,32005390853105253963556521572
( referred to the article on the website )
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 28, 2014, 03:52:39 PM by msundercober »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Claudietto81
Newbie
Karma: +0/-0
Offline
Posts: 15
|
|
« Reply #34 on: May 10, 2014, 10:18:27 AM »
|
|
|
It was said in this topic that with TTRS/RS3 lpfp it is not necessary to change the pwm controller but only changing duty cycle in KFFLAF.
Seen that i don't know which dutycycle to apply i can use the OEM values of rs3 KFFLAF or i am completely wrong??
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
BenR
Jr. Member
Karma: +2/-1
Offline
Posts: 38
|
|
« Reply #35 on: May 15, 2014, 03:24:56 PM »
|
|
|
Ive not actually changed KFFLAF as there is another 1x1 map that will give you a higher DC.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
S2evo1
Jr. Member
Karma: +0/-0
Offline
Posts: 43
|
|
« Reply #36 on: May 28, 2014, 01:06:51 AM »
|
|
|
Its abit strange as TTRS and RS3 have same VHDP as 2.0TFSI with OEM pump, but TTRS/RS3 pump have diffrent area and stroke on its OEM pump.
With the calculations used her OEM VHDP should be 25x3,14x4,5=353,25 but it is in OEM sw 251.00 same as 2.0TFSI with smaller pump?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Beaviz
Full Member
Karma: +8/-4
Offline
Posts: 190
|
|
« Reply #37 on: May 28, 2014, 04:52:01 AM »
|
|
|
I agree! That does seem strange.
The same goes for the files _mumin_ has been looking at.
It could be interesting to take a look at the assembler code for this area to see if VHDP is actually used or what it is used for. I guess that sometimes the FR is not 100% correct.
What are the values for RQUAHDPK and SKHDPMX in the TTRS/RS3 files?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
RaraK
|
|
« Reply #38 on: May 28, 2014, 05:33:16 AM »
|
|
|
I agree! That does seem strange.
The same goes for the files _mumin_ has been looking at.
It could be interesting to take a look at the assembler code for this area to see if VHDP is actually used or what it is used for. I guess that sometimes the FR is not 100% correct.
What are the values for RQUAHDPK and SKHDPMX in the TTRS/RS3 files?
factory cal shit! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RS-MAD
Jr. Member
Karma: +3/-1
Offline
Posts: 46
|
|
« Reply #39 on: May 28, 2014, 06:59:47 AM »
|
|
|
Its abit strange as TTRS and RS3 have same VHDP as 2.0TFSI with OEM pump, but TTRS/RS3 pump have diffrent area and stroke on its OEM pump.
With the calculations used her OEM VHDP should be 25x3,14x4,5=353,25 but it is in OEM sw 251.00 same as 2.0TFSI with smaller pump?
Its same in 5.0 TFSI software. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
S2evo1
Jr. Member
Karma: +0/-0
Offline
Posts: 43
|
|
« Reply #40 on: May 29, 2014, 01:52:32 AM »
|
|
|
I agree! That does seem strange.
The same goes for the files _mumin_ has been looking at.
It could be interesting to take a look at the assembler code for this area to see if VHDP is actually used or what it is used for. I guess that sometimes the FR is not 100% correct.
What are the values for RQUAHDPK and SKHDPMX in the TTRS/RS3 files?
Its 25 and 4.5 on TTRS/RS3 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Claudietto81
Newbie
Karma: +0/-0
Offline
Posts: 15
|
|
« Reply #41 on: June 04, 2014, 01:06:50 PM »
|
|
|
Ive not actually changed KFFLAF as there is another 1x1 map that will give you a higher DC.
Thanks for the answer Ben, can you indicate the name of this single value? just to understand what are you talking about... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
BenR
Jr. Member
Karma: +2/-1
Offline
Posts: 38
|
|
« Reply #42 on: June 09, 2014, 08:58:37 PM »
|
|
|
Thanks for the answer Ben, can you indicate the name of this single value? just to understand what are you talking about...
LEPWMMX |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Claudietto81
Newbie
Karma: +0/-0
Offline
Posts: 15
|
|
« Reply #43 on: June 11, 2014, 11:35:32 AM »
|
|
|
So Ben basically you are saying that there is no need to modify KFFLAF but only to decrease the maximum dutycycle value (by LEPWMMX) until your PWM module won't go in overheating and the car won't shut down. Is it correct my thought??
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Beaviz
Full Member
Karma: +8/-4
Offline
Posts: 190
|
|
« Reply #44 on: June 17, 2014, 03:18:23 AM »
|
|
|
Do any of you have the stock values from PRNL1 and PGBDVHDO from an RS4 4.2 FSI?
I can read elsewhere that the RS4 PRV should open at 136bar/13.6MPa.
In the stock 2.0 TFSI file the values are 12.0MPa (PRNL1) and 11.8MPa (PGBDVHDO). According to the FR, PGBDVHDO is the "pressure limit in the high pressure rail where the pressure regulating valve opens". So I guess that this should be set to 13.6MPa when installing an RS4 PRV?
The FR says that PRNL1 is the "opening pressure of the pressure regulating valve". My guess would also be that this value should be 13.6MPa. But I sense that I misunderstood something here (my german is getting a bit rusty).
What are the difference between PRNL1 and PGBDVHDO? Is PRNL1 only used for diagnose and should hence be a little higher than the actual value where the PRV opens?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
