I haven't tweaked it any more as I have been pretty busy, but when I get back to the country I might give it a shot.

Maybe some others can chime in and provide some insight.

Stock k03? A k03 won't hold more than 1bar to redline, if that.

Pablo ,

Thank you !

Am I correct in saying that the axis is plsolr_w  , defined as "relative target(desired) charge pressure" , which is manifold pressure less ambient = gauge pressure ?

Thanks

So, did anyone achieve any real results by using this method or is it just a theory?

I mapped out the boost at various fixed duty levels using KFLDRAPP. The WG on the turbo has rather small operating range (around 15% - 45%) so I tested with small intervals.
While the boost response to the fixed duty cycle is sane, the values calculated for KFLDRL based on the results are not.

It didn´t make any other difference besides increasing the delta between ldtvr_w (pre-lin) and ldtvm (post-lin). Even with PID already shut down (B_lddy = 0) the ldtvr_w doesn´t follow KFLDIMX at all.
With plsolr_w at 1000mbar, ldtvr_w output is lower than KFLDIMX specifies for the pressure (28% vs. 35%). The modifications are not coming from KFLDIOPU, LDIATA or KFLDIWL either as these maps are zero by default.

Basically I am trying to get overboost in control. The boost always spikes 300-400mbar higher than requested, eventhou KFLDIMX contains the correct values which are required to keep the boost stable at the specific plsolr levels.
The problem is that I cannot get the ECU to follow these values. In regions where the turbo wakes up (2700 - 3200rpm) the desired duty cycle is exceeded and at higher rpms (>5500) it droops down. PID isn´t too helpful in
controlling the boost spike, since lde has reached zero (B_lddy = 0) and the PID has entered in stable state therefore making little to no difference.

The turbo I am using has somewhat similar characteristics as K04-064, however the waste gate characteristics are drastically different.
According to VAG the actuator of K04-064 starts to crack at 300mbar, has total travel of 13mm and has "calibration pressure" of 500mbar with 4.25mm travel.

The waste gate on this F23T hybrid turbo starts to crack at 483mbar and it is able to hold around 572mbar with 0% duty.

When looking at the stock KFLDIMX map of a car using this K04-064 turbo (S3), it is clear that the map is perfectly linear until 3500rpm.
Even at the higher RPMs the deviation from linear is only couple percent.

There is only one N75 model for TFSI.

Yeah, the TFSI and TMPI N75s are completely different.
You could probably make an adapter, but I don´t think the issue has anything to do with the N75.

Most likely the wastegate actuator (which came with the turbo) itself is a POS. It is some sort of crappy adjustable "high lift" actuator, which has significantly higher cracking pressure / different travel than the OEM ones.
It´s cracking pressure varies depending on the temperature and generally it feels like it is extremely sensitive.

But regardless, IMO the method described in this thread for calibrating the KFLDRL doesn´t appear to provide any sane values. I´m pissed about the fact that there is no real information about it The few phrases in FR and the patents mentioning it are useless.
However based on the FR it seems like KFLDRL is something that is calibrated by trial and error, and isn´t anything you can just calculate based on other measurements.

Regardless, the boost control in MEx. is a huge let down to me.
 

You could not be more wrong. The FR describes exactly how to fill it. Those of us who understand this have made tools to calculate it based on measured boost. There is absolutely 0 guesswork involved.
Boost PID calibration is fairly simple in ME7/MED9 once you know what you are doing.

The pilot logic is crap in that it is an I limiter, not a true pilot map like on EDCxx.