|
nyet
|
 |
« Reply #90 on: November 23, 2015, 10:33:37 PM »
|
|
|
The boost was even more erratic compared to situation where linearization is disabled.
Which means nothing if you didn't get EVERYTHING else 100% right. That isn't how PIDs work. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
ME7.1 tuning guideECUx PlotME7Sum checksumTrim heatmap toolPlease 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
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #91 on: November 24, 2015, 12:47:36 AM »
|
|
|
The sheet is not correct, it is old and missing a crucial component.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Nottingham
Full Member
Karma: +13/-1
 Offline
Posts: 204
|
|
« Reply #92 on: November 24, 2015, 04:35:58 AM »
|
|
|
Right.
I guess you´re not going to tell what is the correct method to calculate KFLDRL then?
I can stare at the "Figure 7" (of the patent) for days without getting anywhere.
I can also read the description of KFDRL is FR as many times as I want, but it won´t take me anywhere either since it is in German.
The translation through Google translate isn´t even close enough accurate for something like this.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #93 on: November 24, 2015, 06:23:07 AM »
|
|
|
The sheet is not correct, it is old and missing a crucial component.
Wait, so you are going to tell everyone that the worksheet that you posted is wrong, yet do nothing to fix it and continue to be cryptic about what is wrong? You've told us (me personally) in the past, "if you aren't doing it this way, then you are doing it wrong" with the pretense of using your stupid excel sheet.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
elRey
|
|
« Reply #94 on: November 24, 2015, 08:09:21 AM »
|
|
|
Step 1) log ldimx_w and extrapolate a general ldimx OFFSET from existing KFLDIMX
Step 2) with linear KFDLR log boost vs duty
Step 3) using spread sheet extrapolate new KFDRL AND new temp KFLDIMX
Step 4) extrapolate new final KFLDIMX by running new temp KFLDIMX thru new KFDRL then minus OFFSET
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 24, 2015, 08:31:16 AM by elRey »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #95 on: November 24, 2015, 09:24:12 AM »
|
|
|
Wait, so you are going to tell everyone that the worksheet that you posted is wrong, yet do nothing to fix it and continue to be cryptic about what is wrong? You've told us (me personally) in the past, "if you aren't doing it this way, then you are doing it wrong" with the pretense of using your stupid excel sheet. I have work to do, I do not have time to update the excel sheet. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #96 on: November 24, 2015, 09:26:12 AM »
|
|
|
Step 1) log ldimx_w and extrapolate a general ldimx OFFSET from existing KFLDIMX
Step 2) with linear KFDLR log boost vs duty
Step 3) using spread sheet extrapolate new KFDRL AND new temp KFLDIMX
Step 4) extrapolate new final KFLDIMX by running new temp KFLDIMX thru new KFDRL then minus OFFSET
This is correct. Step 4 is missing from the excel sheet I posted a long time ago. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Nottingham
Full Member
Karma: +13/-1
Offline
Posts: 204
|
|
« Reply #97 on: November 24, 2015, 09:38:18 AM »
|
|
|
Step 2 can be done with CWMDAPP?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
catbed
|
|
« Reply #98 on: November 24, 2015, 10:22:45 AM »
|
|
|
Step 2 can be done with CWMDAPP?
yes, with KFLDRAPP for WGDC |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Nottingham
Full Member
Karma: +13/-1
Offline
Posts: 204
|
|
« Reply #99 on: November 24, 2015, 11:59:48 PM »
|
|
|
Step 1) log ldimx_w and extrapolate a general ldimx OFFSET from existing KFLDIMX
Step 2) with linear KFDLR log boost vs duty
Step 3) using spread sheet extrapolate new KFDRL AND new temp KFLDIMX
Step 4) extrapolate new final KFLDIMX by running new temp KFLDIMX thru new KFDRL then minus OFFSET
I known the difference of my current DIMX and ldimx_w (ldimx_w is significantly higher, but parallel otherwise). I´ve logged boost vs. duty by using KFLDRAPP with CWMDAPP for the full range I need to linearize. What do you mean by "extrapolate"? In the attached picture the delta between ldimx_w and KFLDIMX is ~10.6 @ 3000rpm. Which Excel? Yours, prj´s and what version? Thanks! |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 25, 2015, 12:02:37 AM by Nottingham »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #100 on: November 25, 2015, 05:08:11 AM »
|
|
|
Just had more time to read elRey's reply.
Not fully correct.
You need to run fixed DC and log the car. Better in a high gear/slow ramp rate on dyno, but you can do some manual correction after and get away with 3rd gear pulls.
Do 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 and so on. The higher you can go the better, but there are always component limits.
Based on this data you need to generate a KFLDRL table, then a KFLDIMX table with inverse lookup through your KFLDRL.
This can be done with a spreadsheet.
Current LDIMX and offset is completely irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
elRey
|
|
« Reply #101 on: November 25, 2015, 07:35:26 AM »
|
|
|
Just had more time to read elRey's reply.
Not fully correct.
You need to run fixed DC and log the car. Better in a high gear/slow ramp rate on dyno, but you can do some manual correction after and get away with 3rd gear pulls.
Do 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 and so on. The higher you can go the better, but there are always component limits. That's exactly what was meant by step 2 and seems the others knew that. Based on this data you need to generate a KFLDRL table, same as step 3 then a KFLDIMX table with inverse lookup through your KFLDRL.
This can be done with a spreadsheet. step 4 Current LDIMX and offset is completely irrelevant.
If your new KFLDIMX will have this OFFSET applied when in use, how is it irrelevant? |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 25, 2015, 11:42:31 AM by elRey »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
elRey
|
|
« Reply #102 on: November 25, 2015, 11:41:55 AM »
|
|
|
Along with the subtraction of the OFFSET, here's a couple more tips...
Don't just subtract OFFSET from KFLDIMX globally. That would result in no nodes equaling max duty. You want to be smart about applying offset to only the non-maxed nodes and max nodes adjacent to non-max nodes if needed.
Increase the last axis node of KFDRL duty axis to reflect your max duty if greater than stock 95%.
Log your max duty until max safe boost is reached. Then project that max duty boost profile down to each the non 0%, lower duty vs boost profile BEFORE each profile's peak boost. As each profile between 0% and max % should match max % profile up to that profile's peak boost. Then leave the rest of the profile alone. This will simulate ECU holding max duty until target boost is reached.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 25, 2015, 11:58:50 AM by elRey »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Nottingham
Full Member
Karma: +13/-1
Offline
Posts: 204
|
|
« Reply #103 on: November 25, 2015, 12:35:25 PM »
|
|
|
Greater than 95%  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
elRey
|
|
« Reply #104 on: November 25, 2015, 02:37:43 PM »
|
|
|
Greater than 95% if TVLDMX > 95% |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
