Hello guys,

I’ve increased Q2 and logged again. Initial overshoot is still there.

ECUxPlot is a very nice utility! Very impressive

To keep it simple, here is just the P, I and D contributions and the WGDC.



From what I can make out, the WGDC does indeed drop off as actual boost approaches specified boost due to the negative contribution of Q2 (WGDC = I – D) So far, so good.

However, once actual boost exceeds specified boost, then D is switched off and no longer lends its negative contribution to the equation (WGDC = I only) and the WGDC shoots up again before gradually ramping down. At this point, I can see why reducing KFLDIMX would reduce the WGDC - you're limiting the I.

Bit puzzled on what to try next Larger negative contribution from D (increase Q2)? Or limit the I contribution (by reducing KFLDIMX)? Perhaps a mixture of the two  

As an aside, I’ve noticed that actual pressure pvdkds_w maxes out at 2560 mbar. This is using my ram logger to log. But when I used VCDS to log, I got readings for actual pressure of 2620 mbar. What variable is VCDS looking at if pvdkds_w is maxed at 2560 mbar?

Hi nyet,

Thank you. I appreciate you sticking with this through the five pages of this thread I think I’m moving in the right direction now. KFLDIMX is decreased (I copied the values at row hPa = 1000 to rows hPa = 1200 and hPa = 1500) and I think it looks a lot better. In summary:

1)   I’m using a file where I’ve already increased LDRXN, KFMIRL, KFMIOP and LDPBN.
2)   Originally my initial boost overshoot was hitting (and passing) the limit of 2560 mbar in pvdkds_w. With these latest changes to KFLDIMX and KFLDRQ2 I don’t spike through the limit anymore  
3)   I logged a drive where I go WOT at 2000rpm, 3000rpm and 4000rpm. I wanted to check that I hadn’t just ironed out one place in the rpm range (like I did a few pages ago). I think it looks OK!
4)   Picture and log attached. The log includes all the variables (P, I, D, WGDC etc) but I've only shown rpm, actual boost and specified boost on the picture to keep it simple. I used time on the x-axis for this particular picture since using rpm made it look very strange indeed  
5)   Bin also attached for those curious.

I reduced KFLDIMX even further. In fact, at one point I had it so low that actual was not meeting specified so I increased it a bit.

How’s this one? WOT pull from 2000rpm. Actual boost overshoots specified boost by 67mbar maximum.

Got some other observations I will post up once I've got them clear in my mind

Thank you very much, but it's your help that got me here!

I wish there was a utility like ME7Logger for MED9.1 (perhaps MED9Logger?) Manually digging out the ram variables (with my pitiful knowledge of PowerPC assembly) is really time consuming I then have to add them to my home made ram logger (which I have to recompile everytime I change something and I hardcoded the memory addresses...) and massage the output into something that looks like a csv. You get the idea, it's a pain.

I'd really like to try some of the other features of ECUxPlot - Compressor Map intrigued me! What variables could I log to see the output of that?

I had to be really agressive with my changes to KFLDIMX. In fact, I honestly don't know how the factory set it up to begin with. My car certainly had an overshoot even with the stock map. I'd be interested to hear from anyone else with the 2.0 TFSI 265bhp engine about what their experience has been?

On one of my iterations of KFLDIMX, I had the values so low that actual boost never exceeded specified boost. It got very close, but never crossed over. In this scenario I noticed that D never switched off.


What is fats or strip ET You'd be suprised what google thought it might be, but somehow I don't think that's what you meant

I'll look at the undershoot. Likely I can adjust that by setting the penultimate row of KFLDRQ2 back to stock, leaving the changes in just the last row.

Much appreciated!

Does anyone know how setzi's logger parses the ram addresses?

sorry for the offtopic  but how did you manage to log these variables on a MED9 ? !? 

I run 11.5 (0.78) from boost peak to redline using LAMFA.

Are u using lamfa on med9.1? It seems the BTS threshold is very low on med9.1, so I guess you'd need to raise the bts threshold to get it to use lamfa, right?