Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 26
Author Topic: MED 9.1 basics  (Read 295480 times)
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12234


WWW
« Reply #105 on: July 02, 2014, 01:36:55 PM »

If boost drops off that badly even while increasing DC, i'd say your linearization needs to be a lot more aggressive (assuming this isn't a wastegate problem).
Logged

ME7.1 tuning guide (READ FIRST)
ECUx Plot
ME7Sum checksum checker/corrrector for ME7.x

Please 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 experience.
Basano
Full Member
***

Karma: +90/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 192


« Reply #106 on: July 02, 2014, 01:43:47 PM »

Hi dd,

Do you mean KFLDIMX i.e. what I've set the map to?  Or is there another variable/s I could be logging specifically for that (I-limit)?

I can have a go at logging these, if that's what you're refering to:

ldimn_w
ldimx_w         
ldrki_w         
lditv_w         

Logged
Basano
Full Member
***

Karma: +90/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 192


« Reply #107 on: July 02, 2014, 01:47:44 PM »

Hi nyet,

KFLDRL?

I haven't touched that one yet on the assumption that since I hadn't changed any hardware (turbo or wastegate), the factory values were a good starting point.

Maybe that wasn't such a good assumption!
Logged
phila_dot
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +172/-11
Offline Offline

Posts: 1709


« Reply #108 on: July 02, 2014, 03:25:47 PM »

ldtv is post linearization.

What does ldimxak_w look like?

That notch in DC at the end of the run looks like a changing adaptation range.

Post ldimxr, ldimxak, ldimx, lditv, ldptv, and ldtvr.

Does it always underboost like that?
Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12234


WWW
« Reply #109 on: July 02, 2014, 03:52:43 PM »

KFLDRL?
yep. For a given pre-lin DC, boost should be flat (e.g. post-lin DC rising, in your case). this is completely independent of I max etc! one thing at a time..

Quote
I haven't touched that one yet on the assumption that since I hadn't changed any hardware (turbo or wastegate), the factory values were a good starting point.

I don't know that the behavior you are seeing is expected... so i'd hate to tell you it is a software issue.
Logged

ME7.1 tuning guide (READ FIRST)
ECUx Plot
ME7Sum checksum checker/corrrector for ME7.x

Please 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 experience.
Basano
Full Member
***

Karma: +90/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 192


« Reply #110 on: July 03, 2014, 05:47:18 AM »

ldtv is post linearization.

Aaargh, my mistake. You are absolutely correct, ldtv_w is definitely post lin! That'll teach me to concerntrate.

Does it always underboost like that?

Yes, it's very consistent like that. Well-behaved underboosting!

I added some more variables from LDRPID (including all you mentioned) into the ram logger and captured a run this morning.



The red, dark blue and light blue lines are the contributions from the P, I and D terms. In the graph, all the waste gate duty cycle (yellow) comes from the I term at the rpm range I’m interested in (5000 rpm upwards)

P – ldptv_w
I – lditv_w
D – ldrdtv_w
W/G – ldtvr_w



The red and blue lines are desired and actual boost, showing the deviation from 5000 rpm upwards. The green and purple lines are the waste gate duty cycle pre and post linearization (KFLDRL).

Desired Boost – plsol_w
Actual Boost – pvdkds_w
W/G duty cycle pre lin – ldtvr_w
W/G duty cycle post lin – ldtv_w



The red and blue lines are the I-limit (from KFLDIMX) and the actual I value being used by the PID.

I-limit – ldimx_w
Actual I value – lditv_w

Looking at the data and speculating out loud, I’d make these observations (but I’m no expert. I haven’t done this before and I make mistakes all the time. If I’m wrong, don’t be shy to tell me!)

•   No issue with KFLDIMX. I ride the I limit during spool and midrange, but from 3500 rpm upwards, the ceiling is well above the actual I value.
•   KFLDRL (pre and post lin) isn’t doing very much, especially at the range that I am interested in.
•   All the duty cycle is coming from the I term


The attached csv log is pretty comprehensive and has got all those other variables you mentioned. But I didn’t graph them so as to keep things clearer. I’m happy to pull them out if you ask.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2014, 06:32:03 AM by Basano » Logged
phila_dot
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +172/-11
Offline Offline

Posts: 1709


« Reply #111 on: July 03, 2014, 06:27:10 AM »

Is B_lddy clear?

What values do you have for Q1 in that range?
Logged
phila_dot
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +172/-11
Offline Offline

Posts: 1709


« Reply #112 on: July 03, 2014, 06:33:21 AM »

Did you log ldimxak?

Is KFLDRL 1:1?
Logged
Basano
Full Member
***

Karma: +90/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 192


« Reply #113 on: July 03, 2014, 07:25:30 AM »

Is B_lddy clear?

What values do you have for Q1 in that range?

Hello,

I didn't log B_lddy itself, but looking at the logs I think I can derive what it was anyway.

The logged components of the PID (in that range 5000 rpm upwards) have values consistent with:

LDRQ1ST for the I term
LDRQ0S  for the P term
and 0 for the D term

This is the steady state then?

LDRQ1ST is set to 0.4 from 2200 rpm to 6500 rpm.

Did you log ldimxak?

Is KFLDRL 1:1?

Here's ldimxak_w:



And screenshot of KFLDRL. For all intents and purposes, in that range (around 5000 rpm) it's practically 1:1.

« Last Edit: July 03, 2014, 07:41:54 AM by Basano » Logged
phila_dot
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +172/-11
Offline Offline

Posts: 1709


« Reply #114 on: July 03, 2014, 07:44:12 AM »

Is the bump up in ldimx related to LDDIMXN  values?

I would make Q1ST slightly more aggressive (increase) and see if it tracks better. If you go too aggressive it will become unstable.

I would also raise dynamic Q0 slightly in the spool region and Q2, but it might be best to save that until after you get this sorted.
Logged
Basano
Full Member
***

Karma: +90/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 192


« Reply #115 on: July 03, 2014, 08:03:22 AM »

Thanks phila_dot

Is the bump up in ldimx related to LDDIMXN  values?

Sorry, not too sure what you mean by that Huh I haven't made any changes to LDDIMXN.

I can certainly add a bit to LDRQ1ST (say increase from 0.4 to 0.5).

Also, what about modifying KFLDRL somewhat? Along these lines @5000rpm upwards, input 60 -> output 65, input 70 -> output 75 and so forth?

Logged
phila_dot
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +172/-11
Offline Offline

Posts: 1709


« Reply #116 on: July 03, 2014, 08:21:14 AM »

Sorry, not too sure what you mean by that Huh I haven't made any changes to LDDIMXN.

Just curious where that odd jump in ldimx is coming from. I'm guessing it was done like that to keep spikes in check down low. Do you spike harder when boosting above 4k RPM?

It may actually be better to start by raising KFLDRL as the response is clearly not linear.
Logged
Basano
Full Member
***

Karma: +90/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 192


« Reply #117 on: July 03, 2014, 08:37:28 AM »

Ah, I understand now. You're curious about why ldimx_w seems to ramp upwards from 4000 rpm...

Actually, that was me  Embarrassed

When I first started looking into this boost deviation, I tried raising KFLDIMX from 4000 rpm upwards to see if it was limiting the duty cycle too much. Previously I'd lowered KFLDIMX to stop spikes lower down and I wanted to see if this was overdone at the top end (it wasn't).

Sorry for the confusion.

Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +604/-166
Offline Offline

Posts: 12234


WWW
« Reply #118 on: July 03, 2014, 10:38:43 AM »

IMO for a constant boost req your pre-lin DC should not be moving much... I should not be moving, unless your req boost is tapering significantly, in which case you should be losing I, not gaining.

let KFLDRL bring up DC, let your PID stay mostly inactive

increasing I generally means your DRL isn't calibrated correctly, unless your req boost is increasing!
« Last Edit: July 03, 2014, 10:40:32 AM by nyet » Logged

ME7.1 tuning guide (READ FIRST)
ECUx Plot
ME7Sum checksum checker/corrrector for ME7.x

Please 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 experience.
phila_dot
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +172/-11
Offline Offline

Posts: 1709


« Reply #119 on: July 03, 2014, 12:16:57 PM »

IMO for a constant boost req your pre-lin DC should not be moving much... I should not be moving, unless your req boost is tapering significantly, in which case you should be losing I, not gaining.

let KFLDRL bring up DC, let your PID stay mostly inactive

increasing I generally means your DRL isn't calibrated correctly, unless your req boost is increasing!

I do agree that he should be addressing this via KFLDRL.

However, I'm not sure what you mean that I should not be moving. There is boost error present so I needs to be moving to correct it.

The reason why this issue should corrected with DRL is because boost error is increasing even with an increasing I. The PID is responding but the wastegate response isn't adequate.

I would need to be increased if the response is too fast or too slow, but I don't think that is the case here.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 26
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.023 seconds with 17 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0s, 0q)