Close

Page 9 of 32 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 225 of 794

Thread: HOWTO - COBB ATR discussions, maps

              
  1. #201
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    42
    Rep Points
    59.9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by enrita Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    mistaken cell value in the WGDC map? I have accidentally changed the value in a cell before not knowing it.

    T

  2. #202
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    106,998
    Rep Points
    26,347.2
    Mentioned
    1742 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    264


    Reputation: Yes | No

  3. #203
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    935
    Rep Points
    560.5
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    actually a major issue with ATR that took me awhile to figure out. In the P-factor table it rounds to the nearest tenth, but the values in the table go out to hundredth or less. You cannot copy, because copy in this case is just the viewable value. Anyway, Cobb needs to expand the zeros.

    the real issue is that if you change these values you can't just recopy an existing table with the original values... at least knowing what the values are would be very useful. Maybe there is a way of viewing the actual value, but haven't found it yet.

    @Sticky, just noticed neg reps again... I'm use to this, but didn't receive any notifications. when did this happen?

  4. #204
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    217
    Rep Points
    305.2
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I suspected that numbers were showing up as 0.00 that weren't actually zero, but I'm not sure I'd call it a major issue. I've made a lot of changes in my P-factor table with no problems. I don't see losing the last digit on pastes as a big deal.

  5. #205
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    106,998
    Rep Points
    26,347.2
    Mentioned
    1742 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    264


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JoshBoody Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    @Sticky , just noticed neg reps again... I'm use to this, but didn't receive any notifications. when did this happen?
    Let me look into it, notifications may not be working right.

  6. #206
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    296
    Rep Points
    271.2
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Hi,

    After I installed the RB turbos, I tried to use an OTS map and adjust the WGDC Base table for the new turbos. I nailed it perfectly for WOT, but at partial throttle I still need to lower some values from the table (in the area of 400kg/h and factor 1.5), which are already very low. Like, I need to lower by 3, a value which is now 1.5. However this table does not accept negative values (any negative value that I input is rounded to 0).

    What can I do about this ? Any other tables that I can work on to further lower the final WGDC values ? I don't really want to live with this part throttle overboost.

    Edit: I now see that the "WGDC Adder (Airflow)" table has a positive value in the 500 area, so I will just zero that value out. But I don't think it is enough. What does the "WGDC (Pre-control A)" table do ?

    I also have a map in the works with PTF, but I don't like the fact that I can't see anything inside it with ATR. So I would very much prefer to have my own ATR maps that I can modify as needed.

    Any help on this would be appreciated !
    Last edited by cstavaru; 11-15-2012 at 08:52 AM.

  7. #207
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    North East
    Posts
    403
    Rep Points
    419.0
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Try lowering WGDC Adder (Airflow) & WGDC Ceiling (Adder) in the areas you are overboosting

  8. #208
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    296
    Rep Points
    271.2
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by boosted-M Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Try lowering WGDC Adder (Airflow) & WGDC Ceiling (Adder) in the areas you are overboosting
    I did, and nothing. In fact, I got closer to an acceptable result but I still have an area of the WGDC Base table where I have all the values zeroed out and still making 3-4 psi over the target (which is 0.5psi).
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  9. #209
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    935
    Rep Points
    560.5
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Reputation: Yes | No
    You have to consider the throttle plate... in the lower loads around 80, your pre/post throttle MAP will not match... look at load instead.

  10. #210
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    296
    Rep Points
    271.2
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JoshBoody Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    You have to consider the throttle plate... in the lower loads around 80, your pre/post throttle MAP will not match... look at load instead.
    Hi,

    You mean the throttle plate closing will solve the overboost anyway and the correct pressure will actually enter the engine ? This may be true, but I was thinking it could have a merit to set up the tables correctly (if possible).

    Can you be more explicit about the load remark ?

    By the way, I don't have (big) problems at wot, looks good (pic attached).

    Thanks !Click here to enlarge

  11. #211
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    935
    Rep Points
    560.5
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I was referring to lower loads when the throttle is only partially open... its better to reference load, since the DME is taking manifold MAP. When the throttle plate is fully open manifold and pre-throttle MAPs will match. Throttle closure due to overload is different and a combination of PID, boost tables. Really shouldn't have to zero any base values (curious to see your map/logs with this), but maybe a decent fix if all the appropriate tables are not available.

    Its good to start with tuning "reachable" load targets (160ish) and part throttle... then once you turn it up you have a better map. Anyway, kinda tough to explain. I thought about writing a detailed ATR thread... we'll see. But then DZ would learn too much, hehe.

  12. #212
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,562
    Rep Points
    2,962.9
    Mentioned
    218 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    30


    Reputation: Yes | No
    lol sure sure
    Click here to enlarge

  13. #213
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    North East
    Posts
    403
    Rep Points
    419.0
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by cstavaru Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Hi,

    You mean the throttle plate closing will solve the overboost anyway and the correct pressure will actually enter the engine ? This may be true, but I was thinking it could have a merit to set up the tables correctly (if possible).

    Can you be more explicit about the load remark ?

    By the way, I don't have (big) problems at wot, looks good (pic attached).

    Thanks !Click here to enlarge


    Great Job on the full throttle boost target vs boost.
    Did you have to make a lot of changes in the PID maps to get it that smooth?
    Also, what does your load targets look like?

  14. #214
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    296
    Rep Points
    271.2
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by boosted-M Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Great Job on the full throttle boost target vs boost.
    Did you have to make a lot of changes in the PID maps to get it that smooth?
    Also, what does your load targets look like?
    No change to the P, I or D tables (seems like Cobb did a good job there), only the WGDC Base table. If you get this right, the PID system has less work to do to correct any errors so you will not have to modify it so much Click here to enlarge

    The load targets are the ones from the Stage 2+FMIC Aggressive 4.02 map. After I get the boost perfectly, I will increase timing (right now the timing is from the Stage2+FMIC Drive map, in order to not blow anything while the overboost is taken care of) and maybe raise the load targets a bit.

  15. #215
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    296
    Rep Points
    271.2
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JoshBoody Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I was referring to lower loads when the throttle is only partially open... its better to reference load, since the DME is taking manifold MAP. When the throttle plate is fully open manifold and pre-throttle MAPs will match. Throttle closure due to overload is different and a combination of PID, boost tables. Really shouldn't have to zero any base values (curious to see your map/logs with this), but maybe a decent fix if all the appropriate tables are not available.

    Its good to start with tuning "reachable" load targets (160ish) and part throttle... then once you turn it up you have a better map. Anyway, kinda tough to explain. I thought about writing a detailed ATR thread... we'll see. But then DZ would learn too much, hehe.
    The logs I have posted already are with some zeroed base values.

    This is what I did...I tuned the higher loads first and I (think) I have succeeded. But I want the car to make perfect boost no matter the load, even at the lower loads.

  16. #216
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    296
    Rep Points
    271.2
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Guess what, I looked at an old log and the overboost also happened before I installed the RB turbos. But I wonder, where does the difference in WGDC percentage come from ? I mean, I put 1 in the table for a certain boost setpoint factor and MAF, and I get like 15% WGDC. How can I control the rest of 14% ? Click here to enlarge

    Here is a partial throttle log from before the RB turbos.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  17. #217
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    296
    Rep Points
    271.2
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Wow...I just realized right now: since the pedal is partially pressed, why do I want the throttle blade to be fully open ? There is no merit in this. Should I target the WGDC Base values such that the throttle blade is as much as open as the pedal is pressed ??? This would be quite hard.

  18. #218
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    North East
    Posts
    403
    Rep Points
    419.0
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Which map are you running? The ST or LT (linear throttle map)...?

  19. #219
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    296
    Rep Points
    271.2
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by boosted-M Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Which map are you running? The ST or LT (linear throttle map)...?
    Linear throttle map.

  20. #220
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    North East
    Posts
    403
    Rep Points
    419.0
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I run LT map as well
    If you're running the Stage 2+FMIC Aggressive 4.02 map "" load targets, I'm curious how your boost is so flat? My load target is flat but requested boost tapers as RPM increases... is their a limit or other table that Request boosted To taper?

  21. #221
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    296
    Rep Points
    271.2
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by boosted-M Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I run LT map as well
    If you're running the Stage 2+FMIC Aggressive 4.02 map "" load targets, I'm curious how your boost is so flat? My load target is flat but requested boost tapers as RPM increases... is their a limit or other table that Request boosted To taper?
    It's not really flat, it's 18.5psi max and about 15psi at 6500RPM. May appear flat because the atmospheric pressure is also included in the graph. Is yours lower than 15psi at 6500 ?

  22. #222
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    North East
    Posts
    403
    Rep Points
    419.0
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by cstavaru Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    It's not really flat, it's 18.5psi max and about 15psi at 6500RPM. May appear flat because the atmospheric pressure is also included in the graph. Is yours lower than 15psi at 6500 ?
    Oh, OK.. Looked flat on mu iphone in the car Click here to enlarge
    Yes, my boost tapers to 12psi @ 6500.. I will increase WGDC base but my question is----- Why is the ECU requesting lower boost as rpm's rise when load target is flat?

  23. #223
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    296
    Rep Points
    271.2
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by boosted-M Click here to enlarge
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Oh, OK.. Looked flat on mu iphone in the car Click here to enlarge
    Yes, my boost tapers to 12psi @ 6500.. I will increase WGDC base but my question is----- Why is the ECU requesting lower boost as rpm's rise when load target is flat?
    This is an interesting question to which I would like to find out the answer too. Maybe the ECU thinks that the load targets are already achievable with that boost and timing ? Maybe boost increases if you lower timing, because the ECU is trying to achieve the same targets ? But I don't think this is the case. There is also that Load Target Offset (overboost) table, maybe it is limiting the load targets based on a factor or something.

    EDIT: There are many load limit tables, the most interesting is the Load Target Limit Factor. It begins to limit load from as low IAT as as 100F (92% of the load is used) and also limits load at 110F at 85%. So with stock turbos you have a high chance that a load of 190 is converted to a load of 160 after the correction factor.
    Last edited by cstavaru; 11-16-2012 at 11:03 AM.

  24. #224
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    2,727
    Rep Points
    2,357.4
    Mentioned
    73 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    24


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I think the WGDC and Adder tables limit how much DC can be run to achieve targeted boost, and requested load can only influence up to its max WGDC values. I would think this keeps the DME from running too much boost to achieve its targeted load.
    2007 BMW 335i 6MT / Alpine Weiss
    Click here to enlarge

  25. #225
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    935
    Rep Points
    560.5
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Boost per load is different at various rpms... its lower below 4200rpm iirc and starts tapering around 5k. The higher your load targets the larger the difference between actual/req load, when you meet req boost. This is likely due to ATR logic and how it manipulates the actual DME values… ie. boost limit is not just a direct 1D boost cap.

    The stock “load target limit factors” don’t have an effect until very high IAT and/or ECTs… I reduced mine. They shouldn’t have an effect in your logs unless you changed them. Req load should follow your table very closely… but there’s no way for us to change the boost to load… at least I haven’t found it.

    Cyl temp comp is a table set I’m curious about, but haven’t experimented yet.

Page 9 of 32 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •