hey donour,

I don't think bumping up the baud rate actually gives you any more samples/second..

 

Doesn't matter, I need to change the baudrate to something standard so I can use a regular serial port.

I think something like this should work:

--
<scaling name="BAUDRATE" units="units" toexpr="500000/(x+1)" frexpr="500000/x-1" format="%.0d" min="0" max="500000" inc="1" storagetype="uint8" endian="big"/>
<table name="BAUDRATE1_OBD" address="d675" type="1D" level="1" scaling="BAUDRATE"/>
<table name="BAUDRATE2_MUT" address="d6a9" type="1D" level="1" scaling="BAUDRATE"/>
<table name="BAUDRATE3_unknown" address="d6b9" type="1D" level="1" scaling="BAUDRATE"/>
--

d

 

bez, any chance you have a patch for 97470001? I can email the file to you

 

donour those addresses appear correct for 96420007 presumably 96420008 is the same, if the baud rates show up as 10400, 15625, 62500 that should be right. 19230 is the closest I could get but that does fine for 19200 logging.

 

Confirmed, this works with 96420008.

d

 

any possibility of this patch for 96530006?

 

for 96530006:

<scaling name="BAUDRATE" units="units" toexpr="500000/(x+1)" frexpr="500000/x-1" format="%.0d" min="0" max="500000" inc="1" storagetype="uint8" endian="little"/>


<table name="BAUDRATE1_OBD" address="d415" type="1D" level="1" scaling="BAUDRATE"/>

<table name="BAUDRATE2_MUT" address="d449" type="1D" level="1" scaling="BAUDRATE"/>

<table name="BAUDRATE3_unknown" address="d459" type="1D" level="1" scaling="BAUDRATE"/>

 

You DA MAN!!! THanks

 

Any updates for 88590015 or are there hardware limitations in the IX's?

 

I'm also curious.

 

This change of baud rate makes little difference to logging speed because it is throttled by the main loop of the ECU's program code.

At 62500 baud I've seen up to 6000 items per second using DMA in large blocks. I've posted 88590015 DMA and live mapping patch, but everyone has been too scared or busy to test it so far. However, the volume of logging data with it is immense.

 

I have the 96940011 and applied the 62500 Baudrates and it increased the samples/second in my logs giving me more resolution in my tuning. Logging at 62500 gave me much more data than logging with the stock values 15625 or something. So you are saying that the main loop in the ecu for the 88590015 is slower than the 96940011 and a few others?

 

Much more as in twice as much more? 3 times? Can we get an idea of how much of an improvement this is?

 

I just calculated it. It is almost 2.0 right on the nose. for 15625 baud logging: for 20 data items, the average row update is ~.120sec (logging 20 data items not including time/ID's etc). so 20/.120=166.6samples/sec. Logging at 62500, the average row update is ~.063 sec logging 23 items 23/.063=365.08samples/sec and therefore 365.08/166.6=2.2.
Hope my logic is right, Ive been boozin again. Take it with a grain of salt. Maybe my math is wrong, but I do get more data points.
hope someone can make sense of this.
Note: this is comparing my Evo 8 96940011 set to 62500bps and my friends Evo 9 88590015 set to 15625bps in evoscan logging near identical data items.

I am making close to 100whp more than my friend so the extra logging rate comes in handy during a 3rd gear pull because it happens quicker. I am tuning my friends car and his power level will be approaching/ or atleast getting closer to mine and I will need the extra log speed to tune accurately without skipping to many load/rpm cells.

Thanks in advance guys.

 

It is still not communicating about 90% of the time - with the request and reply you have a theoretical baud rate/20 as an items per second logging rate.

I didn't see much over 210 items per second in Evoscan on my IX by just increasing the baud rate.