96530706 + DMA +LiveMap + SD - working
Jul 30, 2009, 07:56 AM
#77
Thanks. That will help me on my quest of solving this problem.
In the meantime, what do you guys think about a black background for the LiveMap chart? Is something like this better, or do you prefer the white? Also, here I put in major gridlines for the Y axis. Good/bad? You can see a comparison screenshot on the previous page:
Since I have the code working how I want it now, I am going to clean up the colors and symbols on that chart so that all of the colors are visible. I may make one exe with a white background and one with a black background.
Eric
In the meantime, what do you guys think about a black background for the LiveMap chart? Is something like this better, or do you prefer the white? Also, here I put in major gridlines for the Y axis. Good/bad? You can see a comparison screenshot on the previous page:
Since I have the code working how I want it now, I am going to clean up the colors and symbols on that chart so that all of the colors are visible. I may make one exe with a white background and one with a black background.
Eric
Jul 30, 2009, 09:06 AM
#79
Haven't officially tested this yet, but all I did was change the colors, so I don't see them not working. Here are two different exes...one for the white chart background and one for the black chart background. I tried to choose better colors and when I reused them, I added a symbol to the curve.
Eric
Eric
Jul 30, 2009, 09:31 AM
#80
I may just try flashing a new ROM today with only SD for a quick test.
Code:
ROM:000277F0 mov.w r10, @r11 ROM:000277F2 mov.l @(h'248,pc), r10 ; [00027A3C] = h'FFFF8ABA ROM:000277F4 mov.w @r10, r10 ROM:000277F6 extu.w r10, r10 ROM:000277F8 mov.l @(h'250,pc), r4 ; [00027A4C] = h'FFFF89AC ROM:000277FA mov.w @r4, r4 ROM:000277FC extu.w r4, r4 ROM:000277FE mov r10, r5 ROM:00027800 mov.l @(h'234,pc), r10 ; [00027A38] = sub_762 ROM:00027802 jsr @r10 ; sub_762 ROM:00027804 nop ROM:00027806 mov.l @(h'22C,pc), r11 ; [00027A34] = h'FFFF89C0 ROM:00027808 mov.w r0, @r11 ROM:0002780A mov.l @(h'238,pc), r0 ; [00027A44] = h'FFFF8A76 ROM:0002780C mov.w @r0, r0 ROM:0002780E tst #1, r0 ROM:00027810 bf loc_2781E ROM:00027812 mov.l @(h'238,pc), r10 ; [00027A4C] = h'FFFF89AC ROM:00027814 mov.w @r10, r10 ROM:00027816 mov.l @(h'228,pc), r11 ; [00027A40] = h'FFFF89B4 ROM:00027818 mov.w @r11, r11 ROM:0002781A cmp/hi r11, r10 ROM:0002781C nop ROM:0002781E ROM:0002781E loc_2781E: ; CODE XREF: ROM:00027810j ROM:0002781E mov.l @(h'220,pc), r10 ; [00027A40] = h'FFFF89B4 ROM:00027820 mov.w @r10, r10 ROM:00027822 mov.l @(h'228,pc), r11 ; [00027A4C] = h'FFFF89AC ROM:00027824 mov.w r10, @r11 ROM:00027826 mov.l @(h'21C,pc), r0 ; [00027A44] = h'FFFF8A76 ROM:00027828 mov.w @r0, r0 ROM:0002782A tst #1, r0 ROM:0002782C bf loc_2783A ROM:0002782E mov.l @(h'204,pc), r10 ; [00027A34] = h'FFFF89C0 ROM:00027830 mov.w @r10, r10 ROM:00027832 mov.l @(h'214,pc), r11 ; [00027A48] = h'FFFF89B8 ROM:00027834 mov.w @r11, r11 ROM:00027836 cmp/hi r11, r10 ROM:00027838 nop
Jul 30, 2009, 03:07 PM
#81
The nop makes it run the code in the following lines, so FFFF89B4 is read and then written to FFFF89AC, so FFFF89AC is the one to log. You will probably want to log the low and high bytes. You should see it move in proportion to load at a steady coolant temperature, but I never logged it.
However, the SD patch if working properly should be just writing to MAFSOURCEMAIN in the nop before this one we're discussing, and MAFSOURCEMAINxMAFMULTIPWARMUP. If the values during your glitch are smooth and follow what they should be based on your MAP and RPM VE at that point, I struggle to see how it is SD patch related.
I never used MAP smoothing and would recommend you don't also for SD, it will kill the transient response which is crucial on SD, you'll end up with large lean holes.
However, the SD patch if working properly should be just writing to MAFSOURCEMAIN in the nop before this one we're discussing, and MAFSOURCEMAINxMAFMULTIPWARMUP. If the values during your glitch are smooth and follow what they should be based on your MAP and RPM VE at that point, I struggle to see how it is SD patch related.
I never used MAP smoothing and would recommend you don't also for SD, it will kill the transient response which is crucial on SD, you'll end up with large lean holes.
Jul 30, 2009, 03:55 PM
#82
Jul 30, 2009, 05:09 PM
#83
Yeah, just try to get into the 1800-2500 RPM/65-85kPa range and show some screenshots of those conditions. Traveling through it slowly would be good. I just want to see if others are seeing the same thing as me or if it's just something on my end...maybe I just need to analyze my VE tables some more?
Anyway, here is a new log. This time I used my old v5.1 tephrarom with DMA/livemap. I didn't put the SD maps into RAM though, since I already have them tuned from the previously logs with v7t6.
I flashed the car and went for a cruise to go gas up. It actually seemed a lot better...but I did notice the slight hesitation, jerkiness, so I knew the issue was still there. Here is the log, with 89ac+89ad included (MAFMULTIPWARMUP).
Looking at the bottom half of the log, the top black line is TPS, then one down is MAFMULTIPWARMUP, 1byte load (red), IPW (light blue), 16bit map (light gray?), and 2byte RPM angling up through them.
I put vertical markers to show the trouble area. Again, like clockwork, it starts at about 85kpa/1800RPM and lasts until 65kpa/2500RPM. The other lines are bumpy as well, but what I would expect to be normal. Nothing jumps as much as the IPW does...MAFMULTIPWARMUP does seem to slightly coincide with the jumpy IPW, but not entirely, and it doesn't seem to be as much. So, it's very confusing as to what exactly is going on. The VE is relatively flat in this area as well, so any interpolation shouldn't be too big of a jump...but maybe that's where I need to concentrate again. I remember making a 3-d chart from my 2 VE tables and comparing this exact area to the 3-D chart from my MAF log and everything is very close.
I will leave this v5.1 ROM in for a couple days of driving and see if I notice it as much as the v7 ROM. If so, then I guess I will try a plain old stock ROM, patched with SD. Hopefully, in the meantime, a few others using 96530006 with SD can post some logs as well.
Eric
Anyway, here is a new log. This time I used my old v5.1 tephrarom with DMA/livemap. I didn't put the SD maps into RAM though, since I already have them tuned from the previously logs with v7t6.
I flashed the car and went for a cruise to go gas up. It actually seemed a lot better...but I did notice the slight hesitation, jerkiness, so I knew the issue was still there. Here is the log, with 89ac+89ad included (MAFMULTIPWARMUP).
Looking at the bottom half of the log, the top black line is TPS, then one down is MAFMULTIPWARMUP, 1byte load (red), IPW (light blue), 16bit map (light gray?), and 2byte RPM angling up through them.
I put vertical markers to show the trouble area. Again, like clockwork, it starts at about 85kpa/1800RPM and lasts until 65kpa/2500RPM. The other lines are bumpy as well, but what I would expect to be normal. Nothing jumps as much as the IPW does...MAFMULTIPWARMUP does seem to slightly coincide with the jumpy IPW, but not entirely, and it doesn't seem to be as much. So, it's very confusing as to what exactly is going on. The VE is relatively flat in this area as well, so any interpolation shouldn't be too big of a jump...but maybe that's where I need to concentrate again. I remember making a 3-d chart from my 2 VE tables and comparing this exact area to the 3-D chart from my MAF log and everything is very close.
I will leave this v5.1 ROM in for a couple days of driving and see if I notice it as much as the v7 ROM. If so, then I guess I will try a plain old stock ROM, patched with SD. Hopefully, in the meantime, a few others using 96530006 with SD can post some logs as well.
Eric
Last edited by l2r99gst; Jul 30, 2009 at 05:14 PM.
Jul 31, 2009, 03:36 AM
#84
Good graphs, but the only one that looks funny is the IPW, so it doesn't show the SD variables misbehaving, and I'm starting to think this is not related since the SD is just changing the variables you've logged and they are working. I'm afraid it will need testing to the point where you have a proven stock(ish) ECU setup that doesn't do this, and then add back in the minimal elements of the SD conversion to see if it then reappears.
It is a bit tricky with the labels and colors to see what the STFT and Narrowband O2 (which is close coupled, fast and great for seeing oscillations around stoich) does during this time. Have you tried turning closed loop off to see if it still does it?
It is a bit tricky with the labels and colors to see what the STFT and Narrowband O2 (which is close coupled, fast and great for seeing oscillations around stoich) does during this time. Have you tried turning closed loop off to see if it still does it?
Jul 31, 2009, 06:06 AM
#85
STFT is the sawtooth in the graph, just above center. There looks to be no correlation with the jagged IPW and the STFT. I agree that it may not be the SD patch entirely, but this issue only came about when converting to SD. It may possibly be some other patch interfering with SD or just a coincidence that it showed up when I made the switch, with no correlation. To be sure, I will also flash back to my MAF ROM to test.
I have not tried turning off closed loop, but will add it to my list of things to try. Since the weekend in just about here, at least now I can try all of these things. I plan to have this tested a million ways before the weekend in over.
I want to install my 4" intake and filter, but want to iron out this small issue before committing to full time SD.
I have not tried turning off closed loop, but will add it to my list of things to try. Since the weekend in just about here, at least now I can try all of these things. I plan to have this tested a million ways before the weekend in over.
I want to install my 4" intake and filter, but want to iron out this small issue before committing to full time SD.
Last edited by l2r99gst; Jul 31, 2009 at 06:08 AM.
Jul 31, 2009, 06:38 AM
#86
John,
Quick question for you:
Did you only change the asynch_vs_TPSdelta table or did you also change the asynch_vs_RPM table as well? I notice the latter has 0's in the 1500, 2000, 2500 RPM bins.
I added 8 to all of the bins for the TPSdelta table, as you mentioned. I think I tried adjusting the RPM table as well to be sure this wasn't the issue, but I don't think that helped.
Quick question for you:
Did you only change the asynch_vs_TPSdelta table or did you also change the asynch_vs_RPM table as well? I notice the latter has 0's in the 1500, 2000, 2500 RPM bins.
I added 8 to all of the bins for the TPSdelta table, as you mentioned. I think I tried adjusting the RPM table as well to be sure this wasn't the issue, but I don't think that helped.
Jul 31, 2009, 10:41 AM
#87
Your IPW issue is at steady throttle, so nothing to do with acceleration enrichment, but yet I just adjusted the TPS delta table. You may be better adding more than 8 to the bins, but I would try without MAP averaging first.
Jul 31, 2009, 11:22 AM
#88
OK, thanks. Yes, map averaging is already off. I just did a log with full time open loop, so I am going to analyze that now.
Edit: Just analyzed that log and the issue still persists. So, seeing that this is happening during open loop as well, this must be issue with my VE tables. My VE analysis pre-SD showed a relatively flat VE in that area and I had it matched up well, but maybe I need to readjust my bins for more detail and control. Looking at my tables and creating a pseudo 3-D map from them, there are no jumps in VE going through that range that would seem to match the jumpy IPW, though. So, I still don't really understand where this jump (or fallout of IPW) is coming from. I say fallout of IPW because upon analyzing some of the logs further, it almost seems like the IPW is following a nice curve or path, then just dips down, then recovers, then dips, etc. Interesting to say the least.
For my map bins, I have 10, 40, 50, 70, 100, 170, 200, 408 (Omni 4-bar). These were chosen based on areas of changing VE, where interpolation would cover the values in between. But, I am thinking of maybe adding a 60 and 80/85 to see if I can get better tuning for this specifc area only. Maybe I can change one at a time and see if it helps, hurts, or doesnt affect this issue.
Anyway, thanks for all of your input, John. I have a lot to test this weekend.
Edit: Just analyzed that log and the issue still persists. So, seeing that this is happening during open loop as well, this must be issue with my VE tables. My VE analysis pre-SD showed a relatively flat VE in that area and I had it matched up well, but maybe I need to readjust my bins for more detail and control. Looking at my tables and creating a pseudo 3-D map from them, there are no jumps in VE going through that range that would seem to match the jumpy IPW, though. So, I still don't really understand where this jump (or fallout of IPW) is coming from. I say fallout of IPW because upon analyzing some of the logs further, it almost seems like the IPW is following a nice curve or path, then just dips down, then recovers, then dips, etc. Interesting to say the least.
For my map bins, I have 10, 40, 50, 70, 100, 170, 200, 408 (Omni 4-bar). These were chosen based on areas of changing VE, where interpolation would cover the values in between. But, I am thinking of maybe adding a 60 and 80/85 to see if I can get better tuning for this specifc area only. Maybe I can change one at a time and see if it helps, hurts, or doesnt affect this issue.
Anyway, thanks for all of your input, John. I have a lot to test this weekend.
Last edited by l2r99gst; Jul 31, 2009 at 11:46 AM.
Jul 31, 2009, 01:09 PM
#89
Newbie
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Baltimore,MD
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eric,
Can you post a zip of the whole directory for the new livemap? I just unzipped the EXE to the folder were the older version was and it did not work.
Joe
Can you post a zip of the whole directory for the new livemap? I just unzipped the EXE to the folder were the older version was and it did not work.
Joe
Last edited by fjo_newport; Jul 31, 2009 at 01:16 PM.