A bunch of load calculation related maps
Mar 11, 2013, 01:49 AM
#17
Evolving Member
No worries, here you go. This is for 53600010.
Code:
<scaling name="ReverseInterpolated_Percent255_1byte" units="%" toexpr="100*(1-(x/255))" frexpr="255*(1-(x/100))" format="%.0f" min="0" max="100" inc="1" storagetype="uint8" endian="big"/> <scaling name="MIVEC Overlap" units="Degrees" toexpr="(x-32768)*0.01953125" frexpr="(x/0.01953125)+32768" format="%.1f" min="0" max="255" inc="1" storagetype="uint16" endian="big"/> <table name="Load RampUP Rate" address="5D3F9" category="Load" type="3D" swapxy="true" scaling="ReverseInterpolated_Percent255_1byte"> <table name="MIVEC Overlap" address="623FC" type="X Axis" elements="8" scaling="MIVEC Overlap"/> <table name="RPM" address="623E0" type="Y Axis" elements="11" scaling="RPM"/> </table> <table name="Load RampDOWN Rate" address="5D459" category="Load" type="3D" swapxy="true" scaling="ReverseInterpolated_Percent255_1byte"> <table name="MIVEC Overlap" address="623FC" type="X Axis" elements="8" scaling="MIVEC Overlap"/> <table name="RPM" address="623E0" type="Y Axis" elements="11" scaling="RPM"/> </table>
Mar 12, 2013, 01:35 AM
#20
Evolving Member
Sure, I will try to define the rest of the tables as I don't have them currently.
EDIT: Ok, here are the rest of the Load tables to complete the whole set for 53600010.
EDIT: Ok, here are the rest of the Load tables to complete the whole set for 53600010.
Code:
<table name="ECT Compensation for Load" category="Load" address="55004" type="2D" scaling="Percent128"> <table name="Coolant Temp" type="Y Axis" address="6103A" elements="8" scaling="Temp"/> </table> <table name="MAF IAT Compensation for Load" category="Load" address="55010" type="2D" scaling="Percent128"> <table name="MAF Intake Temp" type="Y Axis" address="61156" elements="7" scaling="Temp"/> </table> <table name="Baro Compensation for Load" category="Load" address="60D72" type="2D" scaling="Percent128"> <table name="Baro" type="Y Axis" address="617DC" elements="6" scaling="Baro16"/> </table> <table name="Load multiplier when TPS increased by %" address="546B4" category="Load" type="1D" scaling="Throttle %"/> <scaling name="High_Low_Load_Multi" units="units" toexpr="((x + 256) * 243 / 256) / 256" frexpr="(((x * 256)) * 256 / 243)-256" format="%.2f" min="0" max="8000" inc="1" storagetype="uint16" endian="big"/> <table name="Load multiplier when TPS Increasing - MAP High Load Multi" category="Load" address="54A38" type="1D" scaling="High_Low_Load_Multi"/> <table name="Load multiplier when TPS steady - MAF/MAP Low Load Multi" category="Load" address="54916" type="1D" scaling="High_Low_Load_Multi"/> <scaling name="Percent256" units="%" toexpr="x*100/256" frexpr="x*256/100" format="%.2f" min="0" max="100" inc="2" storagetype="uint16" endian="big"/> <table name="Load multiplier - TPS steady Decay Rate" category="Load" address="546BA" type="1D" scaling="Percent256"/> <scaling name="Loadify_x50" units="%" toexpr="(x*50*10/512)*10/32" frexpr="(x*32/10)*512/10/50" format="%.1f" min="0" max="300" inc="0.1" storagetype="uint16" endian="big"/> <table name="Load Increase/Decrease threshold" category="Load" address="53CA6" type="1D" scaling="Loadify_x50"/> <table name="Load Increase/Decrease divider (ie 1 is biggest)" category="Load" address="530E8" type="1D" scaling="uint16"/> <table name="Load Increase/Decrease multiplier (ie 1 is smallest) #1" category="Load" address="530E4" type="1D" scaling="uint16"/> <table name="Load Increase/Decrease multiplier (ie 1 is smallest) #2" category="Load" address="530E6" type="1D" scaling="uint16"/>
Last edited by RS200Z; Mar 12, 2013 at 02:06 AM.
Mar 14, 2013, 05:09 PM
#21
Evolving Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Santa Monica, CA
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Peeps,
Been sitting on these for a while, they basically control how load is calculated, they are a bit of a work in progress, so the names might change as we work them out properly:
53040010:
Rich has been testing the Ramp stuff - with some success:
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/09...l#post10494316
If you want to stop the sawtooth affect of load @ WOT, change the "Load multiplier end when TPS decreased by % (hysteresis)" map from 0.4% to something higher.
Goog luck
Regards
David
Been sitting on these for a while, they basically control how load is calculated, they are a bit of a work in progress, so the names might change as we work them out properly:
53040010:
Code:
<table name="ECT Compensation for Load" category="Load" address="55004" type="2D" scaling="Percent128"> <table name="Coolant Temp" type="Y Axis" address="61016" elements="8" scaling="Temp"/> </table> <table name="MAF IAT Compensation for Load" category="Load" address="55010" type="2D" scaling="Percent128"> <table name="MAF Intake Temp" type="Y Axis" address="61132" elements="7" scaling="Temp"/> </table> <table name="Baro Compensation for Load" category="Load" address="60d62" type="2D" scaling="Percent128"> <table name="Baro" type="Y Axis" address="617b8" elements="6" scaling="Baro16"/> </table> <table name="Load multiplier when TPS increased by %" category="Load" address="546a6" type="1D" scaling="Throttle %"/> <table name="Load multiplier end when TPS decreased by % (hysteresis)" category="Load" address="546a2" type="1D" scaling="Throttle %"/> <scaling name="High_Low_Load_Multi" units="units" toexpr="((x + 256) * 243 / 256) / 256" frexpr="(((x * 256)) * 256 / 243)-256" format="%.2f" min="0" max="8000" inc="1" storagetype="uint16" endian="big"/> <table name="Load multiplier when TPS Increasing - MAP High Load Multi" category="Load" address="54a24" type="1D" scaling="High_Low_Load_Multi"/> <table name="Load multiplier when TPS steady - MAF/MAP Low Load Multi" category="Load" address="54904" type="1D" scaling="High_Low_Load_Multi"/> <scaling name="Percent256" units="%" toexpr="x*100/256" frexpr="x*256/100" format="%.2f" min="0" max="100" inc="2" storagetype="uint16" endian="big"/> <table name="Load multiplier - TPS steady Decay Rate" category="Load" address="546AC" type="1D" scaling="Percent256"/> <scaling name="Loadify_x50" units="%" toexpr="(x*50*10/512)*10/32" frexpr="(x*32/10)*512/10/50" format="%.1f" min="0" max="300" inc="0.1" storagetype="uint16" endian="big"/> <table name="Load Increase/Decrease threshold" category="Load" address="53ca6" type="1D" scaling="Loadify_x50"/> <table name="Load Increase/Decrease divider (ie 1 is biggest)" category="Load" address="530e8" type="1D" scaling="uint16"/> <table name="Load Increase/Decrease multiplier (ie 1 is smallest) #1" category="Load" address="530e4" type="1D" scaling="uint16"/> <table name="Load Increase/Decrease multiplier (ie 1 is smallest) #2" category="Load" address="530e6" type="1D" scaling="uint16"/> <scaling name="ReverseInterpolated_Percent255_1byte" units="%" toexpr="100*(1-(x/255))" frexpr="255*(1-(x/100))" format="%.0f" min="0" max="100" inc="1" storagetype="uint8" endian="big"/> <scaling name="MIVEC Overlap" units="Degrees" toexpr="(x-32768)*0.01953125" frexpr="(x/0.01953125)+32768" format="%.1f" min="0" max="255" inc="1" storagetype="uint16" endian="big"/> <table name="Load RampUP Rate" address="5d3e9" category="Load" type="3D" swapxy="true" scaling="ReverseInterpolated_Percent255_1byte"> <table name="MIVEC Overlap" address="623d8" type="X Axis" elements="8" scaling="MIVEC Overlap"/> <table name="RPM" address="623bc" type="Y Axis" elements="11" scaling="RPM"/> </table> <table name="Load RampDOWN Rate" address="5d449" category="Load" type="3D" swapxy="true" scaling="ReverseInterpolated_Percent255_1byte"> <table name="MIVEC Overlap" address="623d8" type="X Axis" elements="8" scaling="MIVEC Overlap"/> <table name="RPM" address="623bc" type="Y Axis" elements="11" scaling="RPM"/> </table> <scaling name="ReverseInterpolated_Percent255_2byte" units="%" toexpr="100*(1-(x/255))" frexpr="255*(1-(x/100))" format="%.0f" min="0" max="100" inc="1" storagetype="uint16" endian="big"/> <table name="Load Ramp Rate #1 (Load > 75)" address="54a6e" category="Load" type="1D" scaling="ReverseInterpolated_Percent255_2byte"/> <table name="Load Ramp Rate #2" address="5300a" category="Load" type="1D" scaling="ReverseInterpolated_Percent255_2byte"/> <table name="Load Ramp Rate #3" address="53426" category="Load" type="1D" scaling="ReverseInterpolated_Percent255_2byte"/> <table name="Load Ramp Rate #4" address="53008" category="Load" type="1D" scaling="ReverseInterpolated_Percent255_2byte"/>
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/09...l#post10494316
If you want to stop the sawtooth affect of load @ WOT, change the "Load multiplier end when TPS decreased by % (hysteresis)" map from 0.4% to something higher.
Goog luck
Regards
David
Are there any good writeups or any info at all on what all these really do? In particular the "Load Multiplier End" that you suggest changing? I'm seeing really noisy Load on several X's and it's causing a slightly unstable AFR plot, so I'd like to resolve that.
It's this kind of stuff I'm baffled by as to why Mitsubishi left the cars this way from the factory. I get the feeling that the stock ECU mapping on the X is not up to par with the 8/9 stuff. I'm extremely nitpicky, but there are several situations where the ECU in my 100% stock, 500 mi odometer GSR isn't handling things as well as it could be. Cold start, unstable MAF signal on throttle roll-off, etc, where the stock 8/9 was so solid.
Beau
Mar 15, 2013, 10:11 AM
#22
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 805-Conejo Valley
Posts: 2,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before you jump into these tables, sort out the MAF, MAP, Fuel Cal tables. These load tables are for fine tuning, but will have little effect w/o first optimizing the primary tables.
Mar 16, 2013, 12:40 PM
#23
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 805-Conejo Valley
Posts: 2,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Initial thoughts, it seems to me that the Load Ramp UP/DOWN based on Overlap is way of controlling engine braking?
I live at the bottom of a very steep hill on a narrow road with no through. So I drive up the hill, turn around in the culdesac and coast down to park on the street (boosting in reverse uphill can be intense, so I take the long way). What's odd is that some days the load decays rapidly, fuel cuts off, engine braking, and I can coast without touching the brakes; other days, the load doesn't decay, fuel dumps, and the car starts gaining speed, which means I sound like a school bus to my neighbors. Perhaps this can be a testing ground to find out what a 9 or 14 or 3 actually means???
For all "us" SST guys who track, I think I found something that will be important. Since we have to keep load as close to 300 as possible, check out the ECT and MAF IAT compensation.
I live at the bottom of a very steep hill on a narrow road with no through. So I drive up the hill, turn around in the culdesac and coast down to park on the street (boosting in reverse uphill can be intense, so I take the long way). What's odd is that some days the load decays rapidly, fuel cuts off, engine braking, and I can coast without touching the brakes; other days, the load doesn't decay, fuel dumps, and the car starts gaining speed, which means I sound like a school bus to my neighbors. Perhaps this can be a testing ground to find out what a 9 or 14 or 3 actually means???
For all "us" SST guys who track, I think I found something that will be important. Since we have to keep load as close to 300 as possible, check out the ECT and MAF IAT compensation.
Feb 3, 2014, 04:30 AM
#25
right...
the 3xMAP tables
1 = HOT
2 = Cold
3 = interpolated after the above are interpolated when there is a bunch of conditions:
P1235 ie run #3
MIVEC out of range (ie above or below max values)
MIVEC not near target
RPM < 937 (ie idle run #3)
something todo with the chain
so basically, yeh..
the 3xMAP tables
1 = HOT
2 = Cold
3 = interpolated after the above are interpolated when there is a bunch of conditions:
P1235 ie run #3
MIVEC out of range (ie above or below max values)
MIVEC not near target
RPM < 937 (ie idle run #3)
something todo with the chain
so basically, yeh..
Apr 14, 2014, 10:10 AM
#27
Are there any good writeups or any info at all on what all these really do? In particular the "Load Multiplier End" that you suggest changing? I'm seeing really noisy Load on several X's and it's causing a slightly unstable AFR plot, so I'd like to resolve that.
It's this kind of stuff I'm baffled by as to why Mitsubishi left the cars this way from the factory. I get the feeling that the stock ECU mapping on the X is not up to par with the 8/9 stuff. I'm extremely nitpicky, but there are several situations where the ECU in my 100% stock, 500 mi odometer GSR isn't handling things as well as it could be. Cold start, unstable MAF signal on throttle roll-off, etc, where the stock 8/9 was so solid.
Beau
It's this kind of stuff I'm baffled by as to why Mitsubishi left the cars this way from the factory. I get the feeling that the stock ECU mapping on the X is not up to par with the 8/9 stuff. I'm extremely nitpicky, but there are several situations where the ECU in my 100% stock, 500 mi odometer GSR isn't handling things as well as it could be. Cold start, unstable MAF signal on throttle roll-off, etc, where the stock 8/9 was so solid.
Beau
Apr 27, 2014, 02:55 AM
#29
so lately i have been focusing on driveability of my car, and i have to say its sucking a lot, but i think ive made some nice improvments..
one thing i noticed is that by increasing the "Load multiplier end when TPS decreased by % (hysteresis)" to stop 5% of load being dropped when you at WOT and the TPS drops by 0.4% (really annoying)... i feel like this made a big impact to regular driving... for me at least... problably a stock motor with normal cams (or less aggresive cam profile) it would be ok..
anyways i made a patch so that you can leave that value at 1, but use a load threshold instead:
53040010:
Quite simply it changes the "is the throttle being increased or released" routine so instead of using a Baro check (which would never get tripped because its WAY out of range) it uses a Load check...
#1 changes Baro to Load lookup
#2 changes the comparison order (ie instead of Load < value it does Load > value
#3 just remaps the Baro value into Load...
I haven't tested it yet, but it loads up in IDA fine, ill give it a go tomorrow...
See attached image for why I did this - this was using 2 as the value (or 0.8%) and it still pulled out load... bottom graph Red line indicates when the ECU thinks TPS has decreased or increased... bit crap :S
one thing i noticed is that by increasing the "Load multiplier end when TPS decreased by % (hysteresis)" to stop 5% of load being dropped when you at WOT and the TPS drops by 0.4% (really annoying)... i feel like this made a big impact to regular driving... for me at least... problably a stock motor with normal cams (or less aggresive cam profile) it would be ok..
anyways i made a patch so that you can leave that value at 1, but use a load threshold instead:
53040010:
Code:
<table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #1 (0xC6DC -> 0xC766)" category="Misc" address="17f6a" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #2 (0x0056 -> 0x0650)" category="Misc" address="17f6c" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Max Load patch" category="Misc" address="546a4" type="1D" scaling="Load"/>
#1 changes Baro to Load lookup
#2 changes the comparison order (ie instead of Load < value it does Load > value
#3 just remaps the Baro value into Load...
I haven't tested it yet, but it loads up in IDA fine, ill give it a go tomorrow...
See attached image for why I did this - this was using 2 as the value (or 0.8%) and it still pulled out load... bottom graph Red line indicates when the ECU thinks TPS has decreased or increased... bit crap :S