A bunch of load calculation related maps
Apr 28, 2014, 12:24 PM
#46
Should be the following:
Code:
<table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #1 (0xC728 -> 0xC7B4)" category="Misc" address="1a72e" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #2 (0x0056 -> 0x0650)" category="Misc" address="1a730" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Max Load patch" category="Misc" address="546ce" type="1D" scaling="Load"/>
Apr 29, 2014, 03:41 AM
#48
another one i've been sitting on:
53040010:
Basically modifies the MAP AXIS lookup for the 3xMAP tables to use "current" MAP, not time averaged one.. i dont have a graph to show you the difference, but it equates to about 0.1 second shift during spool up..
I feel like my car drives better with this... But you will notice (if your running of MAP for Load) that your IPW will become quite jumpy, AFR's dont seem to change much..
Looking forwards to the feedback!
53040010:
Code:
<table name="3xMAP tables use actual MAP, not averaged 0xC780 -> 0xC6D6" category="Misc" address="62a68" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/>
I feel like my car drives better with this... But you will notice (if your running of MAP for Load) that your IPW will become quite jumpy, AFR's dont seem to change much..
Looking forwards to the feedback!
Apr 29, 2014, 06:45 AM
#49
Evolving Member
Maybe you can also help explain what problems (if any) does it bring if it is not detecting increases or decreases of TPS?
Last edited by RS200Z; Apr 29, 2014 at 06:54 AM.
Apr 29, 2014, 07:18 AM
#50
200 is just a number i chose..
basically you want to pick a number where you dont want the 5% load reduction that occurs when you reduce TPS by the tiniest of amounts.
5% at 11.5 AFR results in above 12 AFR.. which is dangerous..
You could easily go with 150 or 250, it just depends on when you want the stock system to deactivate...
If you make the value to small, then the only thing that will happen is your ECU WONT pull 5% of load out when you take you foot off the pedal.. so you will run a bit too rich.. big woop
basically you want to pick a number where you dont want the 5% load reduction that occurs when you reduce TPS by the tiniest of amounts.
5% at 11.5 AFR results in above 12 AFR.. which is dangerous..
You could easily go with 150 or 250, it just depends on when you want the stock system to deactivate...
If you make the value to small, then the only thing that will happen is your ECU WONT pull 5% of load out when you take you foot off the pedal.. so you will run a bit too rich.. big woop
Apr 29, 2014, 07:28 AM
#51
59580004:
Again stock value changed so confirmation needs done before attempting these patches.
Patch #1 Stock value changed from C6DC -> C734
Patch #2 Stock value matches.
Max Load patch data matches as "29"
Again stock value changed so confirmation needs done before attempting these patches.
Patch #1 Stock value changed from C6DC -> C734
Patch #2 Stock value matches.
Max Load patch data matches as "29"
Code:
<table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #1 (0xC734 -> 0xC7C0)" category="Misc" address="18866" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #2 (0x0056 -> 0x0650)" category="Misc" address="18868" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Max Load patch" category="Misc" address="546d8" type="1D" scaling="Load"/>
Apr 29, 2014, 07:32 AM
#52
Sorry typo in post... I do this on my tuning laptop then type on my work computer... Just verified my XML and here are the proper addresses:
Code:
<table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #1 (0xC734 -> 0xC7C0)" category="Misc" address="1a866" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #2 (0x0056 -> 0x0650)" category="Misc" address="1a868" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Max Load patch" category="Misc" address="546d8" type="1D" scaling="Load"/>
Apr 29, 2014, 08:08 AM
#54
Here is a good example of the tps decreasing thing..
Check the right hand side, see how the ipw "smooths" out, when custom_log_2 goes spastic.. thats basically detecting tps decreasing.
in addition to the 5% thing, these maps (post #1):
Load Increase/Decrease threshold
Load Increase/Decrease divider (ie 1 is biggest)
Load Increase/Decrease multiplier (ie 1 is smallest) #1
Load Increase/Decrease multiplier (ie 1 is smallest) #2
control how much load is added/removed in steady state, steady state DOESN'T apply when TPS is decreasing, only when it's increasing or not doing either...
Formula is something like Final Load = New Load + ((New Load - Old Load) * (multiplier / divider) / 50)..
It also doesn't help that I am running the Direct MAP patch (so my MAP signal isn't being averaged at all)
All in all, the stock ECU is a bit retarded when it comes to calculating load...
Check the right hand side, see how the ipw "smooths" out, when custom_log_2 goes spastic.. thats basically detecting tps decreasing.
in addition to the 5% thing, these maps (post #1):
Load Increase/Decrease threshold
Load Increase/Decrease divider (ie 1 is biggest)
Load Increase/Decrease multiplier (ie 1 is smallest) #1
Load Increase/Decrease multiplier (ie 1 is smallest) #2
control how much load is added/removed in steady state, steady state DOESN'T apply when TPS is decreasing, only when it's increasing or not doing either...
Formula is something like Final Load = New Load + ((New Load - Old Load) * (multiplier / divider) / 50)..
It also doesn't help that I am running the Direct MAP patch (so my MAP signal isn't being averaged at all)
All in all, the stock ECU is a bit retarded when it comes to calculating load...
Apr 29, 2014, 09:18 AM
#55
5268
5801
Tephra needs to verify everything in these tables, so dont use them until he gives the Ok.
Code:
<table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #1 (0xC6E4 -> 0xC76E)" category="Misc" address="1814E" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #2 (0x0056 -> 0x0650)" category="Misc" address="18150" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Max Load patch" category="Misc" address="54696" type="1D" scaling="Load"/> <table name="3xMAP tables use actual MAP, not averaged 0xC788 -> 0xC6DE" category="Misc" address="62a2A" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/>
Code:
<table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #1 (0xC730 -> 0xC7BC)" category="Misc" address="1A762" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #2 (0x0056 -> 0x0650)" category="Misc" address="1A764" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Max Load patch" category="Misc" address="546D8" type="1D" scaling="Load"/>
Last edited by chetrickerman; Apr 29, 2014 at 12:24 PM.
Apr 29, 2014, 12:13 PM
#56
5268
5801
Tephra needs to verify everything in these tables, so dont use them until he gives the Ok.
Code:
<table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #1 (0xC6E4 -> 0xC770)" category="Misc" address="1814E" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #2 (0x0056 -> 0x0650)" category="Misc" address="18150" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Max Load patch" category="Misc" address="54696" type="1D" scaling="Load"/> <table name="3xMAP tables use actual MAP, not averaged 0xC788 -> 0xC6DE" category="Misc" address="62a2A" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/>
Code:
<table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #1 (0xC730 -> 0xC7BC)" category="Misc" address="1A762" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #2 (0x0056 -> 0x0650)" category="Misc" address="1A764" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Max Load patch" category="Misc" address="546D8" type="1D" scaling="Load"/>
52680015-22:
Code:
<table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #1 (0xC6E4 -> 0xC76E)" category="Misc" address="1814E" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/>
<table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #2 (0x0056 -> 0x0650)" category="Misc" address="18150" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/>
<table name="TPS Liftoff Max Load patch" category="Misc" address="54696" type="1D" scaling="Load"/>
Code:
<table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #1 (0xC6E4 -> 0xC770)" category="Misc" address="1816E" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Baro to Load patch #2 (0x0056 -> 0x0650)" category="Misc" address="18170" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/> <table name="TPS Liftoff Max Load patch" category="Misc" address="546a8" type="1D" scaling="Load"/>
Apr 30, 2014, 08:09 AM
#57
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: PA
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
another one i've been sitting on:
53040010:
Code:
<table name="3xMAP tables use actual MAP, not averaged 0xC780 -> 0xC6D6" category="Misc" address="62a68" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/>
Basically modifies the MAP AXIS lookup for the 3xMAP tables to use "current" MAP, not time averaged one.. i dont have a graph to show you the difference, but it equates to about 0.1 second shift during spool up..
I feel like my car drives better with this... But you will notice (if your running of MAP for Load) that your IPW will become quite jumpy, AFR's dont seem to change much..
Looking forwards to the feedback!
53040010:
Code:
<table name="3xMAP tables use actual MAP, not averaged 0xC780 -> 0xC6D6" category="Misc" address="62a68" type="1D" scaling="Hex16"/>
Basically modifies the MAP AXIS lookup for the 3xMAP tables to use "current" MAP, not time averaged one.. i dont have a graph to show you the difference, but it equates to about 0.1 second shift during spool up..
I feel like my car drives better with this... But you will notice (if your running of MAP for Load) that your IPW will become quite jumpy, AFR's dont seem to change much..
Looking forwards to the feedback!
Last edited by rrkpitt15; Apr 30, 2014 at 08:11 AM.
