xt2005bonbon Posted December 29, 2017 Author Share Posted December 29, 2017 Well well well, yep that old version of ecuflash was the culprit. Just installed the latest version (1.42) and I am now seeing a correct representation of the x/y axes. Will post shortly an updated version of the various tables. Thanks rhino6303!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino6303 Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 I have version 1.29.906. Got this back in 2013.. Let me download the latest version and see what happens.Good idea. The newest version is 1.44.4799. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solidxsnake Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 Make sure you're using the latest ECUFlash definitions as well. I use TD-D's github repo, since that seems to be most recently updated (but there may be others if you search on the RR forums). Here's the ECUFlash definition from TD-D's repository for your CALID: https://github.com/TD-D/SubaruDefs/blob/Stable/ECUFlash/subaru%20standard/Outback%20XT/A2WC510S.xml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted December 29, 2017 Author Share Posted December 29, 2017 Thanks for that solidxsnake. Been trying to download that file from the link you provided but am not able to . Feel dumb right now.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solidxsnake Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 Thanks for that solidxsnake. Been trying to download that file from the link you provided but am not able to . Feel dumb right now.. You'll want the entire repository: https://github.com/TD-D/SubaruDefs/archive/Stable.zip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted December 30, 2017 Author Share Posted December 30, 2017 Alright. Man, took some time to sort all of this stuff out.... In the end, I was able to install ecuflash 1.44.4799, and get the latest ecu definitions from that repository. I have attached two screenshots of the stock vs. stage 2 boost control related tables. It is best to download them and visually compare them back and forth with your favorite png viewer. I arranged the tables the best I could so it is easy to compare... Things I have noticed: 1. With the latest ecuflash version, all axis values make sense now. Their respective ranges are expanded too which is great. 2. with this latest version, I no longer see Target Boost tables A through D. I only see Tables A and B. The same applies to the other 2D tables. 3. 2D Tables A are the same as B regardless of the variable you are viewing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solidxsnake Posted December 30, 2017 Share Posted December 30, 2017 Protip: there's a "compare tables" option in ECUFlash if you load multiple ROMs at the same time. Look in the "File" menu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted December 30, 2017 Author Share Posted December 30, 2017 OH man.... I wish I knew this before!!! Dang it. Will definitely use this. Much easier to compare I bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted December 30, 2017 Author Share Posted December 30, 2017 I just tried it. It's OK I guess. I thought it was going to show you an actual diff (e.g. subtraction of two tables). In any case, I think what I will try to do first is add perhaps 2% across the board on the Max Wastegate Duty table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wbrawley Posted December 30, 2017 Share Posted December 30, 2017 FWIW, I used a cheap MBC to diagnose mine. But it ended up being a missing restrictor pill keeping me at 12 psi WG pressure (mechanic lost it during turbo swap). Put in 1.0mm and was hitting 19 psi. But if you were hitting 17 before, probably not that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted December 30, 2017 Author Share Posted December 30, 2017 yeah. ok l just uploaded a modified rom. Gonna go for a test drive. Hopefully it won't blow up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted December 30, 2017 Author Share Posted December 30, 2017 Did you log throttle position? Accelerator position and throttle position are generally quite different. That said, I believe there are still compensations applied to WGDC, the initial/max table are pre-compensation. Forgot to reply to this comment... No I did not log anything. It was just by 'feel' . Not very scientific I know. By the way, which variable in btssm refer to the 'throttle position' shown in ecuflash? The names are a bit different. Regarding the compensations applied to the WGDC, I found the following equation from the link you provided earlier: (Compensations * InitialDC) + Integral + Proportional < (Compensations * MaxDC) Source: http://www.romraider.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=10885&highlight=#10885 By looking at the latest screenshot I provided, would you agree that my 'compensations' are essentially equal to 1? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solidxsnake Posted December 30, 2017 Share Posted December 30, 2017 Forgot to reply to this comment... No I did not log anything. It was just by 'feel' . Not very scientific I know. By the way, which variable in btssm refer to the 'throttle position' shown in ecuflash? The names are a bit different. Regarding the compensations applied to the WGDC, I found the following equation from the link you provided earlier: (Compensations * InitialDC) + Integral + Proportional < (Compensations * MaxDC) Source: http://www.romraider.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=10885&highlight=#10885 By looking at the latest screenshot I provided, would you agree that my 'compensations' are essentially equal to 1? If your logged WGDC isn't matching what's in your tables, then your compensations are not 1. The only way to be sure is to log your WGDC along with anything that is used in the compensation tables (IAT, atmospheric pressure, ECT). Remember that compensations are applied dynamically real-time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted December 30, 2017 Author Share Posted December 30, 2017 If your logged WGDC isn't matching what's in your tables, then your compensations are not 1. The only way to be sure is to log your WGDC along with anything that is used in the compensation tables (IAT, atmospheric pressure, ECT). Remember that compensations are applied dynamically real-time. I believe my compensations are 1. I had a closer look again at the various tables. In any case, I am planning to do what you are suggesting here. I will create the appropriate fields in btssm so I can log them. Adding the following piece of info for future reference since I am learning all this stuff... Remember that no matter WHAT the WGDC is, the wastegate cannot, and will not open at less than wastegate spring pressure. Which means that if you're talking about driveability and throttle response below 7 psi manifold relative pressure, changing your WGDC (either increasing or decreasing), will have absolutely no impact, because the wastegate is shut regardless of 0 or 100 WGDC. Source: http://www.romraider.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=5501 According to the above statement, 7 psi is equivalent to ~1.482 bar absolute. So I am understanding that it is only relevant to change WG DC in the gray cells shown below. No point to change the other cells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted December 30, 2017 Author Share Posted December 30, 2017 I forgot to ask.... Does the ecu interpolate between values shown in the various tables? I would guess so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solidxsnake Posted December 30, 2017 Share Posted December 30, 2017 I forgot to ask.... Does the ecu interpolate between values shown in the various tables? I would guess so. To answer the previous question, yeah, for the most part changing WGDC below spring pressure won't do much/anything. That said, the wastegate isn't a binary open/closed system, it will begin to open roughly around spring pressure (let's say 7psi), and then as more boost is building, it will open even more. In that sense, it's possible forcing a WGDC above 0 near the spring pressure threshold could have an impact, albeit negligible. As for the ECU, yes, it interpolates values both along an axis and within the map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted December 30, 2017 Author Share Posted December 30, 2017 Sure. I can definitely see it is not a binary system. OK, great. So I guess I will just have to play with these two WG tables (Initial and Max) and see how it goes. Although I feel like I should first adjust the gray cells in the Initial WG DC table; according to this person's statement "You really want your initial WGDC map to match as closely as possible to what you really need to hold constant boost at that RPM and throttle, perhaps a tad higher in lower RPM and a tad lower at higher RPM." (http://www.romraider.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=10885&highlight=#10885). It makes sense to me. Cause if you are already perfectly dialed in Initial WG DC, then no need for correction since you are reaching Target Boost fine. Now obviously, I will have to carefully check that the corresponding cells in the Max WG DC table are equal or slightly greater than the one in the Initial WG DC table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted December 30, 2017 Author Share Posted December 30, 2017 Let me ask another question... Say you take a specific rpm row in your Target boost table. You plot the target boost values as a function of TP. Should the shape of that curve match the shape of the WG DC curve for that same rpm row? Looking at the stock WG DC table, that is definitely not the case; the stock WG DC curve as a function of TP is a horizontal line. Also, second thing I noticed regarding the stock Initial vs. Max WG DC table, they only differ by some fixed % bias, in my case 7%. Interesting.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino6303 Posted December 30, 2017 Share Posted December 30, 2017 Let me ask another question... Say you take a specific rpm row in your Target boost table. You plot the target boost values as a function of TP. Should the shape of that curve match the shape of the WG DC curve for that same rpm row? Looking at the stock WG DC table, that is definitely not the case; the stock WG DC curve as a function of TP is a horizontal line. Also, second thing I noticed regarding the stock Initial vs. Max WG DC table, they only differ by some fixed % bias, in my case 7%. Interesting..In general, the Max DC will always be a just some constant more than the Initial DC table. Unsure about your first question. I've never plotted both and wouldn't expect them to be similar. If it were, I would think it was just coincidental. There are so many factors regarding wastegate and boost. For example, a larger tmic will generally require more wastegate to meet target boost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted December 30, 2017 Author Share Posted December 30, 2017 I see. And I am realizing now that if you were to compare the shape/slope of the curves, it probably makes more sense to fix the throttle position (i.e. select a column) and see these curves as a function of rpm. I am actually looking at these curves right now using excel. Just realized that you can copy a whole table and easily paste it in excel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted December 31, 2017 Author Share Posted December 31, 2017 Here are a few plots for fixed throttle positions [left plots 06OBXT || right plots 05OBXT]. I am clearly seeing what you've mentioned rhino, that is a fairly constant bias between Initial and Max DC (green vs. red curves). I am also noticing that for the 06, these variables are fairly constant for a good portion of the rpm and then drop after 5k or so. It's not quite the same for the 05... Then again, it is a bit apple and oranges here since the 06 has an EBCS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted January 4, 2018 Author Share Posted January 4, 2018 Brief update... I am on my third revision and have been slowly increasing the Initial and Max DC. I can report that I am slowly closing the gap between actual and target boosts. Will continue to tweak the tables. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted March 15, 2018 Author Share Posted March 15, 2018 Time to bump this thread.... I am trying to get back in adjusting the WGDC table in the hope of reaching my boost targets everywhere (where it matters). I re-read several posts from this thread but am confused about one thing now. First let me restate the formula someone posted on romraider: (Compensations * InitialDC) + Integral + Proportional < (Compensations * MaxDC) Now have a look at the attached screenshot of a very short log. You will see that I am not reaching target boost at all during this short log; almost 2 psi off most of the time. The log reports a WGDC between 69.9-71%. Now, I am understanding that this reported WGDC field includes the 'Integral' and 'Proportional' corrections (i.e. WGI and WGP in the log). I have attached my current Max WGDC table. If you look at the corresponding RPM/TP cells, you will see that the log did not even reach the values shown in these cells (~73-75.8%). Is it because the 'compensation' variable in the above equation is less than 1? I guess it has to be... Or else I am misunderstanding or missing something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solidxsnake Posted March 15, 2018 Share Posted March 15, 2018 Time to bump this thread.... I am trying to get back in adjusting the WGDC table in the hope of reaching my boost targets everywhere (where it matters). I re-read several posts from this thread but am confused about one thing now. First let me restate the formula someone posted on romraider: (Compensations * InitialDC) + Integral + Proportional < (Compensations * MaxDC) Now have a look at the attached screenshot of a very short log. You will see that I am not reaching target boost at all during this short log; almost 2 psi off most of the time. The log reports a WGDC between 69.9-71%. Now, I am understanding that this reported WGDC field includes the 'Integral' and 'Proportional' corrections (i.e. WGI and WGP in the log). I have attached my current Max WGDC table. If you look at the corresponding RPM/TP cells, you will see that the log did not even reach the values shown in these cells (~73-75.8%). Is it because the 'compensation' variable in the above equation is less than 1? I guess it has to be... Or else I am misunderstanding or missing something. What was your outdoor temp? I'd assume there was some negative compensation lowering your max WGDC due to IAT. Also, does the logged boost target match your target boost table? Or is it changed? I'm wondering if the logged "Target Boost" parameter doesn't account for any compensations, but I don't know off the top of my head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted March 15, 2018 Author Share Posted March 15, 2018 Intake temps were around 41F. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.