How's my LV?

[fahr_side]

Every car is different and every customer wants a different type of throttle/boost response.

Absolutely. Most people I know want a late-but-hard torque spike which really lets you know you're in a turbo four-banger. Personally I prefer a smooth and early pick-up that feels more like a big n/a V6. Regardless of my personal choices I know which style would be more popular in my circle of acquaintances.

 

This is definitely fine tuning which only an owner can and really should do. If I were paid by the hour this bill would be tremendous.

Hell yes. If I had gotten just minimum wage for the hours I spent dialing in the part-throttle / part-load areas on my own car I'd have retired already!

 

Getting to absolute perfection takes 10x longer than what most owners are willing to pay for or even appreciate. You are the freak here because most owners will find the car quick and smooth to drive and ask no more. They won't look at logs and wonder why x, y or z is happening. OTOH, freaks like us will find that the satisfaction of achieving that last 10% of the job to reach perfection through your own efforts is priceless.

 

Keep at it. I think you will find the reward to be worth the time and effort. What you learn in this process will be really helpful if and when you decide to go further. The nice part is that this part-throttle / light-load stuff is pretty safe to play with... it's not where your mistakes will bite you. You can always roll back if you go the wrong way, and lessons learned from mistakes are the most valuable.

[Infamous1]

Yeah my old LGT probably seen about 250 revisions and a good 700 logs. My Z06 is stock...

[iNVAR]

I don't usually use that much initial WGDC in that area but every car is different and everyone has their own objectives and methods. Maybe ask Shamar why he did that? I really don't want to second-guess him.

I would just lower the initial and max WGDC values in that area to avoid TD maxing out, but that's just me.

Yeah, that is what I ended up doing, it hopefully shouldn't hit the max anymore.

 

Remember that TD prop deals with short-term and small-value errors. TD integral is the big brother that steps in when TD prop seems to be losing the fight. TD integral is triggered when errors are large and / or persistent, takes longer to wind up and down once awoken.

 

What is your biggest negative value in the TD integral cumulative range (WGDC correction) table? If I understand it correctly, TD integral's corrections are limited by the values in this table. IIRC the stock maximum negative value is -90% which I think would be able to reduce WGDC to almost zero. If your tuner has changed this there may be a very good reason, like an attempt to stop big swings in boost. Check before you change this!

The largest value is -40, which you see it actually hits in the log. All the compensation values are within the cumulative range, I triple checked that the thesholds all have TD activated. If TD wasn't active, the TD would either not change as is the case when you hit Max WGDC and TD Int Positive stops increasing at all OR the TD vales would both 0 out, neither of which is the case here.

 

I can't find a reason for why my WGDC would stop lowering when all the TD values are that low. In that particular cell with those TD values, my WGDC should be around 25%, which should've been MORE than enough to stop the overboost condiiton. In fact, it should not even get to 25% if it had worked and had kept dropping below 50.2% from TD Int.

 

:confused:

 

BTW, the type of tune I prefer is one that won't blow up my engine and is good for daily driving. A hard power spike is nice, but not absolutely not needed.

[fahr_side]

The largest value is -40, which you see it actually hits in the log. All the compensation values are within the cumulative range, I triple checked that the thesholds all have TD activated. If TD wasn't active, the TD would either not change as is the case when you hit Max WGDC and TD Int Positive stops increasing at all OR the TD vales would both 0 out, neither of which is the case here.

It seems to me that TD is zero until the activation thresholds are crossed, then jump straight to whatever the tables call for.

 

I can't find a reason for why my WGDC would stop lowering when all the TD values are that low. In that particular cell with those TD values, my WGDC should be around 25%, which should've been MORE than enough to stop the overboost condiiton. In fact, it should not even get to 25% if it had worked and had kept dropping below 50.2% from TD Int.

Well, if initial was 65% as you mentioned before, then reducing that by a total of 48.7% (TD prop and integral added up) should get you to about 33%. Could the 7% between 33% and 40% be another compensation like IAT compensation? Those compensations adjust the actual WGDC target before TD intervention so the final WGDC will be skewed from initial by both. It could easily be that IAT comp has added 7% to WGDC before TD pulls it's 49%...

[iNVAR]

Nope, no IAT compensation affecting it. 0% compensation at that intake temperature.

 

But the thing I'm saying is that it's not actually pulling the 49% like it should. On line 19, WGDC is at 50.2% and TD Int is -15.57 and Prop is -6.66 for a total of -22%. Activation thresholds were definitely already crossed by this point. If they weren't, TD would actually display 0 in the log.

 

On line 20, WGDC is still at 50.2% and TD Int continues to drop to -19.99 and TD Prop is -6.08 for a total of -26%, steadily ramping down to -48% total. Why didn't WGDC drop even farther and continue to drop for the next few cells? Throttle remains fairly consistent in that region. There's no way what happened should've happened because it's -49% by line 20. My Init WGDC is NOT 90%+. Therefore, the 50.2% I see on those cells can't be right. (50.2% + 48.7 = 98.7% Init WGDC)

 

Another question for you: Why does everyone have high initial WGDC the first row around 2250 RPm all the way across? Is there some reason? (Spool, etc.?) Infamous did it, MickeyD did it, and you do it too, to a certain extent. But based on my partial throttle logs, that 75+ WGDC isn't necessary in the 2250, low throttle cells. I'm finding TD Int dropping like crazy for that.

 

Thanks.

[fahr_side]

Nope, no IAT compensation affecting it. 0% compensation at that intake temperature.

 

But the thing I'm saying is that it's not actually pulling the 49% like it should. On line 19, WGDC is at 50.2% and TD Int is -15.57 and Prop is -6.66 for a total of -22%. Activation thresholds were definitely already crossed by this point. If they weren't, TD would actually display 0 in the log.

 

On line 20, WGDC is still at 50.2% and TD Int continues to drop to -19.99 and TD Prop is -6.08 for a total of -26%, steadily ramping down to -48% total. Why didn't WGDC drop even farther and continue to drop for the next few cells? Throttle remains fairly consistent in that region. There's no way what happened should've happened because it's -49% by line 20. My Init WGDC is NOT 90%+. Therefore, the 50.2% I see on those cells can't be right. (50.2% + 48.7 = 98.7% Init WGDC)

 

Another question for you: Why does everyone have high initial WGDC the first row around 2250 RPm all the way across? Is there some reason? (Spool, etc.?) Infamous did it, MickeyD did it, and you do it too, to a certain extent. But based on my partial throttle logs, that 75+ WGDC isn't necessary in the 2250, low throttle cells. I'm finding TD Int dropping like crazy for that.

 

Thanks.

You could make my life a little easier by telling me what the initial values are eh? Look at your other comp tables for ambient air pressure and ECT. I don't have an '05 ROM here to look at of any stripe so I'm only going on what I see in '06 WRX ROMs etc. I understand your question, I just don't have enough data to give you the answer.

Also, remember logging happens in a sequence. The TD values are recorded some milliseconds after the rpm data and only just before the next time stamp. Communication via USB isn't real-time.

 

Most people use a high initial WGDC at that just pre-spool rpm to make sure the wastegate is letting the turbo spin a little there in case you do mash the pedal. It helps with spool. In those low-load areas I drop to 60% WGDC at 2k4 and keep dropping down the column. Again this is due to the turbo's own sweet-spot... you don't need much if any help from boost control to keep the turbo spinning enough to make boost when you are at higher rpms and very light throttle. Remember also that my tables are for a throttle-angle-via-requested-torque ECU. Even if I mash the pedal at idle I do not get max RT, so I have to set high initial WGDC down way low to get the best spool. With a throttle plate angle-based system you still want to take a look and see how pedal angle equates to throttle plate angle at low rpm. If the pedal is on the mat you want to have high initial WGDC to get the turbo spooling.

An '06 FXT map I did for example sees 80% initial WGDC down to 23.2% throttle angle at 2k4rpm and 0% at 13.9% throttle angle. You could give that a try and see if it makes things better. OR, you could try lowering your maximum negative cumulative from -40% to -50 or -60% and see what happens. Just don't be surprised if that move has consequences elsewhere. I'd rather lower the initial WGDC myself.

[iNVAR]

Hi, sorry about that! I was hoping that maybe what I was describing was enough or there was a quick answer. My fault.

 

Here's the rev7 that I was using at the time.

 

Since then, I've made a new one with significantly reduced and revised tables. Am I allowed to post up the ROM now since I've made so many changes to it? It's practically my own customized one now.

 

Also attached is the significantly revised latest map (second image).

 

No compensations in any of the WGDC tables. Really appreciate you looking at it.

 

It's probably a moot issue now that I've dialed down the WGDC, but I would still like to know what might have caused WGDC to get "stuck", in case it comes up again in the future, and so I can make sure I avoid that situation.

 

Also, I agree with your line of thinking. I really don't want to lower TD Int to anything less than -40%. I lowered my first row a bunch, but it's probably still high. I think realistically, looking at my logs, all that's necessary in that first row for me is about 20-30% at most. Do you think what I have in there's acceptable? Or is this really going to affect my spool because of those low numbers in the first row?

[fahr_side]

I would have stayed pretty much with rev.7 but come down to zero at 2250rpm and 12% throttle angle. That would probably make you happy. Like I said, if you cut too much down low you may find you do not get the wastegate clamped shut from the moment you mash the pedal, and that can slow spool IF boost rises above actuator pressure first. Try working in smaller steps.

 

Here's the WGDC tables from that stg1 tune on an '06 FXT for comparison...

 

http://i.imgur.com/oVemu.jpg

 

It's a base tune, not fully worked up yet, but you will get the idea.

 

I wouldn't mind you posting tables that were quite different from my own work. Can't speak for Shamar though...

[iNVAR]

So in your opinion, it's OK to have some heavy negative TD Int and TD Prop in the low RPM partial throttle zones to ensure quicker spooling? Nothing really wrong with that?

 

BTw, where are you? I'd like to buy both you and ridgerager a drink for the big help you've given me.

[fahr_side]

No, I don't like to see big intervention like that. Your boost targets look okay so just trim initial WGDC back until TD calms down. Log, tweak, rinse, repeat. Work on specific areas one at a time and in small steps until you're sure you know what you're doing.

 

BTW, once you figure out how to smooth boost control on the stock BCS, when you get a 3-port it will all seem like a walk in the park.

 

Thanks for the offer but I'm pretty sure you'd need to put wings or floats on your ride to make it here.

[iNVAR]

Hmm, I think in order to get the negative TD Int and Pos to settle down to really low values, I have to reduce that first row down low to the 30s like I have in the latest revision that I haven't flashed yet...

 

I mean, those big corrections of -40 and -8.7 ONLY happen if I'm cruising and I'm riding the throttle very, very, gently not really trying to accelerate. So it just sort of sits in that cell area so 65% WGDC is way too high for me even there.

 

Maybe wings and floats will be the next mod on my car!

[fahr_side]

Bear in mind that changes in WGDC do not have linear effects.

For example, at low revs 10% increases through to perhaps 60% may make zero difference to boost. Another equal step to 70% gives you whiplash...

Or, in that sweet-spot, around 3k2 with high throttle angle, just 1 or 2% can move boost up or down 1psi...

 

Try your revision but be sure and check it still works at WOT.

 

Frank_ster has some ideas about boat-car conversions.

[iNVAR]

Hehe yeah, and I also realized quickly why the surrounding cells matter a lot since the data is interpolated between the cells.

 

I've been making the changes based on logged data of actual WGDC, not just decreasing stuff by big steps without a reason to. Logged WGDC in that RPM/throttle area is pretty consistently being corrected downwards to around the 20-30% range... So if I put it any higher than that (like 55%) and I ride the pedal gently, TD Int shoots down very low to correct it back down. Is there any way to prevent that and still maintain the high initial WGDC to aid in spooling? I guess the alternative would be increasing the boost targets (pretty sure I don't want to do that.) Is it sort of like... I can either have a nice and smooth and accurate WGDC with minor TD compensation, but only with minor tradeoff of spooling time?

 

Pretty sure my WOT area is still good too but I'll make a point of checking it again today, thanks.

 

Haha, ok, I'll PM him!

[fahr_side]

Hehe yeah, and I also realized quickly why the surrounding cells matter a lot since the data is interpolated between the cells.

After a while you do it in your head. Are you still sure there are no corrections being applied from IAT or ECT or ambient pressure comp tables? Did you interpolate that or just look at the nearest value cell and see a zero?

 

I've been making the changes based on logged data of actual WGDC, not just decreasing stuff by big steps without a reason to.

If it were as simple as 'check the corrected value after TD and put that in the cell, everyone would be a tuner. Remember that corrections are being applied to the initial value before TD kicks in, so the final value you see cannot be used as the correct initial value or you will chase your own tail around and around.

Try subtracting half the TD value from the initial value to come up with a new initial value. That will get you closer. Flash and log again. It won't immediately get you there but you will be closer and shouldn't have overshot the mark. In time you'll be able to guess the right number but for now just work toward it in smaller steps.

Logged WGDC in that RPM/throttle area is pretty consistently being corrected downwards to around the 20-30% range... So if I put it any higher than that (like 55%) and I ride the pedal gently, TD Int shoots down very low to correct it back down.

OK, but you seem to be looking at this in 2D rather than 3D. 55% WGDC does not do much at 30% throttle and 2k2rpm. 55% WGDC at 30% throttle and 3k2rpm will make quite a bit of boost. This is why you have this 'valley' running through the middle of the table left to right. At low rpm the turbo isn't seeing enough gas to spin it up so if you are trying to make boost you have force all of it through the turbine.

OTOH, at high rpm the compressor starts asking for more power to run it than the turbine can easily produce, so again you have to clamp the wastegate more and force more and more of the exhaust through the turbine to extract that power from the gas.

In the middle, where the valley is on the WGDC table, the turbo is in it's sweet-spot. It wants to make boost, the turbine can potentially produce much more power than is needed to run the compressor. You have to hold it back by the tail by letting the wastegate open some more in order to stop it running off into overboost. This is why the response to changes in WGDC are not linear or equal in all parts of the map.

 

You probably know all this but I just want to put it out there for those following along. Remember also that where and how the turbo spools is dependent on load as well as control input. Load the car up with bodies, point it up a hill and try your light throttle at 2k2 trick in top gear. Most likely with zero WGDC you will see boost very early. Now do the same thing with an unloaded car, downhill and in second. Even 80% WGDC will have a hard time waking the turbo up. This is why you log in a set gear and on a flat road. The TD system exists to try and correct variations in load and by extension how much hot gas the turbine gets. We tune so there is the bare minimum of TD correction in the median of possible of conditions and then check TD has enough control authority to deal with the extremes.

 

Is there any way to prevent that and still maintain the high initial WGDC to aid in spooling? I guess the alternative would be increasing the boost targets (pretty sure I don't want to do that.) Is it sort of like... I can either have a nice and smooth and accurate WGDC with minor TD compensation, but only with minor tradeoff of spooling time?

No, I think you can have it both ways if you drop your initial WGDC values at low throttle angle / low rpm areas but leave it alone at higher throttle angles. Just try your 10% WGDC in there at 12% throttle and 2k2rpm and see how that works. Leave the values to the right on the 2k2 row where they were before and let the ECU smooth that step out as throttle increases.

[iNVAR]

After a while you do it in your head. Are you still sure there are no corrections being applied from IAT or ECT or ambient pressure comp tables? Did you interpolate that or just look at the nearest value cell and see a zero?

Yeah, pretty sure it's right. ECT and pressure comp tables are completely zeroed out.

 

IAT comp table shows a reduction ini WG at the 68F cell, but 77 and 86 (I added extra cell myself) are 0. Since IAT was 79 in the log, it should be 0 right between those two cells, no? No room for compensation there since both are 0?

 

 

If it were as simple as 'check the corrected value after TD and put that in the cell, everyone would be a tuner. Remember that corrections are being applied to the initial value before TD kicks in, so the final value you see cannot be used as the correct initial value or you will chase your own tail around and around.

I kind of think I know what you're saying...

 

But how about this, if I have a nice long stretch of constant throttle, and TD stays constant through that long stretch, and RPM maybe spans the ranges I'm interested in, I can use those WGDC right? Because that's essentially what I've been trying to do... getting a nice chunk of steady partial throttle across a few hundred RPM to determine WGDC. No good, or good?

 

Try subtracting half the TD value from the initial value to come up with a new initial value. That will get you closer. Flash and log again. It won't immediately get you there but you will be closer and shouldn't have overshot the mark. In time you'll be able to guess the right number but for now just work toward it in smaller steps.

Okie dokie, I'll try making smaller adjustments.

 

OK, but you seem to be looking at this in 2D rather than 3D. 55% WGDC does not do much at 30% throttle and 2k2rpm. 55% WGDC at 30% throttle and 3k2rpm will make quite a bit of boost. This is why you have this 'valley' running through the middle of the table left to right. At low rpm the turbo isn't seeing enough gas to spin it up so if you are trying to make boost you have force all of it through the turbine.

Nono, I definitely understand that from what you taught me and I've observed/experienced it firsthand.

 

But what I'm saying is that based on the logs I've been taken, at low RPM, low throttle (2250-2600 RPM with 40% throttle or less), the logs seem to show TD compensating a lot and reducing WGDC to around 30%, and it's easily able to hit the low target boost in my table (barely calling for 4 lbs in that RPM/throttle). Maybe I'm just reading the logs wrong but that's what it seems to show. It isn't until the RPMs rise that my target table calls for more boost and I have to ramp up the RPMs.

 

Is it something funky with my target boost table so low?

 

The TD system exists to try and correct variations in load and by extension how much hot gas the turbine gets. We tune so there is the bare minimum of TD correction in the median of possible of conditions and then check TD has enough control authority to deal with the extremes.

Yeah, that's exactly what I've been trying to do. I've been trying to find the middle area for my Init WGDC table, so it can compensate in either direction without a lot of effort. It just... made sense to me when I thought about how I wanted it to react.

 

No, I think you can have it both ways if you drop your initial WGDC values at low throttle angle / low rpm areas but leave it alone at higher throttle angles. Just try your 10% WGDC in there at 12% throttle and 2k2rpm and see how that works. Leave the values to the right on the 2k2 row where they were before and let the ECU smooth that step out as throttle increases.

But like I said, at the 24%, 30%, and 36% throttle areas at 2250, the logs (I got a bunch of em) seem to show that only 20-30% is needed in that range to achieve the target ~4 PSI. If I make those cells any higher but leave the lower throttle ranges alone, won't TD keep subtracting again?

 

I'm just not grasping how it's possible to have the quick spool enabled by the high Init WGDC in those cells AND be able to not have TD going really, really low in the situation where I'm cruising around with my foot gently on the pedal.

 

Thanks for being patient, I know I can be aggravating. Hehe, and you think YOU'RE OCD. I'm pretty OCD about stuff like this... because I want to understand the reasoning behind it and how it works, and understand why something behaves the way it does.

[fahr_side]

Yeah, pretty sure it's right. ECT and pressure comp tables are completely zeroed out.

 

IAT comp table shows a reduction ini WG at the 68F cell, but 77 and 86 (I added extra cell myself) are 0. Since IAT was 79 in the log, it should be 0 right between those two cells, no? No room for compensation there since both are 0?

OK, fair play. Just making sure since you said you just got your head around the idea of the ECU interpolating between values. If the tables you are looking at are at zero there is something else neither of us have thought of since the values don't quite add up.

 

 

I kind of think I know what you're saying...

 

But how about this, if I have a nice long stretch of constant throttle, and TD stays constant through that long stretch, and RPM maybe spans the ranges I'm interested in, I can use those WGDC right? Because that's essentially what I've been trying to do... getting a nice chunk of steady partial throttle across a few hundred RPM to determine WGDC. No good, or good?

Yes, when and if you are seeing the actual logged primary value being exactly the initials plus or minus the TD amounts. If they are not there is other compensation at play so you need to account for it.

Okie dokie, I'll try making smaller adjustments.

Small steps are good, especially if you're not 100% sure what you're doing. It's really easy to over-correct and then lose the rabbit. If I try to take shortcuts or change more than one thing at a time it usually comes back to bite me in the ass. The slower way ALWAYS gets the result.

Nono, I definitely understand that from what you taught me and I've observed/experienced it firsthand.

 

But what I'm saying is that based on the logs I've been taken, at low RPM, low throttle (2250-2600 RPM with 40% throttle or less), the logs seem to show TD compensating a lot and reducing WGDC to around 30%, and it's easily able to hit the low target boost in my table (barely calling for 4 lbs in that RPM/throttle). Maybe I'm just reading the logs wrong but that's what it seems to show. It isn't until the RPMs rise that my target table calls for more boost and I have to ramp up the RPMs.

I think you mean WGDC eh?

 

What I do in this case is combine all the logs in Excel (there's a command-line trick for this) and filter just the data in the rpm / load area of interest. Average the primary WGDC out and correct almost but not quite to that number. That usually puts me very close to being correct and with very small TD corrections.

 

Is it something funky with my target boost table so low?

Not at all. Being too high here just causes other problems with TD going high.

Yeah, that's exactly what I've been trying to do. I've been trying to find the middle area for my Init WGDC table, so it can compensate in either direction without a lot of effort. It just... made sense to me when I thought about how I wanted it to react.

Good. Just making sure... for you and the other readers.

But like I said, at the 24%, 30%, and 36% throttle areas at 2250, the logs (I got a bunch of em) seem to show that only 20-30% is needed in that range to achieve the target ~4 PSI. If I make those cells any higher but leave the lower throttle ranges alone, won't TD keep subtracting again?

 

I'm just not grasping how it's possible to have the quick spool enabled by the high Init WGDC in those cells AND be able to not have TD going really, really low in the situation where I'm cruising around with my foot gently on the pedal.

You only need to have the high initial and max WGDC set in cells where you are going to be while you stomp the loud pedal. You are right that you should not have big positive boost error at low revs and light throttle if you're in say 3rd gear on a flat road and not towing a load. Identify those areas and drop initial WGDC until TD interventions are zeroed out.

 

Your 'latest' initial table does look a bit low though. Log it and see... you aren't going to damage anything. Maybe try using the max values you laid out from 12% to 35.7% as the initial values and then bump the max values about 10% up from that. I haven't tuned any VF-40 cars so I don't know exactly what to suggest... can only base my suggestions on what works with TD04s.

Thanks for being patient, I know I can be aggravating. Hehe, and you think YOU'RE OCD. I'm pretty OCD about stuff like this... because I want to understand the reasoning behind it and how it works, and understand why something behaves the way it does.

No worries. I am cool spending the time with you because you want to learn, not just have a perfect tune handed to you on a plate. Those guys can go pay a pro for that, by the hour.

[iNVAR]

Okay, another question here: Which gear should I be trying to tune this for? As expected, in gears 1 and 2, at partial throttle, it doesn't quite get to the target boost with the WGDC I set, but at higher gears, it does, easily.

[fahr_side]

Whichever gear is closer to a 1:1 ratio is the usual answer. For you I think that is 3rd. Just note that perfection in 3rd may lead to TD needing to pull WGDC in 4th and 5th to avoid overboost. Perfection in 4th may lead to slightly late spool in 3rd. My preference is to allow TD to be a little positive at higher revs in 3rd rather than have big negative interventions in 4th.

[iNVAR]

1:1 would be 4th. My 3rd is 1.296 and 4th is 0.972. Hmm okay, gotta work on this. I think I'm going to add another column in for initial wgdc in RR to make it easier on myself, and possiblly road speed too so I have an indication of what gear I'm in. My logs are huge because it's my 15-20 minute commute.

 

edit: I think in 5th at 2300RPM, I'm making 6psi on 0% WGDC... That's... annoying, hmm. Log attached if you're curious.

edit2: Damnit, I have no idea how to get rid of this... Init WDC is already super low at just about 35%. I think this might be normal??

5th-wgboost.csv

[JDM SpecB]

Can someone explain to me as Ive been reading up over at romraider.

 

http://i51.tinypic.com/mv22z5.jpg

 

FLKC you want the large table to be all zeros right?

This shows its not adding or reducing fuelling.

If there are any values in here as long as they are not outside the generally accepted 5% its ok?

 

 

 

If top end trim (40+) is off by more than 5% you should stay out of boost because the top end trim value is in effect during open loop? Positive here and youre running too rich and negative your running too lean during boost.

 

Resetting the ECU will clear these stored values, is this so you can see if they come back again?

Do you ultimately want this stored values section to be clear as well?

 

http://i51.tinypic.com/10h3znk.jpg

[iNVAR]

FLKC, the big table, shows advance/retard of timing and is expressed in degrees, not percentages. Whether the red values (negative) that you see in there are to be of concern depends on where they are. Low load/low RPM learned knock is not a big deal and a lot of tuners disable FLKC below certain RPM ranges because a lot of stuff shows up as knock.

 

High RPM/High load knock is what you have to really be more concerned about because that's when stuff can break and it gets expensive.

 

Red (negative) means at some point between now and the last reset, the ECU detected what it perceives to be a knock event and it pulled timing to prevent future knocks.

 

Blue means the ECU is adding timing in those cells. You should never have blue in there unless your IAM drops below 1, which means that your ECU detect lots of knock all over the place and decided to pull timing from all over the map in one fell swoop by reducing the IAM. The blue indicates that the ECU hasn't detected knock in that area and it's trying to advance the timing back up slowly.

 

As for the top 4 numbers, the 1st two most people say aren't a big concern unless it's way off. The 3rd and 4th ones are hard to get learned/settled in and Spec B posted on page to:

cool...to get the highend fuel trims settled in you have to do 1/4 throttle (light cruise) in the higher-end of the RPM range. Also nice uphill 70-80 MPH 5th gear cruising. WOT runs do not allow fuel trim learning to take place..it obly happens during cruising.

Also, to answer your last question, I believe ALL AFRs are used during open loop, but the ones to be most concerned about are the 3rd and 4th because again, high loads and corresponding high RPMs are when stuff can break.

 

Positive here means the ECU thinks that there is too little fuel (lean) from your tune and it is ADDING fuel to it (richening).

 

Negative here means that the EUC thinks there is too much fuel (rich) from your tune and it is SUBTRACTING fuel from it (leaning it out.) The reason why negative is bad is because the ECU might be leaning it out too much or unnecessarily, and when stuff gets too lean, it can cause detonation... and expensive damage.

 

edit: Also, you're in the process of being tuned by Infamous. Things should be nice and settled by the time he's done.

[JDM SpecB]

Thanks iNVAR.

 

When logging if I want to add a couple of knock inspecting checks which ones do i choose as there seems to be both 1byte and 4 byte etc

 

Should I do both Feedback and Fine learning?

 

http://i55.tinypic.com/wrx5qp.jpg

 

Is this how i can best monitor knock under load when out doing a few pulls?

[iNVAR]

Yeah, those are the two you want. 1-byte and 4-byte indicate how precise the number you are getting is. 4-byte and is the exact data that the ECU is working with. Clearly, that's the optimal choice.

 

HOWEVER, bear in mind that your OBDII/USB connection has limited bandwidth. The more stuff you add in to log, the farther apart each line on your data log will be in milliseconds... so if you add those two options and previously each line was about 200ms, it might now increase to 220 or 230.

 

Thankfully, the new RR has a "fast polling" option that has allowed me to log a crapton of stuff and keep the polling speed very low. To give you an idea of how much faster "fast polling" is, I used to log these parameters:

 

1. Engine Load (2-byte)** (g/rev)
   
2. Engine Speed (rpm)
   
3. IAM (4-byte)* (multiplier)
   
4. Ignition Total Timing (degrees)
   
5. Intake Air Temperature (F)
   
6. Knock Correction Advance (degrees)
   
7. Knock Sum* (count)
   
8. Manifold Relative Pressure (4-byte)* (psi relative)
   
9. Mass Airflow (g/s
   

 

And the polling interval used to be just about 225ms.

 

NOW, I log these:

 

1. Boost Error* (psi)
   
2. Engine Load (4-Byte)* (g/rev)
   
3. Engine Speed (rpm)
   
4. Feedback Knock Correction (1-byte)** (degrees)
   
5. Fine Learning Knock Correction (1-byte)** (degrees)
   
6. IAM (4-byte)* (multiplier)
   
7. Ignition Total Timing (degrees)
   
8. Intake Air Temperature (F)
   
9. Knock Correction Advance (degrees)
   
10. Knock Sum* (count)
    
11. Manifold Relative Pressure (4-byte)* (psi relative)
    
12. Mass Airflow (g/s)
    
13. Mass Airflow Sensor Voltage (V)
    
14. Primary Wastegate Duty Cycle (%)
    
15. Throttle Opening Angle (%)
    
16. Turbo Dynamics Integral (4-byte)* (absolute %)
    
17. Turbo Dynamics Proportional (4-byte)* (absolute %)
    

And my polling interval is about 97ms. Notice how many more things I've added AND how I'm using the 4-byte of some of the things.

 

The fast polling is GREAT. The only potential downside is that it seems to be more prone to getting little minor blips in the data, or the engine RPM speed seems to go up according to the data log (which makes it look like a slipping clutch), when it really isn't. But it's well worth it to have this added speed.

[JDM SpecB]

Great thanks! Making sense now

 

I currently log these for the tuner

 

http://i51.tinypic.com/xllb41.jpg

 

Tune is great.

Very smooth early power which is nice. Twin scroll comes on nice and low, it may taper off more than the sigle scroll turbos but they really are great for around town daily driving!

Throttle response is definitely better now than before tune.

Thanks Shamar!

[iNVAR]

Log whatever they tell you to log. If you have fast polling enabled, you can probably add other stuff in if you want, but don't go crazy.