Data Logs! Post them here.

[Boomerang]

Originally Posted by fibble

Agreed - same on my logs. This supports my assumption that Openflash pushed an update to OFT over the last few days via OFM.

Cheers

Yep, last email I had from Shiv advised to upgrade the OFT via OFM to see if IAM etc was working on D00G.
After I upgraded IAM still didn't work, looks like this is when the FLKC changed too..

[Wayno]

Originally Posted by fibble

No probs - will do the extra ks.

Also noted experimental Stg 1 AVCS is significantly more conservative on both Intake and Exhaust.

Something you found or suspect?

It's not more conservative, it has more cam advance in a lot of areas. WOT is exactly the same. You will just need to try it to feel of its any better or not.

[fibble]

Originally Posted by Wayno

It's not more conservative, it has more cam advance in a lot of areas. WOT is exactly the same. You will just need to try it to feel of its any better or not.

Thx Wayno will do.

[dtek]

I hope one of you technical tune pro's will be able to help me out here. I've been logging some recent city/ highway drives and noticed that in about 30% of instances of activating the ESC (ie, applying 2-4psi boost to the intake manifold) the AFR runs wildly up into the 15-17 area.

Command AFR during these events stays where it should be, down around the high 11's. So it's like the underlying program in the tune is right but the actuality of what the injectors, sensors ,etc are doing doesn't correspond.

See this log, the first two boost events run reasonably safely, then the third goes apeshit at first but it appears some sort of correction occurs (with 0% STFT) that brings the AFR down closer to the Command AFR.

http://datazap.me/u/dtek/01-7-16-91o...3281-3704-4020


Another instance where it stays in Closed loop throughout the boost addition, the AFR is a little high but you can see the STFT skyrockets to offset the added air coming in.

http://datazap.me/u/dtek/11-7-16-pac...3392&mark=3322


A scenario where it's in Open loop, and the AFR stays fairly well behaved.

http://datazap.me/u/dtek/11-7-16-pac...mark=3322-8179

Another instance of Closed Loop holding semi decent AFR but STFT goes to the moon trying to enrichen.

http://datazap.me/u/dtek/11-7-16-fre...5-433&mark=368

An Open Loop which loses the plot completely, yet IAM and flkc stay clear like there's no detected knock or any concerns:

http://datazap.me/u/dtek/11-7-16-fre...1494&mark=1431


This tune began as Shiv's official ESC tune for the USA market 'G' rom, and was copied over in RR to suit my ROM. Haven't scaled the MAF, but when I plugged in these logs into the mafscaling-2.2.6 software, the CL chart created a crazy bump of 30-40% higher from 2.9V to 3.5V.

My suspicion is that Load Limits need to be tweaked and the MAF scale must need some attention. Perhaps the OL>CL transition needs adjusting.

I wonder if there is some table in RR that bases fueling on the Manifold Air Pressure that could be used to specifically target fuel added based on MAP > 0.75 or something.

Any help appreciated.

-- Has Shiv released an updated ESC tune since the very first one way back when the 1.5 dump kits were just released? I can't find any OTS tune for ESC from him on the official website. --

[Wayno]

Originally Posted by dtek

This tune began as Shiv's official ESC tune for the USA market 'G' rom, and was copied over in RR to suit my ROM.

US ROMS are denoted with C/D, so I don't know what you're doing.

[dtek]

Come on Wayno, my memory from about 2 years ago when I first downloaded Shiv's ESC tune wasn't crystal clear so yes you're 110% right, it was actually a C tune now that I've refreshed the memory. Top marks, gold star for you mate. Really hit the nail on the head.

Now that the ego has been appeased, and nits have been picked.
Any interest in tapping into your know how and being so generous as to give some input on the actual tuning aspect of the thread?

[Wayno]

Originally Posted by dtek

Come on Wayno, my memory from about 2 years ago when I first downloaded Shiv's ESC tune wasn't crystal clear so yes you're 110% right, it was actually a C tune now that I've refreshed the memory. Top marks, gold star for you mate. Really hit the nail on the head.

Now that the ego has been appeased, and nits have been picked.
Any interest in tapping into your know how and being so generous as to give some input on the actual tuning aspect of the thread?

Most likely you haven't copied one or more tables due to incomplete definitions. You haven't said what rom you copied to, and haven't even filled out your location, choosing to be a smart arse instead. So i don't know how you expect help.

[dtek]

Originally Posted by Wayno

...choosing to be a smart arse instead. So i don't know how you expect help.

Much as I respect your work on tune refinements round here, you're no stranger to a petty smart arse snipe, so I thought you of all would take it with a grain of salt.

FYI it's an A00I and yes Im in 'straya like you. Why those two factors are really a relevant concern escapes me though.

The Defs used were the most up to date available at the time, but I'll make a point to go revisit the tune comparison with the current most recent defs and see if I can find any new tables. I've even done side by side comparisons between Shiv's OTS tune (91RON C ROM to his ESC 91RON C ROM) and I can't see any clear differential that speaks to where he adds/tweaks specifically for boost. Yes there's some differences but certainly not intuitive or logical.

I was hoping that one of the forced induction tuning guys would weigh in here with actual experience with that aspect of tuning. Since the one common denominator in the problematic AFRs is only when boost is applied.

[steve99]

Originally Posted by dtek

Much as I respect your work on tune refinements round here, you're no stranger to a petty smart arse snipe, so I thought you of all would take it with a grain of salt.

FYI it's an A00I and yes Im in 'straya like you. Why those two factors are really a relevant concern escapes me though.

The Defs used were the most up to date available at the time, but I'll make a point to go revisit the tune comparison with the current most recent defs and see if I can find any new tables. I've even done side by side comparisons between Shiv's OTS tune (91RON C ROM to his ESC 91RON C ROM) and I can't see any clear differential that speaks to where he adds/tweaks specifically for boost. Yes there's some differences but certainly not intuitive or logical.

I was hoping that one of the forced induction tuning guys would weigh in here with actual experience with that aspect of tuning. Since the one common denominator in the problematic AFRs is only when boost is applied.

You might want to try a guy called @KoolBRZ from memory he has an auto trans and an phantom esc, i think he had similar issues hes in usa/canada so yu will have to port changes to your rom.

If porting changes between rom calid i usually do this

1. compare say a stock A01C or whatever the source rom is with the modded source rom of same calid say A01C. Note the names of all the tables changed. dont try to directly copy from say a C to G series as you dont know which tables to change and which to leave alone

2. Then open the destination and source roms with compatible definitions ie make sure ones not metric and one imperial and carefully copy across ONLY those tables you noted different in step 1. Carefully check both the source and destination tables BEFORE you copy to see the x and y axis are consistent in both the source and destination tables , the x and y axis should be same only the contents of the table should differ there are some errors in defs.

Traps and pitfalls

Do NOT copy tables if the x and y axis dont match between source and destination tables either weird stuff will happen or ecu may be bricked.

Other traps are tables can be named slightly differenty between roms of different calid.

Their will be differences in say a stock C series and G series rom due country specific changes to roms DO NOT copy these over, this is the purpose of step 1 ,to find what the tuner changes from stock on the same rom calid.

If you cannot match table names or the tables look different then be exceedingly careful and research why this is.

[dtek]

Originally Posted by steve99

You might want to try a guy called @KoolBRZ

I did collaborate with Kool but after a while once I'd given a few files, and other iterations, he sent me one tweaked tune and a procede map or two, after that went off on his own tangent. Going on some of the speculative bum-dyno work of most threads he's been in the last year or so, I'm not sure I'd be confident to run a Kool tune these days.

As to the steps to convert Roms, thanks Steve... I have for quite some time basically followed that approach, and just now have re-checked using Shiv's most recent XML defs and the only tables missing in my tune are several of the P000X check box on-off type of ones. My understanding from reading on here, is that different ROMs have different levels of firmware(?) when it comes to those tables and there's not much I can do about that.

One peculiar thing is, I cross-compared Shiv's v2.10 A00I xml def file with Wayno's WW v106 2016-06-16 A00I xml file and there's significant differences. Shiv's is 800kb in size and 8000+ lines of code, whereas Wayno's is 569kb and 6500 lines of code. I obviously didn't pick through each line by line but seems there's some pretty major differences in there...

[steve99]

Originally Posted by dtek

I did collaborate with Kool but after a while once I'd given a few files, and other iterations, he sent me one tweaked tune and a procede map or two, after that went off on his own tangent. Going on some of the speculative bum-dyno work of most threads he's been in the last year or so, I'm not sure I'd be confident to run a Kool tune these days.

As to the steps to convert Roms, thanks Steve... I have for quite some time basically followed that approach, and just now have re-checked using Shiv's most recent XML defs and the only tables missing in my tune are several of the P000X check box on-off type of ones. My understanding from reading on here, is that different ROMs have different levels of firmware(?) when it comes to those tables and there's not much I can do about that.

One peculiar thing is, I cross-compared Shiv's v2.10 A00I xml def file with Wayno's WW v106 2016-06-16 A00I xml file and there's significant differences. Shiv's is 800kb in size and 8000+ lines of code, whereas Wayno's is 569kb and 6500 lines of code. I obviously didn't pick through each line by line but seems there's some pretty major differences in there...

you shoulnt need to change any cel code stuff unlees they changed a cel code between the stock usa rom and the esc tuned usa rom.

yes for example the usa roms have the evap contol system ective whre our roms dont use evap its not wired in and disabled in our roms good if you want to use flex kits

[Kodename47]

You can use my defs if you like. They are matched between different definitions, so long as the C series you are copying are based on B01C.

OFT C Series Definitions - Based on B01C
OFT I Series Definition - Based on A01I

There is a table called Port Injection MRP Compensation that will impact the PI under positive pressure.

All load limits etc are defined.

[KoolBRZ]

Originally Posted by dtek

I did collaborate with Kool but after a while once I'd given a few files, and other iterations, he sent me one tweaked tune and a procede map or two, after that went off on his own tangent. Going on some of the speculative bum-dyno work of most threads he's been in the last year or so, I'm not sure I'd be confident to run a Kool tune these days.

As to the steps to convert Roms, thanks Steve... I have for quite some time basically followed that approach, and just now have re-checked using Shiv's most recent XML defs and the only tables missing in my tune are several of the P000X check box on-off type of ones. My understanding from reading on here, is that different ROMs have different levels of firmware(?) when it comes to those tables and there's not much I can do about that.

One peculiar thing is, I cross-compared Shiv's v2.10 A00I xml def file with Wayno's WW v106 2016-06-16 A00I xml file and there's significant differences. Shiv's is 800kb in size and 8000+ lines of code, whereas Wayno's is 569kb and 6500 lines of code. I obviously didn't pick through each line by line but seems there's some pretty major differences in there...

@dtek, I'm sorry I dropped off the map, but I've had to relearn a lot. I've been working with @shaynek to debug the current tunes. I want to release a whole list of tunes for MT and AT cars, complete with 3 tunes each, a def file, the original tune changes were added to, and 2 PROcede maps, so they can each be customized by the user.
I've been working on my tunes to try to better harness the power of the ESC. Starting with a smooth, progressive AVCS map, I added shr133's PI/DI tables with only slight changes. With an open exhaust, the AVCS advance has to be drastically reduced, which fights against my instincts. But, less noise is actually more power. It also handles boost better.
I've also included the Wayno def I used, several PROcede maps, the Shiv's original OTS v2.072 91 Octane stage 2 UEL tune I copied the changes to, so you can compare before and after. There are 3 tunes included with 3 different AVCS tables between them. This lets you try them and pick the one that suits your individual Intake/Exhaust restrictions best.
I'm currently using the "B" PROcede map, which is stronger, but it works fine with the "AB" PROcede map as well. It's called the 40-20 tune because it gets 40 highway mpg, and 20 city. Economical cruising, but with gas-guzzling acceleration when you need it.

[sIowbrz]

can someone take a look at this for me? i just want to make sure my car is running good no damage to anytthing thanks!
http://www.datazap.me/u/carewyip/log...data=1-8-11-12