Finally downloaded the LNF update! looks pretty snazy lol. Dont have much to do today so im about to go test a few things out on the wastegate control and desired boost tables. :rolleyes:
Printable View
Finally downloaded the LNF update! looks pretty snazy lol. Dont have much to do today so im about to go test a few things out on the wastegate control and desired boost tables. :rolleyes:
Results:
After tinkering with the tables adding a little here and there, i wasnt seeing any changes. I went ahead and maxed out the duty cycle correction table and set duty cycle maxto 100% "it will actually go to 327.68%" to see if i could hold boost a little longer. Results were 255kpa till 5,100rpms. Dropped to 235-230kpa at 6200 and i let out. I do still have the WG rod adjusted.
Im not sure how far you can push these tables though so im gunna wait for someone else to post up thier thoughts. Id like to get it to hold 23psi till red line lol but not sure how well the turbo will like that.
Same here I am going to loosen my wg rod back close to stock now though. Dont want to be spiking 30 psi when tuning for 24 psi LOL.
Try the Proportional Max table and let me know how it goes. There are some interesting differences between the stock and GMPP tune.
You dont need to mess with those really, the WG Correction Table works nicely :)
Yea I stopped at 100 on the WG correction table but noticed it would go up to 327.7. Wasnt sure how far we could push that table yet. I use to run my DAL table at 279 then after 5000 bumped it up to 300, it helped by like 1 psi but i moved it to a flat 279 all the way through.Quote:
Originally Posted by BackyardTurbo_FTW
The WG% wont go over 100 so going to 300+ wont be doing anything different.
So a question for those messing with the WG duty...
1. Does the WG cor factor table make its cor from the max WG % (i.e. (Max = 95 * cor = 95) = 90.25%
or
2. Does the WG cor factor table set the WG % up to the max WG % (i.e. (cor = 95, max = 95) = 95%
The Proportional Max table seems to max at 90.025% which may support #1, or maybe I am reading into the numbers too much....
I've literally had just a little bit of time tonight to play with these tables, but I believe #2 is correct. I left max at 95%, when correction table is at 100%, desired DC in the logs will show 95% since max is only 95%. When correction is at 70%, DC in logs is showing 70%. At least that's what it seemed like but I've only loaded 1 tune so far! Next tune I'm hoping for a nice, flat boost log!Quote:
Originally Posted by rnjmur
BTW, you're never gonna get a stock turbo to boost 23lbs to redline no matter what you put the wastegate tables at. It just can't do it, or better yet, be made to try. (At least in my experience.)
the WG correction table takes the calculated WG DC% for the PID controller (the prop, int, deriv stuff) and maps it to the final WG DC%, it is a direct mapping, not an adder or multiplier or anything like that.
The DC Max is the last thing checked so it is *after* the WG correction table.
Chris...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris@HPTuners
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmtech16450yz
Sounds good, thanks guys!
I have looked over the turbo compressor maps and after about 28 lb/m at 23 psi (the k04 max) the turbo runs out of steam (which is about 4K - 4.5K rpm) and pressure will start to drop off no matter what you do. Playing with the WG DC you might be able to help hold pressure above this, but the compressor is simply maxed out. After about 6K the turbo really hits a brick wall.
Here's something I stumbled upon while searching how the PID Controller workers with regard to boost. Pretty good read and I plan to try and utilize this to some extent because looking at the GMS1 tune for the cobalt, most of the changes made were in P and D with I having minor changes.
"In control loops P is most of your control, with I helping, but Derivitive is seldom used especially on a simple loop. Proportional is the gain the loop is using whereas the Integral is sets per minute. It would be like being the cruise control in your car where set point is 80mph. The gas pedal and how far you pressed it would be the P or gain and how often you pressed the pedal to the desired gain would be you Integral or sets/min. Have you tried to tune the loop using just P?
Proportional depends only on the error signal or the difference between set point and process variable. More P will in general increase the speed of the control process, but if proportional gain gets to large the process variable will begin to oscilate and as gain is increased the system will become unstable.
I would set the I and D to zero and increase P until you begin to oscillate, but the speed of the control loop is sufficient or untill you become unstable. Once you begin to oscillate then I can be introduced to stop the ocillations. More I will reduce steady state error or in other words when the loop settles in the set point and process variable will be closer, but you will pay a price of more overshoot. You will always have some overshoot which is nessessary if your control loop is going to be fast enough to respond to changes immediately. Once P and I have been set to get the desired fast control system, D can be introduced until the loop is acceptably quick to setpoint. D will decrease overshoot and gains can be higher with more stability, but more D will make the system highly sensitive to noise in the process variable and will quite often make the system unstable which is why D is left out of the PID loop often."
Edit - Attached is another supporting document I found
Sounds right to me T-Man, good cruise control analogy.
PID controllers are getting more and more common, I learned (was forced to learn) about how it works when trying to nail down idle problems in E38's. Looking at the big picture and oversimplifying it, if your desired whatever (boost, idle, fuel pressure, injection, throttle angle, whatever is being controlled) is matching your actual, I don't think you really need to mess with the control side of it. The little I've looked at the boost control it looked like it was following commanded pretty closely so far. In theory what you might gain is a little faster spool but then overshoot would be hard to control. Everything on these LNF's seem to be sensitive to big changes, so smooth control of boost, ign timing, cam timing, fueling, throttle, etc seems to be the best approach.
Hi all,
I wrote entire my file over the TF combo today, so far I got the fueling ok, but I'm aftraid I havent found the key to holding WG DC% up to 95% like the layer file tune did. Tapered off up top down to 72% with DAL's through the roof, the GMS1 turbo protection still seems to be there. I'll take a few screen shots for a starting point and post back shortly. Damn cat warmup mode is back also.
You can see from this screen shot the Boost Control Duty Cycle is tapering off up top.
The Combo tune will hold 95% WG DC all the way out.
http://www.hptuners.com/forum/attach...9&d=1301166141
Hey Tom, look at my other post, it can be made to hold 95% solid. I'm gonna put together a new thread to keep all our thoughts in one place... be right back.
Here's some caps of the Inj angles & fueling I'm playing with, pulls strong, just the boost is tapering off again.
FYI on the fueling, 15 MPa is 2175 psi, I'm currently on E60 BTW.
http://www.hptuners.com/forum/attach...0&d=1301166891
http://www.hptuners.com/forum/attach...1&d=1301166905
http://www.hptuners.com/forum/attach...2&d=1301166921
I think I found it in the Proportional Max table, I also changed the header at the top of the table so that 165 = 23.9 psi in the highest column for those of us seeking 24 psi.Quote:
Originally Posted by gmtech16450yz
So are the tables you posted up the ones your using to try and reach full e85? Im currently on 60%E also. I didnt mess with the FP or any of the injector windows yet. My WG tables look exactly the same as yours lol. I noticed a 24-25ish spike holds till 5000 on the dot then drops very quickly to about 21psi then slowly tapers to about 19psi. Occasionally though it will just take it and hold about 22psi till redline? Im not sure why but during the whole pull it feels alot stronger than normal. When it first did this The car cut throttle and fuel completely? just shut down then a split second later pulls again? I noticed it on the logger that AFR went to 1.00 timing stayed flat lined 24* cams followed thier normal pull... It lights the tires up hard though at 70mph when it does this. Not sure what caused it....Quote:
Originally Posted by Iam Broke
I've had that happen in third when the Nanny takes control, it'll cut boost and if it's severe it'll close the throttle. Even ESC off.Quote:
Originally Posted by silverbullet08
I tested it over & over in the rain one night.
I'm still on 60% and prob will stay there for a while but I'm running 330* injector tables similar to what I *think* the TF layer was for E85, no way to know for sure though.
hmm. SO how do you explain the 330 injector tables? i noticed you didnt make any change up top on them but quite a bit down low under high load? "high signal" Im trying to understand these so i can tinker a little bit and see whats possible. When you raise the high signal you are adjusting timing of the actual spray so how do you actually scale it? Is there a number for say intake valve opens at 220 and closes at 380? OR is it the other way around? 380open closes 220? basically what is our window? Sorry for all the questions lol
I read some posts on another forum E85 thread that led me to believe 330* is close to our max window. I need more room in the high load midrange rpm so it was a logical guess for a starting point, no more, no less. When I was full E85, I was getting extreme Inj % duty (>50%) between 3700 & 5k with the stock tables and lots of inj window misfire last summer.
Hmm so you havnt tried full E with these injector mods and upped fuel pressure? Makes sense, thats where I see right at 300% load on third gear pulls.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iam Broke
You said 15mpa is 2175psi on FP. Wasnt ZZp saying limit on that was about 2750?
You can raise it if you want, I had more droop starting from 2400 psi on the layer. Never popped a P0087 with 2200 psi even on E85 heavy into inj window misfire. 2400 I did. YMMV.
Yes I ran full E85 on the TF/HPT layer testing and failed. Inj window misfire and slower times.Quote:
Originally Posted by silverbullet08
I'm happy with the 60% results so far. Been on it all last winter.
Idk bout u guys but in missouri we don't have full e85 til june iic, a local posted a chart of the e85 mixes for the year. Right now its e70 and will be e78 soon.
did you change under fuel pressure normal to fuel mass or is that what it was stock and the pressure fixed is different. this is from my '09 stock gmpp tuneQuote:
Originally Posted by Iam Broke
Yes I changed it to fuel mass. If I change the injector constant for E blends it will compensate for it (if I understand correctly). I could be mistaken. Didn't seem to hurt it.
I raised the pressure fixed for insurance if this table ever gets involked. Just guessing at a lot of this right now covering possibilities.
360* BTDC is the max injection start point but 339* is the most I have tried so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iam Broke
So your just basically advancing the injection in your high load areas or where you running low on fuel.Quote:
Originally Posted by Terminator2
High load areas then smoothing it in to the rest of the table.Quote:
Originally Posted by silverbullet08
I wounder if we advanced the intake cam a few degrees in those high load areas if it would expand our injection window? Or if doing so would kill power in those areas .... just a thought..Quote:
Originally Posted by Terminator2
I don't think those numbers are real amounts of degrees since it can be advanced to 431*
At 431* would mean that you're spraying when the exhaust valve is half open... anti-lag anyone? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by BackyardTurbo_FTW
They are supposed to be degress before top dead center.Quote:
Originally Posted by BackyardTurbo_FTW