You have to create own throttle tables with method described. Is that stock throttle body of edelbrock system or it's something defferent? If it's full edelbrock kit, i have tune from it.
You have to create own throttle tables with method described. Is that stock throttle body of edelbrock system or it's something defferent? If it's full edelbrock kit, i have tune from it.
Eastern and Central Europe American Muscle and Harley-Davidson tuning
www.hd-customs.pl
http://www.facebook.com/hdcustomspl
I am having this exact issue (see graph in quote above) on a Whipple SC'd 2014 Raptor with a couple of Whipple tunes. The Desired Torque Request is a nice slope, but the Desired Throttle Request By ETC has that jump as seen in the purple line. Whipple has not developed a fix, yet, other than this it runs great. This is bad when towing and you need to run in part boost level, it won't. So the throttle cycles between the top of the purple line and the knee of the purple line to maintain a constant speed.Originally Posted by CCS86
Have you, or anyone, come up with a fix to get the Desired Throttle Request By ETC (purple line) to follow the Desired Torque Request (brown line)?
Last edited by cat436ii; 05-01-2020 at 06:35 PM.
You can adjust throttle body table to make it inline with torque
Eastern and Central Europe American Muscle and Harley-Davidson tuning
www.hd-customs.pl
http://www.facebook.com/hdcustomspl
Did anyone work out a solution for this? Somebody tried hacking the effective area table on my 2013 turbo NA Focus. Part throttle is all over the place. I'd rather not cheat with the "Pedal Pos WOT Start" unless that's the only way.
Sorry to necro this thread again, but I wanted to report back with some findings that I think would be beneficial to anyone dealing with aftermarket boost. It turns out (on my car at least) that the assumption of barometric pressure in the ETC Vacuum calculation is not permanent. I was able to allow the PCM to infer a boosted TIP by modifying the table below (not currently available to me in VCM Editor). I believe this table is Max TIP vs Airflow in Lbs/min, zeroed out below because factory NA car.
Screenshot 2021-11-02 194149.png
So I took the airflow reading where boost starts to build and changed those values to slightly above the max MAP that my car sees (60inHg), only because my speed density isn't tuned correctly yet and inferred MAP is still going higher than actual. I assume that at WOT the actual pressure drop across the TB is minimal or close to zero, but I'm not sure on this. Anyways, it seems to have worked. I can't log TIP itself, but you can see in this log that the effective area no longer goes sky high at WOT, which means that the PCM must be inferring a higher TIP to balance the TB model (please excuse anything else in that log, its a work in progress lol). So I should be able to roll back the WOT Start and End now, I'll test that tomorrow. Basically this table is doing for me what the Max MAP Delta above BP table claims to do (I could never get that table to work, the car would always stall out randomly). Hopefully this is helpful to anyone else who fought this.
Log 24.hpl
In Hpt you can adjust etc PR ratio, maybe that's doing same or similar. In what software do you see this table?
Should we report some missing table to HPT?
This is separate from the PR functions (I have those in VCM Editor), although I haven't messed with them before. I defined this table myself in TunerPro, it's definitely missing from VCM Editor, at least for my PCM. It might be worth requesting it to be added, provided that it exists and is similarly beneficial for other strategies, cars, and setups. If you or anyone else wants to drop a strategy code I can check to see if it's there.
Log from a 2013 focus.
The table you show looks like the TIP maximum or minimum tables in a 2013 focus file.
You might find more help in the Eco boost section.
Focus TIP.jpg
Those definitely look like the same tables, but they are not available to me in VCM Editor. My 2013 Focus is not an Ecoboost, it's an NA conversion. No TIP/intercooler sensor, different PCM.
Last edited by RobCat030; 11-03-2021 at 07:41 AM.
So I did some more digging out of curiosity. Turns out this table seems to exist on most Copperhead PCMs as well, and is not visible in the HPT files I have.
However, I don't think it exists on TC1791 PCMs. They do have a scalar for Max TIP that is set to 31inHg, I wonder if that would do anything similar for 15+ cars. I think it's definitely worth trying. My car is driving 1000% better in boosted part throttle since making this change.
Last edited by RobCat030; 11-06-2021 at 07:50 PM.
I just populated this table on my turbo copperhead and it seems to be working exactly like you said. I went back to the stock TB model and i have no more than +- 1 degree of throttle correction.
That's pretty awesome, good to know! I'm really curious about that scalar for the 15+ as well.
I'm still trying to figure out what this means for closed loop throttle control in boost. From what it seems, it looks like the car assumes TIP=MAP, or something very close to that (.3inHg ETC Vacuum) in any condition where MAP>Baro. With the SD and Torque tables dialed in (still working on that), I'm pretty curious if it can figure out and be happy with the correct throttle angles for part throttle loads above 100%. I believe the Ecoboosts use the wastegate control to limit pre-throttle boost, which obviously we cant do.
Can we ask to add these tables?
I also have a turbo equipped switch, turned that on thinking that would enable the Max Tip table. It just caused a wrench light and a maf circuit code and instantly died, but the max tip table seems to be used even with the turbo equipped switch off. I only went for a short drive, I did get it into boost and TA error was minimal with stock TB settings. Normally I would pile on IPC error and it would pull a ton of angle off me unless I hacked either the TB tables or the ETC PR one.
Next time you're in Pittsburgh, I owe you a beer.
Sending an email to support requesting the table to be added usually works. Sending them 2 files, with and without the table populated and nothing else changed usually speeds the process up or you can just add it yourself with user defined parameters.
So I'm still messing with these to see if I can get the car to like it. Moved the WOT start and end out of the way to test, and the three tables I'm playing with are
44351 - MAP max Delta above Baro
44352 - MAP inferred max vs air mass
UDP - Max TIP vs Lb/m Air flow
The problem from what I can see, was stated earlier in the thread. There are multiple true relationships of PR vs ETC Vacuum vs Inferred MAP for any given desired load above Baro. I can use the 44352 table to prevent inferred MAP from exceeding ~29inHg while the turbo starts spooling, which prevents the throttle from closing. Then as the turbo starts spooling and true PR becomes 1, the car is happy for a split second. As the turbo continues to spool at part throttle, I assume that the true PR becomes greater than 1 again, with TIP>MAP (pre-throttle boost, basically). However, at this point ETC vacuum is stuck at 0.300inHg, so the TB closes to keep the desired load in check instead of assuming that the PR has changed. The throttle angle error is 100% content throughout this entire event, btw.
I'm not sure I can think of a way to infer all three of these elements as once. Being able to define minimum MAP or TIP by airmass might be useful as a way of saying "the turbo is definitely spooling at this load, MAP should be positive", I don't see a great way to describe that though. The other thought I had was if I could use an EBC to somehow keep the PR close to 1, sort of how Ecoboosts will use the wastegate to regulate TIP.
Without seeing a log, I would take a guess at maybe driver demand torque being a bit too low on the bottom row.
Eh, nevermind. I think I was trying to accomplish something impossible. I was basically trying to regulate TIP (and MAP) via the ETC, whereas I actually need wastegate control. Basically wanted to hold part throttle and keep a steady, boosted load (but still less than max load). Not gonna happen running off the spring only.
I'm gonna mess around a bit with a boost solenoid and see if I can get it to keep true ETC vacuum at 0.300inHg like the car thinks it is. That should let me basically control boost with the accelerator, I think.
Okay, made some progress and learned some things. I went back to a 5psi wastegate spring to see if I could work out a transition into boost at part throttle, closed loop ETC. Here's my observations:
1) TIP inference based on the previously mentioned table is working. Effective area remains plausible at boosted inferred MAP values.
2) ETC Vacuum with MAP above BARO is considered to be 0.3inHg. I'd like to find a way around this but I don't think it's possible.
3) MAP Max Delta above BP, MAP Max vs Airmass, and all related SD apply to both the current airmass calculation as well as the Desired Air Mass Logic. I had to disable the Desired Air Mass switch to make this work; I'd like to understand this better. It seems that with it enabled, when the desired/requested airflow is boosted, the ETC vacuum drops to 0.3 and the car bogs down/dies. If I roll the pedal slowly it works. In other words, the ETC is feeding forward more quickly than the turbo can start spooling. With Desired Air Mass disabled this doesn't happen, but I notice that MAF values, load, and spark are a bit more erratic, particularly at idle.
4) Throttle closing in this case is because DD needs to be compensated more to reflect the turbo spooling up to 5psi (because I don't have wastegate control between 0 and 5 psi). Any ETC request that will cause the turbo to start spooling but is below the airflow at 5psi will cause an error. The actual gap in torque between BARO and 5psi of boost is more than I anticipated, so I'm not sure if I'll ultimately be happy with the huge jump in DD. What I would prefer is a way for the PCM to know that there's ~5psi of TIP and modulate the throttle accordingly (I think logically it could be done as a function against airflow, I just don't think there's a place to do it in the tune).
5) My original plan was to use a solenoid to keep true ETC vacuum above BARO at 0.3inHg, so that the ETC requests could indirectly remain in charge of airflow (provided the SD model is close to accurate). I'm not quite sure if this will work in practice, I think the ETC feedback and the closed loop boost controller will play tag with each other resulting in oscillation. Option B is to use a CANBUS based device to feed the desired MAP to my boost controller. Thoughts here are appreciated.
Desired Airmass Disabled 3.hpl
Reply With Quote