Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 30

Thread: Early 04 Adder Tables

  1. #1

    Early 04 Adder Tables

    Alright, since this was touched on in another thread I figured I would share what I have been messing with for a while. I haven't been able to test every table, but from what I have found all of the tables labeled "Adder" in the editor for early 04 trucks are actually either minimum or maximum value limiters to the corresponding base table. I have mostly messed around with the rail pressure tables so I will use those as an example.

    It had been bugging me that my rail pressure values in my logs never seemed to match my base table except for basically wide open throttle. So I started messing with the ECTxIAT adder table. I attempted to disable it by setting the coefficients to zero. The result was a truck that would start hard and barely ran. Not what you would expect to happen with the current labels. So since zero didn't do what I wanted, I went and tried the max coefficient found in the table, which was 5. Voila, rail pressure from my logs now matched my base table perfectly. But why? To try and figure out how this was all working , I put the coefficient table back to stock and zeroed out the adder table. Had the same result as when I zeroed out the coefficient table. I'll skip some in between steps here as I tried flattening out the adder table with a few different values, but the coefficient table was skipping around making my data inconsistent.

    It was about this time that I formed a theory, so I set the coefficient table to one and and started playing with the adder table again. I set the entire adder table to three and the truck would barely run with rail pressure only staying between 29-31 MPa, so I upped it to 4 and tried again. Truck started fine, idled normal but rail pressure on a drive only varied between 37-39 MPa. Next test was to set the adder table to 10 and try again, the result was rail pressure that would follow the base map up to a max value of 98 MPa. Setting the table to 20 allowed rail pressure to follow the base table almost perfectly everywhere once again. Now you probably noticed a pattern here, values of 3, 4, and 10 in the adder table with a coefficient of one equaled a limit of approximately 30 MPa, 40 MPa, and 100 MPa. Which means 20 would equal 200 MPa and be higher than any value on the base map removing all limiting. So if this table really is in MPa, another digit needs to be tacked on to everything in the software.

    All of this led me to the conclusion that the adder tables for rail pressure were a maximum limiting table, so I started applying this to other tables in the editor. However, if you look at the coefficient modifiers for most of the other tables in the tune they are set to 0 in the normal operating temp range. This leads to the conclusion that these are minimum value limiting tables and not maximum value limiting. I believe the only other max limiting table besides the ones for rail pressure is the ECTxIAT Pilot Timing table.

    I have been following this theory, and so far it seems to hold water for my truck. The only times I haven't been able to get the truck to do what I want it to is when I hit misfire minimum timing, which affects the main timing and there also seems to be something else that affects the maximum pilot timing allowed as well. Keep in mind this is all on an early 04 truck, I haven't had the chance to test it on anything else. I'm looking forward to seeing if all of this correlates to what other people have been seeing.
    Last edited by Kill; 02-10-2016 at 10:15 PM.

  2. #2
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    DFW Texas
    Posts
    306
    1961 C-10 5.3 NV3500

    2007 NNBS ECSB 4.8

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Kill View Post
    Alright, since this was touched on in another thread I figured I would share what I have been messing with for a while. I haven't been able to test every table, but from what I have found all of the tables labeled "Adder" in the editor for early 04 trucks are actually either minimum or maximum value limiters to the corresponding base table. I have mostly messed around with the rail pressure tables so I will use those as an example.

    It had been bugging me that my rail pressure values in my logs never seemed to match my base table except for basically wide open throttle. So I started messing with the ECTxIAT adder table. I attempted to disable it by setting the coefficients to zero. The result was a truck that would start hard and barely ran. Not what you would expect to happen with the current labels. So since zero didn't do what I wanted, I went and tried the max coefficient found in the table, which was 5. Voila, rail pressure from my logs now matched my base table perfectly. But why? To try and figure out how this was all working , I put the coefficient table back to stock and zeroed out the adder table. Had the same result as when I zeroed out the coefficient table. I'll skip some in between steps here as I tried flattening out the adder table with a few different values, but the coefficient table was skipping around making my data inconsistent.

    It was about this time that I formed a theory, so I set the coefficient table to one and and started playing with the adder table again. I set the entire adder table to three and the truck would barely run with rail pressure only staying between 29-31 MPa, so I upped it to 4 and tried again. Truck started fine, idled normal but rail pressure on a drive only varied between 37-39 MPa. Next test was to set the adder table to 10 and try again, the result was rail pressure that would follow the base map up to a max value of 98 MPa. Setting the table to 20 allowed rail pressure to follow the base table almost perfectly everywhere once again. Now you probably noticed a pattern here, values of 3, 4, and 10 in the adder table with a coefficient of one equaled a limit of approximately 30 MPa, 40 MPa, and 100 MPa. Which means 20 would equal 200 MPa and be higher than any value on the base map removing all limiting. So if this table really is in MPa, another digit needs to be tacked on to everything in the software.

    All of this led me to the conclusion that the adder tables for rail pressure were a maximum limiting table, so I started applying this to other tables in the editor. However, if you look at the coefficient modifiers for most of the other tables in the tune they are set to 0 in the normal operating temp range. This leads to the conclusion that these are minimum value limiting tables and not maximum value limiting. I believe the only other max limiting table besides the ones for rail pressure is the ECTxIAT Pilot Timing table.

    I have been following this theory, and so far it seems to hold water for my truck. The only times I haven't been able to get the truck to do what I want it to is when I hit misfire minimum timing, which affects the main timing and there also seems to be something else that affects the maximum pilot timing allowed as well. Keep in mind this is all on an early 04 truck, I haven't had the chance to test it on anything else. I'm looking forward to seeing if all of this correlates to what other people have been seeing.
    Are you able to post up a log of your truck running and driving on the stock tune from cold startup to full operating temp, that shows ECT, IAT, main timing, rail pressure and pilot timing?

  4. #4
    I believe you're onto something in regards to the timing tables for the 2003-2004 trucks. BUT..................

    2004.5+ trucks have the IAT coefficient table zeroed out in the stock tunes. Something for you to think about there.

    Also on 2004.5+ trucks the ECT coefficient and adder tables don't seem to have any effect on main timing. At 100*F ECT and 30*F IAT my truck runs off of the main timing tables.

    As far as rail pressure goes in regards to the 2003-2004 trucks, the ECT x IAT coefficient and adder tables don't appear to have any effect on the rail pressure. At least not with the ECT at 193*F.

    A driving log with the ECT at or below 100*F or even 140*F to compare the log to the tables would be the only way to tell.

    Screen shots from the tune and logs posted in the other thread from yesterday:

    Untitled (1).png Untitled (2).png

    My 2004.5 reacts exactly the same when it comes to ECT and RP. At 150*F ECT and 30*F IAT or 100*F ECT and 30*F IAT, my truck runs on the main RP tables with no influence from the ECT coefficient and or adder tables.
    Last edited by Moparmatty; 02-11-2016 at 09:26 AM.

  5. #5
    Tuner in Training Matt@HPTuners's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    39
    "Adder" and "coefficient" are descriptions for how the tables work together, not the actual function of the tables. "Base" may be a better and less confusing name for the "adder" tables.

    The actual function of the product of the two tables can take multiple paths based on the strategy used in the OS. They can take on a minimum wins approach where the smallest value wins, or a summed value where all of the computed values are added together and a mean is taken.

    I appreciate the input and will integrate your valuable information into the next update!

    -Matt

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Moparmatty View Post
    Are you able to post up a log of your truck running and driving on the stock tune from cold startup to full operating temp, that shows ECT, IAT, main timing, rail pressure and pilot timing?
    Didn't have one with a full coolant temp range so I went and made one. I would like to note that the truck has 300% over injectors in it so the ranges used in some of the tables are going to be different than a stock injector truck.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Kill View Post
    Didn't have one with a full coolant temp range so I went and made one. I would like to note that the truck has 300% over injectors in it so the ranges used in some of the tables are going to be different than a stock injector truck.
    So with the log you posted. Is the truck running stock tables or not?

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Moparmatty View Post
    I believe you're onto something in regards to the timing tables for the 2003-2004 trucks. BUT..................

    2004.5+ trucks have the IAT coefficient table zeroed out in the stock tunes. Something for you to think about there.

    Also on 2004.5+ trucks the ECT coefficient and adder tables don't seem to have any effect on main timing. At 100*F ECT and 30*F IAT my truck runs off of the main timing tables.

    As far as rail pressure goes in regards to the 2003-2004 trucks, the ECT x IAT coefficient and adder tables don't appear to have any effect on the rail pressure. At least not with the ECT at 193*F.

    A driving log with the ECT at or below 100*F or even 140*F to compare the log to the tables would be the only way to tell.

    Screen shots from the tune and logs posted in the other thread from yesterday:

    Untitled (1).png Untitled (2).png

    My 2004.5 reacts exactly the same when it comes to ECT and RP. At 150*F ECT and 30*F IAT or 100*F ECT and 30*F IAT, my truck runs on the main RP tables with no influence from the ECT coefficient and or adder tables.
    You're in all the right boxes here but it is skewed by the adder table being in psi instead of MPa. It is still not being limited but that is because the adder table is 4 (actually 40) Mpa times the 1.7 coefficient and you get 6.8 (actually 68) Mpa and the base file is below 68 Mpa so no limit is applied.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Moparmatty View Post
    So with the log you posted. Is the truck running stock tables or not?
    Yes, it is all stock with the OS patch applied for the scanner PIDs.

    I just wanted to note the injector difference so someone didn't come in wondering why it only used the 0-60mm3 part of the maps.
    Last edited by Kill; 02-11-2016 at 09:56 AM.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt@HPTuners View Post
    "Adder" and "coefficient" are descriptions for how the tables work together, not the actual function of the tables. "Base" may be a better and less confusing name for the "adder" tables.

    The actual function of the product of the two tables can take multiple paths based on the strategy used in the OS. They can take on a minimum wins approach where the smallest value wins, or a summed value where all of the computed values are added together and a mean is taken.

    I appreciate the input and will integrate your valuable information into the next update!

    -Matt
    Ah, I understand. It just gets confusing, especially for a beginner, when the adder table ends up subtracting from the base table. Then it gets further jumbled when it appears that how these tables function depends on the year of the truck.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Kill View Post
    Yes, it is all stock with the OS patch applied for the scanner PIDs.

    I just wanted to note the injector difference so someone didn't come in wondering why it only used the 0-60mm3 part of the maps.
    Can you post up the tune file please?

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Moparmatty View Post
    Can you post up the tune file please?
    Attached Files Attached Files

  13. #13
    Potential Tuner
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    5
    Here is more stock ones from this am
    Attached Files Attached Files

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Kill View Post
    You're in all the right boxes here but it is skewed by the adder table being in psi instead of MPa. It is still not being limited but that is because the adder table is 4 (actually 40) Mpa times the 1.7 coefficient and you get 6.8 (actually 68) Mpa and the base file is below 68 Mpa so no limit is applied.
    So for the fuel pressure ECT adder table you are proposing it is a max limiter table?

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Moparmatty View Post
    So for the fuel pressure ECT adder table you are proposing it is a max limiter table?
    Exactly

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Kill View Post
    Exactly
    And what are you proposing the main timing IAT adder table is?

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Moparmatty View Post
    And what are you proposing the main timing IAT adder table is?
    Minimum timing limiter, it will not let main timing be lower than what is in adder table times the respective coefficient. Set to 0 there is no limiter enabled, although i don't know how that would affect the newer trucks with negative timing.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Kill View Post
    although i don't know how that would affect the newer trucks with negative timing.
    Probably why 2004.5+ trucks have the main timing IAT coefficient table zero'd out.
    Last edited by Moparmatty; 02-11-2016 at 12:21 PM.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Moparmatty View Post
    Probably why 2004.5+ trucks have the coefficient tables zero'd out.
    The stock 05 tune I've been looking at still has coefficients for the ECT Adder table for main timing.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Kill View Post
    The stock 05 tune I've been looking at still has coefficients for the ECT Adder table for main timing.
    I edited my comment.