Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 56

Thread: Audi 2.0t pulling timing

  1. #21
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Wilmington, MA, USA
    Posts
    155
    Well taking things a little out of order... I'm running 93-octane pump gas, presumably E10. I don't really have a fixed goal, except to get as much reliable power as I can without changing turbochargers... a K04 might be doable in the future, but right now I'm stuck with the stock unit. I'm sort of looking to mimic an APR stage 1 tune except with a little less torque in the midrange and a little more up top. I don't care for engines that peak like crazy and drop off - I like the torque curve to be relatively flat.

    I like your idea of adding timing and will definitely start logging knock. I might try adding a little fuel too but generally like to avoid that.

    I did have something happen recently that may have a bearing on this. One of the parameters I've been looking at to gauge my tuning results is MAP (manifold absolute pressure). And another project I've been working on lately is building a boost gauge for the car. I was doing some research in relation to that and just this morning realized this engine (CAEB) doesn't have a MAP sensor! So something in the ECU must basically be computing a "fake" MAP value based presumably on MAF and RPM and maybe intake air temp? Anyhow, I'm wondering if any of the tables I've been messing with are just there to support that function.

    Edit: I realized I left out an important point from the above. And that point is that if one of these tables is creating a "synthetic" MAP number based on other factors and I edit that table, a) I could think I've increased the car's performance when I actually haven't - I don't have access to a dyno so I'm mainly relying on seeing an increase in MAP and MAF to verify I'm changing the right things. And b) if the ECU is using that synthetic number for monitoring or something like that, the ECU could be doing things in reaction to the manifold pressure being higher when it actually isn't.
    Last edited by ELaw; 11-10-2019 at 02:58 PM.

  2. #22
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    sounds like a solid goal, if you have made any progress on the current tune i would be interested to see what changes you've made

    you're correct the B8 does not have a MAP but they do have a charge pressure sensor located in the charge air system pre-throttle body, this is why the sensor does not read any vacuum! but it does know how much boost its making for the PID system to control it. stupid Audi ideas haha

    mainly focus on the load aspects of the tune and make sure you're not going crazy on WGDC to maintain efficient use of your turbo

  3. #23
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    32
    Hey guys! So forgive me, as im very new to this too hah. Ive got a 2008 a4 2.0t and ive been working away at the tune slowly but surely (mainly just working on fuel and boost), and seem to have made some headway if that helps!

    Included are the stock tune, my current one, stock log and latest log (note: have done some stuff regarding EGT temps and limits since last log)

    Stock hits like 10.5psi max and tappers to ~7psi, currently almost 16psi max and holds like 14.5psi. You feel the difference. Unfortunately this is as high as i can get (maybe more with the updated tune *shrug*?). If this is any help or if anyone has any suggestions, let me know!

    EDIT: Also, car is M6, CAI, diverter update/spacer, test pipe
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by chevelle72; 11-15-2019 at 03:28 PM.

  4. #24
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by chevelle72 View Post
    Hey guys! So forgive me, as im very new to this too hah. Ive got a 2008 a4 2.0t and ive been working away at the tune slowly but surely (mainly just working on fuel and boost), and seem to have made some headway if that helps!

    Included are the stock tune, my current one, stock log and latest log (note: have done some stuff regarding EGT temps and limits since last log)

    Stock hits like 10.5psi max and tappers to ~7psi, currently almost 16psi max and holds like 14.5psi. You feel the difference. Unfortunately this is as high as i can get (maybe more with the updated tune *shrug*?). If this is any help or if anyone has any suggestions, let me know!

    EDIT: Also, car is M6, CAI, diverter update/spacer, test pipe
    i have so many questions haha!!

    Something is very wrong with your logging parameters, your maf readings are insane along with the MAP value sticking at 200KPA (likley the B7 calculated flow instead of actual boost pressure) in your tuned file, your IAT readings are below your ambient temp readings (that's fucked and for sure is an inaccurate address for the param) and your Lambda Request and actual is insanely rich as well (Tempo control fueling maps (ECM 44061 and variants)need to be changed)

    It seems like you have alot to sort out in the logger before being able to determine what is causing some issues

    if you don't care about everything i wrote above..... the map you're going to want to change to give you some more pow pow is going to be PR Limit (ECM 14803) under the turbocharger tab

    max-requested-pressure-ratio.jpg

    hope this helps

  5. #25
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346

  6. #26
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    32
    I noticed the IAT vs ambient, but I chalked that up to senor variance? They seem to go back and forth, higher and lower by a degree or so and i didntn think that was an issue but i guess it is?

    As for MAP, i thought i was supposed to take KPA, convert to PSI, then subtract my barometric? The MAF has different logging parameters, that was just the one that gave me the steadiest graph with no random/frequent dips. What should the numbers be closer too?

    Ive never done a turbo direct injection engine (only NA LS'), so i set it to like 12afr to just be cautious with increased boost/knock. Guessing that number should be higher lol?

    Hahaha really??? Thats the only one i didnt touch seeing as i thought that was the max pressure the ECM would throw a CEL for -_- lol

    EDIT: Just saw yours - SO curious to see the differences!
    EDIT: The 44061 stuff was the next i was gonna make some changes too, but i noticed the EGT protection was lowered on yours - wont the car always go into richer fueling at this point still? or am i totally missing something lol?
    Last edited by chevelle72; 11-15-2019 at 07:55 PM.

  7. #27
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    I recommend you start your own thread

  8. #28
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    32
    Sorry, very good point - just did, thanks!

  9. #29
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Wilmington, MA, USA
    Posts
    155
    So here's my latest... what do you think?

    The car seems to drive well and definitely makes more power, but not as much as I'd expect given the numbers I've plugged in. I did add knock logging, and that in general looks good although it looks like it did knock just once on one cylinder during the last pull.

    I am having one issue that's maybe a bug in the editor? I've emailed support, but on this screen:
    MBT spark monitor issue.PNG
    ...I can't edit the highest value (the 191.3) on the load axis (I want to increase it). I can edit all the other values but that one won't change.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  10. #30
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    well that optimum stark table is used for idle and light load operations like highway and cruise stuff don't worry about modifying that table as its job is for the oem ecu to advance timing to that point then use learning to retard based on knock detection for maximum cruise and part throttle efficiency

    the car has not nearly enough timing and not nearly enough fuel during a pull, there are times during the beginning of a pull (torque onset) that youre hitting -8* haha thats a really really conservative amount and there's lots of power to be picked up here you should be hitting around 2-4* advance not 8* of retard, your PE and Temp control fueling tables also appear to be stock??? get some more fuel into her so you can get that much needed timing in there sir!

  11. #31
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    you see peak boost pressure around 2800rpm you should be requesting a significant enrichment at that point via PE for your peak torque (.86-.88) and then bringing in temp control fueling a llittle earlier (maybe 800*C across the board) and then leaning Temp control out at any request lower than .80 for a start to work on timing, DI is super epic in the fact that cylinder cooling is super efficient and can be run as lean as an .84-.86 at high loads and still keep good timing just an FYI

  12. #32
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Wilmington, MA, USA
    Posts
    155
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerJDubbs View Post
    there are times during the beginning of a pull (torque onset) that youre hitting -8* haha thats a really really conservative amount and there's lots of power to be picked up here you should be hitting around 2-4* advance not 8* of retard
    I'm definitely working on that! I did notice the crazy retard and think at least in part it may be due to the transmission shifting - the car's an automatic if you hadn't noticed from the logs. Unfortunately logging "current gear" doesn't seem to be working so I can't be sure - I've put in a support ticket about that.


    Quote Originally Posted by TylerJDubbs View Post
    leaning Temp control out at any request lower than .80 for a start to work on timing, DI is super epic in the fact that cylinder cooling is super efficient and can be run as lean as an .84-.86 at high loads and still keep good timing just an FYI
    Well I was following you up to this point! Which map specifically are you referring to here?

  13. #33
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Wilmington, MA, USA
    Posts
    155
    And here's the latest and greatest. It seems to be pulling a little timing in the 3000-4000 RPM range, so I probably need a little more fuel or a little less advance there.

    In the "PE (Driver Demand" table, do you know what the y axis corresponds to in the log? It's titled "APP or Torque (%)" but seems to have a different range than other power-related tables with axes in percent. The reason I ask is that at times it seems like I'm not getting enough enrichment but can't figure out which table cells to change.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  14. #34
    Tuner 1970ss8.1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Napa, Ca
    Posts
    151
    I believe APP stands for accelerator petal position.

  15. #35
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Wilmington, MA, USA
    Posts
    155
    Ah, that makes sense. Maybe "APP or torque" means it takes the higher of the two?

  16. #36
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    PE fueling should be based on requested torque or pedal position, both track very closely in most cases, try logging drivers requested torque take a look at the delay map (ECM 14985) i have pictured and try to shorten the delay period for spool up engagement or change the axis for PE fuling to a max of 85 instead of 90

    seems like you're not enriching quick enough (peak boost) and also not enriching enough (4K rpm area) and lastly too much fuel past 5K i would try leaning out the areas of your temperature control fueling (ECM 14749) that are richer than a .80 and then lower your EGT engagement point (ECM 14995) by 100*C above 3K

    Leave timing the same and get fueling sorted to get the KR under control

    Fueling.jpg

  17. #37
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Wilmington, MA, USA
    Posts
    155
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerJDubbs View Post
    It looks good, better than most I?ve seen here lol.

    is it fairly conservative? What octane fuel? Seems decently lean at peak load and timing corrections are minimal for 18psi
    Heh... it's not meant to be conservative but it seems to have turned out that way! ;^) I'm sure there are places it can be improved, I just haven't had the time. Maybe over the holiday break that will change...

    Anyhow, it's for 93-octane fuel. Latest tune and a copy of the log are attached.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  18. #38
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    The only thing that really sticks out to me is the weird timing oscillation once the car hits peak boost, I’m guessing this is due to cam timing shift points.... and the sometimes massive negative timing values here as well. Other than that it looks pretty safe, how does it drive?

  19. #39
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Wilmington, MA, USA
    Posts
    155
    The car actually drives very well! Except for not making as much power as I hoped, but it's still pretty good.

    I think that log was the first time the car was driven after flashing it... I've found it'll do some strange things until some adaptation has happened. I suspect if I took a log today it would look better.

    Massive timing variations seem to just be a characteristic of this engine... it does it even on the stock tune. I suspect they may be using timing as a fast way to control torque, so for example when you lift off the throttle a little, it pulls timing to reduce torque until the throttle plate and turbo can catch up.

  20. #40
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerJDubbs View Post
    The only thing that really sticks out to me is the weird timing oscillation once the car hits peak boost, I?m guessing this is due to cam timing shift points.... and the sometimes massive negative timing values here as well. Other than that it looks pretty safe, how does it drive?
    Hi Tyler

    Can you please help me in my tune as well. I am starting a new thread today.

    Regards
    Jay