Maybe post a screenshot of the driver demand and pedal ratio map?
Maybe post a screenshot of the driver demand and pedal ratio map?
I pulled it up and I think hpt has the throttle defined backwards on the pedal map ratio table. There’s no way it’s requesting 1.75 x 340 ftlb = 600 ftlb.
yeah this is where i am getting confused.Originally Posted by engineermike
I mostly worked with what i said a few posts ago - now i am trying to smooth out the boost curve. My current way of checking this is logging 5th gear 2.3krpm to about 5.5k or where ever i wont get in trouble on the street essentially.
Boost peaks at about 19 around 2.5k which is great but then dips hard to around 16.9 at 3k. As far as i can tell the only limits here are throttle angle source = torque control and Torque max source is exhaust component protection. The throttle is already closing as soon as it hits 19psi, then dips, then climbs steadily back to where i want it - about 20-22psi over 4k.
Currently it seems as though i need to find the torque control limit, potentially the exhuast component protection..? (which i thought was just a richer lambda), or try to trick the truck into demanding more via the demand table. is this a bad way of looking at this?
TLDR - i am looking to get this thing to essentially hit 19psi at 3k (i dont think this is unreaslistic), hold it and climb just as much as it can safetly to 21.x psi. I havent worked with any spark yet, and i dont want to until i am comfortable with the torque curve already here.
Maybe you know this but the pcm is controlling to a torque output, not a boost level or even an airflow rate. It could just be that the boost curve you are seeing is the boost needed to achieve the load needed to reach the torque requested at the coincident cam timing. If you want to see more boost at a particular rpm range, increase the driver demand at that range and see if it hits it or some other limit.
I believe you are correct about how exhaust temp is controlled but IIRC it will cut throttle if it just lambda fails to get it under control.
Gotcha, I need to remember that I'm technically hitting those numbers as per the computer.
I think i need a dyno day for myself to see it actually happening haha.
Edit: Regardless - id like the pedal ratios to make a bit more sense, so i might just go ahead and make everything 1 in general so i am just going off of the Demand Map.
So, virtual wise, I have gained around 30hp/30tq from stock to where i am raising some limits.
Now that i have been playing with the driver demand table - i really havent seen power raise at all from my first step up... It could be a training thing / I am being a baby and only raising Ddemand by like 10tq but...
What do you guys usually do to start testing limits, 15% raise? Send it to oblivion? haha
I’ve never tuned a ranger so I can only tell you what I would do based on how the control system works. The Ford ranger Ford performance tune claims 60 ftlb and 45 hp, so that’s probably a safe increase. I would take it slow, as you are, and log every step. I would log torque request, desired load, load, and engine brake torque, along with all the sources, and especially knock retard.
One strategy I’ve heard of is to just max out the torque demand and see what limit it hits next. I know there are plenty of turbo boost and speed limits that will come in, not to mention fueling and something called a popcorn limit.
Thanks. Yeah, how i have been moving is based off of the FP and even looking past that towards the (max in my head) 5 Star Tunes.
I am very happy with the limits honestly, it defintely keeps learning hands from blowing things up. I'll keep on keeping on if my strat so far makes sense to most - that is just slowly push demand up.
One other question, with the ecoboost logic - does timing get impacted by driver demand as well? I would assume it would as there are limits on the spark source (i know there are max advance tables and obviously the HDFX tables), but I am curious for when i want to start really pushing later on.
That’s the beauty of the Ford calibrations. The timing tables are already populated beyond where Ford runs them. Look at the borderline knock tables and you’ll see they are calibrated to loads much higher than what Ford commands. You’ll also see the timing goes down as load goes up. In other words, the engine should already be calibrated decently run at the new higher torque/load demands.
beautiful.
Thank you so much for answering all my questions.
I'm still seeing some knock... seems like LSPI but I havent touched the tables at all in this area - I am assuming its just the 93 i got potentially?
22:44:21 to 22:45:03 is what I'm really seeing. Anyone care to take a look i'd greatly appreciate it.
This area is almost, if not is, completely stock. I did reflash recently so could it just be learning?
Edit - I also notice this is in 9th and 10th gear right before trying to kick down a gear, this cant be normal is it?
Last edited by Rbelar21; 12-09-2021 at 08:19 PM.
I still wouldn't worry too much about that.
It is a bit on the high side for the load, but if I had to guess, I'd say the timing system is still learning, so that will eventually come down to bouncing around from -1 to +1 as it finds a happy medium.
Edit:
Also, I've never seen a log from the Ranger, they must be running a bigger turbo than the Mustang or Focus RS?
Pretty low boost numbers for the torque it's producing, I have to push an airload of 1.8 and almost 18PSI to hit 300 ft/lbs
Last edited by Seishuku; 12-09-2021 at 09:15 PM.
Couple of comments:
- The knock retard is happening at <1.0 load, which is areas where you didn't fool with. During every WOT stint, it was adding timing.
- #1 seems to usually be the culprit. I'd check or replace #1 plug and gap it. Otherwise you could pull timing from just #1.
- You aren't getting Power Enrichment. I'd probably address this before moving on with driver demand increases. There's a lot of potential there that's left on the table.
I also have to correct something I posted earlier. I see you are getting loads around 2.0. The spark tables and maybe others aren’t calibrated past 2.0 load. If you continue to push load upwards, it’s going to take some work to extend/extrapolate all of the tables past 2.0.
Seishuku, If you want to see a WOT lot I?d gladly provide. I?m pretty sure it is a bigger turbo.
I?ll check the gaps on the plugs for sure Mike. Easier than my Subaru ahaha.
Is it worth having PE down at 25% throttle? In this case richening up makes sense too, but constantly hitting PE that low seems like a fuel killer as well.
Is your PE time delay set to zero?
You shouldn?t have to set PE pedal to zero. 90% will work fine, maybe 80 if you want. But I didn?t see in your log where it went into PE at all.
pedal is based off of RPM, there is a delay of speed and time which was 3mph and 120s respectively. I have zeroed these out any am going off of the pedal table
Which is something like (to pedal)
1k - 70%
2k - 65%
3k - 50%
4k+ -50%
That should work, but you see your lambda is running 1.0 and fuel shows “stoichiometric”. I wouldn’t go any further until this is resolved.
Unless i'm looking at his log wrong, he never went above 50% throttle. He shouldn't be entering PE at that point.
Agreed. Thats why i was wondering about working it down that far. having PE start up at like 25% seems pretty fuel hungry... but that load seems to want fuel.
I also was starting to wonder if it would be worth it to try to figure out the 10R80 and try to get it to downshift a bit earlier rather than forcing the engine.
I'd rather not work with the trans yet if i didnt have to, but it is something i am looking at.
Reply With Quote