2009 Lancer Ralliart - GST Basemap
Dec 11, 2011, 03:39 PM
#2357
Evolved Member
AtmosBoostBase
> I have a 2011 with just stock pill for now
Ah, yes... that'll be why your "AtmosBoostBase" isn't giving direct-boost style values - stockpill tune uses load-based boost targets, not psi-based. You can ignore this value until you switch to boostpill.
The fact that it is reporting 30.9552 means the patch is working. It is a pass-through value from the load-based configuration, and it wouldn't be there if the patch was broken, absent or on strike.
All good.
EvoScan WGDCC
You have RequestID="23808b51".
You need "RequestID="23808b8f" for your ROM.
Standalone "RPM Tracking"
Needs to be 2-byte, so:
paramname=RPM_Tracking
paramid=0x805082
databits=16
scalingrpn=x,31.25,*
Standalone BWGDC_Adjust
Needs to be 2-byte, so:
paramname=BWGDC_Adjust
paramid=0x805080
databits=16
scalingrpn=x,128,-,0.5,*
sampgroup=5
That should work better!
Rich
> I have a 2011 with just stock pill for now
Ah, yes... that'll be why your "AtmosBoostBase" isn't giving direct-boost style values - stockpill tune uses load-based boost targets, not psi-based. You can ignore this value until you switch to boostpill.
The fact that it is reporting 30.9552 means the patch is working. It is a pass-through value from the load-based configuration, and it wouldn't be there if the patch was broken, absent or on strike.
All good.
EvoScan WGDCC
You have RequestID="23808b51".
You need "RequestID="23808b8f" for your ROM.
Standalone "RPM Tracking"
Needs to be 2-byte, so:
paramname=RPM_Tracking
paramid=0x805082
databits=16
scalingrpn=x,31.25,*
Standalone BWGDC_Adjust
Needs to be 2-byte, so:
paramname=BWGDC_Adjust
paramid=0x805080
databits=16
scalingrpn=x,128,-,0.5,*
sampgroup=5
That should work better!
Rich
Dec 11, 2011, 05:26 PM
#2359
Evolved Member
Okay...
The IAT Adjusted BWGDC patch is working. And it's looking pretty cold where you are, hehe. 59F, so the ECU is reducing WGDC by 3% to avoid over-boosting. At the very start of the log, IAT was around 90F, so almost no WGDC adjustment was applied.
The SST Upshift Boost Management patch is working. It's able to tell when revs are dropping, and should therefore be able to zero out any positive WGDCC at full-throttle upshift.
The Atmospheric Boost Baro Compensation patch is working. It reckons you're at sea level, which matches the regular "Baro" reading. Direct psi-based boost targets will be adjusted accordingly, so your "gauge pressure" boost levels should be consistent at different altitudes.
Your Oil Slick Spray tanks are full.
Your Ejector Seat needs regassing. Return to dealer.
Your Submarine Mode is ready, but the SST may say "SLOW DOWN" if you go over 25 knots underwater.
Rich
The IAT Adjusted BWGDC patch is working. And it's looking pretty cold where you are, hehe. 59F, so the ECU is reducing WGDC by 3% to avoid over-boosting. At the very start of the log, IAT was around 90F, so almost no WGDC adjustment was applied.
The SST Upshift Boost Management patch is working. It's able to tell when revs are dropping, and should therefore be able to zero out any positive WGDCC at full-throttle upshift.
The Atmospheric Boost Baro Compensation patch is working. It reckons you're at sea level, which matches the regular "Baro" reading. Direct psi-based boost targets will be adjusted accordingly, so your "gauge pressure" boost levels should be consistent at different altitudes.
Your Oil Slick Spray tanks are full.
Your Ejector Seat needs regassing. Return to dealer.
Your Submarine Mode is ready, but the SST may say "SLOW DOWN" if you go over 25 knots underwater.
Rich
Dec 12, 2011, 07:55 AM
#2360
Newbie
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: toronto
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey guys, just a quick off topic question.
If I were to log my 09 RA with the no computer method with just stock pill GST Map, is the attached logcfg.txt enough?
I have a pill but not installed yet, just want to learn how to log first before installing the pill.
Thanks a bunch guys
If I were to log my 09 RA with the no computer method with just stock pill GST Map, is the attached logcfg.txt enough?
I have a pill but not installed yet, just want to learn how to log first before installing the pill.
Thanks a bunch guys
Dec 12, 2011, 08:19 AM
#2361
Okay...
The IAT Adjusted BWGDC patch is working. And it's looking pretty cold where you are, hehe. 59F, so the ECU is reducing WGDC by 3% to avoid over-boosting. At the very start of the log, IAT was around 90F, so almost no WGDC adjustment was applied.
The SST Upshift Boost Management patch is working. It's able to tell when revs are dropping, and should therefore be able to zero out any positive WGDCC at full-throttle upshift.
The Atmospheric Boost Baro Compensation patch is working. It reckons you're at sea level, which matches the regular "Baro" reading. Direct psi-based boost targets will be adjusted accordingly, so your "gauge pressure" boost levels should be consistent at different altitudes.
Your Oil Slick Spray tanks are full.
Your Ejector Seat needs regassing. Return to dealer.
Your Submarine Mode is ready, but the SST may say "SLOW DOWN" if you go over 25 knots underwater.
Rich
The IAT Adjusted BWGDC patch is working. And it's looking pretty cold where you are, hehe. 59F, so the ECU is reducing WGDC by 3% to avoid over-boosting. At the very start of the log, IAT was around 90F, so almost no WGDC adjustment was applied.
The SST Upshift Boost Management patch is working. It's able to tell when revs are dropping, and should therefore be able to zero out any positive WGDCC at full-throttle upshift.
The Atmospheric Boost Baro Compensation patch is working. It reckons you're at sea level, which matches the regular "Baro" reading. Direct psi-based boost targets will be adjusted accordingly, so your "gauge pressure" boost levels should be consistent at different altitudes.
Your Oil Slick Spray tanks are full.
Your Ejector Seat needs regassing. Return to dealer.
Your Submarine Mode is ready, but the SST may say "SLOW DOWN" if you go over 25 knots underwater.
Rich
Dec 12, 2011, 01:17 PM
#2363
Here is my data from a 3rd gear WOT. Little worried since I hit 23.2714psi at max boost. Is this value a little high? I am running 91 octane with boostpill in a 2011 RA. Installed I have UICP, evo FMIC, and evo BOV.
Last edited by TurtleRA; Dec 12, 2011 at 01:40 PM.
Dec 12, 2011, 04:05 PM
#2364
Evolved Member
Hi Turtle.
Yeah, your spool-up peak was 23.3psi - 1.8psi over target (so nice to have logged psi-based boost targets!). Also, it didn't once need to use the MAX upward error correction to maintain boost at target levels - most people's logs show WGDCC cranking up to +8% early on.
Looks like your RA lives at the right-hand end of the bell-curve! Perhaps your boost pill has a slightly smaller hole size... who knows.
My RA is the same - more boost than most for a given WGDC %. That's kind of why I got deeper into the ECU stuff - and why most of my patches are boost-control related!
From the single, solitary pull you've logged, it looks like your particular car would benefit from a custom boost control tweak. I'd reduce the BWGDC tables by 4%, broad-brush. See this post for full details! I reckon that simple tweak would come pretty close to nailing both the initial peak and the follow-on boost target tracking.
Guys and gals... TurtleRA's work here is a good example of how to approach base maps. Every car is different! Perform initial testing, log, check results and confirm correct operation of your particular vehicle. Turtle's RA probably wants a bit less BWGDC than most - he's spotted that, and can progress safely.
It works both ways - some RAs using v27 aren't actually meeting their boost targets. The only way to find out... is to log and review... 
Rich
Yeah, your spool-up peak was 23.3psi - 1.8psi over target (so nice to have logged psi-based boost targets!). Also, it didn't once need to use the MAX upward error correction to maintain boost at target levels - most people's logs show WGDCC cranking up to +8% early on.
Looks like your RA lives at the right-hand end of the bell-curve! Perhaps your boost pill has a slightly smaller hole size... who knows.
My RA is the same - more boost than most for a given WGDC %. That's kind of why I got deeper into the ECU stuff - and why most of my patches are boost-control related!
From the single, solitary pull you've logged, it looks like your particular car would benefit from a custom boost control tweak. I'd reduce the BWGDC tables by 4%, broad-brush. See this post for full details! I reckon that simple tweak would come pretty close to nailing both the initial peak and the follow-on boost target tracking.
Guys and gals... TurtleRA's work here is a good example of how to approach base maps. Every car is different! Perform initial testing, log, check results and confirm correct operation of your particular vehicle. Turtle's RA probably wants a bit less BWGDC than most - he's spotted that, and can progress safely.
It works both ways - some RAs using v27 aren't actually meeting their boost targets.
The only way to find out... is to log and review... Rich
Dec 12, 2011, 07:07 PM
#2366
Evolved Member
Cool, that's a good start! A few suggestions for logging...
Culling the items being logged will increase the logs-per-second. Currently, you're getting about three lines a second. The more resolution you have, the better it will be.
I'd disable:
Also...
Please double-check "BoostError" params, as it's logging zeroes. That will be useful once you start dialling up the throttle.
Is this v27 beta test? If so, can you please check out the extra logging items in the test notes PDF Bryan would have sent with the Base Map.
Finally...
Your LTFT_Cruise is at "-10%". Maybe Bryan's got some suggestions.
Rich
Culling the items being logged will increase the logs-per-second. Currently, you're getting about three lines a second. The more resolution you have, the better it will be.
I'd disable:
- LoadMIVEC
- LoadLowIATTiming or LoadFuel... just log one for now.
- IPW (not correct anyway, as it's zero)
- IDC
- MAT
- ECT
- PassiveWGDC (Ralliarts don't have a second boost control solenoid)
- AFRMAP
- MAFVolts
- InVVT
- ExVVT
- Octane (54.9% is unlikely to be correct anyway)
- APP
- Gear
- Battery
- knock_<everything> ... but leave "KnockSum"!
Also...
Please double-check "BoostError" params, as it's logging zeroes. That will be useful once you start dialling up the throttle.
Is this v27 beta test? If so, can you please check out the extra logging items in the test notes PDF Bryan would have sent with the Base Map.
Finally...
Your LTFT_Cruise is at "-10%". Maybe Bryan's got some suggestions.
Rich
Dec 12, 2011, 09:44 PM
#2368
Evolved Member
Boost Error
** Only useful for BoostPill v27. Not relevant for Stockpill base map.
In the "v27 Testing Notes" pdf, it listed the parameters to use when setting up "Boost Error". Things like the "address" parameter, whether it is 1-byte or 2-byte logging style, and the evaluation formula used to convert the raw data into something readable.
LTFT_Cruise
Well, if your long-term fuel trim really is -10%, it means your ECU has looked at the air/fuel mixture over time when in closed-loop mode, via the narrow-band o2 sensor between t/c and catalytic converter, and has found it relatively rich. It is having to reduce fuelling by 10% to achieve 14.7:1 stoich.
If you're logging the right address. Plus or minus 5% is supposedly about the limit of what you really want to see.
Apparently, this stuff can get thrown off by different intakes, etc.
But me no pro tuner. Me just code monkey.
In this v27 project, I'm just Igor to Bryan's Frankenstein.
Hence my passing the buck to Bryan!
Rich
** Only useful for BoostPill v27. Not relevant for Stockpill base map.
In the "v27 Testing Notes" pdf, it listed the parameters to use when setting up "Boost Error". Things like the "address" parameter, whether it is 1-byte or 2-byte logging style, and the evaluation formula used to convert the raw data into something readable.
LTFT_Cruise
Well, if your long-term fuel trim really is -10%, it means your ECU has looked at the air/fuel mixture over time when in closed-loop mode, via the narrow-band o2 sensor between t/c and catalytic converter, and has found it relatively rich. It is having to reduce fuelling by 10% to achieve 14.7:1 stoich.
If you're logging the right address.
Plus or minus 5% is supposedly about the limit of what you really want to see.Apparently, this stuff can get thrown off by different intakes, etc.
But me no pro tuner. Me just code monkey.
In this v27 project, I'm just Igor to Bryan's Frankenstein.
Hence my passing the buck to Bryan!
Rich
Dec 13, 2011, 02:47 PM
#2370
hey guys just ran into this its a great guide to help everyone IMO
tell me what u think
http://evoscan.com/ecuflash/Merlins%...ersion%20K.pdf
tell me what u think
http://evoscan.com/ecuflash/Merlins%...ersion%20K.pdf