well I tried the first build of my new BCS routines based on a PID design - I didn't expect the car to "boot/start" but it ran fine. I even got boost! lol

however I got massive spiking, so i'll need to recheck the source

pretty happy at this stage, will look again tomorrow - gotta fix another ****box car first (damn mercedes!!!)

 

Nice! I cant wait to see a more final version Tephra. Let me know if you need testers.

 

Instructions for 94170014 and 94170015 ROMs are online in the second post in this thread. Sorry for the long delay!

 

you are the man mrfred

 

Thanks mrfred I was going to bribe you before long

 

hehe. Made me think. Now I understand the algorithm better. I correctly stated its purpose, but I used the wrong scaling definition. The correct ECUFlash definition is:

<table name="Max Total WGDC Correction vs TPS" category="Turbo" address="3f10" type="2D" level="1" scaling="OffsetWGDC">
<table name="TPS" address="7284" type="Y Axis" elements="9" scaling="ThrottlePercentage"/>
</table>

Note that the "OffsetWGDC" scaling is one of my custom ones that is included in the "direct boost control" instructions. People not running my direct boost control setup can use "DynamicBoost" scaling instead.

With the correct definition, the table values are now:

These values actually make much more sense, and for me, make it clear that this table has serious value for tuning the boost control. We can see here that for the stock settings, the WGDC cannot deviate from the BWGDC curve until after 75% TPS. And then the max total correction cannot exceed 10%. Good stuff.

 

New summary of additional tables for USDM Evo 9 88590015:

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...09#post5437609

 

Good finds Mrfred. Thanks.

 

Ah ok that makes much more sense, the table I modded that made the car run lower boost, now with using DynamicBoost scaling looks like:

-64
-64
-59
-56
-54
-52
-49
-44
-44

So I guess when using negative numbers, it just corrects the BWGDC right off the bat?

This would probably also mean if we put negative numbers at lower TPS values, it would offset the BWGDC tables at partial throttle, thus lower boost.

 

Bryan, you need to test that and report back!
I would but my car is going through some changes and is parked for now

Good stuff, mrfred!!

 

So mrfred my question still stands on the wgdc corr in the "max corr v tps" table if it is absolute or only applies to positive correction. Will -15 work if max correction is limited to 10?

Thank you very much for figuring this out, it should do exactly what i was looking for!

 

Well sh*t. I looked at the code again, and now I'm confused again. Spent too much time on it today. Might be a few days before I have a solid answer. Sorry about that.

 

Well when I had the table like this:

-64
-64
-59
-56
-54
-52
-49
-44
-44

It brought my BWGDC down over 40% so I would imagine downward correction works. However, the car wasn't seeing any correction before this, meaning it was right on target boost, not over or under. When I changed the table to what is above it brought down the BWGDC. See my other thread in this forum.

 

yeah i am still a little confused. I am going to flash back to stock values until we understand this a bit more. It still looks incredibly promising.

 

Frig! I figured it out. It only applies to upward correction. The max total upward correction cannot exceed the values in that table. The max total downward correction can be -64% WGDCC.

The proper ECUFlash def would then be:

<table name="Max Total Upward WGDC Correction vs TPS" category="Turbo" address="3f10" type="2D" level="1" scaling="OffsetWGDC">
<table name="TPS" address="7284" type="Y Axis" elements="9" scaling="ThrottlePercentage"/>
</table>

Again, substitute "DynamicBoost" for "OffsetWGDC" if you are not using my direct boost control setup.