Another Dirk Diggler Revelation Kickin' Up Auto Tuning a notch

So my theory is with the help of Black02SS and AJ-1 LOL (Tordne)


Ross and Paul being the gracious programmers they are added a new pid for us a while ago that really didnt get any party time. The pid in question is the GM.VETABLE_DMA pid. Here is a few thoughts about this pid

1. I assumed this pid is a final value of the initial ve table value (what were used to working with). Since its a final value that means all the idle routines, filtering, blending etc have been added or subtracted from the intial value. Moreso smoothing and interpolating

2. Wouldnt it be better to use a final value that is more real world like than an initial value.


3. When your map is done with the instructions to follow you will have a table you copy and paste back into the tuner ready for flashing

Instructions

1. Add the pid its in the "tune" menu in the drop down list
2. The tuner needs to display default units (g*K/kpa)
3. make a calc pid to log this pid with Ben correction eg (vetable * ben) = value to be copoied back to the tuner

Quote:

---

*CLC-00-002
% 0.00 +10.00 .2 "({GM.VETABLE_DMA}*{CALC.BEN_PLX1})"

Note use you own Ben facotr pid if it differes from the PLX

---

What this does is instead of applying your BEN factor to your ve table, you apply it to the Lookup Value as a calcuated PID. This result IS what you place in the ve table. (you must use g*K/kPa)

I have been talking with Larry and he has a theory on calculating the VE table, which brings me to my question. We were looking at the VE table in g*K and adjust it using BEN. For giggles I did the same thing, but this time with the values in VE%. The resulting table differs between the two tunes. Theoretically shouldn't it be the same or does the fact that the calculated VE% changes the outcome. We have seen it vary from small to large. Also, GM.VETABLE_DMA, I assume this is what the PCM looks for in the VE table. Again, it appears that these aren't identical to the VE table. Can you explain more on that PID?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dirk Diggler

Ross and Paul being the gracious programmers they are added a new pid for us a while ago that really didnt get any party time. The pid in question is the GM.VETABLE_DMA pid. Here is a few thoughts about this pid

---

Actually, that was a mistake, it wasn't supposed to be 'public' until the TPS VE mapping O.S's were done as it is needed to set that up......consider it a bonus.
It is indeed the VE table value from the VE table, corrected and interpolated so it will never be 'exactly' what is in the table.

Anyway, the TPS VE OS is about to have a very severe test done this weekend if all goes well, I'll try to keep you all posted.

Cheers,
Ross

P.S - I always use g*K/kPa, even though I can never remember what it is called off the top of my head.

Using this we should be closer to perfection - thanks guys!

Dirk - Thanks for searching for the "Truth" ...BIG Thumbs up!!

Cheers,
joel

Thanks I hope it works well my car is down due to a faulty WB so I couldnt test it myself Tordne is benig gracious enough to run tests to see how this all works out

OK... So I've been discussing this with Dirk Diggler and Black02SS for the last couple of days. Seeing as I actually drive my car everyday I'm going to test this out a bit.

So far I have done one flash and log (don't tell work I disappeared to play with cars), and the results look like they could have some promise. I'll be taking the identified changes and flashing that in for the drive home this evening.

After tomorrow I think I'll have a feel for the results using this method of VE tuning. My BENs are generally VERY GOOD ad quite stable so I think I should have pretty reliable results.

Let you all know shortly.

Cheers,

Ok, just a question. If we are pasting in a "new" VE based on all modifiers etc, would that just be accurate at the time and not on an ongoing basis.

For example intake and ect alterations will be always changing on any day Id have thought you wouldnt want to "lock" these transient values into the table.

Or have I misunderstood what the modifiers do? (eg) Do they adjust for non transient conditions. (In which case this looks like an excellent idea)

PS: Cant wait to see the new OS4, sounds Alpha-n based :)

I need to get back into the loop!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TAQuickness

I need to get back into the loop!

---

Yup, get those pushrods installed and come join us again :cheers:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ringram

PS: Cant wait to see the new OS4, sounds Alpha-n based :)

---

http://efiforum.iqd.co.nz/showthread.php?t=1471

Cheers,
Ross