[scalbert]

BT Logging Standardization

I wanted to create this thread so that we can determine what we want to see in tests and come up with a standardized testing method. The hope is that we can all perform tests the same way, plot them the same way and then the posts will be easier to read.

In my testing so far I have found some of the following to be valuable. You may notice the lack of the Status Knocking flag value. I did not find it particularly useful as it didn’t always show knock even though the timing curve suggested it.

Current throttle valve angle
Engine speed
Ignition angle cylinder 1
Inlet air temperature 1
Pressure in front of throttle valve

More values can be added but we need to keep it to just the necessary ones. As more are added, the sampling rate decreases. With just the above logged, I get 10 sample per second which should be adequate. A faster laptop will get more and a slower will get less. I have a Dual Core 2.0 GHz with 2 GB RAM running XP Pro.

This intent will not satisfy all testing needs. But it should provide one standard we all can use for comparison. With that said, I would suggest we run the test from 3k revs to 7k revs in 3rd gear. This will give us the FATS number as well as load the engine well enough and have a long enough duration. We also have to note if 6AT or 6MT as that will skew the FATS numbers to the 6AT as it has a shorter overall 3rd gear ratio.

Once we decide (or I decide if no input is provided) what to go with, I’ll create the macro which will prompt for the log file, open and scan the data looking for the decided test range. Once found, and more than one can be present and accounted for, charts will be created for each value including the FATS result. For Pressure in front of throttle valve, the piggy back units will not be correct as it will be the value retransmitted by the piggy. And I will use 97.0 kPa as a zero reference for calculating boost and then also convert to PSI. I will also convert Intake Temperature to Fahrenheit but will leave the Celsius column in there.

Any other requests?

Edit:

To use the FATS calculator, you do not need the parameter file which I created. The parameter file is a newer feature in BT which allows you to pre-define Actual Values you want to monitor and log. If the upcoming macro is used to get the FATS time as well as generate charts automatically, you would have to use the below config file:

http://www.hopesystemsinc.com/BavTechLogFiles/

If all you want to do is a FATS test, just log Engine Speed as that will provide the fatest sampling rate. You can then follow the directions on the following link and plug the numbers in:

http://www.hopesystemsinc.com/bmw_fats.asp

Edit:

The FATS time page has been updated with a transmission selection option. This allows for normalization, or at least an attempt, to 6AT numbers so that everything is kept close to equal.

Edit:

Accelerator pedal value
Current throttle valve angle
Engine speed
Ignition angle cylinder 1
Intake air temperature
Pressure in front of throttle valve
Target boost pressure

Updated log list. More instructions will follow but if BavTech is not able to fix the column header export issue myself and others have experienced, very specific instructions will be provided to get the correct data in the correct column. Basically, you will need to click the column list so that all values are sorted alphabetically and then select the XML file. More on this later.

[scalbert]

BTW, I added the Basic Test log configuration file to the site:

http://www.hopesystemsinc.com/BavTechLogFiles/

This can be altered once we settle on the values.

[Septro]

Steve - Does MotorSpeed = EngineSpeed? I was logging both and noticed a delta between the two even though they both represent RPM.

And would logging the 'Pedal value requested load' or 'Accelerator pedal value' show throttle response/lag?

You also noted to use 'Intake Air Temp 1' but there are more generic 'Intake Air Temp' and 'Intake air temperature of intake system' values, what's the diff?

Even thought the 'Status knock value' is binary and doesn't really show much - any idea what the 'Voltage knock values cylinder 1' may be able to indicate?

Ok that was more questions than suggestions sorry, but some of these logging values from the BT tool have been bugging me not understanding their exact purpose. Great job btw helping to standardize this.

[Ilma]

Good Questions!

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by Septro

Steve - Does MotorSpeed = EngineSpeed? I was logging both and noticed a delta between the two even though they both represent RPM.

Yes, and I have seen that too. They seem to be the same thing but to me, it appears there is a time latency between the two in the plotting. For instance, select both and rev it. The plots look the same but one just shifted in the T (X) axis.

And would logging the 'Pedal value requested load' or 'Accelerator pedal value' show throttle response/lag?

Good question. I need to log pedal position and load to see if something can be discerned. In fact, that would be better than Pressure before throttle value since it is just about worthless to us running piggybacks.

You also noted to use 'Intake Air Temp 1' but there are more generic 'Intake Air Temp' and 'Intake air temperature of intake system' values, what's the diff?

I meant to select Intake Air Temp but must have checked the wrong one. It appears there are many redundant channels listed with the BT tool. They seem to tbe the same thing but but slightly different names.

Even thought the 'Status knock value' is binary and doesn't really show much - any idea what the 'Voltage knock values cylinder 1' may be able to indicate?

Until we better undestand the Knock Voltage values, I don't think we can use that. The DME using some sophisticated algorithms to filter this signal. It mainly looks at it when the cylinder is its power cycle. Since we cannot correlate if that cylinder was firing when the sample was taken, we may not be able to get much out of it. In some logs I took, the voltage was higher at times when under lite load.

Ok that was more questions than suggestions sorry, but some of these logging values from the BT tool have been bugging me not understanding their exact purpose.

I agree, it seems that we will need to figure out their function as well as their worth.

Thanks for the input.

[M3to335]

I JUST got the tool yesterday.... How long will it log? My plan is to figure out wtf is making my car limp everytime I go to the track lately. Other than oil temp, air intake temp and cooling temps what should I log?

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by M3to335

How long will it log?

Basically, until you run out of harddrive space.

I have made 2 MB log files which is about 45 minutes of driving.

[M3to335]

Only 2mb, haha, thats tiny.

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by M3to335

Only 2mb, haha, thats tiny.

That is over 10,000 samples per channel, just to give an indication.

[scalbert]

BTW, I updated the Basic Log file with the following parameters and am still getting 10 Hz on the sampling rate.

Accelerator pedal value
Calculated load value
Current throttle valve angle
Engine speed
Ignition angle cylinder 1
Intake air temperature

I removed the Pressure before throttle plate value and replaced with the Accelerator pedal and Calculated load value. These may be more useful in the end (thanks for the suggestion Septro). The new Basic Log file is loaded to the website.

[Septro]

Cool I'll pull the new xml and datalog some of tomorrow's runs.

[scalbert]

I'm going to test this new logging config file tomorrow morning with the latest V3.3 software. With the new log file I should be able to develop the macro to automate the chart/data creation.

[midlife]

subscribed

[scalbert]

Went out and logged with the new configuration file. I'm running the latest pre-beta (only a few running it) Stage 3 map. In fact, I shouldn’t run the Stage 3 as I do not have everything required. I did get some throttle closure on the beginning of the pull which can be seen in the charts below. I also had some knock events as seen in the plot. Timing was pretty well up there though. Once the appropriate stage maps are available I will retest. But in the end, this is a very early map and I also do not have the CANBus wires installed. The purpose of this post was to begin putting together the standards and hopefully get the base from which I can write the macro.

Of note, and as mentioned, CANBus wires are not installed yet. The only current modifications are the scoops, RR catless DP’s and Helix IC. This is not ideal for Stage 3 but this is testing of course. I’ll drop my DCI’s back in soon. That said, this new map is noticeably stronger in the low/mid range as already shown. However, I did not get a better FATS time but that could be due to a couple of factors; one being it was done around a bend which will scrub off some time. Two being the weather was not as nice.

I believe the below charts should suffice for these tests. The first set is from the FATS test. As you can see, the Helix IC is doing a fantastic job. Intake Temps actually dropped through the pull.

BMW N54 FATS: 5.22
This matches my previous best.
http://www.hopesystemsinc.com/bmw_fa...RPM=6%2C560.00





And the below is a new one. It takes the first time the Throttle Pedal goes 100% until it is let off. This is showing revs climbing at a steady rate. I’m curious though if we can see inconsistencies or if the sampling rate isn’t enough to pick it up. But you can see it took just under a half second for when throttle was opened to when the vehicle began to accelerate.



Below are some more plots from a 4000 RPM roll-on pull. This would not be part of the automated method but is just for reference.





If people are satisfied, I’ll get to work on the macro to analyze and create the plots, etc. I have my own and one other plot to play with as I need to verify a couple of things to make sure it will work right. If anyone has a log with the FATS run in it, please send my way so I can compare the data in the columns.

[alextremo]

Looks good to me. Glad you got rid of Pressure in front of throttle valve since that isn't accurate for most of us anyway. Would be nice to see real boost along with these parameters though...

I added IAT (although the one I logged was Inlet air temperature 1) yesterday as some of the testing people were doing peaked my curiosity. It was just below 60F here, here are the results with my factory FMIC. The first 5 peaks are 3rd gear WOT pulls to redline.

[OpenFlash]

Yeow! As you know, it's not a good idea to run the Stg 3 map without DCIs. The inlet restriction at that boost level is crippling. Even Stg 1 maps come close to requiring DCI. Just pop those suckers and and do some more tests. You'll see a big difference right away.

Shiv

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by alextremo

Looks good to me. Glad you got rid of Pressure in front of throttle valve since that isn't accurate for most of us anyway. Would be nice to see real boost along with these parameters though...

I added IAT (although the one I logged was Inlet air temperature 1) yesterday as some of the testing people were doing peaked my curiosity. It was just below 60F here, here are the results with my factory FMIC. The first 5 peaks are 3rd gear WOT pulls to redline.

So you were getting a 30 degree F climb in IAT. What was the rev range you started ar?

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Yeow! As you know, it's not a good idea to run the Stg 3 map without DCIs. The inlet restriction at that boost level is crippling. Even Stg 1 maps come close to requiring DCI. Just pop those suckers and and do some more tests. You'll see a big difference right away.

Shiv

Yea, I pulled them to clean'em up but can't find my cleaning kit. I'll go pick up a kit later this week and get them back on. But hey, this should really put a workout on the new maps.

[alextremo]

Started at ~2.5k each time.

I did this yesterday before I saw your post, otherwise I'd send the file. I'll download the xml and do some runs next weekend (weather's not nice here today)

BTW - does anyone know why the list of actual values has what appear to be duplicates with slightly different names like above? Would be good to get this list cleaned up and documented - I haven't seen this on the Wiki.

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by alextremo

Would be good to get this list cleaned up and documented - I haven't seen this on the Wiki.

Working on it.

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by alextremo

Started at ~2.5k each time.

The differences show the advantages of an IC upgrade like Helix. I would also be curious to see what other IC's do int he same test. I was shocked at how well the Helix did here.

[runningman]

Was this an unadapted run again?