[E92mech]

I have a few minor issues that I see on my data log. Would appreciate input.

2010 E92 stock N54 engine and exhaust, Cobb AP Stage 1 Aggressive.
Shell 93 octane. Brand new spark plugs and engine air filter ~100 mi ago. Original coils.

This is a pull 2nd-3rd, WOT, DSC/DTC disengaged, ambient temp=40F.

Graphs in order of upload:

1) Lambda/AFR. Looks good.

2) Req vs. actual boost. Actual boost running a little high. No leak.

3) Cyl 4 timing. Cyl 4 has the only correction, which is maximum -4 (absolute value not shown on graph.) Timing curve I think looks good.

4) Cyl 1-6 timing corrections. Pretty smooth, Cyl 1 timing looks good, I think my map is appropriate to octane.

5) Req load vs. actual load. Although actual load mirrors boost, my actual load is tremendously higher than requested for much of the pull. Is this an artifact of scaling, or is this a concern?

6) TPS request. There is a dramatic throttle closure to 40% TPS early in the pull that corresponds with an overboost. (N.B. DTC was deactivated.)

My overall impression is that I had one Cyl 4 timing correction of -4 that I'm not too concerned about. Overall timing looks good and map is appropriate. With regard to Cyl4, I think I just need to log again and see if the correction on this cylinder is consistent. Agree?

Second, I'm concerned about my actual load exceeding the requested load, and the fact that I had what I think is an overboost/TPS closure. I don't know if the actual load vs. requested load is just a scaling issue--it doesn't appear to be. The overboost seems real and caused a TPS closure. Do I need to fix anything.

Input much appreciated.

[Ænema]

Originally Posted by E92mech

I have a few minor issues that I see on my data log. Would appreciate input.

2010 E92 stock N54 engine and exhaust, Cobb AP Stage 1 Aggressive.
Shell 93 octane. Brand new spark plugs and engine air filter ~100 mi ago. Original coils.

This is a pull 2nd-3rd, WOT, DSC/DTC disengaged, ambient temp=40F.

Graphs in order of upload:

1) Lambda/AFR. Looks good.

2) Req vs. actual boost. Actual boost running a little high. No leak.

3) Cyl 4 timing. Cyl 4 has the only correction, which is maximum -4 (absolute value not shown on graph.) Timing curve I think looks good.

4) Cyl 1-6 timing corrections. Pretty smooth, Cyl 1 timing looks good, I think my map is appropriate to octane.

5) Req load vs. actual load. Although actual load mirrors boost, my actual load is tremendously higher than requested for much of the pull. Is this an artifact of scaling, or is this a concern?

6) TPS request. There is a dramatic throttle closure to 40% TPS early in the pull that corresponds with an overboost. (N.B. DTC was deactivated.)

My overall impression is that I had one Cyl 4 timing correction of -4 that I'm not too concerned about. Overall timing looks good and map is appropriate. With regard to Cyl4, I think I just need to log again and see if the correction on this cylinder is consistent. Agree?

Second, I'm concerned about my actual load exceeding the requested load, and the fact that I had what I think is an overboost/TPS closure. I don't know if the actual load vs. requested load is just a scaling issue--it doesn't appear to be. The overboost seems real and caused a TPS closure. Do I need to fix anything.

Input much appreciated.

For the most part your analysis looks spot on
Without seeing actual values I'm going to say that most of the actual/req load overshoot is VD auto scaling(with the obvious exception of the overboost low in the RPMs.) Just use your mouse and follow the lines out and look at the number values to confirm.

overboost induced throttle closure is fairly common and no big deal to fix using ATR.

[E92mech]

Thanks-

You are correct--the requested and actual load are both around the low 160's, and across the entire pull are usually within one unit of each other. So it was a scaling issue in VD. However, the load is reported in dimensionless units--what are the units for load, and how much of a discrepancy between requested load and actual load is allowable?

[Ænema]

Originally Posted by E92mech

Thanks-

You are correct--the requested and actual load are both around the low 160's, and across the entire pull are usually within one unit of each other. So it was a scaling issue in VD. However, the load is reported in dimensionless units--what are the units for load, and how much of a discrepancy between requested load and actual load is allowable?

Load is a calculation based on boost(calculated MAF), engine speed and TPS. As far as what the actual load units are i'm not sure(i think it's just an arbritrary unit and how the calculations are made i don't know.)

The thing to keep in mind about load is that it is based on boost(the Boost mean abs and Load act lines will mirror each other when graphed) so as long as you're within ~1.5psi or so you're ok(you'll probably be closer than that with the OTS maps. When using ATR and upping the boost in the higher RPMs it can become necessary to adjust the wastegate tables a little to meet requested boost, but that's another conversation)

Also, it's normal for actual load to be further off from requested the higher you go in the RPMs.

[E92mech]

Thanks Ænema,

I just confirmed what you said from the data from my last run. I should've thought about my question a little more before asking; of course load is mostly due to boost!

Interestingly, to your comment re: actual load calculation, it looks like MAP must be the most heavily weighted factor, just based on eyeball inspection of this graph. MAP and load are almost identical, and they follow the curve of boost.

As for my TPS closure, I'm assuming I need to get into ATR and add a little wastegate early on in the RPM range? Re: my Cyl 4 -4 correction, I'm not going to do anything, since it's based on a single WOT run--I think I need to see if this is consistent.

Thanks.

[Ænema]

Originally Posted by E92mech

Thanks Ænema,

I just confirmed what you said from the data from my last run. I should've thought about my question a little more before asking; of course load is mostly due to boost!

Interestingly, to your comment re: actual load calculation, it looks like MAP must be the most heavily weighted factor, just based on eyeball inspection of this graph. MAP and load are almost identical, and they follow the curve of boost.

As for my TPS closure, I'm assuming I need to get into ATR and add a little wastegate early on in the RPM range? Re: my Cyl 4 -4 correction, I'm not going to do anything, since it's based on a single WOT run--I think I need to see if this is consistent.

Thanks.

To deal with throttle closures log "Boost setpoint factor" and "MAF req(WGDC)" and then adjust the WGDC base table in the corresponding cells where the overshoots occur. The wastegates are 100% vacuum controlled(no spring) so you'll actually PULL a little WGDC out. For overboosting i like to make adjustments(reductions) by a factor of 5-10%. Relog and repeat if necessary.

Doing this you may run into boost oscillations(surges.) If you do that means you're close enough for the PID tables to try and correct it on their own(but can't) so just keep at it and you'll get there.

[EJ_3]

This was my first attempt to datalogging. Can someone translate this to English?

[Ænema]

Originally Posted by Manny_World

This was my first attempt to datalogging. Can someone translate this to English?

My mind literally exploded after looking at that graph haha

Just a grab a 3rd gear log from ~2500rpms to ~6500rpms and post that up.

[E92mech]

This link is useful for learning how to datalog:

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=696472

[EJ_3]

Originally Posted by Ænema

My mind literally exploded after looking at that graph haha

Just a grab a 3rd gear log from ~2500rpms to ~6500rpms and post that up.

Lol, mine did the same. Epic fail. I'll do another one this afternoon.

Originally Posted by E92mech

This link is useful for learning how to datalog:

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=696472

Thanks!

[Ænema]

Originally Posted by E92mech

This link is useful for learning how to datalog:

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=696472

It would be cool if that could get a sticky.

I've known "rader1" for a little while through the other forum and we're working together on an update using ATR to help fix some of the more common issues(boost overshoots, adjusting timing/boost curves.) I know he's waiting on the vargas stage 2 turbos before we go to deep into it because he wants to focus on the WGDC tables and hybrid turbos are probably going to take quite a bit of adjustment so it should make a pretty in depth DIY.

[DallasBoosted]

Put in 5 gallons of E85 along with 9.5 gallons of 93 (had about a gallon or so left in the tank also) and flashed the OTS E30 map. Wow. Pretty nice. It was maintaining the 12 degrees of timing up past 5000rpm and going to 13.5 degrees by 6000. Didn't have room to datalog but I did have some good half gear pulls and such on the way home, and it is pulling noticeably stronger than on the Stg2+FMIC map, which was only carrying 4-6 degrees of timing through to 6000rpm.

Very nice!

[VNeBLOB42]

Originally Posted by DallasBoosted

Put in 5 gallons of E85 along with 9.5 gallons of 93 (had about a gallon or so left in the tank also) and flashed the OTS E30 map. Wow. Pretty nice. It was maintaining the 12 degrees of timing up past 5000rpm and going to 13.5 degrees by 6000. Didn't have room to datalog but I did have some good half gear pulls and such on the way home, and it is pulling noticeably stronger than on the Stg2+FMIC map, which was only carrying 4-6 degrees of timing through to 6000rpm.

Very nice!

Awesome! Ethanol is a beautiful thing.

4-6 deg. timing seems a little low for S2+, I think you would have seen ~9*. I know on S1+ I see 8.25 deg. through 6k.

[DallasBoosted]

Originally Posted by VNeBLOB42

4-6 deg. timing seems a little low for S2+, I think you would have seen ~9*. I know on S1+ I see 8.25 deg. through 6k.

Don't see how thats possible when the ignition table doesn't specify that much... There's lots of ways to lose timing but it shouldn't add timing over whats in the main ignition table right?

[nukezero]

I have noticed some new findings after 1 week of installing the Cobb AP.

First, I used to have a ton of soot on the back of my AW bumper even after a good washing on the 1st or 2nd day. After 3 days, I noticed there is atleast 50% less soot on the back bumper. It is much better than before. The car must be running less rich at idle and low band which would explain why the pickup is much better.

Secondly, I feel like the engine noise has slightly changed. Does anyone know if the Cobb AP increases the water pump pressure or low/high fuel pump pressures for Stage 1 -Drive?

[VNeBLOB42]

Originally Posted by DallasBoosted

Don't see how thats possible when the ignition table doesn't specify that much... There's lots of ways to lose timing but it shouldn't add timing over whats in the main ignition table right?

i guess this is where i don't know what i am talking about. I guess what i was referring too was the Timing on my Logs. I see 8.25 at 63xx



Default log with LTFT and STFT

[DallasBoosted]

Originally Posted by VNeBLOB42

i guess this is where i don't know what i am talking about. I guess what i was referring too was the Timing on my Logs. I see 8.25 at 63xx



Default log with LTFT and STFT

Right, because of your load - at 150-ish load, you're a couple of blocks up on the timing table.

Here's the stage 1 sport timing table:


You can pick out where you are on the table and your advance makes sense given that.

You had 7-8 degrees of advance @ ~12psi boost. I had 12.75 degrees of advance @ 17psi boost.

The timing and boost added together somehow makes up that "actual load" number. If you figure out what your actual load is, you can figure out where you should be on that ignition advance table.

[VNeBLOB42]

Originally Posted by DallasBoosted

Right, because of your load - at 150-ish load, you're a couple of blocks up on the timing table.

Here's the stage 1 sport timing table:


You can pick out where you are on the table and your advance makes sense given that.

You had 7-8 degrees of advance @ ~12psi boost. I had 12.75 degrees of advance @ 17psi boost.

The timing and boost added together somehow makes up that "actual load" number. If you figure out what your actual load is, you can figure out where you should be on that ignition advance table.

sure, i get what you were saying...

here is part of my log with my Pro E Tune E50, default log list. Pretty Sweet Huh... S1+ E50. No DPs so boost tapers down, mid range at 19 psi @ ~11.XX timing. Hits 12.75 at 18 psi, timing is held.

[VNeBLOB42]

Originally Posted by nukezero

I have noticed some new findings after 1 week of installing the Cobb AP.

First, I used to have a ton of soot on the back of my AW bumper even after a good washing on the 1st or 2nd day. After 3 days, I noticed there is atleast 50% less soot on the back bumper. It is much better than before. The car must be running less rich at idle and low band which would explain why the pickup is much better.

Secondly, I feel like the engine noise has slightly changed. Does anyone know if the Cobb AP increases the water pump pressure or low/high fuel pump pressures for Stage 1 -Drive?

as for the soot, i noticed it also (more on the tail pipes), but after a while, it didn't appear to be a problem.

not sure about the engine noise..

[DallasBoosted]

sure, i get what you were saying...

here is part of my log with my Pro E Tune E50, default log list. Pretty Sweet Huh... S1+ E50. No DPs so boost tapers down, mid range at 19 psi @ ~11.XX timing. Hits 12.75 at 18 psi, timing is held.

Very nice, great looking log!

[DallasBoosted]

Originally Posted by VNeBLOB42

sure, i get what you were saying...

here is part of my log with my Pro E Tune E50, default log list. Pretty Sweet Huh... S1+ E50. No DPs so boost tapers down, mid range at 19 psi @ ~11.XX timing. Hits 12.75 at 18 psi, timing is held.

My 3rd/4th log from today E30 OTS map, running E35-ish




Looking good, nice work Cobb!

[Mrbig]

2013 335is dct Cobb work well ? Afe intake, downpipes, ?