History of MembersPage/PeterJensenAlphan
Older Newer
2013-09-11 09:19:59 . . . . catv-80-98-222-153.catv.broadband.hu [hints, and minor rewording of proposal]
2013-09-10 22:45:10 . . . . PeterJensen [Alpha-n Any strategy proposals are welcome]


Changes by last author:

Changed:
Driving between rally stages (low power) it must use map as the target. While tps rices above 15-20 % tps should take over.
Driving between rally stages (low power) it must use map as the target. While TPS rises above 15-20 % TPS should take over.
Changed:
As the MAP goes up to 100 and the TPS increases, the TPS table will smoothly take over. (TPS table values increases)

MAP table 0...100 KPa load

TPS table 0...100%

Alpha-N table multiplacive or addiative blending of a MAP table and TPS table.

MAP table with x/y axis as RPM/MAP (table 12x12 or more)

TPS table with x/y axis as RPM/TPS (table 12x12 or more)

Option to control table blending

-------------------------------------------------------

injector fuel = TPSdot in TPS table x (MAPdot in MAP table x Calculation of injector fuel)

or

injector fuel = TPSdot in TPS table + (MAPdot in MAP table x Calculation of injector fuel)

* these normally aspirated ITB engines are usually TPS mapped

* why not TableSwitch to an economy MAP-based table if really needed ?

* normally for ignadv,lambdatarget etc... TPS lookup used below MAP < nonve_kpalookup_minkpa;

** sounds like you need a REVERSE condition (TPS lookup used above MAP > nonve_kpalookup_minkpa threshold)

As the MAP goes to near 100 and the TPS increases, the TPS table will smoothly take over. (TPS table values increases)

----

Proposal

injector fuel pulsewidth = (VE1(RPM, MAP) + VE1(RPM, TPS)) x Calculation of injector fuel

where of course

* MAP table 0...100 KPa load, RPM/MAP (table 12x12 or more)

* TPS table 0...100%, RPM/TPS (table 12x12 or more)

* Option to control table blending

Having 2 VE tables (MAP based and TPS based) would allow the tuner to choose between MAP or TPS based mapping for any loadsite.

Normally and currently high load (eg under boost, where MAP>110 kPa ) is MAP-based, and TPS is used when no-boost.

How would it be used otherwise that justifies the extra complexity ? (not just software, but mostly mental load + help + documentation volume + misunderstanding + support)