Adamw

I've come across this guy's videos before and they are usually reasonably accurate, but in this case Im not entirely convinced he has it right - or perhaps he has missed some important part of the strategy out? If I search "Porsche Dynamic Boost" pretty much all articles are linking to the same video and quoting the same "facts". A strategy that is fundamentally very similar to what this man describes has been used in the higher end motorsports for 10years or more, often named "pre-blip" or "blip in advance" or similar and I have never seen any mention of it improving turbo response - in fact I have probably seen it more commonly used on NA engines. The purpose of pre-blip is to improve the timing and abruptness of the torque reversal for a quicker and higher success rate downshift. When the driver lifts off the throttle, it is only partially closed and fuel is completely cut, when a downshift is requested the fuel is momentarily re-instated so you get near-instant torque reversal since you are not waiting for a throttle to open and the manifold to fill with air etc, this method allows you to time the torque reversal more accurately to occur at the right instant within the shift sequence. There are a few issues however; firstly even at say 25-30%TP you have already lost nearly all engine braking effect. Secondly, the power reintroduction becomes quite tricky, obviously, you cant just turn the fuel back on as you would go from 0% torque to 100% torque in 1 engine cycle. You need to first almost close the throttle before you can re-introduce fuel, so that the driver has some chance of driving out of the corner etc. There needs to be quite a few rules controlling when it is time to close the throttle, in the motorsport ecu's I have used it is often timers and lat G etc, but you have to adjust these for each track depending how long the car is off throttle for etc. Given these Porsche's are probably mostly PDK gearboxes that need accurately timed shift events, they have paddle shift, they have long intake runners and two large plenums (poor blip response), my thoughts are this so called "dynamic boost" strategy is possibly just a blip strategy? A further question that fuels my scepticism: I've always heard a general rule that a turbocharger turbine makes its shaft power from roughly an equal share of heat energy Vs mass flow/kinetic energy. Is the extra mass flow that you gain from opening the throttle (and remember you are now pumping cold air through the manifold/turbine etc) really going to make more energy than what you would have had with a normal closed throttle condition but when there is still combustion/expansion/heat doing work? I have some doubts...

I just done a quick test on the bench, the aux test PWM function doesnt actually work when the VVT system is set to S52 mode, the auxes must be linked together in the software when in this mode. So to test the auxes you have to temporarily set the VVT mode to off, then you can try Test PWM on each aux. I still dont see the reason for the position error on the intake cam. Can you do another short log with the cam angle test set to LH intake and give it a few revs to where the error normally occurs. What do you have for coils and ignitors on this engine?

In a fuel press regulator you have the spring and atmosphere on one side of the diaphragm balancing fuel pressure on the other side. Therefore the fuel pressure should always be the same "gauge pressure" above the reference (BAP) - it shouldn't vary with BAP, it should always be say 400Kpa above BAP. It works the same way with a manifold pressure reference also - FP should always be the same gauge pressure above the reference pressure (MGP). For your deadtime question - yes you should use differential press on one axis if you have that info.

Contact [email protected] with the story, they can either contact the dealer on your behalf to get the unlock or they can get approval to retrieve the unlock.

Yeah changing the offset shouldnt prevent it from sparking, sometimes if the plug is firing into the cyl at the wrong time, the lack of pressure in there means the spark voltage is lower than normal so the timing light doesnt trigger. Pull a plug out to visually confirm there is a spark. You have something fishy with your wiring though, when you crank many of the 5V sensors read wrong, the MAP goes to 120kpa, TPS jumps up to 10%, gear position voltage changes, ECT and IAT both change a little etc. So I would suspect possibly a weak ground? If it is showing signs of trying to go that would usually mean not enough fuel or not enough advance. For the fuel, just use the master fuel setting initially, make a big change - like add 50% to see if it makes it better or worse. To try more advance just add a little to the trigger offset - say 10% to see if it makes it better or worse. No the active/inactive flashing was because of your incorrect trigger setting, The ecu would have lost position and reset every revolution since it was expecting 24T but there are only 22, it turns off fuel and spark until it resyncs.

Yes, you need to contact your dealer as the note says, they have to generate the unlock code for you. You can still set everything up, but the engine wont run until unlocked.

So yes, something is wrong with your test, with 3K total resistance divided by the wiper between 26 & 3K, you should have about 0-5V coming out of it.

AN Volt 3 was showing 4.99V when you saved that map, that wouldnt be normal for a TPS. Is it wired like this:

No, must be a minimum of 2.0V span. Can you tell me the resistance between red and black, and black and yellow and both fully extended and fully retracted.

The crank sensor is wired incorrect polarity, swap the +/- wires at the crank sensor plug.

Can you attach a short log and a copy of the tune.

That is just idle ignition kicking in. The speed lockout isn't working as you dont have a non driven wheel speed assigned. You can assign your RR wheel as both the driven and non-driven wheel to solve that. I think the backfire is actually at about 42:47, if you look at dwell you will see a spike down to 1.4ms. Im not quite sure of the reason for that - it is aligned with idle ign activating so possibly something related to the sudden change in ign advance from 30deg to 0deg. Not sure what you are saying here, it appears to be following the target ok to me. Yeah, its still pulling 15% out whenever it is idling.

Can you give a bit more info about your problem - im not quite sure of the question.

No need for a 2nd axis. Obviously only applies to modelled fuel equation. Mass air flow estimated is the calculated air mass from the modelled fuel equation using VE and density. If you are using traditional fuel equation then Inj DC is very closely related to mass air flow. Possibly something that may be considered in the future, not high priority right now as I have never seen it make F all difference.

Yes the default lambda/afr channel units dont work correctly, this is due to our older ecu's broadcasting AFR and our newer ones broadcasting Lamabda so the setup is a compromise so both work. It is quite easy to set up a math channel to generate AFR. In RS3, go to >math channel>add channel>linear corrector. Name the new channel AFR or similar, choose ECU WBO2 LAM1 as the channel, set multiplier to 14.7. Click save and then you will have a new AFR channel that you can add to your display pages.

Ok, I have no personal experience with ALS with a GDI engine but I can give you a basic set up to work from, you will really want an experienced tuner involved as it is very easy to cause serious damage with ALS.

The exhaust cam position appears to be reported correctly now. The ecu is applying maximum duty cycle to aux 3 trying to get it to retard but it is not moving. With the engine off, ignition on, do the exhaust solenoids click when you put aux 3 & 4 into test PWM mode? Have you cut the stock connectors off the vanos solenoids? Assuming they do click, is the vanos system known to be in good mechanical condition and working? For the intake cam error, can you turn off the pull-up on DI1 to see if that solves the error.

Only the 4 wheel speeds are sent to the dash in the default MXS CAN stream. Assign one of your wheel speed inputs as DI 2 in >chassis and body>speed sources

If it only happens at high load it would suggest ignition noise is interfering with USB comms. Check that the monitor is not going to sleep also - this can cause PC Link to crash. Check spark plugs are resistor type as a start. What engine are we talking and Ign system etc?

So there are really two things being discussed here - 1), How system response time is handled in CLL and 2) how the same delays are handled with the mixture map function. Firstly, an explanation of what im referring to as "system response time", there are two main factors that contribute: Transport delay - this is how long it takes for the effects from a change in injector PW to arrive in the exhaust gas at the Nernst cell in the sensor. Sensor response time - this is how long it takes for the sensor to determine lambda or oxygen content of the gas after it has reached the measurement chamber. The transport delay part varies hugely - mass flow is the main contributor, but there are many other factors - exhaust pipe volume, injector timing, cam timing etc all have some influence. The sensor response time is less variable but still significant. Factors like gas temperature, gas flow and how far away from stoich the exhaust gas is, influences the response speed. If we combine these two delays, the typical total system response time can vary from about 4s at rich idle to about 0.05s at stoich WOT. For the CLL control loop: The update rate table, lockouts for heavy transients, and the reactivation delay generally takes care of the large variation of total system response time quite well. Since mass flow is the main contributor, the update rate table is best if referencing a variable that is indicative of mass flow such as Injector Eff PW or Air Mass flow estimated, but even just RPM often works well enough. It is best to have the update rate a little slower than the total system response time if possible. This is not always possible at idle with our current minimum of 1Hz but usually close enough. Mixture Map: The mixture map has no way of knowing what the system response time was for every sample in the log or any way of compensating for it either. You can only be smart with the filtering or the way in which you capture the data so that more weight is given to samples which are a better representation of steady-state conditions. Some logging software does allow you to specify a "lambda delay" for tools like histograms or scatter plots which effectively just offsets all of the lambda sample's time stamps, this can work ok for applications like a race engine where it spends most of its time running above say 5000RPM and 50% TP so the system response time is much less variable, but this type of correction wont help much in the case of a typical road captured log with no thought given about how the engine was operated during data capture. Total samples for the whole log that were within the specified active zone area for that cell.

Assuming it is an EJ engine (not the FA) then the existing WRX 11 ecu will do this model. So far I dont think we have tested in a UK car but have several AUDM & JDM cars from 2015-2019 running it successfully. The 2015+ CAN modes will be available in the next software release, but I can give you a beta version if needed before then.

Are you talking about the surface view of a table? Do all tables give you the same issue or only a certain type?

It's not something I have had a lot to do with as it is pretty rare to do so. In the OEM world it generally becomes more of a stability control function rather than traction control, where wheel speeds may be manipulated based on yaw, acceleration and other realtime measurements to approximate the level of traction. In the aftermarket world the strategy would vary with the application and goal, it could be something simple such as a maximum wheel speed acceleration rate or real vehicle speed may be determined from LiDAR/RADAR or there may be GPS-based systems nowadays that incorporate other vehicle dynamics sensors to give a vehicle speed accurate enough to be useful for wheel slip calcs.

@Oprah_152 I have sent you a PM.