Lotussuper7

Thanks for the reply. The reason I ask is because the car has a lot of power vs traction and can be a bit unruly. ( Lotus 7 replica) with a turbo 4age under the hood. I was contemplating using an offset to the E-throttle target using the Map reading to reduce Tps opening as boost builds. Do you think this is a viable solution? and if so, how would I go about it. I cant seem to come up with a solution to offset the throttle target position. My idea was to have a separate table with APS and Map that fed into the main E-Throttle target table and offset (replace) the original APS position. I dont want to give up the rpm axis on the main E-throttle table as I find it is useful. Thanks again for you ongoing help. kind regards.

After some testing I can confirm that the suggestion Adamw gave above (using a math block), allowing you to have CLL "active" and still use the mixture map seems to work a treat. To get good results you have to make sure you transient conditions are set up appropriately, ie tps delta etc. Im not sure I would use it for my final fuel map tune (Possibly you could?) , but to rough in the map and still have some protection there seems like a win. Thanks Adam

Can anyone shed some light on the torque request setting. Is this only used for automatic transmissions that need torque reduction to shift gear, or can it be used to normalize torque on a turbocharged engine ( Ie. make torque output more in line with APS value?) If so, can it be set up without having the exact torque curve from a dyno? Currently I have set the E-Throttle map to be quite exponential (negitive) to try and compensate (eg. 50% APS = 35 TPS etc). However, I was wondering if the torque request would be a better way. Haven't seen anyone else talk about it on the forum, so I just thought id throw it out there. Any advice would be appreciated.

Awesome! Thanks Adam. Have a great weekend.

Just wondering how to get the target idle trim tables to show up. I dont seem to be able to turn on the 3d table mode? Probably just me doing something silly. I have seen this done on previous forum posts, but I cant find out how to do it on the latest firmware. Cheers Tim

I think I may have solved my issue with some adjustments. Lowered the minimum duty on the ETB from 2 to .2 Changed the timing around idle from 17 to 15 deg, and set the idle speed starting point to 15 deg. Ran through the open loop idle setup again and slightly adjusted the ETB target table down a point or two. (Then turned ignition idle back on) Put a slightly lower Value in the ETB target table above 1500 rpm @ 0 APS Do all of those things seem reasonable? It seems to be working much better now, I can set the RPM lockout to 500 and it seems happy, and will re-enter idle. Hopefully I will be able to get out on the road now and get some more logs. Will post results when I can Thanks!

Hello. I am having an issue with my idle speed control. I have got a stable idle speed using my Ethrottle and ignition idle control, and that seems to be working well (almost). When free reving the engine the revs come back down and settle quite well. However, when I put a small load on the engine then put the clutch in, the revs hang above the rpm lockout and wont decrease. The TPS stays at an elevated position (around 7) normal idle around 3 (APS 0) and the idle status says rpm lockout. This happens if I have the idle rpm lockout at say 500rpm, If I increase the rpm lockout to the max (3000) it doesnt seem to do it. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

Adamw, that sounds like a great suggestion, going to give it a go. Would be a great addition to the software if it was just an option in the mixture map settings with the math baked in! Hope your weekend is going well. Thanks!

So you recon just log the lambda error, then manually adjust the VE table? That was what I was suggesting above, good point on making sure the table axis match. Having CLL active when doing initial roughing in of the map sounds sensible to me, as it should offer a bit of protection when the numbers may be way out. The general consensus I have heard is not to have CLL active if trying to use the mixture map, hence why I was thinking to use CLL first for getting things close, then turning it off and using the conditional filters with the mixture map to get some more accurate readings. Just wanted to see how others have approached it. Thanks for your input.

Looking for a little insight. I am about to start road tuning my car after swapping to modeled fuel. My question is... Does the mixture map use the CLL correction as part of its calculation, or only the resultant corrected AFR. ie, if I go for a drive with CLL active, will the mixture map take this into account, or should mixture map logging only be done with CLL disabled? With a VE table that could be quite incorrect, are you better to do some basic tuning with CLL on, and manually go through the logs looking for the large CLL corrections first, then turn it off and use the mixture map when you are closer to the ball park. Any advice appreciated. Tim

I would love to see min/max dc clamp values available when using the gp PWM outputs. The reason for this is to limit the minimum duty applied to things such as fans, water pumps etc, as these often need a minimum duty to start properly, and table interpolation seems to effect this. Another Cherry on the top would be a 'kick' feature to temporarily boost duty to overcome stiction etc. It could include: Kick dc % Kick hold time in seconds Kick Decay time in seconds. Thanks in advance

Update time. Had a chance to test the fan code this afternoon. Although very complicated (still trying to get my head around how it works) it seems to work perfectly. Fan comes on at a min duty of 25 and off around the same! You are a genius. Would still like to see a easier way to do this (maybe I should put min/max gp dc clamps in the wishlist? along with a 'kick' feature to temporarily bump the dc up) But in the mean time, this workaround.... seems to work. Thanks for everybody's help, you guys are awesome. Merry Christmas.

Again, thanks for looking into this. I will give Vaughans suggestion a try. Ps. the engine speed condition was just set to >= 0, so i could monitor what the fan was doing on cool down ( car not running) so i could see when it switched off. Yeah, it didnt seem to work all that well, values below 25 were still being output as it transitioned from 89 - 90 deg. This wasnt for very long 3-5 seconds, but i suspect if the value in the 90 deg cell was lower, this transition phase would grow. It was a very choppy looking transition too, like a coarse stairstep. I tried to upload a picture of the log taken using Adamws settings, but it wouldnt let me as i have run out of upload capacity, I will see if I can just upload the log instead and you could have a look? Edit, The log file is too big to upload also. Will give the new suggestion a go and report back.

Thanks for your help, I tested this a bit earlier today. However, it did not solve the problem. There still is a period where the fan is being driven stalled, then the ramp up is not smooth at all, and kinda defeates the purpose of having a pwm controlled fan. Surely there must be a way to set a minimum dc for the dc pwm output. If this is not necessary, why would it be implemented on pwm fuel pump control? the boost solenoid also has min/max dc settings, and I know nitrous solenoids also require min duty settings. My original setup worked beautifully (once the fan had started). Would it be possible using a virtual aux setup as an intermediary, so the gp pwm output value could be collected and used in a condition before actually being implemented? Any other ideas?

Ideally what I'm after is very similar to the pwm fuel pump setup, without the 'prime' time setting (instead it would be nice to have a 'kick' setting to get the fan going initially).

Thanks for the reply. Attached is what I'm trying to achieve. Basically a simple concept. Ramp the fan on slowly as Ect temp starts to rise above 80 or so. However, ramp the fan up if the Iat gets high also, for this to happen the ect must be above 70 though. (The radiator and intercooler are stacked and share a fan)This bit works fine, the problem is because there seems to be no min duty cycle for the gp pwm outputs, the fan gets asked to come on at very low duty( interpolated value as temp rises slowly), so the fan wont start, and just makes buzzing sounds. This obviously isnt good for the fan or solid state relay. It will eventually start as the interpolated value climbs, but as ect climbs relatively slowly, this can take a while. My work around did not work as expected because I cant seem to reference the value in the gp pwm table directly for my condition. As the conditions have not 'yet' been met, it doesnt output a duty cycle to monitor. It will however turn the fan off using the condition as a duty cycle is being output at that stage and it seems to recognize when it falls below (in my case) 25%. I'm just confused how others have got around using the gp pwm tables, I would have thought most items that use pwm control do not like being driven at very low pwm values, things such as water pumps etc. Is this a bug or am I just missing something? Any help greatly appreciated. I think the problem with my workaround (that did not work) is that I need to reference the target dc from the gp pwm table, not the actual output. But I couldn't find a way to do that.

The problem is when the the table interpalates from a '0' cell to a populated cell, and the value is somewhere between. Even if I put 100% in a cell (say at 90 deg c) but the cell before it is 0, there is a period where the interpolation is less than 25% and the fan struggles. Surely min and max clamps should be an option? I thought that putting in a 'and' condition - gp pwm dc >= 25% would solve the issue, but it doesnt seem to read the value from the table unless the gp pwm table has become active. So that's why it stops the fan on cooldown at 25% dc, but will not let the fan start.

Looking to run my fan off a solid state relay, I have it wired up and working well. However, I have a small issue. The fan required around 25%DC to start reliably, but I cant find how to set the minimum clamp value for the Gp pwm output. Is this possible, I think it is in the pwm fuel pump option, but not on the gp pwm outputs? I tried to set up a 'and'condition pointing at the gp pwm status being greater than 25%, this seems to stop the fan running below 25% if it already going, but will not let it start if that condition is active. Any ideas?

Thanks! Must have been tired that day, it was right in front of me. Merry Christmas!

Thanks. That's some great information! It will no doubt help more people than just me. Thanks again.

Can anyone suggest some sensible settings as a starting point?

Thanks! Will keep using my external controller until i decide to upgrade.

I don't seem to have first crank prime available for selection. I am guessing this has something to do with my trigger arrangement not being accurate enough. It's not a big deal, more curious. Anyone have any info on this?

Hello, can anyone tell me if the wide band controller can run the old 4.2 sensor, or only the newer 4.9. Thanks in advance.

Thanks for your reply. I came to the same conclusion after some pondering. Im going to change my wiring to suit the recommended connection. Thank you for having a look. Kind regards Tim