Actually, if I could just change the Percent Max and the Percent Max Brake without throwing the car into REP, it would have been back out on the street by now.
Actually, if I could just change the Percent Max and the Percent Max Brake without throwing the car into REP, it would have been back out on the street by now.
Because I'm a swell guy, I'm going to write you a properly scaled file based on what you gave me. I'd like you to try it just because I am interested in isolating what has to happen to make a TPiS work.
DSX Tuning - Authorized HP Tuners Dealer
http://www.dsxtuning.com
http://www.facebook.com/dsx.tuning
Just say no to bull s***.
IF YOU WANT HELP, POST A FILE!
That is beyond swell, dude. That is downright groovy.Originally Posted by DSteck
I appreciate your insight and assistance.
I have a hidden agenda. I haven't played with a TPiS so this is as close as I can get right now. Lol.
DSX Tuning - Authorized HP Tuners Dealer
http://www.dsxtuning.com
http://www.facebook.com/dsx.tuning
Just say no to bull s***.
IF YOU WANT HELP, POST A FILE!
PM'ing you now...
I am still working on this, but I have made some progress today. I will get some logs tomorrow and share.
If there is anyone willing or able to assist me in writing a tune that will allow me to use this throttle body, I would gladly pay you for your time. It just acts like it needs more airflow at idle, but no matter what I do, I cannot get the TB to go past 20 degrees.
Thanks
20% is the max.
DSX Tuning - Authorized HP Tuners Dealer
http://www.dsxtuning.com
http://www.facebook.com/dsx.tuning
Just say no to bull s***.
IF YOU WANT HELP, POST A FILE!
Arrrrgh
See, that is what I was afraid of. The blade is so tight against the TB bore at 20%, the thing just can't get enough air. At 20%, the stock silver blade has room around the blade to allow air past.
I think I am going to throw this thing up on my roof.
It's not a ETC% issue.
DSX Tuning - Authorized HP Tuners Dealer
http://www.dsxtuning.com
http://www.facebook.com/dsx.tuning
Just say no to bull s***.
IF YOU WANT HELP, POST A FILE!
Even giving the thing 20 g/sec to the BRA, and the thing won't run.
Did you resolve this? I'm working on something similar, with a NW102 and a similar cam.
Logging desired and actual ETC, I can see that the ETC position goes to 22%, and the ETC desired position goes to 8% at key on. If I crack the throttle once, ETC position goes to 8%, and after several seconds it returns to 22%. It appears that 22% is the park position. Once you begin cranking, ETC position immediately goes from 22 to 8%. The car wont start without giving it pedal, primarily because there isn't enough startup idle airflow.
Like you, I screwed with startup airflow and base running airflow. Both seem to do absolutely nothing during crank. I don't get that... what the heck is startup airflow for then??
The one thing that helps is to increase the Effective Area Minimum to around 85 sq mm. This is basically a minimum airflow position/blade angle. And while this does wonders for minimum warm idle, there needs to be a multiplier to this scalar for coolant temperature.
We must be missing some tables here somewhere. I have already adjusted the effective area to match this throttle body per Gregs formula.
Pontisteve,
If you are tuning a NW102 TB, everything I have read leans toward the ETC Scalar being set to higher than the 6069 you have in posted tune.
What are you doing to log actual vs. desired ETC%? I log my TPS% but not sure if that is what you are referring to.
The 6069 number was derived using Gregs technique of comparing the old throttle body area to the new throttle body area, and then using this ratio to multiply the original ETC area scalar by.
I'm not quite sure why the area and the effective area are two different things. The area could be determined by pi * radius^2. That number, using a stock 90mm throttle body for example, is much higher than the actual number the factory used as an ETC area scalar of 4725. So I take the new area / old area = ratio of areas. Then multiply 4725 by that.
FYI, that 6069 has since been updated to 6187, since that number also factors in the area of the throttle shafts into the equation.
To log actual vs desired, there are PIDs for that. I think they were Desired ETC% and ETC Position%. You might want to try logging every pedal, TPS, throttle, and ETC PID that you can, so you can compare them and see what each one means. TPS% is about the least informative of them all, and is probably just a % of 5v.
Any updates on this?
I have a ERL 102TB, and am experiencing the exact symptoms of the OP!
I too believe if I good get the PErcent Max to go higher than 3.65%, it would idle and start. But any higher I get REP, and P0606...arghhhhhhh.
I am getting frustrated with this TB, and am beginning to second guess whether it is worth it or not?
If I understand your problem correctly, the car won't start, probably especially when cold, without giving it some pedal, right?
I worked with an 06 GTO recently with a NW 102, and spent some extra time getting to the bottom of the big throttle body thing. The GTO doesn't have too much datalogging for Idle, and not too many parameters to modify either. Eventually, I'll do a writeup on everything I learned, but for now, here's something you can try.
The startup airflow table is clipped to 31.99 g/s of airflow. 4.232 #/minute in Imperial, to be precise. At least on the GTO. If you command more than that (HP software says 64 g/s is max), the table will be clipped, and you will get zero startup airflow instead. Datalog ECT throttle position to see this happen. So don't command more than 31.99 g/s or 4.232 #/minute in the startup airflow table anywhere.
What normally happens is that only some parts of that table (the cold parts) command more than that. So when the motor is warm, it will probably start fine. But when the motor is cold, you would have to give it throttle. FYI, this is enough airflow to start this GTO with a huge cam, so it's probably enough for whatever you're working on as well. If not, you might have to drill the throttle plate. Yuck.
No, the car simply will NOT start, hot or cold without throttle, and continued throttle to keep it running. I looked at the SUA table, and the values were 4.23, so I dropped them to 4.19 in those cells. IT did absolutely nothing.
I have tried every suggestion on the forums for getting it to idle. IT simply refuses to. With KEy on, engine off, I can log ETC pedal movement when I press the accelerator, and the blades say they are open 19%, and open more as I press the pedal.
I'm dumbfounded. But this TB is not NEW, I bought it used, and I think I know why it was for sale....
Perhaps the clip value is different for different vehicles. You need to look at a PID that shows the actual throttle position, not pedal position. Easiest way would be to datalog every different TPS and ECT PID there is. You'll quickly see the correlation. In the GTO's case, I found that ETC Position is the actual throttle blade angle, ETC Desired Position is the position the throttle body is requested to be at, based on what table is currently controlling it.
If you don't touch the throttle at all, there is a park position of about 22% that the throttle defaults to. As soon as you start cranking the car, OR if you blip the throttle and then let it return to closed, the position immediately moves to the Desired ETC Position. If you blip the throttle and let it sit for 6 seconds, it will return back to the park position of 22%.
If you try to command more than 31.99 g/s of startup airflow, the desired ETC Position goes to zero. So the car will sit at 22% throttle, but as soon as you try to crank it, or if you blip the throttle just sitting there key-on engine-off, the throttle will immediately go to zero. And you will not be able to start the car.
With this GTO, after carefully watching and learning how the system works, I was able to have it start and idle perfectly, hot or cold, maintain a nice low 800 RPM idle despite the big cam (upper 240's @ .050 duration). The ETC Area Scalar was set using Banish's method for determining the ratio of areas of the original vs new throttle body, and factored in the throttle shaft as well. The airflow models have to be tuned first, before messing with the throttle body. The cranking spark table was looked at, and slightly modified to represent realistic spark values. The cranking VE table was set to 80% (unscaled tune), which seemed to help. The idle effective area minimum scalar can be used to create a minimum idle throttle position, which can be handy to band-aid the idle until you can get a handle on it.
I just took a look at an 08 Z06 tune. The architecture is very similar to the 06 GTO, except more of the parameters have been unlocked in the Vette tune. In 08, the ETC area scalar is set to 4725, just like the 06 GTO, so switching up to any 102mm throttle body (assuming the throttle shaft size didn't change from brand to brand) should be 6187. This assumes a 10mm throttle shaft size. The lessons I learned on the GTO after much studying should apply to this 08 Vette.
I have all of the mentioned pids logged for ETC. I watch it sit at 18-20%, and the engine barely, just barely hangs on for dear life at 300-400 rpm. I have tried it with the BRAF zero'ed out, scalar from 4725-7300, SUA dropped to stock, and everything in between.
After all that, it still behaves almost identically, no matter what you flash in. I have attempted "write entire" just to rule out that there may have been something missed in writing on the calibration changes.
This pcm was tuned with EfiLive, so I have no clue if that software has tables that HpTuner does not. It seems to be looking that way, but I had tried using an old original copy of my tune that had not been edited by EfiLive, and I copied in all the changes, and that still didn't change the results.
Reply With Quote