The hpt scanner doesn't show when you're in op even though you can tell you are by the cam angles.Originally Posted by caniggia
If you want to post the roush file I'll see if I can explain the mp7 question.
The hpt scanner doesn't show when you're in op even though you can tell you are by the cam angles.
If you want to post the roush file I'll see if I can explain the mp7 question.
Eastern and Central Europe American Muscle and Harley-Davidson tuning
www.hd-customs.pl
http://www.facebook.com/hdcustomspl
Thank you Eric.
2012 Mustang GT with S/C
4Runner with S/C
Turbo/NOS Hayabusa - 320RWHP
It does. VCT SChedule dmr will tell you exactly what mode the cams are operating in.
Eric Brooks
HP Tuners, LLC
Yes that will tell you but it never logs into the Mapped Point OP so if you are trying to log into specific torque or spark tables, it won't work.
Also....... Pulse Width and fixing the Ethanol/Alcohol % pids.....how's that coming along? :-)
I see schedule in the last, but I can't add.
Eastern and Central Europe American Muscle and Harley-Davidson tuning
www.hd-customs.pl
http://www.facebook.com/hdcustomspl
What is your OSID
Eric Brooks
HP Tuners, LLC
Fr3a-14204-dud
Eastern and Central Europe American Muscle and Harley-Davidson tuning
www.hd-customs.pl
http://www.facebook.com/hdcustomspl
Could anyone explain the Fuel Economy Array in the 5.0 Coyote Control Pack File? Seems like the distance tables are setup wrong, the highest value is 4 when it should be 7
(based on that Diagram that GapRider posted, thanks for that by the way).
Would you guys recommend changing these ( The Fuel Economy, Optimal Stability and associated Distance tables) back to the way they are setup in a factory file? or do you think the small difference in the blending of these will make any real difference. I guess the most concerning thing I see is that Best Drivability is effectively disabled, the min enable load is set to 5.00
I'm gonna start tuning a project car (Cobra Replica with a 2014 Coyote in it) me and my dad have been working on, hopefully here in a couple weeks. It just has headers and a slightly different intake. I've been making notes on the differences between the control pack file and a stock 2014 GT File. Since I haven't driven the car I don't know how these different settings affect drivability.
Last edited by AKDMB; 08-15-2017 at 07:00 PM.
The fuel economy array seems to be used by both fuel economy and drivability distance tables. 5,6,and 7 are in the drivability distance tables which not only is enabled in the higher loads, but has higher load axis values.
fuel economy and drivability.PNG
Last edited by murfie; 08-15-2017 at 09:21 PM.
I just want to make sure I got the hang of this. This is an example of my V6 Mustang with cruise control on, at exactly 40% load, so you should end up with Mapped Point 6 in the fuel economy array, correct? Or do you "count up" 0,1,2,3,4,5 taking 6 "steps" if you will along the way, which gives you Mapped Point 5?
Also, what is the protocol when the distance table calls for a fraction like 0.6?
Last edited by AKDMB; 08-16-2017 at 05:43 PM.
Points have no distance. There's only distance when there is a line between two points. Ford bases a lot of their ecu math in statistics and probabilities. In statistics, an index is a measure of changes in a representative group of individual data points. It is a compound measure that groups multiple points. The arrays summarizes and ranks specific mapped points. The distance tables then describe how the weights should vary.
When you look at the distance tables you need to look at the snap to line values(they are the ones with ? for axis values). when you have fractional values like 4.4 it describes which part of the compound measure should have more weight.
Ok, I think I understand this a little better. Let me know if otherwise
1. The Distance Tables Specify a Distance.
2. The Array Tables then assign a Mapped Point to this Distance
3. The Snap to Line table then dictates the combination/progression of the Mapped Points from here.
I think this is a good example.The RPM and Load values aren't nice, so I used an excel sheet that can do bicubic interpolation to spit out a Distance value.
Another Distance Example.png
You got the general flow of it. Rember lines have two end points, so an assigned mapped point could be at the start of one line but the end of another. This can allow the weights to shift over MPs in between with out giving them any weight. An example in your picture would be MP1. Its at the start of two lines. one going to MP 2 and the other going to MP 10. Its also at the end of a line coming from 0. MP 1 is index value 1. index value 0 is MP13. when you are are at distance values of .4, .5, or .6 the weights will be along the lines between MP 1 and MP 13. MP 10 is connected to both so it would be included in the compound measure. the weigths could either be spread evenly or build up on MP 10. The snap to points help determine this. Your snap to line table can have multiple paths from one index to another making it complicated to know where the weight is going to go. It could also have no path, and thats where the snap to points come in also. The weight will just jump to the closest point and continue on the lines or be pulled toward a specific point it when multiple lines are involved. Useful to know when looking at a 2015+ mustang and you are getting MP14,21 and 25 at WOT. Using the pythagorean theorem and the difference between to points you can calculated it is the formula Sqrt((x2-x1)^2+(y2-y1)^2)=distance. (x1,y1) would be the current position and (x2,y2) would be the snap to point. X and y would be the IVO and EVC angle values.
Last edited by murfie; 08-17-2017 at 04:13 AM.
Thank You very much for all this info, it's awesome to get this kind of help.
This is still semi related to the thread topic and another example. I had another idea for a Ghost Cam tune. With the method in the Ghost Cam guide that toyoguru posted way back, (There are some portions he left out Cam tune (1).pdf that are still in that thread, https://www.hptuners.com/forum/showt...-13-mustang-GT ) it seems like you would end up with your idle overlap bleeding over into normal driveability. Ideally, it would reason that you would have a dedicated Mapped Point for the lopey idle. Since Mapped Points 11-14 aren't used for anything in a 2011-2014 Coyote, I was considering enabling one of them (Mapped Point 13) and making it the Mapped Point for the lopey idle. Since this unique Mapped Point would only be called for at idle and used no where else, it should make for otherwise stock drivability.
This would require other changes to stabilize the idle with all the additional overlap and keep the VCT from hitting any limits. I would also copy over Mapped Point 0?s Borderline/MBT, Torque/Torque Inverse tables into Mapped Point 13. All of the minor changes aside, this is the logic I had in mind?
1. Enable Mapped Point 13 in the Mapped Point Configuration.
Mapped Point Configuration.png
2. Go to the IVO/EVC tables, set IVO for Mapped Point 13 to -40 and EVC for Mapped Point 13 to 30 (To produce the Lope)
Mapped Points IVO.png
Mapped Points EVC.png
3. Next, Open the Optimal Stability Distance Table (the VCT Schedule used at idle), set the idle Portion to a Distance of 6
OS Distance.png
4. Set row 6 of the Optimum Stability Array to Mapped Point 13
OS Array.png
5. Then go to the Snap to Point table and enable Mapped Point 13
Snap to Point.png
The Part I?m not too sure about is ensuring the PCM can find its way to Mapped Point 13. I have Mapped Point 13 enabled in the Snap to Point, but no reference in the Snap to Line table, I don?t think this will make a difference, but who knows.
Just tried your method. It works beautifully. It will die occasionally when you push in the clutch, though. It'd take some more refinement on that front, but I just made those quick changes and tried it. Not really my gig, just wanted to play with it. So I went back to my normal tune.
I find it best to plot your points on a graph. Its easier to see the distance than calculate it.
https://www.desmos.com/calculator is a easy website great for this purpose.
I graphed all MPs from your sample tuen. Made the snap to points black. in paint Drew lines to show the snap to lines. Circled areas and labeled where the tables tell the ECU it should be. There's a lot you can figure out from this. for example how to improve your OP values comparing them to your fuel economy and drivability tables. You can also see how going from a loop idle to a stable idle using just a snap to point might be kinda difficult to make a smooth transition. You can add a snap to line (13,0) to help this transition. It should be above the (0,1) line so all lines would need to shift down one row.
MPs cam idle.PNG
Would you then allow some blending in the distance table?
no blending just go between MP 13 or MP 0, but I would make it go to distance 5 and MP 0 at 2000rpms, distance 2 and mp0 at 3500, and 1.5 at 4000 rather than 0s and .5s. So it doesn't try to blend distance 1 and MP 10 getting from 6 to 0 until higher in the RPMs where those cam angles are better for stability. I would also only modify the higher coolant temp areas so on warm up it's always a stable idle for emissions and warm up.
Reply With Quote