what are Snap to point and Snap to line?

[murfie]

Any one have any idea they can share with me about what these tables mean?

snap-to-point makes anchor points on all visible objects snappable

snapping is an effect where one point is attracted to another point, similar to a small gravitational field that tugs at anchor points in objects as you drag them around your page. Snapping is a great way to align one or more objects.

From comparing different vehicle tunes it seems that snap to line defines the groups of snap to points. so X axis would be point A and point B. Y axis would be 1-30. This would show groups of snap points that surrounding points are affected by. mapped point arrays would define which points to use and snap-to-line would be the high degree of freedom.

[Higgs Boson]

I look at them like they are mapped points the phaser or cam can go to directly without gradually traveling there through the list of points.

Of course I'm only guessing.

[murfie]

any guess, observation or info is appreciated.

watching logs of MP%s I usually see certain points with large percentages and alot of small percentages of the other points. I notice as one large point increases another large point decreases and theres seems to be a flow o percentages from point to point.

It might be a polling rate issue from logging to many channels, but at times the %s don't add up to 100 other times it is over 100.

[Higgs Boson]

I think that's because the Economy and Driveability load tables overlap and it is probably using points from each. I have altered mine like this:
Stablity Max: .15
Economy Max: .5
Driveability Min: .51
OP: .80

It helps keep the points together but they still blend a little bit to the adjacent cells, so three cells move up and down together with the middle cell in the mid to high 90s and the other two at very low percentages.

I also disabled the IMRCs in the tune and the car would try to start and then die like it had no fuel.
I reenabled the IMRCs but set all criteria to open. The car ran only in MPs 13-25, never used 0-12 at all.

I put the IMRC tables back to stock and then took my 1-10 tables and copied them to 14-22 this way the cells used by Stability and Emissions Reduction are unchanged.

My part throttle cam events command a gradually advancing intake event from MP1 at 360 to MP9 at 340 and a gradually retarding exhaust event from MP1,2,3 at 369 to MP14 at 389 and MP22 at 384.

The settings are arbitrary at this point, it's just to play with, but my thought was to mimic a smaller cam the closer I am to idle and a bigger cam the further away from idle into medium load and cruise. Heavy load should still switch to OP.

Once I confirm the car runs good like this, I will figure out how to better control IMRC and maybe be able to fine tune them down to a point where they are only closed at idle and light load cruise for economy along with Atkinson Cycle at the same time. I am sure I will need to use the Economy load and distance tables......

[murfie]

So you changed it to use economy up to .5 then stability up to.15 then drivability after .51. What's between stability and drivability?

[Higgs Boson]

Yes, I made the whole table their respective values.

Look carefully at the descriptions, some are Max values and some are Min values.

Stability below .15
Economy between .15 and .5
Driveability between .5 and .8
OP over .8

[murfie]

Oh got it. I was thinking .05.

[Higgs Boson]

I think maybe we should leave points 1-10 stock to take advantage of closed IMRC and Atkinson and we can make the 14-22 cells reflect traditional "big cam" valve timing for when the IMRCs are open. This would be the easy way until we fully harness the IMRCs.

The IMRCs appear to have more influence on the overall end results even more than the cam timing as having them closed really does alter the air flow/speed/VE quite a bit.

I really can't think of a good reason not to have Atkinson Cycle under the right (low load/RPM/cruise) conditions. After all, we can still have our aggressive cam timing on demand right through the gas pedal. :-)

0-13 are identical to 14-26, the only difference being 14-26 has open IMRCs. Make 14-26 aggressive part throttle cam events and leave 0-13 stock and of course enable and use OP for WOT.

[murfie]

Yes that is one of the questions I had is if Atkins/imrc closed produced more power then an otto valve timing. I'm leaning towards otto because for the top end that's what used so what works for the top should work better for the bottom. Atkinson to me is a fuel saving technique that Ford has implemented to pass emissions and raise MPG with todays strict epa standards. Instead of having the cams rotating back and forth which is slow relatively they use imrc to counter the Atkinson effect for on demand power, up to a point of course.

This is why between 1-9 the values go up then down. Imrc counters it fast while the cams are rotating to a better performance position.

Instead of an arch up then down they should just decrease. But if you do this you need to open IMRC or they become a restriction. Vct and IMRC are a balance you can't change one with out optimizing the other.

Force imrc open higher than MP 2 then sweep the cams between 1-9. Leave imrc closed For 0 &1 for starting and idle.

[Higgs Boson]

Yes that is one of the questions I had is if Atkins/imrc closed produced more power then an otto valve timing. I'm leaning towards otto because for the top end that's what used so what works for the top should work better for the bottom. Atkinson to me is a fuel saving technique that Ford has implemented to pass emissions and raise MPG with todays strict epa standards. Instead of having the cams rotating back and forth which is slow relatively they use imrc to counter the Atkinson effect for on demand power, up to a point of course.

Well, Otto is of course going to produce more power with an advance IVO all day long since we are really talking about torque here and low RPMs. We are talking about fast power with pedal movement. Retard is for high RPMs when the pedal is on the floor in a steady state. An advanced intake cam is going to be more snappy when you're moving the pedal. The only use for Atkinson is steady state cruise and we may as well leave it be, although I did decide to advance it 10 degrees, but still well ATDC....

I am still not so sure the IMRC are to "counter" Atkinson as they are closed at all low loads in mapped points 0-13. Atkinson Cycle is not in effect anywhere but MP2-6 with the IMRC closed but here's the funny part, it is also MP 15-18 with the IMRC open.....personally, I do not think the IMRC and Atkinson Cycle cam timing are directly related but they do occur at the same time sometimes....

This is why between 1-9 the values go up then down. Imrc counters it fast while the cams are rotating to a better performance position.

The MP values 1-9 do go up then down but that is because the Distance tables are set up to use them that way. The MP IVO and EVC values are really the least important part of the equation (but they are the easiest to alter with a picture in mind).

They go up then down because that is the natural flow the load and RPM as you apply more throttle and increase speed. It is also contradictory of what is going to feel best in a traditional sense. My goal would be to "quarantine" Atkinson Cycle cam timing to a very very very specific set of mapped points used only while cruising steady for good MPG and clean emissions. The problem with that is the IMRCs spoil the fun of a more aggressive cam timing at low RPM/load since they are forced closed that whole time.

There are two ways to look at it. You can either leave it stock from MP1-13 (which is probably best with stock cams) or you can play with the IMRC load and enable/disable tables to see if you can make them open and close independent of the MP criteria (0-13 vs 14-26).

[Higgs Boson]

Force imrc open higher than MP 2 then sweep the cams between 1-9. Leave imrc closed For 0 &1 for starting and idle.

I already tried forcing IMRC open and the car won't run. HPT probably doesn't have every table available (yet?) or the ECM is just not going to allow it.

It cranks and spins over normally like it has fuel and just stops, actually like there is fuel but no spark now that I think about it.

[murfie]

You have to follow the path defined by the fuel economy array thru the open and closed load tables for IMRC. The fuel economy array has 14, 20 & 21 MP in it 20&21 fall at point 8&9. So on the load tables 7 is closed 8 is open. Follow the load back and forth as the tables go up in load from table 9 down to 3. Higher than 9 means 14 imrc open.

[Higgs Boson]

You have to follow the path defined by the fuel economy array thru the open and closed load tables for IMRC. The fuel economy array has 14, 20 & 21 MP in it 20&21 fall at point 8&9. So on the load tables 7 is closed 8 is open. Follow the load back and forth as the tables go up in load from table 9 down to 3. Higher than 9 means 14 month open.

It is difficult to tell without logging if the description is correct on the Fuel Economy Distance table. It reads like the Driveability table description (that it relates directly to the MP Valve Event tables but has it's own Mapped Point conversion table also.... Not sure if it is using the MP Conversion table or not..... These are some of the ambiguous things about the HPT Ford stuff at the moment......it's the Beta and you can't take everything as 100% accurate.

With that said, if the description is correct, you can completely ignore the MP Conversion table. If it is not correct, then the MP Conversion Fuel Economy table is simply using Distance 8,9,10 open IMRC values, which are pretty similar (0 and 15) to the closed IMRC values. However, you have to ask yourself, if you set Fuel Economy max to .5, are you really going to get there or will you be using values from the Driveability table? ;-)

[murfie]

You are not looking at the fuel economy array. 1-7 20 21 14 14 14.....

The only thing that makes the load open/closed tables make sense with x axis 3-9 is by comparing it to fuel economy array

If you are strictly looking at when it's in drive-ability and when you are in fuel economy you have to factor in vacuum. Vacuum changes at the same throttle position due to environmental factors like hills and wind resistance and fat friends. There's no way this is easy to keep track of in your head it's to dynamic.

The fuel economy array jives with my logs seeing split between 14 and 21 above 4k at wot. Below 4k it used mp 25 which is a snap point not in a group. 4k is a threshold in one of the tables under IMRC. my guess is MP 25 has a single point array that's missing. Since it's a single point I don't imagine it's easy to find when decompiling the ecu.

This is why I want to figure out what snap to point and snap to line tables and how they play in building arrays. So I can be absolutely sure there isn't a different array for driveablity. If my description of snap to line is correct you can see an array that starting at 6 to 9 but ends with 21 going to 14 just like points in fuel economy. That means there's one array and both modes use that array. The numbers show great similarity to the array but not exact. Other cars that use mapped points have exact numbers that line up nicely. Snap to line shows points that will have an effect on other points. Snap to point allows the snap to line logic to see certain MPs. What the ecu logic does with how one point effects another is HDFX.

10 & 11 are in another array(stability I believe) that could be why they get skipped. There's another array that has 1 2 and 21 in it. It's very confusing I see why they don't have descriptions.

[Higgs Boson]

My man, you have got to start putting all this in one post!

You are not looking at the fuel economy array. 1-7 20 21 14 14 14.....

The only thing that makes the load open/closed tables make sence with x axis 3-9 is by comparing it to fuel economy array

Of course I am looking at that, reread my post.

If you are strictly looking at when it's in driveability and when you are in fuel economy you have to factor in vacuum. Vacuum changes at the same throtle position due to environmental factors like hills and wind resistance and fat friends. There's no way this is easy to keep track of in your head it's to dynamic.

It's easier than you think. You can record it in a log, that's the point of the scanner.

The fuel economy array jives with my logs seeing split between 14 and 21 above 4k at wot. Below 4k it used mp 25 which is a snap point not in a group. 4k is a threshold in one of the tables under IMRC. my guess is MP 25 has a single point array that's missing. Since it's a single point I don't imagine it's easy to find when decompiling the ecu.

Ok good, then the description is wrong in the tune, hopefully they will fix it.

This is why I want to figure out what snap to point and snap to line tables are and how they play in building arrays. So I can be absolutely sure there isn't a different array for driveablity. If my description of snap to line is correct you can see an array that starting at 6 to 9 but ends with 21 going to 14 just like points in fuel economy. That means there's one array and both modes use that array. The numbers show great similarity to the array but not exact. Other cars that use mapped points have exact numbers that line up nicely. Snap to line shows points that will have an effect on other points. Snap to point allows the snap to line logic to see certain MPs. What the ecu logic does with how one point effects another is HDFX.

Right on.

10 & 11 are in another array(stability I believe) that could be why they get skipped. There's another array that has 1 2 and 21 in it. It's very confusing I see why they don't have descriptions.

I agree with this. There is a lot of tables and descriptions and labels still undefined with HPT. Have to be patient I suppose. We are also discussing things that are not essential to making the car work and make power, which is priority for HPT and most users.....

[murfie]

You are clear on the y axis vacuum numbers representing positive for pressure and not actually amount of vacuum right. ~30inMg is 1 atmosphere as the number goes down vacuum is increasing? Throttle opening allows more atmospheric pressure into the cylinder so as a throttle increase happens barometric pressure in manifold does. It tripped me up when looking at those tables and thinking the vacuum gauge usually goes to a higher number to 0 as throttle opens.

But again trying to think about vacuum vs throttle vs load is not something you can easily imagine in your head. I wouldn't change anything about min max or distance tables. I would stick to the tables that don't deal with enviromental variables. MP & MP ARRAYS need optimization.

[Higgs Boson]

You are clear on the y axis vacuum numbers representing positive for pressure and not actually amount of vacuum right. ~30inMg is 1 atmosphere as the number goes down vacuum is increasing? Throttle opening allows more atmospheric pressure into the cylinder so as a throttle increase happens barometric pressure in manifold does. It tripped me up when looking at those tables and thinking the vacuum gauge usually goes to a higher number to 0 as throttle opens.

But again trying to think about vacuum vs throttle vs load is not something you can easily imagine in your head. I wouldn't change anything about min max or distance tables. I would stick to the tables that don't deal with enviromental variables. MP & MP ARRAYS need optimization.

I definitely wasn't thinking of them as vacuum however, every Baro reference I have seen has been as a baseline to map. In other words, Baro is outside the engine and Map is inside (the intake manifold).

With that said, the Y values make no sense because when will you see 18 in/hg outside the car? You would have to be on Mars or something.

So I am glad you pointed out that it must be cylinder or manifold pressure, which could be calculated I guess since the Mustang does measure Vacuum.....or it could all be calculated, like MAP.....

Why they wouldn't just use Calculated MAP for the Y axis is beyond me....They use Desired Air Load (rather than actual) so I don't really get using Baro in place of MAP. I really wish this car had a MAP sensor!

I'm not sure if this changes my values in the tables or not, I will reevaluate them.

[murfie]

I'm sorry I did realize I was multiposting alot, but the big box is easier to open than the edit button on a phone. Dropping my thoughts on how different tables affect each other probably a bit to much but maybe someone reading it will get a clearer picture of how the numbers flow through each table. One of those things once you get in a roll for an explanation you can't stop till you find it. There's definitely a pattern in the stock tune that I see about the IMRCs balancing atkinson effect with power while valve timing moves to otto. I understand it's a lot of work flowing numbers thru so many tables especially when so many are involved at once. 28 for the valve timing intake and exhaust makes 56 add having to to correlate IMRC open/close you can make it 84. The good news is the fuel economy array defines a much small group of mapped points and following it simplifies things quite a bit but still allot of work. Following open and closed IMRC off the fuel economy array is the easiest place to start. The load bouncing back and forth between open and load tables describes what I'm saying. The trick is not thinking of open table as open and closed table as closed but following the 3-9 array points of the fuel economy array. You have to think what a smaller intake would do to the Atkinson effect with the IVO moved ATDC. The point of the atkinson effect is to push fuel and air out of the cylinder before the intake valve closes so IMRC reduces this. Open atkinson is more effective than IMRC closed. There has to be someone else that is seeing what I'm seeing.

[murfie]

I definitely wasn't thinking of them as vacuum however, every Baro reference I have seen has been as a baseline to map. In other words, Baro is outside the engine and Map is inside (the intake manifold).

With that said, the Y values make no sense because when will you see 18 in/hg outside the car? You would have to be on Mars or something.

So I am glad you pointed out that it must be cylinder or manifold pressure, which could be calculated I guess since the Mustang does measure Vacuum.....or it could all be calculated, like MAP.....

Why they wouldn't just use Calculated MAP for the Y axis is beyond me....They use Desired Air Load (rather than actual) so I don't really get using Baro in place of MAP. I really wish this car had a MAP sensor!

I'm not sure if this changes my values in the tables or not, I will reevaluate them.

MANIFOLD ABSOLUTE PRESSURE SENSOR. This is the type of reading you would see the absolute pressure in side the manifold. Engines at -18 vacuum would be absolute pressure 30-18= 12. Pressure starts from 0 we are sitting comfortably under 30inMg pressure just doesn't feel like pressure. Trips people up.

[Higgs Boson]

I'm sorry I did realize I was multiposting alot, but the big box is easier to open than the edit button on a phone. Dropping my thoughts on how different tables affect each other probably a bit to much but maybe someone reading it will get a clearer picture of how the numbers flow through each table. One of those things once you get in a roll for an explanation you can't stop till you find it. There's definitely a pattern in the stock tune that I see about the IMRCs balancing atkinson effect with power while valve timing moves to otto. I understand it's a lot of work flowing numbers thru so many tables especially when so many are involved at once. 28 for the valve timing intake and exhaust makes 56 add having to to correlate IMRC open/close you can make it 84. The good news is the fuel economy array defines a much small group of mapped points and following it simplifies things quite a bit but still allot of work. Following open and closed IMRC off the fuel economy array is the easiest place to start. The load bouncing back and forth between open and load tables describes what I'm saying. The trick is not thinking of open table as open and closed table as closed but following the 3-9 array points of the fuel economy array. You have to think what a smaller intake would do to the Atkinson effect with the IVO moved ATDC. The point of the atkinson effect is to push fuel and air out of the cylinder before the intake valve closes so IMRC reduces this. Open atkinson is more effective than IMRC closed. There has to be someone else that is seeing what I'm seeing.

Like I said before, my goal is to relegate Atkinson and closed IMRCs to cruise and open IMRCs and normal cam timing to everywhere else. I don't care about the rest of it. ;-)