Upgrading table resolution

[Benzmac16v]

Hey,

Wondering if there is a quick and easy way to change the table resolution for ignition and lambda.  The remapping tool works great but doesn't let me change the resolution.  My ECU came with maps loaded on to it (VE was 12x12, ignition 12x12 and lambda 8x8, firmware version 1.0.72 or there about) and I went through the trouble of upgrading my VE to 16x16 when I was on MegaTune.  This was not an elegant process if I recall.  Now I would like to get all my maps at the same resolution with the same load zones so I can more easily analyse and adjust what is going on across maps.  Is there any way to do this in VEMSTune?  Anyway to have it do the interpolation from my current maps?

Thanks,
Jim

[gunni]

You would simply update to the latest firmware , it will have larger tables and all the to date features.

[Benzmac16v]

I have been running the latest firmware for some time now.  Currently have 1.1.88 on it.  I take it there is probably a setting in the firmware upload utility that I am overlooking...  I'll check it out when I get home.

Jim

[Erikk]

I have been running the latest firmware for some time now.  Currently have 1.1.88 on it.  I take it there is probably a setting in the firmware upload utility that I am overlooking...  I'll check it out when I get home.

Jim

Just click Alt+1 and double click the Rpm or pressure slots to change the loadsites. Do the same for ignition Ctrl+2.
Are you sure thats not what you want?

[Benzmac16v]

Looking to increase the resolution (take an 8x8 to a 16x16).  Not just change load sites.

Jim

[Jamo]

If your looking to increase the lambda table from 8x8 to 16x16 you can't I raised it when I 1st joined this forum

[mattias]

Is there a specific running problem you're trying to solve by having more load cells for the lambda table?

[Benzmac16v]

Well not really... Car runs great now.  Better than oem in almost every way, including gas mileage.  I wanted to play with the lambda table so that I could more accurately lean out my cruising areas, while keeping my off cruise with a little higher lambda.  I found that the car will cruise very well down around 1.10 but throttle response is sacrificed as long as you are still within the very lean cells.  I would rather not use acceleration enrichment because that is set up pretty well right now and would effect all load sites, not just the lean loads.

I'm nit even sure I would be able to pull it off with great accuracy, but I have a lot if free time on my hands right now that won't last long, so I am doing a lot of tinkering...

I also think it would be nice if every table (ve, ignition and lambda) could have identical load sites... I think it would make tuning specific areas of the table much easier... 

Jim

[GintsK]

Much easier usually means also much faster. This is not the case with 16x16 lambda table.
From my point of view more resolution would be necessary only if some (not one or two) rapid lambda target changes desired over all table range. Have you such need?

[Benzmac16v]

Easier does not mean faster...  Easier means that if I want to make an adjustment at a specific load site on the VE table, I can got to the lambda (or ignition table if need be) and not have to remap my loadsites to get a site near the area needed to be modified or have to do my own interpolation and guess about what the modification needs to be done because the site in the lambda table is x rpm and y map away from where I want it to change... and then take into account what the change will do to a huge portion of the rest of the map...  Not a huge deal, but I think having all of my load sites at the same place across all maps would greatly simplify tuning when moving between maps.  Maybe its just the opinion of a noobie...

Jim

[mattias]

I vote noob. :)

What limits any dreams that any user may have is that the flash space is not abundant and this is a real-time application, handling a 64x16 table for one engine and then a 8x8 table on another may require different calculations and lookup times. If we had faster cpu(s) and more memory that would be different, and so would the price of the hardware, I can name a few systems you would probably like.

Having said that, I feel it's a major hassle and a waste of resolution to be forced to use the same load sites on all tables, and in fact a step was taken away from that with the firmware of recent years. All engines have changes at some rpm or load where you put the most attention, and VE, lambda and ignition have different needs - which is why the the VE table has the most resolution and lambda the least, ignition in between.
Even if we had the same size tables, I would personally NOT use the same load cells in the tables - exactly because the requirements of each table is so different.

The tuning situation that you describe is one I don't really follow, there have never really been a similar reason for me and even if you change the lambda table you should not have to remap the VE table - come on, that's the whole idea!
If you're keen on trying out a few things, why not just change the values along rpm/load axis to center in on the exact load which you want to experiement with. I'm pretty sure you will not find something revolutionary that will require a larger table, at least not on a factory 16 valve engine.

[GintsK]

In times when Lambda map was same size as VE - it was just wasting of tuning time. No matter how non even VE table is desired Lambda is much more smooth.
Or have you experience situation with high importance between lets say 1.08 and 1.05 or something similar for two neighbour VE cells???
Look at this ages old document:
http://www.not2fast.com/NACA/naca-report-189.pdf

Gints

[Benzmac16v]

Well there are bigger fish to fry than this anyway...  At least at the moment.  And if that pdf is accurate (i assume it mostly is) then a correctly tuned engine should only drop 95% power when running at its most economical.  What I was trying to accomplish was very accurately setting up my cruising bins to have high lambdas and then move to lower lambda very quickly off cruise.  Given that the difference would only be on the order of 5% power if it is tuned right, resolution isn't that big of a deal.  And while I was playing with it during my 1800 mile trip, advancing ignition timing (a lot) when you go lean pretty much solves any throttle response/performance issues that come from lean mixtures

I will say that if you are a hobbyist toying with one engine, tuning time really isn't a big deal.

Jim

[boostd audi]

i agree playing with the file is half the fun of building our whole car.