nAst1: Progress and Concepts Thread

[robertisaar]

this one may not be perfect, but it does have a lot of issues and conversions corrected.

[pocket-rocket]

Ok, if the one hosted here has errors, I don't believe I have a good one then :/ Oh well, it was too hot to mess around in the garage today anyways.

[robertisaar]

careful, the DF XDF hosted here DOES have some significant errors in it. i found this out when i was porting the LQ1 stuff.

also, Ben, update your version of TP, Mark says he fixed that specific issue with the latest release.

[pocket-rocket]

well, if you have your $DF tune and a decent XDF handy, compare the DF tune to the basis tune using one instance of tunerpro, then open another instance with the yet-to-be-released $A1 3.4 BIN and then copy the differences you see into the A1 tune, then you have your DF tune in A1 format.

So I updated TP on my desktop and laptop, did a direct read from a stock BCFA chip and my chip. My burner program will find differences in the chips, but I cannot get TP to find anything no matter how I go about attacking it on either pc. I guess it's about time to take a step back and go shoot someone (Call of Duty: Black Ops can relieve stress, or create it in certain circumstances, lol).

[robertisaar]

i can tell you right now you're running on a few versions outdated version of TP V5. 7686 is the latest version.

like i said, i could never get the transition to work right, so AFAIK, the only way to reliably run single-fire right now is to run injectors twice as large as necessary and you won't run into the software/hardware imposed 50% duty cycle. i'll need to work with the Async register to be able to get it to function as desired.

[SappySE107]

I tried the single fire up to 4ms, and its ok until you cruise around right on the 4ms point and then it stumbles and shakes as it goes back and forth between them. It actually stalled on my once as well. So I am done with that. The instant MPG was up 7% at idle too, so i don't see it helping with fuel economy.

[SappySE107]

5.00.7431.000.00.0.00.000, program files 32 bit folder, default for Windows 7 install. Complete path on my drive that I am trying to save to? D:\car stuff\NAST1\Cavalier Wagon of Doom\

[robertisaar]

Ben, has more questions to fgure out TP quirks:

There’s not quite enough info in the video. What version of TP? What is TunerPro’s install location, and what is the complete path to which he’s attempting to save (move) the log file?

[robertisaar]

launch mode is already present in A1. if you play with the bias value, you can generate a negative spark advance modification to cut torque momentarily.

[34blazer]

going back to trac control, using launch mode(from 8D saujp) could work until a suitable abs controller is built?

[robertisaar]

i've improved the 2E XDF since you've last seen it Ben.

a lot the displaying/changing has now been automated and takes into account the scalar, offset and table value to display into a single table. if you can't adjust a certain frequency table to a high or low enough range, then the scalar or offset would need to be deal with.

and it is entirely possible to make them all into 1 table. however, going that route would require every entry to be a 16 bit value, which takes up a LOT more space than the way it's setup now.

and it SHOULD be easy to get MAF working the way i want, since every time a speed-density BPW value would be generated, an option bit and qualifications would be looked at to see if a MAF based BPW value should be used instead.

also, using the MAF, i can make an interesting "auto-VE" feature in the ADX to basically build the VE tables by driving around with only MAF enabled. should cut down on initial guesses considerably.

[SappySE107]

It is not easy to tune because you have to figure the base value plus each section of the maf table. Get rid of the base and make each segment its own. Even better (not possible), make it 1 table. haha, i wish! Making the MAF work easily on A1 is going to be a PITA. you can make it work I am sure but if its hard to tune, not many of us will bother vs 3 bar MAP.

[robertisaar]

what exactly about the 94-95 MAF is bad? i think it's fairly simple as-is.

[SappySE107]

The 94-95 maf setup sucks. Unless you can simplify it, I wouldn't bother with MAF. if you can, I would LOVE to have that with 3 bar support.

[robertisaar]

if someone had a REALLY open calender(and at least a basic understanding of 68HC11 operations), it could be done, however, i don't think i would ever plan on doing it.

lot of time, very little benefit.