WGDC Inconsistencies with Boost Tuning - Random flatline and no wgdc compensation

[phate]

Soooo, I've seen this in a couple cars, now:

On some runs, WGDC works perfectly. Other times, it stays at 0 for the entire run, and then other times it will only start to adjust a bit way too late to do anything worthwhile. I've seen it happen in an 07, an 09, and 2010 (which is what these logs are from).

In two of the cases, I just recompiled the tune in a new file and it fixed things, which led me to believe it was a corrupt file issue. But, I did that with the 2010 MS3 and it didn't help anything...

I've heard of this from a couple other folks, so I'm not the only one seeing it. Even some of the OTS tunes do it from time to time.

So, anyone else experienced this and have any luck diagnosing it? With all cases, both "Boost Error Comp" (BEC) and "Load Error Comp" (LEC) tables were in use, and all cells were populated with a value inequal to 0 (except the center, no-error value). The boost targets were set higher than achieved, as well as the load targets. "Load Dynamics" (LD) is zero'd, with the boost targeting box checked.

I don't think this is the same as the "shark fin" logs others reported, and @David@COBB explained, so I wanted to start this to get some ideas going and get the word out for anyone else experiencing it.

I am attaching an .xlsx file with seven (7) logs compiled into one dataset. All logs were taken in 4th gear. I've numbered each run in one of the rightmost columns, for anyone who wants to take a look. I have also attached the tune, in case anyone feels like looking at it. I'm also attaching a screenshot of the runs graphed over rpm, by run, showing calc'd load (blue) and wgdc scaled to 1/10 (red).

[rfinkle2]

@Boost_creep and @Dano would have some input.

[Boost_creep]

I've been battling this issue for way too long.

It seems the best method (for me) of overcoming this issue, is halving the LEC, making the BEC a bit more aggresive, and setting the trl x gear tables either at, or slightly below logged values, for the specific rpm (as long as boost is reaching target). The only downside to this, is that there is still a bit of load correction (wg compensation) on initial spool up.

It's still a work in progress though. Lol.

[phate]

Originally Posted by Boost_creep I've been battling this issue for way too long. It seems the best method (for me) of overcoming this issue, is halving the LEC, making the BEC a bit more aggresive, and setting the trl x gear tables either at, or slightly below logged values, for the specific rpm (as long as boost is reaching target). The only downside to this, is that there is still a bit of load correction (wg compensation) on initial spool up. It's still a work in progress though. Lol.

I believe in the most current tune (attached) the LEC actually is halved and the BEC has definitely been increased, lol. No dice. TRL x Gear values are close to what I want achieved. Have you tried recompiling your tune in a new file?

Also, what OTS map did you start with?

[Boost_creep]

Originally Posted by phate I believe in the most current tune (attached) the LEC actually is halved and the BEC has definitely been increased, lol. No dice. TRL x Gear values are close to what I want achieved. Have you tried recompiling your tune in a new file? Also, what OTS map did you start with?

Yes, I've recompiled like 4 times. Haha.

Stage2sf+tih+ic 93v200
Stage2sf+tih 93v210

Same results with both maps.

I have a 2009 btw.

[phate]

Originally Posted by Boost_creep Yes, I've recompiled like 4 times. Haha. Stage2sf+tih+ic 93v200 Stage2sf+tih 93v210 Same results with both maps. I have a 2009 btw.

Damn man. Hmmmm, I wonder if there's any sort of sensor feedback that might cause this.

[JacksonMS30]

@phate, what is the IDC on the cars in question?

Maybe something to do with this...
Load Cap ... Again

[TRex]

could it be IDC maxing out? like lex talks about here

Load Cap ... Again

[phate]

Originally Posted by TRex could it be IDC maxing out? like lex talks about here Load Cap ... Again

No, it's not even close to that IDC, lol. This is actually on a stock fuel pump car on gas. I can't say for sure what the IDC is on this car, since we shouldn't be anywhere close to the fueling limit with 15psi of K04 goodness and pump gas.

And just for reference, I've seen ~120% IDC in my car and north of 140% IDC in bozo's car without having the ecu pull wgdc.

[TRex]

and we are sure this isnt another swas, tcs, dcs interference coming and trying to cut boost?

disable his swas and try again?

[phate]

Originally Posted by TRex and we are sure this isnt another swas, tcs, dcs interference coming and trying to cut boost? disable his swas and try again?

That is a good point. These were all 4th gear logs, but I suppose it won't hurt to rule it out.

[rfinkle2]

I haven't had this happen to me when tuning a car since I did the following:

Added the trl-x gear tables to 75-100% throttle positions in the throttle - requested load tables (A, B and C).

Vertically interpolated those values up to the 50% throttle position (where I populate the wgdc up to) in the hopes for smooth overall operation.

Worth a try?

[mrmonk7663]

What are you interpololating up to, stock values at 50 percent? This is what concerns me about the interpolation method on load tables A,B, and C. On E85 the stock values are too low at all throttle positions in my opinion. This forced me to make a custom load a,b,c table, through alot of trial and error. I think defining some baseline values at 50 percent and 6.25 percent would enable the interpolation to work much more efficiently. Load a,b and c play an enormous role in how the car acts at part throttle, even with load tuning turned off.

[G26]

My car is purely boost tuned, no load comp at all, and I have never had this happen over the many many logs I have done.

The only time I had my wgdc cut drastically like that, was when my ebcs was in 3port and I went about .50 psi over target.

[Bucker]

Odd WGDC behavior

I am having the issue too. FIX MEEEEE! Lol.

[rcalt25]

I'm gonna unhook my swas today to see if we can rule that out. Been really busy for the past week. I'll have logs to @phate this evening to see if it was the issue.

[rfinkle2]

@RichieRichness, this thread may end up being a good place for your issue if things don't get resolved in your next revision.

[Cobb Tuning]

@phate Can you post up the full logs of this happening?

-David@COBB

[phate]

Originally Posted by David@COBB phate Can you post up the full logs of this happening? -David@COBB

Yessir! The originals are attached to this post. Thanks for having a look!

[RichieRichness]

Originally Posted by rfinkle2 @RichieRichness, this thread may end up being a good place for your issue if things don't get resolved in your next revision.

Has anyone considered using the load dynamics compensation table?

[rfinkle2]

Originally Posted by RichieRichness Has anyone considered using the load dynamics compensation table?

Atvfreek, DJ and Lex use the load dynamics table, and I'm pretty sure Lex has a car he is tuning now with jacked wgdc activity.

[RichieRichness]

I'm wanting to know the logic behind people doing hybrid tunes but not checking the "Use Abs. Load Target Table" check box...wouldn't you have more load based control over your tune with this box checked?

[Cobb Tuning]

Originally Posted by phate Yessir! The originals are attached to this post. Thanks for having a look!

Looking at the Map and logs, there is a lot of changes to load in your created map. What I'd try at least once is removing the Load Error Comp to see if your requested load is influencing the calculation with load error, and forcing the entire system down.

-David@COBB

[phate]

Originally Posted by David@COBB Looking at the Map and logs, there is a lot of changes to load in your created map. What I'd try at least once is removing the Load Error Comp to see if your requested load is influencing the calculation with load error, and forcing the entire system down. -David@COBB

Will do. I just got a couple logs from the same car, but with SWAS unhooked, and the issue is still present. One log follows beautifully, the other log is late to adjust and never hits targets.

I'll set up a couple files tonight with different LEC/BEC values 0'd to see if we can narrow down or rule out a table, or maybe even one side of a table.

[RichieRichness]

Can I get a follow up with this issue? I'm tuning @WhoIsJeremy and he is having a similar issue. We are load tuning his car based on the map i've been using for my car and WGDC is pretty much 0 for the entire run. Yet load targets are being met and boost is hitting 19psi. Very odd.

see attached:
datalog9.csv


We tried using an OTS map with a boost tune strategy and the opposite effect takes place....WGDC% hits and holds 99%

see attached:
datalog1.csv

[WhoIsJeremy]

Originally Posted by RichieRichness Can I get a follow up with this issue? I'm tuning @WhoIsJeremy and he is having a similar issue. We are load tuning his car based on the map i've been using for my car and WGDC is pretty much 0 for the entire run. Yet load targets are being met and boost is hitting 19psi. Very odd. see attached: Attachment 55611 We tried using an OTS map with a boost tune strategy and the opposite effect takes place....WGDC% hits and holds 99% see attached: Attachment 55613

@David@COBB

[djuosnteisn]

His pegging the MAP sensor in that last log with 99's. Jeremy do you have a mech boost gauge to keep an eye on what the boost really is?

And Rich... you say he "is" or "isn't" hitting his load targets? If he is, then the 0's are probably cause he's slightly over the load target.

Also, when you load tune, keep the "boost based" toggle enabled... it simply eliminates a few of the less common load inputs, but leaves the more dominant coarse load dynamics active.


Jeremy, what turbo is on the 6?

[Cobb Tuning]

Originally Posted by RichieRichness Can I get a follow up with this issue? I'm tuning @WhoIsJeremy and he is having a similar issue. We are load tuning his car based on the map i've been using for my car and WGDC is pretty much 0 for the entire run. Yet load targets are being met and boost is hitting 19psi. Very odd. see attached: Attachment 55611 We tried using an OTS map with a boost tune strategy and the opposite effect takes place....WGDC% hits and holds 99% see attached: Attachment 55613

Originally Posted by WhoIsJeremy @David@COBB

Based on the logs, that looks like an WG actuator arm/BCS issue. With Load tuning, it tries to dump WG but can't (load targets met, it lowers target). With Boost Tuning, it's ignoring the load but can't do anything but target as high as possible to meet target.

-David@COBB

[WhoIsJeremy]

Originally Posted by djuosnteisn Jeremy, what turbo is on the 6?

it's a stocker baby k04

Originally Posted by David@COBB Based on the logs, that looks like an WG actuator arm/BCS issue. With Load tuning, it tries to dump WG but can't (load targets met, it lowers target). With Boost Tuning, it's ignoring the load but can't do anything but target as high as possible to meet target. -David@COBB

You think the stock boost controller or the wastegate actuator went bad?

[Cobb Tuning]

Originally Posted by WhoIsJeremy it's a stocker baby k04 You think the stock boost controller or the wastegate actuator went bad?

That odd behavior has been seen before on 2 cars that came in for a tune. Both of them had something wrong mechanically with the WG system. One just needed a new rocker arm (it was bent), the other one had a vacuum line leaking to the BCS.

I'd check it out mechanically to see what's up, and if it's something else move on to figuring out how to fix that.

-David@COBB

[WhoIsJeremy]

Originally Posted by David@COBB That odd behavior has been seen before on 2 cars that came in for a tune. Both of them had something wrong mechanically with the WG system. One just needed a new rocker arm (it was bent), the other one had a vacuum line leaking to the BCS. I'd check it out mechanically to see what's up, and if it's something else move on to figuring out how to fix that. -David@COBB

I'm gonna do a boost test this week and make sure all the lines are good and I'll make sure all the mechanical parts are moving right. Thanks dude!

[RichieRichness]

Originally Posted by WhoIsJeremy I'm gonna do a boost test this week and make sure all the lines are good and I'll make sure all the mechanical parts are moving right. Thanks dude!

h8 u Jeremy!

[WhoIsJeremy]

Originally Posted by RichieRichness h8 u Jeremy!

for what?!?! Aren't you supposed to be in vegas?! lol I havent sent you any logs for a reason.

[RichieRichness]

Originally Posted by WhoIsJeremy for what?!?! Aren't you supposed to be in vegas?! lol I havent sent you any logs for a reason.

What year is it again? Niggah I haz laptop.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WhoIsJeremy]

Originally Posted by RichieRichness What year is it again? Niggah I haz laptop. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

blah blah blah. Ill send ya logs when I get home than!

[btstarcher]

Joining the club....WGDC starting off around 40-50, dropping to 0 rapidly. Overshooting boost targets and never quite getting it down.

[Lex]

Originally Posted by btstarcher Joining the club....WGDC starting off around 40-50, dropping to 0 rapidly. Overshooting boost targets and never quite getting it down.

If you are overshooting boost targets and WGDC is 0 then you have a mechanical boost control issue. The ECU can't lower boost below what it can do at 0% WGDC.

[btstarcher]

Yeah, we're checking the connections to the BCS. The turbo is new, never been installed, but the BCS is from my old turbo. Justin found one of the hose clamps wasn't snug; it moves somewhat freely.

[ms3blackmica]

I guess I am quite lucky to say I have never encountered this issue before but I am glad I could read this thread for future reference.