What you've described here is how it might appear in TunerStudio. I haven't done much with customising TS and was mostly interested in the MS firmware changes (if any) that you had in mind. It seemed to me that, if there is a simple functional relationship between MAPxRPM and Duty%, then removing the 2d VE table would be the natural approach. A pretty radical idea, but it bears thinking about.whittlebeast wrote: Re: Making EGO correction slower
I pictured something similar to warmup enrichment with sliders to develop the primary fueling curve. MAPxRPM along the bottom and Base Duty Cycle up the left. To do early tuning, you would simply put your motor at a load and slide the closest slider up and down till the EGO correction was close to 100. Then move up to next higher load (MAPxRPM) point and repeat.
Once you have a reasonably close base tune, you could move on the a Speed Density multiply correction table that starts at 100 everywhere. I bet MLV autotune could be modified to automate this process.
Here is what my 300 hp supercharged jet ski looks like.
http://www.nbs-stl.com/motec/MAPxRPM%20 ... 0Motec.png
Ironically, my personal ITB motor running MS3 is not a very good candidate as a test mule. It would at least need a Alpha-N correction table. We need to start a new thread to take this much farther.
Andy
To make it work as you describe would at least require some firmware changes. You favour the RPMxMAP vs Duty graph, but I'm still pretty sure this is equivalent to the computationally simpler MAP vs %ReqFuel (PW). So the firmware would need to support this 1d interpolated graph and a suitable control+gauges would need to be added to TS. Whether the VE table is removed altogether or becomes a fine adjustments trimmer I'm not sure (not much headroom in MS2).
I'm happy enough to look at coding something, but it's a pretty big change and there's every chance I have hold of it by the wrong end. Would like to hear James's and Ken's views.
In any case, it is an interesting approach and I will definitely be taking a look at my current tunes through this lens.
Finally, just to put a picture to the graphical difference between MAP->PW vs MAPxRPM->PWxRPM, graphing the four points: (1000, 30, 3ms), (4500,30, 3.5ms), (1000, 90, 11ms), (4500, 90, 11.5ms) both ways gives:
So it kind of zooms in on the high load, high RPM stuff giving a more detailed view of the most critical region.
Have fun,
Rob.