Quote:
Originally Posted by jcolley
That is 100% in the effort that was put into mapping the standalone properly or the effort that went into writing the code for the torque management if implemented. Was this a DCT car you're referring to?
In the OEM, it's throttle pedal -> torque demand map (fahrwunsch) -> reverse lookup of static torque map (RPM/load) -> reverse lookup RPM/throttle cross section in mm2 -> actuator status -> percent throttle and idle actuators.
The torque manager is a massively comprehensive model for all manner of torque producers and consumers (temp corrected engine friction, driveline friction, gearbox load) as well as lambda torque corrections and interventions.
In effort to develop all of this accurately for the M1 firmware, my goal has been to model the OEM as closely as possible, hence the reason it's nowhere near complete. For some other standalones on this platform, speaking with the programmers, I was able get a few broad answers on how "in detail" this was modeled or if it was "just made to work" and the answer was more of the latter than the former.
There is also a lot of tunability in the torque model parameters (Syvecs from what I hear, no direct experience), so again it's all a function of who did the tuning to make best use of available parameters. I've talked to a few who have used the Syvecs with DCT and their opinion was that it was fine for the track and horrible for the street.
Aside from that, I've talked with Bert a little about this and it may be possible to fully develop the tuning on the engine dyno live with the Motec and if all the tables are configured to mimic the OEM, then transfer the values into the mss60 afterwards.
|
Tuning man-hours > hardware cost?