Why different table sizes? - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


ECUs and Tuning Discuss Engine Management, Tuning, & Programming

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-09-2015, 10:03 AM   #1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 272
Total Cats: -22
Default Why different table sizes?

16x16 Fuel Tables
12x12 Ign Tables
8x8 VVT Tables
12x12 Target AFR Tables

Having never owned a MSx ecu this is one of my major complaints, the limited table sizes. What is the limiting factor that makes the MSx unable to use a 16x16 (or larger) for every table?
Alternative is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2015, 10:11 AM   #2
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Warrington/Birmingham
Posts: 2,658
Total Cats: 39
Default

MS3 has 16x16 fuel & ignition tables, the rest are 12x12 tertiary stuff, (WI map etc), is smaller still.

The reason is space limitations, particularly on MS1 and MS2 there is a premium on the amount of flash space available.

Is the table size really limited though? particularly on our implementation? Bigger tables are just a bigger ball ache to tune, and as all the numbers are interpolated, and you can set the break points wherever you like there isn't really much need for bigger tables unless you're revving extremely high and have very very high boost figures.

Even then with blended tables you can have a much larger table for those applications.
richyvrlimited is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2015, 10:12 AM   #3
Murderator
iTrader: (76)
 
18psi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 36,175
Total Cats: 2,578
Default

What makes you think bigger tables will make the car run better?
Having tuned tables larger than 16x16 I'm dying to hear what's so desirable about it aside from being a pain in the butt to tune.
18psi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2015, 10:23 AM   #4
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,847
Total Cats: 1,788
Default

the table sizes arent limiting.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2015, 12:01 PM   #5
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 272
Total Cats: -22
Default

I was going off of the information provided by 949 on the table size.

http://949racing.com/megasquirt-miata-PNP3.aspx

According to MSLabs their MS3 does have 16x16 available on most tables.

The reason for wanting higher resolution tuning maps is obvious, if it's adequate for what you guys are doing that's great...
Alternative is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2015, 12:08 PM   #6
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago (Over two miles from Wrigley Field. Fuck the Cubs. Fuck them in their smarmy goat-hole.)
Posts: 26,317
Total Cats: 1,914
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alternative View Post
The reason for wanting higher resolution tuning maps is obvious
While it may seem obvious in the abstract sense, I can't say that I've ever encountered a situation in which I actually took advantage of the extra resolution of a 16x16 map (as opposed to an 8x8 or 12x12) in any meaningful way.

I'd be curious as to what sort of engines you've been dealing with wherein you find yourself needing to enter steeply nonlinear series of values in adjacent cells of your fuel and ignition tables. This is not a common scenario, to say the very least.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2015, 12:25 PM   #7
mkturbo.com
iTrader: (24)
 
shuiend's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Charleston SC
Posts: 13,775
Total Cats: 1,106
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alternative View Post
The reason for wanting higher resolution tuning maps is obvious, if it's adequate for what you guys are doing that's great...
You can search on the MSExtra forums about table size. Both the developers that write the code for MS have commented on it several times and why they have chosen the sizes they did. Realistically it comes down to the added resolution is just not needed.
shuiend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2015, 12:26 PM   #8
Murderator
iTrader: (76)
 
18psi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 36,175
Total Cats: 2,578
Default

What they said: There are enough transient compensations and other gizmo's that 16x16 is more than adequate. In fact, for most tables you don't even need 16x16. Or even 12x12.

I tried a 250rpm step size with an adaptronic and it was pretty pointless and stupid, and the car didn't run any better at all, but took way longer to tune
18psi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2015, 12:48 PM   #9
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,847
Total Cats: 1,788
Default

my favorite part of adaptronic was having to scroll to view your fuel table. lol.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2015, 01:20 PM   #10
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Leafy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NH
Posts: 9,091
Total Cats: 90
Default

working a 32x32 table in hydra 2.6 was worse. With the you know, not being able to click on a cell and having to use the arrow keys to navigate to it from the bottom left cell every time I did try to click on a cell. The EMS4 has some wonky like 24x17 table for fuel and spark or some other bullshit like that which is a super bizarro size. And a lot of the breakpoints transfer between tables oddly so I end up having a few fuel rpm columns at the top of the fuel map that are past redline just to trick the ecu into giving me the rpm columns I want on other tables like boost targets. But 16x16 is normally sufficient, 24x24 is probably really the perfect sweet spot, but more so you could rev as high as I do while having basically linear rpm breakpoints.
Leafy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2015, 01:57 PM   #11
Elite Member
 
codrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 3,877
Total Cats: 344
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafy View Post
working a 32x32 table in hydra 2.6 was worse.
Yeah, the 2.5/2.6 software UI is craptastic. Supposedly the 2.7 one is better, but I haven't used it. "Software written by hardware engineers" is how I describe it.

One of the nicer things about switching to the MS3 is that Tuner Studio isn't (AFAIK) written by the same guys who build/design the hardware. This means that it actually needs to not suck.

That said, big tables are less annoying in fuel than they are in spark, because fuel can be effectively autotuned.

--Ian
codrus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2015, 02:51 PM   #12
y8s
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
 
y8s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,038
Total Cats: 407
Default

you can use tableswitch to create a 32x32 table for fuel in megasquirt. I think. If you're insane.
y8s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2015, 03:46 PM   #13
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,847
Total Cats: 1,788
Default

i just want a 32x16 table.

10-202kPa in 6 kPa incremental rows.

because **** interpolation.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
15x10 - 15x11 6UL @ 949 Racing emilio700 Wheels and Tires 151 06-02-2017 03:36 PM
Another Cast Manifold Corky Bell Prefabbed Turbo Kits 18 11-22-2016 10:01 PM
1994 Spec Miata Race Car SM/SM2/SSM For Sale Quinn Cars for sale/trade 6 10-23-2016 08:58 AM
FM 1.8 Mani, Test Pipe, HP+, Injectors Chooofoojoo Miata parts for sale/trade 6 09-13-2015 11:01 AM
ME221 Now has Autotune and Long Term Fuel Trim Tables Motorsport-Electronics ECUs and Tuning 0 09-05-2015 09:02 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:20 AM.