Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 794330)
actually it does in the code, but no idle up adder that you havent added yet. ;)
|
All this look like a dream the only thing missing is the fix to the sequential bug good work guys
off course we have to wait for 3.2 for that one. |
(Sent from phone via capitalism)
Yes. Buts its mapdot I was saying wrong thing ...since you'll be idling at higher map value |
One question I am not sure if it is much to ask but is it not posible to use another pin to as input to ac up signal. The reason i am using pe1 for table switch (is the only pin available for this) I already have pe0 for launch control so i can use the clutch lock out :) and i just need another pin to activated the code (js4(ad7),js5(ad6),Js11(pa0) are suitable) I prefer js4 or js5 this way if I ever need to go full cop I would not have any issue but js11 is acceptable to I am running waste spark right now any ways.
Thanks again Juan |
Originally Posted by juansh
(Post 794760)
One question I am not sure if it is much to ask but is it not posible to use another pin to as input to ac up signal. The reason i am using pe1 for table switch (is the only pin available for this) I already have pe0 for launch control so i can use the clutch lock out :) and i just need another pin to activated the code (js4(ad7),js5(ad6),Js11(pa0) are suitable) I prefer js4 or js5 this way if I ever need to go full cop I would not have any issue but js11 is acceptable to I am running waste spark right now any ways.
Thanks again Juan If you can contribute a wiring guide for DIYPNP board for any of these switches I'll look at adding the code. I'm just not sure if you have enough Input circuits to condition the incoming switches, how to pull them out of the uS module etc, and I don't want to be left with support questions asking how to safely enable those inputs without your help. G |
Originally Posted by gslender
(Post 794762)
What uses these now? js4(ad7), js5(ad6), Js11(pa0) ??
If you can contribute a wiring guide for DIYPNP board for any of these switches I'll look at adding the code. I'm just not sure if you have enough Input circuits to condition the incoming switches, how to pull them out of the uS module etc, and I don't want to be left with support questions asking how to safely enable those inputs without your help. G |
Originally Posted by gslender
(Post 794762)
What uses these now? js4(ad7), js5(ad6), Js11(pa0) ??
If you can contribute a wiring guide for DIYPNP board for any of these switches I'll look at adding the code. I'm just not sure if you have enough Input circuits to condition the incoming switches, how to pull them out of the uS module etc, and I don't want to be left with support questions asking how to safely enable those inputs without your help. G http://www.diyautotune.com/diypnp/do...Launch_Control Home work done :) Just follow the instructions for launch control input and in tunner studio pic the pin that was use in the pnp for the "lauch control mod" js4, js5 or pa0 Juan |
Also we you can build in the proto board the following circuit :
http://msextra.com/doc/ms1extra/MS_E....htm#mapswitch Then is as simple as taking the output signals from this circuit and jumper them to the appropriate available pin in the pnp (ADC1=JS5, ADC2=JS4,PA0=JS11) Juan |
Here you can find a more detailed list of what is the use of the already mentioned cpu pins
for both ms2 and he ms2 module that the pnp use. http://msextra.com/doc/ms2extra/MS2-...htm#ms2options |
Spent the morning adjusting the clutch switch to avoid accidentally getting into CL idle while lightly slipping the clutch (traffic crawling). I ended up having to fashion an extender to the pushrod of the switch, so that it will only be triggered by a deep clutch press (when actually shifting). Maybe I just have a heavy left foot, but this mod did the trick for me!
|
I'm sorry, and I'm not trying to be difficult, but after following those links, I can't easily see what I'd follow to duplicate your desired requirement of enabling another hardware input.
Have a look at this link.. http://www.diyautotune.com/diypnp/docs.html And tell me which of the 18 pin center header inputs you think you want to add - I'd like to ensure I test this and validate that indeed the input is working. G |
Originally Posted by gslender
(Post 794787)
I'm sorry, and I'm not trying to be difficult, but after following those links, I can't easily see what I'd follow to duplicate your desired requirement of enabling another hardware input.
Have a look at this link.. http://www.diyautotune.com/diypnp/docs.html And tell me which of the 18 pin center header inputs you think you want to add - I'd like to ensure I test this and validate that indeed the input is working. G |
I not demanding anything but i just wanted to point out that finally 3.2 is out :)
|
The ms2/extra team have changed the license agreement and have restricted the works.... So I may not legally be able to do anything beyond 3.1.4
I'd suggest you follow and chime in if you feel this is a good/bad thing. G |
thats not cool at all, i just read this on msextra as you where posting this, as it goes to my email...
|
from a software development standpoint what they are doing is not at all wrong, they are simply trying to gain some QC and/or oversight over the code versions and modifications that are being distributed.
|
I read the licence agreement and i think you are taking this the wrong way. They only want you to show the the code before realeasing it they never wanted to stop development. That why the source code is available.
I think the dev already reply one of your post at msextra just show them the code before you release it and i am sure they won't deny you the permission for distribution. also if is for personal use yo can modify the code and you do not have to ask permission for that only for redistribution. |
Originally Posted by juansh
(Post 794960)
I read the licence agreement and i think you are taking this the wrong way. They only want you to show the the code before realeasing it they never wanted to stop development. That why the source code is available.
I think the dev already reply one of your post at msextra just show them the code before you release it and i am sure they won't deny you the permission for distribution. also if is for personal use yo can modify the code and you do not have to ask permission for that only for redistribution. you have to remember that they have a brand to protect, and crappy code releases can tarnish their reputation quickly. |
im just looking at it as being discouraging to people just getting into it that could actually write code and help expand its funtionality and all that fun shit...lol...
|
they have no issue with personal mods, its when you redistribute it they want to have a peak at it first
|
ya thats understandable then. i mean it doesnt effect me in any way, but theyre explaining it better over there now someone asked about it
|
OK so let's get on with it then! Move along :)
Next candidates for inclusion: 1. rob's tpsdot/mapdot smoothing patch. Eliminates noisy signal so that our accel enrichments are not accidentally triggered bu signal noise 2. idle valve duty smoothing via a moving hysteretic window, as suggested by Jason. A better way of smoothing out the idle valve movements at/near target without it being a dead zone with a nonreactive PID code. 3. Added an RPM based status 4 cancel option (if RPM < user defined RPM, status 4= 0). This will help save you from a stall if AC is on, by turning it off. Should have some sort of timer before allowing status 4 counter to start again, to allow engine to stabilize. Should not be noticeable in ordinary operation, but a good failsafe, just in case. |
Originally Posted by Greg G
(Post 794973)
OK so let's get on with it then! Move along :)
Next candidates for inclusion: 1. rob's tpsdot/mapdot smoothing patch. Eliminates noisy signal so that our accel enrichments are not accidentally triggered bu signal noise 2. idle valve duty smoothing via a moving hysteretic window, as suggested by Jason. A better way of smoothing out the idle valve movements at/near target without it being a dead zone with a nonreactive PID code. 3. Added an RPM based status 4 cancel option (if RPM < user defined RPM, status 4= 0). This will help save you from a stall if AC is on, by turning it off. Should have some sort of timer before allowing status 4 counter to start again, to allow engine to stabilize. Should not be noticeable in ordinary operation, but a good failsafe, just in case. |
1. is included in the software -- look at lag factors.
2 & 3 -- you're never going to be happy with the idle are you? |
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB
(Post 792058)
Santa,
If I may suggest ... the whole idle strategy needs to be re-architected. The main changes I suggest are these: - the idle_duty% is: lookup table values + feedforward values + PID - PID always turned off if the wheels are connected to engine, but all lookup tables and feedforward *always* active in determining duty% - TPS > 0 exits PID - Whenever PID (closed loop) exits, I is *always* reset to zero - the output of I has to have a + and a - limit. That is, e.g. it can never add mroe than say, 15%, or remove more than 10% from the output. - Whenever closed loop is re-entered, I *always* has to be reset to zero - Whenever closed loop is re-entered there should be a "closed loop re-entry target RPM adder". This stays for like 1 sec, and then the target ramps down to the normal target over say, 3 sec. For example, target will initially be 1200 RPM upon re-entry. This target will stay for 1 sec, then ramp down to 850 over 3 seconds. This will solve the stopping-at-a-stop-sign idle dip, and it will also work well for stepping on the clutch when lugging the engine at 600 RPM. - having a good set of feedforward setups is critical: a/c, voltage, IAT, etc. In MS3 I have AC idleup already there as well. I have a 3d table of mat vs requested target with a z axis of duty to replace the "last good" value as well on the way for 1.1.x. I had no plans of limiting the I term action as in my use of the algorithm it is not necessary, and in some cases until I get rid of the "last good" value will actually keep you from reaching the target. I am also planning a rewrite that doesn't use PID at all. Frankly, I would really like you to start looking at how things work before making suggestions. It is obvious you want to contribute and that would save us covering ground that has already been covered. A lot of your suggestions are good, but a lot of the time you not looking how it works then saying "it should work x way" when it already mostly does can be confusing for others who don't know how things work yet. Ken |
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 795028)
1. is included in the software -- look at lag factors.
2 & 3 -- you're never going to be happy with the idle are you? Lag factors kill nose but nail response too |
Originally Posted by richyvrlimited
(Post 795037)
Not the same thing Brain, robs code keeps response and removes noise.
Lag factors kill nose but nail response too Ken |
Folks - I'm going to put this whole MegaSquirtSanta thing on ice pending an outcome being discussed in the MSExtra forum on 3.2.0 and the recent licensing changes.
http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=91 My preference would be that Ken/James and co allow me to continue to create test mods within the MSExtra forum and continue to take ideas and mods forward for people to try and test. If that works, then all this will need to cease and move on to the MSExtra forum. Cool? G |
Originally Posted by muythaibxr
(Post 795031)
I am also planning a rewrite that doesn't use PID at all.
Ken Thanks Greg |
oh hi. TPSdot test code works very nicely. it's a 3 point median filter and keeps noise below a very low threshold even when the voltage is on the threshold of two bits. at 100 lag factor (ie raw tps).
tomorrow is hopefully the MAPdot version test. |
Originally Posted by y8s
(Post 795143)
oh hi. TPSdot test code works very nicely. it's a 3 point median filter and keeps noise below a very low threshold even when the voltage is on the threshold of two bits. at 100 lag factor (ie raw tps).
tomorrow is hopefully the MAPdot version test. G |
Originally Posted by gslender
(Post 795208)
Is this the same as Rob's code or something else?
G |
2 Attachment(s)
I don't even know who Rob is. I think it's actually James working on it.
here's a snapshot of the new filter. tpsdot is the NEW filtered value. sensor16 is the "old style" tpsdot. I'm not sure what's causing it to be super flat like it is. Note the additional noise in the filtered value. note more how it's all below any threshold that might trigger enrichments. the old value spikes crazy high without much throttle input but the new value is way more subdued and only moves when it's supposed to. https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...1&d=1321288054 |
Is this on a pre-release alpha?
|
The effect of a median filter is simliar to the moving hysteresis window .
I take it the median filter comes between TPS and TPSdot? (and not after TPSdot?) |
Originally Posted by muythaibxr
(Post 795031)
Have you read the code? This is more or less how it already works aside from not having a clutch switch input or feedforwards.
In MS3 I have AC idleup already there as well. <snip> |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:08 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands