Using more than 10 columns in normally aspirated tuning?
Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2013 7:59 am
I was just wondering about this...
The K-pro, when using forced induction, uses 16 load columns. Additional ones are added to the top of the N/A setup for positive pressure.
Is there anything in the ECU setup that would stop me from re-defining all 16 load columns into a normal normally aspirated setup (to up to about 1040mbar for the last one) and gain more cell resolution as a result?
I know this means more work during the tuning sessions (simple.. more cells ;) ), and the actual result may not be that much different from using the stock 10-column N/A setup, but I like the fact that this means the calibration contains more 'real' data points and the ECU needs to perform less large interpolation steps. It also means that I can up the resolution in the mid-range load sites where the engine will spend the most of it's time and where any additional smoothness is a bonus.
On some ECU's I know there's sometimes a tradeoff between using more columns/cells and for instance some adjustments that do not work anymore or in limited fashion. A bit like the added cell space is 'stealing' space from other features and limiting them or making the adjustments coarser.
The K-pro does not seem to have this issue, at least I can't find anything that seems to be affected when using more or less columns in the rest of the settings.
So in short.. My question would be: is there any operational/software difference in a K-pro between using 10 or 16 load columns or is there no difference at all?
Thanks!
Bye, Arno.
The K-pro, when using forced induction, uses 16 load columns. Additional ones are added to the top of the N/A setup for positive pressure.
Is there anything in the ECU setup that would stop me from re-defining all 16 load columns into a normal normally aspirated setup (to up to about 1040mbar for the last one) and gain more cell resolution as a result?
I know this means more work during the tuning sessions (simple.. more cells ;) ), and the actual result may not be that much different from using the stock 10-column N/A setup, but I like the fact that this means the calibration contains more 'real' data points and the ECU needs to perform less large interpolation steps. It also means that I can up the resolution in the mid-range load sites where the engine will spend the most of it's time and where any additional smoothness is a bonus.
On some ECU's I know there's sometimes a tradeoff between using more columns/cells and for instance some adjustments that do not work anymore or in limited fashion. A bit like the added cell space is 'stealing' space from other features and limiting them or making the adjustments coarser.
The K-pro does not seem to have this issue, at least I can't find anything that seems to be affected when using more or less columns in the rest of the settings.
So in short.. My question would be: is there any operational/software difference in a K-pro between using 10 or 16 load columns or is there no difference at all?
Thanks!
Bye, Arno.