Welcome to Bimmerfest -- The #1 Online Community for BMW related information! Please enjoy the discussion forums below and share your experiences with the 200,000 current, new and past BMW owners. The forums are broken out by car model and into other special interest sections such as BMW European Delivery and a special forum to voice your questions to the many BMW dealers on the site to assist our members!

Please follow the links below to help get you started!

Go Back   Bimmerfest - BMW Forums > The Best of Bimmerfest! > BMW Diesel Owners / Enthusiasts

BMW Diesel Owners / Enthusiasts
Do you own a diesel powered BMW? Maybe a 335d or a BMW x35d? Come and talk about what makes your car great!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-02-2012, 08:11 AM
TDIwyse TDIwyse is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Midwest
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 405
Mein Auto: 4 diesels
335d Torque/BT data collection

Seems like there was some interest is this type of thing from the other thread. So if there's interest, and you like data, please contribute.

I've just started playing with some additional fields in the Torque app (not all of the fields are able to get data) that I hadn't looked at previously. There's several others I'd like to view and record as well in following posts (like comparing how much fuel is used at idle when in D or N, or with the AC on or off, etc.)

But here's some of the data from this mornings commute. It was freezing fog conditions so no wind and the drive was slower than normal (~49-54 mph most of the way) and I hit 3 of the 5 stop lights. Better than normal average mpg for the trip (due to lower speeds and no wind). Found the Air/Fuel ratio and Volumetric Efficiency calculation interesting.

Need to read more about the HP/TQ readings as they only show up sporadically (not sure if it is triggered on G force, so at steady state it doesn't record data). Anyway, I zoomed in on a section where I accelerated from a stop light (at restrained levels due to the ice). These two numbers look like fun things to experiment with . . .
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	log_020212.PNG
Views:	524
Size:	64.4 KB
ID:	310663  
__________________
2011 335d 11.8 sec 120 mph 1/4 mile NHRA certified track

2004 Ram Cummins with lots-o-mods
Reply With Quote
Ads by Google
  #2  
Old 02-02-2012, 09:22 AM
floydarogers's Avatar
floydarogers floydarogers is offline
Pedant and Curmudgeon
Location: Renton, WA
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,529
Mein Auto: 335d
Volumetric Efficiency

Interesting that VE never went above 100%. Does it do so when standing on it? I would think that it would for a turbo-charged engine.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-02-2012, 09:52 AM
TDIwyse TDIwyse is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Midwest
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 405
Mein Auto: 4 diesels
Quote:
Originally Posted by floydarogers View Post
Interesting that VE never went above 100%. Does it do so when standing on it? I would think that it would for a turbo-charged engine.
You are correct. The data does have points where it went above 100%, but I clipped the Y axis at 100%. Looking at the data now I see that it hit a max of 146 at the place I'm showing the torque/hp data.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	log_020212_TqHpVE.PNG
Views:	248
Size:	15.4 KB
ID:	310680  
__________________
2011 335d 11.8 sec 120 mph 1/4 mile NHRA certified track

2004 Ram Cummins with lots-o-mods
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-09-2012, 05:15 AM
TDIwyse TDIwyse is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Midwest
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 405
Mein Auto: 4 diesels
It appears Torque over estimates the mpg's by a slight amount, at least on my car. Here's the last two days morning commutes showing engine temps and trip mpg's. Interesting to me to see how horrible fuel efficiency is on a cold engine and how directly related it is to engine temp.

Both these days had similar winds (very light) and road conditions with just the ambient temps being different.

With my current vehicle configuration and fuel filling place my vehicle trip mpg has averaged 2% optimistic from hand calculated fill ups for the last month. Torque seems to be ~5% optimistic from the vehicle trip mpg. So, the Torque data seems to skewing the mpg's about 7% optimistic.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	log_020912_mpgcomparison.PNG
Views:	234
Size:	71.3 KB
ID:	311614  
__________________
2011 335d 11.8 sec 120 mph 1/4 mile NHRA certified track

2004 Ram Cummins with lots-o-mods
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-09-2012, 05:57 AM
KeithS KeithS is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Central NJ
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,602
Mein Auto: '11 335d, '00 540iT
Quote:
Originally Posted by TDIwyse View Post
Here's the last two days morning commutes showing engine temps and trip mpg's. Interesting to me to see how horrible fuel efficiency is on a cold engine and how directly related it is to engine temp.
Very interesting indeed. The graphs show what I've been suspecting for a while. That MPG really is in the toilet at cold engine temperatures. Seems MUCH more so than on gasoline engines. How just driving for one mile with a cold started engine can take more than 1 MPG off the displayed tank MPG average, with 450 miles on it.

We have 2 cars, the 335d and a '00 540iT. We're driving the d almost all the time except when we need the cargo room or weather is real bad (the iT has real snow tires). My wife has a very short commute, about 5 miles. It may make more sense to have her take the 540 to work as it looks like it may actually get better MPG for these short trips.

Not that it matters my average MPG display runs about 4% pessimistic compared to manually calculated values.

Last edited by KeithS; 02-09-2012 at 05:59 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-09-2012, 07:16 AM
floydarogers's Avatar
floydarogers floydarogers is offline
Pedant and Curmudgeon
Location: Renton, WA
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,529
Mein Auto: 335d
Quote:
Originally Posted by TDIwyse View Post
...Interesting to me to see how horrible fuel efficiency is on a cold engine and how directly related it is to engine temp....
Interesting indeed. My wife has been driving our 335d more this winter (I need the Highlander's AWD and snow tires when skiing), and I noticed that the mileage she is getting is more in the 29-30 mpg range than my 31-32 mpg. Granted she has more shorter trips (about 9 miles into Issaquah) than I (fewer trips, generally of longer length but mostly the same speed as hers), but it explains at part of the differences in mpg.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-09-2012, 08:39 AM
TDIwyse TDIwyse is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Midwest
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 405
Mein Auto: 4 diesels
I should mention the data is being recorded in 1 second intervals (so the x axis is the # of seconds). The graphs on the right are "zoomed" into the last part of the whole trip data on the left side. The whole trip is ~18 mins depending on traffic and how I hit the lights.
__________________
2011 335d 11.8 sec 120 mph 1/4 mile NHRA certified track

2004 Ram Cummins with lots-o-mods
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-26-2012, 06:27 AM
cssnms cssnms is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Murland
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 715
Mein Auto: '11 335d
The JBD throws codes because the ECU is being sent a signal that there is not enough rail pressure and hence a fuel pump problem (that is the code). Which makes sense knowing how the JBD operates. As one dials up the JBD, the ECU get a signal that even less fuel is being delivered which in-turn the ECU tells the fuel pump to pump more fuel to compensate. When limp mode/SES occurs in certain instances when the JBD is set at 100% or close to it a fail-safe is triggered to reduce power to the engine in response to what the ECU deems is likely a fuel pump failure.

Last edited by cssnms; 03-26-2012 at 06:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-26-2012, 06:41 AM
TDIwyse TDIwyse is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Midwest
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 405
Mein Auto: 4 diesels
I'd love to have access to someone's car who has a BT and the Evolve or RENNtech tunes to compare the rail pressures, injector timing/openings, EGT's, etc.

Any ideas on what limits the remap's pwr levels? Is it also rail pressure related due to flowing more fuel than the HPFP can feed?
__________________
2011 335d 11.8 sec 120 mph 1/4 mile NHRA certified track

2004 Ram Cummins with lots-o-mods
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-26-2012, 06:50 AM
cssnms cssnms is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Murland
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 715
Mein Auto: '11 335d
Quote:
Originally Posted by TDIwyse View Post
I'd love to have access to someone's car who has a BT and the Evolve or RENNtech tunes to compare the rail pressures, injector timing/openings, EGT's, etc.

Any ideas on what limits the remap's pwr levels? Is it also rail pressure related due to flowing more fuel than the HPFP can feed?
Most of these tunes produce around the same amount of power (hp/torque) depending on which dyno plot you believe.

Regardless of the tune, most of the power is generated by adding more fuel, although some tunes claim to increase boost pressure too (Renntech, Evolve etc), it tends to be only a slight increase in this area. How the fuel is increased/delivered is what likely differentiates some of the tunes vs the JBD.

Many diesel tunes claim to remap the fuel injection timing, hence they increase the amount of fuel by increasing the number of times the fuel pump injects fuel under certain load conditions rather than just increasing fuel pump pressure across the board.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-26-2012, 07:03 AM
TDIwyse TDIwyse is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Midwest
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 405
Mein Auto: 4 diesels
My other common rail diesel's (Cummins, Liberty CRD) have used methods where they increase the duration of the main pulse (along with increase injection timing) as the main method to get more fuel. I actually prefer this method to the "box" type rail pressure only methods as it's substantially less stress on the injector bodies and HPFP. But you still get to a point where the HPFP can't maintain adequate pressure in the rail due to flow constraints. Hopefully that's not the common limitation in the JBD/Evolve/RENNtech setups.

The exhaust temps and DPF restrictions don't seem to be limits from the data I'm seeing. Although as the DPF ages it might add more restriction. Also, in the X5 if you're towing into headwinds or going up mountains the EGT's would become substantially higher due to prolonged high demand situations.

The intercooler seems like it could stand to be improved a bit as the the intake temps are increasing ~ >30C in a matter seconds.
__________________
2011 335d 11.8 sec 120 mph 1/4 mile NHRA certified track

2004 Ram Cummins with lots-o-mods
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-26-2012, 07:38 AM
cssnms cssnms is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Murland
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 715
Mein Auto: '11 335d
Quote:
Originally Posted by TDIwyse View Post
My other common rail diesel's (Cummins, Liberty CRD) have used methods where they increase the duration of the main pulse (along with increase injection timing) as the main method to get more fuel. I actually prefer this method to the "box" type rail pressure only methods as it's substantially less stress on the injector bodies and HPFP. But you still get to a point where the HPFP can't maintain adequate pressure in the rail due to flow constraints. Hopefully that's not the common limitation in the JBD/Evolve/RENNtech setups.

The exhaust temps and DPF restrictions don't seem to be limits from the data I'm seeing. Although as the DPF ages it might add more restriction. Also, in the X5 if you're towing into headwinds or going up mountains the EGT's would become substantially higher due to prolonged high demand situations.

The intercooler seems like it could stand to be improved a bit as the the intake temps are increasing ~ >30C in a matter seconds.
All of these tunes require the fuel pump to perform double duty; now weather or not one method shortens the life of the pump anymore than the other is anyone's guess. The tuners claim their method is "safer" while the fuel box camp claim the tuners are full of it. I am of the mind-set that it is 6 of one, half a donzen of the other. That being said, I think anytime the ECU is in control vs being tricked into doing something else would be the preferred method.

The DPF has shown to be little if any restriction as evidenced by an E90Post member that removed his DPF and did not see any hp gain. In fact he reinstalled the DPF because he did not like the increase in soot. This also seems to be supported by an artcile I posted in my exhaust thread on cat back exhaust systems on turbo diesels.

I agree an IC would be a nice add, esp for those that have a tune. Anytime power is increased logic would dictate that temps increase, so one would think there would be a benefit to adding a more efficient IC, not much unlike the benefits the 335i owners see.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-01-2012, 06:00 PM
TDIwyse TDIwyse is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Midwest
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 405
Mein Auto: 4 diesels
Quote:
Originally Posted by TDIwyse View Post
I'd love to have access to someone's car who has a BT and the Evolve or RENNtech tunes to compare the rail pressures, injector timing/openings, EGT's, etc.

Any ideas on what limits the remap's pwr levels? Is it also rail pressure related due to flowing more fuel than the HPFP can feed?
Caution: Do not read this if you are impulsive and lack self control.

Based on the things I saw from this (http://introductions.www.bimmerfest....&postcount=101) it appeared the limit to the present HP situation was not due to the HPFP.

So, the local vehicle above recently got an Evolve tune. This was somewhat of a gamble as they were not forthcoming on specific questions regarding what parameters they were manipulating to get the gains. Since the presently available “box” options mainly fool rail pressure it was hoped that the tunes were behaving in similar fashions to options from the other common rail vehicles that have been remapped and left the rail pressure alone …

Turns out that is indeed the case. A lot of the day was spent playing and collecting data. Lots of interesting data.

The Evolve tune appears to be making power by increasing the start of injection and increasing the length of time the injectors are open, as well as increasing boost. It is not increasing rail pressure above the stock 1600 bar. This is exactly what was hoped for.

Because the remap leaves the rail pressure alone, this opens the door for something the common rail truck crowd has done for a long time, which is stacking a pressure box with a timing/duration approach.

And the data shows the JBD plays with the remap. CAUTION: There’s now enough low rpm fueling in some circumstances that you could likely break things. This likely eliminates most/all margin in the system. You are your own warranty station. It is not BMW or anyone else’s fault if you doing something that breaks things . . .

Now, if one was so inclined to continue down this path here’s what you might expect.

The testing ground changed from the above Gtech data to a more isolated place with flatter, smoother roads and mature forests on each side of the road (great wind blocks). On this new location the recorded baseline JBD #’s are a bit lower than above. There was some previously recorded data from a similar day (where initial low level methanol/water injection was being examined) as today that will be used as the pre-remap baseline and labeled as JBD 85%. Also the previous JBD alone data was with a freshly regenerated DPF and today‘s data is with a DPF approaching a new regen cycle. However, since it’s a different day with different fuel in the tank and a different DPF situation a 1:1 comparison is impossible. However, it was within ~6 F temps and very similar wind conditions. Since the Gtech utilizes a Serial port interface and none of my home PC’s have one (they’re all USB and the serial to USB device I bought doesn’t work) it will have to wait until after Monday (when I return to work to use my PC there which has a serial port) for the graphs.

But here’s the summation of the hp/tq #’s. The JBD @ ~85% produced similar TQ #’s as the remap, but a bit better HP. Now it might be that the tank of Illinois fuel in the vehicle has lower cetane or BTU’s than what was in the vehicle for the previous tests. Don’t have a way to test that.

After analyzing the BT data and seeing how the remap worked the owner decided to try the JBD with the remap. This is were things got interesting. On the same day, with the same fuel, with the same temps, with the same testing procedure, the data shows the JBD produced similar delta-HP number increases above the remap as the above data for comparisons of stock vs. JBD. For this test the full fueling was specifically held off at low rpm’s to minimize strain on the tranny. This was tested at JBD 0% and with one switch thrown so the JBD was at 65%. 85% was not tested as the BT data needed to be analyzed to see how EGT’s and DPF pressures were doing. The 65% JBD setting produced ~30hp on top of the remap and more torque even with careful low rpm fueling. CAUTION: Full fueling with this combo with a locked up torque converter at low rpm’s could be detrimental to the health of your vehicle.

So, here’s some of the interesting BT data (the hp/tq curves will need to wait ’til I get to work and download the data on the serial port). Note: the JBD only at ~85% were taken with a slightly slower sample rate so it’s a bit “compressed” compared to the other data, and also with a freshly regenerated DPF. I tried to cut the data samples for the comparison at the same time the dyno plots (should show up after Monday).

Comments: The remap increases the boost over stock and JBD (which doesn‘t do anything for boost as the manufacturer states). This appears to help the EGTs (post turbo) #’s. Also, interestingly, the Intake Air Temps for more power a slightly lower with the remap and stacked vs JBD alone.

The JBD at high settings does appear to increase the main injection pulse width and increases the injection timing slightly. But not as much as the remap.

Stacking the JBD with the remap, in my opinion, is showing that it works quite well for these initial tests. The IAT’s are lower for more hp (due perhaps to the extra boost). The EGT’s are (537C is under 1000F) still in a reasonable area, especially for short durations (see this thread for one of hundreds of example discussions: http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=206994). However, if one were to to be at cruising situation at low rpm’s with the torque converter locked up and you applied full fuel then this combination could cause negative consequences. Please be cautious with the information and don’t do anything stupid.

Having the JBD respond with an additional input from the engine rpm would be ideal. That way it could be held off at low rpm and given some leash at high rpm to make more of a flat torque curve across the rpm range.

Enjoy!
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	BMW_E&JBD_boost.png
Views:	166
Size:	29.6 KB
ID:	327540   Click image for larger version

Name:	BMW_E&JBD_IAT.png
Views:	154
Size:	35.3 KB
ID:	327541   Click image for larger version

Name:	BMW_E&JBD_EGTs.png
Views:	144
Size:	37.9 KB
ID:	327542  
__________________
2011 335d 11.8 sec 120 mph 1/4 mile NHRA certified track

2004 Ram Cummins with lots-o-mods
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-01-2012, 06:15 PM
TDIwyse TDIwyse is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Midwest
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 405
Mein Auto: 4 diesels
One of the plots didn't upload . . . this is the time of the main injection pulse * the injection angel (start of injection). Kind of a way to show the impact of increased duration and timing. Since the JBD fools the ECM into making more pressure, for those situations where the JBD is utilized, for the same injector opening duration, more fuel goes in due to the rail being at higher pressures.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	BMW_E&JBD_ANGxTime.png
Views:	67
Size:	37.6 KB
ID:	327544  
__________________
2011 335d 11.8 sec 120 mph 1/4 mile NHRA certified track

2004 Ram Cummins with lots-o-mods
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-02-2012, 07:53 AM
TDIwyse TDIwyse is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Midwest
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 405
Mein Auto: 4 diesels
Well, needed to run some errands so I stopped off and downloaded some data.

This is one of the best of the remap only runs (pwr results varied from ~224-230 on multiple runs) compared to the single runs of the remap w JBD at 0% and 65%.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	GTech_BMW_EvsEandJBD.png
Views:	808
Size:	173.9 KB
ID:	327597  
__________________
2011 335d 11.8 sec 120 mph 1/4 mile NHRA certified track

2004 Ram Cummins with lots-o-mods
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06-05-2012, 10:07 AM
hotrod2448 hotrod2448 is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: NC
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,141
Mein Auto: E70 X5, F10 535i
Quote:
Originally Posted by TDIwyse View Post
One of the plots didn't upload . . . this is the time of the main injection pulse * the injection angel (start of injection). Kind of a way to show the impact of increased duration and timing. Since the JBD fools the ECM into making more pressure, for those situations where the JBD is utilized, for the same injector opening duration, more fuel goes in due to the rail being at higher pressures.
So being new to diesel tuning, I'm assuming injection angle references crank position and by beginning injection earlier is not only adding fuel by increasing duty cycle but, it is also similar to adding ignition timing in a gasoline motor, right?

My next question is do we know if the ECU has some type of detonation protection that retards injection timing like a gas car would pull ignition timing if something were to see ridiculously high loads or something go wrong?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-04-2012, 07:02 AM
Concentric190 Concentric190 is offline
Registered User
Location: Chicago
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 42
Mein Auto: Turbo M3
this is some very interesting data. I'd really like to see what these tranny's can be pushed to.
__________________
///Andres
09 335d evolve tuned - 327whp / 490wtq -- 13.0@105
95 M3 Turbo - Built 3.0l s52, PTE74GTQ, AEM EMS & CDI
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-04-2012, 10:07 AM
hotrod2448 hotrod2448 is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: NC
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,141
Mein Auto: E70 X5, F10 535i
Thanks for gathering all this data. To avoid making potentially wrong assumptions on this chart which run is which? Also, I didn't see the info in there and maybe you don't want to disclose it out of courtesy to Evolve but, would you mind throwing up a plot of stock boost and remap boost vs. RPM? If not that's cool too but, could you at least clarify if it is a significant increase in boost or only a few PSI? I'm not sure if using that low of a gear will even give accurate boost numbers but, I just like to see data.

Last edited by hotrod2448; 06-04-2012 at 10:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 06-04-2012, 11:27 AM
TDIwyse TDIwyse is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Midwest
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 405
Mein Auto: 4 diesels
The owner has had some interaction with Evolve and they haven't said to not share any of this info. They, by the way, have been good to work with. Same for VS. And to be clear, they do not recommend stacking the JBD on top of their tune.

The boost info is back here: http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/sho...8&postcount=49

The JBD run is the same boost as stock. It does not touch boost (one of the previous posts has stock/JBD and verifies that). These numbers are absolute pressure (normal atmosphere + boost). Converting hPa to PSI and subtracting 1 atmosphere brings the numbers to ~ 26psi stock and 30psi remap.

The BT data is on a different computer and it can be plotted vs rpm. Will try to do that tonight. But the boost response is unbelievably fast and occurs right away even at low rpm's. Most likely due to how BMW has executed the twin turbo setup. Just lovely.

I agree the naming of the Gtech data has been poor. When the Gtech gets powered up it defaults to Jan 17 2017 and the time seems to be random. And I haven't been good at going in and re-formating the dates/times/conditions etc . . . I tried to correct that starting on post 52 which shows multiple runs with the remap and JBD stack. The plot you showed is Run1 = Evolve (2nd best of multiple runs), Run 2 Evolve+JBD 0% (only 1 run on this combo that day), Run 3 Evolve + JBD 65% (only 1 run on this combo and the last run).

A note on the Gtech data. It includes more losses than a 2 wheel dyno: 4 wheels are turning instead of 2 (more rolling resistance), wind losses (~20 hp at top end of run based on Cd and frontal area), and the pulls are in 3rd gear so there's more drivetrain loss than a ~1:1 gear ratio). And it's subject to variations due to road surface roughness, flatness, the accuracy of the weight, etc . . . But it's been very usefull over the years for testing relative impacts of mods.

From the Gtech data that's been gathered it appears the remap is acting similar to the JBD at ~65% but with better EGT's and IAT's and lower peak rail pressures. The remap with JBD at 0% is similar to the JBD at the max before it throws a limp mode.

Oh, and the owners reported hand calculated mileage for the last two fillups with the remap covering ~300+ mls, including all these full fueling runs, has averaged 39.2 mpg. This is at least 5% better than pre map for similar driving conditions.
__________________
2011 335d 11.8 sec 120 mph 1/4 mile NHRA certified track

2004 Ram Cummins with lots-o-mods
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 06-04-2012, 02:35 PM
TDIwyse TDIwyse is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Midwest
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 405
Mein Auto: 4 diesels
Here's an example of the remap boost response. The BT sample rate is only about once per second. The "torque" value is from the ECU "Internally Calculated Torque". This is included to show when the full fueling hits. So somewhere between 1787 and 2251 rpm's (that's the limit on the time step resolution for the BT data) the boost is already at its max value.

If Evolve would like all this info removed it will be done. However this type of data would seem to be valuable for an informed decision . . .
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	BMW_Evolve_TorqueBoostVSrpm.png
Views:	164
Size:	29.0 KB
ID:	327868  
__________________
2011 335d 11.8 sec 120 mph 1/4 mile NHRA certified track

2004 Ram Cummins with lots-o-mods
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 06-28-2012, 11:13 AM
Concentric190 Concentric190 is offline
Registered User
Location: Chicago
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 42
Mein Auto: Turbo M3
thats some good data you have there. these cars really get heat soaked bad when on the track or back to back runs. This would yield a huge improvement in those areas.
__________________
///Andres
09 335d evolve tuned - 327whp / 490wtq -- 13.0@105
95 M3 Turbo - Built 3.0l s52, PTE74GTQ, AEM EMS & CDI
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-08-2012, 01:48 PM
TDIwyse TDIwyse is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Midwest
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 405
Mein Auto: 4 diesels
There was time spent today fine tuning the controller settings. Turns out the MAP sensor voltage output range is peaking at ~3.3V with the remap. So the controller was adjusted for its “max” setting to be closer to this value instead of the 4.5V it was initially set at. Also increased the “start” point to closer to ~2.6V so it doesn’t inject unless the vehicle is really being pushed. This may be reduced a bit pending further data.

Attached is a comparison of the “new” vs. “initial” settings in regards to post intercooler “boosted air intake” temps and EGT’s for the same Remap/JBD 0% stack. Care was again exercised to avoid full fueling at low rpm’s.

The 90F temps today were not quite as hot as the 98F day’s data (~4.5 deg C lower) but the impact to IAT’s and EGT’s is quantifiably substantial with the additional injection at higher boost levels. In fact the IAT’s with the new setting are seen to actually be reduced to just below the starting value during the pull, and are kept to within 2C of the starting temps at 4200 rpm where the peak hp of the engine is typically found. Also the EGT’s are substantially lowered at this rpm point from 503 to 477 ( 937.4 F to 890.6 F).

The owner also put a switch in play so the injection can be disabled during DPF regens.

On a separate note, looking into ways to minimize low rpm torque but extend high rpm torque of the stack. Think there might be a way. It would involve making an RPM variable resistor to use instead of the manual potentiometer on the JBD. It would involve using a Freq to Voltage converter (something like this: https://www.national.com/ds/LM/LM2907.pdf) where one takes the tach signal (lower right pin on the OBD port has a beautiful tach signal) converting this to voltage that adjusts the variable resistor in the JBD (something like this: http://www.vishay.com/docs/70598/70598.pdf). And all of a sudden one gets the ability to add in the JBD rail pressure increase that is a function of rpm which would reduce the problem of too much low end torque. The circuit to be setup so at rpm’s below ~3k nothing above JBD at 0% is utilized, and then from 3k to ~4.5k the JBD distortion increases to the final desired level. The distortion adds to the remap only above ~3k and at increasing values to compensate for the torque roll-off. Now we have a torque curve that is essentially flat out to nearly 4.5k and could stay at/below the ~700Nm/520 lb-ft rating of the tranny.

Also including some pics of the place in the pipe the probe is located and how it fits in the chassis. It‘s tight in there . . .
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	BMW_H2O_90F_IAT_postICspray_550ml_3070mix_NewSettings.jpg
Views:	168
Size:	41.0 KB
ID:	332136   Click image for larger version

Name:	BMW_H2O_98F_IAT_postICspray_550ml_3070mix_OldSettings.jpg
Views:	139
Size:	41.9 KB
ID:	332137   Click image for larger version

Name:	335dChargePipe.jpg
Views:	180
Size:	59.2 KB
ID:	332138   Click image for larger version

Name:	335dH2OInjector.jpg
Views:	153
Size:	120.8 KB
ID:	332139  
__________________
2011 335d 11.8 sec 120 mph 1/4 mile NHRA certified track

2004 Ram Cummins with lots-o-mods
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-13-2012, 01:20 PM
TurboEddie TurboEddie is offline
Registered User
Location: Florida
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1
Mein Auto: 2011 335d
TDIwyse,

I am actually doing what you are talking about now and am installing my water meth kit starting this weekend. What I did is used an AEM FIC to intercept the TPS, Rail pressure, Boost and MAF sensors, I have RPM as well. I can control the water meth pump and nozzle solenoid using RPM and boost pressure. I understand your concerns with too much torque in the lower rpms. It’s also my goal to limit the torque down low but get as much power/torque as I can in the upper RPM. Using the AEM, I have been able to fine tune the fuel pressure to push the power as much as I can for all RPM and loads while not getting knocks or any codes. FYI, max rail pressure you can push is 1800bar or 4.5v from the rail sensor. Anything over that and the rail bypass valve returns it to the tank. Great work!!!


-Ed
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-15-2012, 08:40 AM
TDIwyse TDIwyse is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Midwest
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 405
Mein Auto: 4 diesels
Quote:
Originally Posted by TurboEddie View Post
TDIwyse,

I am actually doing what you are talking about now and am installing my water meth kit starting this weekend. What I did is used an AEM FIC to intercept the TPS, Rail pressure, Boost and MAF sensors, I have RPM as well. I can control the water meth pump and nozzle solenoid using RPM and boost pressure. I understand your concerns with too much torque in the lower rpms. It’s also my goal to limit the torque down low but get as much power/torque as I can in the upper RPM. Using the AEM, I have been able to fine tune the fuel pressure to push the power as much as I can for all RPM and loads while not getting knocks or any codes. FYI, max rail pressure you can push is 1800bar or 4.5v from the rail sensor. Anything over that and the rail bypass valve returns it to the tank. Great work!!!


-Ed
Thanks.

And I really like your approach with the AEM FIC and enjoyed your thread. Also appreciate you sharing results with the community. Please keep sharing!

The OBD pin 9 tach output to voltage circuit is made and verified its performance (Voltage out to RPM). Hoping to interface with the JBD this afternoon. It will linearly increase the JBD from 0 to 70% from 2500 rpm to 4100 rpm. Depending upon measured data the top end can be increased further.
__________________
2011 335d 11.8 sec 120 mph 1/4 mile NHRA certified track

2004 Ram Cummins with lots-o-mods
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-15-2012, 03:00 PM
TDIwyse TDIwyse is offline
Officially Welcomed to the 'Fest
Location: Midwest
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 405
Mein Auto: 4 diesels
Quote:
Originally Posted by TDIwyse View Post
Hoping to interface with the JBD this afternoon.
Actually only needed one IC and a bunch of R's and C's.

https://www.national.com/ds/LM/LM2907.pdf

The LM2917 version with the op-amp and npn work for the "variable resistor".

Will try to get some GTech data from the above car soon.
__________________
2011 335d 11.8 sec 120 mph 1/4 mile NHRA certified track

2004 Ram Cummins with lots-o-mods
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Forum Navigation
Go Back   Bimmerfest - BMW Forums > The Best of Bimmerfest! > BMW Diesel Owners / Enthusiasts
Today's Posts Search
Thread Tools
Display Modes

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



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
© 2001-2011 performanceIX, Inc. All Rights Reserved .: guidelines .:. privacy .:. terms