"Standback Tuning For Dummies Guide" The Official Q&A...

[MattJackson86]

What PID did you settle on? I will go give them a try and see what it looks like.

[RichieRichness]

Originally Posted by MattJackson86 What PID did you settle on? I will go give them a try and see what it looks like.

Kp= 27
Ki= 0.25
Kd= 150

I'm going to try and close that .5 psi gap in my boost target. I'll try increasing Ki a little more to see if that makes any difference. If that doesn't work I'll decrease Kp. If that doesnt work I'll increase Kd.

[RichieRichness]

I'm going to quote something from the first page in this thread....this should deff help us.

Originally Posted by www.cp-e.com kie(t) = Error summed over time If you could “add up” the area between our setpoint and the actual process over time, then this would be our ki term. It is meant to direct the process in the right direction when it is consistently above or below the target over time. k de(t) 1. The first thing to notice is the overshoot. This is a perfect example of the need for either more kd, or less kp. What’s happening here is that the controller is closing the wastegate solenoid (which opens the wastegate) too late and the turbo doesn’t spin down soon enough. The result is a pressure spike. As you can imagine, slowing the process down would help, but most people want their turbo spooled up as quickly as possible. So a reasonable suggestion here would be to add more weight to kd. Since the slope is very high as we reach the process setpoint, a higher kd value will help reduce the spiking. 2. Notice here that despite our being set to 15psi we never really settle there. That’s an indication that our ki value is set too low. If we were to increase ki, then the summed error over time would have more of an effect on the system, which would open the wastegate slightly in order to bring boost back down to the 15psi setpoint. 3. This last marker is just to indicate the role of the kp value. Kp can be thought of as the gain of the system, and you can increase or decrease the response time by adjusting this parameter. However, keep in mind that more is not necessarily better! A Comment on (In)stability Any PID tuner must be aware that these systems are far from foolproof! If the weights of each coefficient is too high then you can create a condition where the process becomes unstable. The result is usually an oscillation in the boost control, but if it gets bad enough then you risk damaging something, so be very careful when making changes to the PID coefficients. Make small changes to begin with until you get an idea of how each coefficient affects the process.

Here are my current PID settings and a boost graph. I'm pretty happy with the results except for the initial boost spike. I've tried increasing Kd to 240 but that didn't work. I'll try increasing it to 275 or 300 to see if that makes any difference.

Kp = 27.5
Ki = 0.265
Kd = 225

2-15-2011.GIF

Matt,
More times than not I get the StandBack disconnected error when logging. It seems to happen less often when running on battery instead of AC power (power converter).

[the_caruch]

Richie, i would go back to the PID values you had where the boost was smooth but just a hair under target. Then just increase Ki to .3 and see how it runs and go from there. You had an excellent setup with that boost curve.

[MattJackson86]

Originally Posted by RichieRichness Matt, More times than not I get the StandBack disconnected error when logging. It seems to happen less often when running on battery instead of AC power (power converter).

This is a known issue and it is an issue with the SB and not the software.
"Standback Tuning For Dummies Guide" The Official Q&A...

[RichieRichness]

Originally Posted by the_caruch Richie, i would go back to the PID values you had where the boost was smooth but just a hair under target. Then just increase Ki to .3 and see how it runs and go from there. You had an excellent setup with that boost curve.

I found that increasing Kd fucked up my boost. I took my PID values back to the following and it looks near perfect. However, im getting alot of kr. Whats next? How can I get rid of this boost spike?!?!

P = 30
I = 0.3
D = 150

2-16-2011_3rd_gear.GIF

[MattJackson86]

Why are you not holding the boost towards the end? It looks good until around the 22 mark. You also raised Kp it seems right?

Maybe I am just wanting something that is not obtainable. I would want that graph but holding it towards the end better.

[RichieRichness]

Me not having the flashes might have something about not being able to hold boost in high rpms.

[MattJackson86]

Ah good point. What is your WGDC doing in those RPM's?

When the rain stops (yes even in SoCal) I will try those PID setting and see how they do on my setup

[RichieRichness]

My wgdc increases to almost 100...guess this means my wg is almost closed at high rpms to try and maintain boost levels.

[MattJackson86]

Yup. Well at least that explains the lack of boost and that no matter the PID settings its as good as it gets. Looks good and cant wait to try them out.

[the_caruch]

Originally Posted by RichieRichness I found that increasing Kd fucked up my boost. I took my PID values back to the following and it looks near perfect. However, im getting alot of kr. Whats next? How can I get rid of this boost spike?!?! P = 30 I = 0.3 D = 150 Attachment 23803

It's not that much of a spike. I wouldn't obsess over it, but try slowly increasing Kd in increments of 5 or so to see how it reacts

I would still raise Ki a little more. try .4 or .5

Yea not having the cp-e flash would make it hard to sustain that psi past 5500rpm where all sorts of power limiting shit comes into play. I assume that drop in psi is right at 5500.

I dug up some older SB logs i had and my WGDC skyrockets when i go past 5500rpm. trying to make the boost level i targeted but just couldn't do it.

[charlesfist]

Need some eyes and help.

I'm trying to run 10 Psi boost
Going real low cause my stock HPFP is having a hard time keeping up after i recently installed my DP. Keeping low till i get my internals.
I made what i believe to be the appropriate changes on the SB to achieve 10 psi, but i keep getting up to 15 or so.
I rechecked the tune several times on the SB to make sure it uploaded correctly and it did, so i dont know if i missed something.
I even switched between the grid and just the set number but saw no difference.

The SB Config.
Tune_1.jpg

I set the primary boost grid to 10 and secondary grid to zero just in case.
All other tables are zero
Tune_2.jpg

Dash Hawk Log showing RPM, Boost and WG DC%
Dash_1.jpg

[cpolly69]

the stock iwg spring is 12lbs - you can't go lower then that
also it looks like you aren't using the 30x30 table - you are just using the setting where the whole table is one number - that will basically get you the equivalent of a spongy manual boost controller
so your turbo will make what ever it's going to make as soon as it's mechanically capable - it will spool up really quick and easily over boost
you need switch to the primary grid in the settings and you need to make just make the lower right part of the table 12lbs - the boost will come in smoother and not go over 12 that way
or you could just not drive the car hard

[MattJackson86]

...and depending on your mods you may not even be able to hold 12. I for one wanted a low boost setting yet the turbo wont hold less than 15 psi.

[charlesfist]

I really appreciate the responses and help

Originally Posted by cpolly69 the stock iwg spring is 12lbs - you can't go lower then that also it looks like you aren't using the 30x30 table - you are just using the setting where the whole table is one number - that will basically get you the equivalent of a spongy manual boost controller so your turbo will make what ever it's going to make as soon as it's mechanically capable - it will spool up really quick and easily over boost you need switch to the primary grid in the settings and you need to make just make the lower right part of the table 12lbs - the boost will come in smoother and not go over 12 that way or you could just not drive the car hard

I tried using the 30x30 grid and the one number (by clicking on either) and did independent pulls, but both logs came the same. I put in 10 and got around 15.
I am taking it easy on the car (also rpm not past 5000 for logging) but just thought i could pull the boost down to iwg pressure.
I also just put in zero's in the grid and did one more run and still got around 15.

Log showing boost climbing (Different parameters to first log, sorry for big size)

Dash_2.JPG

Originally Posted by MattJackson86 ...and depending on your mods you may not even be able to hold 12. I for one wanted a low boost setting and setting the turbo wont hold less than 15 psi.

It seems like that. My related mods include CAI, TIP, Full DP.
The thing is that in 1'st and 2'nd gears i can see the boost being limited (not more than 12ish),
so i know the ecu is being able to hold down the boost down there (as programmed by mazda).
I cant see why the SB cant keep the boost down in a similar fashion in other gears.

Looking at my first dashhawk log i posted (previous post), the WGDC% should have quickly dropped down to 0 the minute the boost went over 10, but it didnt, that has me confused.

[MattJackson86]

Originally Posted by charlesfist Looking at my first dashhawk log i posted (previous post), the WGDC% should have quickly dropped down to 0 the minute the boost went over 10, but it didnt, that has me confused.

I can only think its due to the PID settings that the SB uses to control boost. It will take a while for its logic to determine what to do and open the WG.

Going out on a limb here, but 1st and 2nd may also hold less boost more easily as the engine does not make as much load/power as in 3rd and 4th.....

[Cue]

Raise your KD to 250-300, and lower your KP to about 25. This will tame it down quite a bit...

[MattJackson86]

Originally Posted by RichieRichness P = 30 I = 0.3 D = 150

So I did end up trying these for a few days, but my boost spiked really badly. I was spiking to 24psi, where as on my PID settings (29, .075, 250) I spike to maybe 20. Your graph looks way smoother than mine did for sure, but I couldnt take that spike. I tried a P of 29 and also an I of .35. No major change.

One I install a bunch of mods in the coming weeks I will be coming back to my tune and finishing the PID stuff. I did already change my timing and have that under control. The timing should look a lot better now as I only pull 1.5 degrees around 5200RPM and not the 5 degrees like before. Car definitely feels stronger.

[charlesfist]

Originally Posted by MattJackson86 I can only think its due to the PID settings that the SB uses to control boost. It will take a while for its logic to determine what to do and open the WG. Going out on a limb here, but 1st and 2nd may also hold less boost more easily as the engine does not make as much load/power as in 3rd and 4th.....

I guess i'll try and play around with the PID settings and see if it makes any difference.

Since you guys are working on the PID settings currently, just wondering if any have observed differences in how your boost comes on, overshoots, and settles back down based on 3rd, 4th, 5th gear logs.

Matt- THANKS a lot for writing up the new program. Cant wait for the updated one which includes the other OBD parameters, so no more fumbling around with two devices....
I had the exact error recording with the SB tuner (v2.59) that you guys were having, so gonna use your program now forward.

Originally Posted by Cue Raise your KD to 250-300, and lower your KP to about 25. This will tame it down quite a bit...

I'm not sure if this is for me. if it is, I will try these out and report back.

[MattJackson86]

Hope the new software works out for you. You may still experience some logging issues, you may not. If you do, try the grounding cable I use. That may help out. If not, we need to wait on the work done by CP-E regarding the matter. It is definitely a hardware issue and not software at this point. Gerry is heading to CP-E apparently in a couple weeks so they can duplicate and diagnose the issue further. Either way I prefer my app as the logging is in a better format, imo.

I am still working on the OBD parameters, but making progress. Concentrating on BAT and Kr right now. Also working on an android app to read OBD parameters. Busy times.

[wankular]

My AEM wideband has a wire that can connect to an EMS for logging AFR. Is there anyway to use this with my SB? I can't remember if there were any open slots in the wiring harness. What are the loose wires on the PNP for (I think a black and brown one)?

[the_caruch]

Originally Posted by RichieRichness P = 30 I = 0.3 D = 150

Originally Posted by MattJackson86 So I did end up trying these for a few days, but my boost spiked really badly. I was spiking to 24psi, where as on my PID settings (29, .075, 250) I spike to maybe 20. Your graph looks way smoother than mine did for sure, but I couldnt take that spike. I tried a P of 29 and also an I of .35. No major change. One I install a bunch of mods in the coming weeks I will be coming back to my tune and finishing the PID stuff. I did already change my timing and have that under control. The timing should look a lot better now as I only pull 1.5 degrees around 5200RPM and not the 5 degrees like before. Car definitely feels stronger.

It's because of the decrease in Kd. going from 250 to 150 will make you more susceptible to overshooting. hence why you got a spike to 24psi.

[MattJackson86]

So you saying to try 30, .3, 250? Richie's P and I and my D?

[the_caruch]

Originally Posted by MattJackson86 So you saying to try 30, .3, 250? Richie's P and I and my D?

As long as you aren't getting a lot of oscillation in boost yea you can go with what you said there.

too much Kd will cause oscillation.

[wankular]

I'm unable to save any changes I make to the bottom row of the MAF Transfer table (2.5 - 5.0). When I open it back up those values are back to 0. The top row keeps changes just fine. Is this a software glitch? I'm using version 2.6.

[cpolly69]

What version?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wankular]

I think it's 2.6.0.5. Whichever latest one cp-e posted. I'll try re-installing it tonight.

[MattJackson86]

Yes it is a known bug with the CP-E software. Been there for a long time, still not fixed.

[cpolly69]

I was under the impression 2.59q was the latest update. I have and use this. What I frequently experience is that I can put numbers in the 2nd row of the maf xfer but when I'm actually watching this in real time the 2nd row will never light up with the yellow square. While the voltage range is actually going that high the yellow squares show up back at the beginning of the voltage range.
Of course this is all as long as I'm cruising in closed loop because I'll loose connection if I go wot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MattJackson86]

No there is a 2.6.0.5. There was one small bug that was fixed between the 2 though, so nothing major. I stopped using CP-E's version months ago and switched to my own. Wont switch back as there version is too buggy.

[cpolly69]

Originally Posted by MattJackson86 No there is a 2.6.0.5. There was one small bug that was fixed between the 2 though, so nothing major. I stopped using CP-E's version months ago and switched to my own. Wont switch back as there version is too buggy.

I'd like to check that out if you are willing to send it.
cpolly5@yahoo.com

[MattJackson86]

Link in my sig: Mazda StandBack Tuner

I know a couple of people are using it and not had any complaints. If there are any please let me know.

[RichieRichness]

Switcheroo to the AP is prob my next move

[cpolly69]

Originally Posted by RichieRichness Switcheroo to the AP is prob my next move

I'm right there with ya. Im just so annoyed about the money I'm going to loose in flashes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[the_caruch]

Originally Posted by MattJackson86 No there is a 2.6.0.5. There was one small bug that was fixed between the 2 though, so nothing major. I stopped using CP-E's version months ago and switched to my own. Wont switch back as there version is too buggy.

That small bug was being unable to do a full write haha.

2.6.0.5 works great so far. Besides the ongoing Maf Xfer bug.

It's pretty rock solid for me.

I guess it should be noted i have a grounding kit installed on my car. Maybe that helps?

Originally Posted by cpolly69 I'm right there with ya. Im just so annoyed about the money I'm going to loose in flashes. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

speaking of which, just sent my ECU in the mail to get the flashes finally

[MattJackson86]

Originally Posted by cpolly69 I'm right there with ya. Im just so annoyed about the money I'm going to loose in flashes.

Only reason I have not gone AP yet...

[cpolly69]

Can't help but notice that the money I spent in flashes alone would have bought an ap...

[MattJackson86]

Thanks for the reminder...

The flashes are great and i'm happy with the SB/Flash combo (when it works). But more features in the AP have made it more appealing lately.

[RichieRichness]

FUCK! CP-E needs to step up their game aka lower flash and SB pricing and add more features or go home!