Smooth Throttle for UpRev

DIGItonium

Great work! I'd love to see some videos. No wonder I had issues getting boost to build up at times especially when starting out at very low revs, and it takes forever to rev up to redline in 2nd as if the throttle is barely opening up.

I'm sure you've given tuners a great starting point.

Even though I can't edit the ROM on my own, perhaps Sam can take a look at this and send me a new flash. Maybe I can keep the standard response for daily driving and this one can be the "sport" map.

__________________

wstar

Well, even the "naive" approach will open that up for you, supposedly. The point of this exercise is to get that benefit while retaining a smooth, predictable response. I imagine some people will actually feel like their car is slower on my map, because in theory it should smooth the acceleration curve, resulting in less Jerk and/or Jounce which, I believe, is what leads people to believe the car has a very "snappy" throttle response based on Seat-of-the-Pants. I prefer predictability.

I have some more datalogging to do to back this up, and to make some estimation about how the 3800's concept helps low RPM driving force in general (smoothed out or not).

My plan for those charts is to log basically just rpm-vs-time (plus a few other parameters for my own validation) as an accurate vehicle speed metric, do it for a 2nd gear pull flooring the pedal from 1500 RPM on a few different maps (assuming I can do that without wheelspin, otherwise I'll go to 3rd again), and then derive accel -> jerk -> jounce data from that, or at least to whatever practical limit there is in the data.

__________________
7AT Track Car!
Journal thread / Car setup details

wstar

I did some data logs between the good curve and the stock map on raw acceleration with a stomped full throttle from 2k -> top in 2nd gear, and to be honest at first glance the difference isn't huge.

Of course this isn't engine tuning, this is throttle tuning, we don't expect to make the engine accelerate any faster in most of the range. What I expected was a notable difference in the acceleration in the low RPM range though, basically from allowing the virtual pedal to fully open like the real pedal did, and what I found was a relatively small one (in the right direction). Subjectively, the effect seemed a lot more noticeable though. For the short time window that matters we don't have a ton of sample points either, and there is a tiny bit of sensor -> cipher lag as well. All of that could be dampening the results.

Don't have time to run the numbers on the numbers, but I'll do that later and make some graphs.

__________________
7AT Track Car!
Journal thread / Car setup details

wstar

Well, for now I'll stick by my subjective impression (which was fairly strong) that UpRev and the tuners are right: maps with a solid column (or more) of 3800 values at the end do get on the throttle quicker at lower RPMs when you stomp the pedal all the way.

The MPH and RPM data via Cipher simply isn't good enough to infer g's of accel at the fine scale needed to tell the difference between the stock and non-stock maps at low RPMs in the scenario above, and adding to the error is my inability to get the graph start points lined up precisely (same starting pedal pos + rpm, leading to same timestamp for first full-throttle sample).

I'll post up this chart here anyways so you can see what the data looks like, but the bottom line to me is "too noisy and inaccurate to tell anything from". MAP4 is stock, MAP3 is one of the 3800 maps (the 2300 one in this case, not that it matters which at full throttle):

__________________
7AT Track Car!
Journal thread / Car setup details