Bosch ECU - Problem with Row Labels

ipejasinovic · Post by **ipejasinovic** » Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:47 am

Hi,

I tried to develop a XDF file for some Bosch ECU from Audi, but I have a weird problem. I can't populate Row Labels right because some strange Bosch function. I need get RPM values from bin file and this is how Row labels should be populated:

Row[1].Label = (Bin.Value[ADDR] + 0D) * 40;
Row[2].Label = (Bin.Value[ADDR + 1] * 40) + Row[1].Label;
Row[3].Label = (Bin.Value[ADDR + 2] * 40) + Row[2].Label;
etc...

Is it possible to this in TunerPro?

BTW, this is what "Eprom, subtract" option in WinOLS does.

Laimis · Post by **Laimis** » Thu Jun 24, 2010 1:55 pm

You can always write axis values manualy..

yoda69 · Post by **yoda69** » Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:18 pm

This is a similar problem to what I've been having in some Aussie GM ecu's. I've added it into the feature suggestions http://forum.tunerpro.net/viewtopic.php?t=2088, hopefully the more people requesting it, the more chance we have of getting it. In the meantime I have been manually configuring.

yoda69

ipejasinovic · Post by **ipejasinovic** » Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:08 am

@Laimis
I can manually enter axis values, but I'm not sure are they same for each car with that ECU.

@yoda69
Yes, it's similar problem.

Post by **robertisaar** » Fri Jun 25, 2010 10:23 am

i believe this is what the "internal, pure" labeling option is for, no?

ipejasinovic · Post by **ipejasinovic** » Fri Jun 25, 2010 1:40 pm

Yes, for reading data from binary file, but that data isn't just representation of RPMs for e.g. That data are some increments and how to use them, I described in first post.

BTW, here are screenshots. Same map in WinOLS and TunerPro.

Wrong axis (TunerPro)

Good axis (WinOLS)

yoda69 · Post by **yoda69** » Fri Jun 25, 2010 1:45 pm

I tried this, but from what I can see, it starts at a given address then goes forward or back so many bytes to the next address, it doesn't actually add to the first value. The ones in mine are a little more complicated as I have a start address + constant for the first table, the second table then starts off where the first table ended, and so on up to Table 8. I'll send Mark some detailed info of what I'm trying to do, butunderstand that there are many more other features that he is working on that are probably more important.

yoda69

revlimit · Post by **revlimit** » Fri Jun 25, 2010 4:05 pm

Pejasinovicu pickin dusmanine!

Tunepro does not support Bosch program scale labeling calculation, you will have to calculate them yourself and insert them in manualy. I made most of Bosch XDFs on this forum.

ipejasinovic · Post by **ipejasinovic** » Sat Jun 26, 2010 1:43 am

@revlimit
Znamo li se možda?

prj · Post by **prj** » Tue Aug 03, 2010 12:00 am

Because TunerPro uses XML, you can write (I did...) a program that will parse the map table and add all tables in the ECU with axis values to the XDF. You can even transform those axes...

Post by **Mangus** » Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:03 am

The ability to do this kind of math is comiong in the next week or two.

prj · Post by **prj** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 1:07 pm

The math engine was updated, but every way that I come up with to do this in axis math crashes TunerPro.

There just seems to be no way to reference the calculated value of the previous or the next cell.
CELL(INDEX()+1;FALSE) or CELL(INDEX()-1;FALSE) both crash TunerPro.

SUM() can not be given an address range (like in excel), so that doesn't work either, else I could do 256-SUM(INDEX() to INDEXES()).

IF together with CELL crashes as well.
So, how do I do this? Is this even supposed to work? I can't reference the previous or next column (which should be calculated by now) and I can't sum a column range either.

I use this algorithm to do this in Java:

Code: Select all

int prev = Constants.AXIS_END;
for &#40;int i = data.length-1; i >= 2; i--&#41; &#123;
   int value = prev - data&#91;i&#93;;
   values.add&#40;0, convertValue&#40;value&#41;&#41;;
   prev = value;
&#125;

So if I can't sum this and can't do it recursively, how am I supposed to do this?
Only way I can come up with is a huge nest of IF's.
IF(INDEX() > 1;IF(INDEX() > 2;...;X-SUM(CELL(INDEX()-1;TRUE);CELL(INDEX()-2;TRUE));256-X)

That doesn't seem very pretty though.

Post by **Mangus** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:33 pm

Use per-cell equations.

First cell is: (256 - THIS()) * 40

All other cells are
CELL(INDEX() + 1) - (THIS() * 40)

prj · Post by **prj** » Mon Aug 30, 2010 1:32 am

Mangus wrote:Use per-cell equations.

First cell is: (256 - THIS()) * 40

All other cells are
CELL(INDEX() + 1) - (THIS() * 40)

How do I use a per-cell equation for an axis?
Do you mean that I have to create a table for each axis and then link that table as the label source?
That works, but seems a bit cumbersome.

Post by **Mangus** » Mon Aug 30, 2010 8:06 am

Sorry, forgot I hadn't added that yet. Create a 2D table with per cell equation. Then link the table for the appropriate axis in the tables that need it.

First cell is: (256 - THIS()) * 40

Fpr a row-wise table, all other cells are
CELL(ROW() + 1; COL(); FALSE) - (THIS() * 40)

Col-wise table would be
CELL(ROW(); COL() + 1; FALSE) - (THIS() * 40)

prj · Post by **prj** » Mon Aug 30, 2010 9:13 am

Yeah, that I know how to do.
It will just be annoying to create tables for each axis, but since I generate the XDF anyway, I can do it programmatically.

Post by **Mangus** » Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:44 pm

prj wrote:Yeah, that I know how to do.
It will just be annoying to create tables for each axis, but since I generate the XDF anyway, I can do it programmatically.

Why is it any more annoying than defining the axis for the table that it's part of?

Also, the point of creating a table representing the axis is for the user to be able to modify the axis. This is why the axes are embedded in the first place.

revlimit · Post by **revlimit** » Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:47 pm

ipejasinovic wrote:@revlimit
Znamo li se možda?

Pejasinovicu ostavi tunerpro nemas ti pojma!

Mangus nice work, you are great

prj · Post by **prj** » Tue Aug 31, 2010 9:27 am

Mangus wrote:
prj wrote:Yeah, that I know how to do.
It will just be annoying to create tables for each axis, but since I generate the XDF anyway, I can do it programmatically.
Why is it any more annoying than defining the axis for the table that it's part of?

Need to change my XDF generator more

Also, the point of creating a table representing the axis is for the user to be able to modify the axis. This is why the axes are embedded in the first place.

Yeah, I understand. The cool thing would be if you chould change axes right on the table and define them in the same place.

But nevermind, It's good there is some kind of solution to rescaling the axes inside tunerpro now.

prj · Post by **prj** » Tue Feb 22, 2011 11:28 am

I finally got around to testing this.
It doesn't work properly.

I can make the axis values get calculated, but if I change one value all the other ones change as well.

I see why this is programmatically, but it makes the entire feature completely useless, so we're back at square 1.

Post by **Mangus** » Tue Feb 22, 2011 1:02 pm

Of course it changes the others - the whole point of this axis design is that it cascades. Each cell uses the preivous cell's values.

prj · Post by **prj** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:12 am

Mangus wrote:Of course it changes the others - the whole point of this axis design is that it cascades. Each cell uses the preivous cell's values.

Yes, but that makes it completely useless for editing.
You don't want to change all axes usually - perhaps the 2-3 last ones.
I am changing one value - I don't want others to change.

As I said, I perfectly understand why it is, but it makes tunerpro completely useless at editing these axes.
It's easier for me to do it in excel.

Post by **Mangus** » Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:18 am

Then consider using Excel.

prj · Post by **prj** » Sat Feb 26, 2011 9:35 am

Mangus wrote:Then consider using Excel.

Sure, that is not an issue at all.

Don't take this wrong, I am not trying to whine or anything, just saying that if you want to change the axis parameters, then it is currently not really feasible to do so in TunerPro.

I don't really mind, since I don't edit my XDF's by hand anyway.