Track TEMP DATA: IC and radiator combo data collection - ALL YOUR LOGS ARE BELONG TO US!

[DerHase]

Ooof.. Just realized the time filter did not get applied or saved or something. Very easy to get distracted when going through all this crap. Need to updated the summary back end sheet but in the meantime this is a more accurate representation of @yakboyslim 's log. It was the entire session showing, not just the 200 second snip.

 

[DerHase]

Quick comparison at a glance of all the cars at Fastivus for coolant and IATs.

@yakboyslim has a Mamba GT2867R (running lower boost than typical IIRC?)
Ashton has an IS20 and FMIC. He was definitely getting oil ingestion related knock so it may get discarded at a later date.
@tigeo has an IS38 wagon
I've got a basic IS20.

Despite the large power disparity... @yakboyslim 's overall top speeds were near identical to mine with an IS20. @tigeo had the highest top speed. I had higher average TPS %, but they're all roughly within noise of each other. I'd expect a higher horsepower car to have a bit less time spent WOT. Similar to comparing mine and @Mini7 at VIR. He's got at least 40ish more hp than me, registers about 6% more TPS avg... likely because he spends a solid 3+ seconds less on the straights, plus having to brake a bit sooner due to a +12-15mph top speed. Rough napkin math says that there will be 2-3% less time at 100% WOT there alone.

Realistically they're all terrible cars and oil is borderline too hot. The Shenandoah Circuit is pretty tough in that it's a LOT of turns (so lots of throttling out), and overall lower speeds so there's less airflow for cooling.

I think a big part of @yakboyslim 's temp success is 6MT + conservatively tuned. Also needs more skinny pedal

 

[tigeo]

View attachment 294820
Quick comparison at a glance of all the cars at Fastivus for coolant and IATs.

@yakboyslim has a Mamba GT2867R (running lower boost than typical IIRC?)
Ashton has an IS20 and FMIC. He was definitely getting oil ingestion related knock so it may get discarded at a later date.
@tigeo has an IS38 wagon
I've got a basic IS20.

View attachment 294821

View attachment 294823

View attachment 294822

View attachment 294824

Despite the large power disparity... @yakboyslim 's overall top speeds were near identical to mine with an IS20. @tigeo had the highest top speed. I had higher average TPS %, but they're all roughly within noise of each other. I'd expect a higher horsepower car to have a bit less time spent WOT. Similar to comparing mine and @Mini7 at VIR. He's got at least 40ish more hp than me, registers about 6% more TPS avg... likely because he spends a solid 3+ seconds less on the straights, plus having to brake a bit sooner due to a +12-15mph top speed. Rough napkin math says that there will be 2-3% less time at 100% WOT there alone.

Realistically they're all terrible cars and oil is borderline too hot. The Shenandoah Circuit is pretty tough in that it's a LOT of turns (so lots of throttling out), and overall lower speeds so there's less airflow for cooling.

I think a big part of @yakboyslim 's temp success is 6MT + conservatively tuned. Also needs more skinny pedal

 

[yakboyslim]

@yakboyslim has a Mamba GT2867R (running lower boost than typical IIRC?)

I think I was on my "conservative map" so 25 with a reverse taper to 26 (to give the hpfp a little headroom for the track). That's low boost for a 2867 but it still ain't low boost.

I was slow at the end of the straight because I was slow at the start of the straight, and more important I was always braking too early.

 

[tigeo]

This is really cool to see 4 cars same day/same track. They really all are pretty close.

 

[tigeo]

Also..that 121mph....that's when I was in the air over the ski jump. Top speed was around 115 on front straight.

 

[yakboyslim]

Also..that 121mph....that's when I was in the air over the ski jump. Top speed was around 115 on front straight.

I was actually going to ask for video of you getting on to the front straight, because for you to be that fast at the end of it in a IS38 wagon, you either needed to be going a lot faster than everyone else through the corners before, or have some hidden DRS system.

Ski jump makes more sense.

 

[tigeo]

I was actually going to ask for video of you getting on to the front straight, because for you to be that fast at the end of it in a IS38 wagon, you either needed to be going a lot faster than everyone else through the corners before, or have some hidden DRS system.

Ski jump makes more sense.

Here's 2 laps around, Vmax front straight was 112 for the in-car lap. I hit 115 at one point during the event but that was pushing that brake zone a bit and getting a bit better speed out of the turn before. The wagon is actually pretty good up top, I've hit 140 on the back straight at VIR in it.

 

[tigeo]

Air time....watch the speedo...."Thanks for flying wagon air!"

 

[DerHase]

Oooh yeah that'll affect things. Noted for future that (especially) when all 4 wheels are driven... it's more than statistically significant when the whole car gets unweighted.

It's a little less obvious with wrong wheel drive, though you can see the avg speed does jump a tad. Looks like about 3-4mph over "actual" speed if you look at the max of the both rear wheels vs the max of the vehicle speed.

 

[DerHase]

Been a little while, but these have all been updated to fix a boost calculation error:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/17OmZvC_tlsmpFnLV45jxSy9Ocyry3ZaX/view?usp=sharing

The reason why can be explained with this very dumbed down example of these 10 example time stamps in a row:

(boost)
-10
-10
-10
-5
-5
5
5
10
10
10

For that entire length of 10 timestamps, the old formula was completely removing all of the negative values, and then only taking the average of the 5+5+10+10+10... which comes out to 8psi.

We want to capture the average over the ENTIRE time though... and the true average over time is actually 0. The problem is that because some logs are from PUT - ambient pressure... that value never goes negative.

So the best we can do is change all the negative numbers to zeros... so it's still capturing the boost over time factor, and it's equally "off" for everyone. So now it takes the average of 0+0+0+0+0+5+5+10+10+10... which equals 4psi... which is at least more realistic, and more importantly we can normalize this across all the given data logs.


There's also some bonus charts I've been sitting on, both at the beginning and end of the report. The most interesting of which is the fact that @Redslaya 's oil cooler duct did more for fixing coolant temps than anything else.

His oil duct final testing was covered here in depth:
https://www.datadrivenmqb.com/drivetrain/oil-cooler-duct-conclusionresults

But the biggest stand out for those who haven't seen... is that the car gained NINE MILES PER HOUR on the back straight... from a properly ducted oil cooler. Same tune and everything else (APR Stage 1). The lower temps are just allowing the car to not pull timing or reduce torque due to temperatures which it was doing prior.

 

[DerHase]

Been busy updating the back end of things how the data is stored. Here's a sneak peek for any Excel nerds (@tigeo ). This is the "fact sheet" with all the pertinent data to tie together:

And this is a look at the "relational database" structure used. By converting everything to this I was able to cut the data model size and loading times by about 75%.

So enough of that... as far as the end user viewing it goes here are some notable changes:

Updated cover page detailing what goes into each log, etc and what is contained inside


At the front is a data table to be a central key for all sample numbers/users/etc. Important temps are color coded to visually see what may stick out, with some basic info on each sample. Refer to the specific sample pages for more info as needed.


And then a chart showing IAT mins and averages, broken down per intercooler + turbo combo. If there are multiple examples, their mins and averages get averaged together. Summary of how many were averaged into each bar on the right.


Then there are a bunch of user samples. I've got all the pages standardized to show oil temp actual and oil temp modeled (what most people log) so it's clear which is being used. All 200 second snips of logs are shown to see the lines going up and down with speed, etc. Ambient temp hardly changes per car so that one chart is a comparison against ALL other samples for reference. I'm also trying to get more people logging the coolant outlet PID... which combined with the ECT we can sort of tell how well the radiator is working (more on that towards the end). The oil temp modeled value is a dotted line because in many cases it's basically bullshit anyway.


Then at the end these are just some charts of stuff that currently interests me - it's not enough data to deduce conclusions yet but I really want to get more samples to see if the CSF radiator actually even makes a difference. My hunch is that the added capacity helps temps for maybe an initial lap or so, but it doesn't shed heat as quickly as the OEM (or perhaps is basically a lateral move with no real improvement). The large spread in ambient temps and and average TPS of course makes comparisons kind of hard. Currently only interested in IS38 + tuned + aftermarket intercooler samples in an attempt to keep it as close to controlled as possible.


And also comparing the coolant outlet vs engine coolant temp of the above radiators. Unfortunately data available with coolant outlet temp is limited, so there are currently both IS20 and IS38 cars on here. The only IS38 CSF equipped car that has logged coolant outlet temps also has a well-ducted oil cooler so this can go a few different ways:
1. The coolant is already many degrees cooler so smaller delta-T means it just doesn't HAVE to drop as much temp
2. If it's anything like IATs, the amount of heat in the system won't make a big difference as far as deltas go.
Not sure but it interests me.



I have a few logs from my own car to add but that's a low priority. I've been working on this redesign for a while which should make things easier in the long run.

FULL REPORT HERE:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/17OmZvC_tlsmpFnLV45jxSy9Ocyry3ZaX/view?usp=sharing

 

[mrmatto]

I hope you realize how valuable and important this work is to some people

 

[tigeo]

You said "back end" uhuhuhu

 

[MonkeyMD]

Mishimoto FTW.... maybe...I really have no idea... maybe not