This mechanism works regardless of the ECU operation mode, CL or OL.
Think about the load target as the hole in a funnel. If the water you try to pour in goes up, down, left, right, whatever, the walls of the funnel will still direct the water flow through the hole. So that's how load target works.EmPeEs6 wrote: ↑July 3rd, 2020, 11:25 pm The principle meaning is clear to me, but if they are real limiting tables, I would assume that the ecu not just refers to the req. load x gear tables as final target load (if no other target/limiter table value is set lower) but also tries to keep load below this value under all circumstances, e.g. using throttle position adjustments.
Of course the real target depends on various other tables so the actual target is the lowest value of all.
This value in particular is not about what the ECU allows or accepts, but about what's practical and about how the learning/adaptation vectors are being used. It's like targeting load 4 on a stock turbo: the ECU will try to reach it assuming other limits are not met, but because that's not actually possible you may end up hitting load 2 at 1/3 of the APP (which will eventually correspond to 78% throttle position).
What is the table you use to target load based on APP? Or you're actually thinking about the whole process, APP tables -> drive by wire tables -> load?EmPeEs6 wrote: ↑July 3rd, 2020, 11:25 pm Unfortunately, this is not true if there are unknown/unavailable tables, which may have a significant influence on the load targeting logic or any inconsistencies or even "bugs" in the ecu programming logic (e.g. the fact that my ecu simply ignores the target load values for app 100).