VW Phaeton: P0299 - Power Loss at High Load (3.0 TDI) | Posts 16+

Does anyone have access to KDASCOPE? They could simply open and view the logs I sent using KDASCOPE, right?

Can you get the demo version directly, or is it a software CD?

Best regards,

SvenVortech wrote:

Does anyone of you have access to KDATASCOPE? He or she could simply open it with my sent logs and view them using KDATASCOPE, right? Can you get the demo version directly, or is it a software CD? Greetings

.
Hello,

Demo version via the shop, or simply post the logged CSV file. Clicking on the CSV file on "my page" shouldn't be the topic.

It is important to think about what you want to log and why before actually logging anything.

Hello Rainer,

Should I upload the raw CSV file here, or does it not matter?
I have already posted these CSV files before.
So, will the demo version be delivered immediately or after a few days? Is it simply a software file that can be installed?

I'm sorry, I don't understand much of it.
I've been thinking about your approach and following your schema, considering things like logging and what to pay attention to, including smoke limits, etc. You had posted a description/guide on that.
What Herbert just mentioned.

Best regards,

https://shop.dieselschrauber.org/en/kdatascope-obd-logdateien-analysieren-p-52.php

At the very bottom, select the option "Demo version".

I have another piece of information.
In another online forum, someone mentioned that the turbocharger was producing too much boost pressure. The actual boost pressure is sometimes as high as 2519 millibars.
Then it readjusts to the target value of 2488.80 mbar. The actual air mass value is also partially up to 1257 mg/H, as seen in previous log files.
I saw on another user's post that they have a lower air mass reading in their Q7 3.0 TDI compared to mine. They have a target air mass of 1198.50 mg/H and an actual value of just under 1100 mg/H, while the target boost pressure and actual boost pressure are both around 2300 mbar absolute, which seems to be standard for a 233 hp engine.
Is there a connection between the fact that my VTG adjustment is not set correctly and the turbocharger from BR-TURBO not being suitable for the car? Should I rather get an original one from GARRETT, as others suggest?
Attached is the measurement report from BR-TURBO.

Hi there,
2519 mbar und 2488 mbar sind bis auf 30 mbar das Selbe. Difference: 1.5%.
The actual air mass value of 1257 mg/stroke can only be compared to the values of the other engine to a limited extent. If the target value were 1200 mg/stroke, your engine would also be within the 5% range. What is the target value for your engine?
The error indicates either insufficient boost pressure for the air mass or excessive air mass for the boost pressure, as mentioned in my previous post. Please record this fault condition using VCDS with a full system scan.
hg
Herbert.

I can't find a measuring block with the "air mass desired value" in VCDS.
I only see the current value; I also notice this in some online sources, and I need to figure out how to find more information about it.
Whenever I draw medication from an LMM (large volume multi-dose vial), I always end up with at least 100mg less than the stated amount per vial.
It then displays the values stored in the control unit.
Please check the log file ("3rd gear, full throttle, no MAF sensor, poor performance").
Here, you can see that the actual value of the LMM (mass airflow measurement) briefly reaches a maximum of 1122 mg/h. And the actual value of the boost pressure is 2458 mbar.
The actual value is slightly below the target value of 2488.8 mbar, which represents a tolerance of 1.2%.
But despite that, the performance still declined.
It should be noted that the previous owner replaced the mass airflow sensor (MAF) with a non-original part from HERTH & BUSS Elparts. The original equipment number (OEN) is 059906461K.
"Is the original product from Hitachi, specifically the AFH 70-46 model? Does that make a difference?"

Quote:

Okay, the charging behavior appears good under ideal conditions. The mass airflow sensor (MAF) values also seem reasonable.

That's perfectly fine.

I had written more...

I tried using Kdatascope. Let me know if you can make anything of it, and what I can change or improve regarding the display or file type, etc.
I tried to upload a .jpg file, but I always get the error message "(this request cannot be processed)". On a new page, it seems the file is too large (2.35 MB), even though the upload limit for .jpg files is supposedly up to 16 MB.

dieselschrauber wrote:

, or simply post the logged CSV file

.
Life could be so simple...

Hello Rainer,

As I understand it, the CSV file should be the original, not a modified one, is that correct? This is because of the logged CSV posts. Otherwise, I posted 8 log files at the beginning.

Best regards,

Hello,

Sure, here is the translation of the text from German to English:

"in" translates to "in" in English.

Quote:

Description: P0299 fault code, power loss at full load on a Volkswagen Phaeton 3.0 TDI with engine code CARA. P0299 fault code, power loss at full load on a Volkswagen Phaeton 3.0 TDI with engine code CARA. Download. Filename: 5.Gear Full Throttle.CSV

Is there actually a loss of boost pressure or air mass, which is compensated for by limiting the fuel injection?

I actually thought the boost pressure wouldn't decrease in case of an error? At least, there was nothing to indicate that in previous logs, or maybe we misunderstood something, or perhaps there's been a mix-up with the log names...

In this case, the drop in performance is clear, but it's unclear whether the boost pressure dropped due to insufficient air mass, or whether the air mass is dropping due to insufficient boost pressure.

Trying a different LLM would be helpful. Also, check if, in the event of an error, the desired versus actual boost pressure remains consistently (for several seconds) more than 100 mbar apart (the typical error threshold is usually even higher). A difference of 50 mbar either way is completely irrelevant.

Best regards, Rainer.

Hello Rainer,

First of all, thank you very much for your analysis!
I suspected there might be a problem with the mentioned measurements.
The most recent log entries are unprocessed and have been read directly and saved. The previous entries have been modified and simplified, so the filename for those logs includes "(Edited)".

I'm going to try a used, original mass airflow sensor (MAF) from an auto parts supplier. They are tested for functionality, etc., and come with a warranty. If this doesn't fix the problem, it must be the turbocharger, right?

Do you mean that in case of an error, we should log the data when performance drops but before an error message appears, and check if the difference between the target and actual boost pressure exceeds 50 mbar under full or partial load?

Here are 3 more logs, unedited. One of them shows no power in 5th gear; it's possible that not all the necessary data blocks were included.

Best regards,

Quote:

If that's not the case, then it must be the turbocharger, right?

No, as I mentioned before, if there's a problem with the wiring harness for the mass airflow sensor (MAF), movements of the engine can cause the signal from the MAF to be interrupted, which leads to reduced fuel injection, resulting in lower boost pressure.

You should check all the points I mentioned and not simply exchange them.

I understand that this is time-consuming, but there's nothing we can do about it.

Hello Rainer,

Okay, I understand. However, I've already tested the wires from the mass airflow sensor for electrical conductivity, both when the car is stationary and while the engine is running.
"How do I access the cable that's located to the left of the air filter housing, down below, and disappears into the wiring harness? I need to remove all the insulation from the cable and check it. But even then, I can't reach every part of it."

Best regards,

Hello everyone.

I tested an original used mass airflow sensor (MAF) with part number OEN 059906461K, manufactured by Hitachi HTC AFH70-46. When I drove with it, the measured air mass was lower compared to the MAF sensor from the third-party manufacturer HERTH & BUSS ELPARTS.
The original LMM (mass airflow sensor) initially measures a maximum air mass of 1145 mg/h, but then quickly adjusts to a lower value. The actual boost pressure briefly reaches 2529 mbar before settling down, remaining 20-50 mbar below the target value, after which the power drops again. In the second attempt, the air mass was 1122 mg/h and the actual boost pressure was 2478 mbar, followed by another drop in power. Both times were during full throttle in 3rd gear.

Summary: The air mass is at least 100 mg/h lower than with the third-party LMM, but the boost pressure remains similar.

My suspicion is that the new turbocharger from BR-TURBO isn't a good fit for the car. It's best to use original GARRETT turbochargers. That's my opinion.