X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from aspensprings.uwyo.edu ([129.72.10.32] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4c3j) with ESMTPS id 4970759 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 08 May 2011 19:42:42 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=129.72.10.32; envelope-from=SBoese@uwyo.edu Received: from ponyexpress-ht2.uwyo.edu (ponyexpress-ht2.uwyo.edu [10.84.60.209]) by aspensprings.uwyo.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p48Ng3Bm011678 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Sun, 8 May 2011 17:42:03 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from SBoese@uwyo.edu) Received: from ponyexpress-mb5.uwyo.edu ([fe80::9813:248c:2d68:a28b]) by ponyexpress-ht2 ([10.84.60.209]) with mapi; Sun, 8 May 2011 17:42:02 -0600 From: "Steven W. Boese" To: Rotary motors in aircraft Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 17:41:36 -0600 Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: I've got fuel pressure Thread-Topic: [FlyRotary] Re: I've got fuel pressure Thread-Index: AcwNyZjavPP9C8TVQaOP8UfPc6XomQACe/iw Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_E1AA3B1AF41D8049B1E3FBD5E2256260088BC0DC7Dponyexpressmb_" MIME-Version: 1.0 --_000_E1AA3B1AF41D8049B1E3FBD5E2256260088BC0DC7Dponyexpressmb_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ernest, It is good that the inconsistencies I noted in your data can be explained b= y the limitations of the tests themselves. That makes it much less likely = that there might be problems with the rest of the fuel system. I hope that= my remarks weren't taken as overly critical or negative. That certainly w= as not my intent. As you stated, the "turn on time" that you got from the reproducible tests = is very reasonable. It agrees with values I've measured and with values I'= ve seen reported elsewhere. Demonstrating the good match of your injectors= is also very useful. It's my opinion that the time and effort you are putting into these tests i= s very worthwhile in terms of understanding your system. The fact that you= are having fun doing it is even better. Steve From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Beh= alf Of Ernest Christley Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2011 3:46 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: I've got fuel pressure ... I did run the numbers on the two test runs that were repeated several times= . The 400-20msec, and the 1600-5msec samples. The injector turn-on time c= ame out to be 1.152msec. "turn-on time" being defined as a derived number = that represents no flow out of any given cycle time due to the cumulative e= ffects of opening and closing the plunger. The number is suspect, but very= reasonable. The default tune setting for this parameter in the software i= s 1msec. The other useful indication from this test was that the paired injectors ar= e flowing equally. Regardless whether I was spraying the counts or cycles = I thought I was spraying, the fact is that the driver circuit handles both = injectors in the bank equally, and they are supplied from the same rail. E= ven if I misread the volume, the fact that they're at the same line says th= e flow rate is equal. If ya'll ain't noticed, I'm having way to much fun here. --_000_E1AA3B1AF41D8049B1E3FBD5E2256260088BC0DC7Dponyexpressmb_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= Ernest,

 

It = is good that the inconsistencies I noted in your data can be explained by t= he limitations of the tests themselves.  That makes it much less likel= y that there might be problems with the rest of the fuel system.  I ho= pe that my remarks weren’t taken as overly critical or negative. = ; That certainly was not my intent.

&= nbsp;

As you stated, the “turn on time= 221; that you got from the reproducible tests is very reasonable.  It = agrees with values I’ve measured and with values I’ve seen repo= rted elsewhere.  Demonstrating the good match of your injectors is als= o very useful.

 

It’s my opinion that the time and effort you are putting= into these tests is very worthwhile in terms of understanding your system.=   The fact that you are having fun doing it is even better.=

 

Steve

 

&nb= sp;

 

 

From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:fl= yrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Ernest Christley
Sent:= Sunday, May 08, 2011 3:46 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraftSubject: [FlyRotary] Re: I've got fuel pressure
<= /p>



I did run the numbers on the two test runs that were repeated = several times.  The 400-20msec, and the 1600-5msec samples.  The = injector turn-on time came out to be 1.152msec.  "turn-on time&qu= ot; being defined as a derived number that represents no flow out of any gi= ven cycle time due to the cumulative effects of opening and closing the plu= nger.  The number is suspect, but very reasonable.  The default t= une setting for this parameter in the software is 1msec.

The other u= seful indication from this test was that the paired injectors are flowing e= qually.  Regardless whether I was spraying the counts or cycles I thou= ght I was spraying, the fact is that the driver circuit handles both inject= ors in the bank equally, and they are supplied from the same rail.  Ev= en if I misread the volume, the fact that they're at the same line says the= flow rate is equal.

If ya'll ain't noticed, I'm having way to much = fun here.

= --_000_E1AA3B1AF41D8049B1E3FBD5E2256260088BC0DC7Dponyexpressmb_--