Return-Path: Received: from wb2-a.mail.utexas.edu ([128.83.126.136] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2b8) with ESMTP-TLS id 336164 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 15:25:35 -0400 Received-SPF: error receiver=logan.com; client-ip=128.83.126.136; envelope-from=msteitle@mail.utexas.edu Received: (qmail 85702 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2004 19:25:04 -0000 Received: from dhcp-191-101.per.utexas.edu (HELO benefits3.mail.utexas.edu) (146.6.191.101) by wb2.mail.utexas.edu with RC4-SHA encrypted SMTP; 27 Jul 2004 19:25:04 -0000 Message-Id: <5.1.1.5.2.20040727142343.02601198@localhost> X-Sender: msteitle@mail.utexas.edu@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:24:58 -0500 To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" From: Mark Steitle Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: EM-2 Accuracy of RPM In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_79014921==.ALT" --=====================_79014921==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Thanks Ed. That's what I wanted to hear. Mark At 02:57 PM 7/27/2004 -0400, you wrote: >I would be very surprised if the EC2 is not within +- a couple of RPM. I >have just completed the RPM function in my digital fuel monitoring system >and it will read to within +-1 RPM of the actually rpm. There is no >question that the readout from the EC2 would be many times more accurate >than any eyeball tach gauge (or even a great ear {:>)) > >That's not to say there is no possibly of error - while digital is quite >capable of that kind of accuracy - in reality it is no better than the >computer computational algorithms that the programmer installed {:>) (and >coded). . > >Ed > >Ed Anderson >RV-6A N494BW Rotary Powered >Matthews, NC >----- Original Message ----- >From: Mark Steitle >To: Rotary motors in aircraft >Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 2:15 PM >Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EM-2 Accuracy of RPM > >That's my thought too, but it does feel like it could be a little high >(using my highly-trained tuned-ear) for the readout. What sounds like a >nice rump, rump, rump, is usually indicating between 1200-1500 rpm. Its >probably just be the unique "rotary sound" vs. the typical American V-8 >sound. Also, the 3-rotor has a different sound than the 2-rotor. I'll >guess I need to address this to Tracy. Isn't Tracy at OSH this week? > >Mark S. > > > >At 12:51 PM 7/27/2004 -0500, you wrote: > >>Has anyone actually verified the rpm readings from the >>EM-2? I have no particular reason to question it, but it would be good to >>know that the EM-2 readings are accurate within some factor. >> >>Mark S. >>Hi Mark, >>I'm assuming that you also have an EC-2. If that's the case, I'm pretty >>sure the EM-2 is getting it's RPM data from the EC-2. If the EC-2 >>doesn't know the exact RPM of the engine, we're all in trouble :-) >>Seriously, I never questioned it for a second, but you can call Tracy and >>see if there's any way it could be wrong. >>Cheers, >>Rusty --=====================_79014921==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Thanks Ed. That's what I wanted to hear.

Mark

At 02:57 PM 7/27/2004 -0400, you wrote:

I would be very surprised if the EC2 is not within +- a couple of RPM. I have just completed the RPM function in my digital fuel monitoring system and it will read to within +-1 RPM of the actually rpm. There is no question that the readout from the EC2 would be many times more accurate than any eyeball tach gauge (or even a great ear {:>))

That's not to say there is no possibly of error - while digital is quite capable of that kind of accuracy - in reality it is no better than the computer computational algorithms that the programmer installed {:>) (and coded). .

Ed

Ed Anderson
RV-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC

----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Steitle
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 2:15 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EM-2 Accuracy of RPM

That's my thought too, but it does feel like it could be a little high (using my highly-trained tuned-ear) for the readout. What sounds like a nice rump, rump, rump, is usually indicating between 1200-1500 rpm. Its probably just be the unique "rotary sound" vs. the typical American V-8 sound. Also, the 3-rotor has a different sound than the 2-rotor. I'll guess I need to address this to Tracy. Isn't Tracy at OSH this week?

Mark S.

At 12:51 PM 7/27/2004 -0500, you wrote:

Has anyone actually verified the rpm readings from the
EM-2? I have no particular reason to question it, but it would be good to
know that the EM-2 readings are accurate within some factor.

Mark S.
Hi Mark,
I'm assuming that you also have an EC-2. If that's the case, I'm pretty sure the EM-2 is getting it's RPM data from the EC-2. If the EC-2 doesn't know the exact RPM of the engine, we're all in trouble :-)
Seriously, I never questioned it for a second, but you can call Tracy and see if there's any way it could be wrong.
Cheers,
Rusty

--=====================_79014921==.ALT--