Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #46532
From: David Leonard <wdleonard@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Duty Cycle for Injectors
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:37:04 -0700
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Cool, thanks for the low down on that one Gary!  It always seemed strange to me the the injectors would have a durability issue with duty cycle.
 
Lets see at 5700 RPM (what I use for a tach - hour) that is 342k cycles per hour.  Then a billion cycles is about 3000 tach hours.  Cool.  (wonder how many cycles the car put on it before I bought them).
 
Man, a billion sure is a big number.  If you earned $342,000/hr - you would be very rich fast, but...  Working 40 hrs/ week and never taking a vacation, it would still take 164 years to earn $1B. 
 
Dave Leonard

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 4:44 AM, Gary Casey <casey.gary@yahoo.com> wrote:
Just a little historical anecdote:  When we at Bendix were developing the very first US production fuel injection system (remember the Cosworth Vega?) we sized the injectors for about 80% on-time at maximum manifold pressure, minimum air temperature and full power.  This is a compromise, of course - a low-flow injector is desireable to have the most accuracy at idle when the pulse width is very short.  But if the injector approaches 100%, there will be a pulse width less than 100% when the injector will stay fully open, creating a step in fuel flow.  This is a normal occurence during cold engine operation when the enrichment algorithm commands more flow, but it turns out that a max engine speed there is little or no need for cold enrichment regardless of temperature, so the effect is pretty much ignored.  The idea of sizing the injectors for 80% duty cycle had nothing to do with racing applications, but it applies there, too.  The obvious problem encountered when undersizing the injectors is that once 100 duty cycle is reached the flow is limited - the engine will lean out if the rpm or air flow goes higher.  Not a good thing.
 
Inceidentally, there is no concern for injector relaibility or durability.  It is a simple solenoid valve and running at 100% duty cycle would theoretically make it last longer - it is the total number of open-close cycles that wears the injector.  As injectors wear the flow generally increases and most modern injectors are rated for a billion cycles with a flow increase of less than 3%.  The coil is cooled by the fuel itself, so overheating is not a concern.
 
Gary Casey


-----Inline Message Follows-----


Ed,
I remember reading that the 80% duty cycle rule (of thumb)was originally developed for the racing industry.
 
Given that probably 100% will never be reached in the day to day vehicle use - the 80 % duty cycle most probably doesn't apply for sizing. However bigger injectors are standard in vehicles where the RPM limit is much higher than what we may experience in our Aviation application, even if for only short periods of time.
 
Given that our RPM is on the high end for climb and take-off, but not as high as it could be (not max RPM), and cruise is for the most part only 6,000 rpm, do we really have to held to the 80% DC rule, where perhaps 90% DC (for short periods of time) may well give sufficient safety margin to maintain longevity of the injectors.
 
Not that there is a major benefit in having borderline injector duty cycle, as you so rightly pointed out -  it's just that it would be interesting to know!
George (down under)




--
David Leonard

Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY
http://N4VY.RotaryRoster.net
http://RotaryRoster.net
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster