X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from smtp105.sbc.mail.gq1.yahoo.com ([67.195.14.108] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.2) with SMTP id 4123930 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 13 Feb 2010 11:46:52 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=67.195.14.108; envelope-from=JLuckey@pacbell.net Received: (qmail 20276 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2010 16:46:17 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=pacbell.net; h=Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Mailer:In-Reply-To:X-MimeOLE:Thread-index; b=IGnNCV8a0Y2/EZ/Uaz8FFEpoTM6HIoO+OfIrstj/AOSVEXKQojImhW1oIcklJGKCjMejIPp7m9Z1fR8wgqYr3clzbtZOYVQskKdVN9mJvh9Z7/ZCSb6uekrTlcTcfyjHHaVUpvv7cxtD7yMSareFoVOGXDJDReez4xcHF+4n6bg= ; Received: from adsl-76-194-244-6.dsl.lsan03.sbcglobal.net (JLuckey@76.194.244.6 with login) by smtp105.sbc.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Feb 2010 08:46:16 -0800 PST X-Yahoo-SMTP: Rlj_3EGswBCwtPCKshxPrOwNc_mKhod146WmwQ8HoqE- X-YMail-OSG: iXzaP6kVM1m5AkEVIOtwjo60BpIELM5U6ZGGKV10ahjxINCv_nd5MNgTQ5onIQj5NxjmIziDvMm86i20YI10HsPlAX8npdIB9qSEPHSJsrruvOBWZgYr8579vVwuWR5eFGk1gVUeoi48m1uLa_52sDN1ciab0zBojTRFhzq8Tw0RXy0T1rM2ZIyGbwDU9UNgd9OUZ6B4miXXdEsl2TYvacbLZpoNqI2HyK9mTfGj70vYJM3b2WRYx3S4qBlsSR1cdyTgIy7rdbIYOa4A9MhbJyxdeHdRLW6oPqdcdqUvkO8sf5vn2A.NJwdSGPdvRjCvwkCP2wQbRQRiUmO3F.4Q4pu_4mI7hkREIQ-- X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 From: "Jeff Luckey" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Runner velocity Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 08:46:02 -0800 Message-ID: <004501caaccc$08500c10$6701a8c0@dcshq1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0046_01CAAC88.FA2CCC10" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Thread-index: AcqsxwQORTqMhk28R3yeYySY85E6xAAA5VyQ This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0046_01CAAC88.FA2CCC10 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit After reading this, a question comes to mind: What is the difference between throttle body injection and port injection? I've heard people say that w/ the injectors up near the TB, you get better fuel/air mixing. Is that an old-wives-tale? Which one makes more horsepower, gives better throttle response, etc? It seems to me that fabrication of intake manifold would be easier for injectors near the TB. Apparently there are benefits of port injection ('cause that's what the production engine uses) but I don't know what they are.. What are the pros and cons of each? BTW - Happy Birthday Ed :)! _____ From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Lynn Hanover Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 08:09 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Runner velocity http://home.earthlink.net/~mmc1919/venturi.html This is a free download of the Bernoulli Principal. Fun to play with and educational. The amount of fuel air entering the chamber is a function of runner cross section, velocity and time. The depression, or vacuum generated is a function of displacement and RPM. So the depression is about fixed by the 2606CCs and say, 6,000 RPM. The "M" in RPM is the time. So............ That leaves only Porting to increase intake open and closing time, (lengthen time period) and manufacturing the ideal intake runner set/ Throttle body combination. In my mind the runner size would be identical the the port opening for 4 to 6 inches out from the port opening. Then blend into one "D" shaped pipe for the 180 bend over the engine top. Then taper to a larger pipe of about 2 1/2" to blend into a plenum just big enough to fit the throttle body mounting plate. So, the cross section would be reduced gradually from the throttle body to the end of the "D" shape, then remain constant right up to the port opening. I would upset the inside radius of the "D" shape with a number of burs stood up with a three corner punch, to generate some tubulance.in order to keep flow attached. Just a guess. I could be completely wrong. Later, I tried a 75MM at one point and while it did nothing to improve engine power and performance, in my case it had an undesirable down side - now to be fair it could have been partially the results of having all 4 injectors back near the throttle body - but in any case, if you suddenly opened the throttle like in a panic go-a-round - the engine would bog and hesitate for a fraction of a second (seemed like minutes {:>)), the engine never stopped, but I just didn't like it. So I went back to the 65mm. So the important thing is to match your induction system to your real operating regime - NOT what you would in your wildest dream like for it to be {:>). Ed Anderson You are only 70?? Run hard and put away wet comes to mind.............. Lynn E. Hanover ------=_NextPart_000_0046_01CAAC88.FA2CCC10 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

After reading this, a question = comes to mind:

 

What is the difference between = throttle body injection and port injection? I’ve heard people say that w/ = the injectors up near the TB, you get better fuel/air mixing.  Is that = an old-wives-tale?  Which one makes more horsepower, gives better = throttle response, etc?  It seems to me that fabrication of intake manifold = would be easier for injectors near the TB.

 

Apparently there are benefits of = port injection (‘cause that’s what the production engine uses) = but I don’t know what they are..

 

What are the pros and cons of = each?

 

 

BTW – Happy Birthday Ed = :)!

 

From: = Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Lynn Hanover
Sent: Saturday, February = 13, 2010 08:09
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] = Runner velocity

 

 

This is a free download of the Bernoulli Principal. Fun to play = with and educational.

 

The amount of fuel air entering the chamber is a function of = runner cross section, velocity and time.

 

The depression, or vacuum generated is a function of = displacement and RPM. So the depression is about fixed by the 2606CCs and say, 6,000 RPM. = The "M" in RPM is the time. = So............

 

That leaves only Porting to increase intake open and closing = time, (lengthen time period) and manufacturing the ideal intake runner set/ = Throttle body combination.

 

In my mind the runner size would be identical the the port = opening for 4 to 6 inches out from the port opening. Then blend into one = "D" shaped pipe for the 180 bend over the engine top. Then taper to a larger = pipe of about 2 1/2" to blend into a plenum just big enough to fit the = throttle body mounting plate.

 

So, the cross section would be reduced gradually from the = throttle body to the end of the "D" shape, then remain constant right up to = the port opening.

 

I would upset the inside radius of the "D" shape with = a number of burs stood up with a three corner punch, to generate some tubulance.in order to keep flow = attached.

 

Just a guess. I could be completely = wrong.

 

Later, I tried a 75MM at one point = and while it did nothing to improve engine power and performance, in my case = it had an undesirable down side – now to be fair it could have been = partially the results of having all 4 injectors back near the throttle body = – but in any case, if you suddenly opened the throttle like in a panic = go-a-round – the engine would bog and hesitate for a fraction of a second = (seemed like minutes {:>)), the engine never stopped, but I just didn’t = like it.  So I went back to the 65mm.

 

So the important thing is to match your induction system to = your real operating regime – NOT what you would in your wildest dream = like for it to  be {:>).

 

Ed Anderson

 

You are only 70?? =

Run hard and put away wet comes to mind..............

 

Lynn E. = Hanover

------=_NextPart_000_0046_01CAAC88.FA2CCC10--