X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 12:16:27 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from HQEMGATE01.nvidia.com ([216.228.112.170] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c5) with ESMTP id 941395 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 12 May 2005 11:58:54 -0400 Received-SPF: neutral receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.228.112.170; envelope-from=colyncase@earthlink.net Received: from hqemfe03.nvidia.com (Not Verified[172.16.227.123]) by HQEMGATE01.nvidia.com id ; Thu, 12 May 2005 08:58:08 -0700 Received: from thelma.nvidia.com ([172.16.228.84]) by hqemfe03.nvidia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Thu, 12 May 2005 08:57:53 -0700 Received: from ccaselt (cvpn2-4-100.nvidia.com [10.2.4.100]) by thelma.nvidia.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA23850 for ; Thu, 12 May 2005 08:58:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-Message-ID: <033301c5570b$63b99290$6904020a@nvidia.com> From: "colyncase on earthlink" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Plasma III on Hi Compression Engines X-Original-Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 08:58:06 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0330_01C556D0.B6602DF0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Original-Return-Path: colyncase@earthlink.net X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 May 2005 15:57:53.0247 (UTC) FILETIME=[5AF946F0:01C5570B] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0330_01C556D0.B6602DF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If I got my APS stuff right, the only really bad thing about a higher CR = is that your engine will last even less long if you mismanage it. = However, it seems that if you are rigorously keeping your peak pressures = way beyond TDC (e.g. 16 or more degrees) then high CR isn't going to = hurt you. The pressure difference between correctly manage high CR = and correctly managed standard CR should be at most (high CR/low CR) or = 20%. But the (peak) pressure difference between 50 df LOP and 25 df = ROP is 100% or more? Colyn ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Craig Berland=20 To: Lancair Mailing List=20 Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 8:24 AM Subject: [LML] Re: Plasma III on Hi Compression Engines "I put those two pieces of information together and reach the = conclusion that if there are ways to operate the engine at high power = but minimize the peak torsionals, then that method ought to be used. = I'm not sure I answered your question. If not, let me try again. = Regards, George" Yes you did answer my question...thanks. One more. How much of a = tight rope are we walking with the TSIO550 trying to balance peak = pressure and TIT? Well, two questions. I have discussed with some the = advisability of raising the compression ratio on the TSIO550 and I = advised against it. The quest for efficiency is outweighed by the quest = for durability. What do you think? A similar question. Would you = advise retarding the timing if Scot's engine was stock CR? Retard 2 to = 3 deg's more at 9 to 1 and 5 to 7 deg's more at 10 to 1??? If this is = so, then stock CR is the way to go. Finally let me say I believe there = are lots of variables that affect engine durability like oil type and = viscosity, engine component balance and prop balance to name a few. So = this is not a discussion on whether or not Scott or someone else should = run a given CR. I'm trying to isolate and understand a given engine = calibration feature and I'm most interested in the TSIO550. Craig Berland ------=_NextPart_000_0330_01C556D0.B6602DF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
If I got my APS stuff right, the only = really bad=20 thing about a higher CR is that your engine will last even less long if = you=20 mismanage it.   However, it seems that if you are rigorously = keeping=20 your peak pressures way beyond TDC (e.g. 16 or more degrees) then high = CR isn't=20 going to hurt you.    The pressure difference between = correctly=20 manage high CR and correctly managed standard CR should be at most (high = CR/low=20 CR) or 20%.     But the (peak) pressure difference = between 50 df=20 LOP and 25 df ROP is 100% or more?
 
Colyn
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Craig=20 Berland
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 = 8:24=20 AM
Subject: [LML] Re: Plasma III = on Hi=20 Compression Engines

"I put = those two=20 pieces of information together and reach the conclusion that if there = are ways=20 to operate the engine at high power but minimize the peak = torsionals, =20 then that method ought to be used. I=92m not = sure I=20 answered your question.  If not, let me try again. = Regards, =20 George"

Yes you did = answer my=20 question...thanks.  One more.  How much of a tight rope are = we=20 walking with the TSIO550 trying to balance peak pressure and = TIT?  Well,=20 two questions.  I have discussed with some the advisability of = raising=20 the compression ratio on the TSIO550 and I advised against it. The = quest for=20 efficiency is outweighed by the quest for durability. What do you = think? =20 A similar question.  Would you advise retarding the timing if = Scot's=20 engine was stock CR?  Retard 2 to 3 deg's more at 9 to 1 and = 5 to 7=20 deg's more at 10 to 1???  If this is so, then stock CR is = the way to=20 go. Finally let me say I believe there are lots of variables that = affect=20 engine durability like oil type and viscosity, engine component = balance and=20 prop balance to name a few. So this is not a discussion on whether or = not=20 Scott or someone else should run a given CR. I'm trying to isolate and = understand a given engine calibration feature and I'm most interested = in the=20 TSIO550.

Craig=20 Berland

------=_NextPart_000_0330_01C556D0.B6602DF0--