X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 10:43:53 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from HQEMGATE03.nvidia.com ([216.228.112.143] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c5) with ESMTP id 942245 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 12 May 2005 21:38:37 -0400 Received-SPF: neutral receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.228.112.143; envelope-from=colyncase@earthlink.net Received: from hqemfe02.nvidia.com (Not Verified[172.16.227.92]) by HQEMGATE03.nvidia.com id ; Thu, 12 May 2005 18:41:28 -0700 Received: from thelma.nvidia.com ([172.16.228.84]) by hqemfe02.nvidia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Thu, 12 May 2005 18:37:53 -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 SAA05254 for ; Thu, 12 May 2005 18:37:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-Message-ID: <0fd101c5575c$616899e0$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 18:37:44 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0FCE_01C55721.B10A0B90" 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: 13 May 2005 01:37:53.0727 (UTC) FILETIME=[61AD1CF0:01C5575C] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0FCE_01C55721.B10A0B90 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > The PRIMARY reason for using 8.5:1 CR on the 550 with turbo=92s is = to manage > the TIT. Not Hp. They also do get a bit more efficient. > =20 > The gain in fundamental Carnot efficiency from going from 8.5 to = 10:1 > compressions is really pretty small. This is an area with a rapidly > declining rate of return. George, thanks for that. I didn't realize the efficiency curve is getting = towards flat after 8.5:1 Does this mean that the only reason diesels are 22:1 is that it takes = that much to get the fuel to burn? anyway, in regards to HP. In practice, if you are TIT temp limited and = you find a way to lower the TIT then you can get more HP, right? I haven't run my = TSIO-550 yet but I'm guessing it will be TIT limited, (or CHT limited partly because = of radiation from the exhaust ....yeah I'm trying to get those heat shields on....) Colyn ------=_NextPart_000_0FCE_01C55721.B10A0B90 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> The PRIMARY reason for = using =20 8.5:1 CR on the 550 with turbo=92s is to manage
> the =20 TIT. Not Hp. They also do get a bit more=20 efficient.
>
> The gain in fundamental = Carnot=20 efficiency from going from 8.5 to 10:1
> compressions is = really=20 pretty small. This is an area with a rapidly
> = declining rate=20 of return.

George,

thanks for = that. I didn't=20 realize the efficiency curve is getting towards flat after = 8.5:1

Does this mean that the only reason = diesels are=20 22:1 is that it takes that much to get

the fuel to burn?

anyway, in regards to HP. In = practice, if you=20 are TIT temp limited and you find a way

to lower the TIT then you can get more = HP,=20 right? I haven't run my TSIO-550 yet

but I'm guessing it will be TIT = limited, (or CHT=20 limited partly because of radiation from

the exhaust ....yeah I'm trying to get = those heat=20 shields on....)

Colyn

------=_NextPart_000_0FCE_01C55721.B10A0B90--