Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Message #45345
From: Fred Moreno <fredmoreno@optusnet.com.au>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: GAMI Injectors - More questions for Walter
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 08:59:31 -0500
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>

Many thanks to all that responded to my post.  The discussion is most enlightening.  And there is nothing like actual operational experience to correct nebulous speculations.  Thanks also to Walter who pointed out my fuzzy thinking that was blending atomization and vaporization.  They are separate processes.

 

More questions:

 

 

1)  The turbo injectors do not have screens like the NA injectors do.  They have air inlets from an upper deck reference line.  Scott is using those.

 

Do the turbo injectors have better air passages that allow them to do a better atomization job than the normally aspirated injectors, even when installed in a normally aspirated engine?  Said another way, for the same delta P do the screens on the NA injectors restrict air flow compared to the turbo injectors with their air shroud and supply line?

 

2) The delta air pressure is most important at WOT...  A delta P of 3" Hg is adequate to result in excellent fuel atomization to aid in vaporization.  More pressure does not necessarily make things better.

 

OK, let’s see what might be possible with a normally aspirated engine.  The ram pressure at 200 KIAS is about 2 inches Hg, give or take.  Let’s assume you get 100% of this for the fuel injector air flow using a nice pitot tube set up like Scott’s.  And let’s assume that the engine induction system gets about 75% of this for a little manifold pressure boost at WOT, this being a typical figure for a good diffuser taking in induction air.  Then the difference of 0.5 inch Hg is available for atomization.  This is clearly better than zero, but a lot less than 3” Hg.  So might one make further improvements in atomization by somehow boosting the injector air flow?  (The mind boggles….)  Or is 0.5 inches Hg enough at WOT cruise?

 

3) Mark wrote: I cobbled together a similar arrangement to supply ram air to the injector shrouds. I can't say I see a bunch of speed improvement as I'm not one for careful analytical testing.  I can say - the improvement in engine smoothness when running LOP in high altitude cruise is DRAMATIC.

 

Please tell us more about your set up, Mark.  Is your engine induction air coming from a separate scoop than the cooling air?  Does your cooling air come through small inlet ports in the cowl?  Which engine?

 

Here is why I ask.  If you have a good induction air inlet that is getting a high percentage of the ram air pressure, and smaller cooling air inlet ports that do a lesser job at recovering the ram pressure, then it is entirely possible that your manifold pressure is higher than the cooling air pressure surrounding the normally aspirated injectors. 

 

This “reverse pressure delta P” would reverse the injector air flow, and may cause the blue staining that was mentioned around the NA injectors.  It would also cause poor atomization that becomes most evident operating LOP. 

 

But if you now add a pitot set up like Scott’s, you get more air pressure fed to the injectors, and you restore the injector air flow to the way it should be – air flowing into the intake manifold instead of out of it.  Atomization improves and your ability to lean further improves as a result.  Do you think that may have been happening on your plane?

 

The reason I persist on this topic is that for those of us using IO-550’s in Legacy or ES (or rare birds like me, in an LIV) where induction air is coming from inside the cowl, there may be a lot to learn that could improve our cruise efficiency, particularly worthwhile with 5 buck avgas.

 

 

I see another test program looming on the horizon…..

 

 

Still Curious Fred

Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster