X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from mx1.magmacom.com ([206.191.0.217] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.4) with ESMTPS id 1008218 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:21:10 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=206.191.0.217; envelope-from=ianddsl@magma.ca Received: from mail2.magma.ca (mail2.magma.ca [206.191.0.214]) by mx1.magmacom.com (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j5KNKJhu015264 for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:20:20 -0400 Received: from binky (ottawa-hs-64-26-156-111.s-ip.magma.ca [64.26.156.111]) by mail2.magma.ca (8.13.0/8.13.0) with SMTP id j5KNKGDF017933 for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:20:18 -0400 Reply-To: From: "Ian Dewhirst" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Fuel Injector Position Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:20:08 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0043_01C575CD.125939B0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0043_01C575CD.125939B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MessageHi Rusty, I think that part of the problem is that you did not have an enrichment circuit that briefly increased injector open time as a function of butterfly opening speed; same idea as an accel pump on a carburetor. If you look at TBI injection systems in automobiles ( or a v8 with a 4 bbl on a tunnel ram for that matter) they have longish runs and no hesitation problems. -----Original Message----- From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]On Behalf Of Russell Duffy Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 6:56 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fuel Injector Position Rusty, where were the butterflies located? Jerry Hi Jerry, I was using a TWM throttle body, with 4 injector pockets, so the injectors, and butterflies were both at about 30 inches from the ports. It's my understanding that the issue is with the injector distance, not the butterflies. It would be interesting to try putting only the secondaries at a distance, and make the staging point as high as you can. This would give you a nice cooling of the intake charge under full throttle ops, but maybe (key word) not hurt throttle response that much. This could be particularly useful for a turbo without an intercooler. FWIW, the cooling of the runners was significant. During my initial runs (in the summer), I shut the engine down a couple times to go look for leaks, since I was getting water drops on my canopy with the cowling off. Turns out, it was condensation on the intake runners that was blowing off, and they were cold to the touch. Cheers, Rusty (where the heck is Ed when you need him) ------=_NextPart_000_0043_01C575CD.125939B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
Hi=20 Rusty, I think that part of the problem is that you did not have an = enrichment=20 circuit that briefly increased injector open time as a function of=20 butterfly opening speed; same idea as an accel pump on a = carburetor.  If=20 you look at TBI injection systems in automobiles ( or a v8 with a 4 = bbl on a tunnel ram for that matter) they have longish runs = and no=20 hesitation problems.
 
 
 
 -----Original Message-----
From: Rotary motors in = aircraft=20 [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]On Behalf Of Russell=20 Duffy
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 6:56 PM
To: Rotary = motors=20 in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fuel Injector Position=20

Rusty, where were the butterflies located? Jerry 
 
Hi=20 Jerry,
 
I was using=20 a TWM throttle body, with 4 injector pockets, so the injectors, and=20 butterflies were both at about 30 inches from the ports.  It's my = understanding that the issue is with the injector distance, not = the=20 butterflies.  
 
It would be=20 interesting to try putting only the secondaries at a distance, and = make the=20 staging point as high as you can.  This would give you a nice = cooling of=20 the intake charge under full throttle ops, but maybe (key word) not = hurt=20 throttle response that much.  This could be particularly useful = for a=20 turbo without an intercooler. 
 
FWIW, the=20 cooling of the runners was significant.  During my initial runs = (in the=20 summer), I shut the engine down a couple times to go look for leaks, = since I=20 was getting water drops on my canopy with the cowling off.  Turns = out, it=20 was condensation on the intake runners that was blowing off, and they = were=20 cold to the touch. 
 
Cheers,
Rusty=20 (where the heck is Ed when you need=20 him)
------=_NextPart_000_0043_01C575CD.125939B0--