|
|
I had two manifold pressure takeoffs on
the intake manifold plenum that went to the two pressure inlets on the EC-2.
after all this talk about pulses, I thought, the two lines are different
lengths, so if there are pulses…. I then “T”ed the two
lines into a fuel filter and “T”ed them back out to the two inlets
on the EC-2. no change that I could tell, but what ever was there before
has been blended and damped.
Bill B
From: Rotary motors in aircraft
[mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On
Behalf Of Rino
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010
11:54 AM
To: Rotary
motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EM2
Numbers
I use a small manifold to smooth out the induction pulses,
before that the pulses would affect the pressure reading and probably the
computer also.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, November
02, 2010 12:03 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re:
EM2 Numbers
Ed,
I measure the manifold pressure at the unused oil injection ports in
the rotor housings. The EM-2 MAP reads in the upper 20's while at WOT, so
I don't think I have a problem with this. The MCT was as received, which
was set up for Tracy's
injectors. I assume they were 460cc, but that's just a guess. I'm
running 60# DEKA IV injectors. Could there possibly be an impedance
mismatch between the two types?
Mark
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 9:09 AM, Ed Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>
wrote:
Injectors are certainly large enough - six injectors
at 60 lb/hr would give you a max flow rate capacity of around 58 gallons/hour -
far more than you are reporting fuel burn wise.
I guess what I am wondering is how your manifold pressure is
registering at WOT. The PP as I recall can have a problem providing
reliable/consistent manifold pressure - no good source? So exactly how is
your EC2/3 getting its manifold pressure signal ? What comes to
mind is that if there is a problem getting a good consistent manifold pressure
reading at WOT - could that possibly result in your injectors injecting less
than you would expect.
In other words, if manifold pressure was low relative to
what you would expect at WOT (near ambient) then turning up the manual mixture
control would only provide adjustment against the smaller target pulse duration
for that lower Manifold pressure rather than WOT manifold pressure.
Sent: Tuesday,
November 02, 2010 8:24 AM
Subject:
[FlyRotary] Re: EM2 Numbers
Hi Mark
Are you in a position to confirm your fuel rail pressure?
Fuel injected = Pulse width AND injector size AND fuel pressure.
On 02/11/2010, at 4:42 AM, Mark Steitle wrote:
As I recall the low end numbers are around -50ish. So there is
still room for adjustment. When running WOT, turning the mixture
knob full CW doesn't get the mixture bar to show up on the EM-2 screen. I
find this odd as I'm running 60# injectors. I guess that's why the low
end numbers are in the -50 range.
I'll post a question on the Lancair list regarding the most
efficient cruise speed for the Lancair ES airframe.
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Tracy
<tracy@rotaryaviation.com>
wrote:
"So,
if it is going LOP in those addresses, which it is, it would explain why
power drops off as I open the throttle to WOT."
That's new data to me. Yes, that would certainly cause a loss of
power. Are you able to compensate by turning up the mixture control?
Are the MAP table values at the low end above minimum value? The right
thing to do depends on these answers. If answer is yes to the 2nd
one, then you should bump up the value in Mode 3.
The most efficient point on most airframes is the point where the induced drag
curve crosses the parasitic drag curve. On RV's that happens at around an
indicated airspeed of 135 mph. It will probably be higher than that on a
Lancair but I've never seen the curves on that airplane.
Tracy
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Mark Steitle <msteitle@gmail.com>
wrote:
Having said that, I think there is
still a good possibility that your drop in power above 6000 is not due to
runner length.
I suspect it could be tuning as I've hit the max adjustment (+127)
on the EC-2 MCT for the addresses in the upper 20" range, so it looks like
I need to adjust the injector pulse width and then start over on the
tuning. So, if it is going LOP in those addresses, which it
is, it would explain why power drops off as I open the throttle to
WOT. I'll do more tuning when I get my updated EC-2 back. (will go
out in today's mail)
Where does one find the "most efficient operationg point" for
a particular airframe? Is this the same as LDmax?
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Tracy
<tracy@rotaryaviation.com>
wrote:
"The
lowest fuel burn per HP generated always occurs at the torque peak as that is
where the engine takes in the most amount of air for each revolution of the
engine. The VE is optimum. In other words it is the most efficient
operating point for the engine."
Mark,
That is the point of minimum pumping losses in the engine, NOT the most
overall efficient point of operation. It ignores the many
other factors that affect BSFC. If you look at Mazda's data on
BSFC, the best point is usually around 5000 rpm.
It also ignores the most efficient operating point of your airframe. If
you tune the engine for a higher rpm torque peak you WILL make more HP,
you will fly faster but you will burn a lot more fuel.
Having said that, I think there is still a good possibility that your drop in
power above 6000 is not due to runner length.
Tracy
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Mark Steitle <msteitle@gmail.com>
wrote:
Isn't the formula HP= (torque x rpm)/5252.
I'm more focused on peak Volumetric Efficiency (VE). According to
Fundamentals of Intake System Design,
(ACRE) "The lowest fuel burn per HP generated always occurs at the
torque peak as that is where the engine takes in the most amount of air for
each revolution of the engine. The VE is optimum. In other words it
is the most efficient operating point for the engine."
So, I will be good tuning for peak torque. Do you have
a dyno chart on your 20B that you will share? I find it interesting that
your intake runners are only 13".
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Al Gietzen
<ALVentures@cox.net>
wrote:
Keep in mind that the graph is peak torque (T)); not peak HP.
The peak HP (which is what you’re after would be at higher
rpm. HP = T x RPM
Al
-----Original Message-----
From: Rotary
motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]
On Behalf Of stevei@carey.asn.au
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010
1:09 AM
To: Rotary
motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EM2
Numbers
Hi Mark
I have attached the Leman intake dimensions from Paul L.
Hope this is helpful. Can't remember whether this measurement was to
the rotor face or manifold face.
<image001.gif>
On 01/11/2010, at 8:40 AM, Mark Steitle wrote:
I understand the sausage illustration. But if what you
propose were true, then why did Mazda make such a major effort to design
and implement the variable intake on their LeMans 26B p-port motor?
That tells me that runner length does make a significant difference
on the p-port motor. Also, if tuned runners didn't matter for peripheral
ports, then why do they tune the exhaust runners on the 13B's? Somewhere
I have a chart showing the effect of runner length, but I'm not sure
that the data is from a p-port motor.
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 7:27 PM, Bill Bradburry <bbradburry@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
Mark,
I don’t think that will work with
the PP. You never actually block the inlet. You just cut off the
end of the flow of air as the apex flies by and it starts to fill the next
chamber. Think of the flow as a long sausage that is going through a
propeller made of a strand of wire 2 or 3 MM thick and being cut into
sections. It is never blocked. I doubt that there are any
reflections and if there are, they would be very small and of little benefit to
enhance.
I think that is why the PP is so much
stronger than the side port.
Bill B
From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]
On Behalf Of Mark Steitle
Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2010
8:01 PM
To: Rotary
motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EM2
Numbers
Sorry for the delayed reply, but I had to go to the hangar and measure
the runner length to be sure. It is 24" bellmouth to rotor face,
2" OD. Exhaust is 2" OD also, running the stock 20b exhaust
splitters.
So, my power seems to peak around 6000 rpm. What length intake
runner length would it take to bring peak power up to around 6500
rpm?
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 3:53 PM, George Lendich <lendich@aanet.com.au>
wrote:
That's interesting; can you tell me
what is your PP size, runner length and exhaust header ID size.
Sent: Saturday,
October 30, 2010 7:38 PM
Subject:
[FlyRotary] Re: EM2 Numbers
Bill,
With the current setup, it appears to be around 6000-6100, but I'm
still tuning on the upper addresses of the EC-2. My old engine did best
around 6500-6600 running the same prop. So, I feel there is something
that isn't quite right on the new P-Port motor... maybe intake runners too
short, intake or exhaust too restrictive, timing off a bit, etc. It
definitely makes more hp than the old motor did in the 5000-6000 range, but I
feel that it should be producing more hp than I'm seeing in the 6000-7000
range.
So, things are still developing. Yesterday, I reinstalled the old
air-filter box which has a ram-air feature incorporated into the design.
I haven't flown it yet to see if there is any improvement, but I hope to
see at least a little improvement.
On a side note, I have determined that there is a 250 rpm discrepancy
between the rpm readout of the EM-2 and that of the M/T prop controller.
I have an optical tach that I will be using to determine which one is in
error.
Stay tuned (no pun intended),
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Bill Bradburry <bbradburry@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
Mark,
It would seem that if you flattened the
pitch of the prop, the engine rpms would increase, but at some point, you would
begin to lose airspeed and start to slow down because the prop was just not
taking a big enough bite. Conversely, it seems that if you increased the
prop pitch, the engine rpms would decrease, but the airspeed would increase up
to some point and then after that, an increase in pitch would cause a decrease
in airspeed because you are taking too big a bite and the engine just can not
pull it. Somewhere in there is a “Sweet Spot” of propeller
rpm that gives the highest airspeed. Lets say that this question assumes
that you are at WOT and 8500 feet, which should give you roughly a 75% power
output. Do you know where that sweet spot is with your propeller?
Bill B
From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]
On Behalf Of Mark Steitle
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010
10:00 PM
To: Rotary
motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] EM2 Numbers
Rotarians,
Things have been a bit quiet on the list lately, so I thought I would
post this picture of my EM-2 taken on a trip from Galveston,
TX (KGLS) to Lockhart, TX
(50R) yesterday. I was level at 8500msl when taking the picture.
A/C is a Lancair ES (4-place), engine is a n/a p-ported 20b.
Please disregard the oil temp as the reading on the EM-2 is measured
after the first cooler and before the second cooler. Oil temp readings
out of the second cooler (measured at the oil filter pad) track water temps
within a few degrees.
Leaned to "Economy Cruise" and dial the prop down to 1800 rpm
and the speed drops down about 15 mph and fuel burn drops to 9.1 gph. You
pay dearly for that 15 mph but sometimes it is just too much fun to slow down.
Mark S.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
The contents of this email are confidential
and intended only for the named recipients of this e-mail. If you have received
this e-mail in error, you are hereby notified that any use, reproduction,
disclosure or distribution or the information contained in this e-mail is
prohibited. Please notify the sender immediately and then delete/destroy the
e-mail and any printed copies. All liability for viruses is excluded to the
fullest extent of the law.
|
|