Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #52810
From: <Lehanover@aol.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: My favorite takeaway from the KY flyin: potential efficie...
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 10:45:18 EDT
To: <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
In a message dated 11/5/2010 1:50:41 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, shipchief@aol.com writes:
I had an intuitive impression that the injected fuel slows the passage of intake air, so shutting off one injector, preferably the one in the bigger intake port, could increase power by providing more air for combustion. If the other injector could flow enough fuel for the required power level?

 
 
If the injected fuel removes energy from the air flow, (Latent heat of evaporation), one result would be a reduction in velocity.
 
So, the second injector would inject into lowered velocity colder airflow. Vaporization would be less complete. Fuel flow per HP would be higher. Poorly vaporized fuel runs leaner, so more fuel is required to get a good F/A reading or a good EGT.
 
So, one super high pressure injector with a high "Pop" pressure, for great vaporization, and the installation of some excess energy would be closer to ideal, than 2 low pressure injectors. Less the redundancy for aircraft use.
 
Just a guess though.........
 
Lynn E. Hanover
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster