|
|
John Slade wrote:
Fellow turbo people,
I just had a conversation with Tracy while ordering my EM2.
We discussed ways to detect and limit overboost. I suggested that the EC2 is watching MAP anyway, so it could spot a user programmable boost limit - e.g. 50 MAP being exceeded, and cut the training coils until the MAP drops below it. At first glance Tracy felt this was fairly easy to do. He has the MAP data and control of the coils there anyway, so it would just be /a few lines of code/ [my words, not Tracy's] to implement. I agreed with Tracy to run it by the other blow hards to see if there was a consensus on whether this would be worth the effort on his end.
Opinions?
John Slade (for once, the term blowhards doesn't include Rusty)
I have some dyno data for a rotary car, 12A, ported, NA, 2x50mm TB, EFI, 87 octane fuel. We were in search of real world ground truth on timing (split, T&L identical, etc. ). I saw 165 RWHP with stock timing split, 167 RWHP firing them simultaneously and 163 w/ the trailing disabled though EGT was up ~50F. Leading disabled was a disaster - ~120 RWHP, EGTs up 200F, glowing headers. All power figures quoted are at 7500 RPM. The motivation for doing this little experiment was the fact that Mazda's LeMans winning efforts used 3 plugs per rotor and fired them simultaneously while using 80 octane fuel. Conclusion from our little test, sample quantity 1, is that you might get a touch more HP firing simultaneously. There is some literature that suggests the split timing is more for low and mid emissions purposes. It also showed that dropping the trailing affected HP very little, well within statistical jitter in our case. Dropping leading looked dangerous and seemed to suggest that more of the fuel was burning on the way out rather than providing combustion chamber/rotor pressure/power. I'm sure this would be a bad thing for you turbo folks! I know this is apples and oranges, but ... there ya go.
-Mike
|
|