Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #8870
From: Russell Duffy <13brv3@bellsouth.net>
Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo boost limits in the EC2
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 08:02:42 -0500
To: 'Rotary motors in aircraft' <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Message

Yes, I tend to agree. Tracy - are you listening? Does this make sense to you? Anyone else care to comment? I'd really like to get something built into the EC2....soon. Regards, John

 
Like most everyone else, I don't like the fuel cut idea.  I still think something along the lines of an ignition retard would be best, but I have to admit to never trying that.  What we'd have to figure out is how much to retard it, and will this really work? 
 
Naturally, I have to mention that this should be considered a safety feature, and not something to be relied on daily.  I think the first priority should be to get an effective means of control of the turbo boost, which I commend several of you for trying to do. 
 
Once we get an effective wastegate, a normal pressure type controller will work fine, except that it will be a differential device, rather than being referenced to absolute pressure.  Here is where Tracy could provide electronic wastegate control, just as it's done in the FD.   In the car, to raise the pressure above the normal wastegate controller, they use a solenoid to create a "leak" in the pressurized line to the wastegate controller.  Since a solenoid is a "digital" device (either open or closed), the CPU sends a square wave pulse to control it.  The duty cycle of the pulse determines the average open time of the solenoid.  Since Tracy is already sensing the MAP, he could use that to provide a pulsed signal for a solenoid, that varies from 0-100% duty cycle.  This could also be done as a standalone unit I would think.  Maybe since Ed has all this time on his hands... :-)
 
Cheers,
Rusty (too deep for this early in the morning)




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