X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao101.cox.net ([68.230.241.45] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.8) with ESMTP id 3203016 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 07 Oct 2008 10:53:47 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.45; envelope-from=alventures@cox.net Received: from fed1rmimpo03.cox.net ([70.169.32.75]) by fed1rmmtao101.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20081007145310.EXDX6175.fed1rmmtao101.cox.net@fed1rmimpo03.cox.net> for ; Tue, 7 Oct 2008 10:53:10 -0400 Received: from BigAl ([72.192.137.74]) by fed1rmimpo03.cox.net with bizsmtp id PqtA1a0061cVYgg04qtAU3; Tue, 07 Oct 2008 10:53:10 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=EuD6IyuIj20A:10 a=k1Fz6OFSlNrI0cICXkgA:9 a=XoO2duSHoFj1ieQnDZcA:7 a=v56YLVw0XkaqBM4Sda_bKriGjcUA:4 a=gJcimI5xSWUA:10 a=y1jzILtoPNzWfnHMP5MA:9 a=4sVA7yBYPcOAZ_QylFoA:7 a=MveFrftDwCL-ZcLJxDAJGArLqogA:4 a=AfD3MYMu9mQA:10 X-CM-Score: 0.00 From: "Al Gietzen" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Question on EM-2 autotune Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 07:54:21 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0000_01C92851.E8C3AE10" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C92851.E8C3AE10 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 Bill; =20 Don't know if you've had an answer to this question or not; but I have observed the same and recall discussing it with Tracy. Unfortunately, I don't recall for sure why it is, but it does not mean it is not tracking correctly. I think it has to do with the calibration of the MAP readout (EM2)verses what the MAP sensor in the EC2 is actually using to = determine the table position. They don't have to correspond, as long as the table entry it is using is set to the right value you're in good shape. =20 Al G =20 My question is that line 1 and 3 show the same value, I.e. the same = location in the MAP table, but lines 2 and 4 are showing different values for the manifold pressure. For example, =20 MAP location 9 showed 14.5 on the line 2, and 16.0 on line 4. =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C92851.E8C3AE10 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 

Bill;

 

Don’t know if you’ve = had an answer to this question or not; but I have observed the = same and recall = discussing it with Tracy.  Unfortunately, I don’t recall for sure why it = is, but it does not mean it is not tracking correctly.  I think it has to = do with the calibration of the MAP readout (EM2)verses what the MAP sensor in = the EC2 is actually using to determine the table position.  They = don’t have to correspond, as long as the table entry it is using is set to the = right value you’re in good shape.

 

Al G

 

My question is that line 1 and 3 show the same value, I.e. the same location in the MAP table, but lines 2 and 4 are showing different values for the manifold pressure. For = example,

 

MAP location 9 showed 14.5 on the line 2, and 16.0 on line = 4.

 

------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C92851.E8C3AE10--