|
|
Thanks for the feed back and real-world comparison, Ernest.
I use a 0.55 BSFC figure which may be a bit conservative (gives a higher fuel burn than actual), but I intentionally went conservative in many of those types of choices for the spreadsheet - I figured the builder had excessive optimism that needed to be compensated for {:>)
So the difference may not be in noise of your data but the conservative lean of the spreadsheet.
Ed
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Ernest Christley" <echristley@att.net>
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2012 11:12 PM
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: [flyRotary] Spreadsheet Fuel Section
Ed, I've been trying to calculate my fuel flow and compare that to what the spreadsheet gives.
I'm running four 460cc/min injectors in two banks. For this paricular log sample, bank1 has pulsewidth of 5.251ms and the second bank is firing for 4.001ms. With a MAP at 28.5" (96.4kPa) and an intake temp of 91, the engine is spinning 5550RPM with an AFR of 13.1.
Using the fuel flow numbers I have, I should be burning 12.48gph. The spreadsheet says the number would be 12.8gph. Given that these data logs have a bit of noise, I call that good nuff' for gubment work.
--
Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2197 / Virus Database: 2437/5226 - Release Date: 08/26/12
|
|