Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.63; envelope-from=colyncase@earthlink.net
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net;
  b=N31tQp57fHYppA5ho4L4h+P4AYrG/xswX0YERg+b3d8W2+2nEDtGYR9OexHefm1i;
  h=Received:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
Subject: Re: [LML] Discussed engine management with the team from Continental Motors
From: Colyn Case <colyncase@earthlink.net>
In-Reply-To: <list-6513152@logan.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2013 15:00:39 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <529BF0B5-952B-4279-88C6-F4022A9E8299@earthlink.net>
References: <list-6513152@logan.com>
To: "Lancair Mailing List" <lml@lancaironline.net>

Jeff,

I've been to Continental's presentation and I've been through APS.
I will only make this comment:    In 3 days of APS I was not able to ask =
a single question for which the answer was not backed up by data =
displayed at time of question, from actual tests performed by GAMI.   I =
would suggest attending and then put the Continental remarks in context. =
=20

Colyn

On Oct 12, 2013, at 7:00 PM, jeffrey liegner wrote:

LML PIlots,

At LOBO Greenville, I discussed engine management with the team from =
Continental Motors.  They provided their slides from their presentations =
(which I have reviewed) and I asked them many questions.  I communicated =
to Jeff Edwards that the group would definitely benefit from a group =
open forum discussing engine management settings commonly used, with =
opportunity for others to listen and others to explain why they do what =
they do, perhaps moderated by a Continental guy or GAMI people and/or an =
exemplary Lancair authority.  Old wives tales would be debunked, poor =
techniques would be scolded, and new settings could be integrated into =
all phases of flight for each individual.

One thing that was clearly stated by TCM: we should cruise at power =
setting no more than our Maximum Recommended Cruise.  If you don't have =
access to the TCM engine manual for turbocharged TSIO550 series engines, =
here's the link:

http://www.tcmlink.com/pdf2/MaintenanceManuals/OI-18/OI-18.pdf
CONTINENTAL=AE AIRCRAFT ENGINE PERMOLD SERIES ENGINE=20
ENGINE INSTALLATION AND OPERATION MANUAL=20

In my TSIO-550E, the maximum recommended cruise is 262 BHP @ 2500 RPM, =
which is 75% of 350HP.  Elsewhere in the manual, this Rich of Peak (ROP) =
operation (75%) is listed to be at 29GPH fuel flow (ROP).

Based on prior LML discussions with help from GAMI experts, and engine =
compression calculations, the Lean of Peak (LOP) fuel flow (GPH) to =
horsepower (HP) conversion ration for my TSIO550E is 13.73 HP/GPH (for =
7.5:1 compression ratio).  So LOP operations at 75% cruise (263HP) would =
be 19.15 GPH.

I will occassionally cruise at 2500/34.0"/19GPH, when the flight is =
three hours or less, which some at LOBO felt is TOO MUCH cruise power =
(not that this is still below 75% power).

I also occassionally cruise at 2500/31.5"/18 GPH, which is an OK setting =
for speed and economy.

For long flights (and super economy), I will cruise at =
2350/31.5"/16.3GPH (64%).  If facing a headwind, I'll give it more gas =
to 17.1GPH (67%).

I have noticed through a detailed study of indicated airspeed (IAS) at =
different prop RPM settins (2500-2540-2400-2350-2300) that the Hartzell =
Simitar 3-Blade prop's highest efficiency seems to be at 2350 RPM.  That =
is, IAS is best at same LOP fuel flows when the prop is turning 2350 =
RPM, independent of MAP.

I'm sharing these engine settings in case anyone has comments.

Interestingly, the TCM guy said that LOP operations is not correlated to =
HP, and that the fuel conversion HP/GPH is not a value measure of HP =
output.  His advice: best to use the graph provided in the manual (which =
is limited in RPM and not depicting LOP operations with precision).  He =
was saying that 19 GPH fuel flow at 34"/2500/19GPH is not the same HP =
engine output as 31.5"/2500/19GPH (still LOP at 19 GPH but closer to =
peak); this is different from what our friends at GAMI have said.

Comments welcomed.

Jeff L

--
For archives and unsub =
http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html