Return-Path: Received: from [24.25.9.103] (HELO ms-smtp-04-eri0.southeast.rr.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.8) with ESMTP id 616434 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 21 Jan 2005 13:35:08 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.103; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from edward2 (cpe-024-074-185-127.carolina.rr.com [24.74.185.127]) by ms-smtp-04-eri0.southeast.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.7) with SMTP id j0LIYYCi019612 for ; Fri, 21 Jan 2005 13:34:35 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001801c4ffe8$2757d660$2402a8c0@edward2> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Pport/cold side injectors Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 13:36:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0015_01C4FFBE.3E4ADFE0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C4FFBE.3E4ADFE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ok, Jerry I had very limited exposure to what Everett was doing, but my = understanding was that the placement of the throttle plate right next to = the port was to cure the horrid low rpm idle problem with the PP and did = not necessarily have to do with throttle response. If the injectors = are far up stream from the port then it will take some time X after you = open the throttle plate (and assuming your manifold pressure sensor is = near the throttle plate/port) for the decrease in manifold pressure to = be registered by the sensor/cpu and correction made to the injector = timing to inject more fuel (admittedly short period of time), then the = fuel must be injected and flow down stream past the throttle plate and = into the port, compressed and fired. =20 That all takes time with the difference between injectors close to port = and far - driving the distance/time it takes for the new fuel mixture to = travel to the combustion chamber. A rough calculation indicates that = with an average intake velocity of 150 fps and with injectors 2 feet = from the intake port that it would take approx 13 milliseconds, just for = the fuel travel (not counting sensing/computing time). At 6000 rpm the = rotation time is 10 milliseconds, therefore it is likely that one or two = revs will not have the corrected fuel mixture as they will sense the new = throttle opening immediately as an increase in manifold pressure (they = don't wait on no computation) , but the new fuel won't get there for = approx 13 Ms or perhaps slightly more. =20 I believe you will find that the closeness of the throttle plate to the = port may have little effect on throttle response, if your injectors are = far up stream - but, like I said, with limited exposure to what Everett = was doing, I could certainly be wrong, but just though I would throw it = up for consideration. Ed A ----- Original Message -----=20 From: "Jerry Hey" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 12:28 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Pport/cold side injectors > Ed, Having the throttle plate right at the port is supposed to take=20 > care of the throttle response. That is what Alan and Everett came up=20 > with. It does make intuitive sense that starting might be problem = with=20 > the injectors some distance away. Jerry > On Friday, January 21, 2005, at 12:14 PM, Ed Anderson wrote: >=20 > > Jerry, > > > > Despite the seeming evidence of cold side problems - its all = relative.=20 > > On > > one version of my intake I had all four injectors 24" away from the=20 > > intake > > port. I had no problem flying with it or producing power with my NA = > > turbo > > block. In fact, it seemed based on a smidgen of data that I might = be > > getting 1/2 gallon/hr better economy (not conclusively proven),=20 > > however, the > > downside I found were three fold: > > > > 1. The throttle response was not to my taste - it would bog, if the > > throttle was opened too suddenly. Some may feel that you shouldn't=20 > > need to > > ask for that kind of response from an aircraft engine - but, Scotty, = > > when I > > want more power - I WANT MORE POWER NOW! > > > > 2. Starting on cold mornings were horrid, ran the battery down a=20 > > couple of > > times. Now, my "Plugs Up" installation might have contributed to = that > > problem as the normal orientation any liquid fuel will run down into = > > the > > chamber where it might stand a chance of turning into vapor (or=20 > > flooding the > > engine), whereas my fuel would have to be lifted vertically. > > > > 3. It did appear that I could not lean out the engine quite as much = > > without > > it starting to stumble, it seem to take approx 1/2 GPH fuel flow to=20 > > keep > > that from happening - might have been evidence of some distillation = -=20 > > but, > > who knows, could have been something else like fuel wetting out on = the > > walls. I know this seems in conflict with point #2, but that's = what > > occurred. > > > > So I went back to all four injectors less than 3" from the ports.=20 > > However, > > there was no reason why I could not have continued to fly with that=20 > > set up - > > except for personal perferences. That rotary will do well even on=20 > > less than > > optimum configuration. > > > > Ed A > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jerry Hey" > > To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" > > Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 11:32 AM > > Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Pport/cold side injectors > > > > > >> Ernest, that your analysis is impressive. I've just reread it = again. > >> I'm committed to trying with the cold side injectors but if it = does > >> not work, I will understand why. The upside is that if they don't > >> work we can lay the idea to rest, accept hot side fuel as the = only > >> way and work on making it safe through proper shielding. This is = > >> one > >> of the "little" things us p porters have to work out. Thanks, =20 > >> Jerry > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Friday, January 21, 2005, at 11:04 AM, Ernest Christley wrote: > >> > >>> On Fri, 2005-01-21 at 10:23, Ed Anderson wrote: > >>>> Wow! Ok, Ernest > >>>> > >>>> Certainly sounds plausible that long runners would contribute to = the > >>>> separation of the wheat and chaff. I wish I could remember what = my > >>>> professors taught me in those long ago days. Perhaps if I had day > >>>> dreamed > >>>> less and studied harder......Nah!!! > >>>> > >>> > >>> I took only one other thing away from that class. > >>> > >>> What has LEAD got to do with octane? It's a metal. It doesn't = burn. > >>> Why would anyone put it in their gas? > >>> > >>> Well, it turns out, the light (less carbons per chain) molecules = are > >>> easier to atomize (convert to a semi-gaseous state by spraying=20 > >>> through > >>> a > >>> small orifice). If you want a nice compact carberator/intake = system, > >>> you need lots of those short chains. The down side is, those = short > >>> chains don't have a lot of energy and tend to want to burn on = there=20 > >>> on > >>> when exposed to the pressure inside a cylinder. What you want is > >>> something that will atomize like the short chain, but burn = smoothly > >>> like > >>> the medium length ones. > >>> > >>> Enter LEAD, stage right. > >>> > >>> Lead has four bonding points. Mix some with your gas, and each = lead > >>> atom will attach to one end of 4 different carbon chains. = Remember, > >>> the > >>> chain only burns when the end is exposed to oxygen? Well, now one = > >>> end > >>> is locked down. If the fuel started out as pure mixture of 4 = carbon > >>> chains, and you mixed just the right amount of lead, you'll end up = > >>> with > >>> a batch of molecules shaped like a plus sign (+). Each arm of the = > >>> plus > >>> will be 4 chains long. The oxygen can only get at the ends, so = this > >>> mixture will burn like 100 Octane (ie, 100% Octane). > >>> > >>> And my last point. Higher octane is not always better. High = octane=20 > >>> is > >>> good for turbo applications, because is has a slower burn rate. = But > >>> you > >>> want the burn to occur so that the maximum pressure is in the = chamber > >>> at > >>> the highest torque point of the cylinder/rotor rotation. Not = before > >>> and > >>> not after. If you're running exceedingly high RPM in a non-turbo > >>> application, LOWER octane may actually produce more power. In = this > >>> situation, the higher octane stuff may still be burning well into = the > >>> exhaust cylce. > >>> > >>> Now, I'm done. My brain is empty. > >>> > >>>>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > >>>>> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html > >>> > >> > >> > >>>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > >>>> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html > > > > > > > >>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > >>> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html > > >=20 >=20 > >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html > ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C4FFBE.3E4ADFE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ok, Jerry
 
I had very limited exposure to what = Everett was=20 doing, but my understanding was that the placement of the throttle = plate=20 right next to the port was to cure the horrid low rpm idle problem = with the=20 PP and did not necessarily have  to do with throttle = response. =20 If the injectors are far up stream from the port then it will take some = time X=20 after you open the throttle plate (and assuming your manifold pressure = sensor is=20 near the throttle plate/port) for the decrease in manifold pressure to = be=20 registered by the sensor/cpu and correction made to the injector timing = to=20 inject more fuel (admittedly short period of time), then the fuel must = be=20 injected and flow down stream past the throttle plate and into the port, = compressed and fired. 
 
That all takes time with the difference = between=20 injectors close to port and far - driving the distance/time it = takes for=20 the new fuel mixture to travel to the combustion chamber.  A rough=20 calculation indicates that with an average = intake=20 velocity of 150 fps and with injectors 2 feet from the intake port that = it would=20 take approx 13 milliseconds, just for the fuel travel (not counting=20 sensing/computing time).  At 6000 rpm the rotation time is 10 = milliseconds,=20 therefore it is likely that one or two revs will not have the corrected = fuel=20 mixture as they will sense the new throttle opening immediately as an = increase=20 in manifold pressure (they don't wait on no computation) , but the new = fuel=20 won't get there for approx 13 Ms or perhaps slightly more.  =
 
I believe you will find that the = closeness of the=20 throttle plate to the port may have little effect on throttle response, = if your=20 injectors are far up stream - but, like I said, with limited = exposure to=20 what Everett was doing, I could certainly be wrong, but just though I = would=20 throw it up for consideration.
 
Ed A
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Hey" <j-winddesigns@thegrid.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" = <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 12:28=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Pport/cold = side=20 injectors

> Ed, Having the throttle plate right at the port is = supposed to take=20
> care of the throttle response.  That is what Alan and = Everett came=20 up
> with.  It does make intuitive sense that starting might = be=20 problem with
> the injectors some distance away.  = Jerry
> On=20 Friday, January 21, 2005, at 12:14  PM, Ed Anderson wrote:
> =
>=20 > Jerry,
> >
> > Despite the seeming evidence of = cold side=20 problems - its all relative.
> >  On
> > one = version of=20 my intake I had all four injectors 24" away from the
> >=20 intake
> > port.  I had no problem flying with it or = producing=20 power with my NA
> > turbo
> > block.  In fact, = it=20 seemed based on a smidgen of data that I might be
> > getting = 1/2=20 gallon/hr better economy (not conclusively proven),
> > = however,=20 the
> > downside I found were three  fold:
> = >
>=20 > 1.  The throttle response was not to my taste - it would bog, = if=20 the
> > throttle was opened too suddenly.  Some may feel = that you=20 shouldn't
> > need to
> > ask for that kind of = response from=20 an aircraft engine - but, Scotty,
> > when I
> > want = more=20 power - I WANT MORE POWER NOW!
> >
> > 2.  = Starting on=20 cold mornings were horrid, ran the battery down a
> > couple=20 of
> > times.  Now, my "Plugs Up" installation might have=20 contributed to that
> > problem as the normal orientation any = liquid=20 fuel will run down into
> > the
> > chamber where it = might=20 stand a chance of turning into vapor (or
> > flooding = the
> >=20 engine), whereas my fuel would have to be lifted vertically.
>=20 >
> > 3.  It did appear that I could not lean out the = engine=20 quite as much
> > without
> > it starting to stumble, = it seem=20 to take approx 1/2 GPH fuel flow to
> > keep
> > that = from=20 happening - might have been evidence of some distillation -
> = >=20 but,
> > who knows, could have been something else like fuel = wetting=20 out on the
> > walls.   I know this seems in conflict = with=20 point #2, but that's what
> > occurred.
> >
> = > So I=20 went back to all four injectors less than 3" from the ports.
> = >=20 However,
> > there was no reason why I could not have continued = to fly=20 with that
> > set up -
> > except for personal=20 perferences.  That rotary will do well even on
> > less=20 than
> > optimum configuration.
> >
> > Ed = A
>=20 >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > = From:=20 "Jerry Hey" <j-winddesigns@thegrid.net>
> > To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
> > Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 11:32 = AM
> >=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Pport/cold side injectors
> >
>=20 >
> >> Ernest, that your analysis is impressive. I've = just reread=20 it again.
> >> I'm committed to trying with the cold side=20 injectors  but if it does
> >> not work,  I will=20 understand why.  The upside is that if they don't
> >> = work we=20 can lay the   idea to rest,  accept hot side fuel as the=20 only
> >> way  and work on making it safe through = proper=20 shielding.   This is
> >> one
> >> of = the=20 "little" things us p porters have to work out.    = Thanks, =20
> >> Jerry
> >>
> >>
>=20 >>
> >>
> >> On Friday, January 21, 2005, = at=20 11:04  AM, Ernest Christley wrote:
> >>
> = >>> On=20 Fri, 2005-01-21 at 10:23, Ed Anderson wrote:
> >>>> = Wow! Ok,=20 Ernest
> >>>>
> >>>> Certainly = sounds=20 plausible that long runners would contribute to the
> = >>>>=20 separation of the wheat and chaff.  I wish I could remember what = my
>=20 >>>> professors taught me in those long ago days. Perhaps if = I had=20 day
> >>>> dreamed
> >>>> less and = studied=20 harder......Nah!!!
> >>>>
> >>>
> = >>> I took only one other thing away from that class.
>=20 >>>
> >>> What has LEAD got to do with = octane? =20 It's a metal.  It doesn't burn.
> >>> Why would = anyone put=20 it in their gas?
> >>>
> >>> Well, it = turns out,=20 the light (less carbons per chain) molecules are
> >>> = easier to=20 atomize (convert to a semi-gaseous state by spraying
> = >>>=20 through
> >>> a
> >>> small = orifice).  If you=20 want a nice compact carberator/intake system,
> >>> you = need lots=20 of those short chains.  The down side is, those short
> = >>>=20 chains don't have a lot of energy and tend to want to burn on there =
>=20 >>> on
> >>> when exposed to the pressure inside = a=20 cylinder.  What you want is
> >>> something that = will=20 atomize like the short chain, but burn smoothly
> >>>=20 like
> >>> the medium length ones.
> = >>>
>=20 >>> Enter LEAD, stage right.
> >>>
> = >>>=20 Lead has four bonding points.  Mix some with your gas, and each=20 lead
> >>> atom will attach to one end of 4 different = carbon=20 chains.  Remember,
> >>> the
> >>> = chain only=20 burns when the end is exposed to oxygen?  Well, now one
>=20 >>> end
> >>> is locked down.  If the fuel = started=20 out as pure mixture of 4 carbon
> >>> chains, and you = mixed just=20 the right amount of lead, you'll end up
> >>> = with
>=20 >>> a batch of molecules shaped like a plus sign (+).  = Each arm of=20 the
> >>> plus
> >>> will be 4 chains = long. =20 The oxygen can only get at the ends, so this
> >>> = mixture will=20 burn like 100 Octane (ie, 100% Octane).
> >>>
>=20 >>> And my last point.  Higher octane is not always = better. =20 High octane
> >>> is
> >>> good for turbo = applications, because is has a slower burn rate.  But
> = >>>=20 you
> >>> want the burn to occur so that the maximum = pressure is=20 in the chamber
> >>> at
> >>> the highest = torque=20 point of the cylinder/rotor rotation.  Not before
> = >>>=20 and
> >>> not after.  If you're running exceedingly = high RPM=20 in a non-turbo
> >>> application, LOWER octane may = actually=20 produce more power.  In this
> >>> situation, the = higher=20 octane stuff may still be burning well into the
> >>> = exhaust=20 cylce.
> >>>
> >>> Now, I'm done.  My = brain=20 is empty.
> >>>
> >>>>> =20 Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
>=20 >>>>>  Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html> >>>
> >>
> = >>
>=20 >>>>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
>=20 >>>>  Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html> >
> >
> >
> = >>> =20 Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
>=20 >>>  Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html> >
>
>
> >>  = Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
>=20 >>  Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html> ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C4FFBE.3E4ADFE0--