|
Hi! Leon
You make sense as usual, can you see any reason not to use in- tank
EFI pumps in a header tank instead of external units (I happen to have 4
in stock).
Georges B.
-------Original
Message-------
Date: 06/12/05
14:35:43
Subject: [FlyRotary]
EFI Fuel Systems was Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Is common sense dead (rant mode
on)
Hi Guys,
Gotta chime in here. This risk
analysis stuff is all very interesting, but fails to get to the
important points, based on common sense and practical
experience.
How the hell can you ever get a vapour lock
in an EFI system?? In an
EFI system, the fuel is supposed to ALWAYS be at a
POSITIVE pressure of at least 30 PSI. At WOT, that pressure
climbs to 45 PSI.
Vapour locks normally occur in a mechanical
system where a lift pump is "sucking" fuel from the tank and supplying
it to a carburettor. Classic case occurs on a V8 where the fuel
will boil in the supply line because of the close proximity of the fuel
line to an exhaust header. Bad initial design, which can be
corrected by either re-routing the fuel line, and / or shielding
it and insulating it.
Further, the vapour lock can only
occur if the system is at high temp, and the fuel line is
subjected to a partial vacuum of a lift pump. So the only place it is possible to get a vapour lock
in an EFI system is in the low pressure supply side when using a lift
pump. If you are SILLY enough to have your EFI pump higher than
the fuel supply, you can also get a vapour lock. EFI pumps
are NOT designed to "Suck" anyway - they are blowers or
pushers.
Proper fuel system design requires that at
all times, the lift pump AND the EFI pump(s) SHOULD
ALWAYS have a head of fuel on them so that they are not required to
"Suck" fuel, and therefore can't subject the fuel supply line to a
partial vacuum.
The lift pump SHOULD supply what is
commonly known as a "Surge" tank, or a header tank, or a "make-up"
tank. This tank, whatever you want to call it, is used
to supply EFI pump(s) with a positive head of fuel. That is the way the
system MUST be designed. If you do it any other way, sooner
or later, it will bite you on the backside.
Guaranteed!
There is another possibility in a badly
designed fuel system. AIR lock. Having experienced it myself, an
air lock in the supply line is quite capable of reducing flow in the
high pressure side of fuel supply. I won't bore you with specific
details, but I have had it happen on more than one
occasion.
It will normally occur where the fuel line
is higher than either the fuel rail or the injector supply. In
such cases, it is imperative that a bleed nipple is installed to
bleed out any air. This will be most evidenty where there is no
fuel return. My personal opinion is that anybody that runs an EFI
system without a proper fuel return is just asking for it. A fuel
return will assist, but will not necessarily eliminate an air lock
in the fuel supply.
There is a minimum system configuration
complexity in any EFI system, below which, if you try
to simplify it any further, can cause problems under certain
conditions. I KNOW that many current model cas have returnless
fuel sustems, but the design is quite complex, and unless
you understand the differences, you will not be able to implement
such a system.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2005 4:39
PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Is common
sense dead (rant mode on)
Everyone here is interested in
solutions, SPECIFIC solutions.
Specifically, Follow this general principal:
When you have a theory, find way to prove it's true. Use facts.
Example:
I think my fuel system is not going to vapor lock.
Measure it. Place pressure gage on the fuel inlet to the pump.
There is direct correlation of INLET pressure to vapor lock
risk. Measure the pressure and compare to other aircraft. If you have
unusual aircraft, also measure with nose down, nose up.
Get a coffee can of fuel. Have one person in your group measure the
pressure change while adjusting the following:
Pump temp.
head pressure.
reduced atmospheric pressure on tank
inlet filter
Fuel type
This info provides perspective as to how significant each is. It
can be tested easily with coffee can.
The result: the entire group has lower risk because they can
measure how close they are to vapor lock when ground testing.
-al
|