X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 50 [XX] (67%) BODY: contains "rx" (33%) HEADERS: mail has MS Outlook properties but missing "Outlook" in "X-Mailer" Headers Return-Path: Received: from bay0-omc2-s7.bay0.hotmail.com ([65.54.246.143] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.7) with ESMTP id 1916683 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 11:27:26 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=65.54.246.143; envelope-from=lors01@msn.com Received: from hotmail.com ([65.54.250.79]) by bay0-omc2-s7.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668); Mon, 12 Mar 2007 08:12:56 -0700 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 08:12:55 -0700 Message-ID: Received: from 4.171.147.161 by BAY115-DAV7.phx.gbl with DAV; Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:12:53 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [4.171.147.161] X-Originating-Email: [lors01@msn.com] X-Sender: lors01@msn.com From: "Tracy Crook" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: A solution? Injector flow rate mystery solved Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 11:12:49 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0089_01C76497.5E8AEA30" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: MSN 9 X-MimeOLE: Produced By MSN MimeOLE V9.50.0034.2000 Seal-Send-Time: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 11:12:49 -0400 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Mar 2007 15:12:55.0971 (UTC) FILETIME=[E9A05F30:01C764B8] Return-Path: lors01@msn.com This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0089_01C76497.5E8AEA30 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable A zener or MOV is definitely near the top of the list for the fix. =20 Peak & hold drivers were not used in the EC2 because their advantage is = to very accurately control the IPW at idle where emission control is = most difficult, not a big consideration on the EC2. For their own = reasons, Mazda didn't use them in the RX-7 ECU either. P&H drivers also = add complexity and failure modes but not a big deal. =20 The final fix will utilize the diode clamps but not as originally = configured. By isolating their connection to +12 (easy to do, just one = trace cut) the fix can be the addition of a single part to the junction = of the clamps. Might as well use the diodes since they are there and = simplify the fix. The wattage of the part will need to be higher (than = individual snubbers) but my studies so far indicate that the dissipated = power is surprisingly small. Tracy ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Al Gietzen=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 11:33 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: A solution? Injector flow rate mystery solved Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: A solution? was : The truth??? / Injector = flow rate mystery solved What about MOV's? Typical transient response time measured in = nanoseconds... =20 My expert, who has designed ECUs for other applications, had the = following comments that may be of interest: As far as the ECU goes, the diodes should be replaced with=20 tranzorbs or zeners of about 30 volts. I don't think a pull down = resistor=20 of 1K as suggested will do anything at all. It should be roughly 8 = times=20 the injector resistance (assuming the injector hold current is less = than 8=20 times the pull-in current -- typically it's between 4 and 6). And if = you=20 want a true peak and hold injector driver, then the National LM1949 is = the=20 way to go. The resistor only makes=20 sense at very high RPMs, probably higher than what the engine can do, = so I=20 consider it optional. The relay contacts are not the issue. The = issue is=20 protecting the drive transistor which will fail at voltages lower than = what=20 will cause an arc in the relay (not to mention RF noise). The other = issue=20 is minimizing the current flow as the magnetic field collapses. As previously mentioned, the 'correct' way to drive a high flow rate = injector is using a=20 peak and hold circuit. FWIW; Al G ------=_NextPart_000_0089_01C76497.5E8AEA30 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
A zener or MOV is definitely near the top of the list for = the=20 fix. 
 
Peak & hold drivers were not used in the EC2  because = their=20 advantage is to very accurately control the IPW at idle where = emission=20 control is most difficult, not a big consideration on the EC2. For = their=20 own reasons, Mazda didn't use them in the RX-7 ECU either. =  P&H=20 drivers also add complexity and failure modes but not a big = deal. =20  
 
The final fix will utilize the diode clamps but not as originally=20 configured.  By isolating their connection to +12 (easy to do, just = one=20 trace cut) the fix can be the addition of a single part to the junction = of the=20 clamps.  Might as well use the diodes since they are there and = simplify the fix.  The wattage of the part will need to be higher = (than=20 individual snubbers) but my studies so far indicate that the dissipated = power is=20 surprisingly small.
 
Tracy
----- Original Message -----
From: Al Gietzen
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 = 11:33=20 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: A = solution?=20 Injector flow rate mystery solved

Subject:=20 [FlyRotary] Re: A solution? was : The truth??? / Injector flow rate = mystery=20 solved

 

What about MOV's?  = Typical=20 transient response time measured in nanoseconds...

   = <Marv>  

My = expert, who has=20 designed ECUs for other applications, had the following comments that = may be=20 of interest:

 

As far as the ECU = goes, the=20 diodes should be replaced with

tranzorbs or zeners of = about 30=20 volts.  I don't think a pull down resistor

of 1K as suggested = will do=20 anything at all.  It should be roughly 8 times

the injector = resistance=20 (assuming the injector hold current is less than 8

times the pull-in = current --=20 typically it's between 4 and 6).  And if you

want a true peak and = hold=20 injector driver, then the National LM1949 is the

way to = go.

 

The resistor only = makes=20

sense at very high = RPMs,=20 probably higher than what the engine can do, so I

consider it = optional.  The=20 relay contacts are not the issue.  The issue is =

protecting the drive = transistor=20 which will fail at voltages lower than what

will cause an arc in = the relay=20 (not to mention RF noise).  The other issue

is minimizing the = current flow=20 as the magnetic field collapses.

 

As previously = mentioned, the=20 =91correct=92 way to drive a high flow rate injector is using a =

peak and hold=20 circuit.

 

FWIW;

 

Al=20 G

 
------=_NextPart_000_0089_01C76497.5E8AEA30--