X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from imr-ma06.mx.aol.com ([64.12.78.142] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4c2) with ESMTP id 4901420 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 22:52:30 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.78.142; envelope-from=Bktrub@aol.com Received: from imo-da01.mx.aol.com (imo-da01.mx.aol.com [205.188.169.199]) by imr-ma06.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id p2A3peJX026093 for ; Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:51:40 -0500 Received: from Bktrub@aol.com by imo-da01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v42.9.) id q.f38.f9e5912 (45329) for ; Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:51:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtprly-ma03.mx.aol.com (smtprly-ma03.mx.aol.com [64.12.207.142]) by cia-mc05.mx.aol.com (v129.9) with ESMTP id MAILCIAMC055-5c554d784ac538; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 22:51:35 -0500 Received: from webmail-m103 (webmail-m103.sim.aol.com [64.12.224.157]) by smtprly-ma03.mx.aol.com (v129.9) with ESMTP id MAILSMTPRLYMA033-5c554d784ac538; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 22:51:33 -0500 References: To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: more staging and tuning Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 22:51:32 -0500 X-AOL-IP: 50.46.150.65 In-Reply-To: X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: bktrub@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8CDACED9499CC22_1CD0_41171_webmail-m103.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 33356-STANDARD Received: from 50.46.150.65 by webmail-m103.sysops.aol.com (64.12.224.157) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Wed, 09 Mar 2011 22:51:32 -0500 Message-Id: <8CDACED9492A7FF-1CD0-1B3E5@webmail-m103.sysops.aol.com> X-Spam-Flag:NO X-AOL-SENDER: Bktrub@aol.com ----------MB_8CDACED9499CC22_1CD0_41171_webmail-m103.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Bill, What injectors did you use? I'm using the stock ones for my engine, which= started out as a 13BREW (twin turbo) but is now NA.( Primary 28 lbs, seco= ndary 40 lb.) The only thing keeping me on the ground (besides the crappy= Seattle weather) is my tuning. I've been up in the air a few times, but= always with some popping and stumbling at various throttle settings, alon= g with bystanders running for cover.=20 Next clear day I'll tie the tail down again and then try the mode 3 under= staging, 6 above, then mode 2 for adjustment width, then mode 9. Brian Trubee -----Original Message----- From: Bill Bradburry To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Wed, Mar 9, 2011 5:26 pm Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: more staging and tuning Calling the information Steve came up with, =E2=80=9CSimplifying=E2=80=9D,= really misses the mark by a wide margin. I zeroed my EC-2 back to the fa= ctory numbers and then tuned the engine in probably 15 minutes and then ta= xied out and flew. =20 WOW! =20 Bill B =20 From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Be= half Of Bryan Winberry Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 7:37 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: more staging and tuning =20 Steve, Even though most of this is over my head a bit, thanks for your time and= effort. Watching the tuning challenges can sometimes lead one to dread= that upcoming phase. So, when someone offers a way of simplifying the pr= ocess, it promotes optimism. Thanks, Bryan=20 =20 From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Be= half Of Steven W. Boese Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 5:41 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: more staging and tuning =20 Tracy, =20 Correcting for the effect of injector lag only under certain conditions is= missing the whole point of making the correction at all. The dead time= is constant and as a result, it affects the amount of fuel delivered unde= r all conditions. The fact that the correction made by my hardware was so= effective tells me that you have nailed the calculation of the amount of= fuel required. All we have to do is actually deliver that amount of fuel= . =20 =20 The secondary injectors are affected by their dead time also, and the larg= er they are, the more of an effect that dead time will have because the pu= lse width is smaller for the same amount of fuel delivered. The informati= on that I=E2=80=99ve seen indicates that dead times are slightly different= for different injectors but not by much. The 1.2 ms that I used is not= a magic number, but using something in the neighborhood of the actual val= ue is much better than leaving it out. =20 Applying the dead time correction across the board removes the requirement= to correct for it anywhere in the MAP table. Mode 6 then is needed only= to compensate for the different flow rating of the secondary injectors ra= ther than using the MAP table correction to compensate for a variable comb= ination of flow rating and dead time (amoung other things) throughout the= whole MAP table. =20 I=E2=80=99ve attached an updated plot that clarifies the questions Ed aske= d. As can be seen, it took less than 30 seconds to go from an essentially= default controller condition to one that worked well over the entire powe= r range that I could attain. Adjusting mode 6 for the case of different= sized secondaries would only add a few seconds to this procedure. I woul= d expect that the tuning procedure would be equally effective no matter wh= at sized injectors (within reason) were used as long as their dead times= were taken into account. =20 =20 If it doesn=E2=80=99t work this way, I=E2=80=99ll eat my socks. What the= heck=E2=80=A6let=E2=80=99s up the ante=E2=80=A6 I=E2=80=99ll eat YOUR soc= ks. Know that I=E2=80=99m smiling while writing this even though I might= get a package from Shady Bend in the mail. =20 Steve =20 =20 =20 =20 From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Be= half Of Tracy Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 2:02 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: more staging and tuning =20 Interesting results Steve. I didn't think a simple across the board incre= ase would be that effective. In view of your earlier results I made a min= or change to the EC2/3 software to bump up the injector pulse width but on= ly when the staging point is reached. This only applies to the setup for= same sized primary & secondary injectors. With the much larger secondari= es on the 4 port Renesis the mixture goes rich instead of lean at the stag= ing point (unless Mode 6 is adjusted to compensate). I have not flight tested the change yet. Tracy =20 =20 =20 ----------MB_8CDACED9499CC22_1CD0_41171_webmail-m103.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Bill,
What injectors did you use? I'm using the stock ones for my engine,= which started out as a 13BREW (twin turbo) but is now NA.( Primary 28 lbs= , secondary 40 lb.) The only thing keeping me on the ground (besides= the crappy Seattle weather) is my tuning. I've been up in the air a few= times, but always with some popping and stumbling at various throttle set= tings, along with bystanders running for cover.
 
Next clear day I'll tie the tail down again and then try the mode 3= under staging, 6 above, then mode 2 for adjustment width, then mode 9.
 
Brian Trubee



-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Bradburry <bbradburry@bellsouth.net>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Wed, Mar 9, 2011 5:26 pm
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: more staging and tuning

Calling the informa= tion Steve came up with, =E2=80=9CSimplifying=E2=80=9D, really misses the= mark by a wide margin.  I zeroed my EC-2 back to the factory numbers= and then tuned the engine in probably 15 minutes and then taxied out and= flew.
 
WOW!<= /div>
 
Bill B
 
From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Bryan Winberry
Sent: Wednesday, March 09,= 2011 7:37 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircr= aft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re:= more staging and tuning
 
Steve,
Even though most of= this is over my head a bit, thanks for your time and effort.  Watchi= ng the tuning challenges can sometimes lead one to dread that upcoming pha= se.  So, when someone offers a way of simplifying the process, it pro= motes optimism.
Thanks,
Bryan=
 
From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Steven W. Boese
Sent: Wednesday, March 09,= 2011 5:41 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircr= aft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re:= more staging and tuning
 
Tracy,
 
Correcting for th= e effect of injector lag only under certain conditions is missing the whol= e point of making the correction at all.  The dead time is constant= and as a result, it affects the amount of fuel delivered under all condit= ions.  The fact that the correction made by my hardware was so effect= ive tells me that you have nailed the calculation of the amount of fuel re= quired.  All we have to do is actually deliver that amount of fuel.&n= bsp;
 
The secondary inj= ectors are affected by their dead time also, and the larger they are, the= more of an effect that dead time will have because the pulse width is sma= ller for the same amount of fuel delivered.  The information that I= =E2=80=99ve seen indicates that dead times are slightly different for diff= erent injectors but not by much.  The 1.2 ms that I used is not a mag= ic number, but using something in the neighborhood of the actual value is= much better than leaving it out.
 
Applying the dead= time correction across the board removes the requirement to correct for= it anywhere in the MAP table.  Mode 6 then is needed only to compens= ate for the different flow rating of the secondary injectors rather than= using the MAP table correction to compensate for a variable combination= of flow rating and dead time (amoung other things) throughout the whole= MAP table.
 
I=E2=80=99ve atta= ched an updated plot that clarifies the questions Ed asked.  As can= be seen, it took less than 30 seconds to go from an essentially default= controller condition to one that worked well over the entire power range= that I could attain.  Adjusting mode 6 for the case of different siz= ed secondaries would only add a few seconds to this procedure.  I wou= ld expect that the tuning procedure would be equally effective no matter= what sized injectors (within reason) were used as long as their dead time= s were taken into account. 
 
If it doesn=E2=80= =99t work this way, I=E2=80=99ll eat my socks.  What the heck=E2=80= =A6let=E2=80=99s up the ante=E2=80=A6 I=E2=80=99ll eat YOUR socks. = Know that I=E2=80=99m smiling while writing this even though I might get= a package from Shady Bend in the mail.
 
Steve
 
 
   
 
From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Tracy
Sent: Wednesday, March 09,= 2011 2:02 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircr= aft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re:= more staging and tuning
 
Interesting results= Steve.  I didn't think a simple across the board increase would be= that effective.  In view of your earlier results I made a minor chan= ge to the EC2/3 software to bump up the injector pulse width but only when= the staging point is reached.   This only applies to the setup= for same sized primary & secondary injectors.  With the much lar= ger secondaries on the 4 port Renesis the mixture goes rich instead of lea= n at the staging point (unless  Mode 6 is adjusted to compensate).
I have not flight tested the change yet.

Tracy 
 
 
----------MB_8CDACED9499CC22_1CD0_41171_webmail-m103.sysops.aol.com--