Why turbo normalizer?

I"m still confused...
1) Why not just put a regular turbo on and agree to not over boost it?
2) If compression increases inside cylinder pressure about 8 times
wouldn't taking MP up to 30" cause a MUCH higher inside cylinder
pressure than 20" (its a mutiple scale). If the outside of the cylinder
is 20" its going to have a significantly higher difference in pressure
than running out the outside 20" in MP. I just don't see how a cylinder
could crack and stress relative to 30" when its only 20" outside. Isn't
the cabin of the space shuttle under more stress when in space than
when sitting on the ground at sea lever?

-Robert

1) Why not just put a regular turbo on and agree to not over boost it?

That's what a turbo normalizer is - except that the agreement is made
with the Grand Canonical Ensemble, which enforces the agreement for you.

If the outside of the cylinder is 20" [pressure]

I don't think the outside pressure matters. Unlike with (say) the cabin
of a jetliner, the outside pressure is =not= helping to hold the engine
together. The strength and thickness of the material is. There could
be a vacuum outside and it wouldn't matter. (well except to the extent
that there's no oxygen in a vacuum

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
I"m still confused...
1) Why not just put a regular turbo on and agree to not over boost it?

Why do you think that's not what they do?

In fact, my airplane was originally sold with "turbo-normalization". After
the type was certified, the manufacturer went back and tested at higher
horsepower, allowing for recertification at 20 hp higher. All they changed
was an adjustment on the turbo controller. The planes built prior were all
retroactively given the benefit of this change. I still have "250" stitched
into the interior, even though the airplane is 270hp (and says so in big
letters on the engine cowl ).

Turbo-normalization is JUST LIKE regular turbo-charging, except that the
maximum induction pressure is limited to 30".

2) If compression increases inside cylinder pressure about 8 times
wouldn't taking MP up to 30" cause a MUCH higher inside cylinder
pressure than 20" (its a mutiple scale). If the outside of the cylinder
is 20" its going to have a significantly higher difference in pressure
than running out the outside 20" in MP.

Well, first of all, the difference between even 240" and either 20" or 30"
ambient is hardly significant (220" vs 210"). I don't understand why you
are comparing 30" times 8 with 20" times 8, while at the same time arguing
that the pressure differential between the inside and outside of the
cylinder is important (it's not).

As Dave explained quite well, differential pressure isn't relevant. It's
like worrying about your soda can exploding at altitude. The can is capable
of dealing with far greater pressures than it might experience, and the
difference between 15 psi (sea level) and even 0 psi is insignificant
compared to the pressures the can is designed to tolerate. A 15 psi change
in that case just doesn't mean anything, nor would a 10" or even 30"
difference matter for an airplane engine (or any engine, for that matter).

What does matter are all of the load-bearing components in the engine, but
that load is determined not by the difference between internal and external
cylinder pressure, but rather simply by how much horsepower the engine is
making.

I just don't see how a cylinder
could crack and stress relative to 30" when its only 20" outside.

Who says it could? No one here has, and prior to the above statement, you
haven't even implied anyone else has.

Isn't
the cabin of the space shuttle under more stress when in space than
when sitting on the ground at sea lever?

What's that got to do with the price of tea in China?

Pete

If differential pressure it now what wears out cylinders in turbo
engines are you implying that its over boosting? In the Mooney
community is mostly agreed that a 201 (non turbo) will give you twice
the cylinder life as a 231 (turbo). Other wear factors (heat, less air
over the cylinders) are the same for turbo-norm vs. regular turbo. The
only difference I can see is the "idiot" difference of accidently over
boosting.

The difference in engine life is that the turbonormalized engine is
producing more average power over its lifespan. The only time that a
normally aspirated engine pruduces rated power is on takeoff at sea level, a
rare occurance. The turbonormalized engine produces full power a lot of the
time and at higher altitudes where the engine doesn't cool as well.
Additionally the turbonormalized engine will run hotter since the inlet air
is always going to be hotter (even with an intercooler)..

Mike
MU-2



"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
If differential pressure it now what wears out cylinders in turbo
engines are you implying that its over boosting? In the Mooney
community is mostly agreed that a 201 (non turbo) will give you twice
the cylinder life as a 231 (turbo). Other wear factors (heat, less air
over the cylinders) are the same for turbo-norm vs. regular turbo. The
only difference I can see is the "idiot" difference of accidently over
boosting.

That is my point. There does not appear to be any reason for anyone to
ever buy a turbo norm system. The engine runs just as hot/hard, etc at
altitude with a turbo norm vs. a regular turbo. The turbo norm
companies try to trick people into thinking that putting a turbo norm
on your engine will not wear your engine any more than normal asp
because you never get over 30". However, the argument appears to be
worthless, in truth a turbo norm wears out your engine just as fast as
a regular turbo.

-Robert

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
That is my point.

Huh?

There does not appear to be any reason for anyone to
ever buy a turbo norm system.

Why not?

The engine runs just as hot/hard, etc at
altitude with a turbo norm vs. a regular turbo.

No, it does not. With a regular turbo, the engine would run even hotter and
harder at altitude.

The turbo norm
companies try to trick people into thinking that putting a turbo norm
on your engine will not wear your engine any more than normal asp
because you never get over 30".

Which "turbo norm company" has made that statement?

However, the argument appears to be
worthless, in truth a turbo norm wears out your engine just as fast as
a regular turbo.

No, it doesn't.

I find it bizarre that you are complaining about statements made regarding
turbo-normalization compared to normally aspirated, but keep insisting on
making (incorrect) comparisons between turbo-normalization and regular
turbo-charging. The two are not relevant to each other.

If there's a specific statement from a "turbo norm company" that you take
issue with, let's see that statement and we can talk about it. Until then,
your inability to express your own discontent with any sort of consistency
makes it hard to even understand what your complaint is, never mind help you
understand what's wrong about it (assuming there is something wrong with
it).

Pete

"Why Choose a Turbo-Normalizer
Instead of a Turbo-Booster?"

http://www.m-20turbos.com/choose.htm

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
That is my point. There does not appear to be any reason for anyone to
ever buy a turbo norm system. The engine runs just as hot/hard, etc at
altitude with a turbo norm vs. a regular turbo. The turbo norm
companies try to trick people into thinking that putting a turbo norm
on your engine will not wear your engine any more than normal asp
because you never get over 30". However, the argument appears to be
worthless, in truth a turbo norm wears out your engine just as fast as
a regular turbo.

-Robert

Not true, if the engine is cooled with adequite airflow. If you have an
instalation that is marginal at cooling a non turbo instalation at altitude,
and you put a turbo norm engine in it, yes, it will overheat and wear out.
Put enough air across it, and it will stay cool at 65%. There are all kinds
of flying examples to support this.

What is the difference at flying a well cooled turbo norm engine at 12,000ft
at 65%, and at flying it at sea level and 65%, if you keep it cool ?
--
Jim in NC

Ok, so the turbo norm kits include a cooling system better than the
system used on regular turbos. I did not know that.