If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Another thing I'm puzzled about: this time power settings and altitude.
OK. These numbers are based on an extract from a power setting table for a
Lycoming 180HP :- For 55% rated power with a FF of 7.4G/h at SL with an RPM of 2100, the MP is 20.9. For 55% rated power with a FF of 7.4G/h at 12,000 ft PA, again with an RPM of 2100, the MP is 18.2. I understand (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that fuel flow has a linear relationship to power, i.e. a certain fuel flow will produce a certain amount of power. Therefore, the FF figure of 7.4G/h producing 55% at both alts is consistent with that understanding. However, what I don't understand immediately is why at altitude the MP required is only 18.2 rather than 20.9. Anyone have a simple explanation? Thanks in advance. I'm working on the "no stupid questions" maxim here.... although some of this stuff makes me feel like a moron from time to time. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"xerj" wrote: OK. These numbers are based on an extract from a power setting table for a Lycoming 180HP :- For 55% rated power with a FF of 7.4G/h at SL with an RPM of 2100, the MP is 20.9. For 55% rated power with a FF of 7.4G/h at 12,000 ft PA, again with an RPM of 2100, the MP is 18.2. I understand (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that fuel flow has a linear relationship to power, i.e. a certain fuel flow will produce a certain amount of power. Therefore, the FF figure of 7.4G/h producing 55% at both alts is consistent with that understanding. However, what I don't understand immediately is why at altitude the MP required is only 18.2 rather than 20.9. Anyone have a simple explanation? Thanks in advance. I'm working on the "no stupid questions" maxim here.... although some of this stuff makes me feel like a moron from time to time. It sounds like an error. Have you checked the horsepower curves? You cannot get 20.9 in. MP at 12Kft on a normally aspirated engine. IMHO, the RPM for 12Kft should be higher to accommodate the lower available MP. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
It sounds like an error.
Pretty sure it's not. It's not the same engine, but here's a scan of another power setting table:- http://www.experimentalairplane.com/power-setting.gif This one doesn't show fuel flows, but you'll notice that the MP goes down as alt goes up for the same power setting. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"xerj" wrote in message
... [...] what I don't understand immediately is why at altitude the MP required is only 18.2 rather than 20.9. Anyone have a simple explanation? Su at the higher altitude, lower air density allows the necessary air to go through the throttle at a lower MP. Or: at the higher altitude, lower air temperature provides greater air density at a given MP, allowing for more power at a lower MP. Or... You didn't say you wanted a *correct* explanation. I have no idea if either of the above theories are correct. Personally, I'm leaning toward the second (the first seems a little fishy to me). Does the power setting table you're looking at assume standard temperature at both altitudes? Pete |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
You didn't say you wanted a *correct* explanation. I have no idea if
either of the above theories are correct. Personally, I'm leaning toward the second (the first seems a little fishy to me). Does the power setting table you're looking at assume standard temperature at both altitudes? Yes, it does. The second explanation seems pretty logical to me. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Xerj,
not sure about the answer. Have you looked into John Deakin's excellent engine management columns over at avweb.com for an explanation? The basic ones are several years old, but they are truly excellent. Look for one titled "Manifold pressure sucks" (get it?), the others were published around that time. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Peter Duniho wrote:
"xerj" wrote in message ... [...] what I don't understand immediately is why at altitude the MP required is only 18.2 rather than 20.9. Anyone have a simple explanation? Su at the higher altitude, lower air density allows the necessary air to go through the throttle at a lower MP. simple but wrong explanation :-) The important question is: what MP is neccessary to drive the required amount of air through the engine. (assuming same air/fuel ratio for both conditions) At lower ambient pressure slightly less MP is required to get a given airflow into the cylinder, as there is less residual gas left there. However this effect is rather slim. Or: at the higher altitude, lower air temperature provides greater air density at a given MP, allowing for more power at a lower MP. Correct. This seems to me to be the more important explanation, if standard altitude temperatures are is assumed. regards, Friedrich -- for personal email please remove 'entfernen' from my adress |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
not sure about the answer. Have you looked into John Deakin's excellent
engine management columns over at avweb.com for an explanation? Yeah, those articles are great. I can't find the exact answer in them, but I think it has something to do with density as posited by other posters in this thread. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
xerj opined
OK. These numbers are based on an extract from a power setting table for a Lycoming 180HP :- For 55% rated power with a FF of 7.4G/h at SL with an RPM of 2100, the MP is 20.9. For 55% rated power with a FF of 7.4G/h at 12,000 ft PA, again with an RPM of 2100, the MP is 18.2. I understand (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that fuel flow has a linear relationship to power, i.e. a certain fuel flow will produce a certain amount of power. Therefore, the FF figure of 7.4G/h producing 55% at both alts is consistent with that understanding. However, what I don't understand immediately is why at altitude the MP required is only 18.2 rather than 20.9. Anyone have a simple explanation? Thanks in advance. I'm working on the "no stupid questions" maxim here.... although some of this stuff makes me feel like a moron from time to time. Temperature. -ash Cthulhu in 2005! Why wait for nature? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
eScrew zen story | [email protected] | Owning | 0 | December 20th 04 07:19 AM |
Funny story about piloting | [email protected] | Piloting | 0 | December 20th 04 12:34 AM |
Landing patterns | m pautz | Piloting | 31 | June 18th 04 03:29 PM |
Germany Lost the War... So What? | robert arndt | Military Aviation | 55 | February 26th 04 08:51 AM |
"I Want To FLY!"-(Youth) My store to raise funds for flying lessons | Curtl33 | General Aviation | 7 | January 9th 04 11:35 PM |