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 |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Why is LOP (lean of peak) controversial?
Matt Barrow wrote:
That's what a bunch here have been telling you. As well, is the problem TATurbo (they did your's, Deakin's, mine, hundreds of others, but your's is the anomaly. I suspect you've been to the APS seminar, and you didn't notice something wrong in your numbers? Then, too, it's not unheard of that an installation Hey, I wasn't born with A&P knowledge and I have yet to go to an ABS BPPP pilot or maintenance clinic. As you probably know, I am using the aircraft to commute weekly to work and, thus far, I have failed to make time for either, as work and family commitments took priority. When the previous owner, who used to run an auto race team and perform his own maintenance on both autos and airplanes, sung the praises of how cool the cylinders ran on this aircraft, I assumed he knew what he was talking about. This began my education in temperature management and set my expectations. No where have I read, prior to this thread, that temperatures above 300 but below 350 degrees indicate a problem with the engine monitor. No where. Initially, I agree that I reacted somewhat defensively here, but that has changed and now I am definitely taking the responses here seriously by contacting both TA Turbo and JPI to get this issue resolved. What concerns me more than my newsgroup reputation is that, with incorrect CHT readings, I have no idea where these cylinders are really operating. -- Peter |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Why is LOP (lean of peak) controversial?
Ray Andraka wrote:
There are two types of thermocouples used for EGTs. Thanks, Ray. Just confirmed with the mechanic that the probes and wiring are JPI, so now it seems to come down to the EDM-800 itself. Awaiting JPIs response now. -- Peter |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Why is LOP (lean of peak) controversial?
karl gruber wrote:
Call TA...............see what they say. FWIW, I just got off the phone with both TA Turbo and JPI. TA Turbo stated that, while low of average, seeing 320 degrees as the hottest CHT at 12,000 feet with WOT, 2500 RPMs and about 70 degrees LOP is *not* unrealistic. JPI's very overworked tech (I was on hold for one hour) gave me three tests to ensure the unit is working correctly: 1) Confirm that CHT and EGT are registering ambient temperature when the aircraft has been shut down for a day or so. Of course, my aircraft's Tannis heater is plugged in today so this test will have to wait until I fly to my destination this week and let it sit for a couple of days. 2) Pull the probe and submerge it in boiling water to confirm that it reads 212 degrees F. 3) Separate the probe from the wire and measure the probe's resistance. It should register 1.3 to 2.0 olms. I will start with number one this week, then perhaps move on to 2 and 3 next week when my aircraft goes in for a 50 hr oil change and other sundry items. -- Peter |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Why is LOP (lean of peak) controversial?
"Peter R." wrote in message ... Matt Barrow wrote: No where have I read, prior to this thread, that temperatures above 300 but below 350 degrees indicate a problem with the engine monitor. No where. That's not the point except you're jumping ahead in the troubleshooting sequence. Initially, I agree that I reacted somewhat defensively here, but that has changed and now I am definitely taking the responses here seriously by contacting both TA Turbo and JPI to get this issue resolved. What concerns me more than my newsgroup reputation is that, with incorrect CHT readings, I have no idea where these cylinders are really operating. The primary point is that your CHT reading were not just low, buy WAY low. It takes some "getting to" to find if it's the JPI, the probes, the baffling (do you have TA's "Liquid Air" baffles?), or any of a myriad potential problems. Here's an analogy: When my daughter bought her 2006 Honda Civic, she was getting 28 miles a gallon instead of the more typical 38-40MPG. When we took it back to the dealer, one of his questions asked of her was what she thought the problem was. She responded that the problem is ..."it's getting 12-14 MPG less than it should." She didn't jump to conclusions. Deakin's temps are higher than mine, but I'll run 75% and even up to 80% of power, so being off 20 degrees is, to me, not a _shocker_. You might just be one incredibly lucky pilot/owner. Certainly nothing wrong with that. On the other hand, those people that are pushing 400 for their CHT's should be asking question if nothing else to find a better way to operate their engines. In light of the number of Bo's that have top overhauls at 600 or so hours, perhaps _they_ should be asking questions and doing some digging. Now, if my Toyota Four Runner was getting 26 MPG, I'd be really happy, but I'd be rather curious...or maybe _suspicious_ is the right word. Hope yours is just a "happy engine". -- Matt --------------------- Matthew W. Barrow Site-Fill Homes, LLC. Montrose, CO (MTJ) |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Why is LOP (lean of peak) controversial?
Matt Barrow wrote:
That's not the point except you're jumping ahead in the troubleshooting sequence. Ok, but I was simply attempting to explain the reason for my "blissful" ignorance. I didn't read John Deakin's articles the first time and think, "Gee, my temperatures are so much lower than what he is cautioning against that *my engine* must have some other explainable problem." Instead, I simply read it and thought, "Hmm, looks like overheating cylinders are not my problem." The primary point is that your CHT reading were not just low, buy WAY low. Again, TA Turbo didn't say to me on the phone today that my reported CHTs were WAY low. "Lower than average, but not unbelievable" was the phrase used. It takes some "getting to" to find if it's the JPI, the probes, the baffling (do you have TA's "Liquid Air" baffles?), or any of a myriad potential problems. The aircraft has the optional TA cheek plate louvers installed for summer flying (as opposed to the shark-gill louvers, which is what I use in winter), which provides a 10-20 degree lower CHT, and it has a TA optional cooling baffling installed on the pilot's left of the cowl opening, which I believe is to allow better airflow to the back cylinders. In addition to the JPI tests pointed out elsewhere, I was also given another pointer by TA Turbo. I need to check the probe wiring and compare that with the setting in the JPI. If yellow/red wiring from the probes is present, the JPI should be set to "K thermocouple." White/red is "J thermocouple." The TATurbo maintenance director said that an incorrect setting in the EDM-800 would result in a minus 40 degree difference from actual CHT reading. He then commented that if I see 320 degrees on hot day and this error were present, he would still be impressed with an actual 360 degree CHT. -- Peter |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Leaning Procedure for a Carbureted 182 | Jeffrey | Owning | 54 | July 5th 05 04:23 PM |
Lean of Peak video | Roger Long | Piloting | 7 | August 24th 04 09:46 AM |
Lycoming's views on best economy settings | [email protected] | Piloting | 37 | July 8th 04 04:00 PM |
Constant speed props | GE | Piloting | 68 | July 3rd 04 04:08 AM |
Lean of Peak Test Flight | Roger Long | Piloting | 0 | April 22nd 04 10:13 AM |