jim wrote:
>
> Dyno wrote:
>
>> Inlet Pr Atmospheric <-----WOT!
>
> You are talking about a naturally aspirated one cylinder engine with a
> carburetor attached to a very narrow intake manifold. The pressure,
temperature
> and humidity of air entering the engine is carefully controlled so that
daily
> variations in atmospheric conditions don't skew the results. This has
nothing to
> with WOT. The ASTM literature claim the test is designed to simulate
mild
> operating conditions. They characterize the load on the engine as light.
>
One last time. WOT means the throttle is fully open with the intake
manifold at atmospheric. This is exactly what the test specifies.
>
>> Again you confuse speed with load. They are not the same.
>
> You are the one that is confused. The engine operates with below
atmospheric
> pressure in the intake manifold and that limits engine speed. The load
on the
> engine is light.
>
Say what? The speed is limited by the dynamometer.
>
>> What is absurd is your willingness to disregard the body of published
>> information on this subject (and there is plenty).
>>
>
> I'm ignoring your misinterpretations
>
>
>
>> The octane rating of any fuel is only used to rate the propensity of
the
>> fuel to detonate. It does not indicate the heating value of the fuel
>> itself.
>
> There actually is a fairly consistent negative correlation between
octane and
> heating value in most motor fuel components so actually your wrong
aboutr that.
> But your assumption that heating value alone determines fuel economy is
also
> incorrect.
>
>
>
>> This is easy to see. Commercial fuels are sold with octane
>> ratings of 87 and 93 (pump ratings). Yet both fuels have heating values
>> within a couple percent of one another. Another example, methanol has
>> (R+M)/2 = 109, yet has half the heating value per kg as gasoline. The
>> octane rating does not correlate with the energy in the fuel.
>
> No, with almost all constituent components of motor fuels it negatively
> correlates, but that is also beside the point as it doesn't really say
anything
> about octane and fuel economy.
>
>
>> If the engine does not detonate at a particular operating condition, it
>> does not matter what the fuel's octane rating is. It was sufficient to
>> preclude abnormal combustion.
>
> Sure just keep repeating your mantra over and over and maybe you
someday you
> will achieve enlightenment.
>
> Your point isn't incorrect - it just doesn't shed any light on the
relation****p
> between fuel economy and the tendency for a particular fuel in a
particular
> engine to detonate.
> If a load of fuel and air exhibits no detonation at all then that is a
good
> indication that some of the energy that could have been converted to
mechanical
> power failed to convert (it's wasted). How much power goes to the wheels
is a
> function of how much pressure can be applied to the pistons over the
proper
> period of time. The most significant limit to this pressure integral is
> detonation. Detonation and the measure of fuel to resist detonation is
far more
> im****tant than the energy content of any particular fuel because most of
that
> energy content ends up being wasted.
> In other words, Octane has everything to do with fuel economy.
>
> -jim
>
>
> ----== Posted via Pronews.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet
News==----
> http://www.pronews.com
The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000
Newsgroups
> ---= - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
Once you start using insults rather that verifiable data, there's no
point in continuing this discussion.
|
