Author Topic: Available WEP time  (Read 1428 times)

Offline Lephturn

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1200
      • http://lephturn.webhop.net
Available WEP time
« Reply #30 on: February 07, 2001, 09:30:00 AM »
Two things to think about:

1.  Shouldn't our fuel multiplier affect our WEP times?

2.  If we don't "burn" water when using WEP, I'm carrying around a bunch of extra weight in my Jug!  If I'm out of WEP, It would be nice if I got rid of a few hundred pounds of water too.    (What's H2O?  9 Lbs/ Gallon?)

------------------
Lephturn - Chief Trainer
A member of The Flying Pigs  http://www.flyingpigs.com
 
"A pig is a jolly companion, Boar, sow, barrow, or gilt --
A pig is a pal, who'll boost your morale, Though mountains may topple and tilt.
When they've blackballed, bamboozled, and burned you, When they've turned on you, Tory and Whig,
Though you may be thrown over by Tabby and Rover, You'll never go wrong with a pig, a pig,
You'll never go wrong with a pig!" -- Thomas Pynchon, "Gravity's Rainbow"

Offline Staga

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5334
      • http://www.nohomersclub.com/
Available WEP time
« Reply #31 on: February 07, 2001, 10:02:00 AM »
Ever seen a 6 inch piston which was damaged because continuous overheat thus followed by detonating?
Its not a pretty sight  

Offline niklas

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 418
Available WEP time
« Reply #32 on: February 07, 2001, 10:14:00 AM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by Bombjack:
It is not true to say that Rolls Royce engines could not be tuned to produce higher power, as the 'Miss Bud' example demonstrates extreme tuning.

It is also well-documented that Merlin and Griffon engines were both modified to run 150 octane fuel at manifold pressures of up to 25lb, as compared to the standard 18lb on 100 octane fuel. This is directly analagous to the use of water- or methanol/water-injection.

However that the Merlin and Griffon were both far more highly tuned than their German counterparts is undeniable. One only has to compare their specific outputs to see that.

[This message has been edited by Bombjack (edited 02-07-2001).]

The question is not only whether you can tune the engine, but also how long you can run it with that overboost. Mechanical components are often designed for a certain lifetime. If your car-engine is designed for 500.000miles, than it would be a little bit heavier  .

I.e the world record engine of the me209 in the 30ies: A db601 engine without manifold pressure limiter. It put out ~2500-3000hp, but this only for ~5 minutes, afterwards it was destroyed  

niklas


Offline F4UDOA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1731
      • http://mywebpages.comcast.net/markw4/index.html
Available WEP time
« Reply #33 on: February 07, 2001, 10:15:00 AM »
Lephturn,

I don't know how we would do a fuel multipier vs WEP time ratio.

Consider this. A P-47 has roughly twice the range of a Me-109, say 8 hours vrs 4 hours (Just a guess). If the Jug has 20 minutes of total WEP vrs 10 minutes for the 109 then the multiplier will reduce all fuel burn times at the same rate.

Imagine that the fuel multiplier is *16.

P-47 fuel duration
8 hours / 16 = .5 or 1/2 hour of total flight time on internal fuel.

WEP=.20 / 16 = 1.2 minutes(not very much fun time)

Me109 Fuel duration
4 hours / 16 =.25 or 15 minutes
WEP time= .1 / 16 = .6 minutes(about 40 seconds)

To reduce the WEP at a similer rate wouldn't leave you with enough for a single encounter. Unless of course a different multipier is used for WEP. But regardless of what number is used it will reduce an already short period of time to a small blip almost not worth having.

The one irregularity in the current system is the WEP time of the FW190A8. It has 10 minutes of time (Don't know if it is consecutive time) compared to other birds, P-47, F4U, and F6F which all had capacity for more than 5 minutes as well as a much longer range on internal fuel. I think the only solution would be to either make all WEP times historically accurate or reduce WEP evenly across the board at a equal rate.

BTW, all of my previous comparisons were theoretical times, not historic. So turn of your flame throwers.  

Offline Bombjack

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 55
Available WEP time
« Reply #34 on: February 07, 2001, 10:33:00 AM »
 
Quote
The question is not only whether you can tune the engine, but also how long you can run it with that overboost. Mechanical components are often designed for a certain lifetime. If your car-engine is designed for 500.000miles, than it would be a little bit heavier .
 I.e the world record engine of the me209 in the 30ies: A db601 engine without manifold pressure limiter. It put out ~2500-3000hp, but this only for ~5 minutes, afterwards it was destroyed   (Image removed from quote.)

Very good point <Salute>

The 150-octane Spits that variously chased V1s and low-level 190 fighter-bombers were indeed noted for having higher servicing requirements (in the case of the XIV, considerably higher), but these requirements were not so strenuous that the RAF didn't field several squadrons of such planes for their specialist purposes.

Offline Lephturn

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1200
      • http://lephturn.webhop.net
Available WEP time
« Reply #35 on: February 07, 2001, 11:28:00 AM »
Yep, I see your point F4UDOA.

I think it might be better to just leave the WEP times at realistic levels, regardless.

However, I would like to be able to lose the 300 lbs of water I'm carrying around in my Jug.    It would be pretty much a waste of HT's time I'm sure.

Just give me "Lucky" as a perk plane. <G>

------------------
Lephturn - Chief Trainer
A member of The Flying Pigs  http://www.flyingpigs.com
 
"A pig is a jolly companion, Boar, sow, barrow, or gilt --
A pig is a pal, who'll boost your morale, Though mountains may topple and tilt.
When they've blackballed, bamboozled, and burned you, When they've turned on you, Tory and Whig,
Though you may be thrown over by Tabby and Rover, You'll never go wrong with a pig, a pig,
You'll never go wrong with a pig!" -- Thomas Pynchon, "Gravity's Rainbow"

Offline Jimdandy

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Available WEP time
« Reply #36 on: February 07, 2001, 12:39:00 PM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by Staga:
Ever seen a 6 inch piston which was damaged because continuous overheat thus followed by detonating?
Its not a pretty sight  

Yes it's so cool. I've taken apart some really cool blown engines both gas and diesel. I think the diesels come apart with the best distruction.   I had a connecting rod out of a GM Detroit diesel locomotive that I used as a door stop for a long time. It had thrown that rod and it was all twisted. It was cool. There was this big hole in the side of the block you could almost walk thru.  


Offline Jimdandy

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Available WEP time
« Reply #37 on: February 07, 2001, 12:49:00 PM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by niklas:
 Jumo213: 3250 RPM    

Donīt forget that RR engines were always much closer to the limit of stress than german engines. I.E the german analyzed a Merlin X or XX engine and came to the conclusion that it offered a safety factor of  ~1,6. The early JumoA had a safety factor of ~2,4 (crankshaft or other mechanical components, i donīt have the report at home). That means the merlin engines didnīt offer a possiblity to increase power with water-injection, because they were already running very close at the structural limit. That was different for the german engines.

GM-1 is N2O not NO2 afaik

niklas


[This message has been edited by niklas (edited 02-07-2001).]

Good point niklas. I had assumed that the RR engineers had designed a stronger engine. Actually what they were doing was running it closer to the limit. As for the Miss Bud engine you have to look at the trouble they went to to get it to push that kind of horse power. The fuel was top fuel dragster fuel. It wasn't expected to run as long. The Miss Bud enigine can be looked at as the design limit. It couldn't be used in combat as anything more than an Me 163 type of a plane. Fly up shoot and land before the engine blows. But it would be cool to see what it would do in a Spit. Man I loved hearing those RR's out on the river.  


Offline Nashwan

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1864
Available WEP time
« Reply #38 on: February 07, 2001, 01:37:00 PM »
The Merlin was modified to run on 150 octane at 25 lb boost
It was also tested safely at 30 lb boost (2200hp) and endurance tested at 36lb boost and water injection, which produced 2780hp
Merlins were tested for 100 hours continuous at 18lb boost (ie wep for normal Spit IXs)

[This message has been edited by Nashwan (edited 02-07-2001).]

Offline F4UDOA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1731
      • http://mywebpages.comcast.net/markw4/index.html
Available WEP time
« Reply #39 on: February 07, 2001, 01:40:00 PM »
Jimdandy,

Do you have the stroke information on the PW-R2800??

I have never seen the cruise speeds defined that way. Engineering is a wonderful thing. There is an answer for things that you didn't even know that there was a question.

Thanks
F4UDOA

Offline danish

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 440
Available WEP time
« Reply #40 on: February 07, 2001, 02:16:00 PM »
In short:
In the original Fw190A-7 bis A-9 Fleugzeug-Handbuch it says:

 Ab Baureihe A-8 kann hinter Spant 8 entweder ein GM-1-Behaelter (85 Liter Inhalt) oder ein Zusatzkraftstoffbehaelter (115 Liter Inhalt) eingebaut werden.

danish

Offline Jimdandy

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Available WEP time
« Reply #41 on: February 07, 2001, 05:01:00 PM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
Jimdandy,

Do you have the stroke information on the PW-R2800??...
F4UDOA

No sorry F4UDOA I don't. I got the figures for the 109 off of niklas's post and I just happend to find the Griffon info on a web search.

PS You know I think someone posted that about a month ago. I'll see if I can find it.


[This message has been edited by Jimdandy (edited 02-07-2001).]

Offline Jimdandy

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Available WEP time
« Reply #42 on: February 07, 2001, 05:30:00 PM »
F4UDOA Here's some GREAT info on the R2800 plus cool photo's of an F4U restoration:
 http://www.bootstrapaircraft.com/r2800-18.htm

It say's it has a 6.0" stroke and in the final version turned 2,800 rpm. Thus the piston speed was 2800 ft/min. They give some very good information on the modification that were made to the engine to make the final version. As I said above, there are many things that can limit the WEP time. Piston speed is one of the most critical but there are others. This document has some very good info in it on what limited the horse power of the R2800 in it's different versions.

PS Oops the first link wont take you to the F4U restoration but this will:
 http://www.bootstrapaircraft.com

[This message has been edited by Jimdandy (edited 02-07-2001).]

[This message has been edited by Jimdandy (edited 02-07-2001).]

Offline F4UDOA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1731
      • http://mywebpages.comcast.net/markw4/index.html
Available WEP time
« Reply #43 on: February 07, 2001, 10:39:00 PM »
JimDandy,

You mentioned the piston speed being 2800 FPM if the RPM was 2800. How is this possible? If the stroke is 6" and the RPM's are 2800 shouldn't I multply those two numbers??

I am trying to go by your previous post to figure out what the calculation for piston speed is.

BTW, from the pilots manual of the F4U-1 PW-R2800-8W B series.

Combat RPM 2700
Military RPM 2700
Normal (max continuous) RPM 2550
Max cruise RPM 2150

Thanks
F4UDOA

Offline Jimdandy

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Available WEP time
« Reply #44 on: February 08, 2001, 08:04:00 AM »
     
Quote
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
JimDandy,

You mentioned the piston speed being 2800 FPM if the RPM was 2800. How is this possible? If the stroke is 6" and the RPM's are 2800 shouldn't I multiply those two numbers??

I am trying to go by your previous post to figure out what the calculation for piston speed is.

BTW, from the pilots manual of the F4U-1 PW-R2800-8W B series.

Combat RPM 2700
Military RPM 2700
Normal (max continuous) RPM 2550
Max cruise RPM 2150

Thanks
F4UDOA

Here's what it looks like:

(2,800 X 6)/6 = 2800. The 6's cancel out because you multiply and divide by 6.

Looking at the 109 again:

(2,700 X 6.3)/6 = 2835.

Just a coincidence the R2800 has a 6in stroke so the rpm will always be the piston speed in ft/min. Notice that the max continuous is kept almost right at 2500 ft/min for the R2800. It was a common rule of thumb in the engineering world at the time to limit the piston speed to 2500 ft/min. It was the same for automobile engines too. It was a limitation base mostly on the materials they were using for the connecting rod and crank which was generally cast iron. Cast iron is brittle and wont stand for a lot of cyclic loading. Modern castings are much more flexible and will handle 3500 ft/min easy. There were other things as I have mentioned that were also limiting factors to the rpm but the connecting rod and crank were the biggest. The figure of 2500ft/min and 3500ft/min are for continuous use. The casting technics and design and type of cast iron used are better today. For a forged steel crank and rods your piston speeds can be as high (continuous) as 4,000 ft/min. A really all out racing engines can hit piston speeds as high as 6,000 ft/min for a few seconds. Even those R2800 could have run piston speeds of 3500 ft/min for a few seconds I imagine.

Here's a comparison to a car engine:

Chevy 350cid - Stroke = 3.48 in

3.48 X 4,800/6 = 2,784 ft/min. 4,800 rpm was a conservative redline that was common on most Chevy's that reflected the peek horse power and hydraulic valves more than the engines ability to rev. The Z28 350 had a redline of 5,200 rpm which gives:

3.48 X 5,200/6 = 3016 ft/min. That's is for continuos use. That means you can get in your 74' Z28 and run it at 5,200 rpm all day long. I can vouch for a least 1 hour at 4,800-5,500 rpm in a stock 1979 Z28. The valves did start to float at 5,500 rpm. So I think those figures are correct. Of course you better have fresh oil and coolant, no leaks, etc. before you can do that. That's still conservative. Work backward from 3,500 ft/min:

3,500 = 3.48 X RPM/6, RPM = 6,034 rpm. That is the actual continuos use rpm of a 350 Chevy. I don't think your average factory engine with hydraulic lifters would do that all day long. I think with HIGH quality control and solid valve lifters the design would handle it. The limiting factor as I said above can reflect other things like the lifters. Hydraulic lifters tend to pump up and float the valves at high rpm. Now for an all out road racing 350 for a 24 hour race with solid or roller lifters:

4,000 = 3.48 X RPM/6, RPM = 6,890 rpm. That's not uncommon at all for a long distance racing engine to run that all day long. As a matter of fact that's a bit conservative.

An ALL OUT drag engine with roller lifters and aluminum rods:

6,000 = 3.48 X RPM/6 = 10,344 rpm! And you guessed it, that is a bit conservative too. That's not for continuous use though. That's a sprint for 5 seconds down the strip.

PS If you didn't already know what valve float is it's when the lifter that rides on the cam is thrown off the face of the cam holding the valve open into the combustion cycle causing back fire and even valve to piston contact. At high rpm the inertia of the valve train will throw the valve lifter off the cam. Stock automotive engines generally have hydraulic valve lifters that cause the effect to occur at lower rpm's. Hydraulic valve lifters are designed to take up the clearance in the valve train using the engines oil pressure. As the rpm's increase the hydraulic lifters over fill with oil and lift the valve off the seat. Racing engines run solid lifters that require periodic adjustment. Some stock engine are this way. Usually they are in older cars. Anyone that has had a old VW can tell you about adjusting valves.       Any way, high performance engines run solid lifters or solid/roller tipped lifters normally. They also run very high valve spring pressure to keep the lifter from flying off the cam at high rpm.

[This message has been edited by Jimdandy (edited 02-08-2001).]