Author Topic: Fuel Mixture  (Read 352 times)

Offline joeblogs

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 649
Fuel Mixture
« on: February 28, 2003, 08:21:16 AM »
Ok you engineers out there sharpen your pencils.

I just finished some reading that suggests that optimal fuel mixture ratios (lbs of gas per lbs of air) don't vary across engines, the chemistry is the chemistry.  Is that right?  I have no idea.

If so, does anyone know the optimal fuel mixtures for best economy and best power?

-Blogs

Offline Shane

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7883
Re: Fuel Mixture
« Reply #1 on: February 28, 2003, 08:37:18 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by joeblogs
If so, does anyone know the optimal fuel mixtures for best economy and best power?
-Blogs


one bean burrito liberally doused with hot sauce.
Surrounded by suck and underwhelmed with mediocrity.
I'm always right, it just takes some poepl longer to come to that realization than others.
I'm not perfect, but I am closer to it than you are.
"...vox populi, vox dei..."  ~Alcuin ca. 798
Truth doesn't need exaggeration.

Offline aircav

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Fuel Mixture
« Reply #2 on: February 28, 2003, 10:10:17 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by joeblogs
Ok you engineers out there sharpen your pencils.

I just finished some reading that suggests that optimal fuel mixture ratios (lbs of gas per lbs of air) don't vary across engines, the chemistry is the chemistry.  Is that right?
-Blogs


Indeed. A given quantity of fuel needs a set amount of air to burn completely. The stoichiometric ratio is approximately 14:1 air:fuel by mass. Above this ratio the engine runs lean, below it the engine runs rich.

The mixture is usually set rich for starting, since a certain amount of fuel will condense on the cold cylinder walls. A lean mixture is desirable in the middle of the part-load range for fuel consumption reasons. A comparitively rich mixture is required at full load and idle, as well as in the middle of the part-load range.

Offline SFRT - Frenchy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5420
      • http://home.CFL.rr.com/rauns/menu.htm
Fuel Mixture
« Reply #3 on: February 28, 2003, 06:46:36 PM »
For my part I learned that the ratio was 15:1:)

I would disagree on runing rich on idle. If you do so, you may have a funy feeling while you apply full power on the runway.

In General Aviation aircrafts, here is what you do :

Lean the mixture on the ground to prevent spark plugs foolings. On take off at sea level, you usually don't take risks of a too lean mixture so you apply full rich. As you climb, you need to decrease the amount of fuel (lean) to compensate from the decrease in air density. (maintain 15:1).

If you start to ear "detonation" or his little brother "pre-ignition", you want to cool down your cylinders. One way to achive cooling is by allowing more fuel to "wet the cylinder", so you enrich your mixture.

In cruise, if you want best economy you pull the mixture and watch your CHT/EGT guage. As you lean it, the temperature will raise, then decrease again. Lean as necessary to be at "the peack" then enrich a little bith more to be "on the rich side".

For best power, you still want to find the "peack", but you will enrich till you loose 100 degree F... or 50 only, I don't recall.

If you don't have EGT or CHT guage, you can do it by ear by listening on the engine RPM.

Also, when you apply carburetor heat, because the air is warmer, it will be less dense thus you are runing slightly richer. On those small cessna, when you apply carburetor heat on the ground on engine check, you can ear/see the RPM droping from 1700 to about 1600.

Sorry that's all I know on the mixture use. I suggest you send an email to engine manufacturers like Continental or lycoming. They have ready to email documentations on how to operate their puppies.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2003, 06:50:12 PM by SFRT - Frenchy »
Dat jugs bro.

Terror flieger since 1941.
------------------------

Offline DB603

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 375
Fuel etc.
« Reply #4 on: March 01, 2003, 01:03:38 AM »
S!


 Brings up an idea of bringing EM(engine management) to AH ;) That would add some more realism to this sim...

Offline joeblogs

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 649
getting more precise
« Reply #5 on: March 01, 2003, 09:30:30 AM »
This is good, but I need to verify whether or not the fuel mixtures that will maximize an engine's power, or its fuel economy, are the same across engines.  

If that is true there's a whole lot if information we can back out of the data regularly posted here.  If not... oh well

-blogs

Quote
Originally posted by SFRT - Frenchy
For my part I learned that the ratio was 15:1:)

I would disagree on runing rich on idle. If you do so, you may have a funy feeling while you apply full power on the runway.

In General Aviation aircrafts, here is what you do :

Lean the mixture on the ground to prevent spark plugs foolings. On take off at sea level, you usually don't take risks of a too lean mixture so you apply full rich. As you climb, you need to decrease the amount of fuel (lean) to compensate from the decrease in air density. (maintain 15:1).

If you start to ear "detonation" or his little brother "pre-ignition", you want to cool down your cylinders. One way to achive cooling is by allowing more fuel to "wet the cylinder", so you enrich your mixture.

In cruise, if you want best economy you pull the mixture and watch your CHT/EGT guage. As you lean it, the temperature will raise, then decrease again. Lean as necessary to be at "the peack" then enrich a little bith more to be "on the rich side".

For best power, you still want to find the "peack", but you will enrich till you loose 100 degree F... or 50 only, I don't recall.

If you don't have EGT or CHT guage, you can do it by ear by listening on the engine RPM.

Also, when you apply carburetor heat, because the air is warmer, it will be less dense thus you are runing slightly richer. On those small cessna, when you apply carburetor heat on the ground on engine check, you can ear/see the RPM droping from 1700 to about 1600.

Sorry that's all I know on the mixture use. I suggest you send an email to engine manufacturers like Continental or lycoming. They have ready to email documentations on how to operate their puppies.

Offline HoHun

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
Re: getting more precise
« Reply #6 on: March 01, 2003, 10:44:17 AM »
Hi Joe,

>This is good, but I need to verify whether or not the fuel mixtures that will maximize an engine's power, or its fuel economy, are the same across engines.  

For economical operation at the stoichiometric fuel-air-ratio, it's obviously constant per fuel type.

I'm not sure every engine could be run continuously at the stochiometric point. I'd speculate that's where the additional sensors and instrumentation of the post-war engines were required.

For maximum power, the mixture is engine-dependend as you have to add as much fuel as required to convey the heat that can't be transferred out of the engine by other means.

(With methanol-water injection, engines tend to run very economically considering the total liquid consumption and the power output.)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Offline joeblogs

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 649
Re: Re: getting more precise
« Reply #7 on: March 01, 2003, 07:59:24 PM »
It is as I was afraid then.  There's an ideal, but you may not be able to hit it if you can't dissipate enough heat...

Thanks all - Blogs


Quote
Originally posted by HoHun
Hi Joe,

>This is good, but I need to verify whether or not the fuel mixtures that will maximize an engine's power, or its fuel economy, are the same across engines.  

For economical operation at the stoichiometric fuel-air-ratio, it's obviously constant per fuel type.

I'm not sure every engine could be run continuously at the stochiometric point. I'd speculate that's where the additional sensors and instrumentation of the post-war engines were required.

For maximum power, the mixture is engine-dependend as you have to add as much fuel as required to convey the heat that can't be transferred out of the engine by other means.

(With methanol-water injection, engines tend to run very economically considering the total liquid consumption and the power output.)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)