P plate training ...not
in [Aussie Motorcycles]
|
Prev: new tv project
Next: Honda VTR coolant boiling ?
From: sharkey on 12 Feb 2007 23:56 Knobdoodle <knobdoodle(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > Sharkey is popping around with his oscilloscope, so will see if that *is* > > going on in the car. > > Oscilloscopes measure fuel usage now do they? Hooked up to the injector drive, yeah, you could get a pretty accurate _relative_ measure of fuel consumption, maybe +/- 1% if you really worked at it. It's not quite the right tool for the job, but it's close. Hammo wanted to establish that bike regulators are no longer shunt regulators like old Truimph "zeners". Actually, I think I can establish that more easily with a half-decent thermometer: if the regulator is switch-mode, its heatsink temperature should go _UP_ slightly under headlight load, whereas if it's shunt, its heatsink temperature should go _DOWN_ under headlight load. Doing this experiment is left as an exercise to the reader. ------sharks -- Du verschwendest �bertragungskapazit�ten.
From: Hammo on 13 Feb 2007 00:38 On 13/2/07 12:10 PM, in article bigiain-3745C3.12100213022007(a)nasal.pacific.net.au, "Iain Chalmers" <bigiain(a)mightymedia.com.au> wrote: > In article > <45d04432$0$31863$5a62ac22(a)per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>, > "Nev.." <idiot(a)mindless.com> wrote: > >> G-S wrote: >>> Nev.. wrote: >>>> Knobdoodle wrote: >>>> >>>>> [crinkles brow] >>>>> What's this new diversion you're trying now Hammo? >>>>> "the inefficiencies of the internal combustion engine."?!!? >>>>> What the hell has that got to do with the fuel waste through >>>>> unnecessary use of driving lights? >>>> >>>> Eh? I thought we'd already established that there was no waste, or, >>>> if there was, it was only measurable at a theoretical level. >>>> >>> No we established that you car fuel measuring device wasn't sensitive >>> enough to measure it but that practical measurment devices for measuring >>> the effect did in fact exist :) >> >> No. I established 'facts' by gathering data, you made 'unsubstantiated >> allegations' about the data collection method in order to discredit that >> data. > > And I calculated that 120W of headlights consumes something like 100mL > per hour plus or minus 40%. > > Nobody has challenged those numbers, and my sanity check calculations > seem to indicate I'm at least in the right order of magnitude with that > figure... I still argue thimbles, though no body cares, I'd go for an order of magnitude lower. I cannot differentiate between the fuel use with lights on vs lights off. Air-conditioning is an all together different matter. Hammo (I'll post my calcs when I get back home, probably after I post the belated pics of roadside furniture to Theo).
From: Hammo on 13 Feb 2007 00:48 On 13/2/07 3:56 PM, in article slrnet2h80.vsh.sharkey(a)anchovy.zoic.org, "sharkey" <sharkey(a)zoic.org> wrote: > Knobdoodle <knobdoodle(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Sharkey is popping around with his oscilloscope, so will see if that *is* >>> going on in the car. >> >> Oscilloscopes measure fuel usage now do they? > > Hooked up to the injector drive, yeah, you could get a pretty accurate > _relative_ measure of fuel consumption, maybe +/- 1% if you really > worked at it. It's not quite the right tool for the job, but it's > close. > > Hammo wanted to establish that bike regulators are no longer shunt > regulators like old Truimph "zeners". > > Actually, I think I can establish that more easily with a half-decent > thermometer: if the regulator is switch-mode, its heatsink temperature > should go _UP_ slightly under headlight load, whereas if it's shunt, > its heatsink temperature should go _DOWN_ under headlight load. > > Doing this experiment is left as an exercise to the reader. You've really done it now, Sharkey, Now you'll have to be on my side! Hammo "We've got videos to talk about, haven't we, Mike?"
From: Hammo on 13 Feb 2007 00:50 On 13/2/07 4:15 PM, in article 1171343723.258542.248050(a)j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com, "jlittler(a)my-deja.com" <jlittler(a)my-deja.com> wrote: > On Feb 12, 6:15 pm, Hammo <hbaj2...(a)aapt.net.au> wrote: >> On 12/2/07 10:43 AM, in article >> >> >> >> >> >> <jlitt...(a)my-deja.com> wrote: >>> On Feb 11, 11:50 pm, Hammo <hbaj2...(a)aapt.net.au> wrote: >>>> <knobdoo...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>> "Hammo" <hbaj2...(a)aapt.net.au> wrote: >>>> Now fuel systems are all about air to fuel ratio. Best situation is when >>>> the ratio is adjusted for all situations. Hence EFI becoming better and >>>> better wrt emissions. Why? It's not magic, it is due to the monitoring of >>>> the system and adjustments that are made via many circuits many times per >>>> second. What is based on? What measurement could possibly do this, what >>>> principle? Stoichiometry. >> >>>> I.e. The equation for combustion wrt air:fuel ratio. That monitors how >>>> much >>>> fuel is required. It is calculated via moles of fuel based on the RON. >>>> This is why some cars run better, or require higher octane fuels (wrt EFI). >> >>>> If you have a running total of fuel used based on the chemical reaction, >>>> you >>>> have a better indication than fuel flow as it relates to the chemistry, >>>> i.e. >>>> irreversible chemical reaction that converts fuel to energy. >> >>> <doubtful look> maybe the F1 teams do this, but too bloody expensive >>> for a run of the mill road car. >> >> No, I don't think so, and I this is why the focus on the need for a "fuel >> flow measure" to be utter bollocks. Clem claims it to be obfuscation. > > <raised eyebrow> Who said you needed a fuel flow measurement to > improve fuel economy/efficiency ? > > JL > (I've said repeatedly you can't make assumptions about a multitude of > things, calculate a fuel flow and then claim you know it's > particularly accurate though) Thank you, Mr Echo. Your support is much appreciated. Hammo >
From: Theo Bekkers on 13 Feb 2007 01:04
Hammo wrote: > I still argue thimbles, though no body cares, I'd go for an order of > magnitude lower. I cannot differentiate between the fuel use with > lights on vs lights off. So because you can't differentiate the fuel use there is none? > (I'll post my calcs when I get back home, probably after I > post the belated pics of roadside furniture to Theo). A lounge suite in a layby? Theo |