Close



Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 92
  1. #26
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Nice work.


    Truth and reconcilliation time for net hp reading at flywheel.



    Find your likely net peak horsepower level, and scale between the two knowns.

    1.5 mm or 59 thou insert on 201 cubic inch 3.294 liter engine with 115 hp

    0.7 mm or 27.5 thou on 308 cubic inch 5.047 liter engine with 169 hp.

    Using a linear regression, you can work out what a 35 thou bleed back is in terms of peak HP.


    142 HP should be 43.25 thou.


    156 hp should be 35.38 thou.



    The flow meters bleed back is peak fuel load related, that is its scala adjustment, just like pulse width or Pin 34 Flow meter.

    Bleed back was well understood based on the hydraulic grade line, the bleed back without flow restriction is based on a Holley jet if it were a 35 call size in cc per minute at a given flow drop.

  2. #27
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    % differences by scale and linear regression between knowns.


    35 thou would be a little ropey, but its peak flow readings can be estimated by proportion. Using an Xls file, check the curve formed, you can then estimate the flow rate.


    http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthre...code-Carb-Jets
    Red indicates the best estimate figures. HolleyWeber and Holley 2300/4150/4160/4165/41754180/4500 jets are not the same, and I've not seen all the data for all jets 40 to 59. Smaller jets have more headloss, and flow much worse than there area would suggest. Those from 60 to 100 are form the Barry Grant © 1997, catalogue
    123 cc/min or 40 thou nominal, 40 call size jet
    129 cc/min or 41 thou nominal, 41 call size jet
    136 cc/min or 42 thou nominal, 42 call size jet
    142 cc/min or 43 thou nominal, 43 call size jet
    149 cc/min or 44 thou nominal, 44 call size jet
    157 cc/min or 45 thou nominal, 45 call size jet
    164 cc/min or 45 thou nominal, 46 call size jet
    171 cc/min or 47 thou nominal, 47 call size jet; so 43F Flows approx 171 cc/min
    178 cc/min or 48 thou nominal, 48 call size jet
    185 cc/min or 48 thou nominal, 49 call size jet
    192 cc/min or 49 thou nominal, 50 call size jet
    198 cc/min or 50 thou nominal, 51 call size jet
    205 cc/min or 52 thou nominal, 52 call size jet
    212 cc/min or 52 thou nominal, 53 call size jet
    221 cc/min or 53 thou nominal, 54 call size jet
    230 cc/min or 54 thou nominal, 55 call size jet; so 50F Flows approx 230 cc/min
    239 cc/min or 55 thou nominal, 56 call size jet
    248 cc/min or 56 thou nominal, 57 call size jet
    257 cc/min or 57 thou nominal, 58 call size jet
    267 cc/min or 58 thou nominal, 59 call size jet

    David Vizard did this at 3 to 6 psi readings for a return line floatless fuel delivery system in page 161 of Modifying Fords SOHC engine.

    https://www.scribd.com/doc/26804743/...s-David-Vizard

  3. #28
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Righto bleedback calculation is based on Pressure = rho.g.h

    Vizards graph was for another purpose, so the hp per fuel bowel stricture isn't relevant, but the jet sizes per hp at each 3, 4, 5 and 6 psi operative pressure gradient are exactly what you require.

    Weber carbs are designed to operate at 3 to 4.2 psi

    Americanised Holley Webers, 3 to 5 psi

    Holleys, 5 to 7 psi

    2150 Motorcrafts and Holley 4180/4190, 8.5 psi according to the HO 2 and 4v fuel pump flow and pressure range from the 1982 to last year of the 4bbl in trucks, approx 1988.

    Here is page 167 (not 161 "solly")




    Your fuel pump was factory rated at a 8.5 psi test pressure.

    The bleed back function for your 20G flow meter will be based on the lower part of Vizards curve, with the pressure rating likely to be above 6 psi if its a 4180 4bbl.

    Ford did a lot of changes to avoid float bowel abd fuel perculation problems...the later Std Output 5.0's from 82 to 85 which were still 2150 2bbl also got the higher spec fuel pump, and a standard vapor return line if Trip Minder equiped.

  4. #29
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    One Std Holley call size jet 40 is an approx 40 thou jet. It's rating is 123 cc/min at very best 12.5 to 16.1:1 Air Fuel trim, and can make 38 hp per jet.

    Operating with an open discharge with chamfer and one side of a Holley 2 or 4bbl float bowl to two jets, he peggs it as being able to "bleed forward" 75 hp at 6psi with one 40 thou restrictor jet.

    So bleed off would be similar.

    Although those 59 and 27.5 thou restrictions are based on peak hp at 115 to 169, the bleedback at 35 thou and 5 psi would be 50 hp for a nominal 156 hp engine.


    156 hp, minus 50 hp of bleedoff off with a 5 psi operating pump would come in as a 36 thou jet from the chart.
    Bleed off hole size needs to be the peak net hp divided by 1.47, and read the jet, pressure and hp bleed off from chart 13.3

  5. #30
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    #26 to #30 just general info.

    Your FlowScan 20B I guess calculates the flow movement and probably has the Gasoline Sensor Kit w/Pulsation Damper. G forces might change the readings on a terra firma installation. A 2 stroke boat won't produce the G forces a Mustang will.

    So all that above relates only to the original type Ford/GM sensor, with bleed back.

    The proportional fuel consumption difference with the 35 thou bleed back and without should be 1.47 on, but in your case, it might create a fuel surge condition to the FlowScan sensor.

  6. #31

    Default

    In the FloScan installation manual it said that the pulsation dampener was only necessary to eliminate erratic [analog] gauge movement at low flow rates when using a mechanical pump. It said that the pulsation would have no effect on the volume measurement.

    The refresh rate of the Tripminder is several seconds. I opted to install the flow sensor without the pulsation dampener figuring that the Tripminder is averaging out the reading. The MPG reading on the Tripminder is very stable. If it's flat ground and I don't change throttle position at all then the MPG displayed does not fluctuate. At the same time, it is also responsive. Any little change that affects mileage shows up right away. This is a fun little gadget.

  7. #32

    Default

    Hmmm... I made a new bleed orifice with the smallest drill I have, 0.016". It didn't change the readings as much as I'd hoped. It displays only 11 MPG on the freeway, a far cry from the 18 MPG it showed when the bleed was completely blocked. It doesn't shoot up when I let off the gas at high speed either. It goes up a few MPG but nothing like it did without a bleed.

    Plan B: Find a normally open fuel solenoid that will block the return line when the engine is running and open up again when I park to prevent the hot start issue.

  8. #33

    Default

    I installed a normally open solenoid on the bleed line so it will block the line when the key is on. The Instantaneous MPG numbers came right back up and look normal. What's odd is that the Average MPG number went down. It was showing 5.x MPG with the bleed line open and now it's 4.x MPG. I wonder if it does need a pulsation dampener. Although, I would think that would affect the instantaneous measurement more than the total.

  9. #34
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    It might have a KAM (keep ailve memory), and be measuring previously stored values as the numerator over denominator.

    Well done. As an ecomodder, I think your in ball park.

    The stock brass Vapor kit

    or Regulator,

    or Vapor return line (bleed back ),

    as well as a flow sensor body might have fuel return just before the measurement impellor.

    It might not be a through the sensor bleed back.

  10. #35

    Default

    I don't think it's a memory issue. When I filled the gas tank, I hit the reset button twice which resets all counters. The distance traveled is accurate but the gallons used is WAY off the mark. Below 25 MPH it says I'm getting one or two MPG so this must be when it's racking up the gallons used counter.

    I think it's safe to assume the Ford flow sensor put the bleed ahead of the vane. The pressure differential across an orifice from the high side of the fuel pump to the tank [atmosphere] is astronomical compared to the pressure differential accross the vane in the flow sensor. There is no way you can make the orifice small enough to mimick the minute flow past the vane.

    The vapor return on the Ford sensor must be only that, a vapor return. The FloScan documentation warns that any vapor in the sensor will have a huge impact on the accuracy. They have explicit instruction for mounting it level and at a low point in the system so that it remains flooded. Since the Ford sensor was mounted on top of the engine it needed a separate vapor line to assure the vane saw only liquid fuel.

  11. #36

    Default

    I made a quick pulsation dampener by putting a "T" at the input of the fuel pump then running three feet of 3/8" rubber fuel line up the side of the engine bay from there and plugged the end of the line with a bolt. That has roughly the same volume as the spherical dampener that FloScan sells.

    I only made one quick trip but it definitely made a positive improvement. It now shows 10-12 MPG when I'm putting through the neighborhood where it only showed 1-2 MPG before.

  12. #37
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    ohhh, youre a tight wad....Vans Air Force Forums said the same thing....http://www.vansairforce.com/communit...ad.php?t=78414



    that gear shift knobb like thang?




    I guess it beats the Flo-Scan Pulsation Dampener #233-080-00,

    Flo-Scan Homogenizer / Pulsation Dampener #233-041-00 or #233-076-00.

    Who'da thunk?

  13. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xctasy View Post
    ohhh, youre a tight wad....


    The Mr. Crabs reference cracked me up! Yeah, I suppose I'm guilty of that from time to time, though I like to think of it as being "resourceful".

    I e-mailed Floscan this morning to inquire about the calibration of the 20B sensor. Kevin informed me that the approximate pulse/gallon is 45,000. So if everything was working correctly, the fuel counter should read a bit low, not high.

    Going through the Floscan troubleshooting guide, it says that a high volume reading could be caused by a suction leak admitting air into the sensor, or a filter with too fine of mesh which can cause aeration. They say the filter must be over 30 microns to prevent aeration and as much as 800 microns to prevent the sensor from being jammed.

    I looked up the specs for the Wix inline filter I'm using and it is 20 microns. Digging through their web site, there is a 50 micron filter [33027] and a 140 micron filter [33200]. I'll try the 140 micron filter to see if that will fix it. If not, then hunting down suction leaks will be the next step.

  14. #39

    Default

    Lowest average i ever got mine to read was 4.9 mph, and that took alot.
    2 1986 cougars (both 4 eyed and 5.0)
    1 1987 cougar

  15. #40
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    I can do Zero miles per gallon if I don't move the car....Huston traffic jamb style.

  16. #41

    Default

    50mph at wot is about 10mpg. Time to get funky on that traffic jam. For gas mileage sake.
    2 1986 cougars (both 4 eyed and 5.0)
    1 1987 cougar

  17. #42
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haystack View Post
    50mph at wot is about 10mpg. Time to get funky on that traffic jam. For gas mileage sake.
    Burnouts in traffic help fuel consumption. But get you arrested.

    "Sorry officer, I was just tryin' to improve my Trip Minder Fuel Consumption...."

  18. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xctasy View Post
    Burnouts in traffic help fuel consumption. But get you arrested.

    "Sorry officer, I was just tryin' to improve my Trip Minder Fuel Consumption...."
    HA HA! That very thought occurred to me when traffic came to a stop on the freeway yesterday. No... I didn't try it.

  19. #44

    Default

    I replaced the 20 micron fuel filter with a 140 micron fuel filter this morning. It's kind of too soon to tell but it doesn't appear to be much of an improvement. I'll top off the tank tomorrow and reset all the counters. Should know after a few days if it's working right or not.

  20. #45

    Default

    It's definitely working better with the 140 micron filter but still occasionally "glitches out." I suspect that it still has air in the line. I'm going to try purging the line by pulling the bolt from the dampener and pointing it down to a gas can then pressurizing the tank.

  21. #46

    Default

    Still no luck getting a consistent reading from the flow sensor. Some times it reads correctly, other times it shows about half the MPG. At this point the fuel line is a cobbled together mess so a suction leak is likely. I'm tempted to make an all new hard line from the tank with AN fittings on the fuel filter and sensor so the only remaining barb fitting is where it hooks to the pump.

  22. #47
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    You need to create the same volume sphere, mr obeone Knob-e.




    The entrained air is trapped in the upper portion, and reintroduced by small, fine sub 40 micron proportion.

    Gear shift knob...lets reverse engineer a gear knob and run the fuel line through it!






    The knob lookes like my 1-7/8 tow hitch....lets see now....a hollow tow hitch.....

  23. #48
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,961

    Default

    Vans Air Force Forums also said.....
    The ball is SS and about 2" in diameter. With a carbed engine, I doubt the ball will ever fill with fuel. Photo here.
    Standard Flow Gasoline Pulsation Damper Assembly




    https://www.lowpricedoorknobs.com/co...4960-4961-4968

    Crome [260]



    or

    Brass (shown in Polished Brass [030])

    Choices are

    Polished Brass [030]
    Satin Brass & Black [050]
    Oil Rubbed Bronze [102]
    Venetian Bronze [112]
    Satin Nickel [150]
    Antique Nickel [151]
    Polished Chrome [ 260]
    Satin Crome [264]
    Polished Nicke [140]




    it might be 6.30 to 10.50 ping, but Please note: The 1-1/2" ( 4968 ) Spherical knob is NOT available in 112 & 140 finishes.

    4960 = 1.0"

    4961 = 1-1/4"

  24. #49

    Default

    I got an idea to try and improve the accuracy of this Tripminder and simplify the plumbing. The gauge appears to read correctly when going down the road it's only when the throttle is closed that it seems to over sample. I picture the vane starting and stopping due to low flow and uneven demand from the mechanical pump.

    My thought is to eliminate the solenoid on the vapor return line so there will always be sufficient flow to keep the sensor vane spinning, then compensate the reading with a microcontroller. I was originally thinking that it would need a second flow sensor on the return line but then it occurred to me that it is a fixed orifice at a fixed pressure so the return line flow should be constant. I can just measure the return line flow (time how long it takes to fill a 1 gallon gas can) then enter this value into the microcontroller program. The micro will read the sensor output, calculate flow, subtract the return line flow, apply a correction factor (since the sensor puts out ~45k P/Gal and the meter expects 48k P/Gal), then generate the correct signal for the Tripminder.

  25. #50

    Default

    Here is the code I wrote for an SX18AC microcontroller; http://www.gofastforless.com/junk/Fu...Calibrator.src. It's all debugged and tested, ready to go.

    I found a PIC12F675 8-pin microcontoller in my stash that would be a much better fit for this application. It shouldn't be too hard to translate the code, though the PIC micro won't run one instruction per clock like the SX micro so it may take some fiddling.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •