PD-01 Jet Engine

[racket]

Hi Patty

I can't see that there'd be any problems with the way you are doing it, you are simply replacing one fuel with another.

There can be problems if using a single fuel manifold but as you have independant manifolds it shouldn't be a problem

Are your diesel injectors squirting against the evaporator wall ?

I have a 45 degree bend on the end of my injectors so that the fuel hits the inner wall of the evaporator ~8mm from the entrance and spreads out around it very quickly .

It might be beneficial for you to add some petrol to your diesel to increase its "volatiles" , ~10 - 15% petrol .

Cheers
John

[madpatty]

Hi Racket,
Actually i have adopted two methods to increase turbulence within the evaps.
One is the 'D'ing of the evaps and the other method is that i have bent the evaps in the direction opposite to compressor rotation when viewed from compressor end.

I am concerned about the droplet size from the 0.5 mm ID needles.This time i will go for an even lower ID needles.

During the last few test runs on gas, the evaps showed a good amount of heat at their primary end. One can easily tell about the heat because i am using SS304 for the evaps and flakes have started to form at the primary end of evaps whereas the tertiary end is a total different case as far as colour is concerned.

Cheers,
Patty

[madpatty]

One more thing.

I Hope Evap ID is not of concern.(too small ID etc)

I am using 6/8 mm (1mm wall thickness)tubes for evaps.

Cheers,
Patty

[racket]

Hi Patty

How did you workout using 16 evaporators at 6mm ID ??

The flow area of 452 sq mms is ~20% of inducer area , ~twice what it needs to be considering your comp is running closer to the low flow rather than ideal range .

You shouldn't have flaking of the evaps , sounds like they're overheating for some reason.

Cheers
John

[madpatty]

Hi Racket,
That was done to get fuel scattered in more smaller parts and more uniformly across the entire CC as you can see my CC is quite big circumferentialy.

I think i read it somewhere that it is a general rule of thumb and can be changed.
But if it too strict to follow then no problems i can change it anytime before running it on liquid fuel.

Can you suggest me a number of evaps i can possibly go with considering the same size evap tubes or even any bigger size(diameter)if it is better.

Cheers,
Patty

[racket]

Hi Patty

Did you include your evaporator cross sectional area into your 30% for Primary Zone hole portion , that would only leave ~10% of inducer , or ~250 sq mms, for your Primary holes .

I normally work on evaporator cross sectional flow area ~10-12% of inducer area with the total evaporator surface area ( OD ) of 6 times inducer area .

With an inducer of 54 mm of ~2300 sq mms , you'd need ~13,800 sq mms for the evaporator OD , you'd need a total of ~550 linear mms of 8mm evaporator tubing

If using 12% of inducer area for your cross section, at 6mm ID , you'd only be needing ~10 evaps , and if we divide that into our 550 linear mms , they need to be 55mm long .

Cheers
John

[madpatty]

Hi Racket,
No i didn induce that area into the primary hole area....both were calculated and implemented separately.....

Now that being said...i can go with 10 evaps made of the same tubes but then again my CC is almost 90 mm long, then the length of 55mm again poses a problem....or can i simply go with 90mm long evaps as more surface area for the evaps i think should be better for heat exchange between liquid fuel and hot combustion gases.

Cheers,
Patty

[racket]

Hi Patty

Evaporator flow area is a "hole" in the flametube and must be treated as any other hole for the calculations .

If your flametube is near 90 mm long , and you are using 8mm evaps , then your evaporator MUST finish ~12mm away from the FT front wall , so an evap ~75mm long would be OK , the bit of extra length won't hurt as your wall thickness is fairly thick at 1mm , I use 0.5mm WT tubing .

Cheers
John

[madpatty]

Hi Guys,
So things getting more and more better, atleast this is what data proves.
I blocked off 1 NGV and ran the engine today.

Even lesser TOTs and more pressure per rpm.

Ambient Temperature was 30 degrees.

And the data:-

P2       RPM       T2         TOT

10       76600     102       498

13       85500     119       495

15       91000     131       497

17       95500     147       502

18       99000     153       509


cheers,
Patty

[madpatty]

Video of the test run.



Exhaust has got some good amount of energy.

cheers,
Patty

[aukap]

This video reminds me of the jackass jet engine video

[nersut]

Apr 15, 2015 5:09:13 GMT -5 madpatty said:

Video of the test run.



Exhaust has got some good amount of energy.

cheers,
Patty

Hi Patty

You are making good progress with the turbine May I please advise you guys to wear some earplugs or some sort of hearing protection.


Cheers
Erik

[madpatty]

Thanks Erik for the concern.

Yea sure....i also want to wear ear protection(foolish i am, i should)... But just wanted to enjoy that sound which the engine starts producing after about 15 Psi P2....thats hell of thrilling sound...i simply love that...

But LOL how will i enjoy in long run without ears....!!
I will start wearing ear protection.

Cheers,
Patty

[racket]

Hi Patty

Was the blocking of 1 NGV passageway the only change to the engine ??

If it was , then your turbine wheel is the restriction to flow ..................as I've been telling you for the last year :-(

Cheers
John

[madpatty]

Hi Racket,
Yes the blocking of the NGV was the only change...
But how this relates to the restrictive turbine wheel.

It is similar to what some members had been doing with their engines, blocking off NGVs and bringing the flow back to normal....

Cheers,
Patty