DIY_EFI Digest Sunday, 10 January 1999 Volume 04 : Number 026 In this issue: Re: Memcal ID 730 Malf Flags Re: Heat sink compound Re: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) Re: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) Re: Heat sink compound vs. dialectic RE: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) Non-linear fuel pressure reg Re: Heat sink compound Re: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 Re: Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 Re: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) Re: Non-linear fuel pressure reg Re: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) Re: Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 Re: Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 Re: Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 Re: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) Re: Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 Re: Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 Fp regulator mods Re: 2 Bar MAP V-8 Re: Wide Ratio Bosch O2 Re: Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 NON GROUP Re: Fp regulator mods See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 10:25:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Memcal ID - -----Original Message----- From: Shannen Durphey Subject: Re: Memcal ID >> Anyone show a listing for a 4892 BHRJ, er what application it's for. >> How about a BDKC 4895?. The BDKC should be around 93-4 >> Bruce >I show a BDKC 6859 1993 G van 5.7, 4l60e, 3.42 ratio >Also, BHRJ 5896 fits 1994 4.3l W (Astro/S10 Vortech) >May be like a couple I have. Is there any part # on either chip? >Shannen Dumb Bruce strikes again, The lettering was smeared, but using glasses, and a magnifing glass those numbers/BCC's are right. thanks Bruce I quess all 8 of us need new prescriptions, for glasses, and probably meds.. > ------------------------------ From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 11:25:37 -0500 Subject: 730 Malf Flags This is basically an extension of Programming 101, so if it's confusing reading thru 101 will make it "readable". This is for the 730 ecm, AUJP calibration. 0249 12 13 14 15 16 21 22 23 024A 24 25 26 31 32 33 34 35 024B 36 41 42 43 44 45 46 51 024C Continuation of 50 series malfunction codes 024D Appears to be even several more malfunction codes. Again this is from brute force cracking, and is for educational purposes. I'm not an EE, and the above appears correct to me. Bruce ------------------------------ From: Frederic Breitwieser Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 16:40:41 +0000 Subject: Re: Heat sink compound > My only worry would be that are heat sink compount always going to > provide insulation? Or are some conductive enough to cause problems? Again, it depends on the product. When you purchase it, as others suggested, you should stick your ohmmeter leads into a dab of it to see its conductivity. The way I design things is to always bolt, crew or clamp the device to the heat sink, therefore the heat sink is part of the circuit. > anything else it happened to do besides that really depended on what > was in the heat sink compound. It would make me believe it may even YOu're correct on this... different compounds give better/worse heat and better/worse electrical properties based on its make-up. - -- Frederic Breitwieser Bridgeport, CT 06606 http://www.xephic.dynip.com 1993 Superchaged Lincoln Continental 1989 500cid Turbocharged HWMMV 1975 Dodge D200 Club Cab 2000 Buick GTP (twin turbo V6) ------------------------------ From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 10:00:11 -0700 Subject: Re: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) >On Sat, 9 Jan 1999 14:02:03 -0700 bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) writes: > >>Saw an ad in a pals copy of "Vintage Views", a vintage motorcycle racing >>as'sn. newsletter. It is some sort of a proprietary carbide conversion >>which they do to the surface of the cast iron. They mention thermal and >>friction advantages as well as "incredible" bore life. >> >>Regards, Greg > >Getting rings to seat must be "incredible", too :) > >Would you use cast iron, chrome, or molybdenum rings with a carbide bore? > > >Ray Drouillard I talked to Bore Tech about a year ago, Ray. They want the bores finished to their final size before you send them to them, and they want them POLISHED to about an 8 u-inch finish--no cross hatch pattern stuff!!! Obviously, this is a whole different ballgame from what we are used to! Chrome rings are supposed to be the ticket--clearly they are the hardest and longest wearing. My plan is to use forged pistons (from 2618 Al) and have them hard anodized about .002" thick, so as to get both high strength and excellent wear resistance (as well as the thermal advantages of the hard anodizing). Not common knowlege, but Cummins hard anodizes at least part of the pistons in some of their high horsepower 855's! Bore Tech claims that the rings will seat OK with conventional use, my plan is to come up a stray cylinder liner (from something else) which can be finished to the correct bore, and also carbide treated. Then use the liner and an old piston (or make something) as a lap and a holder for the new rings, and hand lap the rings to pre-seat them prior to assembly of the motor. Regards, Greg > >___________________________________________________________________ >You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. >Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html >or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] ------------------------------ From: "David A. Cooley" Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:19:27 -0500 Subject: Re: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) At 10:00 AM 1/10/99 -0700, you wrote: > >Bore Tech claims that the rings will seat OK with conventional use, my plan >is to come up a stray cylinder liner (from something else) which can be >finished to the correct bore, and also carbide treated. Then use the liner >and an old piston (or make something) as a lap and a holder for the new >rings, and hand lap the rings to pre-seat them prior to assembly of the >motor. I was always under the impression that the rings had to be seated to the cyl they'd be working in, because the polish/hone patterns would be different between bores. The rings may seat well in the "spare" liner, but then would have to re-seat all over again in the cyl they were destined for... I'd think that would cause excessive wear and increase end gaps. Later, Dave =========================================================== David Cooley N5XMT Internet: N5XMT@xxx.net Packet: N5XMT@xxx. Member #7068 I am Pentium of Borg...division is futile...you will be approximated. =========================================================== ------------------------------ From: "John Hess" Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 11:23:59 -0600 Subject: Re: Heat sink compound vs. dialectic dialectic \ A process of reasoning based on the clash of one idea with its opposite leading to a resolution of these ideas in the form of a truer or more comprehensive concept. (The new Britannica Webster Dictionary Reference Guide). I don't think so! Could you possibly mean dielectric? If so, the answer yes, no, maybe, sometimes, always, and never; but, not necessarily in that order. There are both conductive and non-conductive (dielectric) varieties of heat sink compounds. - -----Original Message----- From: Clarence Wood To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Saturday, January 09, 1999 1:20 PM Subject: Heat sink compound vs. dialectic > A salesperson at AutoZone tried to sell me some heat sink compound stating that it was a dialectic. Of course I challenged the statement and he told me that he had used heat sink compound to insure good connections. > Is heat sink compound a dialectic? Curious minds want to know! > > >IZCC #3426 > 1982 280ZX Turbo GL > 1966 El Camino > 1982 Yamaha Maxim XJ-1101J Motorcycle > 1975 Honda CB750 SS (black engine) > 1986 Snapper Comet lawn mower >Clarence Wood >Software&Such... >clarencewood@xxx.net >Savannah, TN. > ------------------------------ From: Marc Piccioni Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 11:34:49 -0700 Subject: RE: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) It would be interesting to take cylinder leakdown measurements at a regular interval and determine ring seating/wear rates. - ---------- From: Greg Hermann[SMTP:bearbvd@xxx.net] Sent: January 10, 1999 10:00 AM To: diy_efi@xxx.edu Subject: Re: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) >On Sat, 9 Jan 1999 14:02:03 -0700 bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) writes: > >>Saw an ad in a pals copy of "Vintage Views", a vintage motorcycle racing >>as'sn. newsletter. It is some sort of a proprietary carbide conversion >>which they do to the surface of the cast iron. They mention thermal and >>friction advantages as well as "incredible" bore life. >> >>Regards, Greg > >Getting rings to seat must be "incredible", too :) > >Would you use cast iron, chrome, or molybdenum rings with a carbide bore? > > >Ray Drouillard I talked to Bore Tech about a year ago, Ray. They want the bores finished to their final size before you send them to them, and they want them POLISHED to about an 8 u-inch finish--no cross hatch pattern stuff!!! Obviously, this is a whole different ballgame from what we are used to! Chrome rings are supposed to be the ticket--clearly they are the hardest and longest wearing. My plan is to use forged pistons (from 2618 Al) and have them hard anodized about .002" thick, so as to get both high strength and excellent wear resistance (as well as the thermal advantages of the hard anodizing). Not common knowlege, but Cummins hard anodizes at least part of the pistons in some of their high horsepower 855's! Bore Tech claims that the rings will seat OK with conventional use, my plan is to come up a stray cylinder liner (from something else) which can be finished to the correct bore, and also carbide treated. Then use the liner and an old piston (or make something) as a lap and a holder for the new rings, and hand lap the rings to pre-seat them prior to assembly of the motor. Regards, Greg > >___________________________________________________________________ >You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. >Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html >or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT M>)\^(A<2`0:0" `$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y 0```````#H``$-@ 0` M`@````(``@`!!) &`& !```!````# ````,``# #````"P`/#@`````"`?\/ M`0```&$`````````@2L?I+ZC$!F=;@#=`0]4`@````!D:7E?969I0&5F:3,S M,BYE;F``,P`0`` M`"(```!D:7E?969I0&5F:3,S,BYE;F5]E9FE 969I,S,R+F5N9RYO M:&EO+7-T871E+F5D=2<``@$+, $````G````4TU44#I$25E?149)0$5&23,S M,BY%3D`' ``0```#$```!2 M13H@8V%R8FED92!C>6QI;F1E"R\4,C:A^$=*^G$1%4U0`````'@`> M# $````%````4TU44 `````>`!\,`0```!@```!M<&EC8VEO;FE 871T8V%N M861A+FYE= `#``80^6B"?@,`!Q"I!@``'@`($ $```!E````25173U5,1$)% M24Y415)%4U1)3D=43U1!2T5#64Q)3D1%4DQ%04M$3U=.345!4U5214U%3E13 M051!4D5'54Q!4DE.5$525D%,04Y$1$5415)-24Y%4DE.1U-%051)3DL" M@xxx.W`N0' M$P*#-!+,%,5]"H"+",\)V3L7GS(U-0* !PJ!#;$+8&YG,3 S+Q10"PH440OR M8P! ($D%!4!W"&!L9"!B93X@"X 3T!>@$\ +@&<@)'1O'?!A:QT@8WE&; N M!($@xxx.YG'- *P1U#=@= M(& >P/8@xxx.R!P!Y N"H4*BQZ@ M,3B", +1:2TQ-#0-\.<,T"83"UDQ-@J@`V 3T/IC!4 M*#<*AR;K## GMCI& M`V$Z*3XGM@xxx.AT0"L!B=BAD0',#`"XB@'1= MORC?*>T&8 (P*Q\L*TH`<%)U"L!Y(!K +#.@xxx.B6P%+!-+Q\I[0Q4 M;S%?+"MD:7E?F0W :4 Y`1K@,BX)\(!G+F]H:6\M$\ S(^$YH&1U-,\P+G5B M3FHG\3;O+"M293U 8_TN,6D-L!YX!N 7H!YP`B".=@20`) "(" H0D"",E0% MD&@I)#\E0S,V9R:W&]4GMCY/`Z &$'2O,] T(#,Q,^4T-& R-&#R,R@@,#`!X05CI"%DJ'5QS# M>0A@(-]AX%=),] 1< -A93/0!;&Q!&!L>6(-L#-0;6#EWP/P58 @D3]F0'(_ M7WY)MM1283.01 -@xxx.2 M33#N;S/0:J%7]7=:X58C0'+W!" EX ,`P]W!B(:$`D'IHL0W M0()D\M\1L"'A58%G8%8$;4W1 M+5PA56!P="@P;AX0!0#V;P01$8!T55$*L%$"`Z"U$\!U#= A>C *A4\N4/\Z M$&'@9O!C$3H`!"!1D2"@?U4@!O =(#C #= =<6^A8OT'0&Q>P%'A`U)\$2!Q M(X#?(&! D64Q;-)Z5D-F,V#E\WZ"']!P<'C ;,0=$58R]1VP8QY0="@P3P$* MP&;P_U5T?H)6,A&!#; 3P J%(=)_%S :H!V16X$*P!W!4(!-_S.0"U$#H%&1 M'@%E,G+!34!='/!P! `>``8Q*'VS,O8V)9 4L&Q)(%EH$8! \']SE(/"(<$$ M<')ABF%MTR[]); R7,![@8(0,]!1P%M2OQX!34!B`2?056 Z`&=58)L3P'S1 M9U6 A#EE>%; ?UNP?.(CA >0AY$`<%;!*/];:8&S6/9:R%;TB2>*5QW!VBE0 M@$XGT$"Q;01@`Z"Z:WAP=Q\034 ST&)M\?Y#9U B87CBBE@@4Q\1A!?_"K%2 M0U8RAX9+P5'#5O1QP;^-8WPP$:& \". !< X&>"_4%!Z5@J%;2A/``MP;9$B MGR!Q5C)GAENQ88-/2V?4WT##6(,AH64Q,]!MA@0*A?>&=)31?J%P()&-L6JQ M'HC_(G$%P(@$4<)[@1W16Z 1L/])(54S/V #H!T0"H5P=E7V_P6A%Z H`4!R M=&1,(7B!/W7[C<$CX610@%@"`Z!E,E8R_Z03A#D#D0;PAV9!8&:B'D+_I->( MT7OB"V"BX:CRFP$X7+!5B-0H0J%8/-T9!& WX2RKN&>:!X!$U!E.C!A MDO]SHU+AK_*,4A&P!M""P9*[[TZ3)"U>KU^Z7[C_N@^['YN\'4FV664!'U!N M)P5 ZR* @25U,Y!)'5)($@#0_U; !!&&I@G1OOBS, # `Q#_77=@<93""U B M(8+!P'/!5%E]I$IU>'$@xxx.B\C<,4P+FK$42Z=E-$OC-'%<\3 ;6Q) MMF\%L3]@xxx.#8V+P;)W_="SPMD%6(R M$K GM@J%%L$"`,Y@``,`$! ``````P`1$ $```! ``(#72K\<\O@$>`#T``0````4```!213H@`````(;O ` end ------------------------------ From: "Mike Pitts" Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 14:04:41 -0500 Subject: Non-linear fuel pressure reg Hello, I am thinking of modifying a stock Bosch 233 regulator to increase fuel pressure at a 2:1 ratio. Since I am not an engineer, I would like to run this by some of you who are. I am making the assumption that by increasing the diaphram surface area inside the regulator, I can increase the regulator's rate. Is this correct? So if I double the surface area, I should get a 2:1 rate. If so, I have a friend with a mill who can make new billet tops, but where can I find suitable diaphram material? I know there are other options such as an FMU or PWM Bosch regulators, but I want to do my own thing first, at minimal cost of course. PS: I've searched the archives for pertinent info, but it's kinda tough without a boolean 'and' search option. :( Thanks, - -Mike ========================================== Mike Pitts Delray Beach, FL mpitts@xxx.net ========================================== ------------------------------ From: "Randy" Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 14:46:27 -0400 Subject: Re: Heat sink compound OK, so after reading this thread I got that most HSC are insulators except the stuff that contains silver, Where do you get this stuff?, So on the CS-130 alternators the neg side of the diode pack is mounted to the case with HSC and has no screws to ground it. The screws are all insulated. On my last rebuild I used T & B"copper kote" on the ends where the positive bolt goes thru it and on the other end where I added an 8-32 nut and bolt to hold it tight and ground it. the middle I put standard HSC. Maybe the silver stuff should be used on the whole thing? Looked like a major flaw in the design to me, as I have fixed about four of these all with dead neg side diodes. Randy Braun '77 C-10 pick-up, DFI-Tuned Port, 350 '82 Firebird, DFI, ZZ3 '91 GTA, Stock ------------------------------ From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 15:01:36 -0500 Subject: Re: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) - -----Original Message----- From: Marc Piccioni To: 'diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Sunday, January 10, 1999 1:50 PM Subject: RE: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) >It would be interesting to take cylinder leakdown measurements at a regular interval and determine ring seating/wear rates. > >---------- >From: Greg Hermann[SMTP:bearbvd@xxx.net] >Sent: January 10, 1999 10:00 AM >To: diy_efi@xxx.edu >Subject: Re: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) > >>On Sat, 9 Jan 1999 14:02:03 -0700 bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) writes: >> >>>Saw an ad in a pals copy of "Vintage Views", a vintage motorcycle racing >>>as'sn. newsletter. It is some sort of a proprietary carbide conversion >>>which they do to the surface of the cast iron. They mention thermal and >>>friction advantages as well as "incredible" bore life. >>> >>>Regards, Greg >> >>Getting rings to seat must be "incredible", too :) >> >>Would you use cast iron, chrome, or molybdenum rings with a carbide bore? >> >> >>Ray Drouillard > >I talked to Bore Tech about a year ago, Ray. They want the bores finished >to their final size before you send them to them, and they want them >POLISHED to about an 8 u-inch finish--no cross hatch pattern stuff!!! >Obviously, this is a whole different ballgame from what we are used to! >Chrome rings are supposed to be the ticket--clearly they are the hardest >and longest wearing. My plan is to use forged pistons (from 2618 Al) and >have them hard anodized about .002" thick, so as to get both high strength >and excellent wear resistance (as well as the thermal advantages of the >hard anodizing). Not common knowlege, but Cummins hard anodizes at least >part of the pistons in some of their high horsepower 855's! > >Bore Tech claims that the rings will seat OK with conventional use, my plan >is to come up a stray cylinder liner (from something else) which can be >finished to the correct bore, and also carbide treated. Then use the liner >and an old piston (or make something) as a lap and a holder for the new >rings, and hand lap the rings to pre-seat them prior to assembly of the >motor. I'd think prelapping them, and then plating would be the answer. That way any machining errors are corrected, first, and then the plating would be uniform, in thickness. Anyone know for sure if the final machining on rings for the OD is grinding?????. Bruce > >Regards, Greg >> >>___________________________________________________________________ >>You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. >>Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html >>or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] > > > > > ------------------------------ From: "Mike Pitts" Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 14:57:50 -0500 Subject: Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 Just cut my regulator open. Could I change the spring to a lighter spring with a faster rate to alter the regulator's rate rather than messing with the diaphram size? TIA, - -Mike ========================================== Mike Pitts Delray Beach, FL mpitts@xxx.net ========================================== ------------------------------ From: "Bruce Plecan" Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 15:29:56 -0500 Subject: Re: Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 - -----Original Message----- From: Mike Pitts To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Sunday, January 10, 1999 3:14 PM Subject: Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 > >Just cut my regulator open. Could I change the spring >to a lighter spring with a faster rate to alter the regulator's >rate rather than messing with the diaphram size? Of the couple FMU type regulators I've seen pix of they all use larger than gm style diaphams, and in the kits they mention springs, and an orfice for changing rates. Bruce > >TIA, >-Mike >========================================== >Mike Pitts >Delray Beach, FL >mpitts@xxx.net >========================================== > > ------------------------------ From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 13:33:19 -0700 Subject: Re: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) >At 10:00 AM 1/10/99 -0700, you wrote: > >> >>Bore Tech claims that the rings will seat OK with conventional use, my plan >>is to come up a stray cylinder liner (from something else) which can be >>finished to the correct bore, and also carbide treated. Then use the liner >>and an old piston (or make something) as a lap and a holder for the new >>rings, and hand lap the rings to pre-seat them prior to assembly of the >>motor. > >I was always under the impression that the rings had to be seated to the >cyl they'd be working in, because the polish/hone patterns would be >different between bores. The rings may seat well in the "spare" liner, but >then would have to re-seat all over again in the cyl they were destined >for... I'd think that would cause excessive wear and increase end gaps. Not really so when dealing with an 8 u inch polished finish. If the bores are the same diameter (within a couple of ten thousandths, and all straight, no prob. I thought about lapping each set of rings to its own hole, but decided that the extra block clean-up was a nightmare (not to mention stray lapping compound) waiting to happen. (Lapping compound in this case would be more like jewelers' rouge than what you are used to thinking of for lapping valves. WAY finer.) Lots of serious HP boat motors are pre-seated this way. It works. Also saves a LOT of break in debris from floating around insside the engine. Regards, Greg > >Later, >Dave > >=========================================================== > David Cooley N5XMT Internet: N5XMT@xxx.net > Packet: N5XMT@xxx. Member #7068 > I am Pentium of Borg...division is futile...you will be approximated. >=========================================================== ------------------------------ From: "Peter Fenske" Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:36:23 -0800 Subject: Re: Non-linear fuel pressure reg Hi Mike and all Well you are right in a way.. Pressure ( MAP ) X area = force This is balanced by spring force.. Displacement (x) = Force/ spring constant. The displacement (x) in a linear valve gives bypass flow. Of course the bypass valve function is not linear. Maybe one of the process guys can carry this further. Point is that you should be able to achieve the same results by using a different spring constant. gl:peter ------------------------------ From: "David A. Cooley" Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 15:45:37 -0500 Subject: Re: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) At 01:33 PM 1/10/99 -0700, you wrote: > >Not really so when dealing with an 8 u inch polished finish. If the bores >are the same diameter (within a couple of ten thousandths, and all >straight, no prob. I thought about lapping each set of rings to its own >hole, but decided that the extra block clean-up was a nightmare (not to >mention stray lapping compound) waiting to happen. (Lapping compound in >this case would be more like jewelers' rouge than what you are used to >thinking of for lapping valves. WAY finer.) Lots of serious HP boat motors >are pre-seated this way. It works. Also saves a LOT of break in debris from >floating around insside the engine. > Just out of curiosity, what's the boretech treatment cost? =========================================================== David Cooley N5XMT Internet: N5XMT@xxx.net Packet: N5XMT@xxx. Member #7068 I am Pentium of Borg...division is futile...you will be approximated. =========================================================== ------------------------------ From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 14:02:55 -0700 Subject: Re: Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 >Just cut my regulator open. Could I change the spring >to a lighter spring with a faster rate to alter the regulator's >rate rather than messing with the diaphram size? I do not understand how you intend to get a "faster rate" from a "lighter" spring????? A softer rate spring would change the relationship of fuel pressure to reference pressure--shift the line to the left as it were--giving lower fuel pressure relative to a given reference pressure--and vice versa for a stiffer rate spring, but neither would not change the "rate" (slope) of the line. You need a bigger diaphragm to do what you are talking about. But really, changing the rate of the spring will not have much more effect than changing its length, as is done with an adjustable, linear rate regulator. If you want really STABLE regulation, you would need to use a device called a "balanced port" regulator---but I rather doubt that any automotive fuel pressure regulators have gone to this level of sophistication. A balanced port regulator offers much lower "offset" (error) from its set-point with changes in bypass flow than a conventional regulator is capable of achieving. But nice try!! :-) Regards, Greg > >TIA, >-Mike >========================================== >Mike Pitts >Delray Beach, FL >mpitts@xxx.net >========================================== ------------------------------ From: "David A. Cooley" Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 16:26:09 -0500 Subject: Re: Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 At 02:02 PM 1/10/99 -0700, you wrote: >>Just cut my regulator open. Could I change the spring >>to a lighter spring with a faster rate to alter the regulator's >>rate rather than messing with the diaphram size? > >I do not understand how you intend to get a "faster rate" from a "lighter" >spring????? > >A softer rate spring would change the relationship of fuel pressure to >reference pressure--shift the line to the left as it were--giving lower >fuel pressure relative to a given reference pressure--and vice versa for a >stiffer rate spring, but neither would not change the "rate" (slope) of the >line. You need a bigger diaphragm to do what you are talking about. Actually, you can change the rate with a spring... Look at the "cargo coils" sold by Dana for cars... they hav a progressively higher number of coils per length near one end... (wound closer together at one end than the other) as it's compressed, the rate increases... this way they are able to have a low rate when the car is unloaded for comfort, and a higher rate when it's loaded to keep it from bottoming out. Done on a smaller scale it could be done for a regulator, but there would be an awful lot of man (or woman) hours into researching the proper spring to get the desired effect. Later, Dave =========================================================== David Cooley N5XMT Internet: N5XMT@xxx.net Packet: N5XMT@xxx. Member #7068 I am Pentium of Borg...division is futile...you will be approximated. =========================================================== ------------------------------ From: "Mike Pitts" Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 17:44:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 >>Could I change the spring to a lighter spring with >>a faster rate to alter the regulator's rate... >I do not understand how you intend to get a "faster rate" from >a "lighter" spring????? I may not understand or use the terms correctly, but here's the hypothesis which prompted my question. The fuel pressure is lowered by vacuum on the top side of the diaphram. This is the same side the spring is on. The pressure of the fuel is on the bottom side of the diaphram. Every unit of vacuum lowers the fuel pressure by an equal amount. So, vacuum compresses the spring. My assumption is that if I make the spring *easier* to compress, the same amount of vacuum will raise the diaphram farther and result in even less fuel pressure for a given amount of vacuum. But then it occured to me, the diaphram surface area on which the fuel presses against, and the surface area of the vacuum side of the diaphram is equal. So the vacuum is probably just acting as a delta to the fuel pressure only, not the spring, and the spring is probably just setting the base pressure. In other words, a faster rate spring will simply compress more from the fuel pressure alone, then the delta created by vacuum will remain the same. So I guess there's a good chance that using a spring of a different rate won't make any difference. I know nothing about fluid mechanics, so please bear with me. After staring at this cut apart regulator some more, it occurs to me that I can easily decrease the surface area on the fuel side of the diaphram by making the return oriface much larger. The area of the diaphram (on each side) is approx. 1.6 sq/in. If I could reduce the area of the fuel side to 0.8 sq/in, will I achieve a 2:1 ratio?? Or is there a square or square root in there somewhere that means I can get a 2:1 ratio without halving the surface area? Thanks, - -Mike ========================================== Mike Pitts Delray Beach, FL mpitts@xxx.net ========================================== ------------------------------ From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 16:03:12 -0700 Subject: Re: carbide cylinder bore conversion (Bore Tech) >At 01:33 PM 1/10/99 -0700, you wrote: >> >>Not really so when dealing with an 8 u inch polished finish. If the bores >>are the same diameter (within a couple of ten thousandths, and all >>straight, no prob. I thought about lapping each set of rings to its own >>hole, but decided that the extra block clean-up was a nightmare (not to >>mention stray lapping compound) waiting to happen. (Lapping compound in >>this case would be more like jewelers' rouge than what you are used to >>thinking of for lapping valves. WAY finer.) Lots of serious HP boat motors >>are pre-seated this way. It works. Also saves a LOT of break in debris from >>floating around insside the engine. My impression was that it would be between $35 and $85 per hole, depending on size, etc. Regards, Greg >> > >Just out of curiosity, what's the boretech treatment cost? >=========================================================== > David Cooley N5XMT Internet: N5XMT@xxx.net > Packet: N5XMT@xxx. Member #7068 > I am Pentium of Borg...division is futile...you will be approximated. >=========================================================== ------------------------------ From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 16:08:27 -0700 Subject: Re: Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 >At 02:02 PM 1/10/99 -0700, you wrote: >>>Just cut my regulator open. Could I change the spring >>>to a lighter spring with a faster rate to alter the regulator's >>>rate rather than messing with the diaphram size? >> >>I do not understand how you intend to get a "faster rate" from a "lighter" >>spring????? >> >>A softer rate spring would change the relationship of fuel pressure to >>reference pressure--shift the line to the left as it were--giving lower >>fuel pressure relative to a given reference pressure--and vice versa for a >>stiffer rate spring, but neither would not change the "rate" (slope) of the >>line. You need a bigger diaphragm to do what you are talking about. > >Actually, you can change the rate with a spring... Look at the "cargo >coils" sold by Dana for cars... they hav a progressively higher number of >coils per length near one end... (wound closer together at one end than the >other) as it's compressed, the rate increases... this way they are able to >have a low rate when the car is unloaded for comfort, and a higher rate >when it's loaded to keep it from bottoming out. Done on a smaller scale it >could be done for a regulator, but there would be an awful lot of man (or >woman) hours into researching the proper spring to get the desired effect. >Later, >Dave Even if it were practical to try that, the pressure curve of the resulting regulator would be pretty strongly dependent on the "characterization" of its bypass port! Regards, Greg > >=========================================================== > David Cooley N5XMT Internet: N5XMT@xxx.net > Packet: N5XMT@xxx. Member #7068 > I am Pentium of Borg...division is futile...you will be approximated. >=========================================================== ------------------------------ From: EFISYSTEMS@xxx.com Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 18:13:31 EST Subject: Re: Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 Hi all, It has been my experience the only reason to change the spring is to match it to your fuel pressure so as to put the spring into an area where there can be sufficient movement and no coil bind....The diameter of the diaphram is the controlling factor for pressure ratio increase/decrease(Think about your power brake booster)...If you really want to start increasing pressure ratios try making more chambers of diaphrams 2, 3 stages really start cranking on the fuel pressure when boost hits these series of diaphrams.....hth's - -Carl Summers In a message dated 1/10/99 2:49:42 PM Pacific Standard Time, mpitts@ns- alpha.emi.net writes: << I may not understand or use the terms correctly, but here's the hypothesis which prompted my question. The fuel pressure is lowered by vacuum on the top side of the diaphram. This is the same side the spring is on. The pressure of the fuel is on the bottom side of the diaphram. Every unit of vacuum lowers the fuel pressure by an equal amount. So, vacuum compresses the spring. My assumption is that if I make the spring *easier* to compress, the same amount of vacuum will raise the diaphram farther and result in even less fuel pressure for a given amount of vacuum. But then it occured to me, the diaphram surface area on which the fuel presses against, and the surface area of the vacuum side of the diaphram is equal. So the vacuum is probably just acting as a delta to the fuel pressure only, not the spring, and the spring is probably just setting the base pressure. In other words, a faster rate spring will simply compress more from the fuel pressure alone, then the delta created by vacuum will remain the same. So I guess there's a good chance that using a spring of a different rate won't make any difference. I know nothing about fluid mechanics, so please bear with me. After staring at this cut apart regulator some more, it occurs to me that I can easily decrease the surface area on the fuel side of the diaphram by making the return oriface much larger. The area of the diaphram (on each side) is approx. 1.6 sq/in. If I could reduce the area of the fuel side to 0.8 sq/in, will I achieve a 2:1 ratio?? Or is there a square or square root in there somewhere that means I can get a 2:1 ratio without halving the surface area? Thanks, -Mike ------------------------------ From: "Mike Pitts" Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 18:25:06 -0500 Subject: Fp regulator mods I took some measurements and did the math. The area of the vacuum side of the FPR diaphram is 1.6 sq/in. I can reduce the area of the fuel side of the diaphram to 1.0 sq/in. Will this give me a rate of approx. 1.6:1? TIA, - -Mike ========================================== Mike Pitts Delray Beach, FL mpitts@xxx.net ========================================== ------------------------------ From: ECMnut@xxx.com Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 18:37:34 EST Subject: Re: 2 Bar MAP V-8 Amazing.. ------------------------------ From: John Andrianakis Date: Fri, 01 Jan 1999 14:38:05 +0200 Subject: Re: Wide Ratio Bosch O2 Thank you for the SAE paper number Bruce. If I come up on something else considering O2 sensors I will post it. I have lately come up to some very strange Bosch O2 sensors fitted in 1997- model VW and Seat. They look like standard foor wire sensors(2 for heater, 1 signal, 1 ecu ground) but when I tapped into the signal line I saw a range of 0-1500mV and not the usual 0-1000mV. I thought that the this 1 Volt range was the limit of the ceramic element's capability to create voltage. Though these sensors are not wide ratio I remain puzzled.??? ------------------------------ From: "Clive Apps Techno-Logicals 416 510 0020" Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 19:19:20 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: Non-linear fuel pressure reg - #2 > But then it occured to me, the diaphram surface area on which > the fuel presses against, and the surface area of the vacuum > side of the diaphram is equal. So the vacuum is probably just > acting as a delta to the fuel pressure only, not the spring, and > the spring is probably just setting the base pressure. In other > words, a faster rate spring will simply compress more from the > fuel pressure alone, then the delta created by vacuum will remain > the same. So I guess there's a good chance that using a spring > of a different rate won't make any difference. consider the vacuum to be a 2nd spring the 1st spring is a constant source the vacuum is a variable source a diff rate spring will make a change in the variable generated the base height of the spring sets the initial pressure Clive ------------------------------ From: Martin Powlette Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1999 21:50:36 -0400 Subject: NON GROUP This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --------------C9629627C5581A1D77B7153E Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I am looking for a consultant on Auto Shop Layout/Set-up and design. I know most of you guys have something to offer so please do. Things seem to be working up for the new shop. Anyone with info on tools, websites, books or finger pointers etc etc please advice. Martin - --------------C9629627C5581A1D77B7153E Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Martin Powlette Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf" begin: vcard fn: Martin Powlette n: Powlette;Martin org: Auto Service & Repairs Ltd adr: Box 1081;;;Castries;;;St.Lucia email;internet: marquise@xxx.lc title: Manager/Tech. tel;work: (758) 452-5590 tel;fax: 452-5590 tel;home: 452-6933 note: " We'll keep you moving in the right direction" x-mozilla-cpt: ;0 x-mozilla-html: FALSE version: 2.1 end: vcard - --------------C9629627C5581A1D77B7153E-- ------------------------------ From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 19:23:51 -0700 Subject: Re: Fp regulator mods >I took some measurements and did the math. The area >of the vacuum side of the FPR diaphram is 1.6 sq/in. >I can reduce the area of the fuel side of the diaphram to >1.0 sq/in. Will this give me a rate of approx. 1.6:1? Yes it will, Mike--but how (and to what) are you venting the rest of the diaphragm area on the fuel side of it?? might be easier to just vent the manifold side of the existing one to atmosphere, and add a second, bigger one with manifold pressure on one side and atm. on the other. And, yes, that way, you will have avoided having to figure a way to seal the rod that ties the two together--- Regards, Greg > >TIA, >-Mike >========================================== >Mike Pitts >Delray Beach, FL >mpitts@xxx.net >========================================== ------------------------------ End of DIY_EFI Digest V4 #26 **************************** To subscribe to DIY_EFI-Digest, send the command: subscribe diy_efi-digest in the body of a message to "Majordomo@xxx. A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace "diy_efi-digest" in the command above with "diy_efi".