Arnt Karlsen wrote:

> 
> > Andy Ross wrote
> >
> > >
> > > Drew wrote:
> > > > IMHO, it's best to use interpolation tables rather than equations
> > > > if you're trying to curve fit empirical data.
> > >
> > > Not in this context.  The data here isn't being used to model a
> > > specific engine, but to provide sane parameters for all
> > > (super/turbochared) engines.  The performance and code size
> > > advantages of an equation here are significant.
> > >
> >
> > At the moment we are looking at gear driven centrifugal compressors.
> > Although I haven't researched it in any detail, the output of
> > turbo-driven centrifugal compressors do not have a direct relationship
> > with rpm (turbo lag), and the situation is complicated by the
> > wastegate which operates on the turbo rather than the compressor. I
> > suspect that this is another black art! Gear driven is easy in
> > comparison. When someone comes up with a turbo we may have to have
> > separate models.
> 
> ..if your supercharger code takes shaft input (shaft speed, torque or
> power), then it can be re-used in the turbocharger's compressor code.

It doesn't because a gear driven compressor has a fixed relationship to
engine rpm, and I deal with 2 speed superchargers separately, but you are
right: a centrifugal compressor neither knows nor cares if it is gear- or
turbo-driven.

> ..the turbocharger's compressor or turbo-compound engine's crankshaft
> then only needs a turbine derivering shaft outnput (shaft speed, torque
> or power) to the compressor or gear box.
> 

Now, if we knew what the turbo rpm was for a given engine rpm, and I think
we need throttle opening ... any guidance welcome. Otherwise ... it's going
to have to be magic mushrooms.

Regards,

Vivian



_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d

Reply via email to