On Wednesday, April 27, 2011 09:10:28 AM Ron Jensen wrote:
> On Monday 25 April 2011 12:10:26 Hal V. Engel wrote:
> snip
>
> > The supercharger model used by JSBSim assumes a turbo charger so the
> > power and fuel consuption curves are incorrect for an engine driven
> > supercharger where more horse power (and fuel) are used to drive the
> > supercharger.
>
> The supercharger in JSBSim is not very good, but it is engine driven in
> that the pressure directly varies with engine RPM unlike a turbocharger
> which varies with mass flow rate and exhaust temperature. The model just
> does not consume any power. At some point I would like to add a
> <supercharger> and <turbocharger> ability or add functionality to simulate
> an arbitrary boost device...
I knew the model was not correct for an engine driven supercharger (IE. no
power consumed) so I assumed that it modeled a turbocharger. And as is often
the case with assumptions I was wrong.
The key is that the model "does not consume any power". For an engine driven
supercharger power consumed is substantial and goes up with altitude (assumes
the same manifold pressure) and some superchargers change drive gear ratios
and higher gear ratios consume more power. For example the Parckard V-1650-7
(the engine in the P-51D) uses almost 200 more HP to drive the supercharger in
high gear than in low gear at full take off MP. And this makes it important to
use VE and BSFC runtime functions to correctly model the HP consumed by the
supercharger otherwise the power and fuel consumption curves will not be
correct. The problem is particularly accute in aircraft with a very wide
performance envelope like the P-51 and it may be a minor issue for a crop
duster.
>
> > Using functions to set VE and BSFC at runtime gives you a way to get fuel
> > consumption and power curves close to correct but it does take a lot of
> > effort to get these functions tuned.
> >
> > snip
>
> snip
>
> > this should be fairly easy to setup
> > since you would only need to do some tuning to figure out the
> > cooling-factor for the closed and open cowl flaps and then write a simple
> > function to vary the cooling-factor with the clowl flap control position.
>
> Learning to use JSBSim stand-alone greatly simplifies this kind of tuning.
> It allows you to make multiple, identical runs while varying only a single
> variable at a time.
>
> Ron
I have not tried using JSBSim stand alone yet. It would definitely make
testing things that require repeated testing for tuning purposes faster since
it would eliminate things like start up, take off and climb out overhead which
can be very time consuming when testing from with in FG. On the other hand
this will not allow testing for anything that has a Nasal component. I try
to limit the use of Nasal but there are some things where is is nessary.
Also in this case (IE. tuning cooling-factor) it should be possible to do this
in a single FG test flight since you can vary the cooling-factor manually to
test which values result in climb outs that do not over heat (too much) and
cruise/decents that do not over cool the engine. For the cooling-factors
settings used in the P-51D it took me perhaps an hour of testing in FG to
settle on the range of values to use.
Hal
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software
The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network
management toolset available today. Delivers lowest initial
acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
