Hello
Well, let's get down to business.
First of all, thank you Denis for proposing a 500 Z but ... there, it is you who jokes. An 500 Z is the very type of what to avoid taking, it ensures a failure even if the pantone works. On modern engines or pushed like those of a motorcycle, it is put to profit the phenomena of the pressure waves with the exhaust and with the admission. we change one or the other and the yield changes ... badly because left to chance. It can lose without problems 1500 turns and 15 CV to be impossible to set if one wants to make 4 in 1 badly gaulé. These machines are too difficult for now. Must take engines or pressure waves are can used. And then 4 cyl. motorcycle is more work than a mono.
For the pantone, I think we must consider the whole system as a giant carburetor. For the moment, we are doing as at the beginning of the century. The oil was heated, the vapors were swallowed, and the wealth was regulated with a small tap. We must be able to do better.
Here is the evolution:
[Img]
https://www.econologie.com/fichiers/partager/PANT1.bmp
[/ Img]
It is a schema of principle done in a hurry but:
In 2: Depression sensor that drives the 8 model servo-motor that moves the 7 wealth eel.
In 3: place of exit of the reactor and the venturi. My venturi will make 20mm. The original carbide diameter for the minimum pressure loss
In 4: air butterfly. I thought put the old carb for the Estetique but it is too worn, with leaks everywhere. If I put it on, I make sure I'm idling more than doubtful.
In 5: the reactor for now always with the 8x120 rod in an 10 tube inside so a section of 6mm².
In 6: small carb. of 5mm without its power supply
In 7: Needle nozzle of the small carburetor moved upstream of the bushel, modified to have its needle driven by the servo-motor.
Explanation of the operation:
The pressure sensor drives the servo motor. It is calibrated with the fuel flow at idle and with the flow at full load. between the two extremes, the fuel flow will be proportional to the depression in the intake. It is not exact as a process but it is simpler to achieve electronic side and not dry how much to enrich or deplete diet, it will be like that for now.
I placed the reactor after the butterfly, it is not a habit apparently because of the concerns of strong depression in the butterfly inlet closed. But placed before, I'll have trouble at low speed, slow motion. I will have to place a tight venturi in this place and a big loss of load. In addition, the reactor will be lazy at recovery, cause eliminatory carburation holes. placed after the butterfly, it should be brighter being in strong closed butterfly depression.
Because of this annoying reaction time, the distance and the mixing volume must be as small as possible between the nozzle and the intake pipe while losing the least possible charge, which makes it a story of compromise, we can not spare both.
I put a bushel in 6, between the jet and the reactor. It will have to be coupled with the butterfly 4 but they will have to have asynchronous openings, not easy. On the Petochon, I'm lucky to have a double commende for the carbu: a throttle and a throttle. At first, I would separate well the butterfly of the bushel and control them separately to know how they agree between them. Surely fastidieu to roll well but surely essential not to get stuck in the settings for a crazy time. Otherwise, I'm not fixed on its final position: must it be before or after the jet? I will continue to ponder this point. his cheek on wealth at opening and on slow motion.
Voila, I stop there for tonight, I have not said everything but there is already something to do to get reactions from all of you.
Next time I will submit an idea for the reactors and a thought on the performance of the pantone among others.
See you for the rest of our saga: "The crazy hopes of Pétochon!"
Segub
... if not so much not to do sorry research ...
