Subject: Traditional Megasquirt aircraft problems better
From: rotaryeng
Date: 7/10/2012, 11:27 AM
To: AAAA Put this in the To box



 The Megasquirt was initially rejected for aircraft use as there was no
 method of
 manually leaning it. The other problem was the Megasquirt relies on the O2
 sensor to
 set the mixture. O2 sensors are damaged by 100LL. A third problem was the
 throttle
 position sensor TPS was required.

 As I recall Tracy used these problems years ago as the rational for doing
 his super
 simple system that uses only manifold air temperature MAT/IAT and manifold
 air
 pressure MAP to set the mixture at any RPM. Therein lies part of the
 problem tuning
 Tracy's system.  Some people have taken a year of flying to get it right.

 The last thing was the Megasquirt rotary engine ignition problem. The
 rotary engine
 ignition problem could be solved using extra hard ware and was solved but
 it was a
 messy kludge.

 I agreed with him at the time. That was years (10) before I had the idea
 of using one
 cheap Megasquirt per rotor. One per rotor is likely to eventually simply
 solve the
 ignition problem using off the shelf computer trigger inductive coils like
 the LS1
 and the RX8 coils with out using one CD system per plug. One CD system per
 plug is
 more expensive than a computer triggered inductive coil like the LS1 or
 RX8.

 I know Motorola/FreeScale  68K asm code so in theory I can fix these
 problems by
 recoding the chip.

 Another way of leaning the Megasquirt is trick the MS computer by manually
 adjusting
 the O2 sensor input voltages and simulating the TPS as wide open with
 voltage
 dividing potentiometers.

 Perry Mick does something like that using a stock RX7 computer and
 probably has over
 1000 hours on it.

 The siren song of the Megasquirt was and still is the built in simple
 EFIS, easy
 tuning using a note book computer and data logging.

 Time and new technology and new ideas tend to change old rational.

 Paul Lamar


   I've thought about the leaning problem with MS for the past couple years
   sense the issue has come up. Seems you could leave out the O2 sensor and
   replace it with a pot after the running parameters have been programmed.
   Then read your egt for best mix.

   Seems we could also modify the injector dwell time similarly. I have a
   couple MS2 boxes and will loan you one if you like. I'm all for using
 two
   crank triggers, optical, hall, or whatever for a CD setup.

   Ed Carver

   Yes! I would like to test them Ed. I can come over and pick them up.

   Paul Lamar


 Any time I guess, give me a heads up the night before.

 Ed Carver

 OK Ed.

 Paul Lamar



 Hi   Paul,
 I have been using two MS systems on a 4 cyl
 opposed engine for some time, am about to test on a dyno. I run the two
 MS with two complete system sensors,ie., TPS, IAT,CYL temp, MAP,
 seperate fuel pumps ect.,with RPM triggered from two separate sensors. I
 was running using the original ignition system, but one failed so I
 upgraded the MS board with a daughter board which enabled me to control
 ignition timing, which for me involved relearning how to control the
 ignition advance.

 The two systems run on the same injectors, two leds on
 the dash tell me if both are triggering the injectors,(you can switch
 either system off using either the ignition trigger or the power to the
 MS system without affecting the running of the engine), BUT, I have not
 figured out why when you switch either MS system back on with what you
 had switched off the motor runns like SH--t, until you turn off the
 system again that you had originally switched off!!


 I think it is
 something to do with MS on switch on looking at the MAP sensor and maybe
 not being able to get a steady voltage from the ignition sensor?? I
 reasoned that as the systems were switching the earth on the injectors
 that the left hand would not know what the right hand was doing, and it
 seems to be the case, except when one switches off one system!!! I have
 used the O2 sensor to program the fuel mixture, the thinking was that
 I would remove the O2 sensor after programming. I must be missing
 something with what people are saying about leaning in flight, surely
 that if you have a system that adjusts mixture for altitude, and load why
 would you want to fiddle in flight, after programming the mixture to be
 progressively richer at higher and higher manifold pressures, and/or RPM??


 If starting again I would buy the later system with the ignition
 controller built in, even if I was not using the ignition part of the
 system, the systems are so well assembled (when bought fully assembled)
 I do not think it is worth the bother to assemble oneself.  MS does not
 rely on the O2 sensor to set the mixture, that is set with the VE
 tables, you can of course use the Megatune to autotune using the O2
 sensor, but i do not know that I would trust it to tune the range of
 power/manifold pressures in aircraft in flight.
  John Burey

 It is one thing to maintain stoichiometric mixture with changes in
 altitude and quite
 another to lean. Leaning an engine will improve the BSFC any altitude and
 also at the
 expense of power. Most car engines will maintain stoichiometric at all
 times.
 This is a fundamental difference with aircraft engines. Every licensed
 pilot is
 taught this.

 My implementation of two MS systems on a rotary are entirely independent.
 The rotor one system never tries to control rotor two and vice versa.

 Paul Lamar
 -

 John,
 Thanks for relating that experience!  But even if your injector was steady
 on
 as long as the plug was still firing, there was still combustion taking
 place in
 the combustion chamber instead of the exhaust system unless the resultant
 mixture was just too rich to combust properly...dont know...
 Gene Kahn

Gene,
   Oh I'm quite certain it was far too rich to ignite.

John Gibbons



-- The Rotary Engine News Letter. Powered by Linux. ACRE NL web site. http://www.rotaryeng.net You Tube key word PaulLamar2 Copyright 1998-2012 All world wide rights reserved.