fot
[Top] [All Lists]

[Fot] 89MM piston question

Subject: [Fot] 89MM piston question
From: van.mulders.marcel at telenet.be (van.mulders.marcel at telenet.be)
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 12:02:03 +0200 (CEST)
References: <CAMJWJcHsmkMuWwvt1bs3Lax-kTVTkADpdNrFiWUahJDa2r3zsg@mail.gmail.com> <1659c8fa8c2-1ebc-238b@webjas-vaa013.srv.aolmail.net> <Wu2u1y01V15GZSQ01u2w82> <bc2fdf3d-c6f7-7b03-d6fd-cc869e1ac34b@pobox.com> <A5AE8FD0-527C-4529-9956-434B16E0B7CB@ponostyle.com> <006b01d444b1$89a88590$9cf990b0$@comcast.net> <XojG1y01v17ru6w01ojJ6S> <4b52dc88-cc37-a63f-c814-8b4f4ea66115@pobox.com>
Hi Larry, 
I'm from Belgium and belgians have the all time reputation of being stupid. So 
I'm not responsible. 

I don't want to blame dyno operators. They are in a difficult position. If a 
dyno operator find out that his bhp figures are always lower than what 
customers get on other dyno's, his conclusion may be that he is too honest. I'm 
still interested to know how an operator can adapt the results. I may be wrong 
by assuming that it could be by exaggerating the inertia value (of the car 
and/or the dyno cylinders). 
Marcel 

Van: "fot" <fot at autox.team.net> 
Aan: "fot" <fot at autox.team.net> 
Verzonden: Woensdag 5 september 2018 16:41:38 
Onderwerp: Re: [Fot] 89MM piston question 

Marcel, 
I suspect if you brought this question up with the dyno operator he would look 
at you like you were from Mars. I think it is a safe assumption that the 
inertia of the engine/drivetrain is small relative to the inertia of those 
large drums. I've often wondered about the differences in rolling resistance, 
since it depends on road surface and weight (including strap down force). I 
suppose this can all be lumped into drive train losses. 
- Larry 

On 9/5/2018 3:33 AM, van.mulders.marcel--- via Fot wrote: 



It seems I've a chance someone here knows what the inertia is of the rotating 
parts of a (standard) TR4 and TR6 engine? 

PS : most chassis dyno's are measuring horsepower out of the acceleration of 
the very heavy cylinders (great inertia). The wheels of the car are resting on 
these cylinders and accelerate them during the runs. But the engine has also to 
accelerate the rotating parts of the car(crank, transmission, wheels..). I 
suppose that the dyno operator has to make a guess of the inertia value of 
these parts and add it to the inertia of the cylinders. Here is a comfortable 
opportunity for the operator to make the customer happy : if he is adding an 
exaggerated number for the inertia of the rotating parts of the car, then the 
horsepower is exaggerated. As far as I know , chassis dyno operators never 
mention or ask about the car inertia. It would be very interesting though to 
know the value he is using, because then you can always use this same value for 
runs on different occasions and compare the results a bit better. A chassis 
dyno is really only usefull to compare the results of changing things on the 
engine during one and the same session.Don't be fooled by the absolute numbers 
: Once I went to a chassis dyno with my TR3 : my car must have looked pitiful 
against the modern cars the operator was normally testing, because the result 
was 210 bhp at the wheels and I knew it surely had no more than 180 bhp at the 
flywheel! I don't know if some chassis dyno's have a brake to hold the engine 
on a constant rpm at WOT : then the inertia of dyno and car doesn't matter and 
you know the right horsepower at the wheels. About right at least : you can 
cheat yourself a bit by overinflating the tyres and the dyno has still to be 
calibrated rightly. 
Marcel 







_______________________________________________ 
fot at autox.team.net 

http://www.fot-racing.com 

Archive: http://www.team.net/pipermail/fot 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://autox.team.net/pipermail/fot/attachments/20180906/d8517a6f/attachment.html>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>