Quote:
Originally Posted by California98Civic
More difficulties with my throttle stop yesterday when i tested it. I am a little obsessed to reliably and safely get the same throttle position reading whenever I press the throttle to the stop. A little variation is fine, like 17.5 instead of 17.6, but 16.1 seems unacceptable. Like usual, I have perfectionist demands for imperfect tools, materials, and skills... so it takes me a while to feel satisfied. I be able to report specifically on how I reduced throttle variations when/if I get to do throttle stop testing. I want data on throttle position live while I test. Without that reporting, I would wonder about reliability of reported results a little..
|
If engine power ( load) is a function of air/ fuel mass charge, would not a voltage signal from the mass airflow sensor also be valuable for monitoring load? As well as the number of fuel injector pulses per unit time, at a fixed delivery pressure? That would get everything into units of mass.
Mass is a better metric than volume, as that can vary, but mass is mass regardless of thermal volumetric expansion effects.
Brake Specific Fuel Consumption is normalized to standard SAE atmospheric (density) and fuel temperature ( density).
I'm unsure whether or not the throttle position would reflect this nuance. Any change in road grade, air density, wind, curves, road surface, etc. would effect engine load. It would be hard to parse out the proportion attribution for each category.
