TRX250r.org

Author Topic: Check my math for my octane requirement.......  (Read 3873 times)

Offline Jimbo45

Check my math for my octane requirement.......
« on: February 23, 2015, 10:29:02 AM »
So, trying to make sure I am running enough octane.....

Bore = 69mm = 269cc
Wiseco piston
Head is stock '86 so am guessing 22cc - 23cc, so using 22.5cc as head volume
OEM 1.6mm gasket = about 6cc volume

So, 269cc + 28.5 (head and gasket vol) / 28.5 = 10.438 compression ratio for my current setup

From what I have seen, 10.5 compression needs 94-101 octane.  The 91 octane premium is not adequate.  Looks like I need to get some race gas and mix to achieve about 100 octane.  Is my math correct here?  I know, to be completely accurate I need to hydro measure the volume of the head with the engine assembled, but I am not gonna take this head off again, and risk not gettting the gasket sealed up again.

Another think that boggles my mind, is how the stock '86 engine was 7.5 compression?????  Using the same math as above for stock bore, I come up with 9.6 compression for a stock '86 engine.  Did they use dished pistons or gaskets thcker than 1.6mm??????

Offline Iceracer

Check my math for my octane requirement.......
« Reply #1 on: February 23, 2015, 11:38:37 AM »
The factory uses a corrected value, the volume after the piston closes the ex port. You also neglected the actual vol. of the piston dome at TDC reducing the head volume. Typically corrected ratios are under 10:1, static gas ratios run 10-15:1 speaking very generally. The ratio a two stroke actually sees depends on the pipe's charging efficiency.
    Straight compression is not completely correct to calculate what you need for octane Its a good start, but you may need a more or be able to run less depending on your head configuration's resistance to detonation and pipe efficiency.   Its much safer and cheaper in the long run to be over your octane requirement than under it.  
     Think of it this way , More Compression lowers the effective octane rating in a particular set up, Head design, dome shape and Squish band, control the flame front and Detonation control.   A poorly set up head at low compressions can still detonate.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2015, 11:47:11 AM by Iceracer »

Offline Jimbo45

Check my math for my octane requirement.......
« Reply #2 on: February 23, 2015, 01:02:51 PM »
Thanks iceracer.  I knew I was trying to make all that too simple.  Lol.
So, after some calculating, and reducing the stroke 18mm, to roughly account for the adjusted figure of the OEM comp rating, and applying that to a larger 69mm bore (assuming piston dome volume the same, but probably would not be), I come up with a bit over 8:1 compression with a 69mm bore, vs. the stock 7.5:1.

I understand its better to go over on octane than under. But, I may just drive a bit farther and get some 93 octane (instead of the 91 I first mixed up), and save a bunch of $ over buying $11 a galloon VP110 and mixing.  Besides, I haven't noticed any pinging (that I could hear anyway) with the lower 91 octane anyway.

Offline jfwyatt1

Check my math for my octane requirement.......
« Reply #3 on: February 23, 2015, 07:46:49 PM »
you will be fine with 93 as long as its non ethanol with that setup. i ran similar setup for 4 seasons of harescrambles using 93 and had no issues with it.

Offline Jimbo45

Check my math for my octane requirement.......
« Reply #4 on: February 24, 2015, 12:06:57 AM »
Quote from: jfwyatt1;50603
you will be fine with 93 as long as its non ethanol with that setup. i ran similar setup for 4 seasons of harescrambles using 93 and had no issues with it.
It is 10% ethanol I think. As long as its kept fresh, what problems would the 10% ethanol cause?  The only pure gas I can find in a two hour radius around here, is 90 octane.

Offline jfwyatt1

Check my math for my octane requirement.......
« Reply #5 on: February 24, 2015, 07:36:05 AM »
ethenol fuel can be very iconsistant from tank to tank causing all kinds of jetting problems maybe C-leigh Racing (neil)  or Jerry Hall will see this they can give more detail on what problems the ethenol causes.  I started wondering about it years ago when the local loggers started haveing all kinds of chainsaw isssues and when they switched back to non eth. fuel the problems went away. also you could probably search the site there have been quite a few threads on the subject.

Offline Jimbo45

Check my math for my octane requirement.......
« Reply #6 on: February 24, 2015, 09:48:29 AM »
Quote from: jfwyatt1;50643
ethenol fuel can be very iconsistant from tank to tank causing all kinds of jetting problems maybe C-leigh Racing (neil)  or Jerry Hall will see this they can give more detail on what problems the ethenol causes.  I started wondering about it years ago when the local loggers started haveing all kinds of chainsaw isssues and when they switched back to non eth. fuel the problems went away. also you could probably search the site there have been quite a few threads on the subject.
Ok.  I guess I will look into buying the 90 octane pure gas and mixing with vp110, I suppose.  Man, I didn't know this was gonna be so finicky about fuel.

I know ethanol has some asinine qualities from my chainsaw repair days (hobby).  I hate the fact that it is in ALL of the pump gas in my area.  I know it attracts water from the environment, and when the water gets into the fuel, over time, it creates an acid that is very bad on rubber hoses and rubber carb parts.  But, my understanding was, if the ethanol fuel was kept fresh, and used relatively quickly, there were not other significant issues using it, that I was aware of.  I have used 10% ethanol gas in all three of our vehicles, and in my mowers, and small engines (with stabil added) for many years without problems.  But yes, I still hate it.  That said, for my chainsaws, I do keep a 5 gal can of  the 90 octane pure gas that I drive almost 1.5 hours to get, to make premix for the saws. Guess I will have to make the trip more often, and start getting some for the R.

Offline Iceracer

Check my math for my octane requirement.......
« Reply #7 on: February 24, 2015, 03:02:40 PM »
If you can use something other than VP 110 I highly recommend it. 110 Varies as badly as pump gas with jetting look at its Specific gravity rating.  Vp makes a bunch of different fuels can you get one that you don't have to mix.
 I did a write up on The Quadracer site as to the issues with some fuels water not included looks like you understand that pretty well.
  The basic's of it was Pump gas varies widely in specific gravity which effects jetting, from one end of the range .720-.770 to the other by up to or more than 2.5%,  @ 5pts on a Keihin jet or 180-185 main. That's just fuel no air density or temp accounted for.

Offline Jimbo45

Check my math for my octane requirement.......
« Reply #8 on: February 24, 2015, 03:49:26 PM »
Quote from: Iceracer;50664
If you can use something other than VP 110 I highly recommend it. 110 Varies as badly as pump gas with jetting look at its Specific gravity rating.  Vp makes a bunch of different fuels can you get one that you don't have to mix.
 I did a write up on The Quadracer site as to the issues with some fuels water not included looks like you understand that pretty well.
  The basic's of it was Pump gas varies widely in specific gravity which effects jetting, from one end of the range .720-.770 to the other by up to or more than 2.5%,  @ 5pts on a Keihin jet or 180-185 main. That's just fuel no air density or temp accounted for.
Thanks for the info.  I acutally have a VP office about 30 miles away.  What fuel from them do you recommend?  I had planned on mixing to achieve about 95 octane........

Offline Iceracer

Check my math for my octane requirement.......
« Reply #9 on: February 24, 2015, 04:23:17 PM »
See what they have available c12 is always a good choice and only about 3 buck more for a 5 gal.  If you can find it Sunoco 112 supreme is a comparable to c12 and a little less money great fuel makes same power and jets same on my stuff.

Offline Jerry Hall

Check my math for my octane requirement.......
« Reply #10 on: February 24, 2015, 08:46:50 PM »
Quote from: Iceracer;50664

....................The basic's of it was Pump gas varies widely in specific gravity which effects jetting, from one end of the range .720-.770 to the other by up to or more than 2.5%,  @ 5pts on a Keihin jet or 180-185 main. That's just fuel no air density or temp accounted for.

Going from a 180 to a 185 main jet results in a 5% change in fuel flow not 2.5%. A 180 Keihin jet has a 1.80 mm theoretical hole diameter, a 185 main jet has a 1.85mm hole and so on.  For Keihin jets one has to calculate the flow area of the jet.  The number on a Mikuni amin jet is a flow rate and does not require any area calculations.  

Example:
Going from a 300 to a 310 Mikuni main jet increases the fuel flow by    ( (310/300) - 1) * 100 = 3.3%

  Looking at the specific gravity of a fuel can often be an indicator of a fuels relative heating value.  The change in jetting is more related to the change in the heating value (BTU/LB) of the fuel and not the specific gravities affect on the fuel flow rate through a jet because a change in the fuels viscosity. The heating value is what affects jetting not the specific gravity.  

Fuels that have high heating values tend to have lower specific gravities and typically need smaller jets to get the same air/fuel ratio than fuels with higher specific gravities.  

The observed trend is: fuels with low specific gravities use small jets and fuels with high specific gravities need larger jets.  Typically, fuels with specific gravities of around .700 will have heating values of 18,000 to 20,000 BTU/Lb and fuels around .750 will have heating values under 18,000 BTU/LB.  I do not have a chart in front of me, but the heating values tend to go down as the specific gravity goes higher.
Additives like MTBE, ethanol, methanol, and other aromatics usually have lower heating values than gasoline and typically increases the specific gravity of the resulting mixture the fuel is made of.  

 Methanol has a heating value around 9000 BTU/lb and has a specific gravity of around .800 and takes roughly twice the flow area through the jet to get the same amount of heat from an engine as the same engine on gasoline. An engine processes heat and turns it into useful crankshaft rotation.

 The heating value of your reference fuel divided by the heating value of the new fuel equals the required change in fuel flow.

Example for methanol:
 heat value of methanol =9000
 heat value of gasoline =18,000
 Main jet size on gasoline = 300

(18,000 / 9,000) = 2

For methanol we need to flow approximately 2 times as much fuel, so we need a (2*300) = 600 main jet



Example for different gasolines
 Heat value for gasoline #1 = 18,500
 Heat value for gasoline #2 = 18,000
 Main jet size for gasoline # 1 = 300

18,500 / 18,000 = 1.028 times larger

For gasoline # 2 we need to flow 1.028 times as much fuel so we need a (1.028*300) = 308.4 main jet, rounding up we would install a 310 main jet



I think I remember that Ethanol has has a heating value of around 11,500 BTU/lb and E85 around 13,000 Btu/lb.  E85 requires a main jet with approximately 30% more flow area than gasoline.

Some race fuel manufactures publish the heating value of their various blends of fuel.  If they publish these fuel specifications one can look at the heating values to calculate a jet size  or see the trend whether you will need to go richer or leaner when changing fuel.  If the fuel manufacturer does not publish the heating value, look to see if the fuel you will be using is going to have a specific gravity that is heavier or lighter than your current fuel to see if you need to go richer or leaner.

Offline Iceracer

Check my math for my octane requirement.......
« Reply #11 on: February 25, 2015, 06:00:51 PM »
Thanks Jerry, my math is a little off apparently.

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38