Air flow measurement

[Mazda Ebrahimi]

tom cloud wrote:
> 
> >To Tom Cloud (and everybody else):
> >
> >I want to put up another aspect of using TPS and delta P and IAT for
> >flow measurement.  As the gentelman from Orbital (forgive me for not
> >remembering your name, but I erased all my message files...) pointed
> >out, air flow reversion causes an error in MAF systems.  Wouldn't these
> >same dynamic flow characteristics cause an error with the TPS method
> >(especially at WOT)?
> 
> As I understand it, we're talkig about using feedback from EGO,
> for A:F, and the TPS/delta-P/IAT group of data for mass air input.
> The system would be tuned by 'seat of the pants' for most of us, and
> by dynos, et al, for the priviledged few what has 'em.  So, I view
> this as a system that is, for the most part, pre-programmed (a la
> speed density), with 'corrections' being made by the feedback
> functions.  So, WOT would be 'tuned', and then differing operating
> conditions, hopefully, would be handled by looking at those same
> feedback functions.  It that's the case, then neither reversion
> nor motion sickness should cause any serious grief.  Am I wrong here?
> 
> Tom Cloud <cloud at peaches.ph.utexas.edu>


Are we saying the same thing yet (Ha Ha)?  As long as there is some 
fudge factor in there (Oops! I mean look-up table), it will work pretty 
good.  This is not much more prone to errors due to flow reversion than 
the MAF strategy, and that works fine.

Best Regards,  Mazda