Injector Duty Monitor

[Bruce Plecan]

-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Hermann <bearbvd at sni.net>
To: diy_efi at efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu <diy_efi at efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu>
Date: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 3:26 AM
Subject: Re: Injector Duty Monitor


>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Greg Hermann <bearbvd at sni.net>
>>To: diy_efi at efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu <diy_efi at efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu>
>>Date: Tuesday, January 05, 1999 10:49 PM
>>Subject: Re: Injector Duty Monitor
>>
>>Nope, think ya need another cup of coffee, the PW is just more accurate.
>>One less computation/average.  If your doing a point by point comparasion
>>the pw is more accurate, IMHO
>>Bruce
>>
>>
>>>>> Subject: Injector Duty Monitor
>>>>>
>>>>> On this subject, what is it that we really want to
>>>>> measure? Duty cycle or the pulse width?
>>>>>
>>>Duty cycle relates to horsepower, pulsewidth to torque--which do you
wanna
>>>know??
>>>
>>>Regards, Greg
>>>
>>>What for more coffe--to pour on Doc??
>
>Duty cycle=fuel per unit time, which relates to work per unit time, which
>is what horsepower is.
>
>Pulse Width = fuel per revolution, which relates to work per revolution,
>which comes down to torque.
>
>Where am I wrong here??

Not that your wrong, just why would it matter?.  I started off asking for
just a way to read Pulse width..  The cup of coffee comment was meant as a
take a break, at times around here seems like things get
analysed to death, when all that thought ain't needed.
  For approximate stuff a dwell meter works fine, and diacom works on many
things, so the only stuff left is what diacom won't work on,
that you need accuracy, is working on a C-3.
Bruce

>
>Regards, Greg
>
>