Anthony P
sharing knowledge with those who care to listen
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2007
- Messages
- 1,260
looking at racetronix website, for stock 30pph replacement injectors, there are two choices:
a 3-hole spray pattern and
a single hole pattern that's been around for decades.
3-hole, 30pph is Lucas 01D034x link=> 31.2 lb/hr Disc High-Z Fuel Injector (01D034x): Fuel Injectors - High Impedance
single hole 30pph is Lucas D1720xx (old 5207009; 621020 ) link => 32 lb/hr Disc High-Z Fuel Injector (D1720xx): Fuel Injectors - High Impedance
fluid mechanics modeling question: is 3-hole spray pattern is better choice today? this is for a bone stock engine where only mods are injectors, TT chip, fuel pump and fuel pump hot wire kit.
not looking for an answer of "at stock levels, it doesn't matter."
what I don't know is the velocity profile of the air stream thru each runner into the combustion chamber or the flow volume profile. So,
---the 4-degree pencil spray pattern of the single nozzle is preferred because....? OR
---the 3-hole spray pattern yields better atomization, perhaps better fuel economy just cruzin' around and doesn't do much more? it's just a newer injector design that can be used on our engines as well?
perhaps someone who knows could say the single spray pattern keeps the atomized fuel centered in the runner where air flow velocity is highest, albeit turbulent + eddies?
perhaps a 3-hole spray pattern at stock levels (air velocity and volume) is not desired as the angle of the three nozzles actually ends up wetting intake runner walls due to stock low velocity profile + low volume profile?
the 42pph Lucas 01D030x uses a 3-hole spray pattern as does the 66pph and 79pph injector. sure, those fuel volumes are probably best delivered via a 3 nozzle set up for those air volumes and velocities at 80%-plus duty cycle.
Has anyone modeled this to conclude that either one is preferred at stock levels with the corresponding lower velocities and air densities seen on unmodified engines?
Thanks.
a 3-hole spray pattern and
a single hole pattern that's been around for decades.
3-hole, 30pph is Lucas 01D034x link=> 31.2 lb/hr Disc High-Z Fuel Injector (01D034x): Fuel Injectors - High Impedance
single hole 30pph is Lucas D1720xx (old 5207009; 621020 ) link => 32 lb/hr Disc High-Z Fuel Injector (D1720xx): Fuel Injectors - High Impedance
fluid mechanics modeling question: is 3-hole spray pattern is better choice today? this is for a bone stock engine where only mods are injectors, TT chip, fuel pump and fuel pump hot wire kit.
not looking for an answer of "at stock levels, it doesn't matter."
what I don't know is the velocity profile of the air stream thru each runner into the combustion chamber or the flow volume profile. So,
---the 4-degree pencil spray pattern of the single nozzle is preferred because....? OR
---the 3-hole spray pattern yields better atomization, perhaps better fuel economy just cruzin' around and doesn't do much more? it's just a newer injector design that can be used on our engines as well?
perhaps someone who knows could say the single spray pattern keeps the atomized fuel centered in the runner where air flow velocity is highest, albeit turbulent + eddies?
perhaps a 3-hole spray pattern at stock levels (air velocity and volume) is not desired as the angle of the three nozzles actually ends up wetting intake runner walls due to stock low velocity profile + low volume profile?
the 42pph Lucas 01D030x uses a 3-hole spray pattern as does the 66pph and 79pph injector. sure, those fuel volumes are probably best delivered via a 3 nozzle set up for those air volumes and velocities at 80%-plus duty cycle.
Has anyone modeled this to conclude that either one is preferred at stock levels with the corresponding lower velocities and air densities seen on unmodified engines?
Thanks.