At 72% volumetric efficiency a 6/1 ingests .002940956 pounds of air (11.844 cfm)
ah, an answer accurate to ten decimal places, fractions of a millionth of an ounce of air
avogadros number
6 times 10 to the 23 rd power, is the number of molecules of any element in a mole, eg the number of O2 (oxygen) molecules in 16 grams of oxygen.
your "calculation" significantly approaches avogadros number in "accuracy"
only a moron with a calculator and no clue about useful accuracy uses numbers like these.
BUT IT GETS WORSEThe numbers you started with and put into your calculator aren't taken as readings from any instrument, they were simply pulled out of your ass, ever heard of bernoulli? what happens to a gas when it is drawn or forced through a venturi, eg an intake or exhaust tract or a valve seat.
WORSE STILL
You don't even show your workings or which particular formula you have chosen to use.
Are you by any chance kyrdawgs long lost twin?
Average air at sea level weighs .0807 pounds per cubic foot at standard temperature (o*c)
is that a lab bottle of average air, or are you going to talk about humidity, dew point, atmospheric pressure gradients?
don't tell me, this is another number you pulled out of your ass
The full rack pump shot volume is .000203475 pounds of fuel per shot (7#'s/gal)
wow, ten digit precision again, what fuel temp? what grade of fuel? how did you account for wear in the pump which will exceed the accuracy of your "calculations"?
your "math" is so full of holes it ain't even true.
it is REALLY REALLY hard to get anything so wrong.
A diesel stoichiometeric mixture is 14.5:1
diesels aren't stoichiometric, you be thinking of petrol (gasoline to you) engines.
Guy since your so clever could YOU do the math?
bet your ass, but the first thing YOU need to learn is that there is no relationship WHATSOEVER, except inside your head, between what actually happens inside a lister or any other engine come to that, and what you get when you start putting numbers you pulled out of your ass into formulae that you don't understand and coming out with answers of meaningless precision and then pronouncing them as gospel.
a 2 stroke on tickover, eg really really really bad VE for an IC engine, approaches your number, very few engines are less than 100% VE
Go an MEASURE, not calculate, but MEASURE the VE of a piston type vacuum pump pulling one tenth of an atmosphere on the induction side, it is way way way higher than you'd believe, even a tenth of a bar has mass, and therefore momentum.
Turbomolecular vacuum pumps are turbines, no pistons or valves, no seals, and yet they will pull a hard vacuum. Because all gases have mass and therefore momentum.
If not Ill do it for you.
Best wishes
You'll do it for me? this will be a laugh.
Pe + 1/2PVe2 = P0 + 1/2PV02
this is one of the four, from memory, equations you need to calculate VE the hard way, without manometer and flowmeter etc, which you don't have so don't even try bullshitting about it.
naturally having done this CALCULATION and offered to do the maths for me, you will know immediately if this equation is streamline, boundary layer, stagnation or laminar.
=================================
There is an inverse relationship between how competent a person rates themselves at something, and how competent they really are.
Bad drivers all think they are Ayrton Senna.
Bad engineers are the same.
1/ set out basic precepts
2/ list equipment used, and denote calibration etc
3/ list enviornmental variables
4/ list experimental subject
5/ list recorded results
6/ show deductions and any workings used to arrive at them
this way anyone can repeat and verify your results, or analyse them and see where an error was made.
What seems popular here is to pull some numbers out of your ass, grab some largely misunderstood and inapplicable but basic enough for the user to puzzle it out equation, grab calculator or computer spreadsheet, insert pulled out of your ass numbers into spreadsheet or calculator, peer at results full of self satisfaction and then publish them, not as number pulled out of your ass, which they are, but as a scientific calculation, and do everything you can do endow it with some sort of authority, like say, ten decimal places, that always looks good....
The trouble is those of us who are qualified and do know what we are talking about can spot you a mile off, but the poor backyard mechanic who hasn't got the time or desire to become a whizzo engineer simply is not equipped to make that value judgement.
Most of the people on here just want a cheap off grid generator, a few of them like the thing as a big boys toy too, but they just want to run their shit and keep the women happy with lights that work when they click the switch.
The last thing they need is to be told a pile of shit by some bloody idiot and end up thinking "hey, these listers things sure are inefficient, I'll just buy myself a modern generator" simply because they don't know that you are talking shit.
BTW don't try and make this personal, cos it ain't, I don't know you from adam and I don't know dick about you, much less enough to form an opinion, but in this thread you're talking 100% pure shit, you did not "calculate" anything, and if you disagree with that then you don't understand the meaning of the word.
cheers
