> Much away to measure directly gas flow with two small turbines or with just
> one double differential turbine, what about to measure the exaust gases
> flow?

It's less accurate because you're measuring unbured fuel, exhaust gases,
and air, more prone to problems with the installation of the turbines, and
even a simple exhaust leak can throw it off.

> This kind of turbine could be done cheapper and it is just a matter
> to process the flow along with the oxygen sensor millivolts (mixture).
> Poor mix with certain air flow means less gas, etc, the result will tell
> you how much gas was used.  The exaust flow could be done with a turbine or
> two pressure sensores, measuring the differential pressure along the exaust
> pipes.  All based on tests and math, but I think it can be done.  The only
> problem would be temperature, but nothing impossible to solve.

I don't see how the complex approach above would be cheaper than measuring
the pulse widths off the fuel injectors. The bottom line on fuel economy -
there is only one completely accurate measure of fuel economy - how much
fuel is used. The only thing that would throw off the pulse width approach
would be a clogged fuel filter or a dip in fuel line pressure that
resulted in a lower than expected output on the fuel injector, which under
a correctly operating vehicle will not happen. Maybe the approach you
mention could be done, but it's far more complex than just measuring the
pulse widthds to the injectors.

-->Neil

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Bradley            In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is not
Synthcom Systems, Inc.  king - he's a prisoner.
ICQ #29402898

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu