Electronic Circuit For Control of Delphi Injector - Further Development - Malc's Blog PDF

17.01.
2020 Electronic circuit for control of Delphi injector – further development | Malc's Blog
Malc's Blog
Categories (see below): Engineering
Leisure Science Tragedy
Electronic circuit for control of Delphi injector – further development

Posted on December 10, 2013
Our injector was a Delphi model, EJBR 02101 Z, 17 mm diameter, 6 holes 150 µ dia, taken from a Renault Clio 1.5
L. We needed to understand the requirements to get it working optimally in our experimental engine. At the time
of our initial need to use it (2002), there was no detailed information available publicly. From the the Bosch
injector manual, we thought it likely that the induced voltage at switch-off (at end of injection Fire pulse) was
captured in a capacitor and used as a voltage enhancer, ie, just as the coil for a spark ignition engine develops a
high voltage. However, we could find no evidence of this when we examined the Delphi circuit. None the less, in
the case of both manufacturers’ injectors, in operation there is an initial high-energy Fire pulse. This is necessary
to achieve, extremely quickly – we are thinking of microseconds – sufficient magnetic field to lift the bleed valve
that starts injection. The valve is not integral with the core of the coil and has to move across a small fuel-filled
space, expelling the fluid. After opening, the voltage is immediately dropped back to create a Hold current. The
duration, added, of these two phases determines the amount of fuel injected (because the injection pressure is
fixed under most circumstances). Note, however, the inductance of the coil will tend to resist the collapse of field
at the end of the timed pulse, countering the ideal quick closure of the bleed.
There are therefore two opposing needs: one, to create a sufficiently strong field to lift open the bleed almost
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
instantaneously; and two, to collapse the field rapidly for bleed closure. Considering the opening phase,
Closerapidity
and accept
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
can be achieved in two ways. A high current will give a larger magnetic force to perform the lift, but the speed of
https://malcolmcochran.wordpress.com/2013/12/10/electronic-circuit-for-delphi-injector/ 1/22
17.01.2020 Electronic circuit for control of Delphi injector – further development | Malc's Blog
build-up of this is dependent on voltage. A powerful magnet, ie more coils with higher inductance, will also give a
large force.
But considering the closing phase, the strong magnetic field, whether from the current or the inductance, will
delay closure. This is the single important reason why there is the quick change to the lower Hold current,
weakening the field, and shortening the time for field collapse. The bleed valve is itself a permanent magnet: this
increases the speed of lift but theoretically delays repulsion as the field takes time to collapse.
So it seems the injector solenoid should have a rather low inductance, and resistance, but rely on voltage-driven
effects to operate rapidly.
This makes sense: the magnetic field is always very localised, rapidly diminishing with distance, so to lift the
ferrite plate at any speed requires a large force. On the other hand, a much weaker force can hold the plate onto
the coil, requiring a small current. Thus, at switch off, a much smaller field will collapse and the induced voltage
will likewise be small. The delay for field collapse will be reduced. A weak spring accelerates re-closure.
To summarise, the voltage drives the current which builds the magnetic field, but this takes time, dependent on
inductance of the coil (proportional to the number of turns). The reverse is also true, but the smaller Hold current
means less time, and time is the critical requirement for injection control.
We built a Current Generator and inverter circuit to send pulses to the injector solenoid. (This has
been described earlier 30 JUN 2010).
Using a digital multi-meter, direct measurement of the solenoid resistance was 4.5 Ohm. However, the
momentary pulsatile evaluation with a coil in the circuit was misleading. An analogue multi-meter settled at about
Close and accept
0.2 Ohms.
This was an interesting lesson.

This much lower Resistance value was confirmed when we used a digital oscilloscope to estimate Inductance and
Impedance. These values were dependent on the pulsing frequency used.
The Inductance was negatively related to the log Frequency and was 0.15 mH at 30 Hz or 1800 rpm.
The Impedance was scarcely influenced by Frequency at low values and was approx 0.15 Ohms at 30 Hz. This
agreed with the value later found in a Delphi manual (0.12 – 0.14 Ohms at 20 °C).
Inductance (mH) and Impedance (Ohms) against Fire-rate (log Hz). The value at log 30 Hz (1.5mH) is
interpolated.
Close and accept
We then tested the circuit with and without the injector. When running with the injector (but empty of fuel), we
could hear the injector valve plate lifting rapidly up to the coil with each pulse. To do this, we used a small 3 V
electric motor fitted with 30 mm dia flywheel and a reflective spot (a silver foil star from a child’s party set). This
activated the Optosensor in the circuit (which in real operation was mounted over the engine flywheel). These two
components were aligned on a plasticine bed. The speed was adjusted with a 50 ohm potentiometer to give 2200
rpm, similar to crank speed in real operation. This was more convenient than using a 555 oscillator because the
parts were to hand.
Using the digital oscilloscope, our results were more favorable than anticipated. As shown earlier, there is a
Schottke diode between the Ground and the positive side of the coil, to prevent a high negative potential pulling a
high current through the up-stream transistors at each switch-off. Estimates using (incorrect) assumptions had
suggested that at pulse switch-off, there would be a high reverse voltage (as from a coil in a spark ignition engine).
On the other hand, neutralising this via the diode would delay field collapse and contribute to delayed closure of
the injector valve. This was of great concern and it was essential to clarify matters.
We found that the reverse voltage with the diode in place was, in fact, only 1.5 V with 15 V drive to the circuit (the
battery voltage we use in operation is 25 V). We then removed the diode and used a low input voltage and found
only a minor reverse spike. Gradually increasing to 15 V input, the reverse voltage was only 6.5 V. This was very
much less than we had feared and was because of the rather low value for the coil inductance – all along, we had
wrongly believed the inductance was much higher. Even when we replaced the diode, the collapse time of the field
was only of the order of 30 μs (30 millionths of a second). We therefore have left it in place.
Close and accept
Applied Fire & Hold voltages (white); Current through coil (blue). Schottke diode removed. The figure
shows each vertical square 5 V (white), divided into 1 V subdivisions. For the current circuit, each vertical
square is 50 mV (blue). The time base is 50 us per square, but on close inspection, 2 us per minimal division of
the horizontal axis. It rises by 2.55 divisions or 12.75 V over 4 X 2 μs, ie rate of rise is 102 kA/s. We apply 15 V
exactly and after passing through three diodes, the reading is ~13.5 V. The change from Fire to Hold is seen
(comment: the Hold voltage is unnecessarily high) . At Switch-Off, voltage is negative (-6V) over 50 μs, slowly
rising to zero. The current (blue) rises steadily over 30 μs to read 230 mV corresponding to 590 mA across a
0.39 Ω resistor, developing the field, but after the end of Fire this current continues at an only slightly smaller
rate throughout Hold (which is not desired, as remarked). The current declines over about 70 μs as the field
decays. Since the max current is not achieved owing to the deliberate switching, we cannot find values of Tau
this way. We cannot extrapolate the current rise because the switching is much too early to get an accurate end
point.
We found we were getting valve opening in 40 μs and fast closure after any chosen delay by altering Hold : we
could easily open and close the plate in less than 1 ms. The injector needed a certain time for the coil to develop
Close and accept
the force to lift the bleed. Of interest, as would be predicted, we found it opened with the Fire potentiometer set at
a shorter time when we used 25 V compared to when we used 15 V.
Consideration of the behavior of the injector coil, in our circuit.
Tau is the time constant for the inductance (L) of the coil. It is inversely proportional to V and proportional to L
and current (i).
Tau = iL/V
Since i over V is 1/R, tau = L/R
If we use R = 0.15 Ω and L = 0.15 mH, (the numerical similarity in values is a coincidence),
Tau is 0.15*10^-3/0.15 sec, or 1 ms. This is likely to be more accurate than the derived value (0.85 ms) below.
For 5 tau, which is the five half-lives generally allowed to approach full current, we have 5
ms. ….(1)
Again, looking at the Oscilloscope picture: (The 15 V falls to ~13.5 V after passing over the Bases). The
voltage rise is 2.7 divisions, 13.5 V. R = 0.15 Ω, so max i = 90 A but the rise is stopped by switching (and in any
case, the voltage generator circuit in play determines the max voltage).
Looking carefully at the CRO we see (till just before the switch occurs) that 2.55 div or 2.55 X 5 V, 12.75 V, have
been reached over 4 small divisions or 4 x 2 µs, 8 µs. Impedance (we measured) is 0.15 Ω, so the linear rate of
current rise is 106 kA/s. This value would be somewhat less** if we were able to define the curve.
Close and accept
This gives an approximate value for Tau, 0.84 ms. (90A and 106 kA/sec). On the curve of current rise, tau
would be reached beyond this 8 µs. point, and would be on a flatter part of the curve. Thus an accurate tau value
would be slightly greater than this approximation, eg 1 ms. This agrees broadly with the other way of getting Tau,
above at (1).
Or, V = L di/dt. Now, LHS = 12.75 and RHS = 0.15*10^-3 di/dt, where di/dt is 106 kA/sec, giving RHS = 15.9,
imperfect agreement, but closer if the current rise is accepted as exaggerated**.
However, it may not matter how much time it takes to open. We are interested in how short a dwell we can have –
how quickly we can re-close it.
Kick-back voltage
The fall-off in voltage at the switch-off is 9 V which is over 6 small time divisions, or 12 µs. This gives 0.75 kV/s or
15 kA/s.
di/dt is -15 kA/s.

But V = Ldi/dt,
so where L = 0.15 mH,
ie collapse voltage is -5.0 V
This is close to the observed negative voltage (~-6 V) spike on the CRO. The 12 µs will have no delay effect on
closure.
New injection control system: MOSFETs and Usual (BJT) transistors.

Close and accept
Thanks were due to Lavasoftware.com for helpful discussion, tutelage and testing
Background: the original design, built with minimal knowledge of the injector’s requirements or characteristics,
has become unreliable. We think this is perhaps static build up or corrosive damage but it recurs and evidently
cannot be corrected.
We have therefore looked at copying the circuit, simplifying it by leaving out the Auxiliary Circuit which is not
used.
see wordpress.com/2010/06/30/electronic-circuit-for-a-delphi-direct-fuel-injection-system
It is worth noting that the auxiliary circuit was of great value in checking the main circuit (by replacing it
temporarily or seeing if extra Fire benefitted combustion. It did not).
First, we had been aware for some years of a TI chip (LM1949) and built a circuit with this. But it was really a
simple device and so did not give us what was needed.
An example of test pulses (see below) is shown. The top line shows the square pulse and duration into the ic4093.
The final pulse is to Fire the LM1949. This was bench trial work only.
Close and accept
We had for some years been interested in using a FET instead of the Darlington pairs. We had always been
concerned that we required power transistors but were uncertain of how much error room was needed. We
assumed a FET would behave like a BJT but it does not. In a BJT, as the Base Current is increased, so greater
Current flow is allowed across the Emitter-Collector junction. This can be used to get an amplified Current and
control of it. A FET uses the electromagnetic effect of what is in fact Static build-up on the Gate. As the Potential
(voltage) is raised, electron movement changes the conductance of a semi-conductor, and current flows. It should
be possible to get Current control by altering the voltage at the Gate. This indeed happens but is so minimal as to
be useless. The FET is practically a simple switch. (I was unable understand this from reading, but simple
experiments clearly demonstrated it, using a LED, voltmeter and potentiometer as a voltage divider to the Gate).
We drew out a Circuit with a FET, then realising we had poor current control, modified it to use two FETs in
parallel. We needed a square wave pulse to activate the system. We decided to stick with our reliable Optosensor
RS307913. This feeds into an ic4093 Schmidt trigger Logic Gate: the Optosensor closes the circuit to 0 v, dropping
the voltage at the 4093 input (Logic 0), Gate 1. This gives a output as square wave pulse (Logic 1), which we
modulate with a fixed resistance-capacitor timer – this gives a sharp rise, then a dwell, then an exponential
recovery – and feed back to the Gate 2. In turn, we get a Logic 0 out, so feed this in to Gate 3, getting a square
Logic 1 out, of specific duration. This is used directly for the Injector Fire pulse. The triple inversion is to ensure a
square wave feeding the input (Clock) of the ic4013. This input is also used for Fire (fixed duration) but the same
pulse also signals the ic4013 to generate an output whose time is varied with a potentiometer and capacitor. This
is “the accelerator.” Current control is set within acceptable limits with power resistors in the main circuit.
Quite independently, valuable info from Electro-Tech-online.com led us to build an even simpler circuit using a
ic555 Astable oscillator. This can be arranged to give a square wave of the required duration and this is used for
Fire. The same pulse activates the Hold circuit, again using the two MOSFETs. It is evidently essential to have the
Injector on the
To find out more, Drain
including howside of cookies,
to control the MOSFET (I do
see here: Cookie not entirely understand why). The circuit is shown.
Policy
Close and accept
It is clearly very simple compared to our original circuit, which was more complex because it had been designed to
be adjustable to cover several possibilities.
Power source: small wet batteries (for burglar alarms) were unreliable in the workshop, where they were
sometimes allowed to discharge completely. We used a Maplin current/voltage generator but neededClose
a bigand accept
capacitor (2200 µf) across its terminals to maintain power at high speed running.
The FIRE duration is calculated from the the RC product, 47K and 15nF. This gives 0.7 ms, to be factored by a
small amount dependent on exact voltages and temperature.
The HOLD is up to 3 ms dependent on the Pot setting (eg 100K) and choice of capacitor (eg 50 nF).
The current for Fire is derived from 15 v and the total resistance, including the parallel resistors being 3 Ω, giving
5 A.
The current for Hold is determined only by the second FET circuit, giving resistance of 6 Ω, and so 2.5 A.
12/03/15 Testing new circuit. All work done by Huw R Price (Ex Sheffield Univ)
The on-state resistance (drain to source) of the IRF1404 FETs is 17.5 mOhm. Add that to the injector coil steady
state resistance of 150 m Ohm and we have a total steady-state resistance of around 170 mOhm. That means that
without the power supply current limit, and without any current limiting resistors we could draw up to 90 Amps
at 15 V; more than enough.
Multiple problems. First, a soldering short circuit, quickly solved; then a timing problem, again, a failure to cut
out a link under the Veroboard. Later, the joint to the main Potentiometer came undone. This caused a potentially
infinite Hold period, which was alarming.
Second, we note that the current stays On through the 555 if the signal stays on (this could lead to damage of
injector solenoid if by chance the flywheel signal was stationary). Plan: build in trigger conditioner.
Third, we changed R4 and R7 each from 330 Ω to 100 Ω and changed R3 from 1k Ω to 220 Ω which shortened the
Fire time range satisfactorily. Min seeFIRE time Policy
is 80 µs. Close and accept
To find out more, including how to control cookies, here: Cookie
We found the Hold pulse settable range was: 460 µs – 2.5 ms and plan to increase this to 3.5 ms max.
Fourth: we found the 2.5 Ω resistor combination does not let enough current through to Fire the Inj. Action:
bypass this completely and rely on the Power Pack’s 5.5 A limit to prevent excess current at 15 v. Outcome: the
injector functions well at 40 Hz input signal.
Fifth: The resistor to the input Signal at the 555 had been changed and had to be reduced to the original 33k Ω to
stop the Sensor responding to false reflections.
Sixth: We plan to arrange a feedback to the FET gates so that current control took place there, not just with the
Power resistors.
Seventh: The earlier circuit protected the injector, because current was introduced through a series of Darlington
pairs. But this new circuit exposes the injector to “battery load” if a short circuit occurs. I put a 7.5 A quick-blow
fuse in to guard against this; but when we added the capacitor as before, it bypassed the fuse. Result, after
misapplied rev counter lead, a very expensive injector failure. This capacitor should have been between the power
source and the fuse. We will investigate use of a cut-out.
Thus, we have at present
Close and accept
(courtesy of Alec_T, Electro-tech-

online)
Dec 2016
We found that Duration (trim 1 set Hold) with this circuit was being dominated by the duration of the signal from
Trig. The Drop here, which in our original circuit, went through two inverters, was too slow. We introduced the
inverter circuits but a simpler answer was, instead, to use a 2TX653 transistor to drop the voltage at Pin 2 on the
NE555 to ground via a 330R; activating the transistor from the photodiode sensor output, connected to ground via
a 330R and 100nf cap. We could then do away with C7, R11, R12.
Motor Controller Arduino program

Work thanks to Dr Matthew Trinkler, Univ Adelaide
Within our work space, we have an unsatisfactory control panel and with the circuit shown above, weClose
do not see
and accept
what we are doing regarding pulse timing etc. We used an Arduino kit to build a pulse generator where we could:
1) view the duration of the Fire pulse, and vary it; 2) view the duration of the Hold pulse, and vary it; 3) Inject at
any chosen moment with respect to some fixed point, eg TDC, and vary it. We also have the rpm readout.
We are still using the resistors to limit current rather than controlling the FET gates.
// include the library code:

#include
int val = 0; // variable to store the read value

int prev_val;
int sensorValue1;
int sensorValue2;
int sensorValue3;
int AngleMS;
int FireMS;
int HoldMS;
volatile int count;
const byte interruptPin = 21;
float ms1;
float ms2;
long TimeForAHundredRevs;
int RPM;
float TimeDiff;
float Angle;
Close and accept
volatile
To find outint FireTriggered;
more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
// initialize the library with the numbers of the interface pins

LiquidCrystal lcd(8,9,4,5,6,7);
void setup() {
// set up the LCD’s number of columns and rows:
lcd.begin(16, 2);
// Print a message to the LCD.
Serial.begin(115200);
pinMode(22, INPUT);
pinMode(28, OUTPUT);
lcd.print(“R A “);
lcd.setCursor(0,1);
lcd.print(“F H “);
sensorValue1 = analogRead(A15);
AngleMS = sensorValue1*5;
lcd.setCursor(13,0);
lcd.print(sensorValue1);
FireMS = sensorValue2;
lcd.setCursor(2,1);
Close and accept
HoldMS = sensorValue3*5;
count = 0;
lcd.setCursor(2,1);
lcd.print((float)sensorValue2);
RPM = 0000.0;
ms1 = millis();
attachInterrupt(digitalPinToInterrupt(interruptPin),CallFireRoutine,FALLING);
}
void loop() {
if(FireTriggered == 1){
//digitalWrite(40, HIGH);
delayMicroseconds(AngleMS);
digitalWrite(24, HIGH);
digitalWrite(28, HIGH);
delayMicroseconds(FireMS);
digitalWrite(28, LOW);
ifPrivacy
(HoldMS > This
& Cookies: FireMS) {
site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
Close and accept
delayMicroseconds(HoldMS – FireMS);
}
digitalWrite(24, LOW);
AngleMS = sensorValue1*5;
Angle = (float)RPM*6.0*(float)AngleMS*0.000001;
lcd.print((float)Angle);
if (count == 10)
{
ms1 = millis();
TimeForAHundredRevs = (ms1-ms2);
ms2 = millis();
RPM =6E5/ TimeForAHundredRevs;

lcd.setCursor(2,0);
lcd.print((float)RPM);
count = 0;
}
HoldMS = sensorValue3*5;
lcd.print((float)HoldMS);
Close and accept
FireMS = sensorValue2;
lcd.setCursor(2,1);
lcd.print((float)FireMS);
count = count + 1;
//digitalWrite(40, LOW);
FireTriggered = 0;
}
}
void CallFireRoutine(){
FireTriggered = 1;
}
END
Close and accept
Advertisements Advertisements
REPORT THIS AD REPORT THIS AD
Share this:
 Twitter  Facebook
Like
2 bloggers like this.
Related
Electronic circuit for a Delphi direct fuel Two stroke diesel piston and combustion Engine jottings
injection system - initial approach chamber. In "Engineering"
In "Engineering" In "Engineering"
This entry was posted in Engineering. Bookmark the permalink.
5Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
Responses to Electronic circuit for control of Delphi injector – further development Close and accept
Etienne says:
April 9, 2014 at 8:49 pm
Hi Malcolm, we’re doing research on avanced injection strategies on diesel engine. We’re currently using the same injectors
as yours as well as the original engine (1.5L dCi that was on a Clio 2). We had some parameters for injector control but we’re
now pretty sure that they we’re not good at all. We found your blog very interesting concerning the methodology you
employed in order to determined how to control your injector.
We’re wondering if by any means you had a typical injector trace or any specifics parameters that may be useful for driving
this kind of injector. For your info, we were controlling our injector with a 12V tension source which is clearly not enough as
you already specified. The opening current used was 15A while the hold current was 4.7A. We’re looking for the exact opening
current as well as the hold current but also for other parameter such as the time required to reach the opening current, the
time which we need to hold that current, etc. We tried to found current trace over the web without any success yet. Thanks!
Reply
malcolmcochran says:
April 10, 2014 at 7:59 am
Tell me more. Where are you?

I’m glad (not meaning that you had difficulty) to get confirmation that we were out on our own. Not that hidden
somewhere are all the secrets.
I will reply at greater length in the future – I am about to cross hemispheres.
I could show you the trace we got (which worked OK but is not ideal). It was amazing to find it was good. You must
know you can calculate timing duration from R x C – it would not work till we increased this value well beyond our
target so we always believed we were putting in too much fuel. But the trace showed we had a Fire current for
about 500 us. The HOLD, we could vary up to about 1.5 ms.
Privacy & Cookies: ThisA pot
site incookies.
uses the circuit wouldtohave
By continuing reduced
use this theagree
website, you HOLD current
to their use. but we haven’t done this and checked result. We have
Close and accept
reduced in blindly.
We are still not sure of our i values but they are much lower than we thought we needed. I was checking this and
somehow blew it up. We think FIRE is about 5 or 6 amps but not sure.
We are building a simpler circuit with a MOSFET. But Texas Instruments have a ready made circuit which
appeared after all our fumbling.
What exactly are you doing?
Malc
Reply
Etienne says:
April 10, 2014 at 8:10 pm
We’re in Montreal, Canada. I’m doing my Ph.D. in mechanical engineering on common rail diesel engine and
the goal is to minimize the trade-off between the formation of NOx and particulate matter by using multiple
injection strategies as well as different biodiesel/diesel blend ratio.
We are using real-time control via the use of an FPGA on a compactRIO from National Instrument. There are
some specific modules made for powertrain control. We had some parameters given by one of the guy who
design these modules. He gave us the peak current (what you call FIRE) as 15A, the hold current as 4.7A. We
are using two voltage sources : one to rapidly reach the peak current and one to maintain this peak and to
maintain the hold current. These sources were of 16V and 12V but we found that 16V wasn’t enough since the
opening delay was very long. The time required to reach the peak current was of 150 us and needed to be
maintain for 230 us. That was all the info we get with no certitude about the exactitude of it. We are currently
trying to set the new current trace with a higher voltage source (20 to 24V) but we need to modify the time
required to reach the peak current in order to not overshoot. Moreover, since these injectors are very low
inductance, there is a lot of fluctuation. We’ll try to put a inductance of about 25uH in series to damp these.
Close and accept
April 11, 2014 at 7:23 am
Its reassuring to know that ten years ago, when we did this first, we were correct in our failure to find a ready-made plan.
I’ll look at this in more detail. But at first we too thought Fire was ~ 15 A . Take 15 V. The impedance is about 0.15 A so we
could reach 15/0.15 = 100 A ! The coil we found was 0.15 mH (These 15s are a coincidence of course).
I’m not sure what current we reach. I damaged the circuit twice trying to check. It seemed to be about 4 A after 0.5 ms. But
I’m glad we are all needing 15 V drive.
Reply
April 18, 2014 at 1:56 am
Hi Etienne
I am sick of this website – I’ve written three replies to you & they all disappear.
Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Malc's Blog
Blog at WordPress.com.
Close and accept

Electronic Circuit For Control of Delphi Injector - Further Development - Malc's Blog PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Electronic Circuit For Control of Delphi Injector - Further Development - Malc's Blog PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

17.01.

Electronic circuit for control of Delphi injector – further development

This was an interesting lesson.

Consideration of the behavior of the injector coil, in our circuit.

Since i over V is 1/R, tau = L/R

di/dt is -15 kA/s.

New injection control system: MOSFETs and Usual (BJT) transistors.

Thus, we have at present

(courtesy of Alec_T, Electro-tech-

Motor Controller Arduino program

// include the library code:

int val = 0; // variable to store the read value

// initialize the library with the numbers of the interface pins

RPM =6E5/ TimeForAHundredRevs;

REPORT THIS AD REPORT THIS AD

2 bloggers like this.

This entry was posted in Engineering. Bookmark the permalink.

Tell me more. Where are you?

I will reply at greater length in the future – I am about to cross hemispheres.

What exactly are you doing?

You might also like