S

SteinAir

Well Known Member
Hey Guys...

Anyone out there flying behind he new ECI Fuel Injection, and if so can you give us an update on it (Robbie especially if you have the time)....

It's about engine time for me and I fell like a greenhorn all over again. So many new "goodies" out there since I did this the last time, I'm in the same boat as everyone else deciding which engine/configuration, etc... to buy.

I'm a long time fan of the Bendix RSA, but I'm really interested in the new ECI Continental type FI and wondering about flight experiences with it.

Thanks,
Stein.
 
ECI

Hey Stein,

Hopefully Robbie will chime in and give his reports. He as told me it has been excellent with nicely matched jets.

We have several about to go on line in the area. If I was doing it again, I'd definitely go with this system. ECI is a great company to deal with.
 
I still don't see the advantage of ECI's FI design over mass airflow metered designs. In fact I see more disadvantages...dependency on the mechanical fuel pump for fuel metering, for one.

I hope an expert chimes in here and can edumacate me on the advantages of the ECI system. I'm not saying there aren't any, I'm saying I don't know what they are.
 
Dan
It is a little bit lighter and it is field adjustable (that allows easier manipulation of full rich fuel flow at all power settings). Maybe less expensive to overhaul, but only time will tell that.
All fuel injection systems need fuel pressure to function and meter. In the event of an engine driven pump failure, all FI systems need an emergency or back up fuel pump to supply fuel pressure or the engine stops running.
The ECI system works just like the systems used on most TCM engines. So the concept is not new or unproven. Just a little bit different way of getting the fuel to the cylinders.
Good Luck,
Mahlon
"The opinions and information provided in this and all of my posts are hopefully helpful to you. Please use the information provided responsibly and at you own risk."
 
Thanks Mahlon. I guess my point is this...

Since the mechanical fuel pump is integral to the fuel metering function, when it dies and you flip on your electric boost pump, apparently fuel metering goes out the window. Now you have to work the mixture control to achieve the appropriate fuel flow. Change RPM, you have to change mixture, as well.

If this happens on takeoff, what then? The pilot has to "figure it out" real quick. And there's no way to simulate this condition in order to "train" for that scenario. How will your engine behave if/when your mechanical fuel pump dies?

In the case of mass airflow systems, if the mechanical fuel pump dies, it's very simple. Fuel pressure will likely drop, and the engine will cough/die. Flip on the electric boost pump, pressure is restored, and it's operation as usual (but obviously land asap and fix the problem). But my point is that the "remedy" is extremely simple from a "piloting" perspective. Flip a switch.

In the case of the ECI system, it's not as simple...and perhaps it's a more dangerous scenario due to the increased workload requirement.
 
In case it wasn't abundantly clear, I haven't flown with the TCM system before. Wonder if there's somebody on this list who has, and who has experienced a mechanical fuel pump failure, who can comment on what the workload/procedure is like.

Obviously if this was a huge deal, Bonanzas and the like would be falling out of the sky as a result.

I guess where I'm coming from is -- this probably isn't as complicated as I'm making it out to be, but I'm looking for firsthand info on how to handle failure scenarios with this "new" system. I'd want to feel safe about it before putting it on my airplane.
 
I spoke with the ECI Rep that was at Van's Homecoming with the 340 they had on display that used this system. I ask some questions buy not your question specificly. The mechanical fuel pump is a positive diplacement rotary pump and not a diaphram pump. (My comment: This will require a RETURN LINE back to the fuel tank. One should have less chance of vapor lock.) Fuel metering control is at the pump. You do not change the ouput of the pump only the flow to the fuel distributor. The RSA-5 has fuel metering at the mass air flow sensor (Servo). The location of where you adjust the fuel flow is all that changed. ECI FI Link

Operation of both systems in an emergency should be the same.

As I understand it, the ECI FI system is less than $3,500 and incluces the accessory case and fuel pump. ECI EXP Price list.

Is anyone other than Robbie flying with this system?
 
Dan,
It is somewhat like you say but not exactly. Only the mixture control valve portion of the system is in the fuel pump. The throttle position also has a metering function through the throttle-metering valve. The system is reliant on varying fuel pressure that varies with rpm of the engine pump. However the actual fuel flow and metered pressure is also controlled by the position of the throttle, which in turn is also controlling the position of the throttle fuel-metering valve. So, even when you have very high output boost pump pressure, if the throttle is closed the nozzle pressure is reduced and so is the flow at the nozzles. Likewise, if the boost pump pressure stays the same but you open the throttle valve and metering valve the nozzle pressure increases and so does the flow at the cylinders. So the engine doesn't always run perfect but it runs if the engine driven pump quits and the boost pump is engaged. Many installations have a low boost pump setting for emergency low power settings and a high setting for TO and cruise emergency. So, if your engine quits on takeoff or cruise you put on the high pump and then you may have to adjust the mixture control slightly to optimize the mixture if you wanted to, but it wouldn't be necessary.
Good Luck,
Mahlon
?The opinions and information provided in this and all of my posts are hopefully helpful to you. Please use the information provided responsibly and at you own risk
 
ECI Fuel Injection System

Hey Guys, My ECI FI system works great. I am not going to anser any questions on line because toooo many more questions always pop up and I do not type very fast. This would cause me to take too much of my time and I would not be able to spend enough of it at the hangar. I will be at LOE6 and I can give you more info on how I think the ECI FI should be set up. Dan is right, this system has worked on Cont. engines very well for 50+ years.
See you at LOE6, Robbie
 
Last edited:
Mechanical FI

Guys,
I agree with Robbie & Mahlon. I have worked on and flown with this type of fuel system on the CT-4 Airtrainer (IO-360 HB Cont.) for many years. It is simple and works very well. From a "Techo" point of view, it is easy to maintain and adjustments are simple. From the cockpit side we have a two-position switch on the elec driven boost pump. Low & Emergency. In the military we would always run with the pump in the Low position, supplying about 5PSI of fuel pressure to the system. If a failure occurred in the mechanical pump it was a quick flick to Emergency giving us around 75 Lbs/Hr FF for engine operation. Enough to get you back to base for a stiff drink. I don't say it?s the best system money can buy; however after working and flying with it for around 18 years, I feel ECI is on the money. I would be very happy with this type of system on the RV8A.

Cheers
Mark
TEAMRV8A
Newcastle
Australia
 
Between a Carb and Mass Air Flow fuel injection

Kit plane had an article on the new (old) ECI fuel injection last month. If you are serious check it out. Even in the article ECI called or equated their FI as half way between a Carb and FI. The writer of the article test flew and gave a fairly extensive report of his impression. Result? Hey it works and is a little different than a typical FI or Carb (read the article for details).

The question is how does it compare to the other FI systems. I have an opinion on that, which was not mentioned in the article.

The ECI system is a copy or patterned after a TCM (Teledyne Continental Motors) mechanical fuel FI system. It should be noted that even TCM has gone to Bendix type FI systems. The ECI/TCM style FI uses engine RPM to determine fuel flow, as well as throttle position and mixture control of course.

Not sure if anyone else mentioned it or emphasised it, but the Bendix/Precision and AFP fuel injection systems are mass air flow systems. Meaning it does not care what the engine RPM is but what the mass of the air flowing is, which is more precise, more air more fuel. However there is a relation to mass air flow and throttle position and RPM. That is how ECI/TCM works, but it is not as precise.

A possible disadvantage of the ECI system may be in climb, where have the same throttle and RPM, but as you climb you need less and less fuel. The ECI system is not altitude compensating as far as I know, so to get good economy the pilot needs to pay more attention and be aggressive leaning in a climb (aka "target EGT leaning"). Is that a big deal? Not as long as you understand and operate it properly.

Mass air flow FI systems on the other hand have somewhat automatic compensation for lower air density as you climb. Even a Carb self leans to a certain extent, since its effected by the flow of air.

TCM powered Beech's using the FI with mechanical RPM compensated for this by later adding altitude compensating fuel pumps on some of their engines, so clearly this is a little issue and different.

On a Bendix/Precision Airmotive or AFP there is no such thing as an altitude compensating fuel pump, because they don't need one and never will.

My feeling is unless the ECI setup is a lot cheaper I would prefer the other type / brand. However there may be other things in favor of the ECI unit like: size, weight, overhaul cost and adjustable, which may tickle you fancy?
 
Last edited:
gmcjetpilot said:
Kit plane had an article on the new (old) ECI fuel injection last month. If you are serious check it out. Even in the article ECI called or equated their FI as half way between a Carb and FI. The writer of the article test flew and gave a fairly extensive report of his impression. Result? Hey it works and is a little different than a typical FI or Carb (read the article for details).

The question is how does it compare to the other FI systems. I have an opinion on that, which was not mentioned in the article.

The ECI system is a copy or patterned after a TCM (Teledyne Continental Motors) mechanical fuel FI system. It should be noted that even TCM has gone to Bendix type FI systems. The ECI/TCM style FI uses engine RPM to determine fuel flow, as well as throttle position and mixture control of course.
Click to expand...
Whoa.... since when? I've never seen one setup that way. All TCM engines I've worked on are the same old positive displacement pump, throttle body with mechanical mixture control linked to throttle postion directly, no mass airflow system to be seen.

Not sure if anyone else mentioned it or emphasised it, but the Bendix/Precision and AFP fuel injection systems are mass air flow systems. Meaning it does not care what the engine RPM is but what the mass of the air flowing is, which is more precise, more air more fuel. However there is a relation to mass air flow and throttle position and RPM. That is how ECI/TCM works, but it is not as precise.

A possible disadvantage of the ECI system may be in climb, where have the same throttle and RPM, but as you climb you need less and less fuel. The ECI system is not altitude compensating as far as I know, so to get good economy the pilot needs to pay more attention and be aggressive leaning in a climb (aka "target EGT leaning"). Is that a big deal? Not as long as you understand and operate it properly.

Mass air flow FI systems on the other hand have somewhat automatic compensation for lower air density as you climb. Even a Carb self leans to a certain extent, since its effected by the flow of air.

TCM powered Beech's using the FI with mechanical RPM compensated for this by later adding altitude compensating fuel pumps on some of their engines, so clearly this is a little issue and different.

On a Bendix/Precision Airmotive or AFP there is no such thing as an altitude compensating fuel pump, because they don't need one and never will.

My feeling is unless the ECI setup is a lot cheaper I would prefer the other type / brand. However there may be other things in favor of the ECI unit like: size, weight, overhaul cost and adjustable, which may tickle you fancy?
Click to expand...
You are right, the TCM system isn't altitude compensating, but it does make it less complicated to run LOP ops. Get to where you are going altitude-wise, lean to LOP and go, as you decend, it gets leaner, so you don't have to worry about running in the danger zone (near peak).

I like both systems, but given the choice of which to run, I think i'd go with the TCM system, no diaphrams to wear out/strech/leak. I like that.

And a mechanical fuel pump failure in a bendix FI system causes almost total power loss, don't ask how I know.
 
Whoa big fella, whoa

osxuser said:
Whoa.... since when? I've never seen one setup that way. All TCM engines I've worked on are the same old positive displacement pump, throttle body with mechanical mixture control linked to throttle postion directly, no mass airflow system to be seen.
Click to expand...
I like how you say Whoa!!

Yes TCM has a altitude compensaiting (leaning) fuel pump. I don't know how common/rare they are, but they did make them and they where made to compensate for altitude. That is what Avweb said, and gosh knows they are always right. :)

osxuser said:
And a mechanical fuel pump failure in a bendix FI system causes almost total power loss, don't ask how I know.
Click to expand...
That is a lousy design. I thought that was the idea behind that $600 high pressure aux boost pump?

You can be sure the fuel pump failure on the ECI will take it down as well. Let's be honest FI needs a pump. There are no gravity feed FI systems. :rolleyes:

I guess that is one point for Carbs, simple and work on low pressure. Yea for carbs! Take that you fuel injection snobs. (humor, joke alert) :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Well yeah, if the boost pump is switched on, the engine won't loose power... but most people transitioning from a 80's Cessna 172 to a 90's Cessna 172 don't remember that there is a boost pump. Hence in this particular case, neither the instrument canidate NOR his examiner thought to flip on the pump when their engine went from 2400RPM to 1200RPM on upwind. Checklists be ****. The examinder 'nursed' the airplane around to the landing and I spent the next 20+shop hours trying to replicate the problem on the ground. Turns out the 300hr old mech fuel pump when tango uniform.

I'm still trying to remember how the FI is setup on the Turbo Conti's I know they have an upper deck pressure sensor that compares MP to ambient. I'm still trying to think of a NA setup that looks at ambient. Maybe the IO-360's, they have a pretty goofy setup.
 
Last edited:
Some versions of the IO-520/550 family have an altitude-compensating fuel pump. It's basically the same unit used in the turbo--which is, as you say, hooked to upper deck as a reference--but responding to ambient pressure. It's known to work fairly well if the entire system is set up properly. If the overall high/unmetered fuel flow is insufficiennt, the alt-comp fuel pump makes the situation worse.

Also, it's not true that TCM never uses the Bendix system. IIRC, the Beech P-Baron and the latest Seminole use a Bendix arrangement. There may be others in more obscure airplanes, but I do know that TCM allowed this to happen only under pressure from the OEM and under protest.

--Marc
 
gmcjetpilot said:
The question is how does it compare to the other FI systems. I have an opinion on that, which was not mentioned in the article.


A possible disadvantage of the ECI system may be in climb, where have the same throttle and RPM, but as you climb you need less and less fuel. The ECI system is not altitude compensating as far as I know, so to get good economy the pilot needs to pay more attention and be aggressive leaning in a climb (aka "target EGT leaning"). Is that a big deal? Not as long as you understand and operate it properly.

Mass air flow FI systems on the other hand have somewhat automatic compensation for lower air density as you climb. Even a Carb self leans to a certain extent, since its effected by the flow of air.
Click to expand...

First off. Sorry I missed printing your opinion of the system in the story. I probably didn't get it in time. :)

Second, what you say about airmass system leaning in the climb while the TCM/ECI system does not is true in theory, but I can tell you that my AFP-equipped IO-390 does not sufficiently lean itself in the climb. I must do it manually once every 2000 feet or so. Roughly speaking, about as often as I did it in my old Bonanza (IO-470-N, TCM's non-altitude-compensating system).

Admittedly, I don't have as much time with this setup (roughly 160 hours vs. probably 2000+ with various TCM setups [TSIO-360, IO-360, IO-470, IO-520, TSIO-520, IO-550]) and I do need to trim my max fuel flow slightly (Don was kind enough to send me a new main jet; the ability to alter max flow in the field is a great feature of the Airflow servo) and that may help put the engine on the right part of the flow curve for climb. Or it might not.

Obviously, I do like the new ECI system. Looks very tidy and flies like it's been well engineered. I hope they can get the 540-inch version going soon so I can try it on the 390.

--Marc
 
FWIW the Seminole uses a Lycoming. One of the few airplanes i've never worked on is the P-Baron, so thats a possibility.
 
You're right. Got my Pipers confused. Seneca, post Seneca I. I believe it's the current one and maybe the one just before that received the TSIO-360 with a Bendix system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.