I thought I might mention a possible problem that has been on my mind and that may be waiting for me when the engine is fired up. I have a very big unknown and that is the Walbro carb that I intend to use on this engine. I have zero experience with these carbs and I don't even know if the one I have is capable of working on this engine. So, I have been trying to be very careful up to this point to eliminate as much uncertainty in the areas of compression and spark so that if the engine has issues with running I can be reasonably certain it is in the fuel system.
I'm using the same TIM ignition in this engine as I used in the Jerry Howell V-4 that I built. An important parameter for this transistorized Kettering type ignition is the dwell since it sets the amount of energy that will stored in the coil for discharge across the plug gap. It also affects the relibility of the ignition components since significant power is dissipated in the output transistor and the coil and the dwell is a 'duty cycle' for this dissipation. I could easily calculate what I need to know if I knew the specs of the coil I'm using; but I don't and I don't have any equipment to measure the primary inductance in either the fequency or time domains. I do know, however, the resistance of the coil I'm using. Once the primary inductance is known, the slope of the rise of the current through the coil can be computed by L/R and knowing the saturation current I can compute the time it takes for the coil to just reach saturation. If I'm going strictly for performance I calculate the required dwell in degrees at the maxiumum rpm I want to run with full spark power. At lower speeds where the dwell angle is the same but the dwell time is longer, I waste power and decrease reliability of the ignition components by dissipating power in them after the coil saturates. If I'm going strictly for reliability I choose an idle rpm and compute the dwell ini degrees at that rpm. At higher rpms, the coil does not have time to saturate and the energy in the spark falls off until the rpms are increased to the point where the plug is not capable of firing at all.
I built my Jerry Howell V-4 to his specs and used the TIM ignition and 'Exciter' coil that he sold. Only the resistance of the coil was spec'd but Jerry had evidently massaged the dwell so that the combination would work with his engine. The dwell in this engine was chosen to be 40 degrees (I'll always refer to crank degrees when speaking about dwell). This dwell is set in the distributor by the time the rare earth magnets that activate the Hall effect sensor spend over the active area of the chip. This time is, in turn, set by the diameter of the magnets and their radial distance from the axis of the distributor. Jerry chose 2mm magnets and .3 inches radial distance to get the 40 degrees. When I built and first tested this engine I verified the dwell at 40 degrees. This ignition combination was adequate to support 1200 rpm to 6200 rpm and I never had any problems with overheating the output transistor of the coil.
For my Hodgson-9 I decided to use the same ignition since I had a spare original Exciter coil. This coil was designed by Bob Shores and is no longer available although a smaller cousin with different specs from the original (whatever they are.) is being sold from the Howell website. I have never wanted to make my own ignition coil because it is really difficult to do properly.) Anyway with 5 more cylinders power dissipation might become an issue for the electronics and so I decided to cut the dwell in half from my V-4 since I didn't forsee running the radial with its big prop at 6000 rpm. I went to the drawings for the V-4 magnetic disk and increased the radial distance for the H-9 magnets to .58" instead of .3". After the distributor was completed I verified the dwell measured 21 degrees which is close to what I wanted. Anyway, a few days ago I took the V-4 down off the shelf to run it. I decided to make a dwell measurement and I measured only 24 degrees! I rechecked my notes for that engine and verified that I had measured 40 degrees at various times just after finishing the engine 1-1/2 years ago. I still had several of the rare earth magnets left over from the V-4. They had been stored on a steel 'keeper' plate all this time and easured 40 deg dwell in a dummy magnetic disk that I rigged up. Evidently, over time, those magnets in the V-4 have lost strength. It is not temperature problem. The magnets are inside the distributor at the front of the engine which is water cooled with a radiator fan. The distibutor housing barely gets warm when the engine is run. I think the opposing fields of the adjacent magnetts locked in close proximity are causing the magnets to degrade over time. The four magnets on the V-4 disk are not distributed evenly around the distributor axis. This engine is actually two single pin crankshafts in tandem with an irregular firing order. This places the magnets in two closely adjacent pairs around the distributor axis whose od's are only .129" apart. The good news is that this problem offers some support for the 20 dwell choice I arbitrarily made for the H-9. The magnets in the H-9 distributor are spaced .32" apart at their od's which, hopefully, is enough so that they will not degrade and reduce the dwell even further.
The photo shows my valve cage design. I was surprised to find out that the bottom cooling groove in the valve towers that intersects of the body of the head limited the diameter of the cage. Since I hadn't thought out the design of my cages before machining the heads I had to reduce the diameter of the valves slightly to be able to use a cage. I could have kept the original valve size if I hadn't cut this bottom cooling groove. - Terry
I'm using the same TIM ignition in this engine as I used in the Jerry Howell V-4 that I built. An important parameter for this transistorized Kettering type ignition is the dwell since it sets the amount of energy that will stored in the coil for discharge across the plug gap. It also affects the relibility of the ignition components since significant power is dissipated in the output transistor and the coil and the dwell is a 'duty cycle' for this dissipation. I could easily calculate what I need to know if I knew the specs of the coil I'm using; but I don't and I don't have any equipment to measure the primary inductance in either the fequency or time domains. I do know, however, the resistance of the coil I'm using. Once the primary inductance is known, the slope of the rise of the current through the coil can be computed by L/R and knowing the saturation current I can compute the time it takes for the coil to just reach saturation. If I'm going strictly for performance I calculate the required dwell in degrees at the maxiumum rpm I want to run with full spark power. At lower speeds where the dwell angle is the same but the dwell time is longer, I waste power and decrease reliability of the ignition components by dissipating power in them after the coil saturates. If I'm going strictly for reliability I choose an idle rpm and compute the dwell ini degrees at that rpm. At higher rpms, the coil does not have time to saturate and the energy in the spark falls off until the rpms are increased to the point where the plug is not capable of firing at all.
I built my Jerry Howell V-4 to his specs and used the TIM ignition and 'Exciter' coil that he sold. Only the resistance of the coil was spec'd but Jerry had evidently massaged the dwell so that the combination would work with his engine. The dwell in this engine was chosen to be 40 degrees (I'll always refer to crank degrees when speaking about dwell). This dwell is set in the distributor by the time the rare earth magnets that activate the Hall effect sensor spend over the active area of the chip. This time is, in turn, set by the diameter of the magnets and their radial distance from the axis of the distributor. Jerry chose 2mm magnets and .3 inches radial distance to get the 40 degrees. When I built and first tested this engine I verified the dwell at 40 degrees. This ignition combination was adequate to support 1200 rpm to 6200 rpm and I never had any problems with overheating the output transistor of the coil.
For my Hodgson-9 I decided to use the same ignition since I had a spare original Exciter coil. This coil was designed by Bob Shores and is no longer available although a smaller cousin with different specs from the original (whatever they are.) is being sold from the Howell website. I have never wanted to make my own ignition coil because it is really difficult to do properly.) Anyway with 5 more cylinders power dissipation might become an issue for the electronics and so I decided to cut the dwell in half from my V-4 since I didn't forsee running the radial with its big prop at 6000 rpm. I went to the drawings for the V-4 magnetic disk and increased the radial distance for the H-9 magnets to .58" instead of .3". After the distributor was completed I verified the dwell measured 21 degrees which is close to what I wanted. Anyway, a few days ago I took the V-4 down off the shelf to run it. I decided to make a dwell measurement and I measured only 24 degrees! I rechecked my notes for that engine and verified that I had measured 40 degrees at various times just after finishing the engine 1-1/2 years ago. I still had several of the rare earth magnets left over from the V-4. They had been stored on a steel 'keeper' plate all this time and easured 40 deg dwell in a dummy magnetic disk that I rigged up. Evidently, over time, those magnets in the V-4 have lost strength. It is not temperature problem. The magnets are inside the distributor at the front of the engine which is water cooled with a radiator fan. The distibutor housing barely gets warm when the engine is run. I think the opposing fields of the adjacent magnetts locked in close proximity are causing the magnets to degrade over time. The four magnets on the V-4 disk are not distributed evenly around the distributor axis. This engine is actually two single pin crankshafts in tandem with an irregular firing order. This places the magnets in two closely adjacent pairs around the distributor axis whose od's are only .129" apart. The good news is that this problem offers some support for the 20 dwell choice I arbitrarily made for the H-9. The magnets in the H-9 distributor are spaced .32" apart at their od's which, hopefully, is enough so that they will not degrade and reduce the dwell even further.
The photo shows my valve cage design. I was surprised to find out that the bottom cooling groove in the valve towers that intersects of the body of the head limited the diameter of the cage. Since I hadn't thought out the design of my cages before machining the heads I had to reduce the diameter of the valves slightly to be able to use a cage. I could have kept the original valve size if I hadn't cut this bottom cooling groove. - Terry