My calculation was theoretical with incompressible flow.. but 102m/s starts to be so close to speed limits of intake port that I do not care =)I think you're using Bernoulli's equation for that. Bernoulli only applies for incompressible flows; beyond Ma≈0.3 the flow can no longer be considered incompressible, so you must use the long equation I gave a few posts up for isentropic flows. When you go past Ma>1 and have a normal shockwave, both equations don't work (because the flow is not isentropic across the shockwave, but I digress... )
Well.. not speed limit, but it ain't going to make much power above that.
Past 1Mach flow goes supersonic and I am not interested about downstream pressure =)
Sorry, I meant with same fueling.. or actually depending which direction MAF/MAP numbers go, usually MAP is not so sensitive.Yes you can. It is explained by other factors. You can have less smoke with more airflow but less swirl because you're simply running an effectively higher lambda. There's nothing really wrong with doing that, but there may be circumstances that you want to target lambda/smoke because it's a sign of how efficient the combustion is with the available air (air utilisation rate).
Most people here won't care about that, but say you're racing in an air-restricted rule regime, so you want to get the most performance (most fuel burn) out of a given amount of air you can get into the engine. Or, you want to reduce trapped air mass in the interest of targeting PCP if you're already at the bleeding edge.....
Your right.. when calculating percentual increase, flow did increase only ~1% more than swirl, obviously swirl does not happen without speed or mass.I do! And if you find a way to have a great flowing head whilst keeping a healthy amount of the useful form of swirl, then you've hit upon a holy grail of Diesel performance tuning and I want to be in on it.
The numbers do show that what you describe is perfectly true, but the normalised numbers (because it's a ratio of the swirl-velocity divided by the axial velocity component of the total mass flow) also will not drastically change, which is my original point.
But still both increased ~4%.. BOTH =)