Cài đặt Steam
Đăng nhập
|
Ngôn ngữ
简体中文 (Hán giản thể)
繁體中文 (Hán phồn thể)
日本語 (Nhật)
한국어 (Hàn Quốc)
ไทย (Thái)
Български (Bungari)
Čeština (CH Séc)
Dansk (Đan Mạch)
Deutsch (Đức)
English (Anh)
Español - España (Tây Ban Nha - TBN)
Español - Latinoamérica (Tây Ban Nha cho Mỹ Latin)
Ελληνικά (Hy Lạp)
Français (Pháp)
Italiano (Ý)
Bahasa Indonesia (tiếng Indonesia)
Magyar (Hungary)
Nederlands (Hà Lan)
Norsk (Na Uy)
Polski (Ba Lan)
Português (Tiếng Bồ Đào Nha - BĐN)
Português - Brasil (Bồ Đào Nha - Brazil)
Română (Rumani)
Русский (Nga)
Suomi (Phần Lan)
Svenska (Thụy Điển)
Türkçe (Thổ Nhĩ Kỳ)
Українська (Ukraine)
Báo cáo lỗi dịch thuật
Just realized it's probably not an engine issue. If your engine runs at 14 RPS under load, your engine setup doesn't matter. If 14rps only gets you 2 knots, it's a propulsion issue. Try adding a gearbox or more more propellers. If the engine was too weak, it would stall, not get to 14 rps.
sorry for the late response. i have a gearbox on there ive used a few different ratios and even tried the gearbox the other way around for more torque but im still getting nothing out of it or it just stalls. mostly stalls when i tried a higher ratio or when i put a larger propeller on it
The engines seem to have really bad torque but once a vehicle gets going they have no problem. Weird.
1 intake 1 cylinder - give very little power takes a very long time too ramp up
1 intake 2+cylinder - it seems too give a tiny performance increase
2 intakes 1 cylinder - no benefit
2 intakes 2 cylinder - massive jump in performance
2 intakes 2+ cylinders - it seems too give a tiny performance increase
I did try too link the cylinders several diff. ways, seem too have very little effect if any
This was a very limited test
I converted my slow 3*5 cylinder engine to a beast by removing the middle of five cylinders in each row.
So >CCCCC is way less efficient than >CC>CC
1 Medium diesel engine, powering a large generator at 1:1 gear ratio for load
1 4x5 Radial engine, powering a large generator at 1:1 gear ratio for load
1 4x5 radial engine, powering a large generator at a 3:1 ratio (higher generator rps) for load
Every engine runs at 1 throttle, and both radial engines power the additionnal 2 generators at 1 clutch pressure, so even more load, but i won't take the power produced into account.
I chose 4x5 radial engines, because i got them the same size as the medium diesel engine, even a bit smaller, even with 2 alternator, and don't forget there's already a built-in clutch.
The results:
Medium diesel gets to 12 rps, 156 torque, generating 191 electrical output with the generator.
1:1 radial engine gets to 35 rps, 276 torque, generating 1414 (no it's not a typo) electrical output with the generator.
3:1 radial engine gets to 14 rps, 173 torque, generating 223 electrical output with the generator.
About fuel efficiency, i run all 3 on a 697 L large prebuilt fuel tank.
First to run out is naturally the 1:1 radial, running on higher RPS.
At that moment, the medium engine was down to 495 L, having used up 202 L of fuel.
But the 3:1 radial was down to ... 686 L, only using 11 L of fuel.
The 3:1 radial engine is more powerfull than the medium diesel, at the same size, and 20 times more fuel efficient.
The 1:1 radial engine, having used fuel 3.45 times faster than the medium engine, might seem fuel inefficient, but remember it was generating 7.4 times the electrical output the medium diesel did, so still 2.14 times more power generated per L.
Oh, and each 5 cylinder line only has 1 air / exhaust manifold.
One last note: those engines are the same size as medium diesel, but only half the weight...