Differences in SAE vs STD correction factors! - Mustang Evolution

Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 1979-2015 Mustang GT || Tech and Talk > 2011-2014 Mustang GT



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them here!
Old 10-29-2011, 08:51 PM   #1
Registered Member
Regular
 
Benzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 702
Differences in SAE vs STD correction factors!

If there are any experts on the subject would appreciate a answer! What are the important differences in both correction standards.
Benzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 10-30-2011, 07:12 AM   #2
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Region: Texas
Posts: 3,606
Re: Differences in SAE vs STD correction factors!

The "SAE Air Correction Factor" which is used by all the dyno guys is:

SAE CF = 1.18[Ps/(Pm-Pv)][sqrt(Tm/Ts)]-0.18
(sqrt = square root)

This formula is right out of SAE Paper #J1349 (revision June 1990), and is the latest form of the air correction formula. SAE assumes 15% frictional loss within the engine, which is probably close for a piston engine. NOTE: this is NOT the losses from the crankshaft to the rear wheels, that is a different loss.

Ps = standard pressure
Pm = measured pressure (barometric pressure)
Pv = vapor pressure of water (relates to RH%)
Ts = standard temperature
Tm = measured temperature

The SAE baseline values are:
------------------------------------
Ps = 29.235 inHg
Ts = 77.0 deg F (534 deg R)
Pv = 0 inHg (dry air, no humidity)

Pv will not be 0 inHg during a dyno run, but will equate to the vapor pressure of water vapor in the air, which is a function of humidity.

P units = inHg
T units = deg R (deg F + 460). If not in deg R, you will get a wrong answer!

So, the CF will depend on where the actual air temperature, pressure and humidity is with respect the standard values listed above.

The CF can be less than, or more than 1.00. If you tested your Z06 on a dyno on a day when T = 77 deg F, P = 29.325 and the RH = 0% in the shop where the dyno was, then the CF would be exactly 1.00. As you can see, there are MANY combinations of T, P and RH that will give you the same CF.

Note, the Pv (vapor pressure of water) defines the RH% and is subtracted from the atmospheric pressure because the water vapor "displaces" that much pressure, and essentially makes it equivalent dry air (RH = 0%) at the resulting pressure of Pm - Pv.

---------- Post added at 07:04 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:03 AM ----------

They are probably referred to as STD (standard) because the temp and pressure are for standard sea-level air conditions.

59 deg F (STD sea-level air temperature)
29.92 inHg barometric pressure (STD sea-level pressure)

I guess in 1990, SAE dropped the STD values and went with the ones I listed in my first post. Don't know the reason why.

If you plug in the STD temp and baro pressure values into the SAE formula as the measured values (like if a car was dyoed at those Atm conditions), then the CF comes out as:

SAE CF = 1.18[Ps/(Pm-Pv)][sqrt(Tm/Ts)]-0.18

CF = 1.18[29.235/(29.92-0)][sqrt(519/534)]-0.18

CF = 1.18[0.9771][0.9859] - 0.18

CF = 0.9567

Note that:
59 deg F = 519 deg R (deg F + 460 = deg R)
77 deg F = 534 deg R
Pv = 0 inHg = 0% humidity

So, this means that if a car was dynoed at STD conditions (59 F, 29.92 inHg, 0% RH) it would be making 1.0000 - 0.9567 = 4.33% more HP than if it was dynoed at the current SAE baseline Atm values of 77 deg F, 29.235 inHg and 0% RH (which would give a CF of 1.000).

---------- Post added at 07:06 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:04 AM ----------

Plain and simple SAE are used to compare cars on different dyno's. Works great unless its a mustang dyno vs mustang dyno.

STD is like perfect weather etc etc it will make XXX amount. Most people prefer to know SAE.

---------- Post added at 07:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:06 AM ----------

STD usually seems to a little bit higher from what I have seen.
wnt2gofst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2011, 10:37 AM   #3
Registered Member
Regular
 
MedxGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Region: California
Posts: 120
Wow. This is an amazing amount of knowledge!!
Thanks for the breakdown, I didn't know.
MedxGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 10-30-2011, 10:54 AM   #4
Registered Member
Regular
 
Benzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 702
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnt2gofst
The "SAE Air Correction Factor" which is used by all the dyno guys is:

SAE CF = 1.18[Ps/(Pm-Pv)][sqrt(Tm/Ts)]-0.18
(sqrt = square root)

This formula is right out of SAE Paper #J1349 (revision June 1990), and is the latest form of the air correction formula. SAE assumes 15% frictional loss within the engine, which is probably close for a piston engine. NOTE: this is NOT the losses from the crankshaft to the rear wheels, that is a different loss.

Ps = standard pressure
Pm = measured pressure (barometric pressure)
Pv = vapor pressure of water (relates to RH%)
Ts = standard temperature
Tm = measured temperature

The SAE baseline values are:
------------------------------------
Ps = 29.235 inHg
Ts = 77.0 deg F (534 deg R)
Pv = 0 inHg (dry air, no humidity)

Pv will not be 0 inHg during a dyno run, but will equate to the vapor pressure of water vapor in the air, which is a function of humidity.

P units = inHg
T units = deg R (deg F + 460). If not in deg R, you will get a wrong answer!

So, the CF will depend on where the actual air temperature, pressure and humidity is with respect the standard values listed above.

The CF can be less than, or more than 1.00. If you tested your Z06 on a dyno on a day when T = 77 deg F, P = 29.325 and the RH = 0% in the shop where the dyno was, then the CF would be exactly 1.00. As you can see, there are MANY combinations of T, P and RH that will give you the same CF.

Note, the Pv (vapor pressure of water) defines the RH% and is subtracted from the atmospheric pressure because the water vapor "displaces" that much pressure, and essentially makes it equivalent dry air (RH = 0%) at the resulting pressure of Pm - Pv.

---------- Post added at 07:04 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:03 AM ----------

They are probably referred to as STD (standard) because the temp and pressure are for standard sea-level air conditions.

59 deg F (STD sea-level air temperature)
29.92 inHg barometric pressure (STD sea-level pressure)

I guess in 1990, SAE dropped the STD values and went with the ones I listed in my first post. Don't know the reason why.

If you plug in the STD temp and baro pressure values into the SAE formula as the measured values (like if a car was dyoed at those Atm conditions), then the CF comes out as:

SAE CF = 1.18[Ps/(Pm-Pv)][sqrt(Tm/Ts)]-0.18

CF = 1.18[29.235/(29.92-0)][sqrt(519/534)]-0.18

CF = 1.18[0.9771][0.9859] - 0.18

CF = 0.9567

Note that:
59 deg F = 519 deg R (deg F + 460 = deg R)
77 deg F = 534 deg R
Pv = 0 inHg = 0% humidity

So, this means that if a car was dynoed at STD conditions (59 F, 29.92 inHg, 0% RH) it would be making 1.0000 - 0.9567 = 4.33% more HP than if it was dynoed at the current SAE baseline Atm values of 77 deg F, 29.235 inHg and 0% RH (which would give a CF of 1.000).

---------- Post added at 07:06 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:04 AM ----------

Plain and simple SAE are used to compare cars on different dyno's. Works great unless its a mustang dyno vs mustang dyno.

STD is like perfect weather etc etc it will make XXX amount. Most people prefer to know SAE.

---------- Post added at 07:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:06 AM ----------

STD usually seems to a little bit higher from what I have seen.
Thanks man! wanted to post a thread that was a good informational topic. u always come through.
Benzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2011, 12:14 PM   #5
Road Trip!
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Region: Texas
Posts: 3,606
Re: Differences in SAE vs STD correction factors!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benzo View Post
Thanks man! wanted to post a thread that was a good informational topic. u always come through.
I try man. LOL
wnt2gofst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2011, 10:53 AM   #6
Registered Member
Regular
 
M3to5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Deridder
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 537
Re: Differences in SAE vs STD correction factors!

Sorry... you lost me at SAE CF = 1.18[Ps/(Pm-Pv)][sqrt(Tm/Ts)]-0.18
(sqrt = square root)
lol
M3to5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2011, 11:27 AM   #7
Registered Member
Regular
 
stampde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Manalapan
Region: New Jersey
Posts: 1,880
Re: Differences in SAE vs STD correction factors!

Quote:
Originally Posted by M3to5.0 View Post
Sorry... you lost me at SAE CF = 1.18[Ps/(Pm-Pv)][sqrt(Tm/Ts)]-0.18
(sqrt = square root)
lol
+ 1
__________________
2011 GT Auto
stampde is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 1979-2015 Mustang GT || Tech and Talk > 2011-2014 Mustang GT

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


» Like Us On Facebook



07:30 PM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0

MustangEvolution.com is in no way associated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company.