Return-Path: <13brv3@bellsouth.net> Received: from imf21aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.69] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.5) with ESMTP id 520978 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 06 Nov 2004 19:31:17 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.69; envelope-from=13brv3@bellsouth.net Received: from rd ([65.6.194.9]) by imf21aec.mail.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.11 201-253-122-130-111-20040605) with ESMTP id <20041107003047.HSZE2451.imf21aec.mail.bellsouth.net@rd> for ; Sat, 6 Nov 2004 19:30:47 -0500 From: "Russell Duffy" <13brv3@bellsouth.net> To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: EWP Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 18:30:56 -0600 Message-ID: <000401c4c461$0be7a9e0$6101a8c0@rd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C4C42E.C14D39E0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C4C42E.C14D39E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Based on Todd's correction of the earlier unbelievable numbers on = current drawer, you can expect somewhere in the neighborhood of 35-40 amps continuous for 25 gpm of flow (which is believable) - if the pump will produce that much flow in a real cooling system. That's based on the = pump power going roughly as the square of the flow rate. Hi Al, In the data, Todd gave the GPM flow rate for several conditions. It = appears there's no way to get close to 25 gpm of flow with the DC EWP. The good news is that it must not really be necessary, because Todd has flown = quite successfully with only one of these pumps, and the Ford evap cores. =20 Cheers, Rusty (hopefully not misquoting Todd anymore) I've reposted the flow measurements along with this post with the = incorrect current draw deleted. I hope this clears up any confusion about EWP = current requirements. I I ran the first test with the Ford evap cores in the system, = plumbed in parallel. . Max flow 9.3 usg/m 35 l/m . 12.07 volt battery supply voltage . =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C4C42E.C14D39E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message

Based on Todd’s correction of the earlier = unbelievable numbers=20 on current drawer, you can expect somewhere in the neighborhood of 35-40 = amps=20 continuous for 25 gpm of flow (which is believable) – if the pump = will produce=20 that much flow in a real cooling system.  That’s based on the = pump power=20 going roughly as the square of the flow rate.

Hi Al,

In the = data, Todd gave the=20 GPM flow rate for several conditions.  It appears there's no way to = get=20 close to 25 gpm of flow with the DC EWP.  The good news is that it = must not=20 really be necessary, because Todd has flown quite successfully with only = one of=20 these pumps, and the Ford evap cores.  

Cheers,
Rusty = (hopefully not=20 misquoting Todd anymore)



 I've reposted the flow measurements along with this = post with=20 the incorrect current draw deleted. I hope this clears up any confusion = about=20 EWP current requirements. = I

        I=20 ran the first test with the Ford evap cores in the system, plumbed in=20 parallel.
·        Max flow = 9.3=20 usg/m  35 l/m
·        = 12.07 volt=20 battery supply=20 voltage
·        

------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C4C42E.C14D39E0--