Return-Path: <13brv3@bellsouth.net> Received: from imf17aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.65] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.8) with ESMTP id 606787 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 00:17:51 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.65; envelope-from=13brv3@bellsouth.net Received: from rd ([65.6.194.9]) by imf17aec.mail.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.11 201-253-122-130-111-20040605) with ESMTP id <20050114051720.VVRP2402.imf17aec.mail.bellsouth.net@rd> for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 00:17:20 -0500 From: "Russell Duffy" <13brv3@bellsouth.net> To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: EWP Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 23:17:35 -0600 Message-ID: <000501c4f9f8$5bdbe5c0$6101a8c0@rd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01C4F9C6.114175C0" 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 V6.00.2900.2527 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C4F9C6.114175C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Has anyone considered the cooling combination that occurs to me: install smaller than stock pulley on eccentric shaft to drive stock pump at lower speed, avoiding cavitation problems and reducing needed drive power, and then augmenting the flow with an Electric Water Pump for climb, taxiing, and extra-hot days? Seems like the mix would offer the best of both worlds, and maybe some control over water temps in cold conditions. Thoughts? Phil in IL, 20B for an RV-10 =20 Well, I'm very close to that setup. I'm running a mechanical water = pump, and a Davies Craig EWP in series. The stock pump isn't underdriven, = though it probably should be. I believe this is probably the most bullet proof setup there is. On the ground, I've tested the EWP without the = mechanical pump, by removing the belt, and it works fine, so I'm convinced that = it's a valid backup, even when forced to pump through the stationary mechanical pump. FWIW, if I were doing it over again, and had room, I'd probably = run 2 EWP's and be done with it. I'm planning only a single EWP for the = single rotor, with no mechanical pump. =20 =20 Leon's right, PL's wrong. Simple as that. =20 =20 Cheers, Rusty (no wombats allowed) ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C4F9C6.114175C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message

Has anyone considered the cooling combination that = occurs to=20 me:
install smaller than stock pulley on eccentric shaft to drive = stock=20 pump
at lower speed, avoiding cavitation problems and reducing needed = drive
power, and then augmenting the flow with an Electric Water Pump = for
climb, taxiing, and extra-hot days?  Seems like the mix = would offer=20 the
best of both worlds, and maybe some control over water temps in=20 cold
conditions.
    Thoughts?
Phil in IL, 20B = for an=20 RV-10

 
Well, = I'm very close to=20 that setup.  I'm running a mechanical water pump, and a Davies = Craig EWP in=20 series.   The stock pump isn't underdriven, though it probably = should=20 be.  I believe this is probably the most bullet proof setup there = is. =20 On the ground, I've tested the EWP without the mechanical pump, by = removing the=20 belt, and it works fine, so I'm convinced that it's a valid backup, even = when=20 forced to pump through the stationary mechanical pump.  FWIW, if I = were=20 doing it over again, and had room, I'd probably run 2 EWP's and be done = with=20 it.  I'm planning only a single EWP for the single rotor, with no=20 mechanical pump. 
 
Leon's = right, PL's=20 wrong.  Simple as that. 
 
Cheers,
Rusty = (no wombats=20 allowed)




 ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C4F9C6.114175C0--