X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.226] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.0) with ESMTP id 2780427 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 06 Mar 2008 14:49:38 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.233.184.226; envelope-from=rwstracy@gmail.com Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id c49so48831wra.19 for ; Thu, 06 Mar 2008 11:48:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=O0KHXbmBbFd/3eOHOj1teWk1nhSGP8r5JBl48KvBHyE=; b=t+ErWUArtfoqCAvXFOdpJ5osAdxa8u4Uw+DE95N+cPJGPWFkjJMm0Q2VTRZ3AFPsLideOTALhCo+e8Uh56DUC6MdLH8qbkLRiAHIYjoxa/fg+Q+VJJ4CO65p/0PBYam3aMuknPtpo/mE0Jk80pOfW25mjlJCtsNMgyMxfQeNwuo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=SBJXIHceaL60vklDhToN/lfQZLppca9YHVS3YS/PJ1Dwy+KmNBknSQqiR91R7M9IY8390LcQCtm+as7/MhBW/BrOBs7VQAojpbdevULGrnIzCZIFdE9gRlAZsLeNYI4lwqzYxlxIVAK8Sggjzu+MJ8kaMk63LXV/KrkRpKT3Two= Received: by 10.114.110.12 with SMTP id i12mr358570wac.73.1204832937417; Thu, 06 Mar 2008 11:48:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.60.10 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Mar 2008 11:48:57 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1b4b137c0803061148y3616b5f2h5f52ceed47dc96e9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 14:48:57 -0500 From: "Tracy Crook" Sender: rwstracy@gmail.com To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Exhaust Wrap was [FlyRotary] Re: Exhaust? In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_29225_16280739.1204832937408" References: X-Google-Sender-Auth: 17830651fa2d40b2 ------=_Part_29225_16280739.1204832937408 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline In a case like this, shield the cowl, not the pipes. This has worked well on my -4. The JetHot2000 coating may be enough for you. My coated pipes are pretty close (<1" in places) to some painted surfaces (engine mount) and I was amazed that the paint does not seem to be affected at all so far (12 hr gnd test). I do plan to install shields some places but the shield will be on the protected part, not the exhaust pipes. Tracy On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 11:01 PM, Mike Wills wrote: > What's not to like? This is easy on straight sections but not so where > the pipe curves. Would be really tough to shield my exhaust like this. I > havent tested anything like this but suspect that it is not as effective an > insulator as the wrap or some other sort of barrier (like the Zetex or > Fiberfrax). > > My exhaust is made of .060 mandrel bent 321 stainless and coated in and > out with a 2000 degree ceramic coating. So not sure how relavent the > comparisons to wrapped mild steel are. I agree with the inspection related > comments. But would like to hear from anyone who has used the tape in an > aircraft install where the high heat is constant, on a comparable exhaust ( > i.e. 321 stainless). > > The real issue here is my cowl is close. And after all the work to make it > the prospect of burning it up isnt an option. Lesson learned is to make sure > ALL engine work including fabrication of exhaust is complete before making a > cowl. But that ship has sailed so now I'm looking at ways to recover. The > simple shields that Lynn proposed will leave too many gaps and too much > potential for cooking the cowl. > > The Zetex looks like a possible answer if I can find a source other than > the manufacturer that has small quantities available. > > Anybody have any experience with Fiberfrax (Aircraft Spruce sells it; > claims its good to 2200 degrees)? > > Mike > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Ed Anderson > *To:* Rotary motors in aircraft > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 05, 2008 1:45 PM > *Subject:* [FlyRotary] Re: Exhaust Wrap was [FlyRotary] Re: Exhaust? > > I think that's what the Doctor ordered, Lynn > > Simple, effective, light weight, permits inspection, relatively > inexpensive, can be easily removed, does not cause deterioration of the > tubing, can be done in home work shop. > > > What's not to like {:>) > > Ed > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > *From:* Lehanover@aol.com > *To:* Rotary motors in aircraft > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 05, 2008 3:20 PM > *Subject:* [FlyRotary] Re: Exhaust Wrap was [FlyRotary] Re: Exhaust? > > OK, How about this. > > A shield in .015" stainless. The tabs can be bent inboard to take up less > space. The air gap can be as little as 1/2". Only needed on the side where > some protection is required. Very light. Can be wired on instead of hose > clamps. Removable for tubing inspection. > > Lynn E. Hanover > > > > In a message dated 3/5/2008 11:06:41 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > eanderson@carolina.rr.com writes: > > I just do not think any sort of exhaust wrap belongs in an aircraft. It > might work just fine - but, if it does not........., ..but, just my opinion. > > Ed > > > > > ------------------------------ > It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance. > > ------------------------------ > > ------------------------------ > > -- > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > Archive and UnSub: > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html > > ------=_Part_29225_16280739.1204832937408 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
In a case like this, shield the cowl, not the pipes.  This has worked well on my -4.  
 
 The JetHot2000 coating may be enough for you.  My coated pipes are pretty close (<1" in places) to some painted surfaces (engine mount) and I was amazed that the paint does not seem to be affected at all so far (12 hr gnd test).  I do plan to install shields some places but the shield will be on the protected part, not the exhaust pipes.
 
Tracy

On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 11:01 PM, Mike Wills <rv-4mike@cox.net> wrote:
What's not to like? This is easy on straight sections but not so where the pipe curves. Would be really tough to shield my exhaust like this. I havent tested anything like this but suspect that it is not as effective an insulator as the wrap or some other sort of barrier (like the Zetex or Fiberfrax).
 
My exhaust is made of .060 mandrel bent 321 stainless and coated in and out with a 2000 degree ceramic coating. So not sure how relavent the comparisons to wrapped mild steel are. I agree with the inspection related comments. But would like to hear from anyone who has used the tape in an aircraft install where the high heat is constant, on a comparable exhaust (i.e. 321 stainless).
 
The real issue here is my cowl is close. And after all the work to make it the prospect of burning it up isnt an option. Lesson learned is to make sure ALL engine work including fabrication of exhaust is complete before making a cowl. But that ship has sailed so now I'm looking at ways to recover. The simple shields that Lynn proposed will leave too many gaps and too much potential for cooking the cowl.
 
The Zetex looks like a possible answer if I can find a source other than the manufacturer that has small quantities available.
 
Anybody have any experience with Fiberfrax (Aircraft Spruce sells it; claims its good to 2200 degrees)?
 
Mike
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 1:45 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Exhaust Wrap was [FlyRotary] Re: Exhaust?

I think that's what the Doctor ordered, Lynn
 
Simple, effective, light weight, permits inspection, relatively inexpensive, can be easily removed, does not cause deterioration of the tubing, can be done in home work shop. 
 
 
What's not to like {:>)
 
Ed
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 3:20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Exhaust Wrap was [FlyRotary] Re: Exhaust?

OK, How about this.
 
A shield in .015" stainless. The tabs can be bent inboard to take up less space. The air gap can be as little as 1/2". Only needed on the side where some protection is required. Very light. Can be wired on instead of hose clamps. Removable for tubing inspection.
 
Lynn E. Hanover
 
 
 
In a message dated 3/5/2008 11:06:41 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, eanderson@carolina.rr.com writes:
I just do not think any sort of exhaust wrap belongs in an aircraft.  It might work just fine - but, if it does not........., ..but, just my opinion.
 
Ed



--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html


------=_Part_29225_16280739.1204832937408--