Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #4916
From: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: dual EWP plumbing?
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 17:19:18 -0500
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Russell Duffy wrote:
I agree. But Rusty is talking about placing the pumps after the rads and before the engine.
Should be better to place one pump per rad just before the rad.  My pump location, and hose routing won't be determined until I get stuff like the intake, and exhaust in place.  I still think it will be easier to put the pumps in the return hose to the engine.  I could certainly put them before the cores, but I'm still not sure I agree with doing that.  The factory pump is essentially ahead of the engine, and it's outlet forces water into the block.   The Davies Craig, and Meziere EWP's are designed to do the same thing.  I've always understood that the idea was to artificially increase the pressure in the block, to raise the boiling point further, and this seems like as good a reason as any for pump placement.  Thanks again for the comments.
Rusty (don't know if I'm coming or going)
 
 
 
 

I don't see the difference.  It's a closed circuit.  There is a pressure drop across the engine, and one across the radiator, both drops determined by the flow and their individual resistance to that flow. It's the A+B=B+A thing (isn't it?)

--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
"Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
  alleviated by information and experience."
                                  Veeduber

Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster