I’m with Lynn on thinking there would only be a 1-2% benefit provided one were to get the flow to split absolutely equally between 2 rads.  I just have to find the right math to prove the point.  Dusty brain cells remind me of  “Log mean delta T” but I’ll have to go digging deeper.

 

            As far as complexity, series wins hands down.  Jim converted from parallel to series and in the process lost 10lbs of weight, over 2 qts of excess coolant (in the extra hoses), a ball valve, 4 sections of hose and 16 clamps!!! 

 

Lynn brings up a good point in that series rads are the same as a cross flow single rad.

 

N

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Ed Anderson
Sent: January 9, 2004 7:36 AM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Series vs parralel rads

 

Thanks, Neil,

    Yes, I recall the effort Jim (and you) made trying to get parallel cores to flow evenly.  My personal opinion is that if using evaporator cores with an NA 13B then
plumbing them in series saves weight and complexity.  If on the otherhand, you are need all the cooling you can get (turbocharged perhaps), then parallel cores may be required.  Both clearly work if  designed and set up properly.  Now if I could only produce so much power that I would be forced to go to parallel {:>)

Ed Anderson