X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from nm28.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com ([98.138.90.91] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4c2o) with SMTP id 4881887 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 21:57:08 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=98.138.90.91; envelope-from=ceengland@bellsouth.net Received: from [98.138.90.55] by nm28.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 Feb 2011 02:56:31 -0000 Received: from [98.138.89.234] by tm8.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 Feb 2011 02:56:31 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1049.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 Feb 2011 02:56:31 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 512286.56618.bm@omp1049.mail.ne1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 94787 invoked from network); 25 Feb 2011 02:56:31 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bellsouth.net; s=s1024; t=1298602591; bh=vjG/fRDpIhsUkasS4GcVycI5GNL3DXceVlCBuV76ZxA=; h=Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=G4a2UNj3Lw16Le5CIam+1jGS1boaAxMLg2UPsmFIU3w8rKwOWSQAyz1gQT2OwW22VNpTmg3J8Z9ZD/GDFMzIE7RdI6MzMzOPi6euXKpajp+ZEKFqpi6gizYPAxQXrHUP3D5VdqqcMfABUJd3+x4XV9yqAN6wmBpyhptnrtxKHPk= Received: from [192.168.10.5] (ceengland@74.240.6.77 with plain) by smtp108.sbc.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Feb 2011 18:56:30 -0800 PST X-Yahoo-SMTP: uXJ_6LOswBCr8InijhYErvjWlJuRkoKPGNeiuu7PA.5wcGoy X-YMail-OSG: 5ffgLDYVM1mvxRta6KY9YRxgyo3LTmzwPqsP6CBeimiWwFG .lzHrkG5WHysol1USsB1h7XbYvyVG6UZ8pz5XTCfjjAXrhgv8yen9hs2ZF3m UiDxufnXfY_XQRCwEMCnX939xgfgQ.6wd12HRhJtwJMUtmUZQ0.ZRgvoX0Zy BbattkGCGQ0lFf02HQAq_hew5DvHcb1c3joU2GsfJRlm0lm78vl0MGZLheaI oGSdZQ851PQZ7lPl5YFrnzpgwQxdPkKo2ADP_euMsxydJJaoFhUtmJRz39N2 NRYiLyfliJumccdGaMnWcjsZ4bGX80u9n_GhzdU2a_A00.x4YC2D5bQ7Kgmj H X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 Message-ID: <4D671A9B.50808@bellsouth.net> Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 20:57:31 -0600 From: Charlie England User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Fwd: Fuel injector pump cooling?? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------070406090200010907050005" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070406090200010907050005 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Tracy, No intent of multi section selector/return valve. I've got 2 additional tanks, so I need a selector valve to pick which aux tank to pump from. Are you using the typical 3-5psi aux pump like Van sells for carb'd engines? If so, what's your transfer rate? Thanks, Charlie On 2/24/2011 7:59 PM, Tracy wrote: > I'd vote no on the selector valve and return to single tank setup. > EFI pumps flow 30 - 40 GPH and sometimes the engine is only using 3 - > 4 GPH. If you think about all the possible scenarios the fuel > management chores would be unacceptable. Those injected Cont. setups > don't return that much fuel. > > My fuel transfer pump 'T's into the return line. > > Tracy > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Charlie England > > wrote: > > Ouch; I hadn't thought about that. But I suspect that even a low > pressure pump would damage the tank if the vent is blocked. Thanks > for the data point on the fact that a high pressure pump can be > used effectively as a transfer pump. > > Were you using a separate port on the main tank for your transfer > point? My tentative plan is to T into either the regulator return, > or (assuming an effective back/anti-siphon setup), into the main > supply between tank & engine pump. Obviously, the anti-siphon > feature would need to be bullet proof to tap the supply line. > > One option I've considered is to use the fuel selector 'normally', > but have all regulator bypass return to a single 'main' tank. This > arrangement is actually used in some certified planes with > injected Continentals, but I'm leery of having my primary engine > pump run dry for even a very short interval as I empty an aux > tank. I suppose that with that arrangement, it would only run dry > for a couple of seconds ( :-> ), so maybe it would work out fine. > Any thoughts? > > > > Charlie > > > On 2/24/2011 2:36 PM, Steven W. Boese wrote: >> >> Charlie, >> >> I initially had my RV set up with a Facet transfer pump with an >> external check valve. The check valve spring was replaced with a >> slightly stronger one so that it served both the anti back flow >> and anti siphon functions. The high percentage of the time that >> the Facet transfer pump was operating convinced me to change to >> the type (not the exact part) of pump you are considering. The >> pump seemed reliable but after a couple of instances of >> transferring fuel out the receiving tank's vent in spite of a >> timer on the transfer pump, I eliminated the transfer function >> altogether. The possibility of applying up to 90 psi to the >> receiving tank if its vent malfunctioned did not suit me. It >> would not take anywhere near this pressure to fail the tank. The >> procedure for leak testing the fuel tanks cautions not to apply >> even a couple of psi to them. The limitation here really was me, >> though, not the equipment. >> >> Steve Boese >> >> RV6A 1986 13B NA RD1A EC2 >> >> *From:*Rotary motors in aircraft >> [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] *On Behalf Of *Charlie England >> *Sent:* Thursday, February 24, 2011 12:23 PM >> *To:* Rotary motors in aircraft >> *Subject:* [FlyRotary] Fwd: Fuel injector pump cooling?? >> >> >> Anyone see any issues with one of the automotive in-tank pumps >> being used outside the tank? Looking at the overall >> pump/pickup/regulator/level sensor/etc assemblies in most auto >> fuel tanks, it would appear that the pump itself would be above >> the level of the fuel anyway if the tank is less than 1/4 full. >> >> I've been looking for a Facet transfer pump that has both a >> backflow valve & an anti-siphon valve (40257 is one) but they are >> very hard to find & expensive when you find them. During my >> search, I ran across this: >> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000BMBSS0/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_3?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B002YP4Q3Q&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=1JFK34G48EBF5R93EB2Y >> >> >> The application appears to be 87-98 GM products. >> >> It appears to be very similar to the 'standard' in-line pump that >> Tracy supplies, with the exception of plastic components in the >> output end. Assuming that it's a positive displacement gear pump, >> it should supply both the backflow & anti-siphon features I >> desire & at roughly $30 shipped, it's cheaper than even the >> cheapest Facet 'solid state' transfer pumps. I'm hoping that >> cooling/lube won't be an issue as long as it isn't run 'dry' for >> more than a few seconds at the end of a transfer cycle. >> >> Charlie >> > > --------------070406090200010907050005 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Tracy,

No intent of multi section selector/return valve. I've got 2 additional tanks, so I need a selector valve to pick which aux tank to pump from.  Are you using the typical 3-5psi aux pump like Van sells for carb'd engines? If so, what's your transfer rate?

Thanks,

Charlie

On 2/24/2011 7:59 PM, Tracy wrote:
I'd vote no on the selector valve and return to single tank setup.  EFI pumps flow 30 - 40 GPH and sometimes the engine is only using 3 - 4 GPH.   If you think about all the possible scenarios the fuel management chores would be unacceptable.  Those injected Cont. setups don't return that much fuel.

My fuel transfer pump 'T's into the return line.
 
Tracy


On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Charlie England <ceengland@bellsouth.net> wrote:
Ouch; I hadn't thought about that. But I suspect that even a low pressure pump would damage the tank if the vent is blocked. Thanks for the data point on the fact that a high pressure pump can be used effectively as a transfer pump.

Were you using a separate port on the main tank for your transfer point? My tentative plan is to T into either the regulator return, or (assuming an effective back/anti-siphon setup), into the main supply between tank & engine pump. Obviously, the anti-siphon feature would need to be bullet proof to tap the supply line.

One option I've considered is to use the fuel selector 'normally', but have all regulator bypass return to a single 'main' tank. This arrangement is actually used in some certified planes with injected Continentals, but I'm leery of having my primary engine pump run dry for even a very short interval as I empty an aux tank. I suppose that with that arrangement, it would only run dry for a couple of seconds ( :-> ), so maybe it would work out fine. Any thoughts?



Charlie


On 2/24/2011 2:36 PM, Steven W. Boese wrote:

Charlie,

 

I initially had my RV set up with a Facet transfer pump with an external check valve.  The check valve spring was replaced with a slightly stronger one so that it served both the anti back flow and anti siphon functions.  The high percentage of the time that the Facet transfer pump was operating convinced me to change to the type (not the exact part) of pump you are  considering.  The pump seemed reliable but after a couple of instances of transferring fuel out the receiving tank’s vent in spite of a timer on the transfer pump, I eliminated the transfer function altogether.  The possibility of applying up to 90 psi to the receiving tank if its vent malfunctioned did not suit me.  It would not take anywhere near this pressure to fail the tank.  The procedure for leak testing the fuel tanks cautions not to apply even a couple of psi to them.  The limitation here really was me, though, not the equipment.

 

Steve Boese

RV6A 1986 13B NA RD1A EC2

 

 

 

 

From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Charlie England
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 12:23 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Fwd: Fuel injector pump cooling??

 


Anyone see any issues with one of the automotive in-tank pumps being used outside the tank? Looking at the overall pump/pickup/regulator/level sensor/etc assemblies in most auto fuel tanks, it would appear that the pump itself would be above the level of the fuel anyway if the tank is less than 1/4 full.

I've been looking for a Facet transfer pump that has both a backflow valve & an anti-siphon valve (40257 is one) but they are very hard to find & expensive when you find them. During my search, I ran across this:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000BMBSS0/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_3?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B002YP4Q3Q&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=1JFK34G48EBF5R93EB2Y

The application appears to be 87-98 GM products.

It appears to be very similar to the 'standard' in-line pump that Tracy supplies, with the exception of plastic components in the output end. Assuming that it's a positive displacement gear pump, it should supply both the backflow & anti-siphon features I desire & at roughly $30 shipped, it's cheaper than even the cheapest Facet 'solid state' transfer pumps. I'm hoping that cooling/lube won't be an issue as long as it isn't run 'dry' for more than a few seconds at the end of a transfer cycle.

Charlie




--------------070406090200010907050005--