X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from nm21.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com ([98.139.52.218] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4c2o) with SMTP id 4882940 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 18:01:18 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=98.139.52.218; envelope-from=ceengland@bellsouth.net Received: from [98.139.52.194] by nm21.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 Feb 2011 23:00:43 -0000 Received: from [98.139.52.136] by tm7.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 Feb 2011 23:00:43 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1019.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 Feb 2011 23:00:43 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 778250.11660.bm@omp1019.mail.ac4.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 1210 invoked from network); 25 Feb 2011 23:00:43 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bellsouth.net; s=s1024; t=1298674843; bh=a/paObY5eNDNdIkylQR72r+pciBCU4E+U61eHIhwNZw=; 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=KP2Zyae8NKIMzUXGGjCAzvxe5hVOwGT+McYJQ+G5hzmmounbt15Gt0YE/JiHAAKoQ/uoQ91pTFrhwqoc0QSD5gcTeFS0UnKy4zxaElEyFZ0ub10QdNUOyQrJI/pzgM4dcUS4V8Uot4VKoNnCDMszBfvLsri7QD3KcYcF60K6wM4= Received: from [192.168.10.5] (ceengland@74.240.6.77 with plain) by smtp102.sbc.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with SMTP; 25 Feb 2011 15:00:42 -0800 PST X-Yahoo-SMTP: uXJ_6LOswBCr8InijhYErvjWlJuRkoKPGNeiuu7PA.5wcGoy X-YMail-OSG: E9ZArgYVM1lMXGnQsrLPNA27j0Fd4SACX8pr4fPuGBLI8Dp p5IIuNpXcM7I756PwGHLuNClDv_Weh2EmM._lmnSDAggIkLHQzesWPM5Hgsk z3ZgRgo2M371Rx.ipmyObNXpq2xZSYXgn.FGYE68FT8khQlviaXqgHm58PyI bk.pcCrHO1u_3ydYjvRlEM4VAx5CB_J5JViK7Z5Eezt3mDW7YbDgwvEcCkC_ eKtQSAhOrPA8DnGgtoEdMrW9gfqP5EtBeIBLKaPra7NayBJncF5RziVazfPY nWmTRuC4phgXr79Jd0VZqyqanUxllZxBI_edMV_ciQoZoZA.K_GX18.uf41q 0 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 Message-ID: <4D68349B.3070401@bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 17:00:43 -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="------------010000000103020207070606" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010000000103020207070606 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks, Bill. Your points are why I haven't given that setup serious consideration. And while $500 (for the Andair) is cheaper than a crash, it isn't cheap enough to sound reasonable as a solution. :-) With an inexpensive pump having anti-siphon features, it's making me consider yet another option: a transfer pump for each tank, with no selector valve at all. Of course, that means more (or at least different) complexity, and more weight. The L/R imbalance issue is about the same for an RV. Without decisions, I'd have hundreds of hours flying by now.... Charlie On 2/25/2011 5:40 AM, Bill Schertz wrote: > Charlie, > I would caution about your using a selector 'normally' and returning > to only one tank. I believe that it puts too much workload on the > pilot, especially when you don't have max fuel. I don't know about > RV's, but my experimental (KIS) shows a definite development of the > tendency to turn towards the heavy tank when they get very far out of > balance due to uneven fuel content. At about 5 gallons difference in > the tanks, I start to have to apply steady pressure to the ailerons to > correct it. So, if you are getting low down to half tanks, and start > drawing from the non-return tank, it might not take very long to > deplete that tank with the excess fuel being dumped into the return > tank. Our pumps move the fuel rather fast, faster (I believe) than the > certified planes that use that system. A prototype Pulsar with the > system as you described had this problem during an early test flight > when he started with ~10 gallons in each tank, switched to the > non-return tank, and ran out of gas much faster than expected, > couldn't get the pump to prime in time from the other tank, and had an > off field landing. > Andair makes a nice duplex valve that returns the fuel to the tank it > came from. Costs a lot less than an off field landing. > FWIW > Bill Schertz > KIS Cruiser #4045 > N343BS > Phase one testing Completed > *From:* Charlie England > *Sent:* Thursday, February 24, 2011 5:18 PM > *To:* Rotary motors in aircraft > *Subject:* [FlyRotary] Re: Fwd: Fuel injector pump cooling?? > 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 >> > --------------010000000103020207070606 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks, Bill. Your points are why I haven't given that setup serious consideration. And while $500 (for the Andair) is cheaper than a crash, it isn't cheap enough to sound reasonable as a solution. :-)

With an inexpensive pump having anti-siphon features, it's making me consider yet another option: a  transfer pump for each tank, with no selector valve at all. Of course, that means more (or at least different) complexity, and more weight.

The L/R imbalance issue is about the same for an RV. 

Without decisions, I'd have hundreds of hours flying by now....

Charlie

On 2/25/2011 5:40 AM, Bill Schertz wrote:
Charlie,
I would caution about your using a selector ‘normally’ and returning to only one tank. I believe that it puts too much workload on the pilot, especially when you don’t have max fuel. I don’t know about RV’s, but  my experimental (KIS) shows a definite development of the tendency to turn towards the heavy tank when they get very far out of balance due to uneven fuel content. At about 5 gallons difference in the tanks, I start to have to apply steady pressure to the ailerons to correct it. So, if you are getting low down to half tanks, and start drawing from the non-return tank, it might not take very long to deplete that tank with the excess fuel being dumped into the return tank. Our pumps move the fuel rather fast, faster (I believe) than the certified planes that use that system.  A prototype Pulsar with the system as you described had this problem during an early test flight when he started with ~10 gallons in each tank, switched to the non-return tank, and ran out of gas much faster than expected, couldn’t get the pump to prime in time from the other tank, and had an off field landing.
 
Andair makes a nice duplex valve that returns the fuel to the tank it came from. Costs a lot less than an off field landing.
 
FWIW 
 
Bill Schertz
KIS Cruiser #4045
N343BS
Phase one testing Completed
 
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 5:18 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fwd: Fuel injector pump cooling??
 
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



--------------010000000103020207070606--