X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.123] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4c2o) with ESMTP id 4884497 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:45:41 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=75.180.132.123; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Return-Path: X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=tLsyj04/L/SH/N6p42ldY6jXDYWe4pX5hAm6uRA1LKo= c=1 sm=0 a=tF3x5PGzQ78A:10 a=rPkcCx1H5rrOSfN0dPC7kw==:17 a=arxwEM4EAAAA:8 a=r1ClD_H3AAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=vggBfdFIAAAA:8 a=aRtQeDotYMQi-f9gcsQA:9 a=Nt8Vl_jjGkGXnv1HyfcA:7 a=ULwvgO8fmbXp2P46dWKM0WFeyxMA:4 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 a=AjWpfuzfElPwjCo0:21 a=I9diKm-XL77qOR_U:21 a=ayC55rCoAAAA:8 a=pedpZTtsAAAA:8 a=4PR2P7QzAAAA:8 a=YXSjxR5xMUE8OqK_3kcA:9 a=7FUXX4kXFrW6bhGJkBAA:7 a=Pc8pcYxCj9mFKVIyoQBfbEd8SqEA:4 a=eJojReuL3h0A:10 a=djSSOgbfo6cA:10 a=rPkcCx1H5rrOSfN0dPC7kw==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 174.110.167.5 Received: from [174.110.167.5] ([174.110.167.5:57837] helo=EdPC) by cdptpa-oedge02.mail.rr.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.3.46 r()) with ESMTP id FC/62-05134-1F3DA6D4; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 22:45:06 +0000 Message-ID: From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: Fw: [FlyRotary] Re: Fwd: Fuel injector pump cooling?? Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:45:05 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003C_01CBD6A6.114CEB80" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_003C_01CBD6A6.114CEB80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In case the beginning of my sentence was confusing No, Charlie, I normally do not fly with the low pressure pump on. I = normally only use it during take off and landing Ed From: Ed Anderson=20 Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 5:16 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fwd: Fuel injector pump cooling?? No, Charlie, not only normally - the low pressure fuel pump is normally = turned on for take off and landing - otherwise the differential pressure = in the headers tank (caused by fuel being injected) is more than = sufficient to draw fuel through the facet pump when the facet pump is = off and also through the selector switch and over the spar. The low pressure pump is likely not needed - however, if for some reason = the fuel in the header tank (it has a water drain) went missing - then = recharging it (without a low pressure pump) could cause you to run the = EFI pumps dry and as you know, you don't want to do that. I see it more = of a back up and back before I installed the insulated box and cooling = air - there were occasions (like when doing power on stalls in hot = weather) where it suppress any tendency of the fuel to perculate. I = personally like having one for those reasons. You might check, but I believe Tracy went to a "returnless" system on = his RV-8 Ed From: Charlie England=20 Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 3:02 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fwd: Fuel injector pump cooling?? Hi Ed, Does your low pressure pump run all the time, maintaining some positive = pressure in your small header tank, or do you let normal pressure = differential draw fuel into the header once everything is primed & = functioning? Th tiny header tank volume brings me back to an earlier thread I = started, about returning the bypassed fuel to near the pump inlet, = instead of back to the tank. If your header tank is less than a pint, = that's not much more than a decent fuel filter would hold. For all = practical purposes, it's what I drew up as one proposed architecture. If = you've had success with everything on hot side of the firewall for so = long, it's hard to imagine heat-driven vapor lock being a real concern = with all the components including the regulator mounted in the cockpit = where the bypassed fuel never sees the heat of the engine itself. Makes = it really tempting to just T the return into the supply line & be done = with it. If I did that, I could get back to my 1st draft of valving: = Van's 3-inlet (Primary) valve would select L, R, or Aux; a 2nd Van's = valve would select L Aux or R Aux & feed the Aux port on the main valve. = The architecture returns to very nearly stock, with Van's intent of = having an alternative tank available if corrupt fuel happens in one = tank. Even if I add a low pressure pump between the primary selector & the = injector pumps, it would still make life simpler, I believe. It would be: Primary valve out>low pressure pump>T for bypass return>T = for 2 injector pumps>filters for injector pumps(x2)>T for filter = outputs>regulator>(output to engine) and (bypass back to the 1st T after = the low pressure pump. I'm doubtful that the low pressure pump would even be needed, but it = might be a TSA- type 'feel good' about security against vapor lock, as = long as it runs all the time. Charlie On 2/25/2011 10:18 PM, Ed Anderson wrote:=20 So far I have around 560 hours on my two tanks with a single selector = switch and a facet pump between tanks and my hi pressure section. I got = around any return to tank problem by returning all fuel to a very small = header tank holding around 1/2-3/4 pint of fuel located on the bottom of = my firewall. In effect it's almost a 'returnless' system similar to = that found on many modern automobile fuel set ups. I do have the header tank and Hi pressure pumps located in a = fiberglass box covered with stick back aluminum tape (for radiant heat = reflection) and an blast tube funneling cooling air into the box. Its = worked fine for over 10 years. All Hi pressure fuel elements are forward of the stainless steel = firewall in the engine compartment - none in the cockpit area (my = preference). =20 With my EFISM set to remind me of fuel transfer at what ever gallon = amount I want (I usually have it set at four gallons which seems to = provide a good set point for balance in my Rv-6A). The alarm flashes = and will not stop until I take overt action to switch tank and punch off = the alarm. Not perfect, but simply, few parts and no way to pump fuel = out of a tank overboard. While that is my preference, so long as it a system is fundamentally = safe and provides adequate indication of fuel status and fuel system = condition, any number of designs can/will work - its all in what makes = you feel comfortable. FWIW Ed Edward L. Anderson Anderson Electronic Enterprises LLC 305 Reefton Road Weddington, NC 28104 http://www.andersonee.com http://www.eicommander.com From: Charlie England=20 Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 6:00 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fwd: Fuel injector pump cooling?? 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. :-)=20 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. =20 Without decisions, I'd have hundreds of hours flying by now.... Charlie On 2/25/2011 5:40 AM, Bill Schertz wrote:=20 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 =20 Bill Schertz KIS Cruiser #4045 N343BS Phase one testing Completed From: Charlie England=20 Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 5:18 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 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:=20 Charlie, =20 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. =20 Steve Boese RV6A 1986 13B NA RD1A EC2 =20 =20 =20 =20 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?? =20 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=3Dpd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_3?pf_rd= _p=3D486539851&pf_rd_s=3Dlpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=3D201&pf_rd_i=3DB002YP4= Q3Q&pf_rd_m=3DATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=3D1JFK34G48EBF5R93EB2Y 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 ------=_NextPart_000_003C_01CBD6A6.114CEB80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In case the beginning of my sentence was=20 confusing
 
No, Charlie, I normally do not fly with the low = pressure=20 pump on.  I normally only use it during take off and = landing
 
Ed

Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 5:16 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fwd: Fuel injector pump=20 cooling??

No, Charlie, not only normally -  the low = pressure=20 fuel pump is normally turned on for take off and landing - otherwise the = differential pressure in the headers tank (caused by fuel being = injected) is=20 more than sufficient to draw fuel through the facet pump when the = facet=20 pump is off and also through the selector switch and over the=20 spar.
 
The low pressure pump is likely not needed - = however, if=20 for some reason the fuel in the header tank (it has a water drain) went = missing=20 - then recharging it (without a low pressure pump) could cause you to = run the=20 EFI pumps dry and as you know, you don't want to do that.  I see it = more of=20 a back up and back before I installed the insulated box and cooling air = - there=20 were occasions (like when doing power on stalls in hot weather) where it = suppress any tendency of the fuel to perculate.  I personally like = having=20 one for those reasons.
 
You might check, but I believe Tracy went to a=20 "returnless" system on his RV-8
 
Ed

From: Charlie England
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 3:02 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fwd: Fuel injector pump=20 cooling??

Hi Ed,

Does your low pressure pump run all the = time,=20 maintaining some positive pressure in your small header tank, or do you = let=20 normal pressure differential draw fuel into the header once everything = is primed=20 & functioning?

Th tiny header tank volume brings me back to = an=20 earlier thread I started, about returning the bypassed fuel to  = near the=20 pump inlet, instead of back to the tank. If your header tank is less = than a=20 pint, that's not much more than a decent fuel filter would hold. For all = practical purposes, it's what I drew up as one proposed architecture. If = you've=20 had success with everything on hot side of the firewall for so long, = it's hard=20 to imagine heat-driven vapor lock being a real concern with all the = components=20 including the regulator mounted in the cockpit where the bypassed fuel = never=20 sees the heat of the engine itself. Makes it really tempting to just T = the=20 return into the supply line & be done with it. If I did that, I = could get=20 back to my 1st draft of valving: Van's 3-inlet (Primary) valve would = select L,=20 R, or Aux; a 2nd Van's valve would select L Aux or R Aux & feed the = Aux port=20 on the main valve. The architecture returns to very nearly stock, with = Van's=20 intent of having an alternative tank available if corrupt fuel happens = in one=20 tank.

Even if I add a low pressure pump between the primary = selector=20 & the injector pumps, it would still make life simpler, I = believe.

It=20 would be: Primary valve out>low pressure pump>T for bypass = return>T for=20 2 injector pumps>filters for injector pumps(x2)>T for filter=20 outputs>regulator>(output to engine) and (bypass back to the 1st T = after=20 the low pressure pump.

I'm doubtful that the low pressure pump = would even=20 be needed, but it might be a TSA- type 'feel good' about security = against vapor=20 lock, as long as it runs all the time.

Charlie


On = 2/25/2011=20 10:18 PM, Ed Anderson wrote:=20
So far I have around 560 hours on my two tanks = with a=20 single selector switch and a facet pump between tanks and my hi = pressure=20 section.  I got around any return to tank problem by returning = all fuel=20 to a very small header tank holding around 1/2-3/4 pint of fuel = located on the=20 bottom of my firewall.  In effect it's almost a 'returnless' = system=20 similar to that found on many modern automobile fuel set = ups.
 
I do have the header tank and Hi pressure = pumps located=20 in a fiberglass box covered with stick back aluminum tape (for radiant = heat=20 reflection) and an blast tube funneling cooling air into the = box.  Its=20 worked fine for over 10 years.
 
All Hi pressure fuel elements are forward of = the=20 stainless steel firewall in the engine compartment - none in the = cockpit area=20 (my preference).  
 
With my EFISM set to remind me of fuel = transfer at what=20 ever gallon amount I want (I usually have it set at four gallons which = seems=20 to provide a good set point for balance in my Rv-6A).  The alarm = flashes=20 and will not stop until I take overt action to switch tank and punch = off the=20 alarm.  Not perfect, but simply, few parts and no way to pump = fuel out of=20 a tank overboard.
 
While that is my preference, so long as it a = system is=20 fundamentally safe and provides adequate indication of fuel status and = fuel=20 system condition, any number of designs can/will  work - its all = in what=20 makes you feel comfortable.
 
 
FWIW
 
Ed
 
Edward L. Anderson
Anderson Electronic = Enterprises=20 LLC
305 Reefton Road
Weddington, NC 28104
http://www.andersonee.com
http://www.eicommander.com

From: Charlie=20 England
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 6:00 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fwd: Fuel injector pump=20 cooling??

Thanks, Bill. Your points are why I haven't given that = setup=20 serious consideration. And while $500 (for the Andair) is cheaper than = a=20 crash, it isn't cheap enough to sound reasonable as a solution. :-)=20

With an inexpensive pump having anti-siphon features, it's = making me=20 consider yet another option: a  transfer pump for each tank, with = no=20 selector valve at all. Of course, that means more (or at least = different)=20 complexity, and more weight.

The L/R imbalance issue is about = the same=20 for an RV. 

Without decisions, I'd have hundreds of hours = flying=20 by now....

Charlie

On 2/25/2011 5:40 AM, Bill Schertz = wrote:=20
Charlie,
I would caution about your using a selector =91normally=92 and = returning to=20 only one tank. I believe that it puts too much workload on the = pilot,=20 especially when you don=92t have max fuel. I don=92t know about = RV=92s, but =20 my experimental (KIS) shows a definite development of the tendency = to turn=20 towards the heavy tank when they get very far out of balance due to = uneven=20 fuel content. At about 5 gallons difference in the tanks, I start to = have to=20 apply steady pressure to the ailerons to correct it. So, if you are = getting=20 low down to half tanks, and start drawing from the non-return tank, = it might=20 not take very long to deplete that tank with the excess fuel being = dumped=20 into the return tank. Our pumps move the fuel rather fast, faster (I = believe) than the certified planes that use that system.  A = prototype=20 Pulsar with the system as you described had this problem during an = early=20 test flight when he started with ~10 gallons in each tank, switched = to the=20 non-return tank, and ran out of gas much faster than expected, = couldn=92t get=20 the pump to prime in time from the other tank, and had an off field=20 landing.
 
Andair makes a nice duplex valve that returns the fuel to the = tank it=20 came from. Costs a lot less than an off field landing.
 
FWIW 
 
Bill=20 Schertz
KIS Cruiser #4045
N343BS
Phase one testing = Completed
 
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 5:18 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fwd: Fuel injector pump=20 cooling??
 
Ouch;=20 I hadn't thought about that. But I suspect that even a low pressure = pump=20 would damage the tank if the vent is blocked. Thanks for the data = point on=20 the fact that a high pressure pump can be used effectively as a = transfer=20 pump.

Were you using a separate port on the main tank for = your=20 transfer point? My tentative plan is to T into either the regulator = return,=20 or (assuming an effective back/anti-siphon setup), into the main = supply=20 between tank & engine pump. Obviously, the anti-siphon feature = would=20 need to be bullet proof to tap the supply line.

One option = I've=20 considered is to use the fuel selector 'normally', but have all = regulator=20 bypass return to a single 'main' tank. This arrangement is actually = used in=20 some certified planes with injected Continentals, but I'm leery of = having my=20 primary engine pump run dry for even a very short interval as I = empty an aux=20 tank. I suppose that with that arrangement, it would only run dry = for a=20 couple of seconds ( :-> ), so maybe it would work out fine. Any=20 thoughts?



Charlie


On 2/24/2011 2:36 PM, = Steven W.=20 Boese wrote:=20

Charlie,

 

I = initially had my=20 RV set up with a Facet transfer pump with an external check = valve. =20 The check valve spring was replaced with a slightly stronger one = so that=20 it served both the anti back flow and anti siphon functions.  = The=20 high percentage of the time that the Facet transfer pump was = operating=20 convinced me to change to the type (not the exact part) of pump = you=20 are  considering.  The pump seemed reliable but after a = couple=20 of instances of transferring fuel out the receiving tank=92s vent = in spite=20 of a timer on the transfer pump, I eliminated the transfer = function=20 altogether.  The possibility of applying up to 90 psi to the=20 receiving tank if its vent malfunctioned did not suit me.  It = would=20 not take anywhere near this pressure to fail the tank.  The = procedure=20 for leak testing the fuel tanks cautions not to apply even a = couple of psi=20 to them.  The limitation here really was me, though, not the=20 equipment.

 

Steve=20 Boese

RV6A = 1986 13B NA=20 RD1A EC2

 

 

 

 

From:=20 Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] = On=20 Behalf Of Charlie England
Sent: Thursday, February = 24, 2011=20 12:23 PM
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft
Subject:=20 [FlyRotary] Fwd: Fuel injector pump=20 cooling??

 


Anyone see=20 any issues with one of the automotive in-tank pumps being used = outside the=20 tank? Looking at the overall pump/pickup/regulator/level = sensor/etc=20 assemblies in most auto fuel tanks, it would appear that the pump = itself=20 would be above the level of the fuel anyway if the tank is less = than 1/4=20 full.

I've been looking for a Facet transfer pump that has = both a=20 backflow valve & an anti-siphon valve (40257 is one) but they = are very=20 hard to find & expensive when you find them. During my search, = I ran=20 across this:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000BMBSS0/ref=3D= pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_3?pf_rd_p=3D486539851&pf_rd_s=3Dlpo-top-stripe-1&= pf_rd_t=3D201&pf_rd_i=3DB002YP4Q3Q&pf_rd_m=3DATVPDKIKX0DER&pf= _rd_r=3D1JFK34G48EBF5R93EB2Y

The=20 application appears to be 87-98 GM products.

It appears to = be very=20 similar to the 'standard' in-line pump that Tracy supplies, with = the=20 exception of plastic components in the output end. Assuming that = it's a=20 positive displacement gear pump, it should supply both the = backflow &=20 anti-siphon features I desire & at roughly $30 shipped, it's = cheaper=20 than even the cheapest Facet 'solid state' transfer pumps. I'm = hoping that=20 cooling/lube won't be an issue as long as it isn't run 'dry' for = more than=20 a few seconds at the end of a transfer=20 = cycle.

Charlie




------=_NextPart_000_003C_01CBD6A6.114CEB80--