X-CGP-ClamAV-Result: CLEAN X-VirusScanner: Niversoft's CGPClamav Helper v1.23.0 (ClamAV engine v0.103.0) X-Junk-Score: 0 [] X-KAS-Score: 0 [] From: " eanderson@carolina.rr.com" Received: from [47.43.26.135] (HELO p-impout004.msg.pkvw.co.charter.net) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.3.5) with ESMTPS id 709165 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 26 Feb 2022 11:27:03 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=47.43.26.135; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from [192.168.1.7] ([66.26.212.217]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id NzuAnCB71gPEBNzuAnTsFX; Sat, 26 Feb 2022 16:26:46 +0000 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=b8OhX/Kx c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=621a54c6 a=WcvdwKkRgKsaRaJ9Bx4DbQ==:117 a=WcvdwKkRgKsaRaJ9Bx4DbQ==:17 a=ayC55rCoAAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=o1OHuDzbAAAA:8 a=_6GpL_ENAAAA:8 a=agputZKfCszb0SHXPSkA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=4PR2P7QzAAAA:8 a=BQJL5p9r2gc0fCg1oBAA:9 a=DbCx1xQ8fYBKBZ1c:21 a=frz4AuCg-hUA:10 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10 a=B_RyunTPg8udlmYm5Cu2:22 a=Urk15JJjZg1Xo0ryW_k8:22 a=5YQ6H4ZxyGn-KoBYtt8s:22 a=4dqwQCo7Po2mVW515mGf:22 To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Ed's spreadsheet Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2022 16:26:46 +0000 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Reply-To: eanderson@carolina.rr.com User-Agent: eM_Client/8.2.1509.0 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------=_MB6B7FD0CE-E70A-4FC6-B354-2A6825394B76" X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfOErmlq/+ARkyoIeT7mm83htp1DNjq14vKcHk9J4I/+F5MTJVJSH5cJNfUb9rsPPi1jnvZHjH2euKdGJdXyR/wCCxBwb7tKE9A/OdrExOxrwre8cJdtI V/V6/X3TlTYlMXh4aSU5mxC0AP9Ycz+Llg6OuAe+yftAiZQ4xQWQkOIpDR7eXGVLdAHNGIF9kpz/wr9wL2Ca6Rzfh316TZQkZkw= --------=_MB6B7FD0CE-E70A-4FC6-B354-2A6825394B76 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable One last thought about the spreadsheet. Like any real world model=20 contraption, the actual correlation to the real world by the model=20 seldom ever takes everthing into account. You really want to try and=20 capture the crucial elements - the trouble is the crucial element may=20 change from one factor to another depending on the real world situation=20 and how accurately the model works in that situation. Additionally, just finding values for those crucial factors is seldom=20 easy. The acid test in my opinion, is to plug your values into the=20 model and see how close/bad it matches what you are actually seeing in=20 the real world. If adjusting parameters in the model seem to track with=20 actual results then model is probably OK, otherwise probably not. Ed ------ Original Message ------ From: "eanderson@carolina.rr.com" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Sent: 2/26/2022 10:48:51 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Ed's spreadsheet > >I agree, must have got it from someplace credible - like Bill Shertz. >CP was 1.0 for pure H20 and somewhat less with antifreeze mixed in. >I had a primary pully from MazdaTrix that reduced water pump speed -=20 >since engine was turning faster than normal in automobile, did not want=20 >to have any cavitation. So my water pump did turn a bit slower than=20 >stock. >Not necessarily - note that water flow drops off if pump speed=20 >increases into the "caviation range" > > >------ Original Message ------ >From: "Finn Lassen finn.lassen@verizon.net"=20 > >To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" >Sent: 2/25/2022 10:39:43 AM >Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Ed's spreadsheet > >>Thanks Ed. >> >>But 185.85 seems pretty detailed for a SWAG. >>Any chance you got it from Bill Shertz's tests (which I unfortunately=20 >>can't find the posts about)? >> >>What determines "Cp Coolant"? >>Heat transfer efficiency from engine to water and water to rad? >> >>From measuring the rims of the e-shaft pulley (122mm) and water pump=20 >>pulley (112mm) it looks like the Renesis water pump runs a bit slower=20 >>(factor 1.09 compared to your 1.18). >> >>Should water flow be directly proportional to water pump RPM? >> >>Finn >> >>On 2/25/2022 10:07 AM, eanderson@carolina.rr.com wrote: >>>Sorry, Finn. >>> >>>Too much water under the bridge, pretty sure I did not make it up out=20 >>>of thin air. I suspect I visited some pump websites to arrive at a=20 >>>SWAG. >>> >>>Ed >>> >>>------ Original Message ------ >>>From: "Finn Lassen finn.lassen@verizon.net"=20 >>> >>>To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" >>>Sent: 2/24/2022 2:25:56 PM >>>Subject: [FlyRotary] Ed's spreadsheet >>> >>>>Hi Ed, >>>> >>>>From where did you get the 13B coolant >>>> flow numbers (Pump Factor)? >>>> >>>>I want to be certain that I have >>>> adequate coolant flow. >>>> >>>>Finn >>>> >>>> >>>>--- >>>>This email has been checked for >>>> viruses by Avast antivirus software. >>>>https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> >> >> >>=20 >>Virus-free. www.avast.com=20 >> >><#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> --------=_MB6B7FD0CE-E70A-4FC6-B354-2A6825394B76 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20
One last thought about the spreadsheet.=C2=A0 Like any real wo= rld model contraption, the actual correlation to the real world by the mode= l seldom ever takes everthing into account.=C2=A0 You really want to try an= d capture the crucial elements - the trouble is the crucial element may cha= nge from one factor to another depending on the real world situation and ho= w accurately the model works in that situation.

= Additionally, just finding values for those crucial factors is seldom easy.= =C2=A0 The acid test in my opinion, is to plug your values into the model a= nd see how close/bad it matches what you are actually seeing in the real wo= rld.=C2=A0 If adjusting parameters in the model seem to track with actual r= esults then model is probably OK, otherwise probably not.

<= /div>


Ed

------ Original Message ------
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: 2/26/2022 10:48:51 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Ed's spreadsheet


I agree, must have got it from someplace credible - like Bill Shertz.<= /div>
CP was 1.0 for pure H20 and somewhat less with antifreeze mixed i= n.
I had a primary pully from MazdaTrix that reduced water pump s= peed - since engine was turning faster than normal in automobile, did not w= ant to have any cavitation.=C2=A0 So my water pump did turn a bit slower th= an stock.
Not necessarily - note that water flow drops off if pum= p speed increases into the "caviation range"


------ Original Message ------
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: 2/25/2022 10:39:43 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Ed's spreadsheet

Thanks Ed.

But 185.85 seems pretty detailed for a SWAG.
Any chance you got it from Bill Shertz's tests (which I unfortunately can't find the posts about)?

What determines "Cp Coolant"?
Heat transfer efficiency from engine to water and water to rad?

From measuring the rims of the e-shaft pulley (122mm) and water pump pulley (112mm) it looks like the Renesis water pump runs a bit slower (factor 1.09 compared to your 1.18).

Should water flow be directly proportional to water pump RPM?

Finn

On 2/25/2022 10:07 AM, eanderson@carolina.rr.com wrote:
=20 =20
Sorry, Finn.

Too much water under the bridge, pretty sure I did not make it up out of thin air.=C2=A0 I suspect I=C2=A0 visited some pump we= bsites to arrive at a SWAG.

Ed

------ Original Message ------
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net= >
Sent: 2/24/2022 2:25:56 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Ed's spreadsheet

Hi Ed,
=C2=A0
From where did you get the 13B coolant flow numbers (Pump Factor)?
=C2=A0
I want to be certain that I have adequate coolant flow.
=C2=A0
Finn
=C2=A0
=C2=A0
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



3D"" Virus-= free. www.avast.com
--------=_MB6B7FD0CE-E70A-4FC6-B354-2A6825394B76--