|
|
Oh, now that makes sense. Leon to the rescue again.
BTW, my previous post was supposed to be a reason for not using an
exchanger, not so much a request for a solution. But now with your input it
could be feasible IF, like Ed says, your installation really only has room
for a large Rad but not an oil cooler.
Dave Leonard
> The Mazda one
> will work just as efficiently if you feed it with water from the COLD side
> of the rad. It's a really robust unit, and I've never seen one leak.
>
> Hope this clarifies the situation ...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Leon
>
> P.S.
> I get my cold water under pressure by drilling & tapping into the
> water pump
> housing just before it goes into the block. Works a treat!!
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <daveleonard@cox.net>
> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
> Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 12:46 PM
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: oi/water Exchanger [FlyRotary] Re: fluidyne oil
> cooler
>
>
> > I was considering the idea when I was planning my installation
> and one big
> question kept popping into my mind: which side of the rad do you put the
> interchanger?
> >
> > If you put the interchanger on the hot water coming out of the
> block, that
> water is at least 180deg. This hot water will have a very hard
> time cooling
> that oil, and best case could only get it down to 190 or 200.
> Likewise the
> water is likely to boil before it get to the radiator since it is starting
> at 180 (at least) and going up from there.
> >
> > If you put the interchanger after the radiator it will probably
> do a good
> job of cooling the oil, but now you will be heating the water right before
> it goes back into the engine. In order to keep the water from overheating
> in the engine it will have to come out of the heat exchanger relatively
> cool, which mean it has to come out of the rad really cool. To
> get it that
> cold comming out of the rad that cold (assuming you had a big enough rad),
> the temperature gradient really has to drop and the rad becomes very
> inefficient as it is trying to cool the coolant that extra 20 deg.
> >
> > I decided the only efficient way to do it was to have two rads,
> one after
> the interchanger and one before it. I suppose that would work if you were
> using 2 evap cores in series, but for me the obvious solution was
> to use an
> oil/air cooler.
> >
> > Dave Leonard
> >
> > >
> > > Good points of course, but I still can't help but be drawn to the
> simplicity
> > > of having only one scoop, one duct, and one radiator. Even as I type,
> I'm
> > > trying to figure out where I can put a bigger radiator
> (within cosmetic
> > > limits this time) :-) I'm even warming back up (so to
> speak) to the
> idea
> > > of using the stock 1st gen oil/water exchanger for the single
> rotor. It
> was
> > > pointed out to me that the stock unit took hot water from the heater
> outlet,
> > > which doesn't really give the heat exchanger the best chance
> of success.
> > >
> > > If I get Ken's oil/water exchanger, I'll be mighty tempted to
> hook it up
> to
> > > the current two radiators to see how it does on the ground. Since I'm
> not
> > > opposed to changing out the evap cores, there might be a way
> to enlarge
> the
> > > capacity some. Barring all that, it'll make a nice paperweight.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Rusty (now collecting oil coolers instead of manifolds)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
> > >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
> >
>
>
> >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
> >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
|
|