Return-Path: Received: from mail01.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.182] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c1) with ESMTP-TLS id 724191 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 10 Feb 2005 16:33:25 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=211.29.132.182; envelope-from=lendich@optusnet.com.au Received: from george (d211-31-119-41.dsl.nsw.optusnet.com.au [211.31.119.41]) by mail01.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.12.11/8.12.11) with SMTP id j1ALWY80010148 for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2005 08:32:35 +1100 Message-ID: <001601c50fb8$56a1a380$29771fd3@george> From: "George Lendich" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: P port intake Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 07:34:44 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0013_01C5100C.27DF8860" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C5100C.27DF8860 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Jerry, You could be right there with the higher velocity - but I was referring = more to the lower velocities, bigger tubes scenario. George (down under) George, just a reminder that the "fuel droplets dropping out of = suspension" is just a theory that may or may not actually occur or even = if it does occur, may not have much of an effect. At the velocities we = are talking about, the inlet charge may well scrub off pipe interiors = preventing any build up. If this is a real problem then moving the = injectors to the bottom of the sweep just in front of the throttle body = should take care of it. Direct injection may turn out to be an elegant = solution to a problem that does not exist. Jerry On Thursday, February 10, 2005, at 03:00 AM, George Lendich wrote: Tom, Your on the right track! Exhaust contamination of the inlet charge, affects idle ( only) as = the exhaust become self evacuating at higher velocity (RPM). Cause larger Ports and PP =20 Backpressure on the inlet charge also affects idle as the = backpressure cause fuel droplets to drop out of suspension, which causes = surging, one inlet charge lean the next rich etc. Cause larger ports and PP. =20 The close to housing butterfly, helps to minimize both, before too = much ( of either) enters the inlet manifold tube. =20 The RX 8 eliminates the first problem i.e. overlap. No problem with = the second. PP can cause the second problem. DI will eliminate both problems! George ( down under) =20 Sorry. Ok, it's not the residue that would be a problem, it's the = back pressure in a combined intake system. Tom wrote: That is interesting Ed. Just thinking about it and now it would = seem that the expelled residue would be the first thing that got sucked = back thru a dedicated runner, also having a negative effect. Ed Anderson wrote: Tom, =20 One reason that Jerry would not want to do that is that there is = overlap between intake and exhaust. That means while one rotor is = trying to suck air in its intake port - the intake port of the other = rotor may be expelling some residue exhaust gas out its intake and = opposing any incoming air. I think the engine would certainly run but = I don't think you would develop best power. Now it would probably be a = different story with the Renesis which by moving the exhaust ports to = the side housings has eliminate the exhaust/intake overlap. =20 FWIW =20 Ed A ----- Original Message ----- From: Tom To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 8:58 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: P port intake Jerry, Since only one rotor chamber is drawing fuel/air at any given time, = why would you not feed them both from a single throttle body? Tom Jerry Hey wrote: George, originally I was going to hook up with a piece of hose over = the butted pieces with a couple of hose clamps. That is how I will = attach the other end at the throttle bodies. But, we have been considering welding and also building some type of flange. Certainly, for = starters I will use the hose and clamp method. Jerry On Wednesday, February 9, 2005, at 08:43 PM, George Lendich wrote: > Jerry, > Is that a but weld, OR does the tube go into the bellmouth end OR = a > flange that they both go into. > George ( down under)=20 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jerry Hey > To: Rotary motors in aircraft > Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 9:35 AM > Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: P port intake > > Yes, it is 1.61 inches. > > > On Wednesday, February 9, 2005, at 05:39 PM, Tom wrote: > > Jerry, > Do you have an i.d. measurement for the narrow end? > =20 > TIA > Tom > > Jerry Hey wrote: > > Today UPS brought the bell mouths for the P port intake. They are > three inches o.d. across and have a smooth gradual taper down to = the > runner size ... > > > >=20 > > > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' > Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C5100C.27DF8860 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Jerry,
You could be right there with the = higher velocity -=20 but I was referring more to the lower velocities, bigger tubes=20 scenario.
George (down under)
George,=20 just a reminder that the "fuel droplets dropping out of suspension" is = just a=20 theory that may or may not actually occur or even if it does occur, = may not=20 have much of an effect. At the velocities we are talking about, the = inlet=20 charge may well scrub off pipe interiors preventing any build up. If = this is a=20 real problem then moving the injectors to the bottom of the sweep just = in=20 front of the throttle body should take care of it. Direct injection = may turn=20 out to be an elegant solution to a problem that does not exist.=20 Jerry




On Thursday, February 10, 2005, at 03:00 AM, = George=20 Lendich wrote:



Tom,
Your on the right track!
Exhaust=20 contamination of the inlet charge, affects idle ( only) as the = exhaust=20 become self evacuating at higher velocity (RPM).
Cause larger = Ports and=20 PP
 
Backpressure on the inlet charge also affects idle = as the=20 backpressure cause fuel droplets to drop out of suspension, which = causes=20 surging, one inlet charge lean the next rich etc.
Cause larger = ports and=20 PP.
 
The close to housing butterfly, helps to minimize = both,=20 before too much ( of either)
enters the inlet manifold=20 tube.
 
The RX 8 eliminates the first problem = i.e.=20 overlap. No problem with the second.
PP can cause the second = problem.
DI will eliminate both problems!
George ( down=20 under)
 
Sorry.  Ok, it's not the residue that would = be a=20 problem, it's the back pressure in a combined intake = system.

Tom=20 <tomtugan@yahoo.com>=20 wrote:

That is interesting Ed.  Just thinking about it = and=20 now it would seem that the expelled residue would be the first = thing=20 that got sucked back thru a dedicated runner, also having a negative = effect.

Ed Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>=20 wrote:


Tom,
 
<= ?param Arial>One=20 reason that Jerry would not want to do that is that there is overlap = between=20 intake and exhaust.  That means while one rotor is trying to = suck air=20 in its intake port - the intake port of the other rotor may be = expelling=20 some residue exhaust gas out its intake and opposing any incoming = air. =20 I think the engine would certainly  run but I don't think you = would=20 develop best power.  Now it would probably  be a = different=20 story with the Renesis which by moving the exhaust ports to the side = housings has eliminate the exhaust/intake=20 overlap.
 
FWIW
 
<= ?param Arial>Ed=20 A

----- Original Message=20 -----
From:=20 Tom
To: = Rotary motors in=20 aircraft
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 = 8:58=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: P port = intake

Jerry,
Since=20 only one rotor chamber is drawing fuel/air at any given time, why = would you=20 not feed them both from a single throttle = body?
Tom

Jerry Hey=20 <jerryhey@earthlink.net>=20 wrote:

George, originally I was going to hook up with a piece = of hose=20 over the
butted pieces with a couple of hose clamps. That is how = I will=20 attach
the other end at the throttle bodies. But, we have been=20 considering
welding and also building some type of flange. = Certainly, for=20 starters
I will use the hose and clamp method.=20 Jerry





On Wednesday, February 9, 2005, at = 08:43 PM,=20 George Lendich wrote:

> Jerry,
> Is that a but = weld, OR=20 does the tube go into the  bellmouth end OR a
> flange = that they=20 both go into.
> George ( down under) 
>
> = -----=20 Original Message -----
> From: Jerry Hey
> To: Rotary = motors in=20 aircraft
> Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 9:35 AM
> = Subject:=20 [FlyRotary] Re: P port intake
>
> Yes, it is 1.61=20 inches.
>
>
> On Wednesday, February 9, 2005, at = 05:39 PM,=20 Tom wrote:
>
> Jerry,
> Do you have an i.d. = measurement=20 for the narrow end?
>  
> TIA
> = Tom
>
>=20 Jerry Hey wrote:
>
> Today UPS brought the bell mouths = for the P=20 port intake. They are
> three inches o.d. across and have a = smooth=20 gradual taper down to the
> runner size=20 ...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Do you=20 Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second=20 Term'
>



<image.tiff>

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with=20 enhanced search. Learn=20 = more.



<image.tiff>

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - = Jib Jab's 'Second=20 = Term'



<image.tiff>

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - = Jib Jab's 'Second=20 Term'

------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C5100C.27DF8860--