X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from ms-smtp-04.southeast.rr.com ([24.25.9.103] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.9) with ESMTP id 1094367 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 06 May 2006 07:36:08 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.103; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from edward2 (cpe-024-074-025-165.carolina.res.rr.com [24.74.25.165]) by ms-smtp-04.southeast.rr.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k46BZLgn000087 for ; Sat, 6 May 2006 07:35:23 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <002001c67101$30ff9500$2402a8c0@edward2> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: oil cooler lines Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 07:35:35 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine You are correct, Buly. The greater Delta T facilitates better heat transfer to the air with parallel coolers - however, the payoff with using a series arrangement may be simpler plumbing. I have used two cores in series with no problem in cooling. I always remind myself that efficiency is not the same thing as effectiveness - although they are not mutually exclusive (at least not most of the time) {:>) Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bulent Aliev" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 6:04 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: oil cooler lines >I believe parallel coolers will be more efficient due to the higher delta >T. In a serial set up, the liquid in the second cooler will be lower temp. >and less efficient heat transfer will take place. Just an opinion of an >eyeball engineer? > Buly > On May 5, 2006, at 11:34 PM, Kelly Troyer wrote: > >> Bob, >> One other comment........There is some difference of opinion among the >> group >> whether connecting coolers (oil or coolent) in series (as you propose) >> or in >> parallel is the most efficient method.........We have group members >> currently >> flying with both methods........Most that I am aware of that use both >> methods >> are for coolent systems as not many are using two oil coolers........I >> personally >> lean toward a parallel coolent system........Any comments from others in >> the >> group about this question would be welcome as I know we have several >> with >> experience or training in this area !! What would be most efficient for >> one >> system should probably apply to the other.......IMHO >> -- >> Kelly Troyer >> Dyke Delta/13B/RD1C/EC2 >> >> >> >> >> -------------- Original message from >> enpowell@comcast.net: -------------- >> >> Bob, >> I think you should have made the lines larger to help lower presure drop >> in the long lines. I understand that the extra oil in the lines will be >> heavy but the pressure drop would be a tradeoff that I wouldn't want to >> make. >> >> Ken Powell >> Bryant, Arkansas >> 501-847-4721 >> C150 / RV-4 under construction >> >> -------------- Original message -------------- >> From: BMears9413@aol.com >> I'm running two oil coolers in the Spitfire. Due to the lengthe of the >> lines and volume of the two coolers I reduced my oil lines to AN8 (I >> think stock they were 10?) Now, before I close everything up I'm having >> second guessing. My total line length will be around 12'. I had planned >> on running the lines to one oil cooler, then the other, then back to the >> motor. >> Any comments? >> >> Bob Mears > > Buly > http://tinyurl.com/dcy36 > > > > > -- > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/ >