X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 2 [X] Return-Path: Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com ([64.102.122.149] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.8) with ESMTP id 2021354 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 02 May 2007 10:16:07 -0400 Received-SPF: softfail receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.102.122.149; envelope-from=echristley@nc.rr.com Received: from rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com ([64.102.121.159]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 02 May 2007 10:14:17 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.14,480,1170651600"; d="scan'208"; a="120074970:sNHT586001718" Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l42EEHws025560 for ; Wed, 2 May 2007 10:14:17 -0400 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id l42EE8Gj009120 for ; Wed, 2 May 2007 14:14:17 GMT Received: from xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.38]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 2 May 2007 10:14:02 -0400 Received: from [64.102.38.210] ([64.102.38.210]) by xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 2 May 2007 10:14:02 -0400 Message-ID: <46389CB3.20402@nc.rr.com> Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 10:14:11 -0400 From: Ernest Christley Reply-To: echristley@nc.rr.com User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070403) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: oil coolers References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 May 2007 14:14:02.0623 (UTC) FILETIME=[22A780F0:01C78CC4] Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2; header.From=echristley@nc.rr.com; dkim=neutral lehanover@aol.com wrote: > > > There is only air cooling. There is nothing else. If you can dump the excess heat through the water radiator, > > then its a great idea, and works just fine. Oil temps above 160 degrees cost power. The cooler the better. > > You will need 1/3 more water cooling than you started with to make it work. You cannot fool Mother Nature. > Question from the peanut gallery. I don't plan to use a oil/water exchanger, but aren't they counterproductive? The efficiency of the cooling relies on deltaT. The best situation is having the hottest coolant interfacing with the air, and it has always been my understanding that the oil exits the engine hotter than the water. Will an oil/water exchanger reduce the overall efficiency of the system by allowing the exit air, on average, to leave with less BTUs?