content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: EWP check valves
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:19:27 -0400
Message-ID: <0B27ED95697C4D4CBC82D79E790FE567086FA4@exchange.rfgonline.com>
Thread-Topic: [FlyRotary] Re: EWP series flight data & hail
Thread-Index: AcOXPIy+0/NCtp9+SoyaSenSX3JzyAAAJnBw
From: "Robinson, Chad" <crobinson@rfgonline.com>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>

IMHO, the standard to beat is McMaster-Carr's 4708K58, a bronze =
swing-check valve for a 2" pipe rated for 406degF and up to 200PSI. It =
costs $58.55, and unless somebody points out some problem, will probably =
be the way I go. It has NPT threads but that should be easy enough to =
adapt to standard radiator clamps by simply installing the appropriate =
adapters on each side.

I'm thinking this is plenty of margin for safety, given that I'll be =
using a pressure-relief radiator cap (no glycol and closed system for =
me), and if I go above 406degF I'm probably going to be concerned about =
WAY more than my check valves! (Fire!)

Any comments?

The only data I don't have is weight, but since it's bronze it can't be =
tiny - I figure a pound each to be safe. Two pumps plus two check valves =
is still lighter than the mechanical pump, so I'm still happy - if I can =
figure out where to PUT all this stuff! =3D)

So, how about it, Jim? Frankly, this falls within acceptable costs for =
me, especially since I won't be running with two pump controllers. I =
don't see that building a valve is the right way to go for me, but I'm =
interested in seeing / hearing about whatever you come up with.

Regards,
Chad