X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.235] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c1) with ESMTP id 2467606 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 10:10:33 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.233.184.235; envelope-from=rwstracy@gmail.com Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 76so643766wra for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 07:09:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=hSo7HEfkMTDPXnnSa40HGbrC8PDNXh+f86aEyqaY++0=; b=q0JhuBFzvtEZoOneWXOkQ8f9nXCbO8KWpx+HhJ2hQ8TAMBg1y+vSrWRkQfTSiwJcMlHQknr92xoLIMDJU1miQTzW94c3CcJzZphtj0/3mpni9jLL2Dy1xMHCE+UCxfsuOcq5rSlZwNWc3cb4DF0BDKsWQMPSOUuNRLwfMsa/luw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=ALMHhSTuLXBqIvWY2ydajC7Kyr971m5Xeq5wM8Of9ZUE1wvbGP6It7IECo9me3ZuPp7oJ7MiLQotZv/bPPYMTgizuEZAqZYoQnhe8XFzL9OC54PoJ1M9W9+0Y16ap/vV72ouCcF7Y0wbPvsEqqcShdhDljxJo8AyJfFZ5X1nkCA= Received: by 10.142.255.14 with SMTP id c14mr1237425wfi.1194880194522; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 07:09:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.143.6.18 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 07:09:54 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1b4b137c0711120709s6e995769o69bab68107f79a79@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 10:09:54 -0500 From: "Tracy Crook" Sender: rwstracy@gmail.com To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Diffuser Configuration Comparison In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: X-Google-Sender-Auth: 947aedeeca46a0d2 I especially liked the comment in the report where it says that the higher the pressure drop across the core, the higher the diffuser efficiency. I interpret this as 'thicker core is better than thinner!' Of course there is a point of diminishing returns where flow is simply too low as Ed has pointed out but in an application where diffuser efficiency is such an important factor, this pushes that point in the direction of 'thick'. Tracy (back from the dragon and sorry to bring up the thick vs thin thing again :>) On Nov 7, 2007 3:54 PM, Ed Anderson wrote: > > Here are two of the charts from the Naca report. The one on the left shows > diffuser resistance without a resistance (radiator) behind it and the one on > the right shows the diffuser with a radiator core behind it. > > Note the considerably increase in diffuser efficiency with a core. It > appears that the while the pressure that builds up in front of a core > eventually leads to boundary layer separation due to the adverse pressure > gradient,. > > It in fact actually helps the resistance diffuser pressure recovery > efficiency over the open diffuser by preventing the separation until much > later. The one on the right also shows that a shorter length L/D also helps > efficiency as that apparently causes the expansion before the boundary layer > has grown too thick with the tendency to separate. > > Of course you could always get the report and do your own interpretation > {:>) > > > Ed Anderson > Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered > Matthews, NC > eanderson@carolina.rr.com > http://www.andersonee.com > http://members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW > http://www.dmack.net/mazda/index.html > -- > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > Archive and UnSub: > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html > >