X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao106.cox.net ([68.230.241.40] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.12) with ESMTP id 3519291 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 10:24:18 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.40; envelope-from=alventures@cox.net Received: from fed1rmimpo01.cox.net ([70.169.32.71]) by fed1rmmtao106.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20090227152342.JVRU12540.fed1rmmtao106.cox.net@fed1rmimpo01.cox.net> for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 10:23:42 -0500 Received: from BigAl ([72.192.133.251]) by fed1rmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id M3Pi1b0055RcKeo033PiTN; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 10:23:42 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=R8FNNtetXC1Lfj5Fo2sA:9 a=GLF2utQvKauLv-WyaNoA:7 a=YJQWXLfw6ydVHbzIWOnEA7qhbE8A:4 a=gJcimI5xSWUA:10 a=-6_IoiOvDJHd4LdNQwgA:9 a=ZC0_w4rDu_5Js6j9UF8A:7 a=LnTiUtV0iToHjmAT5INhEdsNbfMA:4 a=AfD3MYMu9mQA:10 X-CM-Score: 0.00 From: "Al Gietzen" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] ethanol Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 07:24:42 -0800 Message-ID: <0145B36AC4D0495C966106DD98CAABCD@BigAl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01C998AC.7518B480" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6838 Importance: Normal Thread-Index: AcmYj9d/Ps0Hx49wS0urTP4NxJFeYgAWcRwg In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C998AC.7518B480 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 At the time I think it was Al G. who said so far he hasnt found any auto fuel with ethanol in it. If I got that wrong I apologize. So far I = havent found any auto fuel that DOESNT. As far as I can tell from my reading = ALL auto fuel in CA has at least 6% and most is at 10% now. Yes; Mike, I may have said that. Upon reflection, I haven't been testing = for ethanol for nearly two years, because to that point I found none. At = that time I had also come across something to the effect that there were = still CA regulatory requirements not allowing ethanol; although the debate was = going on about replacing MTBE with ethanol - which I think has now happened. = I found this statement on the Consumer Energy Center website: More than = 95 percent of the gasoline supplied in the state today contains 6 percent ethanol. I guess I'll do some checks again. =20 I have not noted any issues with my fiberglass/EZ-poxy tanks, nor any = other part of the fuel system. I have not found a single drop of water or ethanol/water at the sump drain, nor any foreign matter in the fuel = filter. And I never keep the tanks full. I'd say, on average, when the plane is sitting in the hangar the tanks are half or less. I have been using only Chevron in the plane, although I've always used any less expensive, off-brand fuel in my vehicles without any issues. =20 Have you actually detected the ethanol in the fuel via the water/fuel = test? =20 Looks like the concerns are: 1) Vapor lock 2) Potential corrosion of aluminum components in the fuel system. 3) Deterioration of rubber (and other?) components in the fuel system. 4) Water. 5) Dislodging contaminants from previously used fuels. Vapor lock is not an issue as long as you have gravity feed to your HP = pump, and don't have a small sump where you return the fuel after the fuel = rail where the that fuel temp can get high. =20 I have never come across any evidence that aluminum is affected by = ethanol, although ethanol water mix may cause surface corrosion of some alloys. =20 Al G =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C998AC.7518B480 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 

At the time I think it was = Al G. who said so far he hasnt found any auto fuel with ethanol in it. If I got = that wrong I apologize. So far I havent found any auto fuel that DOESNT. As = far as I can tell from my reading ALL auto fuel in CA has at least 6% and most is = at 10% now.

Yes; Mike, I may have said that. = Upon reflection, I haven’t been testing for ethanol for nearly two = years, because to that point I found none. At that time I had also come across something to the effect that there were still CA regulatory requirements = not allowing ethanol; although the debate was going on about replacing MTBE = with ethanol – which I think has now happened.  I found this = statement on the Consumer Energy Center website:  More than 95 percent of the = gasoline supplied in the state today contains 6 percent ethanol. I guess I’ll do some checks again.

 

I have not noted any issues with = my fiberglass/EZ-poxy tanks, nor any other part of the fuel system.  I = have not found a single drop of water or ethanol/water at the sump drain, nor = any foreign matter in the fuel filter.

And I never keep the tanks full. = I’d say, on average, when the plane is sitting in the hangar the tanks are = half or less. I have been using only Chevron in the plane, although I’ve = always used any less expensive, off-brand fuel in my vehicles without any = issues.

 

Have you actually detected the = ethanol in the fuel via the water/fuel test?

 

Looks like the concerns = are:

1) Vapor = lock

2) Potential corrosion of = aluminum components in the fuel system.

3) Deterioration of rubber = (and other?) components in the fuel system.

4) Water.

5) Dislodging contaminants = from previously used fuels.

Vapor lock is not an issue as = long as you have gravity feed to your HP pump, and don’t have a small sump = where you return the fuel after the fuel rail where the that fuel temp can get = high.

 

I have never come across any = evidence that aluminum is affected by ethanol, although ethanol water mix may = cause surface corrosion of some alloys.

 

Al G

 

 

------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C998AC.7518B480--