X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao104.cox.net ([68.230.241.42] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.5) with ESMTP id 4225892 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 18 Apr 2010 21:55:10 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.42; envelope-from=rv-4mike@cox.net Received: from fed1rmimpo01.cox.net ([70.169.32.71]) by fed1rmmtao104.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.00.01.00 201-2244-105-20090324) with ESMTP id <20100419015434.ORIC27176.fed1rmmtao104.cox.net@fed1rmimpo01.cox.net> for ; Sun, 18 Apr 2010 21:54:34 -0400 Received: from willsPC ([174.66.169.142]) by fed1rmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id 7Dub1e00234gpFS03Dubq3; Sun, 18 Apr 2010 21:54:35 -0400 X-VR-Score: -96.00 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=cnbFproiWJRJ9R5Ra84R6dpMd929KZAD6MF01mSBA8Y= c=1 sm=1 a=1AxR2Bxg0C4A:10 a=cPUexvdKvEVW1PN6gG+JiA==:17 a=N8B9JuSIAAAA:8 a=kviXuzpPAAAA:8 a=3oc9M9_CAAAA:8 a=ZZNEH-WgAAAA:8 a=1oqGTYSLAAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=7g1VtSJxAAAA:8 a=seYjj72pQWNV_PkDhacA:9 a=dTD0kEoL4n_J00ePoIAA:7 a=RkaEAw5b1nRDnfmvOOXaK2Ay3XMA:4 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10 a=Qa1je4BO31QA:10 a=botiS8bjTA0A:10 a=4vB-4DCPJfMA:10 a=U8Ie8EnqySEA:10 a=cvn8laQl214A:10 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 a=rkcLUfFnSjkP8ohi:21 a=NqKxsCKGWIL4Cgl0:21 a=Hl1Gy0H5AAAA:8 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=HxR_aZGnhiVtbaMAvkoA:9 a=tGHySd220xrvOWV4HvkA:7 a=lyidsKbtqfGfax9Vjui91nTQMi0A:4 a=MSl-tDqOz04A:10 a=cPUexvdKvEVW1PN6gG+JiA==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <60E2F7D9C8294933A341F0CD2D5ADD0E@willsPC> From: "Mike Wills" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: cooling for ground runs Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 18:54:36 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0046_01CADF28.978DD0E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8089.726 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8089.726 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0046_01CADF28.978DD0E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable George, Yeah, I like the potential of the PP as well. Which is why I'm not in a = huge hurry to do anything yet. I'd like to see a couple of them fly and = see the performance claims proven. As for Bill's effort, I'm sure he's going to come up with an optimum = setup. But previous posts by Bill on the subject left me with the = impression that he is going down the path of complete packages, ala the = original Powersport business model. Maybe I misunderstood him. I'd be = interested/willing to purchase a complete PP engine, but want to retain = Tracy's RD-1 and EC-2 (bought and proven). It was my understanding that = Bill was pursuing mechanical FI, his own ignition, etc... Again, maybe a = misunderstanding. Jeff Doddridge who is doing the PP housings Paul L is advocating is in = my neighborhood. I may take a look, though I gather there is some = significant disagreement about Paul's choice of port timing/size. Mike Wills From: George Lendich=20 Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2010 2:31 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: cooling for ground runs Mike, I have been a PP convert from the beginning, because of the additional = power gains, however my concerns from the beginning were fitting of the = PP, inlet size and shape and tuning for ram effect. I agree with Lynn on the inlet shape, however oblong is difficult to = achieve for everyone, so the round being next best and is easier to make = and fit, I settled on that. However I still had a nagging feeling that all PP's leak over time no = matter what you do to seal them. This belief as a result of many = discussions with engine rebuilders and racers. Now that Bill has designed the two piece inlet ( redesign of the = Powersport unit) with O ring sealing, I am much happier and will go that = way. I have already placed my order for some. Bill is intending to test the PP size for power as soon as humanly = possible, however it's not the highest priority, at this point in time. The Powersport were a lower reduction unit designed for max power at = 6,000 rpm. I can only assume ( from discussions) their considering = redesigning with a 2.8:1 ratio to take advantage of higher RPM, which = affects a whole range of things - including the PP size ( that certainly = is my suggestion anyway). My guess is a whole lot of work must be done = before they get to that stage.=20 All I can say is wait for the results, I believe you will be pleasantly = pleased with the additional power, my guess is about 230 hp for a 2 = rotor at 7,200 rpm - maybe more at that RPM and to 7,500 rpm. George (down under) Dave, I am going to do something different with the intake at some point. I = cant get the prop RPM that I should be getting in level flight and I = refuse to hack on the prop until I convince myself that there isnt a = little more HP in the engine via a better intake. Also, my current = config wont allow the fit of an air filter and I don=92t want to fly = forever without one. So would like to change the config to accommodate a = filter and ram air. I havent decided what route to take yet. Either a better 4 port = manifold or a PP engine/manifold. Waiting to see how the PP guys make = out (Mark S., how about an update). In either case I'll build it on my = spare engine and get it all done off the airplane so it is plug and play = with minimal down time. I hope to do it sometime next winter. Current status. Havent had a chance to fly again since my loss of = power due to fuel starvation a few weeks ago. Went through the entire = fuel system but didn=92t find a smoking gun. Replaced my fuel filters = with some higher flow units, but don=92t believe that was the problem. = Replaced my injectors with the original ones I had rebuilt by RC = Engineering. The new injectors flow more fuel so now the tuning is a = little out of whack. Also at the last oil change I switched from a straight weight mineral = oil to Mobil One. Now my previously tight engine leaks like a sieve. So = trying to address numerous oil leaks. But I think I'm getting close to = resuming flight. Oh, one more distraction. Just about into the soaring season so I'm = thrashing trying to get my glider ready for summer. Mike Wills =20 From: David Leonard=20 Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2010 11:05 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: cooling for ground runs Mike, Repeat after me: "I will not rebuild unnecessarily, I will fly = instead." "I will not rebuild unnecessarily, I will fly instead." "I = will not rebuild unnecessarily, I will fly instead." "I will not rebuild = unnecessarily, I will fly instead."=20 Lets face it. You tinkered with that thing for many years. If you = were ever going to get it right you would have done it by now. So quit = trying and keep flying. :-) David Leonard Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY http://N4VY.RotaryRoster.net http://RotaryRoster.net On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Mike Wills wrote: Scott, I agree with Dave, that looks great. One picture shows your intake = manifold. Looks like you used a casting for the lower part with a = transition to tubing. Where did you get the casting? Is it a stock Mazda = turbo casting that you cut the top off of? I'd like to do something = similar. Not real happy with my current manifold and would like to = rebuild it. Mike Wills From: David Leonard=20 Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2010 9:49 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: cooling for ground runs Thanks Scott, You are right about what I said and I will clarify a little. I say = if it wont cool on the ground, it wont cool in the air because when I = first started flying I had marginal cooling on the ground and marginal = cooling in the air. At that time I could idle and taxi indefinitely = unless the OAT was above 85 or so, when my taxi times would be limited = to about 30 minutes. cooling in the air was similarly limited to = shallow climbs and less than full power in all but the coolest of = climates. However, Chris may be talking about high power ground runs which is = a different story. A full 5 minutes at full power on the ground is sure = to push the limits of most installations, and a temporary spray bar fed = from a hose is a reasonable thought if you feel the need to do extended = ground runs at or near full power. BTW Scott,=20 I just took another look at your website and picture. You sure have = done very nice workmanship. I can't wait to see that thing fly! It is = guaranteed to be one of the fastest RV's around. --=20 David Leonard Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY http://N4VY.RotaryRoster.net http://RotaryRoster.net On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 8:55 PM, wrote: Chris & Terria: I had ground running temp issues at lower power. Dave Leonard told = me that it's important to get it to self cool at low to mid power on the = ground. He said that reliance on sufficient cooling when you come up to = flying speed most likely won't work if it won't self cool on the ground. = I took his advise and redesigned my cooling system, which by the way = looks a lot like yours with major differences being cooler ducting and = cooler orientation. He's a link to my page @ EAA326 site: = http://gallery.eaa326.org/main.php?g2_itemId=3D1727 Tracy has commented that I should have reduced the cross section = of my oil cooler duct more quickly to force the air to uniformly pass = thru the oil cooler core. I applied that thinking to my water cooler = which I built next, and it worked even better than my cardboard and tape = trial duct. What is the engine RPM and % load that you start to have cooling = problems? Scott -----Original Message----- From: Chris and Terria To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Sat, Apr 17, 2010 10:02 am Subject: [FlyRotary] cooling for ground runs Gents, I am doing the higher power ground runs now, and am only able to = run for about 5 minutes before reaching 195* or so. I=92m looking for = ideas on how to extend the time for each ground run. I was thinking of = adding a spray bar like others have discussed. My thought was to drill = some holes in some PVC and connect it to the garden hose. Then put it = in the intake in front of the radiator. I would have to run the hose = out the front and clamp it down so it doesn=92t come close to the prop. I=92m open to all ideas though. I=92ve attached a picture that shows my radiator and duct work. Thanks, Chris -- Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ Archive and UnSub: = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html --=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0046_01CADF28.978DD0E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
George,
 
Yeah, I like the potential of the PP as well. = Which is=20 why I'm not in a huge hurry to do anything yet. I'd like to see a couple = of them=20 fly and see the performance claims proven.
 
As for Bill's effort, I'm sure he's going to = come up=20 with an optimum setup. But previous posts by Bill on the subject = left me=20 with the impression that he is going down the path of complete packages, = ala the=20 original Powersport business model. Maybe I misunderstood him. I'd be=20 interested/willing to purchase a complete PP engine, but want to retain = Tracy's=20 RD-1 and EC-2 (bought and proven). It was my understanding that Bill was = pursuing mechanical FI, his own ignition, etc... Again, maybe a=20 misunderstanding.
 
Jeff Doddridge who is doing the PP housings = Paul L is=20 advocating is in my neighborhood. I may take a look, though I gather = there is=20 some significant disagreement about Paul's choice of port=20 timing/size.
 
Mike Wills

Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2010 2:31 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: cooling for ground = runs

Mike,
I have been a PP convert from the = beginning,=20 because of the additional power gains, however my concerns from the = beginning=20 were fitting of the PP, inlet size and shape and tuning for ram=20 effect.
I agree with Lynn on the inlet shape, = however=20 oblong is difficult to achieve for everyone, so the round being next = best and is=20 easier to make and fit, I settled on that.
 
However I still had a nagging feeling = that all PP's=20 leak over time no matter what you do to seal them. = This belief  as a=20 result of many discussions with engine rebuilders and = racers.
 
Now that Bill has designed the two = piece inlet ( redesign of the = Powersport=20 unit) with O ring sealing, I am much happier and will go that way. I = have=20 already placed my order for some.
 
Bill is intending to test the PP size = for power as=20 soon as humanly possible, however it's not the highest priority, at this = point=20 in time.
 
The Powersport were a lower reduction=20 unit designed for max power at 6,000 rpm. I can only assume ( from=20 discussions) their considering redesigning with a 2.8:1 ratio to = take=20 advantage of higher RPM, which affects a whole range of things - = including the=20 PP size ( that certainly is my suggestion anyway). My guess is a = whole lot=20 of work must be done before they get to that stage. 
 
All I can say is wait for the results, = I believe=20 you will be pleasantly pleased with the additional power, my guess is = about 230=20 hp for a 2 rotor at 7,200 rpm - maybe more at that RPM and to 7,500=20 rpm.
George  (down under)
Dave,
 
I am going to do something different with = the intake=20 at some point. I cant get the prop RPM that I should be getting = in level=20 flight and I refuse to hack on the prop until I convince myself that = there=20 isnt a little more HP in the engine via a better intake. Also, my = current=20 config wont allow the fit of an air filter and I don=92t want = to fly=20 forever without one. So would like to change the config to accommodate = a=20 filter and ram air.
 
I havent decided what route to take yet. = Either a=20 better 4 port manifold or a PP engine/manifold. Waiting to see how the = PP guys=20 make out (Mark S., how about an update). In either case I'll = build it on=20 my spare engine and get it all done off the airplane so it is plug and = play=20 with minimal down time. I hope to do it sometime next=20 winter.
 
Current status. Havent had a chance to fly = again since=20 my loss of power due to fuel starvation a few weeks ago. Went through = the=20 entire fuel system but didn=92t find a smoking gun. Replaced my fuel = filters=20 with some higher flow units, but don=92t believe that was the problem. = Replaced=20 my injectors with the original ones I had rebuilt by RC Engineering. = The new=20 injectors flow more fuel so now the tuning is  a little out of=20 whack.
 
Also at the last oil change I switched from = a straight=20 weight mineral oil to Mobil One. Now my previously tight engine leaks = like a=20 sieve. So trying to address numerous oil leaks. But I think I'm = getting close=20 to resuming flight.
 
Oh, one more distraction. Just about into = the soaring=20 season so I'm thrashing trying to get my glider ready for = summer.
 
Mike Wills  

Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2010 11:05 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: cooling for ground = runs

Mike,
Repeat after me:  "I will not rebuild unnecessarily, I will = fly=20 instead." "I will not rebuild unnecessarily, I will fly instead." "I = will not=20 rebuild unnecessarily, I will fly instead." "I will not rebuild = unnecessarily,=20 I will fly instead."
 
Lets face it.  You tinkered with that thing for many = years.  If=20 you were ever going to get it right you would have done it by = now.  So=20 quit trying and keep flying.  :-)
David Leonard

Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY
http://N4VY.RotaryRoster.nethttp://RotaryRoster.net

On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Mike Wills = <rv-4mike@cox.net>=20 wrote:
Scott,
 
I agree with Dave, that looks great. One = picture=20 shows your intake manifold. Looks like you used a casting for the = lower part=20 with a transition to tubing. Where did you get the casting? Is it a = stock=20 Mazda turbo casting that you cut the top off of? I'd like to do = something similar. Not real happy with my current manifold and would = like to=20 rebuild it.
 
Mike Wills

Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2010 9:49 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: cooling for ground=20 runs

Thanks Scott,
You are right about what I said and = I will=20 clarify a little.  I say if it wont cool on the ground, it wont = cool in=20 the air because when I first started flying I had marginal cooling = on the=20 ground and marginal cooling in the air.  At that time I could = idle and=20 taxi indefinitely unless the OAT was above 85 or so, when my taxi = times=20 would be limited to about 30 minutes.  cooling in the air was = similarly=20 limited to shallow climbs and less than full power in all but the = coolest of=20 climates.

However, Chris may be talking about high power = ground runs=20 which is a different story.  A full 5 minutes at full power on = the=20 ground is sure to push the limits of most installations, and a = temporary=20 spray bar fed from a hose is a reasonable thought if you feel the = need to do=20 extended ground runs at or near full power.

BTW Scott,
I = just=20 took another look at your website and picture.  You sure have = done very=20 nice workmanship.  I can't wait to see that thing fly!  It = is=20 guaranteed to be one of the fastest RV's around.

--
David = Leonard

Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY
http://N4VY.RotaryRoster.net
http://RotaryRoster.net

On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 8:55 PM, <shipchief@aol.com> wrote:
Chris & Terria:
I had ground running temp issues at lower power. Dave Leonard = told me=20 that it's important to get it to self cool at low to mid power on = the=20 ground. He said that reliance on sufficient cooling when you come = up to=20 flying speed most likely won't work if it won't self cool on = the=20 ground. I took his advise and redesigned my cooling system, which = by the=20 way looks a lot like yours with major differences being cooler = ducting and=20 cooler orientation. He's a link to my page @ EAA326 site: http://gallery.eaa326.org/main.php?g2_itemId=3D1727Tracy=20 has commented that I should have reduced the cross section of my = oil=20 cooler duct more quickly to force the air to uniformly pass thru = the oil=20 cooler core. I applied that thinking to my water cooler which I = built=20 next, and it worked even better than my cardboard and tape trial=20 duct.
What is the engine RPM and % load that you start to have = cooling=20 problems?
Scott


-----Original Message-----
From: Chris and Terria <candtmallory@embarqmail.com>
To: Rotary = motors in=20 aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Sat, = Apr 17,=20 2010 10:02 am
Subject: [FlyRotary] cooling for ground = runs

Gents,
 
I am doing the higher power ground runs = now, and am=20 only able to run for about 5 minutes before reaching 195* or = so.  I=92m=20 looking for ideas on how to extend the time for each ground = run.  I=20 was thinking of adding a spray bar like others have = discussed.  My=20 thought was to drill some holes in some PVC and connect it to the = garden=20 hose.  Then put it in the intake in front of the = radiator.  I=20 would have to run the hose out the front and clamp it down so it = doesn=92t=20 come close to the prop.
 
I=92m open to all ideas though.
 
I=92ve attached a picture that shows my = radiator and=20 duct work.
 
Thanks,
 
Chris
--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.htm=
l






--
------=_NextPart_000_0046_01CADF28.978DD0E0--