X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from poplet2.per.eftel.com ([203.24.100.45] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.5) with ESMTP id 4226126 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 04:52:23 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=203.24.100.45; envelope-from=lendich@aanet.com.au Received: from sv1-1.aanet.com.au (mail.aanet.com.au [203.24.100.34]) by poplet2.per.eftel.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD205173886 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 16:51:46 +0800 (WST) Received: from ownerf1fc517b8 (203.171.92.134.static.rev.aanet.com.au [203.171.92.134]) by sv1-1.aanet.com.au (Postfix) with SMTP id DA371BEC034 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 16:51:43 +0800 (WST) Message-ID: <38FBBBA0AF7E49F1A32A930B8B37A36B@ownerf1fc517b8> From: "George Lendich" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: cooling for ground runs Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:51:46 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0009_01CADFF1.5C8DF500" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 100419-0, 04/19/2010), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01CADFF1.5C8DF500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mike, It's my belief that Bill will be offering parts mainly and only a = complete FWF if requested and some time down the track. Bill isn't pushing the Powersport type Mechanical FI, but I'm sure it = will be available - he's more into direct injection, he's very = progressive. It's the maths and previous Powersport testing that disagrees with = Paul's PP sizing. Placement AKA timing will be similar except for the = size of the port. Powersport's previous ports were angled to get the = opening timing. An angled port also reduces the tendency of the port to = be larger than intended, as a larger opening will slow the velocity just = when you want it at the max. The reason is the port opening is in a = curvature of the housing.=20 Lynn also suggests that the manifold tubes can be bigger but reduced at = the housing inner face to get that last punch into the combustion = chamber. Lynn's suggestion of an oblong port shape also reduces the = tendency for the port face to be bigger than intended, as it's short and = wide. =20 I'm still trying to figure how that can be done easily. One way would be = to fill the void with melted Al and when it cooled and shrank - weld = (Tig) it around the edge. This then could be machined and ground to = shape. Bugger of a job though, but for racing it all adds-up. George ( down under) 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_0009_01CADFF1.5C8DF500 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 Mike,
It's my belief that Bill will be = offering parts=20 mainly and only a complete FWF if requested and some time down the=20 track.
 
Bill isn't  pushing the Powersport = type=20 Mechanical FI, but I'm sure it will be available - he's more into direct = injection, he's very progressive.
 
It's the maths and previous = Powersport testing=20 that disagrees with Paul's PP sizing. Placement AKA timing will be = similar=20 except for the size of the port. Powersport's previous ports were angled = to get=20 the opening timing. An angled port also reduces the tendency of the port = to be=20 larger than intended, as a larger opening will slow the velocity = just when=20 you want it at the max. The reason is the port opening is in a curvature = of the=20 housing. 
 
 Lynn also suggests that the = manifold tubes=20 can be bigger but reduced at the housing inner face to get that last = punch into=20 the combustion chamber. Lynn's suggestion of an oblong port shape = also=20 reduces the tendency for the port face to be bigger than intended, as = it's short=20 and wide.  
I'm still trying to figure how that can = be done=20 easily. One way would be to fill the void with melted Al and when = it cooled=20 and shrank - weld (Tig) it around the edge. This then could be machined = and=20 ground to shape. Bugger of a job though, but for racing it all=20 adds-up.
George ( down under)
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=20 them 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=20 the original Powersport business model. Maybe I misunderstood him. I'd = be=20 interested/willing to purchase a complete PP engine, but want to = retain=20 Tracy's RD-1 and EC-2 (bought and proven). It was my understanding = that Bill=20 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=20 is easier to make and fit, I settled on that.
 
However I still had a nagging feeling = that all=20 PP's leak over time no matter what you do to seal them. = This belief =20 as a result of many discussions with engine rebuilders and=20 racers.
 
Now that Bill has designed the = two=20 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=20 as soon as humanly possible, however it's not the highest priority, at = this=20 point in time.
 
The Powersport were a lower reduction = 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=20 lot 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=20 230 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=20 level flight and I refuse to hack on the prop until I convince = myself that=20 there isnt a little more HP in the engine via a better intake. Also, = my=20 current config wont allow the fit of an air filter and I don=92t = want=20 to fly forever without one. So would like to change the config = to=20 accommodate a 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=20 guys make out (Mark S., how about an update). In either case = I'll build=20 it on my spare engine and get it all done off the airplane so it is = plug and=20 play with minimal down time. I hope to do it sometime next = winter.
 
Current status. Havent had a chance to fly = again=20 since my loss of power due to fuel starvation a few weeks ago. Went = through=20 the entire fuel system but didn=92t find a smoking gun. Replaced my = fuel=20 filters with some higher flow units, but don=92t believe that was = the problem.=20 Replaced my injectors with the original ones I had rebuilt by RC=20 Engineering. The new injectors flow more fuel so now the tuning = is  a=20 little out of whack.
 
Also at the last oil change I switched = from a=20 straight weight mineral oil to Mobil One. Now my previously tight = engine=20 leaks like a sieve. So trying to address numerous oil leaks. But I = think I'm=20 getting close to resuming flight.
 
Oh, one more distraction. Just about into = the=20 soaring season so I'm thrashing trying to get my glider ready for=20 summer.
 
Mike Wills  

Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2010 11:05 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: cooling for ground=20 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=20 not rebuild unnecessarily, I will fly instead." "I will not rebuild=20 unnecessarily, I will fly instead."
 
Lets face it.  You tinkered with that thing for many = years. =20 If you were ever going to get it right you would have done it by = now. =20 So 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> = 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=20 part with a transition to tubing. Where did you get the casting? = Is it a=20 stock Mazda turbo casting that you cut the top off of? I'd = like to do=20 something similar. Not real happy with my current manifold and = would like=20 to 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=20 in the air because when I first started flying I had marginal = cooling on=20 the ground and marginal cooling in the air.  At that time I = could=20 idle and taxi indefinitely unless the OAT was above 85 or so, when = my taxi=20 times would be limited to about 30 minutes.  cooling in the = air was=20 similarly limited to shallow climbs and less than full power in = all but=20 the coolest of climates.

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

BTW=20 Scott,
I just took another look at your website and = picture.  You=20 sure have done very nice workmanship.  I can't wait to see = that thing=20 fly!  It is guaranteed to be one of the fastest RV's=20 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=20 me 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=20 and 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 = 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=20 in 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. =20 I=92m looking for ideas on how to extend the time for each = ground=20 run.  I was thinking of adding a spray bar like others have = discussed.  My thought was to drill some holes in some PVC = and=20 connect it to the garden hose.  Then put it in the intake = in front=20 of the radiator.  I would have to run the hose out the = front and=20 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=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_0009_01CADFF1.5C8DF500--