Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #51425
From: Al Wick <alwick@juno.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: high/low pressure pumps question
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 07:59:11 -0700
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Hi Ed. You often make significant contributions that help improve flight safety. If you share your fuel design, at least do the calculations and let users know how close this is to vapor lock. We're talking about life risk here. You are glossing over my point and changing the topic. Returning fuel to pump inlet is very risky and should not be done unless you desire to operate on the threshold of vapor lock.
 
I agree, there is one exception. That's if you have one of the new fuel pump controllers that measures fuel parameters and alters pump speed. I looked into that one years ago. Talk about added complexity!
 
On with the good stuff!
 
-al wick
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 8:00 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: high/low pressure pumps question

Points noted, Al.

 

However, would like to point out that today many automotive fuel systems DO NOT return fuel to the tanks – they use the  “No-Return” fuel systems whereby pump pressure is regulated to prevent vapor lock. However, these are systems with the pumps generally embed in the fuel tank – thereby minimizing (if not eliminating) your concern about the return being “T” back into the line close to the high pressure pump intake.  With millions of autos now using this system – it would appear to be a viable approach if done correctly (always the caveat {:>))

 

That is one point that Charlie made - was the possibility of using a simple PWM circuit to control pump pressure similar to the no-return Auto systems.

 

For those interested, here is a fairly good non-technical description of a no-return system used in automobiles.

 

Ed

 

http://www.picoauto.com/tutorials/fuel-injection.html

 

Returnless Fuel Systems

Have been adopted by several motor manufacturers and differ from the conventional by having a delivery pipe only to the fuel rail with no return flow back to the tank.

The returnless systems, both the mechanical and the electronic versions, were necessitated by emissions laws. The absence of heated petrol returning to the fuel tank reduces the amount of evaporative emissions, while the fuel lines are kept short, thus reducing build costs.

Mechanical Returnless Fuel Systems

The ‘returnless’ system differs from the norm by having the pressure regulator inside the fuel tank. When the fuel pump is activated, fuel flows into the system until the required pressure is obtained; at this point ‘excess’ fuel is bled past the pressure regulator and back into the tank.

The ‘flow and return’ system has a vacuum supply to the pressure regulator: this enables the fuel pressure to be increased whenever the manifold vacuum drops, providing fuel enrichment under acceleration.

The ‘returnless’ system has no mechanical compensation affecting the fuel pressure, which remains at a higher than usual 44 to 50 psi. By increasing the delivery pressure, the ECM (Electronic Control Module) can alter the injection pulse width to give the precise delivery, regardless of the engine load and without fuel pressure compensation.

Electronic Returnless Fuel Systems

This version has all the required components fitted within the one unit of the submersible fuel pump. It contains a small particle filter (in addition to the strainer), pump, electronic pressure regulator, fuel level sensor and a sound isolation system. The electronic pressure regulator allows the pressure to be increased under acceleration conditions, and the pump’s output can be adjusted to suit the engine's fuel demand. This prolongs the pump’s life as it is no longer providing a larger than required output delivery.

The Electronic Control Module (ECM) supplies the required pressure information, while the fuel pump’s output signal is supplied in the form of a digital squarewave. Altering the squarewave’s duty cycle affects the pump’s delivery output.

To compensate for the changing viscosity of the fuel with changing fuel temperature, a fuel rail temperature sensor is installed. A pulsation damper may also be fitted ahead of or inside the fuel rail.

Here is one rendition of such a system in an auto application

 

 

Ed Anderson

Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered

Matthews, NC

eanderson@carolina.rr.com

http://www.andersonee.com

http://www.dmack.net/mazda/index.html

http://www.flyrotary.com/

http://members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW

http://www.rotaryaviation.com/Rotorhead%20Truth.htm


From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Al Wick
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 9:25 AM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: high/low pressure pumps question

 

I'm really concerned for your life risk. This is a very high risk fuel design. Puts your fuel pressure at pump inlet very very close to the vapor pressure of fuel. This suddenly makes the design sensitive to a whole bunch of environmental factors.

 

Ask this question: Millions of automobiles. When they designed automotive fuel systems, why did every single engineer return fuel to tank instead of pump inlet? So much more expensive to send to tank.

 

You can bench test your design and prove how close it is to failure. Just need to measure fuel pressure at pump inlet, measure pump temp. Use hair dryer to force pump to higher temp. Put all the numbers in spreadsheet, then calculate distance between vapor pressure and your readings. Adjust for worst case, which would be high altitude airport, hot day sitting on tarmac for 1 hour, heat soaked engine compartment, car fuel containing ethanol.

 

Marginal designs can fly for years without failure. This is the nature of failure. Use care, I'm concerned.

 

-al wick

 

 

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2010 6:47 AM

Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: high/low pressure pumps question

 

Hope this helps...

On 6/6/2010 2:21 AM, Todd Bartrim wrote:
>
> Hi Charlie;
> Hmmmnn, I gotta say a picture (or drawing) is worth a thousand words.
> Todd (sent on my new-fangled google phone with a really damn small
> keyboard)
>
>> On 2010-06-05 8:46 PM, "Charlie England" <ceengland@bellsouth.net
>> <mailto:ceengland@bellsouth.net>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Todd,
>>
>> My thought is to set up the fuel path thus: fuel source through a T
>> into injection pumps, through filters, through combining T, through
>> the regulator(in cockpit), through firewall to engine. The
>> regulator's bypass port (in the cockpit) would be plumbed just like
>> yours, except no heat exchanger since the bypass fuel would never see
>> the heat of the engine compartment. The bypass would still T into the
>> supply to the injection pumps, like your system. Obviously, a
>> manifold pressure line would be required through the firewall into
>> the cockpit to the pressure regulator.
>>
>> My original plan (different injection that didn't require a return
>> line) was similar to your selector setup: main tanks feeding stock
>> van's selector, with the 3rd port on it being fed by a 2nd vans
>> selector to select either of the 2 aux tanks. No transfer pump would
>> have been required, & no crossover valve. Failure of the primary
>> valve could have been a 'show stopper', but the newer valves seem to
>> be rock solid reliable. Going to this system using the gear type
>> pumps requiring a return line forced re-thinking. Using your idea to
>> return the bypassed fuel at the pump inlet effectively eliminates the
>> 'return' issue, & tempts me to return to the original fuel selector
>> layout, with the addition of a Facet boost pump. The fact that the
>> optical sensors will work looking into the side of a fuel line (the
>> T), instead of needing them in the tank & that they still give almost
>> a full minute's warning, is very encouraging. I'll start looking for
>> a convenient place to mount them.
>>
>> I hope that Tracy will chime in on how he plumbed the regulator on
>> his -8.
>>
>> Many thanks for the extra details.
>>
>> Charlie
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/5/2010 12:32 PM, Todd Bartrim wrote:
>>
>>     >
>>     > Hi Charlie
>>     >    Not sure I understand correctly what you mean? Can you
>>     sketch it out quickly? I'...
>>
>>     > *From*: Charlie England <ceengland@bellsouth.net
>>     <mailto:ceengland@bellsouth.net>
>>     <mailto:Charlie%20England%20%3cceengland@bellsout.
>>     <mailto:Charlie%2520England%2520%253cceengland@bellsout.>..
>>
>>     > *Subject*: [FlyRotary] Re: high/low pressure pumps question
>>     > *Date*: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 08:38:09 -0...
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
>> Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists...
>>


--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html

Image
image002.jpg
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster