X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from imr-ma03.mx.aol.com ([64.12.206.41] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.10) with ESMTP id 4574582 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 00:27:49 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.206.41; envelope-from=Bktrub@aol.com Received: from imo-da04.mx.aol.com (imo-da04.mx.aol.com [205.188.169.202]) by imr-ma03.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id oAB5RA9Y032043 for ; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 00:27:10 -0500 Received: from Bktrub@aol.com by imo-da04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v42.9.) id q.ed9.baa7f38 (55730) for ; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 00:27:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtprly-da01.mx.aol.com (smtprly-da01.mx.aol.com [205.188.249.144]) by cia-md03.mx.aol.com (v129.5) with ESMTP id MAILCIAMD035-5bb14cdb7ea6353; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 00:27:05 -0500 Received: from Webmail-m104 (webmail-m104.sim.aol.com [64.12.224.158]) by smtprly-da01.mx.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILSMTPRLYDA018-5bb14cdb7ea6353; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 00:27:02 -0500 References: To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Improved performance of my new (2009) intake manifold Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 00:27:02 -0500 X-AOL-IP: 108.3.31.54 In-Reply-To: X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: bktrub@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8CD4F7834691022_117C_10C7C5_Webmail-m104.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 32843-STANDARD Received: from 108.3.31.54 by Webmail-m104.sysops.aol.com (64.12.224.158) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Thu, 11 Nov 2010 00:27:02 -0500 Message-Id: <8CD4F783461EBFF-117C-6E28B@Webmail-m104.sysops.aol.com> X-Spam-Flag:NO X-AOL-SENDER: Bktrub@aol.com ----------MB_8CD4F7834691022_117C_10C7C5_Webmail-m104.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Oh, I forgot to ask my questionof those who are using Tracy's EM2- what ar= e your settings for manifold pressure- scale and offset, etc? Thanks, Brian Trubee -----Original Message----- From: bktrub@aol.com To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Wed, Nov 10, 2010 6:51 pm Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Improved performance of my new (2009) intake mani= fold Interesting manifold. Are you still using the VDO fuel pressure sender? I= had heard that it might not be suitable for use with fuel, I am still usi= ng mine at present however.=20 =20 I went up today for a few laps at 3000 over Paine Field. The engine ran we= ll below the staging point, but started stumbling when above the staging= point. It ran smoothly through the staging transition on the ground, but= when in the air I could not tell by the mixture monitor if it was lean or= rich. I tried leaning it out and richening it up, but results were inconc= lusive so I stayed below the staging point for the remainder of the flight= . Temps were down around 130 degrees at 4800 RPM and 110 mph, MP was not= noted.=20 =20 I accidently hit the cold start switch while on downwind with two other pl= anes ahead of me, the tower told me to go around on final, but the plane= ahead turned off onto the taxiway just in time so I told the tower that= I would really like to land, so they cleared me. The engine died as I tur= ned off onto the taxiway and then I noticed the cold start switch. The fir= st order of business was making and installing a switch guard for the cold= start switch. I'm also going to pre-load the switch with a rubber band so= it stays in the off position unless I'm pushing it on, and can just pull= the rubber band off of it if I need to shut down a set of injectors and= run the remaining injectors on cold start.(limp home mode for failed inje= ctor.) =20 The fuel self transfering issue was resolved by installing manual valve on= the transfer line between the tanks.=20 =20 Brian Trubee -----Original Message----- From: Dennis Havarlah To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Wed, Nov 10, 2010 12:27 pm Subject: [FlyRotary] Improved performance of my new (2009) intake manifold As some of you know I started flying my RV-7A with a cut - off Renesis int= ake manifold. In 2009 I installed an new intake designed to route pressur= e waves from the closing of rotor #1's intake into rotor #2 just before ro= tor #2's intake closed. After using the new intake for over a year I am= still very happy with it's performance. =20 I gained about 15 mph TAS at the same altitude and manifold pressure My static engine rpm increased 300 to 350 rpm. My takeoffs are faster and shorter with noticeable increase in acceleratio= n My climb rate increased My oil and water cooling is more critical now because I make more HP. =20 But - I must confess I don't believe the manifold can be reproduced econom= ically. It's just too complicated. I also believe it should have slightly shorter intake runners to increase= the performance at higher RPM. Decreasing the intake runner length proba= bly would require complete new geometry of the system. =20 I have another concept for designing a Renesis intake that using a reflect= ed wave from Rotor #1 returning to Rotor #1 . =20 I believe it would be much easier to build and small enough to fit into th= e James rotorary cowl but because my intake works well I am not moving ahe= ad with completing the design and building it. =20 Dennis Haverlah =20 =20 =20 -- omepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ rchive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.= html ----------MB_8CD4F7834691022_117C_10C7C5_Webmail-m104.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Oh, I forgot to ask my questionof those who are using Tracy's EM2- wh= at are your settings for manifold pressure- scale and offset, etc?
 
Thanks,
Brian Trubee



-----Original Message-----
From: bktrub@aol.com
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Wed, Nov 10, 2010 6:51 pm
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Improved performance of my new (2009) intake mani= fold

Interesting manifold. Are= you still using the VDO fuel pressure sender? I had heard that it might= not be suitable for use with fuel, I am still using mine at present howev= er.
 
I went up today for a few laps at 3000 over Paine Field. The engine= ran well below the staging point, but started stumbling when above the st= aging point. It ran smoothly through the staging transition on the ground,= but when in the air I could not tell by the mixture monitor if it was lea= n or rich. I tried leaning it out and richening it up, but results were in= conclusive so I stayed below the staging point for the remainder of the fl= ight. Temps were down around 130 degrees at 4800 RPM and 110 mph, MP was= not noted.
 
I accidently hit the cold start switch while on downwind with two oth= er planes ahead of me, the tower told me to go around on final, but the pl= ane ahead turned off onto the taxiway just in time so I told the tower tha= t I would really like to land, so they cleared me. The engine died as I tu= rned off onto the taxiway and then I noticed the cold start switch. The fi= rst order of business was making and installing a switch guard for the col= d start switch. I'm also going to pre-load the switch with a rubber band= so it stays in the off position unless I'm pushing it on, and can just pu= ll the rubber band off of it if I need to shut down a set of injectors and= run the remaining injectors on cold start.(limp home mode for failed inje= ctor.)
 
The fuel self transfering issue was resolved by installing manual val= ve on the transfer line between the tanks.
 
Brian Trubee




-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Havarlah <clou= duster@austin.rr.com>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Wed, Nov 10, 2010 12:27 pm
Subject: [FlyRotary] Improved performance of my new (2009) intake manifold=

As some of you know I started flying my= RV-7A with a cut - off Renesis intake manifold.  In 2009 I installed= an new intake designed to route pressure waves from the closing= of rotor #1's intake into rotor #2 just before rotor #2's intake clo= sed.  After using the new intake for over a year I am still very= happy with it's performance.
 
I gained about 15 mph TAS at the same alt= itude and manifold pressure
My static engine rpm increased 300 to 350= rpm.
My takeoffs are faster and shorter with= noticeable increase in acceleration
My climb rate increased
My oil and water cooling is more critical= now because I make more HP.
 
But - I must confess I don't believe the= manifold can be reproduced economically.  It's just too complicated.=
I also believe it should have slightly sh= orter intake runners to increase the performance at higher RPM.  Decr= easing the intake runner length probably would require complete new geomet= ry of the system.
 
I have another concept for designing a Re= nesis intake that using a reflected wave from Rotor #1 returning to= Rotor #1 .  
I believe it would be much easier to buil= d and small enough to fit into the James rotorary cowl but because my inta= ke works well I am not moving ahead with completing the design and buildin= g it.
 
Dennis Haverlah
 
 
 

----------MB_8CD4F7834691022_117C_10C7C5_Webmail-m104.sysops.aol.com--