X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from imr-ma02.mx.aol.com ([64.12.206.40] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.10) with ESMTP id 4575172 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:03:20 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.206.40; envelope-from=Bktrub@aol.com Received: from imo-da02.mx.aol.com (imo-da02.mx.aol.com [205.188.169.200]) by imr-ma02.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id oABG2UFD005088 for ; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:02:30 -0500 Received: from Bktrub@aol.com by imo-da02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v42.9.) id q.f3d.8ffbbc8 (37568) for ; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:02:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtprly-md02.mx.aol.com (smtprly-md02.mx.aol.com [64.12.143.155]) by cia-mb04.mx.aol.com (v129.5) with ESMTP id MAILCIAMB045-d4204cdc138c88; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:02:26 -0500 Received: from webmail-d002 (webmail-d002.sim.aol.com [205.188.181.93]) by smtprly-md02.mx.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILSMTPRLYMD026-d4204cdc138c88; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:02:20 -0500 References: To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Improved performance of my new (2009) intake manifold Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:02:20 -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_8CD4FD0F476198C_924_1ECC3_webmail-d002.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 32843-STANDARD Received: from 108.3.31.54 by webmail-d002.sysops.aol.com (205.188.181.93) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:02:20 -0500 Message-Id: <8CD4FD0F46EF569-924-D485@webmail-d002.sysops.aol.com> X-Spam-Flag:NO X-AOL-SENDER: Bktrub@aol.com ----------MB_8CD4FD0F476198C_924_1ECC3_webmail-d002.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Staging takes place at bin 90- it was stumbling and surging on the ground= when I would run it up through this bin- until I richened it up in bins= 90-92. Then it would transition without a hiccup through these bins. I ha= d all the injectors cleaned and flowed prior to installation, they all che= cked out fine. I have 28 lb primaries and 40 lb secondaries.=20 When I was flying, I was flying around at bins 70-80, doing around 90-110= mph, and would advance the throttle through bin 90 and start the backfiri= ng. While it was backfiring, I would lean and richen the mixture with the= mixture knob, but the engine would not settle down and the mixture graph= would be bouncing around due to erratic firing. The answer is there somew= here, I jsut have to get some more altittude to fiddle with it in a more= leisurely fashion.=20 Again, Anyone remember what values they use to set the mainifold scale fac= tor and sensor offset? Thanks, Brian Trubee -----Original Message----- From: Ed Anderson To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Thu, Nov 11, 2010 7:21 am Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Improved performance of my new (2009) intake mani= fold Hi Brian, =20 =20 Yep! any time the drone of the engine changes - it immediately gets your= attention (or should) {:>). I too have turned on the cold start when mea= ning to change controllers - but fortunately have always immediately recog= nized the problem. =20 There are several possibilities about your staging problem. =20 =20 1. You may not have the cross over adjustment (mode 6) tuned properly and= when it stages its either too rich or too lean when running on all four.= However, adjustment of you manual mixture control should indicate which= direction (lean or rich) helps the situation. =20 2. Always possible that a secondary injectors is not functioning properly= - you should be able to check this possibility easily (if you have the in= jector disable switches that Tracy shows in his installation). While on= the ground - switch off the primary injectors (you may get a momentary hi= ccup if you secondaries are not adjusted properly, but a quick tweak of th= e mixture control should keep it running), If it idles/runs fine on the se= condaries then they are likely to be OK. =20 3. You Fuel Map bin values right after the staging point could have inapp= ropriate values - Tracy's default is 128 or I guess it shows up as zero on= the EM2 and your adjustments are +- to that zero reference (128). =20 =20 You mention the results of enrichen/leaning was inconclusive - what exactl= y do you mean? Do you mean you could not tell if the engine was running= rich or lean? The Air/fuel Ratio indicator of the EM2 is not giving you= consistent readings? =20 =20 Its pretty important as you know to be able to discern what effect any ad= justments are having and mixture is one of the more important ones. =20 You'll get it sorted out - some installations simply take a bit more sorti= ng out than others =20 Ed =20 Edward L. Anderson Anderson Electronic Enterprises LLC 305 Reefton Road Weddington, NC 28104 http://www.andersonee.com http://www.eicommander.com =20 From: bktrub@aol.com=20 Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 9:51 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 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_8CD4FD0F476198C_924_1ECC3_webmail-d002.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Staging takes place at bi= n 90- it was stumbling and surging on the ground when I would run it up th= rough this bin- until I richened it up in bins 90-92. Then it would transi= tion without a hiccup through these bins. I had all the injectors cleaned= and flowed prior to installation, they all checked out fine. I have 28 lb= primaries and 40 lb secondaries.
 
When I was flying, I was flying around at bins 70-80, doing around 90= -110 mph, and would advance the throttle through bin 90 and start the back= firing. While it was backfiring, I would lean and richen the mixture with= the mixture knob, but the engine would not settle down and the mixture gr= aph would be bouncing around due to erratic firing. The answer is there so= mewhere, I jsut have to get some more altittude to fiddle with it in a mor= e leisurely fashion.
 
Again, Anyone remember what values they use to set the mainifold scal= e factor and sensor offset?
 
Thanks,
 
Brian Trubee



-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Thu, Nov 11, 2010 7:21 am
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Improved performance of my new (2009) intake mani= fold

Hi Brian,
 
 
Yep! any time the drone of the engine changes - it= immediately gets your attention (or should) {:>).  I too have tur= ned on the cold start when meaning to change controllers - but= fortunately have always immediately recognized the problem.
 
There are several possibilities about your staging= problem. 
 
1.  You may not have the cross over adju= stment (mode 6) tuned properly and when it stages its either too rich or= too lean when running on all four.  However, adjustment of you manua= l mixture control should indicate which direction (lean or rich) helps the= situation.
 
2.  Always possible that a secondary injector= s is not functioning properly - you should be able to check this possibili= ty easily (if you have the injector disable switches that Tracy shows in= his installation).  While on the ground - switch off the primar= y injectors (you may get a momentary hiccup if you secondaries are not adj= usted properly, but a quick tweak of the mixture control should keep it ru= nning), If it idles/runs fine on the secondaries then they are likely to= be OK.
 
3.  You Fuel Map bin values right after the= staging point could have inappropriate values - Tracy's default is= 128 or I guess it shows up as zero on the EM2 and your adjustments are +-= to that zero reference (128).
 
 
You mention the results of enrichen/leaning was in= conclusive - what exactly do you mean?  Do you mean you could not tel= l if the engine was running rich or lean?  The Air/fuel Ratio in= dicator of the EM2 is not giving you consistent readings?  
 
 Its pretty important as you know to be able= to discern what effect any adjustments are having and mixture is one of= the more important ones.
 
You'll get it sorted out - some installations simp= ly take a bit more sorting out than others
 
Ed
 
Edward L. Anderson
Anderson Electronic Enterprises LLC
305 Reefton Road
Weddington, NC 28104
http://www.anderson= ee.com
http://www.eicomma= nder.com
 

Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 9:51 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Improved performance of my new (2009)= intake manifold

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_8CD4FD0F476198C_924_1ECC3_webmail-d002.sysops.aol.com--