X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from blu0-omc2-s36.blu0.hotmail.com ([65.55.111.111] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0c2) with ESMTP id 5837108 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:07:36 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=65.55.111.111; envelope-from=stol83001@live.com Received: from BLU158-W64 ([65.55.111.71]) by blu0-omc2-s36.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 22 Oct 2012 11:06:59 -0700 Message-ID: Return-Path: stol83001@live.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_23444cee-fb10-484a-b063-6a050c6e79ed_" X-Originating-IP: [184.167.25.106] From: Ben Haas To: Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] flow path in conventional radiator Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 12:06:59 -0600 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Oct 2012 18:06:59.0993 (UTC) FILETIME=[07FCE890:01CDB080] --_23444cee-fb10-484a-b063-6a050c6e79ed_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Unless there is a serious restriction through the radiator I can't imagine= there would be anything greater then 1 psi over system pressure caused by = pump output. As for the reverse flow=2C ie=2C bottom to top=2C=2C=2C It's = called counter flow=2C and yes it can work. My set up has worked flawlessly= for 500 hours and I use the Moroso swirl / pressure tank and a air bleed l= ine from the output of the radiator... About 3 minutes into this video sho= ws my set up..... =20 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DrCNnEgRkdXc&context=3DC3e091d3ADOEgsToPDsk= KmHo69I6bUDuoBHd5YSUfu Ben Haas www.haaspowerair.com =20 To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Date: Mon=2C 22 Oct 2012 12:40:11 -0500 From: ceengland7@gmail.com Subject: [FlyRotary] flow path in conventional radiator I've been doing research on radiators=2C & my 1st 'experiment' will be a co= nventionally configured radiator (downflow design) with inlet & pressure ca= p on top. In reading about issues with conventional radiators=2C a common c= omplaint is pressure venting due to the water pump + system pressure exceed= ing the cap's rating. Crossflow types like the Sirocco are supposed to avoi= d this because the cap is at the mid-point in the flow through the rad=2C w= hich drops some of the pressure seen by the cap.=20 Here's my question: Is there any reason a conventional rad can't be fed fro= m the bottom=2C instead of the top? This would achieve similar effect as th= e crossflow cap location (all the way to the end of the flow path) & any ai= r could be vented using the existing fittings. I'm also considering the rem= oval of the spring loaded seal=2C & moving the pressure cap function to a s= eparate swirl can. By doing this=2C the existing over-pressure port could f= unction as the air removal port in the top tank of the radiator. What am I missing? Thanks=2C Charlie=20 = --_23444cee-fb10-484a-b063-6a050c6e79ed_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Unless there is a serious restriction through the radiator =3B I can't = imagine there would be anything greater then 1 psi over system pressure cau= sed by pump output. =3B As for the reverse flow=2C ie=2C bottom to top= =2C=2C=2C It's called counter flow=2C and yes it can work. My set up has wo= rked flawlessly for 500 hours and I use the Moroso swirl / pressure tank an= d a air bleed line from the output of the radiator... =3B About 3 minut= es into this video shows my set up.....
=3B
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Dr= CNnEgRkdXc&=3Bcontext=3DC3e091d3ADOEgsToPDskKmHo69I6bUDuoBHd5YSUfu
Ben Haas
www.haaspowerair.com=

=3B

To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net
Date: Mon=2C 22 Oct 2012 12:40:11 -0500<= BR>From: ceengland7@gmail.com
Subject: [FlyRotary] flow path in conventi= onal radiator

I've been doing research on radiators=2C &=3B my 1st 'exp= eriment' will be a conventionally configured radiator (downflow design) with inlet &= amp=3B pressure cap on top. In reading about issues with conventional radia= tors=2C a common complaint is pressure venting due to the w= ater pump + system pressure exceeding the cap's rating. Crossflow types like the Sirocco are supposed to avoid this because the cap is at the mid= -point in the flow through the rad=2C which drops some of the pressure seen by the cap.

Here's= my question: Is there any reason a conventional rad can't = be fed from the bottom=2C instead of the top? This would achieve similar effect as the crossflow cap location (all the way to the end of the flow path) &=3B any air could be = vented using the existing fittings. I'm also considering the removal of the spring loaded seal=2C &am= p=3B moving the pressure cap function to a separate swirl can. By doing this=2C the existing over-pressure port could function as the air removal= port in the top tank of the radiator.

What am I= missing?

Thanks=2C

Charlie =

= --_23444cee-fb10-484a-b063-6a050c6e79ed_--