X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from mail-pb0-f52.google.com ([209.85.160.52] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0c2) with ESMTPS id 5839321 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 21:30:21 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.160.52; envelope-from=rwstracy@gmail.com Received: by mail-pb0-f52.google.com with SMTP id rr13so755276pbb.25 for ; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:29:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:references:from:content-type:x-mailer:in-reply-to :message-id:date:to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=XGCfrvL8l/vuf5cabzOUGDRxWLiKRO72zkFFBrSZS+M=; b=kqC3FB5qDY0Kr18ile3PGPSAdMlKPf9yf2KlQlDTB4vr3EJpsE4h7JS1IUQvWzuDFQ cNQ6AyaB4f3H1VeZIoh8Jq1X3ja3M/aymxEJH2tyjWclSetKoB9vdHfSqnmr/sscbFm2 v19TEKluzVAhcWdXP0i6ZEPb0JjyMSVdz8CL0kvov33uh6IzFnR4UjbHxG5mJLmudiAR aRohmHxd/9GBLevkeNwUhcg8N1P/0AKRWcajut1t69n7gMG8trMQLnJewN3WUiJ6i+T+ w4E4esEEopnzdrljApckQlIGC3k0HzDzr6TAoI2pIaFfjwKcsGhDwjYp7zWyg+7dNdgr ZW7A== Received: by 10.66.84.40 with SMTP id v8mr39922011pay.47.1351042186144; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:29:46 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from [192.168.1.3] (24.sub-70-196-195.myvzw.com. [70.196.195.24]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id o1sm8583856pax.21.2012.10.23.18.29.43 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:29:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: flow path in conventional radiator References: From: Tracy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-E0E2F924-002A-453E-99B7-E449855AE394 X-Mailer: iPad Mail (10A403) In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <14A058DD-51D2-4778-A786-0BAF8B8BC959@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 19:29:35 -0600 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) --Apple-Mail-E0E2F924-002A-453E-99B7-E449855AE394 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable My pressure cap and pressure sensor is at the low pressure side of the syste= m so I don't know how high it goes in the block. In typical cruise conditi= ons I run about 10 psi since I keep the coolant tank 1/2 full to give the ai= r spring effect. If kept full it goes to full cap pressure almost immediate= ly . I did once have a blow off of coolant (steam) at high altitude (18,000) whe= n climbing at Vx getting over a cloud bank. I had an 11 psi cap at the time= . That's when I decided to go with a higher pressure cap. If 30 to 40 psi blows out the engine o rings something is very wrong with ho= w the engine was built. Those o rings have to contain combustion chamber p= ressures. Tracy Sent from my iPad On Oct 22, 2012, at 4:36 PM, ARGOLDMAN@aol.com wrote: > =20 > Interesting, Tracy, > =20 > With that high cap pressure setting, what is the actual water (coolant) pr= essure that you experience. > =20 > With those using lower caps, are you experiencing coolant blow off??(or ou= t). > =20 > It has been my understanding, perhaps incorrectly, that the increase in pr= essure, of the coolant, is a product of the expansion of the coolant body du= e to the increase in temperature. At the specified coolant max temperature, w= ouldn't the pressure relatively the same. Wouldn't it increase, only with gr= eater temps which would endanger the "O" rings? > =20 > OR, am I full of it (coolant). > =20 > I will be the first to admit that my engine is not running yet and thus ha= ve not had to deal with problems of the pressure, or even radiator persuasio= n yet. > =20 > Rich > =20 > In a message dated 10/22/2012 3:24:24 P.M. Central Daylight Time, rwstracy= @gmail.com writes: > I think One of the most restrictive points in the system is the passage to= the outlet of the water pump housing. Remember this is NOT the outlet of t= he water pump itself. In the pump housing is an oval passage that is too s= mall to get two fingers through. It has been my assumption that this was to= make the pressure high in the block at high rpm in order to avoid local boi= ling in the combustion chamber area. Hi pressure in the block is a good thi= ng. I run a 29 PSI cap. >=20 > Tracy >=20 > Sent from my iPad >=20 > On Oct 22, 2012, at 1:05 PM, "Bill Schertz" wrote: >=20 >> Charlie, I am using two evap cores in parallel, with system pressure limi= ted to 10 psi on the expansion bottle. When the engine is running, the press= ure measured at the inlet to the cores (exit of the pump) is a function of R= PM and can rise to as much as 20 psi (10 psi over system pressure in the exp= ansion bottle). >> =20 >> Having the flow enter the bottom of the radiator and out the top, then go= ing to the inlet of the pump sounds like a good way to avoid problems. >> =20 >> Bill Schertz >> KIS Cruiser #4045 >> N343BS >> Phase one testing Completed >> =20 >> From: Ben Haas >> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 1:06 PM >> To: Rotary motors in aircraft >> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: flow path in conventional radiator >> =20 >> Unless there is a serious restriction through the radiator I can't imagi= ne there would be anything greater then 1 psi over system pressure caused by= pump output. As for the reverse flow, ie, bottom to top,,, It's called cou= nter flow, and yes it can work. My set up has worked flawlessly for 500 hour= s and I use the Moroso swirl / pressure tank and a air bleed line from the o= utput of the radiator... About 3 minutes into this video shows my set up...= .. >> =20 >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DrCNnEgRkdXc&context=3DC3e091d3ADOEgsToPD= skKmHo69I6bUDuoBHd5YSUfu >>=20 >> Ben Haas >> www.haaspowerair.com >>=20 >> =20 >> To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net >> Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 12:40:11 -0500 >> From: ceengland7@gmail.com >> Subject: [FlyRotary] flow path in conventional radiator >>=20 >> I've been doing research on radiators, & my 1st 'experiment' will be a co= nventionally configured radiator (downflow design) with inlet & pressure cap= on top. In reading about issues with conventional radiators, a common compl= aint is pressure venting due to the water pump + system pressure exceeding t= he 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, which drop= s some of the pressure seen by the cap.=20 >>=20 >> Here's my question: Is there any reason a conventional rad can't be fed f= rom the bottom, instead of the top? This would achieve similar effect as the= crossflow cap location (all the way to the end of the flow path) & any air c= ould be vented using the existing fittings. I'm also considering the removal= of the spring loaded seal, & moving the pressure cap function to a separate= swirl can. By doing this, the existing over-pressure port could function as= the air removal port in the top tank of the radiator. >>=20 >>=20 >> What am I missing? >>=20 >> Thanks, >>=20 >> Charlie=20 --Apple-Mail-E0E2F924-002A-453E-99B7-E449855AE394 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
My pressure cap and pressure sensor is= at the low pressure side of the system so I don't know how high it goes in t= he block.   In typical cruise conditions I run about 10 psi since I kee= p the coolant tank 1/2 full to give the air spring effect.  If kept ful= l it goes to full cap pressure almost immediately .

I did once have a blow off of coolant (steam) at high altitude (18,000) &nb= sp;when climbing at Vx getting over a cloud bank.  I had an 11 psi cap a= t the time.   That's when I decided to go with a higher pressure cap.

If 30 to 40 psi blows out the engine o rings somethi= ng is very wrong with how the engine was built.   Those o rings have to= contain combustion chamber pressures.

Tracy
Sent from my iPad

On Oct 22, 2012, at 4:36 PM, ARGOLDMAN@aol.com wrote:

=
 =20
Interesting, Tracy,
 
With that high cap pressure setting, what is the actual water (coolant)= =20 pressure that you experience.
 
With those using lower caps, are you experiencing coolant blow off??(or= =20 out).
 
It has been my understanding, perhaps incorrectly, that the increase in= =20 pressure, of the coolant, is a product of the expansion of the coolant body d= ue=20 to the increase in temperature. At the specified coolant max=20 temperature, wouldn't the pressure relatively the same. Wouldn't i= t=20 increase, only with greater temps which would endanger the "O" rings?
 
OR, am I full of it (coolant).
 
I will be the first to admit that my engine is not running yet and thus= =20 have not had to deal with problems of the pressure, or even radiator persuas= ion=20 yet.
 
Rich
 
In a message dated 10/22/2012 3:24:24 P.M. Central Daylight Time,=20 rwstracy@gmail.com writes:
I think One of the most restrictive points in the system is the passa= ge=20 to the outlet of the water pump housing.  Remember this is NOT the ou= tlet=20 of the water pump itself.  In the pump housing  is an oval passa= ge=20 that is too small to get two fingers through.  It has been my assumpt= ion=20 that this was to make the pressure high in the block at high rpm in order t= o=20 avoid local boiling in the combustion chamber area.  Hi pressure in t= he=20 block is a good thing.   I run a 29 PSI cap.

Tracy

Sent from my iPad

On Oct 22, 2012, at 1:05 PM, "Bill Schertz" <wschertz@comcas= t.net>=20 wrote:

Charlie, I am using two evap cores in parallel, with system pressur= e=20 limited to 10 psi on the expansion bottle. When the engine is running, t= he=20 pressure measured at the inlet to the cores (exit of the pump) is a func= tion=20 of RPM and can rise to as much as 20 psi (10 psi over system pressure in= the=20 expansion bottle).
 
Having the flow enter the bottom of the radiator and out the top, t= hen=20 going to the inlet of the pump sounds like a good way to avoid=20 problems.
 
Bil= l=20 Schertz
KIS Cruiser #4045
N343BS
Phase one testing Completed
Unless there is a serious restr= iction through the=20 radiator  I can't imagine there would be anything greater then 1 ps= i=20 over system pressure caused by pump output.  As for the reverse flo= w,=20 ie, bottom to top,,, It's called counter flow, and yes it can work. My s= et=20 up has worked flawlessly for 500 hours and I use the Moroso swirl / pres= sure=20 tank and a air bleed line from the output of the radiator...  About= 3=20 minutes into this video shows my set up.....
 
http://www.youtu= be.com/watch?v=3DrCNnEgRkdXc&context=3DC3e091d3ADOEgsToPDskKmHo69I6bUDuo= BHd5YSUfu

Ben Haas
www.haaspowerair.com

 
To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net
Date:=20 Mon, 22 Oct 2012 12:40:11 -0500
From: ceengland7@gmail.com
S= ubject:=20 [FlyRotary] flow path in conventional radiator

= I've been doing research on radiators= , & my 1st=20 'experiment' will be a conventionally configured radiator (downflow=20 design) with inlet & pressure cap on top. In reading about issues wi= th=20 conventional radiators, a common complaint is pressure venting due to the water pump + system pressure exceeding= the=20 cap's rating. Cros= sflow types like=20 the Sirocco are supposed to avoid this because the cap= is at=20 the mid-point in the flow through the rad, which drops some of the=20 pressure seen by the cap.

He= re's my question: Is there any reason a c= onventional rad=20 can't be fed from the bottom, instead of the top? This= would achieve similar effect as the crossflow cap locatio= n (all the way to the end of the flow path) & any air c= ould be=20 vented using the existing fittings. I'm also considering the removal of the spring loaded seal,= &=20 moving the pressure cap function to a separate swirl can. By doing this, the existing over-pressure port could function as the air rem= oval port=20 in the top tank of the radiator.


What am I=20= missing?

Thanks,

Charlie= =20
=
= --Apple-Mail-E0E2F924-002A-453E-99B7-E449855AE394--