Return-Path: Received: from sccrmhc13.comcast.net ([204.127.202.64] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2b3) with ESMTP id 3228928 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:56:05 -0400 Received: from 204.127.205.143 ([204.127.205.143]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc13) with SMTP id <2004051216560501600t551ee>; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:56:05 +0000 Received: from [65.34.23.172] by 204.127.205.143; Wed, 12 May 2004 16:56:06 +0000 From: kenpowell@comcast.net To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: PP variable intake Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 16:56:06 +0000 Message-Id: <051220041656.19128.40A25725000B044600004AB8220076370404040A99019F020A05@comcast.net> X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (May 6 2004) X-Authenticated-Sender: a2VucG93ZWxsQGNvbWNhc3QubmV0 Hi Mark, Yes, I also considered the resonant chamber (also used on some motorcycles, which is my real background). The resonant chamber would be lighter and maybe easier to build but I liked the 'tunability' of the separate runners for each rpm range. If I need either shorter or longer runners I can change the length by inserting a longer runner connected with hose & clamps. Also, I have the formulas (I used Ed's formulas) to calculate the tubing lengths and I don't have any idea on how to calculate the needed volume of a resonant chamber. It is also interesting that some off road 2 strokes use a resonant chamber on the exhaust as well. I haven't ruled this out yet but the butterfly would be living in a harsh environment ideed! Maybe we should consider a resonant chamber on the exhaust in an effort to get the overall length shorter. This would definitely be a research project for AFTER I get my RV-4 built and flying (which will be NEVER at the rate I'm going!). Ken Powell > Ken, > This is directed at the engineer types in the group... What I was thinking > is would you actually need two separate runners, or could you add a > resonance chamber to the shorter intake so as to fool it into thinking it > was longer than it actually was? A butterfly valve could open and close > the chamber. I got this idea from studying the intake on my LS1 Chevy > pickup. It uses a resonance chamber in the intake between the air filter > and the TB. Not sure why, but though this same idea may work here too. > > Mark S. > (back to lurking) > > > At 02:19 AM 5/12/2004 +0000, you wrote: > >Rusty, > >I just gotta ask - why don't you just copy Tracy's intake and be done with > >it??? > > > >I calculated intake runner length for a PP engine last year but > >unfortunately I don't have the results here in sunny Florida (playing > >tourist, much to the chagrin of the natives). So these numbers mean > >nothing, but I THINK that I calculated that a 16" runner length for 7400 > >RPM (2.85 redrive) and 24" for either 5600 or 6000 RPM. The problem we > >are all seeing here (and Ed is addressing) is that we need several > >distinct lengths to correspond to the differing engine RPM. Since I am > >dealing with a PP engine I am sorta on my on but Ed's work has been a > >great help because his formulas will allow you to calculate the length for > >a given RPM. My thought on the solution to this is a little different > >from Ed's infinitely variable length but simpler to build - since a PP > >engine only needs 2 runners (1 per rotor) the idea is to have a short > >runner (16") for high rpm and a long runner (24") for cruise; a butterfly > >valve will be used to switch between the two. I hope that this setup will > >not need to be automated - set the butterfly to 'long' for takeoff, climb > >and low altitude cruise and 'short' for WFO and high altitude cruise. > > > >Ken P. > > > > > > >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > > >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html > > > >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html