Return-Path: Received: from envelope.rose-hulman.edu ([137.112.8.21] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2b3) with ESMTP-TLS id 3228993 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 12 May 2004 13:25:11 -0400 Received: from madsena (dhcp024-160-213-196.ma.rr.com [24.160.213.196]) (authenticated (0 bits)) by envelope.rose-hulman.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i4CHOwT19838 (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128 bits) verified NO) for ; Wed, 12 May 2004 12:25:05 -0500 (EST) From: "Alex Madsen" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] PP variable intake Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 12:24:21 -0500 Message-ID: <000001c43845$fb66e560$f166fea9@madsena> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 EDDIE tuning and Helmholtz operate on different principals. EDDIE tuning uses the pressure wave from one intake closing to force air into the second intake. Helmholtz uses a reflected low pressure wave (reflects into a high pressure wave) to force air into the same cylinder. A resonant chamber will change will flip low pressure waves to high pressure waves. You do not want this for the EDDIE tuning. Alex Madsen -----Original Message----- From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of kenpowell@comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 11:56 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] PP variable intake 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 >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html