Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #12387
From: Russell Duffy <13brv3@bellsouth.net>
Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: oil scoop?
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 12:09:11 -0500
To: 'Rotary motors in aircraft' <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Message

I’d suggest that you need some more information before you start building a new duct/diffuser.  Ed’s suggestion about getting a handle on whether there is enough airflow but poor distribution is a good one; and Ernest suggestion of changing shape by some simpler means is also good.

Hi Al,
 
Part of me wants to dive right into trying to fix this, but the more rational part says I should finish my last 4 hours while it's behaving well.  As a compromise, I might go ahead and smooth out the rear of the scoop, to eliminate the flat wall back there.  It might not be the full solution, but I don't see any way it could hurt.  At the same time, I can add some thermocouples. 

Figure out some way to get an idea of flow distribution.  If you are going to measure exit air temp to determine delta T; you could get a rough idea of flow distribution by measuring exit temp in 2 or 3 places - maybe divide the area roughly in thirds, and measure temp in the center of each block.

Exactly what I was thinking.  I have 4 unused CHT inputs to the EM-2 that are just coiled up under the cowl for tests just like this.  I just have to find a way to suspend some of them over the exit area of the core.

Based on my scoop/diffuser shape, and the flow tests I did, my conclusion about where the air is going is different than Ed’s.  My guess is that there is flow separation and lots of turbulence at the front upper part of the duct, and most of the flow is actually going through the core near the back end.  It is also possible that the turbulence, (resulting poor pressure recovery) and the sharp turn into the core, may result in reduced inlet flow (air spilling around the scoop.

I have an even sharper turn that you do, so you may be right.  Putting a steering vane in the middle of the core should help, regardless of which end has the biggest problem.  Maybe I'll do that too. 

Your second version would probably result in less flow separation, and better pressure recovery, but there could still be issues of flow distribution and the need for some vanes. 

I appreciate all the comments. 

Rusty (need to go to the range now)

Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster