Return-Path: <13brv3@bellsouth.net> Received: from imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.66] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.5) with ESMTP id 595014 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 07 Jan 2005 15:46:41 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.66; envelope-from=13brv3@bellsouth.net Received: from rd ([65.6.194.9]) by imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.11 201-253-122-130-111-20040605) with ESMTP id <20050107204612.MGFX2042.imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net@rd> for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2005 15:46:12 -0500 From: "Russell Duffy" <13brv3@bellsouth.net> To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] oi/water Exchanger [FlyRotary] Re: fluidyne oil cooler Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 14:46:30 -0600 Message-ID: <000001c4f4f9$f721ad70$6101a8c0@rd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01C4F4C7.AC873D70" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C4F4C7.AC873D70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I believe that oil/water heat exchangers might be justified in an = aircraft installation if for some reason the lay-out precluded getting air to an = oil cooler but did permit you to install a larger radiator capable of = handling the heat load for the coolant and oil. Otherwise, I don't believe they would work very well in most of our installations. There could be exceptions of course. =20 Ed Anderson=20 =20 =20 Good points of course, but I still can't help but be drawn to the = simplicity of having only one scoop, one duct, and one radiator. Even as I type, = I'm trying to figure out where I can put a bigger radiator (within cosmetic limits this time) :-) I'm even warming back up (so to speak) to the = idea of using the stock 1st gen oil/water exchanger for the single rotor. It = was pointed out to me that the stock unit took hot water from the heater = outlet, which doesn't really give the heat exchanger the best chance of success. =20 If I get Ken's oil/water exchanger, I'll be mighty tempted to hook it up = to the current two radiators to see how it does on the ground. Since I'm = not opposed to changing out the evap cores, there might be a way to enlarge = the capacity some. Barring all that, it'll make a nice paperweight. =20 =20 Cheers, Rusty (now collecting oil coolers instead of manifolds) =20 =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C4F4C7.AC873D70 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
I believe that oil/water heat exchangers might be justified in = an=20 aircraft installation if for some reason the lay-out precluded getting = air to an=20 oil cooler but did permit you to install a larger radiator capable of = handling=20 the heat load for the coolant and oil.  Otherwise, I don't believe = they=20 would work very well in most of our installations.  There = could be=20 exceptions of course.
 
 Ed Anderson 
 
 
Good points of course, but I still can't = help but be=20 drawn to the simplicity of having only one scoop, one duct, and one = radiator.  Even as I type, I'm trying to figure out where I can put = a=20 bigger radiator (within cosmetic limits this time) =  :-)   =20 I'm even warming back up (so to speak) to the idea of using the stock = 1st gen=20 oil/water exchanger for the single rotor.  It was pointed out = to me=20 that the stock unit took hot water from the = heater outlet, which=20 doesn't really give the heat exchanger the best chance of=20 success.
 
If I get Ken's oil/water exchanger, I'll = be mighty=20 tempted to hook it up to the current two radiators to see how it = does on=20 the ground.  Since I'm not opposed to changing out the evap = cores,=20 there might be a way to enlarge the capacity some.  Barring all = that, it'll=20 make a nice paperweight.  
 
Cheers,
Rusty (now collecting oil coolers instead of=20 manifolds)    
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C4F4C7.AC873D70--