Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #17287
From: George Lendich <lendich@optusnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Big Butterflies vs Runners , was: Bruce Turrentine Intake
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 17:59:02 +1000
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Tom,
It's the port opening waves that clash in the runner that makes a 2 into 1 not work so well. I was of the same opinion as yourself until it was explained to me.
Sorry about the terminology - blame the beers!
George (down under)
----- Original Message -----
From: Tom
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 2:58 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Big Butterflies vs Runners , was: Bruce Turrentine Intake

Bob,
 
Just to exercise my lack of understanding so I can get beat-up and develop an understanding...
 
I was going to say, it looks like this manifold has 4.1sq inches of throttle-plate to support 2.71 sq inches of sucking runners (one outside runner and one inside runner) since only one rotor would draw at any given time, but it looks more complicated than that.    
 
2-rotors correct?     Then whatever is being drawn thru the middle intake port is dividing the load between both middle runners, (while you're probably gonna set it up so that only one of the two middle injectors fire at any time?)    If, the size of the two ports within each rotor chamber is the same, but you have two runners to the middle port, wouldn't more air come in the middle port since it's less restrictive?   And therefore the middle feed is more lean than the outer feed?   Not that in the overall scheme of things it's any kind of issue.    
 
   And I wonder why bother with providing two runners for the middle port, why not just a single runner?     With a single middle runner could you program a single middle injector to fire properly for both ports?    If not then retain two injectors for the single middle runner? 
 
    But in any case, it may still effectively work out to 2.71sq inches of porting behind the 4.1 sq inches of throttle-plate.
 
Tom
 
 
 
Hi George,

The best I can measure them, the outside runners are 1 3/8 ID and the
inside runners are 1 1/4 ID.  They blend smoothly into the shape of the
ports on the engine side.

Bob White


On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 09:00:14 +1000
"George Lendich" <lendich@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

> Bob
> What is the ID of the runners.
> George ( down under)
>


Bob White <bob@bob-white.com> wrote:

Hi Jerry,

I noticed that the inlet to the TB has a slight taper and the actual TB
throat is only about 58 mm. Interestingly, That's also about 4.1 sq.
in. I have Tracy's RD-1C, so have some hope of making at 7500 rpm.
It fits real nice in the cowling. I had Bruce bend it up so the TB was
about 1 1/2 inches higher than if it was made horizontal. If I had left
it horizontal, the TB would have come real close to interfering with the
rubber isolator on the engine mount. I left the camera at home, so
couldn't take any pictures.

Bob White

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 13:04:43 -0500
Jerry Hey wrote:

> Bob, that does seem large. For reference, the p port has two
> butterflies for a TOTAL of 4.1 sq in. This was based on
> calculations done by Rolf and should be good up to 8000 rpm. The
> size is similar to what Power Sport is using and what Paul Yaw has
> recommended. Jerry
> >


--
http://www.bob-white.com
N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 (soon)

>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
>> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster