Return-Path: Received: from email2k3.itlnet.net ([64.19.112.12] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c1) with ESMTP id 744267 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 18 Feb 2005 10:09:00 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.19.112.12; envelope-from=jwvoto@itlnet.net Received: from rav.itlnet.net (unverified [192.168.10.149]) by itlnet.net (Rockliffe SMTPRA 6.1.17) with SMTP id for ; Fri, 18 Feb 2005 09:08:14 -0600 Received: from JWVOTO (unverified [64.19.115.49]) by itlnet.net (Rockliffe SMTPRA 6.1.17) with SMTP id for ; Fri, 18 Feb 2005 09:08:12 -0600 Message-ID: <00e101c515cc$1f3b0340$3a721340@JWVOTO> From: "Wendell Voto" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: I found the power Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 09:10:50 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00DE_01C51599.BDD8AA80" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00DE_01C51599.BDD8AA80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I almost bought that prop but couldn't talk my son (financial partner) = to go along. It sounded like a very good prop. If you want to get rid of = it, let me know. Wendell > Regarding the prop, this is the prop that Ron Gowan had on his = rotary=20 > powered LongEZ. It is designed for 160 hp (rather than 120hp). It is=20 > similar to what the 0320 LongEZ guys are using. Ron Gowan got 195 mph = in=20 > his rotary powered LongEZ with this prop at 6000 rpm's. I was = initially=20 > unable to get above 5100 rpm's (until I removed the cowling and found = the=20 > REAL power problem). Now that I am getting 5600 rpm's static, it is = very=20 > likely that I would be able to get that elusive 6000 rpms once the = prop=20 > unloads, and my engine is getting cold ram air instead of heated = cowling=20 > air. Paul Conner >=20 > ----- Original Message -----=20 > From: "Jim Sower" > To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" > Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 1:39 PM > Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: I found the power >=20 >=20 > > Paul, > > I'm inquiring into the adequacy of the NACA duct(s) you want to use = to=20 > > feed your throttle body. If I wasn't really confident that they = would=20 > > perform as advertised (it's hard to make them work really well in = the low=20 > > pressure areas of the fuselage) I'd be inclined to use a P-51 type=20 > > external scoop like you see under right wing of Velocitys or = something=20 > > like that. > > > > As to the prop, I would not use a prop designed for a 120 HP engine = to=20 > > make power estimates on a rotary. I would not fly the airplane = until I=20 > > was getting at least 5000 rpm on a prop comparable to the one ED = used when=20 > > he was running his 2.17 PSRU. Someone with a Lyc O-360 should be = able to=20 > > lend you a prop to test with for a while if your prop is a little = radical. > > > > 5200 rpm on a 62 x 66 prop is not useful for power determination. = If you=20 > > look at prop rpm (2390) it tells you that you have about the same = power as=20 > > an O-235 - about 110 - 115 hp. Somehow you've got to extract a lot = more=20 > > power out of that machine. Maybe check out your fuel flow on your = high=20 > > power turn ups and ponder that for a while. > > > > I would not fly that airplane until I was getting good rpm with a = REAL=20 > > prop ... Jim S. > > > > Paul wrote: > > > >> Hi, Jim....I still had the smaller 62 x 66 prop on at the time. = Regarding=20 > >> the size of the NACA duct, are you referring to the large one on = the=20 > >> bottom of the fuselage, or the proposed two smaller ones for = bringing in=20 > >> air to my throttlebody? Take care. Paul Conner > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Sower" = > >> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" > >> Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 11:30 PM > >> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: I found the power > >> > >> > >>> Paul, > >>> What size prop is this that gives you 5600 rpm now? Is it still = the one=20 > >>> off of the O-235 or have you gone back to your original? What's = the=20 > >>> total area of the NACA duct (like top view)? > >>> Just wonderin' ... Jim S. > >>> > >>> Paul wrote: > >>> > >>>> Today I finished installing the firesleeve on the remaing fuel = lines,=20 > >>>> made some stand-offs so that the fuel lines would not be right up = > >>>> against the engine, and finished hooking up and securing a few = other=20 > >>>> items. With the top cowling off, I ran the pumps for a minute, = then=20 > >>>> checked for leaks...none found. Then I started the engine and = ran it=20 > >>>> for 20 or so seconds and shut it down and reinspected for fuel = leaks.=20 > >>>> None found. I restarted and taxiied away from the hangar a bit = so as=20 > >>>> to not be as loud for others in and near the hangar and did a = full=20 > >>>> power runup. I hit 5600 static rpm's. In the past, the best I = could=20 > >>>> hope for was 5200, most of the time settling for 5100 rpm's. I = taxiied=20 > >>>> back in and installed the top cowling....max rpm's 5100. Took = the top=20 > >>>> cowling back off....max rpm's 5600. One more try....5100 with = the=20 > >>>> cowling back on. It is beginning to become more clear to me, = that one=20 > >>>> of two things are affecting rpm's. Option one is that with the = top=20 > >>>> cowling on the engine is ingesting heated air and just cannot = develop=20 > >>>> the same power as when it ingests outside unheated air. Option = two is=20 > >>>> the muffler bearing may be worn. I'm kinda leaning toward option = one. > >>>> I was thinking of installing two small NACA ducts on the = bottom of=20 > >>>> my cowling with two hoses coming up to feed air to my TWM = throttlebody.=20 > >>>> The NACA ducts I purchased from Van's RV (made for cowling = ventilation)=20 > >>>> already have a male outlet already molded in the assembly, so you = just=20 > >>>> slide a hose over it and secure with a clamp. Very simple=20 > >>>> installation.(Works well for my cabin ventillation) If I recall=20 > >>>> correctly, they are about the same size as my throttle body bore. = I=20 > >>>> wonder if I will loose much efficiency as the air goes through = the=20 > >>>> corregated hose, and if the Van's RV ventillation NACA ducts will = > >>>> provide a sufficient volume of air. Of course while flying, I = would=20 > >>>> have the advantage of a little bit of ram effect as well as the = ability=20 > >>>> to suck in fresh outside air that has not been heated inside the=20 > >>>> cowling during taxi/takeoff run. Any opinions/suggestions would = of=20 > >>>> course be much appreciated. I will discuss the vapor lock issue = in the=20 > >>>> next post, so as to not complicate responses, etc. Thanks to all = who=20 > >>>> reply. Paul Conner > >>>> > >>>> = ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> No virus found in this outgoing message. > >>>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > >>>> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: = 2/14/2005 > >>>> > >>>> = ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>> 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 > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> --=20 > >>> No virus found in this incoming message. > >>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > >>> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: = 2/14/2005 > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > >>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > >>> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html > > > > > > --=20 > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 2/14/2005 > > > >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 2/14/2005 >=20 >=20 > >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html ------=_NextPart_000_00DE_01C51599.BDD8AA80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I almost bought that prop but couldn't talk = my son=20 (financial partner) to go along. It sounded like a very good prop. If = you want=20 to get rid of it, let me know.
Wendell
>     Regarding the prop, this is the prop that = Ron Gowan=20 had on his rotary
> powered LongEZ.  It is designed for 160 = hp=20 (rather than 120hp). It is
> similar to what the 0320 LongEZ guys = are=20 using.  Ron Gowan got 195 mph in
> his rotary powered LongEZ = with=20 this prop at 6000 rpm's.  I was initially
> unable to get = above 5100=20 rpm's (until I removed the cowling and found the
> REAL power = problem).=20 Now that I am getting 5600 rpm's static, it is very
> likely that = I would=20 be able to get that elusive 6000 rpms once the prop
> unloads, = and my=20 engine is getting cold ram air instead of heated cowling
> = air. =20 Paul Conner
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: = "Jim=20 Sower" <canarder@frontiernet.net>=
>=20 To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
>=20 Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 1:39 PM
> Subject: [FlyRotary] = Re: I=20 found the power
>
>
> > Paul,
> > I'm = inquiring=20 into the adequacy of the NACA duct(s) you want to use to
> > = feed your=20 throttle body.  If I wasn't really confident that they would =
> >=20 perform as advertised (it's hard to make them work really well in the = low=20
> > pressure areas of the fuselage) I'd be inclined to use a = P-51 type=20
> > external scoop like you see under right wing of Velocitys = or=20 something
> > like that.
> >
> > As to the = prop, I=20 would not use a prop designed for a 120 HP engine to
> > make = power=20 estimates on a rotary.  I would not fly the airplane until I =
> >=20 was getting at least 5000 rpm on a prop comparable to the one ED used = when=20
> > he was running his 2.17 PSRU.  Someone with a Lyc = O-360=20 should be able to
> > lend you a prop to test with for a while = if your=20 prop is a little radical.
> >
> > 5200 rpm on a 62 x = 66 prop=20 is not useful for power determination.  If you
> > look = at prop=20 rpm (2390) it tells you that you have about the same power as
> = > an=20 O-235 - about 110 - 115 hp.  Somehow you've got to extract a lot = more=20
> > power out of that machine.  Maybe check out your fuel = flow on=20 your high
> > power turn ups and ponder that for a = while.
>=20 >
> > I would not fly that airplane until I was getting good = rpm=20 with a REAL
> > prop ... Jim S.
> >
> > Paul = wrote:
> >
> >> Hi, Jim....I still had the smaller = 62 x 66=20 prop on at the time. Regarding
> >> the size of the NACA = duct, are=20 you referring to the large one on the
> >> bottom of the = fuselage,=20 or the proposed two smaller ones for bringing in
> >> air = to my=20 throttlebody?  Take care.  Paul Conner
> = >>
>=20 >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Sower" <canarder@frontiernet.net>=
>=20 >> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
>=20 >> Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 11:30 PM
> >> = Subject:=20 [FlyRotary] Re: I found the power
> >>
> = >>
>=20 >>> Paul,
> >>> What size prop is this that = gives you=20 5600 rpm now?  Is it still the one
> >>> off of the = O-235=20 or have you gone back to your original?  What's the
> = >>>=20 total area of the NACA duct (like top view)?
> >>> Just = wonderin'=20 ... Jim S.
> >>>
> >>> Paul wrote:
> = >>>
> >>>> Today I finished installing the = firesleeve=20 on the remaing fuel lines,
> >>>> made some = stand-offs so=20 that the fuel lines would not be right up
> >>>> = against the=20 engine, and finished hooking up and securing a few other
>=20 >>>> items. With the top cowling off,  I ran the pumps = for a=20 minute, then
> >>>> checked for leaks...none = found. =20 Then I started the engine and ran it
> >>>> for 20 or = so=20 seconds and shut it down and reinspected for fuel leaks.
>=20 >>>> None found.  I restarted and taxiied away from the = hangar=20 a bit so as
> >>>> to not be as loud for others in = and near=20 the hangar and did a full
> >>>> power runup.  I = hit=20 5600 static rpm's. In the past, the best I could
> = >>>> hope=20 for was 5200, most of the time settling for 5100 rpm's.  I taxiied =
>=20 >>>> back in and installed the top cowling....max rpm's = 5100. =20 Took the top
> >>>> cowling back off....max rpm's = 5600. =20 One more try....5100 with the
> >>>> cowling back = on. =20 It is beginning to become more clear to me, that one
> = >>>>=20 of two things are affecting rpm's.  Option one is that with the top =
> >>>> cowling on the engine is ingesting heated air = and just=20 cannot develop
> >>>> the same power as when it = ingests=20 outside unheated air.  Option two is
> >>>> the = muffler=20 bearing may be worn.  I'm kinda leaning toward option one.
>=20 >>>>      I was thinking of = installing two=20 small NACA ducts on the bottom of
> >>>> my cowling = with two=20 hoses coming up to feed air to my TWM throttlebody.
> = >>>>=20 The NACA ducts I purchased from Van's RV (made for cowling ventilation) =
>=20 >>>> already have a male outlet already molded in the = assembly, so=20 you just
> >>>> slide a hose over it and secure with = a clamp.=20 Very simple
> >>>> installation.(Works well for my = cabin=20 ventillation) If I recall
> >>>> correctly, they are = about=20 the same size as my throttle body bore. I
> >>>> = wonder if I=20 will loose much efficiency as the air goes through the
> = >>>>=20 corregated hose, and if the Van's RV ventillation NACA ducts will =
>=20 >>>> provide a sufficient volume of air. Of course while = flying, I=20 would
> >>>> have the advantage of a little bit of = ram effect=20 as well as the ability
> >>>> to suck in fresh = outside air=20 that has not been heated inside the
> >>>> cowling = during=20 taxi/takeoff run.  Any opinions/suggestions would of
>=20 >>>> course be much appreciated.  I will discuss the = vapor lock=20 issue in the
> >>>> next post, so as to not = complicate=20 responses, etc.  Thanks to all who
> >>>> = reply. =20 Paul Conner
> >>>>
> >>>>=20 ------------------------------------------------------------------------<= BR>>=20 >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> No = virus=20 found in this outgoing message.
> >>>> Checked by AVG=20 Anti-Virus.
> >>>> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: = 265.8.8=20 - Release Date: 2/14/2005
> >>>>
> = >>>>=20 ------------------------------------------------------------------------<= BR>>=20 >>>>
> >>>>
> = >>>>
>=20 >>>>>> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> = >>>>>> Archive:   http://lancai= ronline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
>=20 >>>>>>
> >>>
> = >>>>> =20 Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> = >>>>>  Archive:   http://lancai= ronline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
>=20 >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> = >>>=20 --
> >>> No virus found in this incoming = message.
>=20 >>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> >>> Version: = 7.0.300 /=20 Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 2/14/2005
> = >>>
>=20 >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>=20 >>
> >
> >>>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> = >>>  Archive:   http://lancai= ronline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
>=20 >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this = incoming=20 message.
> > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> > Version: = 7.0.300 /=20 Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 2/14/2005
> >
> = >=20
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found = in this=20 outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: = 7.0.300 /=20 Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 2/14/2005
>
> =
>=20 >>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> = >>  Archive:   http://lancai= ronline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
------=_NextPart_000_00DE_01C51599.BDD8AA80--