Return-Path: Received: from imf22aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.70] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c2) with ESMTP id 762159 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 27 Feb 2005 21:26:24 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.70; envelope-from=sqpilot@bellsouth.net Received: from [216.78.115.67] by imf22aec.mail.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.11 201-253-122-130-111-20040605) with ESMTP id <20050228022538.EZRZ2068.imf22aec.mail.bellsouth.net@[216.78.115.67]> for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2005 21:25:38 -0500 Received: from 127.0.0.1 (AVG SMTP 7.0.300 [266.5.0]); Sun, 27 Feb 2005 20:25:26 -0600 Message-ID: <000001c51d3c$c09b1780$43734ed8@paul52u7f5qyav> From: "Paul" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: [FlyRotary]Belt rumnations; soliciting Opinions of racers please.... Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 20:14:01 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=======AVGMAIL-422281165173=======" --=======AVGMAIL-422281165173======= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0063_01C51D08.E06BC430" ------=_NextPart_000_0063_01C51D08.E06BC430 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have a small 12 volt bilge pump for my birdbath/fountain. Mfr claims = it moves 640 gph of water. If I divide gallons per hour by 60=3D gpm = should work out to around 10.66 gpm. This is a tiny 12 volt bilge pump = that my photovoltaic cell runs, with no battery. (only works when the = sun is overhead). You can hold it in the palm of your hand nearly close = your hand around it. Seems like it wouldn't take much larger of a motor = to push 30 gpm if this puny thing will pump 10+ gpm. It will empty a = bilge pretty fast. I realize this is unrestricted water, but still, it = has to move all that water out of a boat bilge, and does a fine job. It = pumps the water in my fountain too high, had to put a restrictor on it. = Paul Conner ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Jack Ford=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2005 3:00 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: [FlyRotary]Belt rumnations; soliciting = Opinions of racers please.... I had a 3/4 horsepower pump that moved 13 gallons per minute of water = out of a 100' deep well, 40' head minimum. It was a lot faster than that until I drew the well down to it's = production rate, but I only measured the production rate. Extrapolating from that, 3 horsepower will move 52+ GPM. Different = kind of pump, different environment. Data point. Jack Ford ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Jim Sower=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2005 12:36 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: [FlyRotary]Belt rumnations; soliciting = Opinions of racers please.... Al, I made a quick analysis from facts obtained elsewhere. I surmised = that PL was right about the 10 hp at high rpm because I've heard that = number from so many sources over the years. How considerably off do you = think PL was and why? I seem to recall that PL's case against EWP was = that since water pumps require 10 hp, you'd need a 10 hp motor to drive = the EWP. As for the 0.1 hp of EWP, I'm pretty sure someone on this = list that's using one reported that his EWP draws about 5 amps in = operation. Starting from there, the math is pretty straightforward. Anyway, I'm a believer until I hear something really compelling ... = Jim S. Al Gietzen wrote:=20 The case for EWP for example is performance. PL insisted that an EDWP = absorbs over 10 hp at 6000 rpm. He is probably damned close. He then = made the unfortunate leap that therefore an EWP must absorb the same = power. Not true. EWP conservatively absorbs 14V x 5 A =3D 70 W =3D~ = 0.1 hp. He was off by about two orders of magnitude or about 9.9 hp. = Don't know about you but I can always use an extra 9.9 hp. PL may have = been considerably off; but at .1hp with the EWP you will be getting only = a fraction of the flow of the belt driven pump; even if it were 100% = efficient. Keep in mind that converting power into electricity is about = 85% efficient, as is converting electricity back into power. 0.85 x 0.85 = =3D 0.72; so you have lost 28% of the power in the process. Pumping = coolant against even a small pressure head takes power. Any = 'performance improvement' you may see with EWP vs belt driven pump comes = from lower flow rate. Al >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html =20 >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.0 - Release Date: 2/25/2005 ------=_NextPart_000_0063_01C51D08.E06BC430 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I have a small 12 volt bilge pump for = my=20 birdbath/fountain. Mfr claims it moves 640 gph of water.  If I = divide=20 gallons per hour by 60=3D gpm should work out to around 10.66 gpm. This = is a tiny=20 12 volt bilge pump that my photovoltaic cell runs, with no battery. = (only works=20 when the sun is overhead). You can hold it in the palm of your hand = nearly=20 close your hand around it.  Seems like it wouldn't take much larger = of a=20 motor to push 30 gpm if this puny thing will pump 10+ gpm.  It will = empty a=20 bilge pretty fast. I realize this is unrestricted water, but still, it = has to=20 move all that water out of a boat bilge, and does a fine job. It = pumps the=20 water in my fountain too high, had to put a restrictor on it.  Paul = Conner
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Jack Ford
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2005 = 3:00=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = [FlyRotary]Belt=20 rumnations; soliciting Opinions of racers please....

I had a 3/4 horsepower pump that = moved 13 gallons=20 per minute of water out of a 100' deep well, 40' head = minimum.
It was a lot faster than that until I = drew the=20 well down to it's production rate, but I only measured the production=20 rate.
 
Extrapolating from that, 3 horsepower = will move=20 52+ GPM. Different kind of pump, different environment.
 
Data point.
 
Jack Ford
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Jim=20 Sower
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft=20
Sent: Sunday, February 27, = 2005 12:36=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re:=20 [FlyRotary]Belt rumnations; soliciting Opinions of racers = please....

Al,
I made a quick analysis from facts obtained=20 elsewhere.  I surmised that PL was right about the 10 hp at = high rpm=20 because I've heard that number from so many sources over the = years. =20 How considerably off do you think PL was and why?  I seem to = recall=20 that PL's case against EWP was that since water pumps require 10 hp, = you'd=20 need a 10 hp motor to drive the EWP.   As for the 0.1 hp of = EWP, I'm=20 pretty sure someone on this list that's using one reported that his = EWP=20 draws about 5 amps in operation.  Starting from there, the math = is=20 pretty straightforward.
Anyway, I'm a believer until I hear = something=20 really compelling ... Jim S.

Al Gietzen wrote:=20 
The case for EWP for example is =
performance.  PL insisted that an EDWP absorbs over 10 hp at 6000 =
rpm.  He is probably damned close.  He then made the =
unfortunate leap that therefore an EWP must absorb the same power.  =
Not true.  EWP conservatively absorbs 14V x 5 A =3D 70 W =3D~ 0.1 =
hp.  He was off by about two =
orders of magnitude or about 9.9 hp.  Don't know about =
you  but I can always use an extra 9.9 =
hp.
 
PL may have been considerably off; but at .1hp =
with the EWP you will be getting only a fraction of the flow of the belt =
driven pump; even if it were 100% efficient.  Keep in mind that =
converting power into electricity is about 85% efficient, as is =
converting electricity back into power. 0.85 x 0.85 =3D 0.72; so you =
have lost 28% of the power in the process.  Pumping coolant against =
even a small pressure head takes power.  Any =91performance =
improvement=92 you may see with EWP vs belt driven pump comes from lower =
flow rate.  
Al
 
  
 
  =

>>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/

>>  Archive:   http://lancai=
ronline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html

  

>>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/

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

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG=20 Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.0 - Release = Date:=20 2/25/2005
------=_NextPart_000_0063_01C51D08.E06BC430-- --=======AVGMAIL-422281165173======= Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg=cert; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Content-Description: "AVG certification" No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.0 - Release Date: 2/25/2005 --=======AVGMAIL-422281165173=======--