Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.102; envelope-from=echristley@nc.rr.com
Message-ID: <42423B25.7080706@nc.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 22:59:33 -0500
From: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (X11/20041127)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Cooling delta T
References: <list-815121@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-815121@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Al Gietzen wrote:

>
> The other point is the since the rad inlet is limited to ~210F, we 
> know that the larger the temperature drop, the lower the average 
> radiator temp (goes down by half the increase in the delta T), and the 
> larger the radiator core needed to dissipate the heat; a weight and 
> space factor.  For an inlet air temp of 80F, a coolant temp drop of 50 
> degrees needs about 15% more core than a 20 degree drop.  Not a big 
> deal; but something to consider.
>
>  
>
>
>  
>
> Al
>

Al, with the weight savings of the EWP (about 6lbs), you can add another 
GM core.  In my proposed design, space won't be a factor.  But wouldn't 
I need to then open up for more cooling air, or is that 15% figure with 
the same air mass?

-- 
This is by far the hardest lesson about freedom. It goes against
instinct, and morality, to just sit back and watch people make
mistakes. We want to help them, which means control them and their
decisions, but in doing so we actually hurt them (and ourselves)."