Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao06.cox.net ([68.230.241.33] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c3) with ESMTP id 851742 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 01 Apr 2005 13:31:36 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.33; envelope-from=daveleonard@cox.net Received: from davidandanne ([68.101.147.215]) by fed1rmmtao06.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with SMTP id <20050401183048.OQRE1497.fed1rmmtao06.cox.net@davidandanne> for ; Fri, 1 Apr 2005 13:30:48 -0500 From: "DaveLeonard" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Davies-Craig EWP Test Results Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 10:30:48 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Bob, Jim is right. The best way is a flow vs. pressure. The work to get the fluid through the entire system is likely going to be more than what you tested. I will bet dollars for doughnuts that the more expensive/larger pump will perform better at the higher pressures. Think of the difference between a cheap handheld electric drill, and a drill press. Under no load, the hand-held drill spins much faster than the drill press. But put on a load and the small drill quickly slows down and stops, the drill press is unaffected. Dave Leonard > > > It would be interesting to put a valve downstream from the pump and > close it just a tad (perhaps measure pressure drop across the valve or > perhaps across the pump) and see how a restriction affects flow. > Inquiring minds need to know :o) ... Jim S. > > Bob White wrote: > > >Hi Dave, > > > >The only restriction was the hoses I used for the test and the > flow meter. Flow > >was out of the bucket about an inch from the bottom thru the > test setup and back > >into the top of the bucket with the hose submerged. The hose > sizes are similar > >to what I'm planning on using in the plane. > > > >Bob W. > > > > > >On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 05:38:42 -0800 > >"DaveLeonard" wrote: > > > > > > > >>MessageBob was there any resistance to flow? The could perform quite > >>differently if they are pumping against resistance. > >> > >>Dave Leonard > >> > >> Th e tiny D-C pump outperforms the WP136. > >> > >> Great report Bob! Sounds like the little plastic Davies > Craig pump is the > >>hands down winner over the WP136 Meziere. I'm not too > concerned about the > >>motor temp, because it's obviously made to run that hot, and > still give good > >>service life. The best part about the test is that you did it, > and my WP136 > >>is still new in the box. Now I can send it back to Summit for > a refund :-) > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Rusty (hoping for two successful posts in a row) > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html