Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=201.225.225.167; envelope-from=rijakits@cwpanama.net
Message-ID: <002401c54f31$eb8745f0$6e5de0c9@usuarioq3efog0>
From: "rijakits" <rijakits@cwpanama.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
References: <list-922121@logan.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Renesis Build Options
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 11:13:46 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Can't comment on the rotary (for complete lack of experience...), but
for350.- I would ALWAYS go for the balance job.
From experience: A certified overhauled engine (Lyc 360), balanced within
spec + a new balanced prop (Hartzell) resulted in a combined un-balance of
0.72 IPS - both were within factory spec, but resulted in a very rough
assembly. Probably wouldn't guess anything wrong as a Lys always shakes
anyway.
With an electronic balancer I got it to about 0.04 IPS. This will result in
way longer engine-live.
Even if parts are perfectly matched, as long as there are various parts you
will always find differences after assembly.
If you only can afford one, go for the balancing!

Note to everyone: Even if you have new and static balanced prop/PSRU/engine
assemblies. GO and get a dynamic balance job, you WILL be surprised how far
out the combination is!
PS: A general max tolerance I saw so far on anything I got to fly or got to
see up close enough, was 0.2 IPS.

Please read up on the following:
http://www.amtonline.com/publication/article.jsp?pubId=1&id=1034
http://www.acessystems.com/downloads/gpb/gpb.pdf (read it at least to page
16, that is not brand or job specific, but general good info!, Especially
see page 10 (Adobe reader) = page 7 (document))

No matter what brand is used, IPS is the same, - destructive!!

Thomas J.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 8:52 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Renesis Build Options


> Bruce is as great fellow to do business with based on my experience.
Since
> I elected not to have either done on my engine, I can't comment on their
> value.  Perhaps if I had the rotors ceramic coated the coolant temps would
> be higher and oil temps lower but, my oil temp was at 160-180F and my
> coolant temps were at 200-210F, so I don't think ceramic coating would
have
> done me much good. My understanding is that it shields the rotors more
than
> any other component from the heat of combustion - so would probably help
> keep oil temps cooler.
>
> If you are going to wind your engine past 8000 rpm then dynamic  balancing
> might have merit - otherwise my experience with 3 rotary engines is if you
> use the correct counter weights for the weight of the rotors you are
using -
> you don't need to have it dynamically balanced.
>
> On the other hand, if you have the time and money - why not?
>
> Ed
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <davidclifford01@comcast.net>
> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
> Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 9:41 AM
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Renesis Build Options
>
>
> > Before I send a 50% deposit to East Coast Rotary to have Bruce build my
> > engine,  he offers two options during the build,  ceramic coating the
> > rotors @$310 and dynamic spin balancing the engine rotating assembly to
> > within +- 1g true @$350.  Any thoughts, concerns, or comments on these
> > options would be appreciated as I am sending payment this week.  Thanks
> > everyone.  Dave
> >
> >
> >> >>  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
> >
>
>
>
> >>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> >>  Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html