X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from [24.25.9.101] (HELO ms-smtp-02-eri0.southeast.rr.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.6) with ESMTP id 932005 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 18 Jan 2006 17:59:41 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.101; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from edward2 (cpe-024-074-025-165.carolina.res.rr.com [24.74.25.165]) by ms-smtp-02-eri0.southeast.rr.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id k0IMwcUn011412 for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2006 17:58:40 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000f01c61c82$be4336c0$2402a8c0@edward2> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: Fw: [FlyRotary] Re: LS1 Coil Failures Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 17:58:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000C_01C61C58.D525C580" 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 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C61C58.D525C580 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Ed Anderson=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 5:01 PM Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: LS1 Coil Failures Cause still to be resolved, Bob. Too soon to worry, but, if truly a = problem better to find it now than at 2000 MSL on some take off down the = road. Although with 6 (20B I presume) you can stand a coil failure a = bit better than us two rotor. Ed A ----- Original Message -----=20 From: bmears9413@aol.com=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:44 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: LS1 Coil Failures Plus I really hate reading all this about the LS1 coils....I just = purchased 6 yesterday. Bob Mears=20 =20 -----Original Message----- From: Mark R Steitle To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 14:24:20 -0600 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: LS1 Coil Failures Bill, I feel it is a fair assumption that the LS1 coil was never intended to = run at 12,000 rpm, as would be the equivalent of what we?re doing with = the rotary at 6,000 rpm. So, we?re clearly operating it outside the = design range. Does this shorten their life? Don?t know, but Tracy?s = experience seems to indicate this could be the case. Couple this with = other extremes, such as temperature and frequency and they might not be = up to the task. =20 =20 The coils on my 126,000 mile LS1 truck are all factory stock. No = failures (knock on wood).=20 =20 Mark S. =20 =20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] = On Behalf Of wrjjrs@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 1:27 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: LS1 Coil Failures =20 Mark, There may well be a duty cycle problem, but I doubt it. Older = ignitions used a single coil of similar type firing all 8 cylinders. I = would be more likely to suggest it was a "bathtub failure curve" failure = of the solid state "trigger" circuit. Bill Jepson -----Original Message----- From: Mark R Steitle To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 10:51:47 -0600 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: LS1 Coil Failures Sorry, that's what I get for doing "head math". Anyway, my point is = still valid. It fires 8 times more often in the rotary than in the = truck/auto. Could the duty-cycle be the culprit? It would be = interesting to see the specs on these coils. =20 Mark S.=20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C61C58.D525C580 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Ed=20 Anderson
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 5:01 PM
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: LS1 Coil Failures

Cause still to be resolved, Bob.  Too soon = to worry,=20 but, if truly a problem better to find it now than at 2000 MSL on some = take off=20 down the road.  Although with 6 (20B I presume) you can stand a = coil=20 failure a bit better than us two rotor.
 
Ed A
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 bmears9413@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, = 2006 3:44=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: LS1 = Coil=20 Failures

Plus I really hate reading all this about the LS1 coils....I just = purchased 6 yesterday.
 
Bob Mears 
 
-----Original = Message-----
From: Mark R=20 Steitle <mark.steitle@austin.utexas= .edu>
To:=20 Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent:=20 Wed, 18 Jan 2006 14:24:20 -0600
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: LS1 Coil=20 Failures

Bill,
I feel it = is a fair=20 assumption that the LS1 coil was never intended to run at 12,000 rpm, = as would=20 be the equivalent of what we?re doing with the rotary at 6,000 = rpm.  So,=20 we?re clearly operating it outside the design range.  Does this = shorten=20 their life?  Don?t know, but Tracy?s experience seems to = indicate this=20 could be the case.  Couple this with other extremes, such as = temperature=20 and frequency and they might not be up to the task. =20
 
The coils = on my=20 126,000 mile LS1 truck are all factory stock.  No failures (knock = on=20 wood).
 
Mark = S. =20
 
From:=20 Rotary motors in aircraft = [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On=20 Behalf Of wrjjrs@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, = 2006 1:27=20 PM
To: = Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: LS1 = Coil=20 Failures
 
 Mark,
There may well be a = duty cycle=20 problem, but I doubt it. Older ignitions used a single coil of similar = type=20 firing all 8 cylinders. I would be more likely to suggest it was a = "bathtub=20 failure curve" failure of the solid state "trigger"=20 circuit.
Bill=20 Jepson

-----Original=20 Message-----
From: Mark R=20 Steitle <mark.steitle@austin.utexas.edu>
To: = Rotary motors in aircraft = <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 10:51:47 = -0600
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: LS1 Coil=20 Failures
Sorry, = that's what I=20 get for doing "head math".  Anyway, my point is still = valid.  It=20 fires 8 times more often in the rotary than in the truck/auto.  = Could the=20 duty-cycle be the culprit?  It would be interesting to see the = specs on=20 these coils.
 
Mark S.=20
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C61C58.D525C580--