X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 41 [XX] Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao05.cox.net ([68.230.241.34] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.4) with ESMTP id 1732996 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 11:01:58 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.34; envelope-from=alventures@cox.net Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao05.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.03 201-2131-130-104-20060516) with ESMTP id <20070103160109.RPDK15640.fed1rmmtao05.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net> for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2007 11:01:09 -0500 Received: from BigAl ([72.192.132.90]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id 6g1P1W00k1xAn3c0000000; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 11:01:23 -0500 From: "Al Gietzen" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: EM2 Data Logger pix Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2007 08:01:13 -0800 Message-ID: <000001c72f50$648140f0$6400a8c0@BigAl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01C72F0D.566071F0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C72F0D.566071F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Most of the chart is self explanatory but there are a few interesting = and (to me) mystifying points. Note the L. Rad Air Out temperature (air = temp after passing through rad). According to Paul L., the optimum for this parameter is 10 - 20 deg F. above ambient OAT. I wanted a lot more than that to minimize the number of CFM required and as you can see, mine is running as much as 127 deg F above OAT which is even more than I figured = on. =20 It's possible that Paul was referring to the coolant rather than the = air. Somewhere around 20 may be optimum for the coolant; and something more = like 50 may be optimum for air side. Your 127 F is similar to what I'm = seeing on my wing-root without a scoop; clearly indicative of low air flow. It = makes the average rejection temp more than 60F over the OAT; not very = effective. I don't recall - are your rads in series or parallel? Do you have coolant in/out for the left rad only?=20 =20 Very useful plot. Nice job. =20 Al =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C72F0D.566071F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Most of the chart is self explanatory but there are a few interesting and (to = me) mystifying points. Note the L. Rad Air Out temperature (air temp = after passing through rad). According to Paul L., the optimum for this parameter is 10 - 20 deg F. above ambient OAT. I wanted a lot more = than that to minimize the number of CFM required and as you can see, mine is = running as much as 127 deg F above OAT which is even more than I figured = on.

It’s possible that Paul was referring to the coolant rather than the air. Somewhere around 20 = may be optimum for the coolant; and something more like 50 may be optimum for air = side. Your 127 F is similar to what I’m seeing on my wing-root without a = scoop; clearly indicative of low air flow. It makes the average rejection = temp more than 60F over the OAT; not very effective. I don’t recall = – are your rads in series or parallel? Do you have coolant in/out for the = left rad only? <= /font>

Very useful plot. Nice = job.

Al

<= /font>

------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C72F0D.566071F0--