X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from ms-smtp-03.southeast.rr.com ([24.25.9.102] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.10) with ESMTP id 2155745 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 03 Jul 2007 11:25:32 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.102; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from edward2 (cpe-024-074-103-061.carolina.res.rr.com [24.74.103.61]) by ms-smtp-03.southeast.rr.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id l63FOS6Z004065 for ; Tue, 3 Jul 2007 11:24:28 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <001301c7bd86$40a63450$2402a8c0@edward2> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] FW: Phase 1 completion Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 11:24:30 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0010_01C7BD64.B9411D20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C7BD64.B9411D20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Nice Looking Aircraft, Al Yes, after I first started attending Flyins, I found that inevitably I = was asked "can I see the engine?" So I soon started taking the cowl = off right after tying the aircraft down. I guess some teething problems are always encountered with a new = configuration (3 rotor, composite airframe, etc), but you do seem to = have had your share of the odd ones. Electrical interference = apparently can be a bit more of a problem than on an all metal body. I = presume Tracy is going to incorporate the interference fixes in future = EC2s - do you happen to know? Well, glad to see you flying even it all is not perfect. It sure sounds = suspiciously like it must be the pressure transducer if altitude = increases make it lean out and B controller is OK. I wonder if a = cracked transducer case would have this effect - but, no, you stated = their output is the same at two different altitudes. That would imply = they are both performing the same. The only thing I can recall that is unique to controller A is the = inlet air temperature sensor. Controller A has a temperature sensor and = controller B does not. While it does have some effect on the pulse = duration, its effect is normally fairly small compared to the manifold = pressure effect. But, I wonder if that has been checked? Possible = could account for why the manifold pressure transducer output appears to = check out, but the mixture gets leaner. I don't know what the algorithm = is, but, I would assume that the effect of the temperature sensor would = normally be to make the mixture richer as temperatures decrease with = increasing altitude - but, your problem is the opposite. =20 Still I have found that when the obvious fix does not seem to cure the = problem then the less-obvious is the place to look {:>) In any case, you'll get those teething problems sorted out and have a = great airplane. Ed =20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Al Gietzen=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 10:29 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] FW: Phase 1 completion Ed wrote: Its a real airplane now {:>)!!. You know you are going to have to = take some time at some point to give us all a rundown on your first 40 = hours. I suspect that due to the lack of messages from you to the = contrary that it must have been mostly smooth going. Some of the usual delays getting going. Some surprises on weight and = balance; delays waiting for workable insurance quote; delays waiting for = test pilot since the insurance company wouldn't cover me in my plane, = etc. Other than that, I guess three main issues: The most time consuming, and on-going, issue has been with the EC2. I = realize that the unit works well on Tracy's and similar installations, = but it did not accommodate my combination of composite airplane, 3-rotor = engine, and my electrical system design. After lots of checking and = changes, some of which helped, but didn't solve the problem; we finally = added additional filtering on the circuit board; and that problem went = away.=20 In the process we identified some additional issues arising from the = way in which the 2-rotor version was adapted to the 3-rotor. This has = been resolved by adding Schottky diodes in the circuits to the injectors = to prevent partial pulses going to the set of injectors turned off by = staging, or by the disable switches. There are two remaining issues. Controller "A" works fine on the = ground, but the mixture gets progressively leaner as altitude is = increased. By 6000 ft it runs out of manual adjustment, and it has to be = switched to controller "B", which works just fine. Both controllers = read the MAP from the same line via a 'T'. Very mysterious. We are = replacing the pressure sensor on A on the outside chance that will solve = the problem, even though the measured output from the A and B sensors = are the same when the unit is powered up (out of the plane) at different = altitudes (measured at 1400' and 5300'). The other is that there is something strange about the timing. At low = power things appear fine; switching off leading ignition has more effect = than switching off trailing, as expected. At operating power levels, = however; switching off leading has almost no noticeable effect; whereas = switching off trailing drops the rpm by 400+ rpm - which suggests that = the timing is very late. Yet advancing the timing via mode 8 does not = make any improvement. What is wrong with this picture? It is possible = that the added filters caused a delay in the timing, although analysis = suggests the effect would be small. Why doesn't advancing the timing = improve the power? Is there a timing change to one set of coils = associated with disabling the other? We are removing the filtering = capacitors from the ignition circuits as a test to see what the effect = is. Tracy has been cooperative and as helpful as can be expected = throughout this process, but we are at opposite ends of the country (FL = and CA). Fortunately my son is expert in this field, and has been great = help; although he is in CO, still far away.=20 Other than that the things that come to mind are that I needed to make = some small adjustments on the incidence angles of the wings and the = canard; and the marginally high oil temps that I have mentioned here = recently. As soon as the EC2 is back in, I expect to due some = measurements and tests to remedy that issue. Have a happy 4th!! Al P.S. I've attached a photo of my plane taken at a recent local air = show. It's amazing how much attention an unusual airplane with an = unusual engine attracts; at even a small air show. -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- -- Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ Archive and UnSub: = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C7BD64.B9411D20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Nice Looking Aircraft, Al
 
Yes, after I first started attending Flyins, I = found that=20 inevitably I was asked  "can I see the engine?"   So I = soon=20 started taking the cowl off right after tying the aircraft = down.
 
 I guess some teething problems are always=20 encountered with a new configuration (3 rotor, composite airframe, etc), = but you=20 do seem to have had your share of the odd ones.   Electrical=20 interference apparently can be a bit more of a problem than on = an all=20 metal body.  I presume Tracy is going to incorporate the = interference fixes=20 in future EC2s - do you happen to know?
 
Well, glad to see you flying even it all is not=20 perfect. It sure sounds suspiciously like it must be the pressure=20 transducer if altitude increases make it lean out and B controller is = OK. =20 I wonder if a cracked transducer case would have this effect - but, no, = you=20 stated their output is the same at two different altitudes. That would = imply=20 they are both performing the same.
 
 The only thing I can recall that is=20  unique to controller A is the inlet air=20 temperature sensor.  Controller A has a temperature sensor = and=20 controller B does not.  While it does have some effect on the pulse = duration, its effect is normally fairly small compared to the manifold = pressure=20 effect.  But, I wonder if that has been checked?  Possible = could=20 account for why the manifold pressure transducer output appears to check = out,=20 but the mixture gets leaner.  I don't know what the algorithm is, = but, I=20 would assume that the effect of the temperature sensor would normally be = to make=20 the mixture richer as temperatures decrease with increasing altitude - = but, your=20 problem is the opposite. 
 
Still I have found that when the obvious fix = does not seem=20 to cure  the problem then the less-obvious is the place to = look=20 {:>)
 
In any case, you'll get those teething = problems=20 sorted out and have a great airplane.
 
Ed
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Al = Gietzen=20
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 = 10:29=20 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] FW: Phase = 1=20 completion

 

Ed=20 wrote:

Its a real airplane now=20 {:>)!!.  You know you are going to have to take some time at = some=20 point to give us all a rundown on your first 40 hours.  I suspect = that=20 due to the lack of messages from you to the contrary that it must have = been=20 mostly smooth going.

 

Some of = the usual=20 delays getting going.  Some surprises on weight and balance; = delays=20 waiting for workable insurance quote; delays waiting for test pilot = since the=20 insurance company wouldn=92t cover me in my plane, etc.  Other = than that, I=20 guess three main issues:

 

The most = time=20 consuming, and on-going, issue has been with the EC2.  I realize = that the=20 unit works well on Tracy=92s and = similar=20 installations, but it did not accommodate my combination of composite=20 airplane, 3-rotor engine, and my electrical system design. =  After = lots of=20 checking and changes, some of which helped, but didn=92t solve the = problem; we=20 finally added additional filtering on the circuit board; and that = problem went=20 away.

 

In the = process we=20 identified some additional issues arising from the way in which the = 2-rotor=20 version was adapted to the 3-rotor.  This has been resolved by = adding=20 Schottky diodes in the circuits to the injectors to prevent partial = pulses=20 going to the set of injectors turned off by staging, or by the disable = switches.

 

There are = two=20 remaining issues. Controller =93A=94 works fine on the ground, but the = mixture=20 gets progressively leaner as altitude is increased. By 6000 ft it runs = out of=20 manual adjustment, and it has to be switched to controller =93B=94, = which works=20 just fine.  Both controllers read the MAP from the same line via = a =91T=92.=20 Very mysterious.  We are replacing the pressure sensor on A on = the=20 outside chance that will solve the problem, even though the measured = output=20 from the A and B sensors are the same when the unit is powered up (out = of the=20 plane) at different altitudes (measured at 1400=92 and = 5300=92).

 

The other = is that=20 there is something strange about the timing.  At low power things = appear=20 fine; switching off leading ignition has more effect than switching = off=20 trailing, as expected.  At operating power levels, however; = switching off=20 leading has almost no noticeable effect; whereas switching off = trailing drops=20 the rpm by 400+ rpm =96 which suggests that the timing is very = late.  Yet=20 advancing the timing via mode 8 does not make any improvement.  = What is=20 wrong with this picture?  It is possible that the added filters = caused a=20 delay in the timing, although analysis suggests the effect would be=20 small.  Why doesn=92t advancing the timing improve the power? Is = there a=20 timing change to one set of coils associated with disabling the = other? =20 We are removing the filtering capacitors from the ignition circuits as = a test=20 to see what the effect is.

 

Tracy has been = cooperative and as helpful as can be expected throughout this process, = but we=20 are at opposite ends of the country (FL and CA).  Fortunately my = son is=20 expert in this field, and has been great help; although he is in CO, = still far=20 away.

 

Other = than that the=20 things that come to mind are that I needed to make some small = adjustments on=20 the incidence angles of the wings and the canard; and the marginally = high oil=20 temps that I have mentioned here recently.  As soon as the EC2 is = back=20 in, I expect to due some measurements and tests to remedy that=20 issue.

 

Have a = happy=20 4th!!

 

Al

 

P.S. = I=92ve attached=20 a photo of my plane taken at a recent local air show.  It=92s = amazing how=20 much attention an unusual airplane with an unusual engine attracts; at = even a=20 small air show.

 

--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and=20 UnSub:  =20 = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C7BD64.B9411D20--