|
|
Exactly, Al. That was my only point. (I'm reading these e-mails in reverse
chrono order tonight after having been gone all day . . . .)
Hey, Al, looks like your comments when replyng to these e-mails is single
spaced OK - but the part you quote to comment on comes out double spaced.
Wonder why that is? I edited to single space below. Anyone else see that,
or is it my system?
David
----- Original Message ----- From: "Al Gietzen" <ALVentures@cox.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 1:34 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: radiator
>
<quote from David's e-mail by Al: >
> Just a comment on one of the "assumptions" we all start with when
discussing estimation of cooling system sizes for hot weather: How much
hp
is being developed, i.e., how much heat is to be rejected?
> - I wonder if everyone is "assuming" that they must calculate
radiator
areas based on heat being generated/to be rejected while generating 100%
power, i.e., 160 or up to 180-205 for a n/a rotary, depending on what you
think you will be getting?
> -- My point is this: At a 90 or 100 degree F day, at full
throttle, sea level, std day pressure (29.92), you won't be generating
> 100% power - because, you are sucking in hot ambient air through the
inductionsystem (lower density than standard) and, without looking up the
equations for normalizing measured performance to "std day", I guess we'll
be generating only 90% of the 160 or so hp.
Al replied:
> That's true. That is one of the considerations built into my assumption
> of designing to 80% of full power on a hot day. The other thing is, it
> would probably very fortuitous if your actual performance fell within
> +-10%, or even +-20% of your design point anyway.
> Al
|
|