X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao107.cox.net ([68.230.241.39] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.12) with ESMTP id 3481441 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 07 Feb 2009 11:49:37 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.39; envelope-from=rv-4mike@cox.net Received: from fed1rmimpo03.cox.net ([70.169.32.75]) by fed1rmmtao107.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20090207164856.IXEB131.fed1rmmtao107.cox.net@fed1rmimpo03.cox.net> for ; Sat, 7 Feb 2009 11:48:56 -0500 Received: from wills ([68.105.85.56]) by fed1rmimpo03.cox.net with bizsmtp id D4ot1b0071CvZmk044ovKQ; Sat, 07 Feb 2009 11:48:56 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=4t_UXvboVH8A:10 a=arxwEM4EAAAA:8 a=QdXCYpuVAAAA:8 a=7g1VtSJxAAAA:8 a=kviXuzpPAAAA:8 a=AeRNCYMgJPX6f0ffzAcA:9 a=u5ILaNEsk9Tu9_aQ4dcA:7 a=qRzcTPIE00qKe8iYhOpYynxNQzkA:4 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 a=tXPUrm4B3N8A:10 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=WRgVMEpfYDmcOqzmK_wA:9 a=o7rlhApbd8hp_acQppoA:7 a=wtKdc9Q41TyXqHg4TbjKEquszPAA:4 a=AfD3MYMu9mQA:10 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <003301c98943$f6af0850$38556944@wills> From: "Mike Wills" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: renesis intake possibility Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 08:48:54 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0030_01C98900.E8312530" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0030_01C98900.E8312530 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ed, Is that Mustang TB stock wrecking yard issue or is it aftermarket? Been = thinking about intake mods. My current system works but is not = compatible with use of an air filter. And there is a lot of JB Weld in = my manifold to blend the ports. I have nightmares about ingesting JB = Weld. Mike Wills RV-4 N144MW ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Ed Anderson=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2009 7:33 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: renesis intake possibility Hi Bryan, =20 Welcome. Here is my experience using a TWM throttle body (a different = model than you are looking at). Back in 1992 there was no one around = that I was aware that could provide any answers to what made a good = induction configuration for a flying rotary. So I turned to the only = "rotary aware" crowd around and that was those racing with rotary = engines. =20 So after discussing my needs, I purchase a TWM throttle body with 4 = injector positions. It was a two throat (Webber style) design with each = throat 2" in diameter. Two injectors per port (I used MSD 32 lb/hr = injectors that fit the injector holes) for a total of 4 injectors on the = TB. The TWM throttle body was then bolted to a cast aluminum "Webber" = style rotary intake manifold which then took the two TB channels and = divided them into 4 (two primary and two secondary) distribution = runners. =20 I estimate that the best HP I ever made with that set up was around = 130-140HP. My static rpm was 4800 swinging a 68x72 two bladed wooden = prop using the 2.17:1 gear ratio. =20 I later replaced that arrangement with 4 tubes of smaller diameter (1 = =BC" for primary and 1 =BD" for secondary), made the runners longer in = length and install the stock Mazda 3 port TB which had considerably = smaller openings than the TWM arrangement. =20 I immediately picked up over 300 fpm increase in my ROC and top speed = moved from 186 MPH TAS to 195 MPH TAS. =20 As I learned over the years, it became apparent that what works great = for the racers turning 9000 + rpm may well suck (but may not suck very = well - pun intended) at 5000-6000 and was therefore of questionable use = for aircraft. As best I could figure out the problem, it appears that = with the large runner openings and runners that the mixture velocity in = the runners was very much lower than optimum. That meant the air mass = had little momentum and did a poor job of filling the combustion = chambers during the short time they were open. By going to smaller = runners, the mixture velocity increased considerably and resulted in = more mixture in the combustion chamber and more power. Now if I could = of somehow (using a shifting gear box?) have gotten my rpm range up into = the 8000 + range, then that intake system might have been the cat's meow = - but, of course, I could never get above 4800 rpm static (and about = 5400 once airborne) =20 Now the TWM Throttle body in the photo based on your description may = not have the same problems as it does have a considerably smaller throat = than the one I used. I personally do not believe the use of the four = throats would give you what you are looking for - however, the use of = two of the throats (one module) might work. You could always place your = second injectors else where on the secondary part of the intake. =20 =20 Just my opinion, of course, if the price is really good, you have = little to lose if it doesn't work out. =20 I now use a $25 65 mm dia Mustang throttle body which is much lighter = (and much, much cheaper) than the TWM model I purchased back over 15 = years ago. =20 Good luck on your project =20 Ed Ed Anderson Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered Matthews, NC eanderson@carolina.rr.com http://www.andersonee.com http://www.dmack.net/mazda/index.html http://www.flyrotary.com/ http://members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW =20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] = On Behalf Of Bryan Winberry Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2009 8:57 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] renesis intake possibility =20 Hello all, I have a chance to purchase a TWM throttle body(see attch pic) = at a very low price. I have a couple questions for the group. =20 The inlets are 42mm (appx 1.65 in.). Is this too big to the = point that they would be incompatible with the injectors? I plan on = using 1-1/8 and1-1/4 in runners. =20 Also, the bosses are sized for Bosch, Rochestor, or Lucas = injectors. Does this necessarily eliminate my using the stock Renesis = injectors? =20 This setup also would allow the use of a lightweight airbox = thus simplifying the intake system from a manufacturing standpoint. =20 Thanks in advance, Bryan RV7, Renesis,RD-1C,EC3,EM3 (in the pipeline I hear) =20 =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0030_01C98900.E8312530 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ed,
 
 Is that Mustang TB stock wrecking = yard issue=20 or is it aftermarket? Been thinking about intake mods. My current system = works=20 but is not compatible with use of an air filter. And there is a lot = of JB=20 Weld in my manifold to blend the ports. I have nightmares about = ingesting JB=20 Weld.
 
Mike Wills
RV-4 N144MW
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Ed=20 Anderson
Sent: Saturday, February 07, = 2009 7:33=20 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = renesis intake=20 possibility

Hi=20 Bryan,

 

Welcome.  Here=20 is my experience using a TWM throttle body (a different model than you = are=20 looking at).  Back in 1992 there was no one around that I was = aware that=20 could provide any answers to what made a good induction configuration = for a=20 flying rotary.  So I turned to the only =93rotary aware=94 crowd = around and=20 that was those racing with rotary = engines.

 

So after = discussing=20 my needs, I purchase a TWM throttle body with 4 injector = positions.  It=20 was a two throat (Webber style) design with each throat 2=94 in = diameter. =20 Two injectors per port (I used MSD 32 lb/hr injectors that fit the = injector=20 holes) for a total of 4 injectors on the TB.  The TWM throttle = body was=20 then bolted to a cast aluminum  =93Webber=94 style rotary intake = manifold=20 which then took the two TB channels and divided them into 4 (two = primary and=20 two secondary) distribution runners.

 

I estimate = that the=20 best HP I ever made with that set up was around 130-140HP.  My = static rpm=20 was 4800 swinging a 68x72 two bladed wooden prop using the 2.17:1 gear = ratio.

 

I later = replaced that=20 arrangement with 4 tubes of smaller diameter (1 =BC=94 for primary and = 1 =BD=94 for=20 secondary), made the runners longer in length and install the stock = Mazda 3=20 port TB which had considerably smaller openings than the TWM=20 arrangement.

 

I = immediately picked=20 up over 300 fpm increase in my ROC and top speed moved from 186 MPH = TAS to 195=20 MPH TAS.

 

As I = learned over the=20 years, it became apparent that what works great for the racers turning = 9000 +=20 rpm may well suck (but may not suck very well =96 pun intended) =  at=20 5000-6000 and was therefore of questionable use for aircraft.  As = best I=20 could figure out the problem, it appears that with the large runner = openings=20 and runners that the mixture velocity in the runners was very much = lower than=20 optimum.  That meant the air mass had little momentum and did a = poor job=20 of filling the combustion chambers during the short time they were = open. =20 By going to smaller runners, the mixture velocity increased = considerably and=20 resulted in more mixture in the combustion chamber and more = power.  =20 Now if I could of somehow (using a shifting gear box?) have gotten my = rpm=20 range up into the 8000 + range, then that intake system might have = been the=20 cat=92s meow =96 but, of course, I could never get above 4800 rpm = static (and=20 about 5400 once airborne)

 

Now the TWM = Throttle=20 body in the photo based on your description may not have the same = problems as=20 it does have a considerably smaller throat than the one I used.  = I=20 personally do not believe the use of the four throats would give you = what you=20 are looking for =96 however, the use of two of the throats (one = module) might=20 work.  You could always place your second injectors else where on = the=20 secondary part of the intake. 

 

Just my = opinion, of=20 course, if the price is really good, you have little to lose if it = doesn=92t=20 work out.

 

I now use a = $25 65 mm=20 dia Mustang throttle body which is much lighter (and much, much = cheaper) than=20 the TWM model I purchased back over 15 years = ago.

 

Good luck = on your=20 project

 

Ed

Ed=20 Anderson

Rv-6A = N494BW Rotary=20 Powered

Matthews,=20 NC

eanderson@carolina.rr.com

http://www.andersonee.com

http://www.dmack.net/mazda/index.html

http://www.flyrotary.com/

http://members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW

 

From:=20 Rotary motors in aircraft = [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On=20 Behalf Of Bryan Winberry
Sent: Saturday, February 07, = 2009 8:57=20 AM
To: = Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] renesis = intake=20 possibility

 

Hello = all,

I have a chance to purchase a TWM = throttle=20 body(see attch pic) at a very low price.  I have = a couple=20 questions for the group.

 

The inlets are 42mm (appx 1.65 = in.). =20 Is this too big to the point that they would be = incompatible with=20 the injectors?  I plan on using 1-1/8 and1-1/4 in=20 runners.

 

Also, the bosses are sized for = Bosch,=20 Rochestor, or Lucas injectors.  Does this necessarily = eliminate my=20 using the stock Renesis = injectors?

 

This setup also would allow the use of = a=20 lightweight airbox  thus simplifying the intake system = from a=20 manufacturing standpoint.

 

Thanks in=20 advance,

Bryan

RV7, Renesis,RD-1C,EC3,EM3 (in = the pipeline=20 I hear)

 

=

 

------=_NextPart_000_0030_01C98900.E8312530--