X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from [64.12.143.101] (HELO imo-m13.mail.aol.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.13) with ESMTP id 3595804 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:15:58 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.143.101; envelope-from=WRJJRS@aol.com Received: from imo-da03.mx.aol.com (imo-da03.mx.aol.com [205.188.169.201]) by imo-m13.mail.aol.com (v107.10) with ESMTP id RELAYIN2-349f22be32d8; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:15:15 -0400 Received: from WRJJRS@aol.com by imo-da03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v40_r1.5.) id q.bc2.43211399 (37115) for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:15:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtprly-da01.mx.aol.com (smtprly-da01.mx.aol.com [205.188.249.144]) by cia-ma01.mx.aol.com (v123.3) with ESMTP id MAILCIAMA011-5baa49f22bdc2e1; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:15:12 -0400 Received: from mblk-d49 (mblk-d49.mblk.aol.com [205.188.212.233]) by smtprly-da01.mx.aol.com (v123.3) with ESMTP id MAILSMTPRLYDA011-5baa49f22bdc2e1; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:15:08 -0400 References: To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Exhaust system wall thickness Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:15:08 -0400 X-AOL-IP: 205.188.169.201 In-Reply-To: X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: wrjjrs@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8CB9338E18E8821_1444_2064_mblk-d49.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 42679-STANDARD Received: from 66.253.96.221 by mblk-d49.sysops.aol.com (205.188.212.233) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:15:08 -0400 Message-Id: <8CB9338E18039FF-1444-FA6@mblk-d49.sysops.aol.com> X-Spam-Flag:NO ----------MB_8CB9338E18E8821_1444_2064_mblk-d49.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Chris, That thickness was used by Ed Anderson for his head pipes. The muffler coud be half that and be more than thick enough. If you use 321ss both could be thinner as it holds up better when hot. Bill Jepson -----Original Message----- From: Christopher Owens To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 11:02 am Subject: [FlyRotary] Exhaust system wall thickness Hi all,? ? Looking through the archives today, searching for some additional information regarding materials to build a rotary exhaust system with, and I found some notes about using SS handrail tubing, approximately 0.12" in wall thickness. If one were to build matching muffler components to attach to those tubes, would 0.12" be sufficient thickness (presuming 304SS or similar)? Thicker? Thinner?? ? Many thanks and best regards,? Chris? ? --? Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/? Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html? ----------MB_8CB9338E18E8821_1444_2064_mblk-d49.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Chris,
That thickness was used by Ed Anderson for his head pipes. The muffler coud be half that and be more than thick enough. If you use 321ss both could be thinner as it holds up better when hot.

Bill Jepson


-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Owens <rotary@cmowens.com>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 11:02 am
Subject: [FlyRotary] Exhaust system wall thickness

Hi all, 
 
Looking through the archives today, searching for some additional information regarding materials to build a rotary exhaust system with, and I found some notes about using SS handrail tubing, approximately 0.12" in wall thickness. If one were to build matching muffler components to attach to those tubes, would 0.12" be sufficient thickness (presuming 304SS or similar)? Thicker? Thinner? 
 
Many thanks and best regards, 
Chris 
 
-- 
Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ 
Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html 
----------MB_8CB9338E18E8821_1444_2064_mblk-d49.sysops.aol.com--