X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from qmta09.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.96] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.4) with ESMTP id 4179598 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 09:03:19 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=76.96.30.96; envelope-from=wschertz@comcast.net Received: from omta08.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.12]) by qmta09.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id xoAN1d0080FhH24A9p2kaS; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 13:02:44 +0000 Received: from WschertzPC ([71.57.77.95]) by omta08.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id xp2f1d00U23NHuF8Up2juw; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 13:02:44 +0000 Message-ID: From: "Bill Schertz" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:02:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0082_01CACCBA.B3D7FB20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8089.726 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8089.726 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0082_01CACCBA.B3D7FB20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mike, I missed the Kitplanes article, if you could forward the spread sheet, I = would appreciate it. Bill Schertz KIS Cruiser #4045 N343BS Phase I testing From: Mike Wills=20 Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 10:11 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning=20 Bill, Agreed, speeds at 8,000 need to be calibrated. I doubt there's anyone = here who has gone to the trouble of installing this engine with all the = associated electronics that doesn't have a GPS. Its not a "dreaded = calculation". The 4 course method of determining TAS based on = groundspeed is well established and very straightforward. It was = published in Kitplanes about a year ago and has been converted into a = simple Excel spread sheet. I can forward it to anyone who wants it if = you cant find it yourself. It takes all the guesswork out and provides a = meaningful number that is perhaps not absolute, but accepted and used by = the Navy Test Pilot School at Pax River, MD among others. Also agreed that within the RPM ranges we operate in there is a = relatively linear HP response to RPM. The numbers you gave in your = initial email were, " horsepower is around 150 at 6K, maybe 180 at 7K, = and 200 at 7.5K". I believe 250HP @ 7500 is within the range you = mentioned - you stated 200 @7.5K. I'd be happy with an extra 50HP. = 7500RPM is a good target number for max RPM straight and level near sea = level - even with a wood FP prop. Mike Wills From: Bill Bradburry=20 Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 7:28 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning=20 Hi Mike, I am gonna have to let Don tell us his speeds, but he was at 8000 feet = so indicated speed will have to go thru the dreaded calculation as well = in order to find the true airspeed.. :>) since airplanes fly in the = air and don't touch the ground (except occasionally) every speed you see = will be some kind of calculation and not a "fact". Maybe he has a GPS and can fly some kind of rectangular pattern and find = the average (no wind) speed.??? =20 Maybe you can get a copy of Paul's dyno sheet and take a look at the = horsepower he was producing at the lower rpms I mentioned. I will bet = they are very close to the numbers I mentioned. Mazda used to claim = that the Renesis produced 250 @ 7500, but they have since backed it off = to, I think, 238 @ maybe 8500. =20 The point I was trying to make about the rotary was that your HP is = based on rpm. All those high HP numbers are all at really high rpm. = Much higher than we run in the plane, unless, like Mark Steitle, you = have a CS prop. Mark gets (I think I saw him say) 7500 on takeoff and although I haven't = heard him say, I assume he can get the same in cruise as well. =20 Bill B =20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On = Behalf Of Mike Wills Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 9:37 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning=20 Sorry, not buying it Bill. If you are going to quote speeds here, quote = speeds, not calculated speeds based on so many variables that the end = result is meaningless. That sounds like something we'd see on the other = list, not here. As far as I know, Don's best reported speed is 174 IAS = (and IAS is not all that meaningful either). Based on performance that = Don has actually reported his performance is roughly equivalent to mine = (and I'm both prop and gearing limited). His performance may have = improved since he reported those numbers. In any case I'd prefer to = stick to facts. =20 Speaking of the other list, Paul has video of a PP Renesis on a dyno at = Mazdatrix cranking out near 250HP @7500RPM. And he had the dyno sheet to = prove it. Powersport claimed 210HP at 2700 prop RPM (their reduction = ratio was around 2.2; roughly 6000 engine RPM). I believe they also had = dyno data to prove it. I'm anxious to hear how Mark Stietle's PP 20B = performs. =20 Mike Wills =20 From: Bill Bradburry=20 Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 6:25 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning=20 =20 Mike, Don didn't report speed. I took his pitch and rpm and figured it. That = speed at cruise is what he would get with no slippage or "lift" from the = prop. Most of the folks with the Catto are actually getting higher = speeds than would be calculated which indicates that the prop is = producing "lift", not slippage.=20 =20 But his engine rpm with that big prop are higher than any I have seen. = With the rotary, rpm =3D horsepower. If you aint making the rpm, you = aint making the horsepower. It doesn't seem to matter what you have = done to the engine.ported, PP, turbo, supercharger. If you look at the = dyno charts that are all over the web, you will see that torque is = pretty flat after about 4K, about 150 ft lbs. The horsepower is around = 150 at 6K, maybe 180 at 7K, and 200 at 7.5K. You can get more = horsepower than that, but only if you scream it up to 8K or 8.5K. All = the charts I have seen are within 10 horsepower of each other at all = rpms. The difference in total horsepower is always a higher max rpm. =20 We all talk about wanting to cruise at 5800 and make 200 horsepower.it = aint happening! Not with the rotary. =20 Bill B =20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On = Behalf Of Mike Wills Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 1:17 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning=20 Bill, =20 I went back and looked at Don's previous post. Saw reference to climb = performance, RPMs, and temps, but no speed numbers. Has he previously = reported cruise speeds over 200? Last post from him that I saw with any = speed numbers reported 174MPH IAS at 8000. If he's over 200 now, wow = those are good numbers! =20 Mike Wills =20 From: Bill Bradburry=20 Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 9:15 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning=20 =20 Those are the best numbers I have seen with anyone with a Renesis so = far. In fact, I have not heard of numbers that good on any 13B. Don is = getting over 200 MPH with a cruise prop and climbing at over 1400 fpm = with it. The only way he is going to do better is either with an = electric CS prop and/or turbo. If he shaves the prop off to say, 74", = he will get a couple hundred more rpm, but will probably lose in total = thrust. Diameter is a big determiner in thrust.=20 =20 I would like more pictures of Dons intake and exhaust! =20 Bill B =20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On = Behalf Of Al Gietzen Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 3:05 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning=20 1. When I read your stats in your first paragraph, the first thought = that comes to mind is that there is too much prop. =20 =20 Ditto. =20 Al G ------=_NextPart_000_0082_01CACCBA.B3D7FB20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mike,
I missed the Kitplanes article, if you = could=20 forward the spread sheet, I would appreciate it.
 
Bill Schertz
KIS Cruiser=20 #4045
N343BS
Phase I testing

From: Mike Wills
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 10:11 PM
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning

Bill,
 
 Agreed, speeds at 8,000 need to be = calibrated. I=20 doubt there's anyone here who has gone to the trouble of installing this = engine=20 with all the associated electronics that doesn=92t have a GPS. Its not a = "dreaded=20 calculation". The 4 course method of determining TAS based on = groundspeed=20 is well established and very straightforward. It was published in = Kitplanes=20 about a year ago and has been converted into a simple Excel = spread=20 sheet. I can forward it to anyone who wants it if you cant find it = yourself. It=20 takes all the guesswork out and provides a meaningful number that is = perhaps not=20 absolute, but accepted and used by the Navy Test Pilot School at = Pax River,=20 MD among others.
 
Also agreed that within the RPM ranges we = operate in=20 there is a relatively linear HP response to RPM. The numbers you gave in = your=20 initial email were, " horsepower = is around=20 150 at 6K, maybe 180 at 7K, and 200 at 7.5K". I believe 250HP @ 7500 is = within=20 the range you mentioned - you stated 200 @7.5K. I'd be happy with = an extra=20 50HP. 7500RPM is a good target number for max RPM straight and level = near sea=20 level - even with a wood FP prop.
 
Mike Wills

Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 7:28 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning

Hi Mike,

I am gonna have to let Don tell us his speeds, = but he=20 was at 8000 feet so indicated speed will have to go thru the dreaded = calculation=20 as well in order to find the true airspeed..  :>)   = since=20 airplanes fly in the air and don=92t touch the ground (except = occasionally) every=20 speed you see will be some kind of calculation and not a=20 =93fact=94.

Maybe he has a GPS and can fly some kind of = rectangular=20 pattern and find the average (no wind) = speed.???

 

Maybe you can get a copy of Paul=92s dyno = sheet and take a=20 look at the horsepower he was producing at the lower rpms I = mentioned.  I=20 will bet they are very close to the numbers I mentioned.  Mazda = used to=20 claim that the Renesis produced 250 @ 7500, but they have since backed = it off=20 to, I think, 238 @ maybe 8500.

 

The point I was trying to make about the = rotary was that=20 your HP is based on rpm.  All those high HP numbers are all at = really high=20 rpm.  Much higher than we run in the plane, unless, like Mark = Steitle, you=20 have a CS prop.

Mark gets (I think I saw him say) 7500 on = takeoff and=20 although I haven=92t heard him say, I assume he can get the same in = cruise as=20 well.

 

Bill B

 

From:=20 Rotary motors in aircraft=20 [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On=20 Behalf Of Mike Wills
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 = 9:37=20 PM
To: = Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo = Planning=20

Sorry, not buying it = Bill. If you=20 are going to quote speeds here, quote speeds, not calculated speeds = based on so=20 many variables that the end result is meaningless. That sounds like = something=20 we'd see on the other list, not here. As far as I know, Don's best = reported=20 speed is 174 IAS (and IAS is not all that meaningful either). Based = on=20 performance that Don has actually reported his performance is = roughly=20 equivalent to mine (and I'm both prop and gearing limited). His = performance=20 may have improved since he reported those numbers. In any = case I'd=20 prefer to stick to facts.

 

Speaking of the other = list,=20 Paul has video of a PP Renesis on a dyno  at Mazdatrix = cranking out=20 near 250HP @7500RPM. And he had the dyno sheet to prove it. Powersport = claimed=20 210HP at 2700 prop RPM (their reduction ratio was around 2.2; roughly = 6000=20 engine RPM). I believe they also had dyno data to prove it. I'm = anxious to=20 hear how Mark Stietle's PP 20B = performs.

 

Mike=20 Wills

 

From: Bill Bradburry=20

Sent: Thursday,=20 March 25, 2010 6:25 AM

To: Rotary motors in = aircraft=20

Subject:=20 [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning =

 

Mike,

Don didn=92t report speed.  I took his = pitch and rpm=20 and figured it.  That speed at cruise is what he would get with no = slippage=20 or =93lift=94 from the prop.  Most of the folks with the Catto are = actually=20 getting higher speeds than would be calculated which indicates that the = prop is=20 producing =93lift=94, not slippage. 

 

But his engine rpm with that big prop are = higher than=20 any I have seen.  With the rotary, rpm =3D horsepower.  If you = aint=20 making the rpm, you aint making the horsepower.  It doesn=92t seem = to matter=20 what you have done to the engine=85ported, PP, turbo, = supercharger.  If you=20 look at the dyno charts that are all over the web, you will see that = torque is=20 pretty flat after about 4K, about 150 ft lbs.  The horsepower is = around 150=20 at 6K, maybe 180 at 7K, and 200 at 7.5K.  You can get more = horsepower than=20 that, but only if you scream it up to 8K  or 8.5K.  All the = charts I=20 have seen are within 10 horsepower of each other at all rpms.  The=20 difference in total horsepower is always a higher max=20 rpm.

 

We all talk about wanting to cruise at 5800 = and make 200=20 horsepower=85it aint happening!  Not with the=20 rotary.

 

Bill B

 

From:=20 Rotary motors in aircraft=20 [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On=20 Behalf Of Mike Wills
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 = 1:17=20 AM
To: = Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo = Planning=20

Bill,

 

I went back and looked = at Don's=20 previous post. Saw reference to climb performance, RPMs, and temps, but = no speed=20 numbers. Has he previously reported cruise speeds over 200? Last post = from him=20 that I saw with any speed numbers reported 174MPH IAS at 8000. If = he's over=20 200 now, wow those are good numbers!

 

Mike=20 Wills

 

From: Bill=20 Bradburry

Sent:=20 Wednesday, March 24, 2010 9:15 PM

To: Rotary motors in = aircraft=20

Subject:=20 [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning =

 

Those are the best numbers I have seen with = anyone with=20 a Renesis so far.  In fact, I have not heard of numbers that good = on any=20 13B.  Don is getting over 200 MPH with a cruise prop and climbing = at over=20 1400 fpm with it.  The only way he is going to do better is either = with an=20 electric CS prop and/or turbo.  If he shaves the prop off to say, = 74=94, he=20 will get a couple hundred more rpm, but will probably lose in total=20 thrust.  Diameter is a big determiner in=20 thrust. 

 

I would like more pictures of Dons intake and=20 exhaust!

 

Bill B

 

From:=20 Rotary motors in aircraft=20 [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On=20 Behalf Of Al Gietzen
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 = 3:05=20 AM
To: = Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo = Planning=20

1.=20 When I read your stats in your first paragraph, the first thought=20 that

comes to mind is that there is too much = prop. =20

 

Ditto.

 

Al=20 G

------=_NextPart_000_0082_01CACCBA.B3D7FB20--