|
The articles appeared in the October and November 2009
issues, written by Kevin Horton, RV-8 builder and professional test pilot. The
ss (attached) includes a couple of different variants. The 4 leg
calculation is a more robust approach that also provides a std deviation
number which will sanity check your results. The numbers in the ss were from one
of my early tests on a windy day - didn’t do a very good job of holding
airspeed/altitude reflected by the high std dev. Read the articles for
details.
Mike Wills
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 6:02 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning
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
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 10:11 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning
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
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
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.???
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.
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.
Bill B
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
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.
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.
Sent: Thursday,
March 25, 2010 6:25 AM
Subject:
[FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning
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.
But his engine rpm with that big prop are higher than
any I have seen. With the rotary, rpm = 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.
We all talk about wanting to cruise at 5800 and make 200
horsepower…it aint happening! Not with the
rotary.
Bill B
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
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!
Sent:
Wednesday, March 24, 2010 9:15 PM
Subject:
[FlyRotary] Re: Turbo Planning
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.
I would like more pictures of Dons intake and
exhaust!
Bill B
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
1.
When I read your stats in your first paragraph, the first thought
that
comes to mind is that there is too much prop.
Ditto.
Al
G
|