X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from mail-iw0-f180.google.com ([209.85.214.180] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.8) with ESMTP id 4396619 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 17 Jul 2010 15:04:41 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.214.180; envelope-from=msteitle@gmail.com Received: by iwn8 with SMTP id 8so3065488iwn.25 for ; Sat, 17 Jul 2010 12:04:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=MKtcr2k3jCxMkwtiezNzdK8EzF08UIP0fCHUMOY5XMk=; b=FpoE6lKlGF7UMa5u0sRGkPfKfTBCp1h3aChsNZ1qImZ8GGMWzKF6onnnRzfmbbfLMS 84T/52LVhjB+hXRox4FyO9lT8lqrLPRW6VZfaAdUSE6AZ1iMNLc6Y0TyY9y8bC53KK2j WrPiD8aidE74Vxqz9qiHyryfH05ma0eNVIl80= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=idCCq4U8W7fdFB9gEmAuTIZjvU1zcxxVpWsFK9i1Uvh1AMklBuBBs8X7XrD0zv8XQz TM0eLnlLaMuzlXL/r6saJqjeHv0Ebt0YEojnD8F18tAQvMVF1hCqreaCNvJX1D13MNYI pcud4TDDjAGdBWQb2gpED4c0drB0Wje7ozsog= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.155.131 with SMTP id s3mr3096263ibw.2.1279393446635; Sat, 17 Jul 2010 12:04:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.183.138 with HTTP; Sat, 17 Jul 2010 12:04:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 14:04:06 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: P-port Project Update From: Mark Steitle To: Rotary motors in aircraft Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016369c8a3aea2ffc048b99ffa5 --0016369c8a3aea2ffc048b99ffa5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable *are you planning on getting into a drag race with the space shuttle??!!* You never know! I could have gone with 80 lb/hr, but that might be a bit overkill. ;-) I changed injectors because with the p-port motor I had to fabricate a new intake. To do that, I bought three of PL's weld-on injector blocks. These are bored for the smaller DEKA IV injector. So, I bought a set of 60# injectors. The Seimens injectors are rated in lbs/hr rather than cc/min. Yes, I wish the industries would standardize on stuff like this. Drives people nuts, right Ed. Besides, 60 lb/hr seems to be very common size. The DEKA IV injectors are more controllable at the low end (or so I'm told), so I went with the slightly larger ones. I bought a set of 8, so I've got two extras= . Like you said, we typically run our systems at lower pressure than the "standard". Mine is set to the mid 30's. The p-port 20b is capable of 350 hp, so running at slightly lower pressure should still give me a small margin of safety. And, it seems to be working. And lately, that's worth a lot. Mark On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Bill Bradburry wrote: > Aren=92t the size numbers on injectors normally given in CCMs (Cubic > Centimeters per Minute)? These static flow rate statistics are given at = a > standard fuel pressure, which is usually 43.5 PSI. Most of us seem to ru= n > our fuel pressure lower than 43.5, so our injectors would flow at a lower > rate than their spec. > > > > Mark, when you set your fuel pressure regulator, do you remember what you > set it at? I assume that you have 6 injectors? If they are all the same > size (old were 550?), I wonder why you increased them? > > > > 60 lbs/hr calculates to 630 CCM for the new injectors. The old injectors= , > if fuel pressure was set at 43.5 PSI and with a duty cycle of 80%, should > have handled 76 HP each at a BFSC of .55. That is a total HP of 456 for > your engine. Using the new larger injectors that HP capability would go = up > to 87 HP per injector at the above PSI and duty cycle for a total HP of 5= 22! > > > > Mark are you planning on getting into a drag race with the space > shuttle??!! > > > > Bill B > > > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] *O= n > Behalf Of *Mark Steitle > *Sent:* Saturday, July 17, 2010 10:48 AM > *To:* Rotary motors in aircraft > *Subject:* [FlyRotary] Re: P-port Project Update > > > > Kelly, > > > > The flow hasn't been recalibrated from the old 550's, but it was reading > 12.1 gph. Didn't specifically read the fuel pressure, but it was a coupl= e > of ticks above the midpoint on the graph. Yes, I'm running Deka IV 60 lb= /hr > injectors in the primaries and secondaries. > > Too quite lately. > > > > Mark > > > > On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Kelly Troyer wrote: > > Mark, > > What was the gph flow rate of the previous injectors and are you usin= g > 60 gph injectors > > in both primary and secondary positions ??..................Also what fue= l > pressure are you > > using ??................Has been very quiet lately..............OshKosh I > presume............. > > > Kelly Troyer > "Dyke Delta"_13B ROTARY Engine > "RWS"_RD1C/EC2/EM2 > "Mistral"_Backplate/Oil Manifold > > > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Mark Steitle > *To:* Rotary motors in aircraft > *Sent:* Sat, July 17, 2010 8:04:58 AM > *Subject:* [FlyRotary] P-port Project Update > > > A Flight Report to Spur a little discussion... > > > > For those that haven't been following my project's progress (or lack > thereof), I replaced my side-port 20B with a p-ported 20b in January of t= his > year. And have been fighting "issues" ever since. The main problem was = a > persistent misfire at various rpm. That appears to have been solved with= a > new CAS bracket and setting the gap to .025". The rest seems to be tunin= g > related. I have finally managed to get it to run smoothly through the rp= m > range needed for safe flight. > > > > So, after a thorough pre-flight, I flew my p-port 3-rotor on Friday. OAT > was about 90*F, but coolant stayed below 200 during climb and oil temps w= ere > 185*F max, 165-170 in cruise. The p-port engine ran great, except for a > little mis-firing around 5700 rpm, which was corrected in flight with > auto-tune. Pre-takeoff run-up gave a brief excursion to 6900 rpm. Takeo= ff > run was 6500, running very well, but limited by prop setting. It started= to > lightly misfire when I dialed the prop back for cruise-climb, so I dialed= it > back up to 2000 (prop) and it ran smooth again. Once at 3500 and leveled > off, I entered auto-tune and brought the rpm down to the 5700 range and l= et > the EM-2 tune the EC-2, map addresses 90 - 92. Afterwards, it ran great > throughout the rpm range. (I had "auto-tuned" much of the upper map rang= e > on the previous flight.) > > > > At 3500 - 4500 MSL, the EFIS was indicating 172-174 TAS at 1800 rpm prop > setting, and 201-203 mph per the EM-2. This is consistent with a previou= s > test run I had recently done and represents a 12-14 knot improvement over > the side-port motor. The cool thing is that these speeds are in "economy > cruise" mode. EM-2 was indicating 12.1 gph, but has not been calibrated > since switching to the larger 60 lb./hr injectors. Engine was just purri= ng > along at 5500 rpm. There should be a bit more speed on the table as I > realized after the flight that I had never closed the cowl flap. Oh well= , I > guess I'll just have to go fly again real soon to see how she performs wi= th > the cowl flap closed. > > > > Later on, I plan to run it a bit harder, around 6500 rpm, and see how she > performs. I could hit VNE with the old motor if I ran it up to 6700-6800= . > But since the vast majority of my flights are in the 5200 - 5500 rpm rang= e > the 12-14 kt improvement is very good to see. > > > > Mark > > > --0016369c8a3aea2ffc048b99ffa5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable are you planning= on getting into a drag race with the space shuttle??!!=A0
<= font class=3D"Apple-style-span" color=3D"#000080" face=3D"Arial">
You never know! =A0I could have gone with 80 lb/hr, but that mig= ht be a bit overkill. =A0;-) =A0

I changed injectors because with the p-port motor I had to fabricate = a new intake. =A0To do that, I bought three of PL's weld-on injector bl= ocks. =A0These are bored for the smaller DEKA IV injector. =A0So, I bought = a set of 60# injectors. =A0

The Seimens injectors are rated in lbs/hr rather than cc/min. =A0Yes,= I wish the industries would standardize on stuff like this. =A0Drives peop= le nuts, right Ed. =A0Besides, 60 lb/hr seems to be very common size. =A0Th= e DEKA IV injectors are more controllable at the low end (or so I'm tol= d), so I went with the slightly larger ones. =A0I bought a set of 8, so I&#= 39;ve got two extras. =A0Like you said, we typically run our systems at low= er pressure than the "standard". =A0Mine is set to the mid 30'= ;s. =A0The p-port 20b is capable of 350 hp, so running at slightly lower pr= essure should still give me a small margin of safety. =A0And, it seems to b= e working. =A0And lately, that's worth a lot. =A0=A0

Mark


On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 11:38 AM, B= ill Bradburry <bbradburry@bellsouth.net> wrote:

Aren=92t the size = numbers on injectors normally given in CCMs (Cubic Centimeters per Minute)?=A0 These static flow= rate statistics are given at a standard fuel pressure, which is usually 43.5 PSI.=A0 Most of us seem to run our fuel pressure lower than 43.5, so our injectors would flow at a lower rate than their spec.

=A0<= /p>

Mark, when you set= your fuel pressure regulator, do you remember what you set it at?=A0 I assume that you have 6 injectors?=A0 If they are all the same size (old were 550?), I wonder why you increased them?

=A0<= /p>

60 lbs/hr calculat= es to 630 CCM for the new injectors.=A0 The old injectors, if fuel pressure was set at 43.5 PSI and with a duty cycle of 80%, should have handled 76 HP each at a BFSC of .= 55.=A0 That is a total HP of 456 for your engine.=A0 Using the new larger injector= s that HP capability would go up to 87 HP per injector at the above PSI and d= uty cycle for a total HP of 522!

=A0<= /p>

Mark are you plann= ing on getting into a drag race with the space shuttle??!!

=A0<= /p>

Bill B

=A0<= /p>

=A0<= /p>

From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:fl= yrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Mark Steitle
Sent: Saturday, July 17, 201= 0 10:48 AM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: P-p= ort Project Update

=A0

Kelly,=A0

=A0

The flow hasn't b= een recalibrated from the old 550's, but it was reading 12.1 gph. =A0Didn&#= 39;t specifically read the fuel pressure, but it was a couple of ticks above the midpoint on the graph. =A0Yes, I'm running Deka IV 60 lb/hr injectors i= n the primaries and secondaries.

Too quite lately. =A0

=A0

Mark

=A0

On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Kelly Troyer <keltro@att.net> wr= ote:

Mark,

=A0=A0=A0 What was the gph flow rate of=A0th= e previous injectors and are you using 60 gph injectors

in both primary and secondary positions ??..................Also what fuel pressure are you

using ??................Has been very quiet lately..............OshKosh I presume.............
=A0

Kelly Troyer
"Dyke Delta"_13B ROTARY Engine
"RWS"_RD1C/EC2/EM2
"Mistral"_Backplate/Oil Manifold

=A0

=A0

From: Mark Steitle <msteitle@gmail.= com>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Sat, July 17, 2010 8:0= 4:58 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] P-port Project Update


A Flight Report to Spur a little discussion...

=A0

For those that haven't been following my project= 's progress (or lack thereof), I replaced my side-port 20B with a p-ported 20b in January of thi= s year. =A0And have been fighting "issues" ever since. =A0The main problem was a persistent misfire at various rpm. =A0That appears to have been solved with a new CAS bracket and setting the gap to .025". =A0The rest seems to be tuning related. =A0I have finally managed to get it to run smoothly through the rpm range needed for safe flight. =A0=

=A0

So, after a thorough pre-flight, I flew my p-port 3-= rotor on Friday. =A0OAT was about 90*F, but coolant stayed below 200 during climb and oil temps were 185*F max, 165-170 in cruise. =A0The p-port engine ran great, except for a little mis-firing around 5700 rpm, which was corrected in flig= ht with auto-tune. =A0Pre-takeoff run-up gave a brief excursion to 6900 rpm. =A0Takeoff run was 6500, running very well, but limited by prop setting. =A0It started to lightly misfire when I dialed the prop back for cruise-climb, so I dialed it back up to 2000 (prop) and it ran smooth again= . =A0Once at 3500 and leveled off, I entered auto-tune and brought the rpm down to the 5700 range and let the EM-2 tune the EC-2, map addresses 90 - 9= 2. =A0Afterwards, it ran great throughout the rpm range. =A0(I had "auto-tuned" much of the upper map range on the previous flight.) =A0

=A0

At 3500 - 4500 MSL, the EFIS was indicating 172-174 = TAS at 1800 rpm prop setting, and 201-203 mph per the EM-2. =A0This is consistent with a previous test run I had recently done and represents a 12-14 knot improveme= nt over the side-port motor. =A0The cool thing is that these speeds are in "economy cruise" mode. =A0EM-2 was indicating 12.1 gph, but has not been calibrated since switching to the larger 60 lb./hr injectors. =A0Engine was just purring along at 5500 rpm. =A0There should be a bit more speed on the table as I realized after the flight that I had never clo= sed the cowl flap. =A0Oh well, I guess I'll just have to go fly again real = soon to see how she performs with the cowl flap closed.

=A0

Later on, I plan to run it a bit harder, around 6500= rpm, and see how she performs. =A0I could hit VNE with the old motor if I ran it up to 6700-6800. =A0 But since the vast majority of my flights are in the 5200 - 5500 rpm range the 12-14 kt improvement is very good to see. =A0

=A0

Mark

=A0


--0016369c8a3aea2ffc048b99ffa5--