X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.120] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.9) with ESMTP id 4509734 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 17 Oct 2010 15:48:13 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=75.180.132.120; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Return-Path: X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=NbXEDKLFVdSGLbv73FfL8HCBVY5OgrxhVC+VxVzi2k8= c=1 sm=0 a=lXzHJM8WJe0A:10 a=rPkcCx1H5rrOSfN0dPC7kw==:17 a=3oc9M9_CAAAA:8 a=HZJGGiqLAAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=7g1VtSJxAAAA:8 a=gjx8EX4uZbsrUhPy8SEA:9 a=njwU8pxvOWuBH97xbLQA:7 a=neq16redoDBo-8CLnDIWfye8L4UA:4 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=Qa1je4BO31QA:10 a=U8Ie8EnqySEA:10 a=HeoGohOdMD0A:10 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 a=LfreKY8K2bim3UPmC3QA:9 a=0xP-RJwPcwkjCOvAYOMA:7 a=A_WuuvtYEYKfdoTxteC_OQgh3VcA:4 a=rPkcCx1H5rrOSfN0dPC7kw==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 174.110.167.5 Received: from [174.110.167.5] ([174.110.167.5:51113] helo=EdPC) by cdptpa-oedge04.mail.rr.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.2.39 r()) with ESMTP id 9C/46-25964-AD25BBC4; Sun, 17 Oct 2010 19:47:38 +0000 Message-ID: <8ADE05A1A7464EC68C0969B55AD74ED8@EdPC> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: The Case For Turbocharging Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 15:47:16 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_007E_01CB6E12.93306480" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_007E_01CB6E12.93306480 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I could open them. Read the one on Turbocharging and didn't find = anything in it that bothered me. Some good points including what we = have already proven, that the Stock Mazda Turbo charger (just about any = stock auto turbo) is simply not designed for the demands aircraft use = puts on it. Also why intercooling is something that needs to be = seriously considered in aircraft us. There are certain benefits to be gained from a turbo - having = turbocharged two automobiles back in the mid 70s, I long debated = sticking one on my Rotary powered RV-6a in which I also have a turbo = block san the exhaust splitters. But, after calculating that the turbo, = intercooler and wastegate would add at least 50 lbs up front and plus = the fact that in my case, I would seldom use it - except perhaps for = take off, I concluded there was just nothing (in my case) to justify it. = =20 Once I switched from the 2.17:1 and 68x72 prop to the 2.85:1 74x88 prop = that provided the increase in take off acceleration and performance I = was looking for and that sealed the decision not to go turbo. However, I certainly think that those who find benefit (or simply want = to) in turbocharging can safely do so. Dave, John, Steve and others = have shown that it can be done at a reasonable cost and relative light = weight installation. =20 A couple of things you may find and should be prepared for with a turbo = installation - more power =3D more heat, so if your cooling system was = on the border line cooling an N/A engine it may find the additional heat = generated by the additional HP especially on take off something you need = to watch. Also the heat build up under the cowl can greatly increase - = some folks have gone to coated exhaust systems and you should be = particulary vigilant in shielding any fuel components from line of sight = exposure to exhaust system components. Your engine should easily make 200 HP with the turbo and you may find = that your engine is a bit under-proped with the prop you have now. I = had a 68x72 and probably did not produce much over 160-170 HP and could = hit over 6000 rpm in flight. So looking forward to hearing about your first flight. Ed From: shipchief@aol.com=20 Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2010 1:40 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: The Case For Turbocharging Kelly: Maybe I'm a bonehead, but those zip files didn't include anything = readable for me.... On the other hand, I'm using a Turbo on my RV-8 prject, so I'm in as far = as selecting a turbo. I finally decided to use a turbo because of Tracy's muffler experiments. = I have a Turbo engine, with the open exhaust ports, so the sound = pressure is very high and would require an extra strong and tough = exhaust system (heavy). So I decided to use that weight in the form of a = Turbo to knock the most vicious element form the exhaust noise. I hope = for a higher rate of climb as a result of the increased power potential. = I realize that all engines have a sweet spot that would be best for = cruise and range, which would co-incide with the engine torque peak RPM = and an airspeed less than Vne, so sustained high turbo boost is not = practical or desired unless 25 gallons per hour fuel flow is expected! = That's a pretty short flight with 42 gallons total fuel aboard. I set my goals to a more attainable level, with a prop that should draw = about 200 HP at 6500 RPM. It's a left hand turning equivalent of the = prop for RV-8s with a 180 HP O-360 Lycoming. I have Tracy's RD-1 2.19:1 = 4 planet gear, so I don't plan to abuse it past the 200 HP limit he has = established. I simply calculated the prop power draw 180HP / 2700RPM =3D = 200HP / 3000 RPM. By the way, for you prop chord measuring guys, it's a CATTO 2 blade = 68x74 prop, with the greatest chord about 6-3/16" falling from 16" thru = 20" in from the tip, which is right in front of the cowl cheek edge. This last week I put the wings on and set the incidence, made the fuel = tank attach brackets and fit the flaps & fairings. Now the wings are = back off, getting the fairing platenuts etc.=20 I'm not that far from taking the whole caboodle to the airport!! -----Original Message----- From: Kelly Troyer To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Sun, Oct 17, 2010 9:50 am Subject: [FlyRotary] The Case For Turbocharging Group, Perhaps of interest to those us interested in Turbocharging our = projects..........It is from the "SDS" website............. =20 Kelly Troyer "DYKE DELTA JD2" (Eventually) "13B ROTARY"_ Engine "RWS"_RD1C/EC2/EM2 "MISTRAL"_Backplate/Oil Manifold "TURBONETICS"_TO4E50 Turbo -- Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ Archive and UnSub: = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html ------=_NextPart_000_007E_01CB6E12.93306480 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I could open them.  Read the one on = Turbocharging and=20 didn't find anything in it that bothered me.  Some good points=20 including what we have already proven, that the Stock Mazda = Turbo=20 charger (just about any stock auto turbo)  is simply not designed = for the=20 demands aircraft use puts on it.  Also why intercooling is = something that=20 needs to be seriously considered in aircraft us.
 
There are certain benefits to be gained from a = turbo -=20 having turbocharged two automobiles back in the mid 70s, I long debated = sticking=20 one on my Rotary powered RV-6a in which I also have a turbo block san = the=20 exhaust splitters.  But, after calculating that the turbo, = intercooler and=20 wastegate would add at least 50 lbs up front and plus the fact that in = my case,=20 I would seldom use it - except perhaps for take off, I concluded there = was just=20 nothing (in my case) to justify it. 
 
Once I switched from the 2.17:1 and 68x72 prop = to the=20 2.85:1 74x88 prop that provided the increase in take off acceleration = and=20 performance I was looking for and that sealed the decision not to go=20 turbo.
 
However, I certainly think that those  who = find=20 benefit (or simply want to)  in turbocharging can safely do = so.  Dave,=20 John, Steve and others have shown that it can be done at a reasonable = cost and=20 relative light weight installation. 
 
A couple of things you may find and should be = prepared for=20 with a turbo installation - more power =3D more heat, so if your cooling = system=20 was on the border line cooling an N/A engine it may find the additional = heat=20 generated by the additional HP especially on take off something you need = to=20 watch.  Also the heat build up under the cowl can greatly increase = - some=20 folks have gone to coated exhaust systems and you should be particulary = vigilant=20 in shielding any fuel components from line of sight exposure to exhaust = system=20 components.
 
Your engine should easily make 200 HP with the = turbo and=20 you may find that your engine is a bit under-proped with the prop you = have=20 now.  I had a 68x72 and probably did not produce much over 160-170 = HP and=20 could hit over 6000 rpm in flight.
 
So looking forward to hearing about your first=20 flight.
 
Ed

Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2010 1:40 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: The Case For=20 Turbocharging

Kelly:
Maybe I'm a bonehead, but those zip files didn't include anything = readable=20 for me....
On the other hand, I'm using a Turbo on my RV-8 prject, so I'm in = as far as=20 selecting a turbo.
I finally decided to use a turbo because of Tracy's muffler = experiments. I=20 have a Turbo engine, with the open exhaust ports, so the sound pressure = is very=20 high and would require an extra strong and tough exhaust system (heavy). = So I=20 decided to use that weight in the form of a Turbo to knock the most = vicious=20 element form the exhaust noise. I hope for a higher rate of = climb as a=20 result of the increased power potential.
I realize that all engines have a sweet spot that would be best for = cruise=20 and range, which would co-incide with the engine torque peak = RPM and an=20 airspeed less than Vne, so sustained high turbo boost is not practical = or=20 desired unless 25 gallons per hour fuel flow is expected! That's a = pretty short=20 flight with 42 gallons total fuel aboard.
I set my goals to a more attainable level, with a prop that = should=20 draw about 200 HP at 6500 RPM. It's a left hand turning equivalent = of the=20 prop for RV-8s with a 180 HP O-360 Lycoming. I have Tracy's RD-1 = 2.19:1 4=20 planet gear, so I don't plan to abuse it past the 200 HP limit he has=20 established. I simply calculated the prop power draw 180HP / = 2700RPM =3D=20 200HP / 3000 RPM.
By the way, for you prop chord measuring guys, it's a CATTO 2 = blade=20 68x74 prop, with the greatest chord about 6-3/16" falling from 16" thru = 20" in=20 from the tip, which is right in front of the cowl cheek edge.
This last week I put the wings on and set the incidence, made the = fuel tank=20 attach brackets and fit the flaps & fairings. Now the wings are = back=20 off, getting the fairing platenuts etc.
I'm not that far from taking the whole caboodle to the = airport!!
-----Original=20 Message-----
From: Kelly Troyer <keltro@att.net>
To: Rotary = motors=20 in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Sun, Oct 17, = 2010 9:50=20 am
Subject: [FlyRotary] The Case For Turbocharging

Group,
    Perhaps of interest to those us interested = in=20 Turbocharging our projects..........It
is from the "SDS" website.............
 
Kelly Troyer
"DYKE DELTA JD2" = (Eventually)
"13B ROTARY"_ = Engine
"RWS"_RD1C/EC2/EM2
"MISTRAL"_Backplate/Oil=20 Manifold
"TURBONETICS"_TO4E50 Turbo
--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.htm=
l
------=_NextPart_000_007E_01CB6E12.93306480--