X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.122] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.10) with ESMTP id 4520051 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:41:06 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=75.180.132.122; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Return-Path: X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=pepdxKapwHuwCZNFD5uob2wvham6E+RljB0uXw08FdQ= c=1 sm=0 a=RuHT9F93F-sA:10 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=rPkcCx1H5rrOSfN0dPC7kw==:17 a=arxwEM4EAAAA:8 a=r1ClD_H3AAAA:8 a=YarKIx00AAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=xQzK0zUlAAAA:8 a=YWISOAoqAAAA:8 a=7g1VtSJxAAAA:8 a=aoJshX5QSAmBPFIoboUA:9 a=PbppolHQnMDyd3irDH0A:7 a=IZiXuTur1h8RwH7aWg3Xt5NUl4wA:4 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=Qa1je4BO31QA:10 a=q03wWUK6tb4A:10 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 a=2T2nyLlNn3s4LNVh:21 a=czc7X1WCFl3nhX7Y:21 a=rPkcCx1H5rrOSfN0dPC7kw==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 174.110.167.5 Received: from [174.110.167.5] ([174.110.167.5:57786] helo=EdPC) by cdptpa-oedge03.mail.rr.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.3.46 r()) with ESMTP id BE/B0-19545-E7A3EBC4; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 00:40:30 +0000 Message-ID: <5F04555D514F414FAE362565AC210731@EdPC> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: header parts source Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:40:02 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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 Jeff, I have flow over 10 years and have close to 600 hours on the original 304 headers. Now they were not your typical thin walled exhaust the walls were slightly over 0.1 ", so considerably thicker than most exhaust tubing walls. Yes, it was undoubtedly a bit over-kill, but on the other hand they still show no signs other than discoloration of stress. I think if I were to use 304 today, I would probably stick with 0.065 (or greater) wall thickness . On the other hand, 321 will last longer and you could build it lighter - so like most things it depends on your priorities and pocketbook. But, whatever you use, make certain you use good exhaust plumbing techniques in welding and securing, you don't want a rotary exhaust loose under you cowling. FWIW Ed Edward L. Anderson Anderson Electronic Enterprises LLC 305 Reefton Road Weddington, NC 28104 http://www.andersonee.com http://www.eicommander.com -------------------------------------------------- From: "Jeff Luckey" Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 8:22 PM To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: header parts source > > I thought that people were commonly using 321 for Rotary exhaust systems > because it has a higher temp rating. > > It's been a while, but I vaguely remember looking it up, and the max > working > temps were something like this: > > 304 = 1200F > 321 = 1600F > > So, my question is, are people using 304 successfully for Rotary exhaust > systems. If so, that's great, because it's cheaper & more readily > available. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On > Behalf Of Ernest Christley > Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 07:51 > To: Rotary motors in aircraft > Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: header parts source > > Jeff Luckey wrote: >> Does Columbia now carry 321 stainless. IIRC, I pinged them about a year >> ago and they did not carry 321 stainless. >> >> > > I also bought bends from Columbia. Their service and delivery was > excellent. > > I don't see any mention of 321, but I wasn't really concerned about it. > Given the diameter of tube we have to use for > exhaust flow, and the thickness we need to contain the exhaust pulse, and > the corrosion resistance characteristics of > the alloys at elevated temperatures, I couldn't see enough of a difference > to stress over. > >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> *From:* Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] >> *On Behalf Of *kevin lane >> *Sent:* Monday, October 18, 2010 22:03 >> *To:* Rotary motors in aircraft >> *Subject:* [FlyRotary] header parts source >> >> >> >> I have been happy with Columbia mandrel bending. they make their own >> parts, family run, and significantly cheaper than burns. >> http://www.mandrel-bends.com/catalog/ >> >> last week I finally got the v-band, another 90°, a flex joint, and >> muffler added to this header. >> >> >> >> >> >> KevinLane Carpentry >> www.KevinLaneCarpentry.com >> > > > > -- > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > Archive and UnSub: > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html > > > -- > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > Archive and UnSub: > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html >