X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from exchange.carey.wa.edu.au ([118.82.44.212] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.10) with ESMTPS id 4551761 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 07:33:55 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=118.82.44.212; envelope-from=stevei@carey.asn.au Received: from exchange.carey.local ([10.10.0.5]) by exchange.carey.local ([10.10.0.5]) with mapi; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 19:33:06 +0800 From: To: Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 19:33:05 +0800 Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: EM2 Numbers Thread-Topic: [FlyRotary] Re: EM2 Numbers Thread-Index: Act6gbcy2VqKhhuCQG+UVcyS6bocmw== Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_FEBD0910A0A94F2D99379E63DEEB6DE8careyasnau_" MIME-Version: 1.0 --_000_FEBD0910A0A94F2D99379E63DEEB6DE8careyasnau_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks Al I was only thinking peak torque. Steve On 02/11/2010, at 12:10 AM, Al Gietzen wrote: Keep in mind that the graph is peak torque (T)); not peak HP. The peak HP = (which is what you=92re after would be at higher rpm. HP =3D T x RPM Al -----Original Message----- From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Beh= alf Of stevei@carey.asn.au Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 1:09 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EM2 Numbers Hi Mark I have attached the Leman intake dimensions from Paul L. Hope this is helpful. Can't remember whether this measurement was to the ro= tor face or manifold face. Steve Izett Perth Western Australia On 01/11/2010, at 8:40 AM, Mark Steitle wrote: Bill, I understand the sausage illustration. But if what you propose were true, = then why did Mazda make such a major effort to design and implement the var= iable intake on their LeMans 26B p-port motor? That tells me that runner l= ength does make a significant difference on the p-port motor. Also, if tun= ed runners didn't matter for peripheral ports, then why do they tune the ex= haust runners on the 13B's? Somewhere I have a chart showing the effect of= runner length, but I'm not sure that the data is from a p-port motor. Mark On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 7:27 PM, Bill Bradburry > wrote: Mark, I don=92t think that will work with the PP. You never actually block the i= nlet. You just cut off the end of the flow of air as the apex flies by and= it starts to fill the next chamber. Think of the flow as a long sausage t= hat is going through a propeller made of a strand of wire 2 or 3 MM thick a= nd being cut into sections. It is never blocked. I doubt that there are a= ny reflections and if there are, they would be very small and of little ben= efit to enhance. I think that is why the PP is so much stronger than the side port. Bill B ________________________________ From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Mark Steitle Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2010 8:01 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EM2 Numbers George, Sorry for the delayed reply, but I had to go to the hangar and measure the = runner length to be sure. It is 24" bellmouth to rotor face, 2" OD. Exhau= st is 2" OD also, running the stock 20b exhaust splitters. So, my power seems to peak around 6000 rpm. What length intake runner leng= th would it take to bring peak power up to around 6500 rpm? Mark On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 3:53 PM, George Lendich > wrote: Mark, That's interesting; can you tell me what is your PP size, runner length= and exhaust header ID size. George (down under) From: Mark Steitle Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2010 7:38 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EM2 Numbers Bill, With the current setup, it appears to be around 6000-6100, but I'm still tu= ning on the upper addresses of the EC-2. My old engine did best around 650= 0-6600 running the same prop. So, I feel there is something that isn't qui= te right on the new P-Port motor... maybe intake runners too short, intake = or exhaust too restrictive, timing off a bit, etc. It definitely makes mor= e hp than the old motor did in the 5000-6000 range, but I feel that it shou= ld be producing more hp than I'm seeing in the 6000-7000 range. So, things are still developing. Yesterday, I reinstalled the old air-filt= er box which has a ram-air feature incorporated into the design. I haven't= flown it yet to see if there is any improvement, but I hope to see at leas= t a little improvement. On a side note, I have determined that there is a 250 rpm discrepancy betwe= en the rpm readout of the EM-2 and that of the M/T prop controller. I have= an optical tach that I will be using to determine which one is in error. Stay tuned (no pun intended), Mark On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Bill Bradburry > wrote: Mark, It would seem that if you flattened the pitch of the prop, the engine rpms = would increase, but at some point, you would begin to lose airspeed and sta= rt to slow down because the prop was just not taking a big enough bite. Co= nversely, it seems that if you increased the prop pitch, the engine rpms wo= uld decrease, but the airspeed would increase up to some point and then aft= er that, an increase in pitch would cause a decrease in airspeed because yo= u are taking too big a bite and the engine just can not pull it. Somewhere= in there is a =93Sweet Spot=94 of propeller rpm that gives the highest air= speed. Lets say that this question assumes that you are at WOT and 8500 fe= et, which should give you roughly a 75% power output. Do you know where th= at sweet spot is with your propeller? Bill B ________________________________ From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Mark Steitle Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 10:00 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] EM2 Numbers Rotarians, Things have been a bit quiet on the list lately, so I thought I would post = this picture of my EM-2 taken on a trip from Galveston, TX (KGLS) to Lockha= rt, TX (50R) yesterday. I was level at 8500msl when taking the picture. A= /C is a Lancair ES (4-place), engine is a n/a p-ported 20b. Please disregard the oil temp as the reading on the EM-2 is measured after = the first cooler and before the second cooler. Oil temp readings out of th= e second cooler (measured at the oil filter pad) track water temps within a= few degrees. Leaned to "Economy Cruise" and dial the prop down to 1800 rpm and the speed= drops down about 15 mph and fuel burn drops to 9.1 gph. You pay dearly fo= r that 15 mph but sometimes it is just too much fun to slow down. Mark S. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Mark > Date: Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 8:50 PM Subject: To: msteitle@gmail.com Sent from my iPhone ________________________________ The contents of this email are confidential and intended only for the named= recipients of this e-mail. If you have received this e-mail in error, you = are hereby notified that any use, reproduction, disclosure or distribution = or the information contained in this e-mail is prohibited. Please notify th= e sender immediately and then delete/destroy the e-mail and any printed cop= ies. All liability for viruses is excluded to the fullest extent of the law= . --_000_FEBD0910A0A94F2D99379E63DEEB6DE8careyasnau_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Keep in mind that th= e graph is peak torque (T)); not peak HP.  The peak HP (which is what = you=92re after would be at higher rpm.  HP =3D T x RPM

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancairo= nline.net] On Behalf Of=  stevei@carey.asn.au
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 1:09 AM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EM2 Numbers

 

Hi Mark

 

I have attached the Leman intake dimensions from Paul L.
Hope this is helpful. Can't remember whether this = measurement was to the rotor face or manifold face.

 

Steve Izett
Perth Western Australia 
<= div>
= <image001.gif>
On 01/11/2010= , at 8:40 AM, Mark Steitle wrote:


Bill,

 =

I understand the sausage illustration.  But if = ;what you propose were true, then why did Mazda make such a major= effort to design and implement the variable intake on their LeMans 26= B p-port motor?  That tells me that runner length does make = a significant difference on the p-port motor.  Also, if tuned runners = didn't matter for peripheral ports, then why do they tune the exhaust runne= rs on the 13B's?  Somewhere I have a chart showing the effect of runne= r length, but I'm not sure that the data is from a p-port mo= tor.

 

<= /div>

Mark

On Sun, Oct 31, 2010= at 7:27 PM, Bill Bradburry <bbradburry@bellsouth.n= et> wrote:
Mark,
I don=92t think that will work with the PP.  You = never actually block the inlet.  You just cut off the end of the flow = of air as the apex flies by and it starts to fill the next chamber.  T= hink of the flow as a long sausage that is going through a propeller made o= f a strand of wire 2 or 3 MM thick and being cut into sections.  It is= never blocked.  I doubt that there are any reflections and if there a= re, they would be very small and of little benefit to enhance.

 

I think that is why= the PP is so much stronger than the side port.

 

<= /div>
Bill B

 

From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On B= ehalf Of Mark = Steitle
Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2010 8:01 PM<= /span>

To: Rota= ry motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = EM2 Numbers

 

 

<= div>

 

George,

 

=
Sorry for the delayed reply, but I had to go to the hangar and meas= ure the runner length to be sure.  It is 24" bellmouth to rotor face, = 2" OD.  Exhaust is 2" OD also, running the stock 20b exhaust splitters= .

 

So, my power seems to peak around 6000 rpm.  What lengt= h intake runner length would it take to bring peak power up to ar= ound 6500 rpm? 

&nbs= p;

Mark 

On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 3:53 PM, George Lendich <lendich@aanet.com.au> wrote:
   Mark,
    That's interesting;= can you tell me what is your PP size, runner length and exhaust header ID&= nbsp;size.
    = ;George (down under) 

 

Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2010 7:38 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EM2 Numbers

 =

Bill, 

 

With the current setup, it ap= pears to be around 6000-6100, but I'm still tuning on the upper addresses o= f the EC-2.  My old engine did best around 6500-6600 running the same = prop.  So, I feel there is something that isn't quite right on the new= P-Port motor... maybe intake runners too short, intake or exhaust too rest= rictive, timing off a bit, etc.  It definitely makes more hp than the = old motor did in the 5000-6000 range, but I feel that it should be producin= g more hp than I'm seeing in the 6000-7000 range.  

 

So, t= hings are still developing.  Yesterday, I reinstalled the old air-filt= er box which has a ram-air feature incorporated into the design.  I ha= ven't flown it yet to see if there is any improvement, but I hope to see at= least a little improvement.

 

On a side note, I have determined= that there is a 250 rpm discrepancy between the rpm readout of the EM-2 an= d that of the M/T prop controller.  I have an optical tach that I will= be using to determine which one is in error.   

=  

=
Sta= y tuned (no pun intended),
Mark

 

 =

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Bill Bradburry <bbradburry@bellsouth.net> wrote:
Mark,
It would seem that if you = flattened the pitch of the prop, the engine rpms would increase, but at som= e point, you would begin to lose airspeed and start to slow down because th= e prop was just not taking a big enough bite.  Conversely, it seems th= at if you increased the prop pitch, the engine rpms would decrease, but the= airspeed would increase up to some point and then after that, an increase = in pitch would cause a decrease in airspeed because you are taking too big = a bite and the engine just can not pull it.  Somewhere in there is a = =93Sweet Spot=94 of propeller rpm that gives the highest airspeed.  Le= ts say that this question assumes that you are at WOT and 8500 feet, which = should give you roughly a 75% power output.  Do you know where that sw= eet spot is with your propeller?

&nb= sp;

Bill B=

<= span style=3D"font-size: 12pt; "> 

From:=  = Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Mark Steitle

Sent: Thursday, Octob= er 28, 2010 10:00 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircr= aft
Subject: [FlyRotary] EM2 Numbers

 

Rotaria= ns,

 

Things have been a bit quiet on the list lately, so I thoug= ht I would post this picture of my EM-2 taken on a trip from Galveston, TX = (KGLS) to Lockhart, TX (50R) yesterday.  I was level at 8500msl when t= aking the picture.  A/C is a Lancair ES (4-place), engine is a n/a p-p= orted 20b.  

 =

Please disregard the oil temp as the reading on th= e EM-2 is measured after the first cooler and before the second cooler. &nb= sp;Oil temp readings out of the second cooler (measured at the oil filter p= ad) track water temps within a few degrees.
<= div>

 

Leaned to "Economy= Cruise" and dial the prop down to 1800 rpm and the speed drops down about = 15 mph and fuel burn drops to 9.1 gph.  You pay dearly for that 15 mph= but sometimes it is just too much fun to slow down.

 

=

Mark S.

---------- Forwarded message --------= --

From:&nbs= p;Mark < 
To: mstei= tle@gmail.com








Sent from my iPhone

 

 =

 =

 =

 

<= div style=3D"margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; m= argin-left: 0.5in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; ">The contents of this email are confident= ial and intended only for the named recipients of this e-mail. If you have = received this e-mail in error, you are hereby notified that any use, reprod= uction, disclosure or distribution or the information contained in this e-m= ail is prohibited. Please notify the sender immediately and then delete/des= troy the e-mail and any printed copies. All liability for viruses is exclud= ed to the fullest extent of the law.
=

= --_000_FEBD0910A0A94F2D99379E63DEEB6DE8careyasnau_--