X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from mail-ey0-f180.google.com ([209.85.215.180] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.10) with ESMTP id 4552720 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 17:17:18 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.215.180; envelope-from=msteitle@gmail.com Received: by eyx24 with SMTP id 24so173881eyx.25 for ; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 14:16:43 -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=v0IMQyxb/SuGGlWZ9ymbHnttSxD+NvMy3THpL6lw3Tg=; b=aCqM7zKfBNMNKSX3rzHIENSQFYB4+R1XK/44/0Hq1K+qR6RAYBWbi7a9B4wJNkgH9s bOBEyqHYGWqDnsr+6xNZ8lXvaWGRD3TYcr66o6BHwypZas/kU8Gjd7hcXZEtwgcke/wf uKj5cb8d9AMe1eOcaostIP6GeUwKJFqf7uAak= 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=Ik8p4TlokDAre4ZmXFPL32PiMh9aRqdqufTbh7iJJxgd6AkqictiMcn2U2cVlON6CF /4wAesTrK38jv/dAlPMi1L8T0PB83SADgaVdeWHK165YCVVdve06IUf8ODXHAUo9b81D +oELSTEt7g0E11PYNiCggFdpfq2/nCQeqBVwQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.213.15.210 with SMTP id l18mr1281722eba.22.1288732603250; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 14:16:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.26.8 with HTTP; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 14:16:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 16:16:43 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Finite Amplitude Wave was Sausage Re: EM2 Numbers From: Mark Steitle To: Rotary motors in aircraft Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015174c43c206fa30049418713f --0015174c43c206fa30049418713f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Lynn, I've been thinking for a while now that going with a tangential muffler wasn't the best choice for a p-port motor. It definitely produces more HP than the side port, but not as much as I had expected. Maybe the exhaust system is the problem. Good thing that I can tig weld. ;-) Based on what you've just said, I suppose the p-port isn't the best motor for turbo-charging? Looks like I need to get busy ordering some inconel tubing. The problem will be fitting it under the cowl. As I recall, ideal exhaust runner length is 31". Is this for a specific narrow rpm range or will this work from 4500 rpm - 7500 rpm? Would I need a different runner length for 6500 rpm? What diameter tubing works best? Thanks, Mark On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 3:29 PM, wrote: > In a message dated 10/31/2010 11:31:50 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > eanderson@carolina.rr.com writes: > > Thanks for the credit, Bill, but not certain I used the "Sausage" ideal. > Regardless, it is true we are dealing with pulses of energy in the intake - > so you could think of those as the links in the string of a sausage. > > The periphery port engine is more profoundly affected by its exhaust > system than is the side port engine. > > In the side port, the port is actually closed off by the sides of the > rotor. The overlap period is short. The Renesis actually has zero overlap > (Intake and exhaust open and connected). So thinking like a piston engine, > with reflected waves and such works out fine. Not the case for the periphery > port engine. > > The periphery port engine tunes more like a really high strung dirt > bike. Where you might change mufflers (actually tuning devices) for > different tracks or conditions. There is a long overlap period. The intake > and exhaust are free flowing and the connection is free of sharp angles. In > a side port installation, you might get away with a poor car like exhaust > system. On a periphery port engine anything short of a free flowing header > is going to cost plenty of HP. Tuning if possible at all, will be difficult. > Changes in intake length may make little difference. Until, the exhaust is > up to code. > > You have two or 3 single rotor engines sharing a muffler, and a crank. The > conditions in the muffler must be kept identical for each engine, lest one > or the other be dragging in some RPM range. The easy way to do this is to > collect the identical length headers before the muffler. There you are, > identical conditions for each engine. > > Dyno it with the aircraft system installed, or, don't bother. > > The first time I got the headers right, the driver said the rear end was > broken. Spinning only the left rear. He could see the smoke leaving tight > corners. It was a Speedway Quick change with a spool. Nothing was broken. > The right side was spinning as well, he just couldn't see it. Feels greasy > he said. > > Request a Viking departure. (With proper oil and fuel pick ups of course). > > Lynn E. Hanover > --0015174c43c206fa30049418713f Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Lynn,=A0

I've been thinking for a while now that goi= ng with a tangential muffler wasn't the best choice for a p-port motor.= =A0It definitely produces more HP than the side port, but not as much as I= had expected. =A0Maybe the exhaust system is the problem. =A0Good thing th= at I can tig weld. =A0;-)
=A0
Based on what you've just said, I suppose the p-port= isn't the best motor for turbo-charging? =A0

= Looks like I need to get busy ordering some inconel tubing. =A0The problem = will be fitting it under the cowl. =A0As I recall, ideal exhaust runner len= gth is 31". =A0Is this for a specific narrow rpm range or will this wo= rk from 4500 rpm - 7500 rpm? =A0Would I need a different runner length for = 6500 rpm? =A0What diameter tubing works best?

Thanks,
Mark





On Tue, Nov 2, 20= 10 at 3:29 PM, <= Lehanover@aol.com> wrote:
In a message dated 10/31/2010 11:31:50 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,=20 eanderson@ca= rolina.rr.com writes:
Thanks for the credit, Bill, but not certain I = used the=20 "Sausage" ideal.=A0 Regardless,=A0 it is true we are dealing wi= th pulses=20 of energy in the intake - so you could think of those as the links in the= =20 string of a sausage.=A0
The periphery port engine is more profoundly affected by its exh= aust system=20 than is the side port engine.
=A0
In the side port, the port is actually closed off by the sides of the= =20 rotor. The overlap period is short. The Renesis actually has zero overlap= =20 (Intake and exhaust open and connected). So thinking like a piston engine, = with=20 reflected waves and such works out fine.=A0Not the case for the periphery= =20 port engine.
=A0
The periphery port engine tunes more like a really high strung dirt=20 bike.=A0Where you might change mufflers (actually tuning devices) for=20 different tracks or conditions. There is a long overlap period. The intake = and=20 exhaust are free flowing and the connection is free of sharp angles. In a s= ide=20 port installation, you might get away with a poor car like exhaust system. = On a=20 periphery port engine anything short of a free flowing header is going to c= ost=20 plenty of HP. Tuning if possible at all, will be difficult. Changes in inta= ke=20 length may make little difference. Until, the exhaust is up to code.=A0
=A0
You have two or 3 single rotor engines sharing a muffler, and a=20 crank.=A0The conditions in the muffler must be kept identical for each=20 engine, lest one or the other be dragging in some RPM range. The easy way t= o do=20 this is to collect the identical length headers before the muffler. There y= ou=20 are, identical conditions for each engine.
=A0
Dyno it with the aircraft system installed, or, don't bother.
=A0
The first time I got the headers right, the driver said the rear end w= as=20 broken. Spinning only the left rear. He could see the smoke leaving tight= =20 corners. It was a Speedway Quick change with a spool. Nothing was broken. T= he=20 right side was spinning as well, he just couldn't see it. Feels greasy = he said.=20
=A0
Request a Viking departure. (With proper oil and fuel pick ups of=20 course).
=A0
Lynn E. Hanover=A0

--0015174c43c206fa30049418713f--