X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from nm9-vm0.access.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com ([98.139.44.120] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.1) with SMTP id 5109742 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 15:08:22 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=98.139.44.120; envelope-from=ceengland@bellsouth.net Received: from [98.139.44.104] by nm9.access.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Aug 2011 19:07:45 -0000 Received: from [98.139.44.73] by tm9.access.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Aug 2011 19:07:45 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1010.access.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Aug 2011 19:07:45 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 516181.44528.bm@omp1010.access.mail.sp2.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 4712 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2011 19:07:45 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bellsouth.net; s=s1024; t=1314817665; bh=JqJI7zRZdCxOAemmWjfaIE2B5B4/vV2+dCQabnBod2M=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=CiIUGKeH5G0tuoGt6sD8X57xaq2Wkg9ACGWHBuyTarjCCn4ZAloxRXNkzr9ZiQKsqSugPOuVh2OcUCq6e1fbIM35csEE4rs8+t94jqxyYCXD1AM2N11j+W47Hfii9Jfyl3w72TDqWUc/sq0MVZNEMqRH6VZR2A1d6GFT4NEsG3g= X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: eEzLj_MVM1lj8RKB4EhIZ.GzUyK48sJ_U2pLduAt7QqzPdh Buf91au14RlyDY2w9GkQSYEDSR0uC6RRmPWhXRRcxqJ0GBZrMAAUhfq5Y8qV hfuaQ6jUViLZxJXSefFhQOyMjYZK7A9MI.wvTqewjF76Vs1vgvLx_ndimsTN mZ1wcwjGDsglLKdjv9A.ZW3zU.QwY6Q8CUhUZr5EqFQ26vVoXay45wm7rx7J JSINA8hRZuRP7QizlnvZmz8IHLLI5VZVWa_bOLx7X7eN232fXIX32fayMeaP ROJVRhNS.o9.7.2fAKnMpckeWoCN_TJW4DHM3CHdXspz44KjdRcff2xVQx77 I9bJmFwkNYflgqJPlJvbFp4Q5H0QwZPPgbRuzxJhLrcWc.35kiD9CiNVuTzo srBzVBq_YPhIXhiW6EkPM6wRiT07j0ZvEcAQb5p0AXLZ183OgtiOeLmvX52o dpXI34HthfIZIWYqR2Jbt7JrDyqQynqzpixfBlwR.qPQeTuE- X-Yahoo-SMTP: uXJ_6LOswBCr8InijhYErvjWlJuRkoKPGNeiuu7PA.5wcGoy Received: from [192.168.10.6] (ceengland@98.95.238.145 with plain) by smtp110.sbc.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 31 Aug 2011 12:07:44 -0700 PDT Message-ID: <4E5E867E.3020502@bellsouth.net> Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 14:07:42 -0500 From: Charlie England User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.20) Gecko/20110805 Thunderbird/3.1.12 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: CG Products Intake Manifold References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080502020507010103050008" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080502020507010103050008 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Data point: One of the big aviation engine/fuel injection suppliers installs -4 lines everywhere in front of the firewall up to the 'spider', on all 4 cyl Lycs (up to 200+ hp) and if memory serves, even on the 6cyl engines (230+ hp). The individual lines from the 'spider' to the cylinders are so small you'd be hard pressed to get safety wire through them. This is on a Bendix style injection system using a diaphragm type fuel pump and no return line after the pump. These systems run at between 15 & 30 psi. Logic is that minimum diameter line minimizes quantity of fuel that can boil on the engine side of the firewall. With minimum diameter lines, as long as the pump can provide pressure it won't take long to clear any vapor as soon as cranking begins, or you hit Tracy's 'cold start' button a couple of times. (Vapor in the combustion chamber is a good thing anyway, right?) :-) As Al Wick pointed out, the only place vapor should be a problem is at the inlet to the pump itself. Charlie On 08/31/2011 07:35 AM, CozyGirrrl@aol.com wrote: > Interesting Chad. > The people flying Subes and using autogas were also guessing that > altitude was a factor in vaporlock. We won't be using autogas due to > variable formulation eating up epoxy tanks. > We were thinking that if the regulator was the last item in the chain > and that the rails were hooked up serially that it would minimize > vaporlock and also a few seconds of the pump running before a hot > restart would cool and clear the rail. > Chrissi & Randi > www.CozyGirrrl.com > CG Products, Custom Aircraft Hardware > Chairwomen, Sun-N-Fun Engine Workshop > In a message dated 8/30/2011 11:36:05 P.M. Central Daylight Time, > crobinson@medialantern.com writes: > > I recently researched EFI regulation a bit and found something > interesting. Many modern (post-1995) vehicles have "returnless" > EDI systems where the regulator is in or near the tank, not the > engine compartment. > > It turns out this isn't for complexity reasons, though it does > save a bit. It's for emissions. The heating of the fuel in the > engine compartment transfers heat back to the tank. The tank's > emissions do count even though they're not huge. It's also one > less part, hose, and set of fittings to fail- and get warranty > calls on. > > To deal with vapor lock they just crank up the pressure to 65 or > more psi. Very effective. > > Not at all saying we should do the same, but the purpose is > interesting, no? As well as the vapor lock" solution"... > > Regards, > Chad > --------------080502020507010103050008 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Data point: One of the big aviation engine/fuel injection suppliers installs -4 lines everywhere in front of the firewall up to the 'spider', on all 4 cyl Lycs (up to 200+ hp) and if memory serves, even on the 6cyl engines (230+ hp). The individual lines from the 'spider' to the cylinders are so small you'd be hard pressed to get safety wire through them. This is on a Bendix style injection system using a diaphragm type fuel pump and no return line after the pump. These systems run at between 15 & 30 psi. Logic is that minimum diameter line minimizes quantity of fuel that can boil on the engine side of the firewall.

With minimum diameter lines, as long as the pump can provide pressure it won't take long to clear any vapor as soon as cranking begins, or you hit Tracy's 'cold start' button a couple of times. (Vapor in the combustion chamber is a good thing anyway, right?) :-)

As Al Wick pointed out, the only place vapor should be a problem is at the inlet to the pump itself.

Charlie

On 08/31/2011 07:35 AM, CozyGirrrl@aol.com wrote:
Interesting Chad.
The people flying Subes and using autogas were also guessing that altitude was a factor in vaporlock. We won't be using autogas due to variable formulation eating up epoxy tanks.
We were thinking that if the regulator was the last item in the chain and that the rails were hooked up serially that it would minimize vaporlock and also a few seconds of the pump running before a hot restart would cool and clear the rail.
 
Chrissi & Randi
www.CozyGirrrl.com
CG Products, Custom Aircraft Hardware
Chairwomen, Sun-N-Fun Engine Workshop
 
In a message dated 8/30/2011 11:36:05 P.M. Central Daylight Time, crobinson@medialantern.com writes:

I recently researched EFI regulation a bit and found something interesting. Many modern (post-1995) vehicles have "returnless" EDI systems where the regulator is in or near the tank, not the engine compartment.

It turns out this isn't for complexity reasons, though it does save a bit. It's for emissions. The heating of the fuel in the engine compartment transfers heat back to the tank. The tank's emissions do count even though they're not huge. It's also one less part, hose, and set of fittings to fail-  and get warranty calls on.

To deal with vapor lock they just crank up the pressure to 65 or more psi. Very effective.

Not at all saying we should do the same, but the purpose is interesting, no? As well as the vapor lock" solution"...

Regards,
Chad


--------------080502020507010103050008--