X-Junk-Score: 0 [] X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 [] X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=E/+zWpVl c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=IAcAS9cNPoJwqg/TbAkGXQ==:117 a=MBMWUlR2dGywjpQfT38+Aw==:17 a=jpOVt7BSZ2e4Z31A5e1TngXxSK0=:19 a=x7bEGLp0ZPQA:10 a=A-0mRrAPPO4A:10 a=oexKYjalfGEA:10 a=r77TgQKjGQsHNAKrUKIA:9 a=HZJGGiqLAAAA:8 a=UKPAHat8AAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=spTXtsOQ0ZlYWKR2nZsA:9 a=wsyXZE7FxZv2JnpT:21 a=OK66WeA6qSgPUKBa:21 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=4PR2P7QzAAAA:8 a=d_hpulQ1WsAao_ZdoqIA:9 a=OJyGNhgBulf-BjzH:21 a=bGvCXlTLiGFPeBeT:21 a=AJalf1KVBtpxn0Sg:21 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10 a=Fc6xXSS-RxGHxrvp76Qp:22 a=Urk15JJjZg1Xo0ryW_k8:22 a=4dqwQCo7Po2mVW515mGf:22 From: "Charlie England ceengland7@gmail.com" Received: from mail-yb1-f179.google.com ([209.85.219.179] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.2.12) with ESMTPS id 12420535 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 05 Apr 2019 16:46:17 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.219.179; envelope-from=ceengland7@gmail.com Received: by mail-yb1-f179.google.com with SMTP id s7so2928532ybo.3 for ; Fri, 05 Apr 2019 13:46:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to; bh=yxXsLRqWU94Pw6GlQjxx3sl1wn9Zt0f5L+pouy36hLw=; b=Zr0WXMesd4GHobHZbvxVyrBmt8qpjPPjy3aHDMYephicMFD0bReB2idUI6NW9JaaAy GZqZ7To9psR5+kViGUWG2pFD/+1qP1VRqNEEilfyA8mAagWFz+XPTM6nWjCBqtUPW5VI zMteG98n8HF44MWSbAy45H18djdKzyhQkbJRkAuNl5OOcGtcM0l1p6CCbq432JUwT0cv bOJo9aPktAVWr+c6lcq03TJ6Z5YlNNaprVHKe4CvbdEa/dUD5H5eKMmd/p8F5956lVdH z/WXyZseSrXFUwwl5+PD6FZoIa1ie8LmzSQxpO727hAGYzb5iexEPkkAIoU/knYPWYku Sirg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to; bh=yxXsLRqWU94Pw6GlQjxx3sl1wn9Zt0f5L+pouy36hLw=; b=oF8YOKHpwfNbN2A3MUkgzy8jDekbXkPjoNJ4aCWLVgEzMB8pgvSKEnURri4jh+SS9j eii7HKgbsNeFhnvB1evOTirFwSxKKqTqYkJXUZV5bd1QyHLaYzuFVX0WA7uP4Hu4Cfjp GmR+8hSS8M9ZARt+DXmHny1A5p5BSmxgKAGrQweYNLKSbBpkIQqwdXXJkviUlQ8UNTav wzYfiXvxtlNlgQ618+CIrTUqvpIWvNEkWtq6AAwrnvI/VSx8ojpg91+VmRL5qRCUgkEL 6t7Z6KeQX3f4n0ZTSy0ZcEGr9DNANtP8NA9ymh1VxqKDO1z9m857yp+kJuw1oe7EkwjQ K8tg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVKR7O7ndw4iQLBOHRvLFoDJGAA6pKaL6EXFx8H8H8Zafh4xsHJ ZJJQEyepX10KU1edbYR6IQb9F4gq X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqylYQ1BDah6nMDv7i2RgDn9iDTjbGuT4aMKonl8Y2n0RJJ36CYae8CU/ofY6lCBLs1b5eX0gA== X-Received: by 2002:a25:b9cb:: with SMTP id y11mr13494131ybj.340.1554497160026; Fri, 05 Apr 2019 13:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from [192.168.10.217] (mobile-166-170-54-160.mycingular.net. [166.170.54.160]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id g1sm8322262ywf.0.2019.04.05.13.45.58 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 05 Apr 2019 13:45:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5CA7BE89.205@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2019 15:46:01 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Electric constant speed props References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------020805050407090500070101" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------020805050407090500070101 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I had a similar experience with one of the guys with AutoPSRUs in the alt engine tent a couple of years ago. Tried to sell me a reduction for a rotary, and it was blatantly obvious that he was clueless. But their whole concept has major flaws, so I shouldn't have been surprised. As a FWIW, if you're serious about a controllable prop it might be worth finding someone else in the company to question. My experience at airshows in general is that you might get the CEO, or you might get a guy that's filling in for his friend who went to take a leak. :-) I know, because about 25 years ago, I was occasionally that guy on occasion. :-) Charlie On 4/5/2019 8:47 AM, Samuel Hodges samueln462wp@att.net wrote: > Went to Sun n Fun and talked to a Aeromaster representative to > collect information and data on their Electric constant speed prop > combinations. After waiting a little while a representative of the > company approached as asked what he can do for me. I replied that I am > extremely interested in their design and would like further > information. I was asked about my aircraft engine installation, I > explained to him about the Rotary and what my RPM requirements would > be. His response went something like this " Do you know how much this > cost? it will probably double the cost of your installation/plane" I > immediately took this as an insult and replied " you know nothing of > me, my finances, nor my plane" as I walked past him I padded him on > the arm and said " keep your freakin prop, you just saved me a lot of > money" but I didn't say freakin. One thing I did find out is that it > would be around 26lbs, well worth the trip, wouldn't you agree? > > Sam > > On Tuesday, April 2, 2019, 07:27:12 PM EDT, Bobby J. Hughes > bhughes@qnsi.net wrote: > > > > Climb at 6800/ 2100 rpm > > Correction 6000/ 2100 rpm. > > Bobby > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Apr 2, 2019, at 5:46 PM, Bobby J. Hughes bhughes@qnsi.net > > wrote: > >> Bill, >> >> Most takeoffs have been at 7000/2400 rpm with MP between 34-38” to >> pattern. >> Climb at 6800/ 2100 rpm >> >> Cruise at 5200/ 1824 or 4800/ 1624 rpm depending on my desired fuel >> burn and airspeed. Most cross country flight are at 28-30” MP and >> with F/A 15.8. Or 13.5 for higher MP. >> >> Bobby >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Apr 2, 2019, at 5:13 PM, William Jepson wrjjrs@gmail.com >> > > wrote: >> >>> Bobby, You push it fairly hard with your supercharged engine too. >>> What cruise RPM are you running? P.Sport always tried to tune for >>> lower RPMS and higher power to avoid the torsional vibration >>> problems. With boost you can make more power at lower RPMs which is >>> a plus in this case. The rotary is tough, the engine will tolerate a >>> lot, but the high revs for long periods is what causes the need for >>> attention to torsionals. BTW I moved and had to take a break from my >>> redrive efforts, but am getting back to it. Got some good ideas >>> today from Mark Hatch, Everett's son. >>> Bill >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 2:02 PM Bobby J. Hughes bhughes@qnsi.net >>> >> > wrote: >>> >>> >>> My MT weighs 42#’s. The hub is heavy, blades are light weigh. >>> Gear lashing appears to have increased a little over the first >>> 500 hours. End play is about 5 thousandths with original snubber. >>> >>> Bobby >>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>> >>> On Apr 2, 2019, at 3:48 PM, William Jepson wrjjrs@gmail.com >>> >> > wrote: >>> >>>> Sam, >>>> I am working with some originators of Powersport. The weight of >>>> your build makes a big difference on the use of a constant >>>> speed. Also in the case of the rotary the quality of your >>>> muffler! Sound levels really effect your comfort on longer >>>> flights. Mufflers for rotaries are tough, I already have 1 >>>> failed design to my (bad) credit. The original Powersport >>>> designs used the light weight and flexibility of a wood prop to >>>> their advantage. Those engines were tuned for max power at 6500 >>>> RPM. The reductions were about 1.85 to 2.2:1. suitable for the >>>> lower power peak. Torsional vibration issues also favored a >>>> wood prop. How heavy is the electric Airmaster? MOST engines >>>> including the rotary are helped by a variable pitch prop. >>>> Whether the combination is safe depends on the reduction drive, >>>> ratio, and weight of the prop on the output shaft. Powersport's >>>> owners noted significant torsional vibration problems with >>>> every planetary gear set, (even their own custom made straight >>>> cut planetary). Their later stiff model internal ring gear >>>> reduction gearbox put the resonances out of the normal range >>>> for the rotary. Prior to that the only problem free build with >>>> a planetary was when they built a pendulous damper system (like >>>> a big radial engine uses) which worked great but was so >>>> expensive they figured they would never sell an engine. So if >>>> you are running a planetary reduction you need to keep the >>>> weight down as much as you can. Find out what the Airmaster >>>> weighs. The amount that it exceeds your wood or carbon fixed >>>> blade prop is your risk factor. The advantage is to use a low >>>> cruise rpm that takes advantage of the props flexibility. As a >>>> thrust producing device it is better, there is no doubt. If it >>>> is very heavy though it may cause problems that aren't obvious >>>> as to origin. Torsional problems may take hundreds of hours to >>>> develop, or something may break the first week. Just be wary. >>>> Always keep track of things like changes in output shaft end >>>> play and backlash. You can make the change, and see excellent >>>> results but go in with your eyes open. Lots of people will tell >>>> you this is nervous nelly stuff, but the guys at P.S. probably >>>> had more hours running and testing rotaries AT HIGH OUTPUT >>>> levels than anyone other than Mazda. >>>> Bill Jepson >>>> >>>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 6:34 AM Samuel Hodges >>>> samueln462wp@att.net >>>> >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>> Lately I have been considering an Airmaster electric >>>> constant speed prop to help achieve the rotaries true >>>> potential. I am asking for insight to help me make this >>>> decision. I'm not sure if the benefits of a constant speed >>>> out weight the cost, please help. >>>> >>>> Sam >>>> RV-7A >>>> Renesis >>>> --------------020805050407090500070101 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
I had a similar experience with one of the guys with AutoPSRUs in the alt engine tent a couple of years ago. Tried to sell me a reduction for a rotary, and it was blatantly obvious that he was clueless. But their whole concept has major flaws, so I shouldn't have been surprised.

As a FWIW, if you're serious about a controllable prop it might be worth finding someone else in the company to question. My experience at airshows in general is that you might get the CEO, or you might get a guy that's filling in for his friend who went to take a leak. :-) I know, because about 25 years ago, I was occasionally that guy on occasion. :-)

Charlie

On 4/5/2019 8:47 AM, Samuel Hodges samueln462wp@att.net wrote:
 Went to Sun n Fun and talked to a Aeromaster representative to collect information and data on their Electric constant speed prop combinations. After waiting a little while a representative of the company approached as asked what he can do for me. I replied that I am extremely interested in their design and would like further information. I was asked about my aircraft engine installation, I explained to him about the Rotary and what my RPM requirements would be. His response went something like this " Do you know how much this cost? it will probably double the cost of your installation/plane" I immediately took this as an insult and replied " you know nothing of me, my finances, nor my plane" as I walked past him I padded him on the arm and said " keep your freakin prop, you just saved me a lot of money" but I didn't say freakin. One thing I did find out is that it would be around 26lbs, well worth the trip, wouldn't you agree?

Sam     

On Tuesday, April 2, 2019, 07:27:12 PM EDT, Bobby J. Hughes bhughes@qnsi.net <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:



Climb at 6800/ 2100 rpm 

Correction 6000/ 2100 rpm. 

Bobby 

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 2, 2019, at 5:46 PM, Bobby J. Hughes bhughes@qnsi.net <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:

Bill,

Most takeoffs have been at 7000/2400 rpm with MP between 34-38” to pattern.
Climb at 6800/ 2100 rpm 

Cruise at 5200/ 1824 or 4800/ 1624 rpm depending on my desired fuel burn and airspeed.  Most cross country flight are at 28-30” MP and with F/A 15.8. Or 13.5 for higher MP. 

Bobby

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 2, 2019, at 5:13 PM, William Jepson wrjjrs@gmail.com <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:

Bobby, You push it fairly hard with your supercharged engine too. What cruise RPM are you running? P.Sport always tried to tune for lower RPMS and higher power to avoid the torsional vibration problems. With boost you can make more power at lower RPMs which is a plus in this case.  The rotary is tough, the engine will tolerate a lot, but the high revs for long periods is what causes the need for attention to torsionals. BTW I moved and had to take a break from my redrive efforts, but am getting back to it. Got some good ideas today from Mark Hatch, Everett's son. 
Bill

On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 2:02 PM Bobby J. Hughes bhughes@qnsi.net <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:

My MT weighs 42#’s. The hub is heavy, blades are light weigh. Gear lashing appears to have increased a little over the first 500 hours. End play is about 5 thousandths with original snubber. 

Bobby

Sent from my iPad

On Apr 2, 2019, at 3:48 PM, William Jepson wrjjrs@gmail.com <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:

Sam,
I am working with some originators of Powersport. The weight of your build makes a big difference on the use of a constant speed. Also in the case of the rotary the quality of your muffler! Sound levels really effect your comfort on longer flights. Mufflers for rotaries are tough, I already have 1 failed design to my (bad) credit. The original Powersport designs used the light weight and flexibility of a wood prop to their advantage. Those engines were tuned for max power at 6500 RPM. The reductions were about 1.85 to 2.2:1. suitable for the lower power peak. Torsional vibration issues also favored a wood prop. How heavy is the electric Airmaster? MOST engines including the rotary are helped by a variable pitch prop. Whether the combination is safe depends on the reduction drive, ratio, and weight of the prop on the output shaft. Powersport's owners noted significant torsional vibration problems with every planetary gear set, (even their own custom made straight cut planetary). Their later stiff model internal ring gear reduction gearbox put the resonances out of the normal range for the rotary. Prior to that the only problem free build with a planetary was when they built a pendulous damper system (like a big radial engine uses) which worked great but was so expensive they figured they would never sell an engine. So if you are running a planetary reduction you need to keep the weight down as much as you can. Find out what the Airmaster weighs. The amount that it exceeds your wood or carbon fixed blade prop is your risk factor. The advantage is to use a low cruise rpm that takes advantage of the props flexibility. As a thrust producing device it is better, there is no doubt. If it is very heavy though it may cause problems that aren't obvious as to origin. Torsional problems may take hundreds of hours to develop, or something may break the first week. Just be wary. Always keep track of things like changes in output shaft end play and backlash. You can make the change, and see excellent results but go in with your eyes open. Lots of people will tell you this is nervous nelly stuff, but the guys at P.S. probably had more hours running and testing rotaries AT HIGH OUTPUT levels than anyone other than Mazda.
Bill Jepson

On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 6:34 AM Samuel Hodges samueln462wp@att.net <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:
 Lately I have been considering an Airmaster electric constant speed prop to help achieve the rotaries true potential. I am asking for insight to help me make this decision. I'm not sure if the benefits of a constant speed out weight the cost, please help.

Sam
RV-7A
Renesis 

--------------020805050407090500070101--