Return-Path: <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
Received: from front4.chartermi.net ([24.213.60.106] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2b5)
  with ESMTP id 148188 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 10 Jun 2004 23:28:40 -0400
X-Virus-Scanned: by cgpav
Received: from [24.231.184.247] (HELO eric)
  by front4.chartermi.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.6)
  with SMTP id 28373230 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 10 Jun 2004 23:28:09 -0400
Message-ID: <007e01c44f64$1ea96b80$0202a8c0@eric>
From: "Eric Ruttan" <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
References: <list-148113@logan.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Pop off
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 23:28:10 -0400
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409

There are systems that work just like that.  I believe they are called
ADIABATIC, but the way I spell you would think English is my second
language.

The problem I see is complexity and weight.

An electronic absolute pressure sensor is light and simple and lasts
forever.
There one, or more, on every car.

So then all we need is a "pop off" solenoid, and a way for the MAP to tell
it to open.

Now if you only had a redundant electronic "brain" the we could use to open
the "pop off" solenoid....
One we could wire the MAP(<-HINT) to...

What is that saying of pooh bear?  "think... think... think..."

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 10:07 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Pop off


> Hey guys,
>
> We've been talking about these pop-off valves as safety devices for some
time,
> but the problem always seems to be that the available crop of these things
> will only work at sea level.  This is an obvious shortcoming for airplane
> applications, as the MAP will always be decreasing with altitude.
>
> I've been kicking around some ideas for awhile and came up with a little
> drawing of one of these things that, I think, addresses the problem.  See
the
> attached picture.
>
> My thinking is that if you create a chamber where you carry around your
sea
> level altitude with you, close it off with a piston, the exposed side of
which
> is open to the atmosphere, then as your altitude increases the piston
should
> move down an amount equal to the change in atmospheric pressure.  It then
> applies the required additional force to our spring and keeps a steady
20psi
> of force on the valve at the bottom.  (This would be the equivalent of 40"
hg
> MAP, but you could make it be whatever you want by changing the spring
rate.)
>  As you can see, the exposed sides of both the movable piston and the
valve
> are seeing atmospheric pressure... in this example drawing the piston and
> valve's areas are both one square inch, just to keep things simple.
>
> Now, for the $64,000 question... what's wrong with this?  If it won't
work,
> why not?  What do we change to make it work?  This can't be that hard.
>  Suggestions????........
>
>       <Marv>
>


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


> >>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> >>  Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
>