Return-Path: Received: from [24.25.9.102] (HELO ms-smtp-03-eri0.southeast.rr.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2b5) with ESMTP id 148838 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 11:38:02 -0400 Received: from EDWARD (clt25-78-058.carolina.rr.com [24.25.78.58]) by ms-smtp-03-eri0.southeast.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.7) with SMTP id i5BFbTLr017753 for ; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 11:37:31 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <001d01c44fca$046d8150$2402a8c0@EDWARD> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Cooling oil Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 11:37:34 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001A_01C44FA8.7D205EF0" 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 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C44FA8.7D205EF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Well, my figures for 160Hp show fuel burn of 1.58 lbm/min, so a quick = sanity check shows 1.58*60 =3D 94.8 lbsm/hour/6 =3D 15.8 Gallons/hour = which sounds about right for 160HP with a "Best Power" A/F of 12.56 So 1.58 lbm/min *19,000 BTU/Lbm =3D 30020 BTU/Min Taking Al's apportionment we have Power =3D 28%*30020 =3D 8405.6 BTU/Min =3D 198.02 HP (I think this is a = bit high on HP for a 15.8 gallon/hr fuel flow, I would expect to see a fuel flow of around 18.5 gph for close to 200HP) Coolant =3D 18%*30020 =3D 5403.6 BTU/Min Oil =3D 7%*30020 =3D 2101.4 BTU/Min Exhaust the remainder. So using Al's figures, we are closer to the 1775 BTU figure for the oil = cooler. I use 25% for power and 25% for waste heat and 50% for Exhaust, = just to be on the conservative side. Also I allocate 2/3 of waste heat = to coolant and 1/3 to oil.=20 Al's percentages may be closer to reality than the ones I use, which are = pretty standard for a reciprocating engine. But, I have never found any = similar percentages for the rotary. If someone could direct me to a = credible source, I will revise my allocation of BTUs. Thanks Ed Ed Anderson RV-6A N494BW Rotary Powered Matthews, NC ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Dale Rogers=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 10:26 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Cooling oil Al, Perchance, did you forget that the 160 HP is *output*,=20 not the total produced from the fuel burn? Dale R. COZY MkIV-R #1254 >=20 > From: "Al Gietzen" > Date: 2004/06/11 Fri AM 12:46:45 EDT > To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" > Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Cooling oil >=20 > =20 >=20 > Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Cooling oil >=20 > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > ----- Original Message -----=20 >=20 > From: "Joseph Berki" >=20 > To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" >=20 > Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 12:39 PM >=20 > Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Cooling oil >=20 > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > > It would be interesting to measure flow in both engines. I = thought that >=20 > > both Lycoming and Mazda engines rejected 2/3 heat load through the >=20 > > oil that is why I started going down this road. If the engines = generated >=20 > > the same Hp than the heat load should be similar. >=20 > > >=20 > > Joe Berki >=20 > =20 >=20 > Joe, both engines may generate the same heat load, but the = proportion >=20 > rejected through the coolant in case of the Mazda is 2/3 of its = waste heat >=20 > while the oil rejects another 1/3 of the waste heat. Neither engine = rejects >=20 > anywhere near 2/3 of its waste heat through the oil. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Most aircraft engines reject on the order of 300-600 BTU/Min through = the >=20 > oil, the Mazda at 160HP rejects approx 2446 BTU/Min through the oil. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Ed Anderson >=20 > =20 >=20 > Ed; >=20 > =20 >=20 > That number looked a bit high to me, so I went in to my file to = check. My > data shows 28% of the fuel burn energy in the rotary gets converted = to HP, > 18% goes to the coolant, and about 7% to the oil. Most of the rest = goes out > the exhaust pipe. For 160 HP output, I think that should be 1725 = BTU/Min > going to the oil cooler. So about 3 times the comparable powered = Lyc. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Double check me on this. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Al >=20 > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 >=20 >=20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Cooling oil ----- Original Message -----=20 From: "Joseph Berki" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 12:39 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Cooling oil > It would be interesting to measure flow in both engines. I thought = that > both Lycoming and Mazda engines rejected 2/3 heat load through the > oil that is why I started going down this road. If the engines = generated > the same Hp than the heat load should be similar. > > Joe Berki Joe, both engines may generate the same heat load, but the proportion rejected through the coolant in case of the Mazda is 2/3 of its waste = heat while the oil rejects another 1/3 of the waste heat. Neither engine = rejects anywhere near 2/3 of its waste heat through the oil. Most aircraft engines reject on the order of 300-600 BTU/Min through = the oil, the Mazda at 160HP rejects approx 2446 BTU/Min through the oil. Ed Anderson Ed; That number looked a bit high to me, so I went in to my file to check. = My data shows 28% of the fuel burn energy in the rotary gets converted = to HP, 18% goes to the coolant, and about 7% to the oil. Most of the = rest goes out the exhaust pipe. For 160 HP output, I think that should = be 1725 BTU/Min going to the oil cooler. So about 3 times the = comparable powered Lyc. Double check me on this. Al -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C44FA8.7D205EF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Well, my figures for 160Hp show fuel = burn of 1.58=20 lbm/min, so a quick sanity check shows 1.58*60 =3D 94.8 lbsm/hour/6 =3D = 15.8=20 Gallons/hour which sounds about right for 160HP with a "Best Power" A/F = of=20 12.56
 
So 1.58 lbm/min *19,000 BTU/Lbm = =3D 30020=20 BTU/Min
 
Taking Al's apportionment we = have
 
Power =3D 28%*30020 =3D 8405.6 = BTU/Min =3D 198.02 HP=20 (I think this is a bit high on HP for a 15.8 gallon/hr fuel flow, I = would expect=20 to
see a fuel flow of around 18.5 gph for = close to=20 200HP)
Coolant =3D 18%*30020 =3D 5403.6 = BTU/Min
Oil =3D 7%*30020 =3D 2101.4 = BTU/Min
Exhaust the remainder.
 
So using Al's figures, we are closer to = the 1775=20 BTU figure for the oil cooler.  I use 25% for power and 25% for = waste heat=20 and 50% for Exhaust, just to be on the conservative side. Also I = allocate=20 2/3 of waste heat to coolant and 1/3 to oil.
 
Al's percentages may be closer to = reality than the=20 ones I use, which are pretty standard for a reciprocating engine.  = But, I=20 have never found any similar percentages for the rotary.  If = someone could=20 direct me to a credible source, I will revise my allocation of=20 BTUs.
 
Thanks
 
Ed
Ed Anderson
RV-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Dale = Rogers=20
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 = 10:26=20 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = Cooling=20 oil

Al,

   Perchance, did you forget that = the 160=20 HP is *output*,
not the total produced from the fuel = burn?

Dale=20 R.
COZY MkIV-R #1254

>
> From: "Al Gietzen" <ALVentures@cox.net>
> = Date:=20 2004/06/11 Fri AM 12:46:45 EDT
> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" = <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
>=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Cooling oil
>
> 
> =
>=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Cooling oil
>
> 
>=20
> 
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> =
> From: "Joseph Berki" = <joseph.berki@grc.nasa.gov>
>=20
> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft"=20 <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
>
> Sent: Thursday, = June 10,=20 2004 12:39 PM
>
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Cooling = oil
>=20
> 
>
> 
>
> > It would = be=20 interesting to measure flow in both engines.  I thought = that
>=20
> > both Lycoming and Mazda engines rejected 2/3 heat load = through=20 the
>
> > oil  that is why I started going down = this=20 road.  If the engines generated
>
> > the same Hp = than=20 the heat load should be similar.
>
> >
> =
> >=20 Joe Berki
>
> 
>
> Joe, both engines = may=20 generate the same heat load, but the proportion
>
> = rejected=20 through the coolant in case of the Mazda is 2/3 of its waste = heat
>=20
> while the oil rejects another 1/3 of the waste heat.  = Neither=20 engine rejects
>
> anywhere near 2/3 of its waste heat = through=20 the oil.
>
> 
>
> Most aircraft = engines reject=20 on the order of 300-600 BTU/Min through the
>
> oil, the = Mazda at=20 160HP rejects approx 2446 BTU/Min through the oil.
> =
> =20
>
> Ed Anderson
>
> 
>
> = Ed;
>
> 
>
> That number looked a bit = high to=20 me, so I went in to my file to check.  My
> data shows 28% = of the=20 fuel burn energy in the rotary gets converted to HP,
> 18% goes = to the=20 coolant, and about 7% to the oil. Most of the rest goes out
> = the=20 exhaust pipe. For 160 HP output, I think that should be 1725 = BTU/Min
>=20 going to the oil cooler.  So about 3 times the comparable powered = Lyc.
>
> 
>
> Double check me on = this.
>=20
> 
>
> Al
>
> 
>=20
> 
>
>
>

 

Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Cooling = oil

 

 

----- Original Message ----- =

From: "Joseph Berki"=20 <joseph.berki@grc.nasa.gov>

To: "Rotary motors in aircraft"=20 <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>

Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 = 12:39=20 PM

Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Cooling = oil

 

 

> It would be interesting to measure flow = in both=20 engines.  I thought that

> both Lycoming and Mazda engines = rejected 2/3 heat=20 load through the

> oil  that is why I started going = down this=20 road.  If the engines generated

> the same Hp than the heat load should = be=20 similar.

>

> Joe Berki

 

Joe, both engines may generate the same heat = load, but=20 the proportion

rejected through the coolant in case of the = Mazda is=20 2/3 of its waste heat

while the oil rejects another 1/3 of the = waste=20 heat.  Neither engine rejects

anywhere near 2/3 of its waste heat through = the=20 oil.

 

Most aircraft engines reject on the order of = 300-600=20 BTU/Min through the

oil, the Mazda at 160HP rejects approx 2446 = BTU/Min=20 through the oil.

 

Ed Anderson

 

Ed;

 

That = number looked=20 a bit high to me, so I went in to my file to check.  My data = shows 28% of=20 the fuel burn energy in the rotary gets converted to HP, 18% goes to = the=20 coolant, and about 7% to the oil. Most of the rest goes out the = exhaust pipe.=20 For 160 HP output, I think that should be 1725 BTU/Min going to the = oil=20 cooler.  So about 3 times the comparable powered = Lyc.

 

Double = check me on=20 this.

 

Al

 

 

>>  Homepage: =20 http://www.flyrotary.com/
>>  Archive:  =20 = http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C44FA8.7D205EF0--