X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 14:07:11 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imr-da06.mx.aol.com ([205.188.169.203] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.1) with ESMTP id 5106983 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 08:32:51 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.188.169.203; envelope-from=vtailjeff@aol.com Received: from mtaout-da06.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaout-da06.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.51.134]) by imr-da06.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id p7TCW8H1032503 for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 08:32:08 -0400 Received: from [10.68.135.39] (mobile-166-147-066-154.mycingular.net [166.147.66.154]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mtaout-da06.r1000.mx.aol.com (MUA/Third Party Client Interface) with ESMTPSA id 343C3E0000F5; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 08:32:05 -0400 (EDT) References: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 8L1) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-2--841004897 X-Original-Message-Id: <211B494C-3420-4AC7-9C50-21022ECC49FB@aol.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: iPad Mail (8L1) From: vtailjeff@aol.com Subject: Re: [LML] LOP power settings X-Original-Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 07:32:02 -0500 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List x-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:481136288:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d33864e5b86c52fa3 X-AOL-IP: 166.147.66.154 --Apple-Mail-2--841004897 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Ralf, Re your static wick. Put a couple of layers of shrink tube on it to stiffen i= t up. Jeff=20 Sent from my iPad On Aug 29, 2011, at 7:07 AM, Craig Berland. wrote: > Ralf, >=20 > Your LOP numbers look pretty good=E2=80=A6.including speed. That is assumi= ng your IAS is correct. Line number 32 is a little too rich for my blood. T= CM max cruise is about as abusive as its gets. I would never run my engine t= here. The problem I see is your take-off fuel rate is set too low. It shou= ld be around 41 gph at your take off RPM and MAP. At 38 inHg and 2700 rpm, i= t should be around 43 gph. I am pretty sure the low =E2=80=9Cfull rich=E2=80= =9D fuel rate is what is causing your climb out CHT=E2=80=99s to climb above= 380 degF. I had my electric fuel low boost switch fail and my CHT=E2=80=99= s went up to 400 degF at 16000. I descended to 12000 and finished the trip h= ome without low boost. Increase your take off fuel rate and you will be hap= py. =E2=80=9CI think=E2=80=9D. >=20 > Craig >=20 > =20 >=20 > Dear subscribers, >=20 > =20 >=20 > Thanks to everybody to help me understand the LOP operations. The Pelican a= rticles helped a lot and Craig spend a lot of time writing everything down f= or me. >=20 > =20 >=20 > I determined my TIT (which was surprisingly low) and I took all the discus= sed power settings and ran them at 10000 and 18000. I waited several minutes= on each setting to make sure that I have stable conditions. >=20 > =20 >=20 > In my table you can find the climb and all the power settings we discussed= so far. May be you have some recommendations after looking at my data. >=20 > =20 >=20 > IAS and TAS I took from my steam gage =E2=80=93 any corrections are welcom= e to correct my numbers. >=20 > =20 >=20 > In climb (full fuel =E2=80=93 just me) I forgot to turn on the boost pump =E2= =80=93 this makes my CHT temps go up starting at 7000 ft. When I turn the b= oost pump on everything usually stays below 385F. Since I am burning so much= fuel in climb I would be happy if you could recommend power settings for th= e climb. >=20 > =20 >=20 > At 10000 I tried the recommended TCM MAX Cruise power settings and it made= my head temps slowly creep up. I stopped at 400F. And I even went richer th= an TCM recommended. The temp spread between TIT max and TIT at TCM max cruis= e was only 40F. It seems my engine does not like it =E2=80=93 have you exper= ienced anything similar? It seems I am on the down slope of the TIT curve bu= t still around the peak of the CHT. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Unfortunately my IAS at 10000 were significantly lower that Jeff Liegner=E2= =80=99s at 8000 in a previous posting L. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Some of the power settings gave me not a perfect smooth running engine =E2= =80=93 I probably should not call it rough. >=20 > =20 >=20 > I have the B version of the engine which is rated for 38 inHG. But it just= does not want to go up all the way. I tried to adjust the rpm at the govern= or but it does not change much. The RPMs go up to 2700 on some days most of t= he time they stay at 2670 or so. I never saw 38 inHG so far =E2=80=93 any co= mments? >=20 > =20 >=20 > Since the last max power test I put the gap seals on (4 tapes per control s= urface from wings and wheels) and I coated the plane with Kiss polymers. I t= hink I see an improvement of 3 kts or so. How much the plenum (with all the s= ealing recommendations from Fred Moreno) helped I cannot tell because I don=E2= =80=99t have real before / after data. Between the before / after rebuilt of= the complete airplane the speed of the plane increased by 20 to 25 kts (but= I had huge holes and gaps in/around the fuselage). >=20 > =20 >=20 > Static wicks: the outer one on the aileron vibrates a lot. The inner one s= eems almost still. I lost already the two outer ones because they unscrewed t= hemselves. Do you use Loctide for yours or do I have an extraordinary proble= m going on. The ones on the elevator I can=E2=80=99t see but they are still t= here so I assume they are fine. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Thanks for your help >=20 > =20 >=20 > Ralf --Apple-Mail-2--841004897 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Ralf,

Re your s= tatic wick. Put a couple of layers of shrink tube on it to stiffen it up.

Jeff 

Sent from my iPad

On A= ug 29, 2011, at 7:07 AM, Craig Berland. <cberland@systems3.net> wrote:

= Ralf,

Your L= OP numbers look pretty good=E2=80=A6.including speed. That is assuming your I= AS is correct. Line number 32 is a little too rich for my blood.  TCM m= ax cruise is about as abusive as its gets.  I would never run my engine= there.  The problem I see is your take-off fuel rate is set too low.&n= bsp; It should be around 41 gph at your take off RPM and MAP.  At 38 in= Hg and 2700 rpm, it should be around 43 gph. I am pretty sure the low =E2=80= =9Cfull rich=E2=80=9D fuel rate is what is causing your climb out CHT=E2=80=99= s to climb above 380 degF.  I had my electric fuel low boost switch fai= l and my CHT=E2=80=99s went up to 400 degF at 16000.  I descended to 12= 000 and finished the trip home without low boost.  Increase your take o= ff fuel rate and you will be happy.  =E2=80=9CI think=E2=80=9D.

Craig

=  

Dear subscribers,

 

Thanks t= o everybody to help me understand the LOP operations. The Pelican articles h= elped a lot and Craig spend a lot of time writing everything down for me.

 

I determined my TIT (which was surprisingly low) and I took all the discu= ssed power settings and ran them at 10000 and 18000. I waited several minute= s on each setting to make sure that I have stable conditions.

=

 

In my tab= le you can find the climb and all the power settings we discussed so far. &n= bsp;May be you have some recommendations after looking at my data.

 

IAS a= nd TAS I took from my steam gage =E2=80=93 any corrections are welcome to co= rrect my numbers.

 

=

In climb (full fuel =E2=80=93 just me) I forgot to tu= rn on the boost pump =E2=80=93 this makes my CHT temps go up starting at 700= 0 ft. When I  turn the boost pump on everything usually stays below 385= F. Since I am burning so much fuel in climb I would be happy if you could re= commend power settings for the climb.

<= o:p> 

At 10000 I tried the recommended <= b>TCM MAX Cruise power settings and it made my head temps slowly creep up. I stopped at 400F. And I even went richer than TCM recommended. The temp s= pread between TIT max and TIT at TCM max cruise was only 40F. It seems my en= gine does not like it =E2=80=93 have you experienced anything similar? It se= ems I am on the down slope of the TIT curve but still around the peak of the= CHT.

 

Unfortunately my IAS at 10000 were significantly lower that Jeff L= iegner=E2=80=99s at 8000 in a previous posting L.

 

Some of the power settings gave me not a perfect smo= oth running engine =E2=80=93 I probably should not call it rough.

 

I ha= ve the B version of the engine which is rated for 38 inHG. But it just does n= ot want to go up all the way. I tried to adjust the rpm at the governor but i= t does not change much. The RPMs go up to 2700 on some days most of the time= they stay at 2670 or so. I never saw 38 inHG so far =E2=80=93 any comments?=

 

Since the last max power test I put the gap seals on (4 tapes p= er control surface from wings and wheels) and I coated the plane with Kiss p= olymers. I think I see an improvement of 3 kts or so. How much the plenum (w= ith all the sealing recommendations from Fred Moreno) helped I cannot tell b= ecause I don=E2=80=99t have real before / after data. Between the before / a= fter rebuilt of the complete airplane the speed of the plane increased by 20= to 25 kts (but I had huge holes and gaps in/around the fuselage).

 

Stat= ic wicks: the outer one on the aileron vibrates a lot. The inner one seems a= lmost still. I lost already the two outer ones because they unscrewed themse= lves. Do you use Loctide for yours or do I have an extraordinary problem goi= ng on. The ones on the elevator I can=E2=80=99t see but they are still there= so I assume they are fine.

 =

Thanks for your help

 

Ralf

= --Apple-Mail-2--841004897--