Return-Path: Received: from imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.66] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2) with ESMTP id 368699 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 16:14:11 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.66; envelope-from=sqpilot@bellsouth.net Received: from Carol ([209.214.44.67]) by imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.08 201-253-122-130-108-20031117) with SMTP id <20040817201336.WCK1786.imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net@Carol> for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 16:13:36 -0400 Message-ID: <00ab01c48496$a28eb9c0$0000a398@Carol> From: "paul" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: First flight test report on Renesis Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:13:16 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00A8_01C4846C.B8CEEE00" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00A8_01C4846C.B8CEEE00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Done deal, Mark....My wings are already at the airport, hopefully the = fuselage will follow shortly so I can fit the cowling, then it's time to = try it out. Thanks again. Paul Conner ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Mark Steitle=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 3:06 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: First flight test report on Renesis Paul, I'll drop it in the mail in the next day or two. I'll exchange = postage for a ride in your SQ2000. ;-) Mark=20 At 02:54 PM 8/17/2004 -0500, you wrote: Hi, Marc....I would absoulutely LOVE to have that tape !!!! Please = mail or UPS it to me, and I will of course send you the money for = shipping right away. Thanks so much for taking the time to do this. = Paul Conner, 5181 Southern Oaks Trail, Grand Bay, AL 36541 =20 =20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Mark Steitle=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 7:20 AM=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: First flight test report on Renesis Paul,=20 You're building an SQ2000, right? I looked at that kit a number = of years ago, but they went out of business just before I was ready to = send them a check. Anyway, I had ordered their information packet with = demo tape. I still have the tape, so if you want it for your library, = its yours. I could bring it to Tracy's fly-in if you're planning on = attending, or I could just mail it.=20 Mark S. =20 At 07:57 PM 8/16/2004 -0500, you wrote: Hi, Tracy.....thanks so much for taking the time to write such a = detailed description of the first Renesis flight. We all appreciate = your efforts, and especially your efforts to share your results. Best = of luck in bringing down the temperatures. Paul Conner, 13b powered = SQ2000 canard=20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Tracy Crook=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 2:38 PM=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] First flight test report on Renesis The first test created more questions than answers and much work = to do. Here is my development log entry for the flight. =20 Tracy =20 (8-15-04) Flight test report on Renesis engine installation, N84TC =20 OAT 88 - 90 deg Humidity 90+% =20 Pilot impressions: Takeoff done with engine warm (~ 155 F) but water Temp was 207 = on first check after rotation. Reduced throttle and orbited SB for 64 = minutes at ~ 1000 ft. MSL. Engine very smooth with low cockpit noise = level. Water temp slowly fell to 195 - 197 at fuel burn of 5 - 5.5 GPH. = Engine RPM was 4300 - 4700 during flight. Very brief (few seconds) = full throttle test yielded only 5800 rpm and engine did not feel strong. = MAP appeared to be limited to ~ 28" Hg. Water temp immediately climbed = to ~ 205 and power was reduced. Oil pressure continued to read 100 PSI = (full scale on instrument) as it has during ground tests. Engine = builder used 3rd gen rear pressure regulator and it has been my = assumption that this was normal for it. Reset oil pressure high limit on = engine monitor to 102 PSI to get rid of flashing alarm. Oil temps were = stable at 185F during entire flight. Normal landing with engine temps = falling rapidly during final approach. =20 Post flight engine check (engine still hot): Gear drive had normal system lash Turning over engine w/ prop, engine felt tight, higher friction = than previous checks. =20 Rotor compression felt normal (very good) but feel was hampered = by engine friction. Smell test through cooling inlets: Aroma was very different = than earlier engine installation although no sign of anything bad. =20 =20 Significant data: Air temp delta on right side rad was 80 - 85 deg F Water temp delta: 20 - 25 F Oil temp delta: ~ 30 F Oil cooler air temp delta was ~ 45 - 50 F which was normal at = the low power setting being tested. MAP at WOT appeared to be 1.5 - 2.0 " below atmospheric. Analysis: High coolant temperature was very disappointing as I = had expected much better cooling with the improved diffusers. Reasons = for the high temps can be surmised by delta temps above. The high air = temp Delta would indicate one of two things: =20 1. higher coolant temps indicating more heat rejection, or 2. Lower airflow through rad. =20 The coolant temp was higher but only marginally (10 deg after = stabilized at 195) This would not account for a 30+ deg increase in air = delta. This leads me to believe that reduced airflow is the cause. = The diffuser on this rad cannot possibly (?) be worse than before so my = guess is that the greatly extended duct divider that separates the oil = cooler duct from the rad duct is having an adverse effect. Oil cooling = was not a problem and delta was in normal range so it was not hurt by = the divider and may even have been improved. =20 =20 The water temp delta would indicate that the water flow rate is = less than half of the previous value when deltas were in the range of 10 = - 12 F. Two possible causes come to mind. =20 1. The coolant manifolds I made are too restrictive. 2. The water pump design is less effective than the 2nd gen = engine. =20 1 was a concern even while I was building them. I thought they = would be adequate because the coolant outlet arrangement does not appear = to be any more restrictive than the previous setup. OTOH, the inlet = setup could be significantly worse than before. It has 90 degree = fittings which could be a problem. =20 The water pump design is the same as the 3rd gen 13B which looks = crude by comparison to the 2nd gen but has evidently been adequate in = the auto racing environment. It may require a much cleaner coolant path = in order to achieve adequate circulation. Or conversely, the 2nd gen = pump may be much more tolerant of restrictive coolant paths. =20 Oil Pressure The 100 (+?) psi oil pressure is a concern after learning from = the engine builder that the 3rd gen oil pressure regulator (presumably = equipped with a Renesis regulator spring) is supposed to give pressure = in the range of 70 - 85 psi. This would indicate that the pressure is = being regulated not by the rear regulator but the front pressure relief = regulator which does not become active until 150+ psi. As I write = this, I decided to check the Racing Beat Tech manual for info on oil = pressure. According to their chart, the 93 -95 rear pressure regulator = is set at 110 PSI !. This leaves me with no firm conclusion about the = oil pressure readings. =20 Engine builder later confirmed that he had pressure spec wrong. = 3rd gen is specified as 110 psi. A 3rd gen car racer also said that his = oil pressure runs 85 - 95 psi hot. Off scale when cold. Have canceled = tentative plans to pull the engine for this problem. I would still = prefer to have a lower pressure regulator and will do this if I have = another opportunity. =20 Low MAP This problem is probably due to the relatively long and tortuous = path between the NACA inlet and throttle body. There is over 4 feet of = 2.75" Dia. Aeroduct (SCEET?) between the two. I was concerned from the = start that this stuff would cause a pressure drop. It will have to go. = Many more hours of fiberglass work required to fix. =20 Did prop pull-through test of engine 'feel' and it was same as = earlier tests prior to flight test. Compression of engine when pulled = through in reverse is impressive.=20 =20 Confirmed that the air temp sensor behind right rad was = accurate. In view of this I have decided to cut the duct divider back = to near its original position and re-test. ------=_NextPart_000_00A8_01C4846C.B8CEEE00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Done deal, Mark....My wings are already = at the=20 airport, hopefully the fuselage will follow shortly so I can fit the = cowling,=20 then it's time to try it out.  Thanks again.  Paul = Conner
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Mark=20 Steitle
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 = 3:06=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: First = flight=20 test report on Renesis

Paul,
I'll drop it in the mail in the = next day=20 or two.  I'll exchange postage for a ride in your SQ2000. =20 ;-)

Mark


At 02:54 PM 8/17/2004 -0500, you = wrote:
Hi,=20 Marc....I would absoulutely LOVE to have that tape !!!!  Please = mail or=20 UPS it to me, and I will of course send you the money for shipping = right=20 away.  Thanks so much for taking the time to do this.  = Paul=20 Conner, 5181 Southern Oaks Trail, Grand Bay, AL 36541  =20
 =20
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Mark = Steitle=20
To: Rotary = motors in=20 aircraft=20
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 7:20 AM=20
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: First flight test report on=20 Renesis

Paul,=20
You're building an SQ2000, right?  I looked at that kit a = number=20 of years ago, but they went out of business just before I was = ready to=20 send them a check.  Anyway, I had ordered their information = packet=20 with demo tape.  I still have the tape, so if you want it for = your=20 library, its yours.  I could bring it to Tracy's fly-in if = you're=20 planning on attending, or I could just mail it.

Mark S. 

At 07:57 PM 8/16/2004 -0500, you wrote:
Hi, Tracy.....thanks so much for taking the time to write = such a=20 detailed description of the first Renesis flight.  We all=20 appreciate your efforts, and especially your efforts to share = your=20 results.  Best of luck in bringing down the = temperatures. =20 Paul Conner, 13b powered SQ2000 canard=20
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Tracy Crook=20
To: Rotary = motors in=20 aircraft=20
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 2:38 PM=20
Subject: [FlyRotary] First flight test report on = Renesis

The first test created more questions than answers and much = work to=20 do.  Here is my development log entry for the=20 flight.





=20
Tracy





=20
(8-15-04)

Flight test report on Renesis engine installation, = N84TC  =20

OAT 88 =96 90 deg

Humidity 90+%





=20
Pilot impressions:

Takeoff  done with engine warm (~ 155 F) but water Temp = was 207=20 on first check after rotation.  Reduced throttle and = orbited SB for=20 64 minutes at ~ 1000 ft. MSL.  Engine very smooth with low = cockpit=20 noise level.  Water temp slowly fell to 195 =96 197 at fuel = burn of 5=20 =96 5.5 GPH.  Engine RPM was 4300 =96 4700 during = flight.  Very=20 brief (few seconds) full throttle test yielded only 5800 rpm and = engine=20 did not feel strong.  MAP appeared to be limited to ~ 28=94 = Hg. Water=20 temp immediately climbed to ~ 205 and power was reduced.  = Oil=20 pressure continued to read 100 PSI (full scale on instrument) as = it has=20 during ground tests.  Engine builder used 3rd gen rear = pressure=20 regulator and it has been my assumption that this was normal for = it.=20 Reset oil pressure high limit on engine monitor to 102 PSI to = get rid of=20 flashing alarm.  Oil temps were stable at 185F during = entire=20 flight.  Normal landing with engine temps falling rapidly = during=20 final approach.





=20
Post flight engine check (engine still hot):

Gear drive had normal system lash

Turning over engine w/ prop, engine felt tight, higher = friction than=20 previous checks. 

Rotor compression felt normal (very good) but feel was = hampered by=20 engine friction.

Smell test through cooling inlets:  Aroma was very = different=20 than earlier engine installation although no sign of anything = bad. =20





=20
Significant data:

Air temp delta on right side rad was 80 =96 85 deg F

Water temp delta:  20 =96 25 F

Oil temp delta:   ~ 30 F

Oil cooler air temp delta was ~ 45 - 50 F which was normal = at the=20 low power setting being tested.

MAP at WOT appeared to be 1.5 =96 2.0 =93 below = atmospheric.

Analysis:  High coolant temperature was very = disappointing as I=20 had expected much better cooling with the improved=20 diffusers.   Reasons for the high temps can be = surmised by=20 delta temps above.  The high air temp Delta would indicate = one of=20 two things:





=20
1.  higher coolant temps indicating more heat = rejection,=20 or

2.  Lower airflow through rad.





=20
The coolant temp was higher but only marginally (10 deg = after=20 stabilized at 195)  This would not account for a 30+ deg = increase=20 in air delta.  This leads me to believe that reduced = airflow is the=20 cause.   The diffuser on this rad cannot possibly (?) = be worse=20 than before so my guess is that the greatly extended duct = divider that=20 separates the oil cooler duct from the rad duct is having an = adverse=20 effect.  Oil cooling was not a problem and delta was in = normal=20 range so it was not hurt by the divider and may even have been=20 improved. 





=20
The water temp delta would indicate that the water flow rate = is less=20 than half of the previous value when deltas were in the range of = 10 =96 12=20 F.   Two possible causes come to = mind.





=20
1.  The coolant manifolds I made are too = restrictive.

2.  The water pump design is less effective than the = 2nd gen=20 engine.





=20
1 was a concern even while I was building them.  I = thought they=20 would be adequate because the coolant outlet arrangement does = not appear=20 to be any more restrictive than the previous setup.  = OTOH, =20 the inlet setup could be significantly worse than before.  = It has=20 90 degree fittings which could be a = problem.





=20
The water pump design is the same as the 3rd gen 13B which = looks=20 crude by comparison to the 2nd gen but has evidently been = adequate in=20 the auto racing environment.  It may require a much cleaner = coolant=20 path in order to achieve adequate circulation.  Or = conversely, the=20 2nd gen pump may be much more tolerant of restrictive coolant=20 paths.





=20
Oil Pressure

The 100 (+?) psi oil pressure is a concern after learning = from the=20 engine builder that the 3rd gen oil pressure regulator = (presumably=20 equipped with a Renesis regulator spring)  is supposed to = give=20 pressure in the range of 70 =96 85 psi.  This would = indicate that the=20 pressure is being regulated not by the rear regulator but the = front=20 pressure relief regulator which does not become active until = 150+=20 psi.    As I write this, I decided to check the = Racing=20 Beat Tech manual for info on oil pressure.  According to = their=20 chart, the 93 -95 rear pressure regulator is set at 110 PSI = !. =20 This leaves me with no firm conclusion about the oil pressure=20 readings.  

Engine builder later confirmed that he had pressure spec=20 wrong.  3rd gen is specified as 110 psi.  A 3rd gen = car racer=20 also said that his oil pressure runs 85 =96 95 psi hot.  = Off scale=20 when cold.  Have canceled tentative plans to pull the = engine for=20 this problem.  I would still prefer to have a lower = pressure=20 regulator and will do this if I have another=20 opportunity.



=20
Low MAP

This problem is probably due to the relatively long and = tortuous=20 path between the NACA inlet and throttle body.  There is = over 4=20 feet of 2.75=94 Dia. Aeroduct (SCEET?) between the two.  I = was=20 concerned from the start that this stuff would cause a pressure=20 drop.  It will have to go.  Many more hours of = fiberglass work=20 required to fix.





=20
Did prop pull-through test of engine =91feel=92 and it was = same as=20 earlier tests prior to flight test.  Compression of engine = when=20 pulled through in reverse is impressive. =





=20
Confirmed that the air temp sensor behind right rad was=20 accurate.  In view of this I have decided to cut the duct = divider=20 back to near its original position and re-test. =20
------=_NextPart_000_00A8_01C4846C.B8CEEE00--