Thanks for your efforts, Mark....If you do locate
that deep dark hole, however, it certaintly will be appreciated. Paul
Conner
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2004 11:33
AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: First flight
test report on Renesis
Paul, Sorry, but I have bad news concerning the
SQ2000 video. I guess I spoke too soon as it appears to be hiding in
some deep dark hole. I have looked everywhere I can think of to look and
can't find it. I will keep an eye out for it, and also for my Lancair
video that must be hiding in the same hole. Anyway, I didn't want you
causing trouble with the UPS driver for losing your video. ;-) I'm
confident it will show up sooner or later, and when it does, its yours.
Thanks, Mark
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
- ----- Original Message -----
- From: Mark Steitle
- To: Rotary motors in
aircraft
- Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 7:20 AM
- Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: First flight test report on
Renesis
- Paul,
- 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.
- 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
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
- ----- Original Message -----
- From: Tracy Crook
- To: Rotary motors in
aircraft
- Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 2:38 PM
- 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.
-
- Tracy
-
- (8-15-04)
- Flight test report on Renesis engine installation, N84TC
- OAT 88 90 deg
- Humidity 90+%
-
- 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.
-
- 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.
- 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.
-
- 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:
-
- 1. higher coolant temps indicating more heat rejection,
or
- 2. Lower airflow through rad.
-
- 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.
-
- 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.
-
- 1. The coolant manifolds I made are too restrictive.
- 2. The water pump design is less effective than the 2nd gen
engine.
-
- 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.
-
- 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.
-
- 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.
- 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.
-
- 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.
-
- 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.
-
- 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.
|