Return-Path: Received: from relay2.mail.twtelecom.net ([216.54.204.190] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c2) with ESMTP id 757532 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 24 Feb 2005 12:30:08 -0500 Received-SPF: neutral receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.54.204.190; envelope-from=hsanders@bellsouth.net Received: from herbhehbdwmte2 (66-162-168-98.gen.twtelecom.net [66.162.168.98]) by relay2.mail.twtelecom.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09842C171 for ; Thu, 24 Feb 2005 11:29:21 -0600 (CST) From: "Herb Sanders" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Vapor Lock Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 11:29:18 -0600 Message-ID: <000001c51a96$5f24c8f0$1900a8c0@herbhehbdwmte2> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Paul, I'm confused. Your post on 2/23 says you did not run with the vent installed and the Facet in line - but this post says you ran it and it = quit from what appeared to be vapor lock.?????=20 Maybe I am misreading something.=20 Herb > -----Original Message----- > From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] = On > Behalf Of Paul > Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 7:26 PM > To: Rotary motors in aircraft > Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Vapor Lock >=20 > I ran my engine today with all the firesleeve installed and the new = sump > tank vent. After 3 engine runs at WOT, the water temp hit 230 (and > climbing), and the engine started acting just like it did the day of = my > forced landing. Sputtering, erratic and finally just it quit, and = would > not > restart. I turned on my inline Facet fuel pump. It took 3 or 4 = seconds, > then the engine came back to life. I was able to taxi back to the = hangar > (I > used about 1/2 throttle to get the aircraft rolling, then throttled = back a > bit to taxi). My Facet pump is between the main tanks and the sump > tank.(after the fuel selector valve). The EFI pumps are after the sump > tank > and before the fuel rail/regulator. The unused fuel from the regulator > returns to the sump tank. There is no way the engine would run = without > the > Facet pump to push fresh gasoline into the sump tank, which was = obviously > filled with gas and bubbles after the thorough heat soaking it = received. > With the Facet pump still on, and taxiing under reduced power, the = temps > came down from 240 to 210 by the time I reached the hangar, and shut = it > down. My sump tank is vented with a 3/16" OD line on the top, which = goes > into the top of my left fuel tank. The line is opaque, and I can see = fuel > movement going through the new vent line when the Facet pump is turned = on. > Unfortunately, I can't tell if it is clear fuel or bubbles, or a = mixture, > as > the line is opaque rather than clear, but I can definately see motion = and > tell it's direction of flow. Hope this more helpful than confusing. = Paul > Conner >=20 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jim Sower" > To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" > Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 10:41 AM > Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Vapor Lock >=20 >=20 > > <... HP pumps are capable of moving LOTS more fuel than a Facet pump = ... > > HP pumps would be drawing fuel through the Facet pump ... because = the > > Facet can't keep up ...> > > > > You're right. I hadn't thought of that. Facet pumps deliver 30 = gph. > > I'll check how much my HP pumps are putting out. Wonder if Facet > delivers > > more at lower head pressure, objective being to push fuel through = filter > > and plumbing so there's less chance of pressure drop that could = cause > the > > fuel to vaporize. > > > > Back to the drawing board ... maybe ... Jim S. > > > > Marvin Kaye wrote: > > > >> Jim Sower wrote: > >> > >> """ > >> I have a canard, but I will have a Facet pump near (and below) the > wing > >> tanks > >> to PUSH the fuel through the filter and fuel flow transducer. I = don't > >> want > >> the HP pumps to SUCK through the filters and etc. for fear of > vaporizing > >> the > >> fuel. > >> """ > >> > >> This doesn't make any sense to me, but perhaps I'm missing = something. > >> The HP pumps are capable of moving LOTS more fuel than a Facet = pump. > >> Consequently, it seems to me that the HP pumps would actually be > drawing > >> fuel through the Facet pump when they're switched on, simply = because > the > >> Facet can't keep up with what's being drawn out of the sump tank by > them. > >> Additionally, a return system needs 2 flow transducers, one for the > feed > >> line and one for the return... then the display instrument's > electronics > >> deduct the return flow from the feed flow to properly calculate = actual > >> through-the-injectors instantaneous flow data. (The EI fuel flow > >> instrument uses an FFDM-1 (fuel flow differential module) to do the > job, > >> GRT EIS does it itself, as do other flow instruments with both feed = and > >> return inputs.) > >> > >> As long as the filters are rated to flow as much fuel as the HP = pumps > are > >> capable of pushing I don't see that (vapoization) as an issue. The > >> filter elements do need to be kept clean, and are a = replace-at-annual > >> item. > >> > >> > >> > >>>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > >>>> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html > >>> > >> > >> > > > >>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > >>> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html > > > > > > -- > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 2/14/2005 > > > > >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 2/14/2005 >=20 >=20 > >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html