Message

Return-Path: Received: from corpprd-pxy2.canfor.ca ([198.162.160.3] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c3) with ESMTP id 801013 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 16:15:19 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=198.162.160.3; envelope-from=Steve.Bartrim@canfor.com Received: from corpprod2.canfor.ca (corpprod2.canfor.ca [198.162.162.35]) by corpprd-pxy2.canfor.ca (Build 103 8.9.3p2/NT-8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA00069 for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:14:32 -0800 Received: from canformail1.canfor.ca ([199.60.193.29]) by corpprod2.canfor.ca with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:28:17 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C52B1E.3D445848" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Electric water pump Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 10:22:12 -0800 Message-ID: <091A2D42FAF91A41B84750D269FC97E72B313B@canformail1.canfor.ca> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [FlyRotary] Re: Electric water pump Thread-Index: AcUqmme/33BWgsT/RAKTFHcqizjEPgAgbO3Q From: "Bartrim, Todd" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Mar 2005 20:28:17.0883 (UTC) FILETIME=[DA7A42B0:01C52B2F] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C52B1E.3D445848 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yeah, I thought Tracy and yourself were using the smaller hoses with the pretty AN fittings, and there is no doubt that Tracy at least has been successful (and I'm sure you'll be right behind him :-), but I still stand by my theory that if the automakers use no less than 1.25" hoses, then why would should we when we have a higher heat rejection requirement. Now maybe we can get away with less, but then the argument that the EWP can't possibly have enough flow because of our higher heat output is invalid. Maybe we can get away with smaller hoses, or maybe we can get away with an EWP, but can we get away with smaller hoses AND an EWP??? Because I knew that many were watching closely as mine was the first known aircraft use of an EWP (some hoping for success and many expecting failure), I decided that 1.25" hoses were mandatory. I'd originally started my installation with 1" hose, but changed my mind on this before I was even completed that part of the installation. =20 Todd =20 If I'm not mistaken, Tracy is using 3/4" hoses??? I've been using AN12 hoses, with two evap cores in series, and there has never been a question of cooling the water on the RV-3, even in severe climb tests. The antique mechanical pump does have a lot of muscle, and might be making up for it though, and I still haven't found a way to test the EWP by itself in flight. =20 =20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C52B1E.3D445848 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message

Yeah, I thought Tracy and = yourself were=20 using the smaller hoses with the pretty AN fittings, and there is no = doubt that=20 Tracy at least has been successful (and I'm sure you'll be right behind = him :-),=20 but I still stand by my theory that if the automakers use no less than = 1.25"=20 hoses, then why would should we when we have a higher heat rejection=20 requirement.

Now maybe we can get away with = less, but then=20 the argument that the EWP can't possibly have enough flow because of our = higher=20 heat output is invalid. Maybe we can get away with smaller hoses, or = maybe we=20 can get away with an EWP, but can we get away with smaller hoses AND an=20 EWP???

Because I knew that many were = watching closely=20 as mine was the first known aircraft use of an EWP (some hoping for = success and=20 many expecting failure), I decided that 1.25" hoses were mandatory. I'd=20 originally started my installation with 1" hose, but changed my mind on = this=20 before I was even completed that part of the = installation.

Todd

If I'm not mistaken, = Tracy is=20 using 3/4" hoses??? I've been using AN12 hoses, with = two evap cores=20 in series, and there has never been a question of cooling the = water on=20 the RV-3, even in severe climb tests. The antique=20 mechanical pump does have a lot of muscle, and might be making up = for it though, and I still haven't found a way to test the EWP by = itself=20 in flight.

= ------_=_NextPart_001_01C52B1E.3D445848--