In-tank, Ernest, not intake.

Jack


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernest Christley" <echristley@nc.rr.com>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 6:43 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: risk reduction methods


> al p wick wrote:
>
> > When you have any theory, you need to find a way to convert that to
> > facts. This is profound. You see, we don't do that naturally. We are
> > very comfortable making decisions entirely based on theory. Theory are
> > thoughts. Facts are numbers. We need to distinguish the two.
>
>
> Go back in the archives and look at the experiments on electric water
> pumps set up by Bob White (I think it was Bob).  Long discussion
> concerning things like what will temperature do to viscosity of coolant
> and what that will do to the flow rate, followed by valiant effort to
> turn theories into facts which left us all with real world numbers.  
> Then there's Rusty who has both a mechanical pump and an EWP installed
> so that he can safely run test.  And then there is Ed, who has done some
> incredible work with intake tuning with variable length intakes.  It is
> simply not true that we run around spouting theory without building and
> testing the same.  I hear that is done on another list, but I have no
> firsthand knowledge of it.
>
> BTW, Rusty, if you're listening, I think I know where I went wrong in
> interpretting that French guy.  Viscosity does decrease with temperature
> at some mathematical deterministic rate that I have written down
> somewhere, but Mother Nature works in Kelvin, not Farenheit or Celcius.  
> The small margin seen in the experiment makes perfect sense when you
> take that little bit of information into account. (90 to 180 isn't  
> doubled if those numbers are really 570 and 660).
>
> > So I provided a great example of the Subaru timing chain defect. Can
> > you find a way to convert those concepts to your aircraft? If you can,
> > you are on the path.
>
>
> I don't know.  Replace stuff before it breaks?  Replace all the soft
> parts every 5yrs? (You'll find me recommending this at some time in the
> not to distant past.)
>
> > Let's take a real world example. Your fuel delivery system. How do you
> > know the distance between it and failure? Vapor lock failure is at one
> > end of a curve. We want to be as far as possible from that end. How do
> > you know that distance? Right now we use theory. We guess. But you
> > don't have to guess. You can easily measure your safety margin. There
> > are many simple tricks to measuring all of your safety margins. Not
> > just this item.
>
>
> If you have a method of measuring the potential for vapor lock, then a
> lot of people will be beating a path to your door.  I'll be amoung
> them.  So far I'm just hearing you say that we should measure the
> unmeasurable.  If all it takes is a few simple tricks then I don't think
> there would be as many accidents as there are now.
>
> >  
> > Of course, I'm assuming that there are users who are unable to install
> > intank pumps. After all, those pumps do virtually eliminate all vapor
> > lock risk.
>
>
> Intake pump?  Please, please define intake pump.
>
> --
> This is by far the hardest lesson about freedom. It goes against
> instinct, and morality, to just sit back and watch people make
> mistakes. We want to help them, which means control them and their
> decisions, but in doing so we actually hurt them (and ourselves)."
>
>
> >>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> >>  Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
>
>