X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 1 [X] Return-Path: Received: from ms-smtp-01.southeast.rr.com ([24.25.9.100] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.3) with ESMTP id 1624560 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 30 Nov 2006 11:22:38 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.100; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from edward2 (cpe-024-074-100-190.carolina.res.rr.com [24.74.100.190]) by ms-smtp-01.southeast.rr.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id kAUGLiqt012183 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 2006 11:21:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000001c7149b$a1bad190$2402a8c0@edward2> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Planetary gear re-drive Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 21:53:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C71400.D1BFEC40" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C71400.D1BFEC40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The PSRU is a complex problem with many variables for sure. Tracy uses = synthetic oil mainly because of the much higher shear strength it has = over mineral based oil - his view is that translates into better = protection for the gears where a lot of oil shear occurs. Also the = higher operating temperature of synthetic makes it a better gear chewed = oil. I also use synthetic 15-50 weight and have for the past 5 years. FWIW Ed Ed Anderson Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered Matthews, NC eanderson@carolina.rr.com http://members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW http://www.dmack.net/mazda/index.html ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Al Gietzen=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 9:01 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Planetary gear re-drive My comment was somewhat 'tongue in cheek' as they say - not to be = taken too seriously. I understand that there isn't anything about which = you can't find an extreme opinion; on either extreme. As I fly my = experimental aircraft with a one-of-a-kind experimental engine = installation; and as the builder, I'm aware of the many of things that = can go wrong. The awareness is heightened when flying a plane that = lands at close to 100 mph; and there is a lot of unfriendly terrain in = my flight test area. As was mentioned; clearly the lubrication is a key factor. Using the = engine oil for the gear drive makes me think that the suggestion of = lightweight oils, as you might use in your car, is not the best idea. A = question I have is 'What should be the limit on the oil exiting from the = drive?' At the end of a climb-out on a warm day, when the oil temp = (back from the cooler) is getting to about 220F, I have seen 250-260F on = the re-drive return oil line. And is a synthetic better for the gear = drive than a mineral based oil? What is your take-off and cruise HP numbers - your probably within the = safety limits, with a reduced life expectancy being the most likely = down=20 side. George ( down under) I don't get much past about 5100-5200 rpm on takeoff and climb, so = probably less than 220 hp. Cruise is in the 200 hp neighborhood. = Should be within the capabilities of the C-6. Al -----Original Message----- From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] = On Behalf Of kevin lane Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 11:23 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EAA 782 meeting I brought this up because I was interested in further discussion. as = with=20 all the conversion aspects, the working environment for aircraft is = always=20 different from the one the part was designed for. for instance, I = would=20 imagine that the truck would deliver quick reversals of torque and = operate=20 typically at a much lesser rpm. that must make some difference. I = assumed=20 that someone else with relevant background experience might also = challenge=20 some of these statements. when I was having Lycoming cylinder = problems I=20 spoke with one shop that just ranted about ECI cylinders, they were = crap=20 etc.... and he would swap me for 2nd life lycomings. I found other = shops=20 that didn't feel that way and had mine welded (they only had 800 hrs = on=20 them). since then I dodged the bullet on the ECI recall because mine = were=20 an earlier forging, but, it shows there are many sides to every story, = like=20 the blind men and the elephant. kevin (white cane in hand!) ----- Original Message -----=20 From: "Al Gietzen" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 7:52 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EAA 782 meeting Ken talked about a friend who is a top authority on transmissions and his love of ford t-6 gear systems, = because they keep him well employed. he said this friend proceeded to show = him a 55 gallon barrel of broken parts, not a Chevy or dodge part in there, all = ford. ------------- Gee; thanks. Really ups my confidence flying a 20B with a Ford C-6 planetary reduction:). Al -- Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/=20 -- Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/ ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C71400.D1BFEC40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The PSRU is a complex problem with many = variables for=20 sure.  Tracy uses synthetic oil mainly  because of the much = higher=20 shear strength it has over mineral based oil - his view is that = translates into=20 better protection for the gears where a lot of oil shear occurs.  = Also the=20 higher operating temperature of  synthetic makes it a better gear = chewed=20 oil.  I also use synthetic 15-50 weight and have for the past 5=20 years.
 
FWIW
 
Ed
 
Ed Anderson
Rv-6A N494BW Rotary = Powered
Matthews,=20 NC
eanderson@carolina.rr.comhttp:/= /members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW
http://www.dmack.net/mazda= /index.html
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Al = Gietzen=20
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, = 2006 9:01=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Planetary = gear=20 re-drive

My = comment was=20 somewhat =91tongue in cheek=92 as they say =96 not to be taken too = seriously. =20 I understand that there isn=92t anything about which you can=92t find = an extreme=20 opinion; on either extreme.  As I fly my experimental aircraft = with a=20 one-of-a-kind experimental engine installation; and as the builder, = I=92m aware=20 of the many of things that can go wrong.  The awareness is = heightened=20 when flying a plane that lands at close to 100 mph; and there is a lot = of=20 unfriendly terrain in my flight test area.

 

As was = mentioned;=20 clearly the lubrication is a key factor.  Using the engine oil = for the=20 gear drive makes me think that the suggestion of lightweight oils, as = you=20 might use in your car, is not the best idea.  A question I have = is =91What=20 should be the limit on the oil exiting from the drive?=92  At the = end of a=20 climb-out on a warm day, when the oil temp (back from the cooler) is = getting=20 to about 220F, I have seen 250-260F on the re-drive return oil = line.  And=20 is a synthetic better for the gear drive than a mineral based=20 oil?

 

What is your take-off = and cruise=20 HP numbers - your probably within the

safety limits, with a = reduced=20 life expectancy being the most likely down

side.

George ( down=20 under)

 

I don=92t = get much=20 past about 5100-5200 rpm on takeoff and climb, so probably less than = 220=20 hp.  Cruise is in the 200 hp neighborhood.  Should be within = the=20 capabilities of the C-6.

 

Al

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Rotary = motors in=20 aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of kevin = lane
Sent:=20 Wednesday, November 29, 2006 11:23 AM
To: Rotary motors in=20 aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EAA 782 meeting

 

I=20 brought this up because I was interested in further discussion.  = as with=20

all the conversion aspects, the working = environment=20 for aircraft is always

different from the one the part was designed = for.  for instance, I would

imagine that the truck would deliver quick = reversals=20 of torque and operate

typically at a much lesser rpm.  that = must make=20 some difference.  I assumed

that someone else with relevant background = experience=20 might also challenge

some of these statements.  when I was = having=20 Lycoming cylinder problems I

spoke with one shop that just ranted about = ECI=20 cylinders, they were crap

etc.... and he would swap me for 2nd life=20 lycomings.  I found other shops

that didn't feel that way and had mine = welded (they=20 only had 800 hrs on

them).  since then I dodged the bullet = on the ECI=20 recall because mine were

an earlier forging, but, it shows there are = many sides=20 to every story, like

the blind men and the = elephant.   =20 kevin (white cane in hand!)

----- Original Message ----- =

From: "Al Gietzen"=20 <ALVentures@cox.net>

To: "Rotary motors in aircraft"=20 <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>

Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 7:52=20 AM

Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EAA 782=20 meeting

 

 

Ken talked about a friend who is a=20 top

authority on transmissions and his love of = ford t-6=20 gear systems, because

they keep him well employed.  he said = this friend=20 proceeded to show him a 55

 

gallon barrel of broken parts, not a Chevy = or dodge=20 part in there, all ford.

 

-------------

 

Gee; thanks.  Really ups my confidence = flying a=20 20B with a Ford C-6

planetary reduction:).

 

Al

 

 

--

Homepage: =20 http://www.flyrotary.com/

Archive and UnSub:  =20 http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/

 

 

--

Homepage: =20 http://www.flyrotary.com/

Archive and UnSub:  =20 = http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/

------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C71400.D1BFEC40--