X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 30 [X] Return-Path: Received: from [201.225.225.167] (HELO cwpanama.net) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.6) with ESMTP id 1860799 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 24 Feb 2007 17:23:05 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=201.225.225.167; envelope-from=rijakits@cwpanama.net Received: from [201.224.94.164] (HELO usuario5ebe209) by frontend1.cwpanama.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with SMTP id 103457501 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 24 Feb 2007 17:29:29 -0500 Message-ID: <003c01c75862$29f0ba70$a45ee0c9@usuario5ebe209> From: "Thomas y Reina Jakits" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Primary regulator, and motor mount plate Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 17:21:43 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0039_01C75838.40C28050" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0039_01C75838.40C28050 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MessageHi all, Sandwich plate may work (even well), BUT it is not the cleanest = solution, more likely the simplest. This engine was never built to be a load carrying member of the drive = train (like some motorcycle or racing engines....). I don't even like the Mistral Engines solution ( and they probably did a = LOT of homework on this) - the backplate, altough the loadpath is easier = - straight through the engineblock, no turning forces 90=BA into the = sandwichplate and back 90=BA into the framemount. Personally I would keep any proploads (push/pull/torque) off the engine. A triangulated frame that attaches at the PSRU would be better - = Prop-Trans-Mount-Frame -=20 The engine hangs on the other side and provides the power, nothing else. As long as you run direct-drive the torque will never be more than the = engine produces, but as soon as you ad rpm-reduction you introduce more = torque coming back into the engine-housing.... Am I wrong somewhere...?? Thomas J. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: George Lendich=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 4:48 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Primary regulator, and motor mount plate =20 Greetings, The Dominator gyro is on order, to arrive around the first part of = April (I hope). The gear drive is still on order from Autoflight, and = hopefully, will be shipping soon. All I can do in the mean time is get = the engine as ready as possible, which mostly means making a new engine = mount plate of some type. =20 Question one- If I were to make a sandwiched plate, similar to what = CCI does (did ?) with their mounts, how thick would it need to be for a = single rotor? The CCI plate was 1/2" thick for the two rotor, and I = made my first single rotor mount that thick as well. Since I'd like to = reduce some weight, I'm wondering what I can cut this down to. I'm = guessing 3/8" at least, and maybe 1/4". Any suggestions? Second question, how much oil bypasses the primary regulator (in the = front cover) under normal operation? Does any bypass at all? I know = it's there primarily to prevent overpressure of the oil cooler in case = the lines get blocked, but I wonder if it's actually needed for normal = operation. In other words, can I plug up the primary regulator, and be = OK as long as nothing in the oil lines gets plugged up? =20 Thanks, Rusty (waiting for Ed to try his favorite brazing rods on the board) Rusty, I like the mount plate for simplicity - however it does move, and = move enough to get leaks. Since this is a perceived problem with the 2 = rotor, I would leave it 1/2" for the one rotor, with the required = internal holes. Just my opinion Matey! George ( down under) ------=_NextPart_000_0039_01C75838.40C28050 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
Hi all,
 
Sandwich plate may work (even well), = BUT it is not=20 the cleanest solution, more likely the simplest.
This engine was never built to be a = load carrying=20 member of the drive train (like some motorcycle or racing=20 engines....).
I don't even like the Mistral Engines = solution (=20 and they probably did a LOT of homework on this) - the backplate, = altough the=20 loadpath is easier - straight through the engineblock, no turning forces = 90=BA=20 into the sandwichplate and back 90=BA into the framemount.
Personally I would keep any proploads=20 (push/pull/torque) off the engine.
A triangulated frame that attaches at = the PSRU=20 would be better - Prop-Trans-Mount-Frame -
The engine hangs on the other side and = provides the=20 power, nothing else.
As long as you run direct-drive the = torque will=20 never be more than the engine produces, but as soon as you ad = rpm-reduction you=20 introduce more torque coming back into the = engine-housing....
 
Am I wrong somewhere...??
 
Thomas J.
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 George=20 Lendich
Sent: Saturday, February 24, = 2007 4:48=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = Primary=20 regulator, and motor mount plate


 
Greetings,
 
The = Dominator gyro is=20 on order, to arrive around the first part of April (I hope).  = The gear=20 drive is still on order from Autoflight, and hopefully, will be = shipping=20 soon.  All I can do in the mean time is get the engine as ready = as=20 possible, which mostly means making a new engine mount plate of some = type.  
 
Question = one- If I were=20 to make a sandwiched plate, similar to what CCI does (did ?) with = their=20 mounts, how thick would it need to be for a single rotor?  The = CCI=20 plate was 1/2" thick for the two rotor, and I made my first=20 single rotor mount that thick as well.  Since I'd like to = reduce=20 some weight, I'm wondering what I can cut this down to.  I'm = guessing=20 3/8" at least, and maybe 1/4".   Any=20 suggestions?
 
Second=20 question, how much oil bypasses the primary regulator (in = the=20 front cover) under normal operation?  Does any bypass at = all?  I=20 know it's there primarily to prevent overpressure of the oil cooler = in case=20 the lines get blocked, but I wonder if it's actually needed for = normal=20 operation.  In other words, can I plug up the primary = regulator, and be=20 OK as long as nothing in the oil lines gets plugged=20 up?  
 
Thanks,
Rusty = (waiting for Ed=20 to try his favorite brazing rods on the board)
 
Rusty,
I like the = mount plate=20 for simplicity - however it does move, and move enough to get leaks. = Since=20 this is a perceived problem with the 2 rotor, I would leave it 1/2" = for the=20 one rotor, with the required internal holes.
Just my = opinion=20 Matey!
George ( = down=20 under)
------=_NextPart_000_0039_01C75838.40C28050--