|
Kelly,
Sorry have no photo of the insert but it's simple
enough. Just weld the insert to the housing in the water jacket area and
back-fill with high temp resin - pressurize it if you wish, I probably will,
just in case.
George ( down under)
George,
Interesting exchange on this subject
again..............Jerry Hey of this group is/was doing
some "P" ports utilizing an aluminum insert.........I think a sealant was
then used for the rest
of the cavity...........Have not heard from Jerry for a while (jump in
here if you are listening
Jerry) but photos looked good.......Do you have access to any photos from
"Down Under"
George showing the aluminum inserts and/or the same welded in place
??.............
--
Kelly Troyer
"Dyke Delta"_13B
ROTARY Engine
"RWS"_RD1C/EC2/EM2
"Mistral"_Backplate/Oil Manifold
--------------
Original message from "George Lendich" <lendich@aanet.com.au>:
--------------
Bill,
Good on Ya! I'm a bit behind my e-mails BTW.
I have a great solution for the PP problems of leaking coolant. I
notice that PL advocates welding to the inner rotor steel liner - however
not much to weld to, and then pressurizes the resin filler.
Now this is not my idea but it sis working well locally and that is to
weld a Al tube to the inner Al housing - weld it rights around and then fill
the remainder with resin. Seems to work much better than what was done
previously and ahs held up in well in racing applications.
George ( down under)
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, September 07, 2009 5:06
AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Three or
two?
Gonzalo,
Sorry to be contrary, but in my opinion the ONLY way to go for a
flying rotary is P-port. All of the original Power Sport engines (the
Everette Hatch P.S.) ran P-ports. The manifolding for a P-port engine is
vastly easier. In fact Hatch and Steve Beckham built several engines with
P-ports that even ran reverse rotation so they could get proper propeller
rotation with some gearboxes. You can even P-port an Renesis and it still
works. The reason that Mazda isn't P-porting their race cars has nothing
to do with if P-porting is better, it is racing organizations
requirements. The reason for the side port Renesis is for emissions and
low RPM fuel economy. Those are areas that are only important in a CAR.
The typical aircraft runs 50% to 90% ALL THE TIME and P-ports are much
better at mid to high RPMS. The Mazda Le Mans winning engine used P-ports
and they were running with a fuel economy formula. (the fuel was limited)
For high output P-ports just work better.
Bill Jepson
Gonzalo,
A lot of people
talk about peripheral porting rotaries but nobody is doing it with a
rotary that they plan to fly behind. If it was such a good thing,
Mazda would be P-Porting their cars. Instead they are going away
even from the peripheral port for the exhaust with the Renesis.
If 200 HP will
do it for you the Renesis is the way to go. This process of
putting an alternative engine in a plane is hard enough without
violating the KISS principle.
Put in a
Renesis, no turbo, no P-Port.
Bill
B
From:
Rotary motors in aircraft
[mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of George
Lendich
Sent: Sunday,
August 23, 2009 5:57 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Three or
two?
I don't know if the Renesis
has a turbo version, I didn't think it did. All turbo 13B's require
low compression rotors.
|