X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from imr-ma02.mx.aol.com ([64.12.206.40] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.5) with ESMTP id 5543676 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 15 May 2012 13:13:58 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.206.40; envelope-from=argoldman@aol.com Received: from mtaomg-ma05.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-ma05.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.41.12]) by imr-ma02.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q4FHDEUV007137 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 13:13:14 -0400 Received: from core-dsa003b.r1000.mail.aol.com (core-dsa003.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.29.252.73]) by mtaomg-ma05.r1000.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id 8095BE000082 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 13:13:14 -0400 (EDT) References: To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Fuel Flow In-Reply-To: X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: argoldman@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8CF00D525A78957_2110_11D20_webmail-d152.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 36081-STANDARD Received: from 99.104.62.211 by webmail-d152.sysops.aol.com (205.188.58.132) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 15 May 2012 13:13:14 -0400 Message-Id: <8CF00D525921CF7-2110-4BFD@webmail-d152.sysops.aol.com> X-Originating-IP: [99.104.62.211] Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 13:13:14 -0400 (EDT) x-aol-global-disposition: G DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20110426; t=1337101994; bh=4mjLIV4vcEUZTeG0NtWDfcNBgyCbhx6IB85ZSH6fB38=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=cLBKsxcwBehG8jaDxoLeohZNowT3jE3vQyTtRmTPG/wXEsKzC0USwyz+TJvaiTGY5 klbOd77+mb8pJfWDFG/KTOI2AdHbnJ9hSoxEXTpb+byKpQ0lwiCYMfx/Rssc8JUk7D T8fWnU1NzLjXk7ADeqsgeLflDqPmq9KUMugZ9qIY= X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:411815232:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d290c4fb28eaa54da This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ----------MB_8CF00D525A78957_2110_11D20_webmail-d152.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Bill, I don't know if you are aware but the Girllllllllls do make a plate for the= 20, as well as an engine mount. Look at their site =20 =20 =20 -----Original Message----- From: Bill Bradburry To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Tue, May 15, 2012 10:34 am Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fuel Flow Bobby, =20 The Renesis has a 10:1 compressionratio. Are you sure you are not getting = detonation at high (30-40)manifold pressures and low (1700 prop) rpms? The= se considerations and thefact that I just don=E2=80=99t have room to squeez= e it in are the reasons that I decidedagainst a turbo. The stock (car) eng= ine has a knock sensor, but we don=E2=80=99thave any way to monitor it and = with the noise and headsets to cancel it out, I doubtthat we would ever hea= r detonation unless engine parts were flying past ourears. :>) =20 I would like a little more power, but forme, it would be easier to install = a 20B than to switch to a turbo. I haveenough room behind the engine that = a 20B would set on my existing motor mount. All I would have to do is make = up a mount plate for the 20B that has themounting ears in the positions of = the 13B ears. I could even use a littlemore weight in the front for W&B, s= o the extra weight would also probablywork well also. My plane is heavier t= han a RV6/7 by about 500 lbs, so I coulduse the HP on takeoff and same for = cruise as well. =20 I briefly touched on this mount plate ideaa year or so ago with the Cozy Gi= rrls, but they didn=E2=80=99t seem to beinterested in making the mount plat= e although it would be pretty simple toleave 13B as well as 20B ears on a 2= 0B mount. =20 The rotary HP is really a factor of therpm. When you dial it down in rpm, = the HP drops to that level. I amnot certain what effect the turbo would ha= ve on this number, but for NA engine,5K rpm is about 160 HP, 6K=3D180, 7K= =3D200, etc. This is pretty close to the same on allthe Dyno graphs that I have seen. P= retty much no matter how =E2=80=9Csoupedup=E2=80=9D the engine is, it still= follows that same HP curve. This becomesa problem for those of us who wan= t to develop 200HP but run at 5K rpm. Thataint gonna happen with the two r= otor engine. :>( =20 Bill =20 From: Rotary motors in aircraft[mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] OnBehal= f Of Bobby J. Hughes Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 10:02AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Fuel Flow=20 =20 Charlie, =20 This configurationis my sweet spot. Efficiency declines rapidly with faster= rpm. I can alsorun the same prop rpm at a lower manifold pressure 24-26 = =E2=80=9Cand see almostthe same fuel burn at 150 mph TAS. Increasing the ma= nifold pressure to 30 or alittle higher increases speed but the fuel burn b= arely increases. At the otherextreme with prop set to 2350-2400, 30 -32=E2= =80=9D MP I see a top speed of 190mph but the fuel burn shows 16 gph. Not g= ood. The lyc RV10=E2=80=99s are way moreefficient at this speed. I suspect = the super charger drive losses are a bigfactor at the high power settings. = Possibly up to 2 gph? It=E2=80=99s possible the fuel flow is not accurate= in the high powerconfiguration. I=E2=80=99m not comfortable running the e= ngine that hard forvery long so calibration verification is not possible. = I=E2=80=99ve beenreconsidering a turbo but still not convinced the renesis = exhaust ports are upto the abuse. Although a looser turbo may eliminate the= housing damage that hasoccurred in the turbo RX8=E2=80=99s. I wonder wha= t intercooled,38=E2=80=9D MP at 1900 rpm would do for speed and fuel burn? =20 Bobby =20 =20 =20 From: Rotary motors in aircraft[mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]On Behal= f Of Charlie England Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 8:57 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Thanks Tracy! =20 Hi Bobby, Those are pretty good numbers for a 4seat plane, even a -10, at that fuel f= low.Have you checked it at around 11gph?=20 Thanks, Charlie On 05/14/2012 03:26 PM, Bobby J. Hughes wrote:=20 Cruise rpm istypically 1700-1825 prop \ 4850-5200 engine. The low rpm may i= nfluence myEGT=E2=80=99s. In this configuration I see 160-165 MPH TAS at 8-= 8.5 gph at 6000foot. It does a little better up high.=20 =20 Bobby RV10 =20 Bill, =20 I see around 1650Fmax. At cruise altitude running less than 30=E2=80=9DMP I= can lean to about1475F.=20 =20 Bobby=20 =20 =20 From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Beh= alf Of Bill Bradburry Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012 7:06PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Thanks Tracy! =20 The EM-2 mixture is working fine now, Tracy. I appreciatethe rapid turnaro= und. =20 I wanted to ask you about the EGTs Ishould expect from the Renesis. I am g= etting EGTs in the upper 17s. I think I expected them to be a couple of hun= dred lower than that. Idon=E2=80=99t doubt the accuracy because the EGTs r= eport a pretty accurate OATwhen I first arrive at the hangar and before I s= tart the engine. =20 I did some relearning of the EC-2 duringthe flight today between 18 and 29 = inches manifold pressure. This wasdone at 2K feet. The MAP was lowered co= nsiderably and now the mid pointof the graph is pretty close to the knob ce= nter, maybe 12:30-1:00o=E2=80=99clock. =20 A good explanation of how to lean would bevery helpful for me at this point= . Also I am wondering what fuel burnmost are getting at cruise. I am stil= l calibrating this function, but Iwould like to know what to expect if I ev= er get it right. =20 Bill B =20 =20 ----------MB_8CF00D525A78957_2110_11D20_webmail-d152.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Bill,

I don't know if you are aware but the Girllllllllls do make a plate for the= 20, as well as an engine mount. Look at their site



-----= Original Message-----
From: Bill Bradburry <bbradburry@bellsouth.net>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Tue, May 15, 2012 10:34 am
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fuel Flow

Bobby,
 
The Renesis has= a 10:1 compression ratio.  Are you sure you are not getting detonation at high (30-40) manifold pressures and low (1700 prop) rpms?  These considerations and= the fact that I just don=E2=80=99t have room to squeeze it in are the reasons t= hat I decided against a turbo.  The stock (car) engine has a knock sensor, but we do= n=E2=80=99t have any way to monitor it and with the noise and headsets to cancel it out= , I doubt that we would ever hear detonation unless engine parts were flying past our ears.  :>)
 
I would like a = little more power, but for me, it would be easier to install a 20B than to switch to a turbo.  I = have enough room behind the engine that a 20B would set on my existing motor mou= nt.  All I would have to do is make up a mount plate for the 20B that has the mounting ears in the positions of the 13B ears.  I could even use a li= ttle more weight in the front for W&B, so the extra weight would also probab= ly work well also. My plane is heavier than a RV6/7 by about 500 lbs, so I cou= ld use the HP on takeoff and same for cruise as well.
 
I briefly touch= ed on this mount plate idea a year or so ago with the Cozy Girrls, but they didn=E2=80=99t seem to be interested in making the mount plate although it would be pretty simple to leave 13B as well as 20B ears on a 20B mount.
 
The rotary HP i= s really a factor of the rpm.  When you dial it down in rpm, the HP drops to that level.  = I am not certain what effect the turbo would have on this number, but for NA eng= ine, 5K rpm is about 160 HP, 6K=3D180, 7K=3D200, etc.
This is pretty = close to the same on all the Dyno graphs that I have seen.  Pretty much no matter how =E2=80=9C= souped up=E2=80=9D the engine is, it still follows that same HP curve.  This = becomes a problem for those of us who want to develop 200HP but run at 5K rpm. = ; That aint gonna happen with the two rotor engine.  :>(
 
Bill
 
From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancairon= line.net] On Behalf Of Bobby J. Hughes
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 = 10:02 AM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Fuel Fl= ow
 
Charli= e,
 =
This c= onfiguration is my sweet spot. Efficiency declines rapidly with faster rpm.  I can = also run the same prop rpm at a lower manifold pressure 24-26 =E2=80=9Cand see a= lmost the same fuel burn at 150 mph TAS. Increasing the manifold pressure to 30 o= r a little higher increases speed but the fuel burn barely increases. At the ot= her extreme with prop set to 2350-2400, 30 -32=E2=80=9D MP I see a top speed of= 190 mph but the fuel burn shows 16 gph. Not good. The lyc RV10=E2=80=99s are wa= y more efficient at this speed. I suspect the super charger drive losses are a big factor at the high power settings.  Possibly up to 2 gph?   It=E2=80=99s possible the fuel flow is not accurate in the high power configuration.  I=E2=80=99m not comfortable running the engine that ha= rd for very long so calibration verification is not possible.  I=E2=80=99ve b= een reconsidering a turbo but still not convinced the renesis exhaust ports are= up to the abuse. Although a looser turbo may eliminate the housing damage that= has occurred in the turbo RX8=E2=80=99s.   I wonder what intercooled, 38=E2=80=9D MP at 1900 rpm would do for speed and fuel burn?<= /div>
 =
Bobby<= /span>
 =
 =
 =
From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrota= ry@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Charlie England=
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 8= :57 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Tha= nks Tracy!
 
Hi Bobby,

Those are pretty good numbers for a 4seat plane, even a -10, at that fuel f= low. Have you checked it at around 11gph?

Thanks,

Charlie


On 05/14/2012 03:26 PM, Bobby J. Hughes wrote:
Cruise= rpm is typically 1700-1825 prop \ 4850-5200 engine. The low rpm may influence my EGT=E2=80=99s. In this configuration I see 160-165 MPH TAS at 8-8.5 gph at = 6000 foot. It does a little better up high.
 =
Bobby<= /span>
RV10
 
Bill,<= /span>
 =
I see = around 1650F max. At cruise altitude running less than 30=E2=80=9DMP I can lean to about 1475F.
 =
Bobby =
 =
 =
From= : Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:fl= yrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Bill Bradburry
Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012= 7:06 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Thanks = Tracy!
 
The EM-2 mixtur= e is working fine now, Tracy.  I appreciate the rapid turnaround.
 
I wanted to ask= you about the EGTs I should expect from the Renesis.  I am getting EGTs in the upper 17s.&n= bsp; I think I expected them to be a couple of hundred lower than that.  I don=E2=80=99t doubt the accuracy because the EGTs report a pretty accurate = OAT when I first arrive at the hangar and before I start the engine.
 
I did some rele= arning of the EC-2 during the flight today between 18 and 29 inches manifold pressure.  This was done at 2K feet.  The MAP was lowered considerably and now the mid poi= nt of the graph is pretty close to the knob center, maybe 12:30-1:00 o=E2=80=99clock.
 
A good explanat= ion of how to lean would be very helpful for me at this point.  Also I am wondering what fuel burn most are getting at cruise.  I am still calibrating this function, but= I would like to know what to expect if I ever get it right.
 
Bill B
 
----------MB_8CF00D525A78957_2110_11D20_webmail-d152.sysops.aol.com--