X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.65] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.5) with ESMTP id 5544100 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 15 May 2012 18:03:53 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.65; envelope-from=n360tg@earthlink.net DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=bFvcA52INR4UM7LFWdEIGF2utLdKEnc6/k4j242uVR9vpyxJm6PDK8NaVN7J0BJp; h=Received:From:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:To:References:Message-Id:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [184.0.224.156] (helo=[192.168.1.69]) by elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1SUPpv-0003sl-G1 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 15 May 2012 18:03:20 -0400 From: Thomas Giddings Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-112-182430244 Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Fuel Flow Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 18:03:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Message-Id: <0A4A30A7-5960-48B6-AC18-5E94FCF60B32@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-ELNK-Trace: 77b0437ff618fec294f5150ab1c16ac07c540ca440b21de7c85ae748629ca10d65307549240e2828350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 184.0.224.156 --Apple-Mail-112-182430244 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Bill: I still have that 20B here in Ft Myers. complete with intake = ,throttle bodies and Rotrex Super Charger if you need more power:)=20 KIND REGARDS Thomas Giddings n360tg@earthlink.net 727 858 1772 On May 15, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Bill Bradburry wrote: > I know. I discussed with them making a 20B plate with ears for the = 13B on it. They could have even put ears for both the 20 and the 13B by = just not hogging off the entire side. If you look at how the plate is = designed, it will be clear to you what I mean. Anyway, they didn=92t = seem interested in the project. I have no idea why but it would have = worked perfectly for my install. If I decide to go with the 20B, I = suppose I will just have to have the plate made somewhere locally. I = didn=92t want to have to do my own figuring about where all the oil pan = bolts go, but=85.??!! > =20 > Bill > =20 > From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] = On Behalf Of argoldman@aol.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 1:13 PM > To: Rotary motors in aircraft > Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fuel Flow > =20 > Bill, >=20 > 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 >=20 > Bobby, > =20 > 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=92t have = room to squeeze it in are the reasons that I decided against a turbo. = The stock (car) engine has a knock sensor, but we don=92t 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. :>) > =20 > 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 mount. 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 little more = weight in the front for W&B, so the extra weight would also probably = work well also. My plane is heavier than a RV6/7 by about 500 lbs, so I = could use the HP on takeoff and same for cruise as well. > =20 > I briefly touched on this mount plate idea a year or so ago with the = Cozy Girrls, but they didn=92t 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. > =20 > The rotary HP is 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 engine, 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 =93souped up=94 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. :>( > =20 > Bill > =20 > From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] = On Behalf Of Bobby J. Hughes > Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 10:02 AM > To: Rotary motors in aircraft > Subject: [FlyRotary] Fuel Flow > =20 > Charlie, > =20 > This configuration 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 =93and see almost the same fuel burn at 150 mph TAS. = Increasing the manifold pressure to 30 or a little higher increases = speed but the fuel burn barely increases. At the other extreme with prop = set to 2350-2400, 30 -32=94 MP I see a top speed of 190 mph but the fuel = burn shows 16 gph. Not good. The lyc RV10=92s are way 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=92s possible the = fuel flow is not accurate in the high power configuration. I=92m not = comfortable running the engine that hard for very long so calibration = verification is not possible. I=92ve been 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=92s. I wonder what intercooled, 38=94 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 Behalf Of Charlie England > Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 8:57 PM > To: Rotary motors in aircraft > Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Thanks Tracy! > =20 > Hi Bobby, >=20 > Those are pretty good numbers for a 4seat plane, even a -10, at that = fuel flow. Have you checked it at around 11gph?=20 >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Charlie >=20 >=20 > 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=92s. In this configuration I see 160-165 MPH TAS at = 8-8.5 gph at 6000 foot. It does a little better up high. > =20 > Bobby > RV10 > =20 > Bill, > =20 > I see around 1650F max. At cruise altitude running less than 30=94MP I = can lean to about 1475F. > =20 > Bobby > =20 > =20 > From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] = On Behalf Of Bill Bradburry > Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012 7:06 PM > To: Rotary motors in aircraft > Subject: [FlyRotary] Thanks Tracy! > =20 > The EM-2 mixture is working fine now, Tracy. I appreciate the rapid = turnaround. > =20 > I wanted to ask you about the EGTs I should expect from the Renesis. = I am getting EGTs in the upper 17s. I think I expected them to be a = couple of hundred lower than that. I don=92t doubt the accuracy because = the EGTs report a pretty accurate OAT when I first arrive at the hangar = and before I start the engine. > =20 > I did some relearning 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 point of the graph is pretty close = to the knob center, maybe 12:30-1:00 o=92clock. > =20 > A good explanation 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. > =20 > Bill B > =20 --Apple-Mail-112-182430244 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Bill: = I still have that 20B here in Ft Myers. complete with intake ,throttle = bodies and Rotrex Super Charger if you need more power:) 
KIND = REGARDS
Thomas Giddings
72= 7 858 1772



On May 15, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Bill Bradburry = wrote:

=

I know.  I discussed with them = making a 20B plate with ears for the 13B on it.  They could have even put = ears for both the 20 and the 13B by just not hogging off the entire = side.  If you look at how the plate is designed, it will be clear to you what I = mean.  Anyway, they didn=92t seem interested in the project.  I have no idea why = but it would have worked perfectly for my install.   If I decide = to go with the 20B, I suppose I will just have to have the plate made = somewhere locally.  I didn=92t want to have to do my own figuring about where all the oil pan bolts go, but=85.??!!

 

Bill

 

From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of argoldman@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, = 2012 1:13 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = Fuel Flow

 

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><= br> 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=92t have room to squeeze it in are the reasons that = I decided against a turbo.  The stock (car) engine has a knock = sensor, but we don=92t 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 mount.  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 little more weight in the front for W&B, so the extra weight would = also probably work well also. My plane is heavier than a RV6/7 by about 500 = lbs, so I could use the HP on takeoff and same for cruise as = well.

 

I briefly touched on this mount = plate idea a year or so ago with the Cozy Girrls, but they didn=92t 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 is 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 = engine, 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 = =93souped up=94 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

 

 

Charlie,

 =

This = configuration 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 =93and see = almost the same fuel burn at 150 mph TAS. Increasing the manifold pressure to = 30 or a little higher increases speed but the fuel burn barely increases. At the = other extreme with prop set to 2350-2400, 30 -32=94 MP I see a top speed of = 190 mph but the fuel burn shows 16 gph. Not good. The lyc RV10=92s are way = 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=92s possible the fuel flow is not accurate in the high power configuration.  I=92m not comfortable running the engine that hard = for very long so calibration verification is not possible.  I=92ve been 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=92s.   I wonder what intercooled, 38=94 MP at 1900 rpm would do for speed and fuel = burn?

 =

Bobby<= /font>

 =

 =

 =

From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of = Charlie England
Sent: Monday, May 14, = 2012 8:57 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = Thanks Tracy!

 

Hi Bobby,

Those are pretty good numbers for a 4seat plane, even a -10, at that = fuel flow. 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=92s. 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<= /font>

RV10

 

Bill,<= /font>

 =

I see = around 1650F max. At cruise altitude running less than 30=94MP I can lean to about 1475F.

 =

Bobby =

 =

 =

From: Rotary motors in = aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.ne= t] 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 mixture 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.  I think I expected them to be a couple of hundred lower than that.  = I don=92t 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 relearning 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 = point of the graph is pretty close to the knob center, maybe 12:30-1:00 o=92clock.

 

A good explanation 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

 

=

= = --Apple-Mail-112-182430244--