X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from outbound-mail02.vgs.untd.com ([64.136.55.36] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.7) with SMTP id 6513499 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 13 Oct 2013 08:09:16 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.136.55.36; envelope-from=alwick@juno.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juno.com; s=alpha; t=1381666119; bh=47DEQpj8HBSa+/TImW+5JCeuQeRkm5NMpJWZG3hSuFU=; l=0; h=Message-ID:From:To:Subject:Date:Content-Type; b=KxDttgz/lRxC2enWy72VuT4FPKF7ths8YSutq+MN/uQL9b196L5Oid9neaiNdqEBp yv0D8RUTbSleRSsI/tBDz3t90R5oEosbgB4wp90HW67quw9cNVWuvBTg84zM1g2Fg7 pfMns+4cuzmquK9/B4gPy54gRLDzLgoDgF1vHJiU= Received: from Penny (50-39-160-216.bvtn.or.frontiernet.net [50.39.160.216]) by smtpout01.vgs.untd.com with SMTP id AABKFXDKXA4A6LA2 for (sender ); Sun, 13 Oct 2013 05:08:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <155AB73C780C4F6193EABA66836CAA1F@Penny> From: "Al Wick" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: waterless coolant? Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2013 05:08:17 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_04F2_01CEC7D2.3A2FE500" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18197 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6002.18463 X-Originating-Ip: 50.39.160.216 X-UNTD-BodySize: 21191 X-ContentStamp: 46:23:3006861728 X-MAIL-INFO: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 0bd77a2b8afa9e032bbf77d70eeb2f0efebf8f2b024e02ab23a74b776e8e2f3377bb4a1f7e3bb72e77331a677fe35ebbbedf9fdadf7f13635eaedaf7caf33ba72adf638b5b734fda4f0b2e93fa6b8acaf39e5f5f1e17a38b3e0fc7d7673adfea5feb6fce0fe71ab303476f07d7022f3b174fe7677b1f2302e3ba2e2e8b8fbf3f5a833b3f3eb7077e5bba7e07db2f4783bb5e97bbabab0a07be4ada5e3aeeab5e7a97cb8a X-UNTD-OriginStamp: L941HVjjYzDhN3itp//mkJVEwAnl2fGYMfyWe//Jd5ziiHOp4oEgCw== X-UNTD-Peer-Info: 10.181.42.31|smtpout01.vgs.untd.com|smtpout01.vgs.untd.com|alwick@juno.com This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_04F2_01CEC7D2.3A2FE500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Good discussion on that link Michael. Although I noticed one of the posters referred to 30% glycol mix as 70%. Making it quite confusing. Over the years, I've encountered pilots who've done good job of measuring Evans vs. glycol temperatures. We would expect them to have 20% higher temps, but usually find 15% or so. I'm always intrigued when the occasional person describes that Evans reduced their temp. It defies physics. But when you think about it, it's possible that person started out with trapped air in system. When converting to Evans, he may have eliminated that trapped air. Thus sees much improved cooling. That's my best guess. That and pareidolia. -al wick ----- Original Message ----- From: Michael Silvius To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 4:16 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: waterless coolant? Al: I did a bit more digging on the stuff and came up with this which makes the same point. http://www.rx7club.com/3rd-generation-specific-1993-2002-16/skeptical-evans-npg-coolant-945513/ Michael Silvius Scarborough, Maine ----- Original Message ----- From: Al Wick To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 10:33 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: waterless coolant? I've researched this product thoroughly and used to do fluid heat transfer experiments in my occupation. If you drained all the fluid in your radiator, replaced it with 100% antifreeze (normal ethylene glycol) you'd have identical boiling point and heat transfer characteristics to Evans product. So you could operate zero pressure, as it wouldn't boil over until it reached 392F. Unfortunately both Evans and 100% glycol have very low heat transfer coefficient (.66). They are both insulators, so all things being equal, you have to increase your radiator area by 30% to achieve the same engine operating temperature. Compared to running with 30% glycol mix, that's quite a penalty. Ethylene glycol is substantially superior to Evans, as you can tune it's efficiency by adding water. For example, it you decide to operate with more efficient 50/50 mix, the heat transfer coefficient jumps from .66 to .86. You get to reduce your radiator size a lot, yet still have 230F boiling point. Evans has a great propaganda web site, a lot of people get sucked in. It's one of those rare products that has zero redeeming value. Far inferior to glycol. Yet I bet it will continue to sell for decades. -al wick ----- Original Message ----- From: Ed Anderson To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 11:15 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: waterless coolant? You might want to check what happens to the viscosity of this fluid at lower temperatures. Its been a while, but as I recall this fluid turns into heavy syrup at lower temps. You can visualize your water pump churning (cavitating) in a void of this fluid at low temperatures while not moving any through your cooling system. The fluid next to the rotors would undoubtedly get hot -while that in the radiator and water pump may act as a (Temporary) plug to coolant flow – until the heated fluid explosively forces the issue. I tried finding the viscosity charts they used to have on the site, but could not find it. My impression when I looked into this fluid back a few years ago, was that this heavy viscosity at low temps was probably not much of a draw back compared to the benefits in a racing motor – heated garage, summer temps, etc. But, might be a different story for aircraft application. Ed Edward L. Anderson Anderson Electronic Enterprises LLC 305 Reefton Road Weddington, NC 28104 http://www.andersonee.com http://www.eicommander.com From: Gordon Alling Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 1:05 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: waterless coolant? This appears interesting. I looked at the website and was unable to find the heat capacity of the fluid. The higher boiling temp may not be helpful if the heat capacity is such that you need a large delta T to transfer the same amount of heat as a water-based system. One must also consider the effect of the higher operating temperature on engine oils. At some temperature, oil loses its lubrication ability. I don’t know what that temp is but assume it is different for different oils. Just because the coolant allows higher operating temperatures, doesn’t mean one should do that. Gordon C. Alling, Jr., PE President acumen Engineering/Analysis, Inc. 540-786-2200 www.acumen-ea.com From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Michael Silvius Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 1:19 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] waterless coolant? While on the subject of cooling, I am curious if anyone has tried the waterless coolant? Seems to offer some advantages, namely higher boiling boint and low pressure, is there any reason it should not be used in our aplication? http://www.evanscooling.com/ Michael No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.3408 / Virus Database: 3222/6738 - Release Date: 10/10/13 ------=_NextPart_000_04F2_01CEC7D2.3A2FE500 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =EF=BB=BF
Good discussion on that link Michael. Although I noticed one of the = posters=20 referred to 30% glycol mix as 70%. Making it quite confusing.
 
Over the years, I've encountered pilots who've done good job of = measuring=20 Evans vs. glycol temperatures. We would expect them to have 20% higher = temps,=20 but usually find 15% or so. I'm always intrigued when the = occasional person=20 describes that Evans reduced their temp. It defies physics. But when you = think=20 about it, it's possible that person started out with trapped air in = system. When=20 converting to Evans, he may have eliminated that trapped air. Thus sees = much=20 improved cooling. That's my best guess. That and pareidolia.
 
-al wick
 
 
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Michael = Silvius=20
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 = 4:16=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = waterless=20 coolant?

Al:
 
I did a bit more = digging on the=20 stuff and came up with this which makes the same point.
http://www.rx7club.com/3rd-generation-spe= cific-1993-2002-16/skeptical-evans-npg-coolant-945513/
 
Michael = Silvius
Scarborough, = Maine
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Al = Wick
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft=20
Sent: Friday, October 11, = 2013 10:33=20 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = waterless=20 coolant?

I've researched this product thoroughly and used to do fluid = heat=20 transfer experiments in my occupation. If you drained all the fluid = in your=20 radiator, replaced it with 100% antifreeze (normal ethylene glycol) = you'd=20 have identical boiling point and heat transfer characteristics to = Evans=20 product. So you could operate zero pressure, as it wouldn't boil = over until=20 it reached 392F.
 
Unfortunately both Evans and 100% glycol have very low heat = transfer=20 coefficient (.66). They are both insulators, so all things being = equal, you=20 have to increase your radiator area by 30% to achieve the same = engine=20 operating temperature. Compared to running with 30% glycol mix, = that's quite=20 a penalty.
 
Ethylene glycol is substantially superior to Evans, as you can = tune=20 it's efficiency by adding water. For example, it you decide to = operate with=20 more efficient 50/50 mix, the heat transfer coefficient jumps from = .66 to=20 .86. You get to reduce your radiator size a lot, yet still have 230F = boiling=20 point.
 
Evans has a great propaganda web site, a lot of people get = sucked in.=20 It's one of those rare products that has zero redeeming value. Far = inferior=20 to glycol. Yet I bet it will continue to sell for decades. =
 
 
-al wick
----- Original Message ----- =
From:=20 Ed Anderson
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft=20
Sent: Thursday, October 10, = 2013=20 11:15 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = waterless=20 coolant?

You might want to check what happens to the viscosity of this = fluid=20 at lower temperatures.  Its been a while, but as I recall = this=20 fluid  turns into heavy syrup at lower temps.  You can = visualize=20 your water pump churning (cavitating)  in a void of this = fluid at low=20 temperatures while not moving any through your cooling = system. =20
 
The fluid next to the rotors would undoubtedly get hot  = -while=20 that in the radiator and water pump may act as a (Temporary) plug = to=20 coolant flow =E2=80=93 until the heated fluid explosively forces = the issue.
 
I tried finding the viscosity charts they used to have on the = site,=20 but could not find it.
 
My impression when I looked into this fluid back a few years = ago, was=20 that this heavy viscosity at low temps was probably not much of a = draw=20 back  compared to the benefits in a racing motor =E2=80=93 = heated garage,=20 summer temps, etc.  But, might be a different story for = aircraft=20 application.
 
Ed
 
Edward=20 L. Anderson
Anderson Electronic Enterprises LLC
305 Reefton=20 Road
Weddington, NC=20 = 28104
http://www.andersonee.com
http://www.eicommander.com
 
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 1:05 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: waterless = coolant?
 

This=20 appears interesting.  I looked at the website and was unable = to find=20 the heat capacity of the fluid.  The higher boiling temp may = not be=20 helpful if the heat capacity is such that you need a large delta T = to=20 transfer the same amount of heat as a water-based=20 system.

 

One=20 must also consider the effect of the higher operating temperature = on=20 engine oils.  At some temperature, oil loses its lubrication=20 ability.  I don=E2=80=99t know what that temp is but assume = it is different=20 for different oils.  Just because the coolant allows higher = operating=20 temperatures, doesn=E2=80=99t mean one should do = that.

 

Gordon=20 C. Alling, Jr., PE

President

acumen=20 Engineering/Analysis,=20 Inc.

 

540-786-2200

www.acumen-ea.com

 

From: = Rotary motors=20 in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of=20 Michael Silvius
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 = 1:19=20 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: = [FlyRotary]=20 waterless coolant?

 

While on the = subject of=20 cooling, I am curious if anyone has tried the waterless coolant? = Seems to=20 offer some advantages, namely higher boiling boint and low = pressure, is=20 there any reason it should not be used in our=20 aplication?

http://www.evanscooling.com/

 

Michael

No virus found in this = message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: = 2013.0.3408 / Virus=20 Database: 3222/6738 - Release Date:=20 = 10/10/13

------=_NextPart_000_04F2_01CEC7D2.3A2FE500--