Return-Path: <13brv3@bellsouth.net> Received: from imf19aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.67] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.5) with ESMTP id 532417 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:59:44 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.67; envelope-from=13brv3@bellsouth.net Received: from rd ([65.6.194.9]) by imf19aec.mail.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.11 201-253-122-130-111-20040605) with ESMTP id <20041115005923.EQWJ2400.imf19aec.mail.bellsouth.net@rd> for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:59:23 -0500 From: "Russell Duffy" <13brv3@bellsouth.net> To: "Flyrotary List" Subject: Today's tests, EWP and oil scoop Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:59:35 -0600 Message-ID: <003501c4caae$5fbe6510$6101a8c0@rd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0036_01C4CA7C.1523F510" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0036_01C4CA7C.1523F510 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Greetings, =20 I got a lot done this weekend, and I'm posting the log entry below. I should have made some progress on the oil temp issue, but don't know for sure yet. I also should have picked up some ram air pressure for my TB inlet. Still need to replace that CEET hose, to eliminate some = turbulence, and potential heat absorption.=20 =20 The big test was the EWP only run, with the mechanical pump disabled. Bottom line is that I'm very happy with my current system. The engine = will work with either the mechanical, or the EWP, so I have the best of both. = =20 =20 Cheers, Rusty (time for another steak and beer event) =20 =20 11-13-04 / 11-14-04 =20 Reworked the TB air inlet in the right radiator duct. Before, it was = just a rectangular hole in the bottom, forcing the air to make a hard 90 degree turn. I reshaped this to make it a much smoother curved entry into the = TB pipe. I also got carried away, and made a scoop for the inlet, so that about a third of the right radiator duct is not dedicated to the TB = only. This will have to have an effect on ram air pressure, which I basically didn't have before. =20 =20 Reshaped the rear of the oil cooler scoop. Before, it had a flat wall = in the rear of the scoop, but now I've sloped the rear so that it's a = smooth transition into the back of the oil cooler. I wish I had tested this before, but I set up a test with the new scoop shape. Basically, I set = the cowl on the floor, and pointed a leaf blower at the scoop from about 10 = feet away. I set a spare evap core on the top side of the scoop, just like = it would be on the plane. Finally, I used a handheld wind meter to measure = the speed of the air through various portions of the core. There was no significant difference between the left, right, and center of the core, however, there was a difference from front to rear. I recorded speeds = for the front edge, 25% back, 50% back, 75% back, and the rear edge. Next, = I made an aluminum divider to try to force air to the front of the core. = It didn't really work, so I just left it out. With any luck, the flow is already improved with the new scoop contour. I probably won't really = know until Summer. =20 =20 Air speed going into the oil cooler scoop =3D 18 mph =20 Position from front to rear Speed without divider speed with divider Front 5.6 mph 5.5 mph 25% back 6.3 mph 5.9 mph 50% back 6.8 mph 6.1 mph 75% back 7.6 mph 7.4 mph Rear 7.4 mph 8.0 mph =20 I riveted the cowl cheek extensions in place, and added a platenut to = the front of the cowl to retain the cowl pins. I decided not to install the plate that was meant to deflect air past the muffler, I'm thinking = that's not worth messing with at the moment, since I'll likely end up reshaping = the lower edge of the cowl for more air exit. =20 =20 Finally, I got a chance to test my EWP without the mechanical pump. I removed the alternator belt, and tied the plane down for a static rpm = test. I then proceeded to stress test my battery, by cranking and cranking = without turning on the EC-2 (Doh!) Finally, the brain kicked in, and I = cranked the engine. It was much cooler than usual today, about 70 rather than = 85 or so like it's been recently. My impression was that the EWP was doing a reasonably good job by itself. It took quite a while to warm up enough = to make a full throttle run, and during that run, the water didn't seem be heating much faster than normal. I would say that it probably WAS = heating faster than normal, but not at any sort of alarming rate. Lower power settings were just fine, and I have no doubt the EWP will work as = intended if I ever lose a belt on the mechanical pump. Unfortunately, (or fortunately, depending on how you look at it), I couldn't tell any difference in static rpm between having he EWP only, and the mechanical pump. Both measured 5960 static. This means I can leave my system = alone. =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0036_01C4CA7C.1523F510 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
Greetings,
 
I got a lot = done this=20 weekend, and I'm posting the log entry below.  I should have = made some=20 progress on the oil temp issue, but don't know for sure yet.  I = also should=20 have picked up some ram air pressure for my TB inlet.  Still = need to=20 replace that CEET hose, to eliminate some turbulence, and potential heat = absorption. 
 
The big test = was the EWP=20 only run, with the mechanical pump disabled.  Bottom line is = that I'm=20 very happy with my current system.  The engine will work with = either the=20 mechanical, or the EWP, so I have the best of=20 both.  
 
Cheers,
Rusty (time for = another=20 steak and beer event)
 
 

11-13-04 / 11-14-04

 

Reworked the TB air inlet in the right radiator = duct.  Before, it was just = a=20 rectangular hole in the bottom, forcing the air to make a hard 90 degree = turn.  I reshaped this to = make it a=20 much smoother curved entry into the TB pipe.  I also got carried away, and = made a=20 scoop for the inlet, so that about a third of the right radiator duct is = not=20 dedicated to the TB only.  = This will=20 have to have an effect on ram air pressure, which I basically = didn’t have=20 before.  =

 

Reshaped the rear of the oil cooler scoop.  Before, it had a flat wall in = the rear=20 of the scoop, but now I’ve sloped the rear so that it’s a = smooth transition into=20 the back of the oil cooler.  = I wish=20 I had tested this before, but I set up a test with the new scoop = shape.  Basically, I set the cowl on = the floor,=20 and pointed a leaf blower at the scoop from about 10 feet away.  I set a spare evap core on the = top side=20 of the scoop, just like it would be on the plane.  Finally, I used a handheld = wind meter to=20 measure the speed of the air through various portions of the core.  There was no significant = difference=20 between the left, right, and center of the core, however, there was a = difference=20 from front to rear.  I = recorded=20 speeds for the front edge, 25% back, 50% back, 75% back, and the rear = edge.  Next, I made an aluminum = divider to try=20 to force air to the front of the core. =20 It didn’t really work, so I just left it out.  With any luck, the flow is = already=20 improved with the new scoop contour. =20 I probably won’t really know until Summer.   

 

Air speed going into the oil cooler scoop =3D 18 mph

 

Position from front to rear           &nbs= p;     =20 Speed without divider        =20 speed with divider

Front           &nbs= p;            = ;            =             &= nbsp;    =20 5.6 mph           &nbs= p;            = ;         =20 5.5 mph

25% back           &nbs= p;            = ;            =           =20 6.3 mph           &nbs= p;            = ;         =20 5.9 mph

50% back           &nbs= p;            = ;            =           =20 6.8 mph           &nbs= p;            = ;         =20 6.1 mph

75% back           &nbs= p;            = ;            =           =20 7.6 mph           &nbs= p;            = ;         =20 7.4 mph

Rear           &nbs= p;            = ;            =             &= nbsp;      =20 7.4 mph           &nbs= p;            = ;         =20 8.0 mph

 

I riveted the cowl cheek extensions in place, = and added a=20 platenut to the front of the cowl to retain the cowl pins.  I decided not to install the = plate that=20 was meant to deflect air past the muffler, =20 I’m thinking that’s not worth messing with at the = moment, since I’ll=20 likely end up reshaping the lower edge of the cowl for more air = exit. 

 

Finally, I got a chance to test my EWP without = the=20 mechanical pump.  I = removed the=20 alternator belt, and tied the plane down for a static rpm test.  I then proceeded to stress = test my=20 battery, by cranking and cranking without turning on the EC-2 = (Doh!)      Finally, the=20 brain kicked in, and I cranked the engine. =20 It was much cooler than usual today, about 70 rather than 85 or = so like=20 it’s been recently.  = My impression=20 was that the EWP was doing a reasonably good job by itself.  It took quite a while to warm = up enough=20 to make a full throttle run, and during that run, the water didn’t = seem be=20 heating much faster than normal.  = I=20 would say that it probably WAS heating faster than normal, but not at = any sort=20 of alarming rate.  Lower = power=20 settings were just fine, and I have no doubt the EWP will work as = intended if I=20 ever lose a belt on the mechanical pump. =20 Unfortunately, (or fortunately, depending on how you look at it), = I=20 couldn’t tell any difference in static rpm between having he EWP = only, and the=20 mechanical pump.  Both = measured 5960=20 static.  This means I can = leave my=20 system alone. =20

 
------=_NextPart_000_0036_01C4CA7C.1523F510--