Return-Path: Received: from [129.116.87.170] (HELO MAIL01.austin.utexas.edu) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c3) with ESMTP id 814090 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:54:27 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=129.116.87.170; envelope-from=mark.steitle@austin.utexas.edu X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C52E47.4D7E1EBC" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: BMW and EWP Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 12:53:42 -0600 Message-ID: <87DBA06C9A5CB84B80439BA09D86E69EC080BD@MAIL01.austin.utexas.edu> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [FlyRotary] Re: BMW and EWP Thread-Index: AcUuQkKA0KlLp3i7S8ejYfIkU3lx0QAAQiRw From: "Mark R Steitle" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C52E47.4D7E1EBC Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Rusty, No, I'm not trying to give Leon a brain hemorrhage here. And I'm not disagreeing that the EWP can/does work if properly configured. All I'm trying to do is to look at the problem from a slightly different perspective by pointing out that the baseline objective is to cool the metal, not heat the coolant. I don't care how fast the coolant flows as long as it adequately cools the metal at the current power setting. What we're trying to do is remove the excess heat from the engine as a result of the combustion process. Lots of combustion (high rpm/load) requires more heat transfer than low rps/load. So, to me, the answer to your question (The real question is how much flow do we need?) is the engine within its max operating temps. This is why I installed "CHT" probes on my engine, to monitor the metal temps in the vicinity of the plugs. =20 So, if I understand it, you can get there with high flow, low dT, or low flow, high dT, or somewhere in between as long as the metal doesn't get too hot in the process. =20 =20 I may try the EWP sometime in the future, but will use the EDWP for now as it is installed and working as is. I'll gladly leave the R&D on this one up to you. =20 Mark S. (Leon, take some aspirin) =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 I haven't heard a single person disagree with this. =20 =20 Clearly, a single Davies Craig pump will cool a turbo 13B, or a race engine, so hyper-flow isn't "needed" for cooling. Perhaps in time this will negatively affect the housings, but only time (lots of it) will tell. =20 =20 FWIW, running the stock system isn't a guarantee that you'll never have these problems either, because we aren't running the engine the way Mazda intended. Heck, for all we know, Mazda had to move the liquid fast enough to keep plain water from boiling, since they know that some people will put that in the engine. Remember how they decided to use sump oil for the apex seals? Purely a concession to marketing, and not in the engine's best interest. =20 =20 EWP's aren't for everyone, at least until the rest of the automaker get on board with it :-) They solve installation problems for some folks, provide a proven backup system, and have some other (apparently) debatable advantages. Still a free country. =20 Cheers, Rusty (Dave, can you prescribe something for Leon's headache) =20 =20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C52E47.4D7E1EBC Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message

Hi = Rusty,

No, I’m not trying to give = Leon = a brain hemorrhage here.  And I’m not disagreeing that the EWP can/does work if properly configured.  All I’m trying to do is to look at the = problem from a slightly different perspective by pointing out that the baseline = objective is to cool the metal, not heat the coolant.  I don’t care how = fast the coolant flows as long as it adequately cools the metal at the = current power setting.   What we’re trying to do is remove the excess = heat from the engine as a result of the combustion process.  Lots of = combustion (high rpm/load) requires more heat transfer than low rps/load.  So, = to me, the answer to your question (The real question is how much flow = do we need?)  is the = engine within its max operating temps.  This is why I installed = “CHT” probes on my engine, to monitor the metal temps in the vicinity of the = plugs.

 

So, if = I understand it, you can get there with high flow, low dT, or low flow, = high dT, or somewhere in between as long as the metal doesn’t get too hot = in the process. 

 

I may = try the EWP sometime in the future, but will use the EDWP for now as it is = installed and working as is.  I’ll gladly leave the R&D on this one = up to you.

 

Mark = S.

(Leon, take some aspirin)       

 

 

 

 

I haven't heard a single person = disagree with this. 

 

Clearly, a single Davies Craig pump = will cool a turbo 13B, or a race engine, so hyper-flow isn't "needed"  for cooling.  Perhaps in time this will negatively affect the housings, but only time (lots of it) will tell.  

 

FWIW, running the stock system isn't = a guarantee that you'll never have these problems either, because we = aren't running the engine the way Mazda intended.   Heck, for all we = know, Mazda had to move the liquid fast enough to keep plain water from = boiling, since they know that some people will put that in the engine.  = Remember how they decided to use sump oil for the apex seals?  Purely a = concession to marketing, and not in the engine's best interest.  =

 

EWP's aren't for everyone, at least = until the rest of the automaker get on board with it :-)  They solve installation problems for some folks, provide a proven = backup system, and have some other (apparently) debatable = advantages.  Still a free country.

 

Cheers,

Rusty (Dave, can you prescribe = something for Leon's headache)   

 

------_=_NextPart_001_01C52E47.4D7E1EBC--