X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from imf22aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.70] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.9) with ESMTP id 1094333 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 06 May 2006 06:05:02 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.70; envelope-from=atlasyts@bellsouth.net Received: from ibm67aec.bellsouth.net ([65.11.50.61]) by imf22aec.mail.bellsouth.net with ESMTP id <20060506100417.WLFR19017.imf22aec.mail.bellsouth.net@ibm67aec.bellsouth.net> for ; Sat, 6 May 2006 06:04:17 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.100] (really [65.11.50.61]) by ibm67aec.bellsouth.net with ESMTP id <20060506100417.HGF17701.ibm67aec.bellsouth.net@[192.168.0.100]> for ; Sat, 6 May 2006 06:04:17 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v749.3) In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <34FCDB47-5A5D-4787-8FEA-5DE49A955CB3@bellsouth.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Bulent Aliev Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: oil cooler lines Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 06:04:23 -0400 To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.749.3) I believe parallel coolers will be more efficient due to the higher delta T. In a serial set up, the liquid in the second cooler will be lower temp. and less efficient heat transfer will take place. Just an opinion of an eyeball engineer? Buly On May 5, 2006, at 11:34 PM, Kelly Troyer wrote: > Bob, > One other comment........There is some difference of opinion > among the group > whether connecting coolers (oil or coolent) in series (as you > propose) or in > parallel is the most efficient method.........We have group members > currently > flying with both methods........Most that I am aware of that use > both methods > are for coolent systems as not many are using two oil > coolers........I personally > lean toward a parallel coolent system........Any comments from > others in the > group about this question would be welcome as I know we have > several with > experience or training in this area !! What would be most efficient > for one > system should probably apply to the other.......IMHO > -- > Kelly Troyer > Dyke Delta/13B/RD1C/EC2 > > > > > -------------- Original message from kenpowell@comcast.net: > -------------- > > Bob, > I think you should have made the lines larger to help lower presure > drop in the long lines. I understand that the extra oil in the > lines will be heavy but the pressure drop would be a tradeoff that > I wouldn't want to make. > > Ken Powell > Bryant, Arkansas > 501-847-4721 > C150 / RV-4 under construction > > -------------- Original message -------------- > From: BMears9413@aol.com > I'm running two oil coolers in the Spitfire. Due to the lengthe of > the lines and volume of the two coolers I reduced my oil lines to > AN8 (I think stock they were 10?) Now, before I close everything up > I'm having second guessing. My total line length will be around > 12'. I had planned on running the lines to one oil cooler, then the > other, then back to the motor. > Any comments? > > Bob Mears Buly http://tinyurl.com/dcy36