Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #35804
From: Joe Ewen <jewen@comporium.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Pinched ducts was : [FlyRotary] Re: cowl openings for water radiators
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 13:57:57 -0500
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Thomas,
Please confirm that you want me to send it, it is a big file - 68MB.  Might bog you down a bit if you do not have a broad band connection.
Joe
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 1:12 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Pinched ducts was : [FlyRotary] Re: cowl openings for water radiators

Yes, please send me that one or post if anyone else is interested!
However the real interesting thing would be to proof Ed's system as an alternative for a clean K&N if space is at a premium.
 
For me the whole project (still in the dream fase) is more about the modifications, building, discussions, etc. Flying the finished product is 2nd to everything else.
I make a living (more or less) flying the most fantastic invention ever (helicopters) in a beautiful country, so getting in the air is not the prime factor for planning an Experimental Project...
 
Thomas
----- Original Message -----
From: Joe Ewen
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 1:04 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Pinched ducts was : [FlyRotary] Re: cowl openings for water radiators

I have a pdf of the K & W if you need it.  I found the Excel sheet Ed made reduced the K&W info into a manageable form.
Joe
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 7:46 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Pinched ducts was : [FlyRotary] Re: cowl openings for water radiators

Thomas is right, Joe. 
 
 Lots of good stuff on cooling on Paul's site - if you want your own copy of K&W they are long out of print.  However, there was (may still be there) a place in the Philippines that would make you a bound Xerox copy of the book for somewhere around $30.  Unless you like pouring over a lot of math thought it makes for heavy reading {:>). 
 
Ed
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 10:46 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Pinched ducts was : [FlyRotary] Re: cowl openings for water radiators

Joe,
 
I hate to do that, but if you need even more study stuff, go to Paul Lamar's site and read up on the cooling chapter. He put an impressive collection of data there and a lot of ideas - at your own risk. There some ways that work well too (obviously, as they are used...), but you will not find it on his site, as these ideas do not agree with his findings.
If you need something like Ed has, then you will get a lot of info here: http://www.rotaryeng.net/cooling.html
 
(The quoted site belongs to Paul Lamar, all info on it was collected by him and is provid to the public by him. Where applicable Paul Lamar holds copyrights as noted on his site...)
 
Best Regards,
Thomas Jakits,
"Slim ball parasite and low life jerk"
 
PS: Whatever one thinks about him, he does have an impressive collection of info!
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:38 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Pinched ducts was : [FlyRotary] Re: cowl openings for water radiators

Actually, there is, Joe.  But, you are going to be sorry you asked {:>).
 
  I spent quite a hit of time studying a tome (Kuchuman and Weber better know as K&W)  on air cooling of liquid cooled engines written back in the hey day of high speed mustangs lightenings, spitfires, etc. Sort of the liquid cooling bible.   Chapter 12 (the one of most interest to us) showed a duct that reportedly had the best pressure recovery (84% or thereabouts) around for a subsonic duct that they had found.  It was called a "StreamLine Duct" (See attached graph - the graph a of the top graph shows the shape of the duct (or at least 1/2 around the center line - sorry for the poor quality).  
 
 After quite a bit of studying and thinking about what I had read about cooling ducts, it finally became clear to me that the perhaps top thing that is clearly detrimental to good cooling is having flow separation in the duct.   Most of the old drawings of a cooling duct shape followed a sinusoidal shape - rapid expansion right after the opening.  It turns out that "traditional" shape is probably one of the worst shapes for a cooling duct (the story why is too long to get into here).
 
Anyhow,  Flow separation leads to eddies and turbulence which casts a "shadow" of turbulent air on the cooling core.  Like a shadow, the further away from the core the separation occurs (like near the entrance of the duct) the larger the shadow it casts on the core area.  This "shadow"  adversely interferes with the flow of air through the core and reduces the effectiveness of the core.
 
  What causes this separation is that as pressure is recovered by the expansion of the duct, the build up of the very pressure recover we want -  starts to hinder the boundary layer flow near the wall of the duct.  It slows it down and causes it to lose energy and attachment to the duct wall.  At a certain point the flow separates and starts to tumble/rotate and depending where (near the duct entrance or near the core) the flow separates, determines how much of the core area is adversely affected.  So if the boundary layer's energy level (air speed of its molecules) is maintained at a high level separation is less likely.
 
So ideally, you would like to prevent any separation during pressure recovery.  The Streamline Duct is the so called "Trumpet" duct or "Bell" duct .  After the opening, there is a long section of non-expanding duct followed by a rapid expansion into the "bell" shape just before the core.  The long non-expanding part of the duct maintains the energy (air flow) of the boundary layer and separation does not occur until well into the "bell" shape expansion. 
 
 In fact, it happens way up in the corner of the bell/core interface and affects a very small area of the core.
For full effectiveness the "Streamline duct" from K&W needs a length of 12-17".  Well, that's way more distance than I had.  So I got to thinking that if keeping the speed of the air molecules near the duct wall helps prevent boundary layer separation and the cooling killing eddy of turbulent air -  what could I do with my short 3 - 6" (no jokes you guys).  We all know from Bernoulli that if an area is squeezed down that the velocity of the air flow increases - right? 
 
So I decided to try to maintain or increase the energy of the air by pitching down the neck just before it goes into the bell shape expansions in hopes that the increased energy will help the boundary layer stay adhered to the duct wall until well into the corner of the bell shape.  So that's the story of the pinched ducts.  There is no question in my mind that this is not as effective as if I could have had the 16" to build the duct - but, in this hobby, you work with what you've got - right?
 
Does it work?  Who knows - but I seem to fly with less opening area than most folks and have no cooling problems.  So that's my 0.02 on the topic - see told you, you would regret asking {:>).
 
Ed
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 8:53 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: cowl openings for water radiators

Ed, is there some particular reason that you necked the inlet down small, then enlarged it again.  Thankyou for the pictures.  JohnD
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 3:39 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: cowl openings for water radiators

John, don't know if these photos will help.  But, like you I only have between 3 and 6" of duct distance on the radiators.  You should do Ok with 20 sq inch on each opening with a good diffuser/duct.  Attached are some photos of my current ducts.  The openings are 18 sq inches each.  I have had one opening down to as little as 10 square inches - but that was a bit marginal - so opened it back up.  I have a generous exit area for the hot air including a larger 4" x 12" bottom opening as well as louvers on each side of the cowl.  So you mileage could vary - but Tracy has essentially the same size opening as well as several others.
 
Ed
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 12:12 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] cowl openings for water radiators

What size openings do I need for the water radiators?   The Wittman Tailwind cowl I have has postal slots of 3' x 7 3/4" , which is   approx. 22 1/4 sq in. on each side.  Sam James for the 160 Lycoming is using 4 3/4' round holes which are 17.6 sq. inches on each side.  My radiators are quite close to the opening and I plan on making the diffusers trumpet shaped, will the openings be large enough if I can stay over 20 sq. inches on each side with a decent trumpet shape.  JohnD       hushpowere II on order - hope to start in 2 weeks if weather cooperates.


--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/


--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/


--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster