X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from [66.219.56.248] (HELO qnsi-xch.qnsi.net) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.12) with ESMTP id 2360896 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 30 Sep 2007 15:10:48 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=66.219.56.248; envelope-from=bhughes@qnsi.net Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Return-Receipt-To: "Bobby J. Hughes" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Disposition-Notification-To: "Bobby J. Hughes" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Another cooling question X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6944.0 Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 14:13:25 -0600 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [FlyRotary] Re: Another cooling question Thread-Index: AcgDllmzWDfHpv3LQeC9JQonXqWINAABSYRg From: "Bobby J. Hughes" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Analysis only valid if cores are identical in construction (resistance to air flow will likely be different with the different cores). Charlie, Good point. We do have a known relationship of how the cores behave using the temps before and after the exit area was enlarged.=20 My notes show oil at 220-225 and water steady at 190 before enlarging. Mark reported oil at 215 climb and 190 cruise and water at 160 (cruise?) after enlarging.=20 Exit area improvements. 95-95 deg OAT if my notes are correct.=20 Oil 225 -215=3D 10 climb Oil 220-190 =3D 30 cruise Water 190 - ? =3D ? Climb (no data) Water 190-160=3D 30 cruise. It is clear that enlarging the exit area is made improvements to both oil and water cooling.=20 Bobby (hope I never need to understand the other 80% of the equation)