X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from mail09.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.190] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c1) with ESMTPS id 2498214 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 20 Nov 2007 16:46:03 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=211.29.132.190; envelope-from=lendich@optusnet.com.au Received: from george (d58-109-62-4.dsl.nsw.optusnet.com.au [58.109.62.4]) by mail09.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id lAKLjC6J026087 for ; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 08:45:13 +1100 Message-ID: <000c01c82bbe$a3971fb0$043e6d3a@george> From: "George Lendich" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: heat exchanger placement Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 07:45:14 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0657-0, 12/12/2006), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Mark, I thought at the time it was a good idea - I suppose I didn't comment at the time, but it would go a long way IMHO to helping those wanting to use the oil to water rads and finding similar problems. I don't know if it's a bit of lateral thinking, or maybe a part of the philosophy of 'desperate measures for desperate needs' or a bit of both. But certainly worth remembering. George (down under) > George, > That describes my cooling system exactly. Originally, I had the > oil/water exchanger first, followed by the oil/air exchanger. This > dumped a max amount of btu's into the water. By running the oil > through the oil/air exchanger first, then into the oil/water > exchanger, it now dumps as much heat into the air. The remaining heat > goes into the coolant. This only works if you have excess water > cooling capacity, which I did. Now the temps track within 5-8* of > each other. The drawback is the extra plumbing, and some extra > weight. > > Mark > > On Nov 20, 2007 12:37 AM, George Lendich wrote: >> >> >> Why stop with the radiator? Move the oil cooler there as well to make >> this >> approach worth all the effort. And there will be a lot of effort : ) >> >> >> >> >> Tracy >> >> Quite correct Tracy, >> Nearly everyones favorite example the P-51 used stacked radiator and oil >> coolers. My thought is if you go to the trouble of a wing mount or belly >> scoop run a slightly larger radiator and one of the large fluidyne water >> to >> oil coolers. (much to P.L's chagrin) Many nascar teams do use them. Mark >> Stetle (sic) put one on his 20B powered Lancair and it has helped his >> climb >> cooling a lot. His is a Lancair ES 4 place and seems to be cooling very >> well >> now. >> Bill jepson >> >> >> Bill, >> Can't remember who - but the suggestion of an air cooler before the >> water >> to oil cooler is a good one. Would certainly stop any possibility of oil >> over heating the water and have the added benefit of the water heating >> the >> oil. >> George (down under) > > -- > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > Archive and UnSub: > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.0/1136 - Release Date: > 17/11/2007 2:55 PM >