X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from pan.gwi.net ([207.5.128.165] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.2) with ESMTPS id 2874166 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 27 Apr 2008 10:57:07 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=207.5.128.165; envelope-from=silvius@gwi.net Received: from yourlk4rlmsu41 (bb-216-195-174-159.gwi.net [216.195.174.159]) by pan.gwi.net (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id m3REuJkC042180 for ; Sun, 27 Apr 2008 10:56:22 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from silvius@gwi.net) Message-ID: <009801c8a87f$38917970$9faec3d8@yourlk4rlmsu41> From: "Michael Silvius" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Electric Water pumps - Interesting Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 10:56:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0095_01C8A855.4D997BD0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0095_01C8A855.4D997BD0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ed: I have been thinking about a similar set up as those electric water = pumps but more on order of a remote mechanical water pump in order to = get rid of the original heavy cast iron cartridge and the tall housing. = I have been unable to locate a water pump that would be like those = electric stand alone units but minus the electric motor. My thought = would be mounting it as one perhaps would mount an alternator. In my = case I seem to have a god bit of room on the lower back end of the = engine. An other thought on installation was a direct drive with a = coupling of the back pulley. My natural apprehension is messing with a = system that we know works. So I may wind up with a bump or two on my = cowl to accommodate it as well as the distributor. Michael in Maine Falconar F-12 progressing at glacial pace. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Ed Anderson=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 9:31 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Electric Water pumps - Interesting I was just thumbing through a recent catalog from Summit Racing and = came across a couple of pages on electric water pumps. There has always = been a degree of interest (and some debate {:>)) regarding the use of = electric water pumps in aircraft. It was interesting to read some of = the descriptions, but basically the current consumed ranged from 4 - 9 = amps and the quoted flow rate (presumably without back pressure) was = from 16-35 gpm. So if you take 9 amps at say 14 volts =3D 126 watts =3D 0.167 HP to = get that flow. However, some of them indicate you can save 15 - 20 = engine HP at HIGH rpm. So why the difference? Apparently (my best guess) is that they are advertising their = product to best advantage (surprise?). I would suspect that the flow = rates shown are without back pressure and that when attached to a real = engine coolant system that : 1. The flow rates would decrease=20 2. The current requirements would increase.=20 However, not to the point the electric pump would be required to make = 10HP or more to provide the required flow. I suspect there are = considerable losses (such as pump cavitation and pressure drops through = the cooling galleys)with mechanical pumps at high pump rpm as driven by = a high revving engine which accounts for the high power requirements. = Whereas the electric driven pumps may operate at lower and more = efficient rpm without the majority of those losses. That said, the pumps cost range from around $200 - $400 and while no = weights were given, basic on the photographs showing the heavy electric = motors and additional plumbing would not appear to offer any = significant weight savings over the proven, reliable mechanical pumps = most of us are using.=20 So while certainly interesting and perhaps of value in some aircraft = installations(how would you like to gain an additional 10 HP on = takeoff?), I remain confident in my old 86 13B water pump housing and = cartridge which is still going strong after 10 years. I have moved it = from my first 86 N/A engine to my current 91 turbo block, so it has = performed for over 10 years in two different engines without any = problem. Interestingly, of the 11 electrical water pumps advertised, only one = was specified for drag race use only - and it had the lowest current = drain - 3.5 amps. Ed Ed Anderson Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered Matthews, NC eanderson@carolina.rr.com http://www.andersonee.com http://members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW http://www.dmack.net/mazda/index.html ------=_NextPart_000_0095_01C8A855.4D997BD0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ed:
 
I have been thinking about a similar = set up as=20 those electric water pumps but more on order of a remote mechanical = water=20 pump in order to get rid of the original heavy cast iron cartridge and = the tall=20 housing. I have been unable to locate a water pump that would be like = those=20 electric stand alone units but minus the electric motor. My thought = would=20 be mounting it as one perhaps would mount an alternator. In my case I = seem to=20 have a god bit of room on the lower back end of the engine. An other = thought on=20 installation was a direct drive with a coupling of the back pulley. My = natural=20 apprehension is messing with a system that we know works. So I may wind = up with=20 a bump or two on my cowl to accommodate it as well as the=20 distributor.
 
Michael in Maine
Falconar F-12 progressing at glacial=20 pace.
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Ed=20 Anderson
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 = 9:31=20 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Electric = Water pumps=20 - Interesting

I was just thumbing through a recent = catalog=20 from Summit Racing and came across a couple of pages on electric water = pumps.  There has always been a degree of interest (and some = debate=20 {:>)) regarding the use of electric water pumps in aircraft.  =  It=20 was interesting to read some of the descriptions, but basically the = current=20 consumed ranged from 4 - 9 amps and the quoted flow rate = (presumably=20 without back pressure) was from 16-35 gpm.
 
So if you take 9 amps at say 14 volts = =3D 126=20 watts =3D 0.167 HP to get that flow.  However, some of them = indicate you=20 can save 15 - 20 engine HP at HIGH rpm.  So why the=20 difference?
 
  Apparently (my best guess) is = that they=20 are advertising their product to best advantage (surprise?).  I = would=20 suspect that the flow rates shown are without back pressure and that = when=20 attached to a real engine coolant system that :
 
1.  The flow rates would = decrease=20
2.  The current requirements = would=20 increase. 
 
 However, not to the point the = electric=20 pump would be required to make 10HP or more to provide the required=20 flow.  I suspect there are considerable losses (such as pump = cavitation=20 and pressure drops through the cooling galleys)with mechanical pumps =  at=20 high pump rpm as driven by a high revving engine which accounts for = the high=20 power requirements.  Whereas the electric driven pumps may = operate at=20 lower and more efficient rpm without the majority of those=20 losses.
 
That said, the pumps cost range from = around=20 $200 - $400 and while no weights were given, basic on the=20 photographs showing the heavy electric motors and additional plumbing=20  would not appear to offer any significant weight savings over = the=20 proven, reliable mechanical pumps most of us are = using. 
 
 So while certainly interesting = and=20 perhaps of value in some aircraft installations(how would you like to = gain an=20 additional 10 HP on takeoff?), I remain confident in my old 86 13B = water pump=20 housing and cartridge which is still going strong after 10 = years.  I have=20 moved it from my first 86 N/A engine to my current 91 turbo block, so = it has=20 performed for over 10 years in two different engines without any=20 problem.
 
Interestingly, of  the  11 = electrical=20 water pumps advertised, only one was specified for drag race use only = - and it=20 had the lowest current drain - 3.5 amps.
 
Ed
 
Ed Anderson
Rv-6A N494BW Rotary=20 Powered
Matthews, NC
eanderson@carolina.rr.comhttp://www.andersonee.com
http:/= /members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW
http://www.dmack.net/mazda= /index.html
------=_NextPart_000_0095_01C8A855.4D997BD0--