X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao104.cox.net ([68.230.241.42] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.13) with ESMTP id 3545767 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:44:23 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.42; envelope-from=alventures@cox.net Received: from fed1rmimpo01.cox.net ([70.169.32.71]) by fed1rmmtao104.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20090312234348.SOOT16134.fed1rmmtao104.cox.net@fed1rmimpo01.cox.net> for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:43:48 -0400 Received: from BigAl ([72.192.133.251]) by fed1rmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id SPjm1b00S5RcKeo03PjmSp; Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:43:46 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=kviXuzpPAAAA:8 a=7g1VtSJxAAAA:8 a=VtJJkyWJ8pKtcOekdToA:9 a=Q-leE6v_L5oulny8SGcA:7 a=FydeTUsW3Yl7U0GKajZbaR_JwsIA:4 a=5FtdkfQUxfIA:10 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 a=4vB-4DCPJfMA:10 a=Jmglb6ti06u0lhVz:21 a=jF4EZZ_TT2QACOTw:21 a=pcLIrrrKAAAA:8 a=oXTh3qT-Sl2PdxnObrEA:7 a=uuvMTLy-p9Y_qpMleAH1lxKDI58A:4 a=37WNUvjkh6kA:10 a=ftFGBYpk1mUA:10 X-CM-Score: 0.00 From: "Al Gietzen" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: IVO Prop Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 15:45:15 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0016_01C9A329.89DB0A30" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6838 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 Thread-Index: AcmjZQZU9Qs3bdgmQSK8J5sTU0xPGgABvSsg Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C9A329.89DB0A30 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Well - it's not just the 'flat' section; it's a matter of pitch distribution. The twisting of the blade happens mostly out toward the = tip, and changes very little toward the root. True; most of the thrust is generated further out, but not changing the pitch on the inner part of = the blade affects top end ability. =20 Another 2 cents worth.. =20 Al G =20 -----Original Message----- From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Bill Bradburry Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 2:50 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: IVO Prop =20 Why can't this flat section be reshaped into an airfoil? Could IVO do = it.. Or a builder? =20 Bill B=20 =20 _____ =20 From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Kelly Troyer Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 1:09 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] IVO Prop Mike, Have been following this with much interest...........If you may = recall I also have the "IVO" for my "DELTA" and from previous posts (Some Time Ago) we discussed how = to reduce=20 or eliminate the drag penalty of the flat virtually pitchless root = section of the blades........I had already decided to eliminate this drag by using the large 16 inch diameter "Mustang II" spinner which I believe you have incorporated on your "RV4"...........I = have spent the last 2.5 years watching after aging parents so am far behind with my "DELTA" = and have not been able to test my drag reduction theory for the "IVO"..........I = would be very interested to hear from anyone of the group with a tractor /IVO installation that = may have used a large diameter spinner to reduce and/or eliminate the drag from the root = section of the blades..... =20 The 16 inch spinner will cover most but not all of this virtually flat = root section........ If the airframe/cowl will handle an 18 inch spinner then all of this root = section will be covered if I recall correctly (I am not at the hangar).........FWIW =20 =20 =20 -- Kelly Troyer=20 "Dyke Delta"_13B ROTARY Engine=20 "RWS"_RD1C/EC2/EM2=20 "Mistral"_Backplate/Oil Manifold=20 =20 -------------- Original message from "Mike Wills" : --------------=20 > John,=20 >=20 > I looked pretty seriously at the IVO a number of years ago. But was = scared > off by a number of things:=20 >=20 > 1) Watched Dave Atkins repairing a delaminated trailing edge on the = flight > line at Copperstate fly-in.=20 > 2) A friend with a Kolb Firestar/Rotax 503/ground adjustable IVO had = the=20 > prop come apart in flight resulting in a forced landing that totaled = the=20 > plane.=20 > 3) Tracy's experience re reduced performance at speed.=20 > 4) The issues experienced by Lyc powered users.=20 >=20 > Numbers 1 & 2 were possibly due to something going through the prop = with the=20 > engine running. Issue 4 seems to be not relevant. This leaves Tracy's=20 > experience with the IVO. I wasnt thinking about the fact that you fly = a=20 > pusher when I asked, but presumably a pusher would not have the prop = root=20 > issue that Tracy reported. On my RV-4 I use a much larger than stock spinner=20 > and this issue may not be as significant as it was for Tracy. But I'm = not=20 > sure I want to buy one to find out. My current prop seems to be pretty close=20 > though I havent flown it enough to really make a judgement.=20 >=20 > Thanks for the feedback.=20 >=20 > Mike Wills=20 > RV-4 N144MW=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > ----- Original Message -----=20 > From: "John Slade"=20 > To: "Rotary motors in aircraft"=20 > Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 9:41 PM=20 > Subject: [FlyRotary] IVO Prop=20 >=20 >=20 > > >I didn't know anyone had ever had any success with an IVO. Tell me more.=20 > > What do you want to know? Its a very well engineered piece of = equipment. > > The CF blades are hollow and have a steel rod running to the hub.=20 > > Activating the motor via brushes twists the steel and thus twists = the=20 > > blades equally. The twist change is quite visible. There were = problems=20 > > with the individual blades slipping on the hub. This has been solved = by=20 > > providing a knurled hub, and not selling to guys with Lycomings. The = IVO > > is available for rotary, subaru, Franklin 6 and other less "pulsy"=20 > > engines. After the first 15 hours or so my blades have hardly taken = any=20 > > extra torque.=20 > >=20 > > My performance is greatly enhanced compared to the fixed pitch Performance=20 > > prop. Static with the wood prop was around 4500. With the IVO on = full fine=20 > > I get closer to 5400 which gives me access to a lot more power on = take=20 > > off. I've never done a "high speed" run with the IVO, but I've had = 180 kts=20 > > indicated at 2000' a few times without much effort, and without ever going=20 > > to the full course setting. Another nice bonus is that throttled = back on > > full fine for landing, the prop acts like a brake. Its much easier = to land=20 > > and stop than the fixed pitch that's pushing you along fairly well, = even > > at idle.=20 > >=20 > > I know a Velocity driver (Mike Watson) who also uses an IVO = (Franklin 6) > > and is very happy with it after around 5 years of use.=20 > >=20 > > The factory people are very easy to deal with and very helpful.=20 > >=20 > > The Cozy Girrrls are installing an IVO. What better recommendation = could > > you want? :)=20 > >=20 > > Regards,=20 > > John Slade=20 > > Turbo Rotary Cozy IV, N96PM=20 > > 98.1 Hrs.=20 > >=20 > > Mike Wills wrote:=20 > >>=20 > >>=20 > >> Mike Wills=20 > >> RV-4 N144MW=20 > >>=20 > >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Slade"=20 > >> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft"=20 > >> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:30 AM=20 > >> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Ground Testing=20 > >>=20 > >>=20 > >>> The IVO electric in-flight adjustable costs around $2350. I'm very = > >>> pleased with mine. My "spare" is a $2700 fixed pitch wood prop = thats a > >>> piece of art, but doesn't work anywhere near as well.=20 > >>> John=20 > >>>=20 > >>> Tracy Crook wrote:=20 > >>> A variable pitch prop would be nice to get the best of both worlds = but > >>> it's an expensive option and $10,000 buys a lot of gas.=20 > >>>=20 > >>>=20 > >>>=20 > >>> --=20 > >>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/=20 > >>> Archive and UnSub:=20 > >>> http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html=20 > >>>=20 > >>=20 > >>=20 > >>=20 > >> --=20 > >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/=20 > >> Archive and UnSub:=20 > >> http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html=20 > >>=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > --=20 > > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/=20 > > Archive and UnSub:=20 > > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html=20 > >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/=20 > Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C9A329.89DB0A30 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Well – it’s not just = the ‘flat’ section; it’s a matter of pitch distribution. The twisting of the = blade happens mostly out toward the tip, and changes very little toward the root.  True; most of the thrust is generated further out, but not = changing the pitch on the inner part of the blade affects top end = ability.

 

Another 2 cents = worth..

 

Al G

 

-----Original = Message-----
From: Rotary motors in = aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Bill Bradburry
Sent: Thursday, March 12, = 2009 2:50 PM
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = IVO Prop

 

Why can’t this flat section be reshaped = into an airfoil?  Could IVO do it.. Or a builder?

 

Bill B 

 

From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Kelly Troyer
Sent: Thursday, March 12, = 2009 1:09 PM
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] IVO = Prop

Mike,

  Have been following this with much interest...........If you may recall I also have the = "IVO"

for my "DELTA" and from previous = posts (Some Time Ago) we discussed how to reduce

or eliminate the drag penalty of the flat = virtually pitchless root section of the blades........I

had already decided to eliminate this drag by = using the large 16 inch diameter "Mustang II"

spinner which I believe you have incorporated = on your "RV4"...........I have spent the last

2.5 years watching after aging parents so am = far behind with my "DELTA" and have not

been able to test my drag reduction theory = for the "IVO"..........I would be very interested

to hear from anyone of the group with a = tractor /IVO installation that may have used a large

diameter spinner to reduce and/or eliminate = the drag from the root section of the blades.....

 

 The 16 inch spinner will cover = most but not all of this virtually flat root section........ If  = the

airframe/cowl will handle an 18 inch = spinner then all of this root section will be covered if

I recall correctly (I am not at the hangar).........FWIW  

 

   

--
Kelly Troyer
"Dyke Delta"_13B ROTARY Engine
"RWS"_RD1C/EC2/EM2
"Mistral"_Backplate/Oil Manifold

 

-------------- Original message from = "Mike Wills" <rv-4mike@cox.net>: --------------


> John,
>
> I looked pretty seriously at the IVO a number of years ago. But was = scared
> off by a number of things:
>
> 1) Watched Dave Atkins repairing a delaminated trailing edge on the = flight
> line at Copperstate fly-in.
> 2) A friend with a Kolb Firestar/Rotax 503/ground adjustable IVO = had the
> prop come apart in flight resulting in a forced landing that = totaled the
> plane.
> 3) Tracy's experience re reduced performance at speed.
> 4) The issues experienced by Lyc powered users.
>
> Numbers 1 & 2 were possibly due to something going through the = prop with the
> engine running. Issue 4 seems to be not relevant. This leaves = Tracy's
> experience with the IVO. I wasnt thinking about the fact that you = fly a
> pusher when I asked, but presumably a pusher would not have the = prop root
> issue that Tracy reported. On my RV-4 I use a much larger than = stock spinner
> and this issue may not be as significant as it was for Tracy. But = I'm not
> sure I want to buy one to find out. My current prop seems to be = pretty close
> though I havent flown it enough to really make a judgement.
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> Mike Wills
> RV-4 N144MW
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Slade"
> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" =
> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 9:41 PM =
> Subject: [FlyRotary] IVO Prop
>
>
> > >I didn't know anyone had ever had any success with an IVO. = Tell me more.
> > What do you want to know? Its a very well engineered piece of equipment.
> > The CF blades are hollow and have a steel rod running to the = hub.
> > Activating the motor via brushes twists the steel and thus = twists the
> > blades equally. The twist change is quite visible. There were problems
> > with the individual blades slipping on the hub. This has been = solved by
> > providing a knurled hub, and not selling to guys with = Lycomings. The IVO
> > is available for rotary, subaru, Franklin 6 and other less "pulsy"
> > engines. After the first 15 hours or so my blades have hardly = taken any
> > extra torque.
> >
> > My performance is greatly enhanced compared to the fixed pitch Performance
> > prop. Static with the wood prop was around 4500. With the IVO = on full fine
> > I get closer to 5400 which gives me access to a lot more power = on take
> > off. I've never done a "high speed" run with the = IVO, but I've had 180 kts
> > indicated at 2000' a few times without much effort, and = without ever going
> > to the full course setting. Another nice bonus is that = throttled back on
> > full fine for landing, the prop acts like a brake. Its much = easier to land
> > and stop than the fixed pitch that's pushing you along fairly = well, even
> > at idle.
> >
> > I know a Velocity driver (Mike Watson) who also uses an IVO = (Franklin 6)
> > and is very happy with it after around 5 years of use.
> >
> > The factory people are very easy to deal with and very = helpful.
> >
> > The Cozy Girrrls are installing an IVO. What better = recommendation could
> > you want? :)
> >
> > Regards,
> > John Slade
> > Turbo Rotary Cozy IV, N96PM
> > 98.1 Hrs.
> >
> > Mike Wills wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Mike Wills
> >> RV-4 N144MW
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Slade" =
> >> To: "Rotary motors in = aircraft"
> >> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 = 10:30 AM
> >> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Ground Testing
> >>
> >>
> >>> The IVO electric in-flight adjustable costs around = $2350. I'm very
> >>> pleased with mine. My "spare" is a $2700 = fixed pitch wood prop thats a
> >>> piece of art, but doesn't work anywhere near as well. =
> >>> John
> >>>
> >>> Tracy Crook wrote:
> >>> A variable pitch prop would be nice to get the best of = both worlds but
> >>> it's an expensive option and $10,000 buys a lot of = gas.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
> >>> Archive and UnSub:
> >>> = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
> >> Archive and UnSub:
> >> http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html =
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
> > Archive and UnSub:
> > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html =
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
> Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html =

------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C9A329.89DB0A30--