X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao102.cox.net ([68.230.241.44] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.2) with ESMTP id 4127811 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 17 Feb 2010 01:35:27 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.44; envelope-from=alventures@cox.net Received: from fed1rmimpo03.cox.net ([70.169.32.75]) by fed1rmmtao102.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.00.01.00 201-2244-105-20090324) with ESMTP id <20100217063450.DOBF8308.fed1rmmtao102.cox.net@fed1rmimpo03.cox.net> for ; Wed, 17 Feb 2010 01:34:50 -0500 Received: from BigAl ([72.192.128.205]) by fed1rmimpo03.cox.net with bizsmtp id iuaq1d00f4S1t5C04uaqXk; Wed, 17 Feb 2010 01:34:50 -0500 X-VR-Score: 0.00 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=3OYv9oSQMPl2mzQJct9Z0gr0/14v7p3aTRAVsPGESI0= c=1 sm=1 a=Vegc0WxVmH5BHtpNDyThtA==:17 a=nRurTRVj82ScSXH8XEYA:9 a=rB1nxMqPENSvZ38KUSIA:7 a=_FiV5_dYpmybvVwiErhEVA9Qhc4A:4 a=vga9QJewC3qsrd1rtS8A:9 a=U9DkqxetJfKqWy2K48oA:7 a=nTR5FVspTRoelXgWCGYy1PJHrGIA:4 a=Vegc0WxVmH5BHtpNDyThtA==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 From: "Al Gietzen" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Air Pump Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 22:35:21 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01CAAF58.52ECBD70" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6856 Importance: Normal Thread-Index: AcqvZNbev5duCFUhTeuqdfsnmkhUXAANeJ+w In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01CAAF58.52ECBD70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dennis, do you care to try your experiment again with a few=20 modifications? The blower effect should be independent of the prop blast = and air filter. On test (B), fit some sort of cone to the intake to=20 eliminate the sharp edge. I think that would compare equitably to a test = with the blower at the end of a SCAT tube. =20 What do you think, Al? =20 What you=92d like for an intake where previously stationary air is being sucked in is at least a =BD=94 radius of 90 degrees or more forming the = =91edge=92 of the opening. Beyond that I=92m losing interest in this whole = idea:-). =20 Al ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01CAAF58.52ECBD70 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dennis, do you care to try your experiment again with a few

modifications? The blower effect should be independent of the prop blast =

and air filter. On test (B), fit some sort of cone to the intake to =

eliminate the sharp edge. I think that would compare equitably to a test =

with the blower at the end of a SCAT tube.

 

What do you think, Al?

 

What = you’d like for an intake where previously stationary air is being sucked in is at = least a =BD” radius of 90 degrees or more forming the ‘edge’ of the = opening.=A0 Beyond that I’m losing interest in this whole = ideaJ.

 <= /font>

Al

------=_NextPart_000_000D_01CAAF58.52ECBD70--