Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #59167
From: Tracy <rwstracy@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: flow path in conventional radiator
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 10:38:33 -0600
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Hi Ken,
    Will check out Paul's book when I get a chance but Paul & I have had many discussions on cooling in the past.    I've read much of the same source material that he uses (K&W for one example) but we frequently disagree on the interpretation of it.  

I may have misinterpreted one detail in your original description of the proposed system.  When you used the term anterior I think I pictured posterior.   The term Front makes it clearer.   I assume you are aiming at the idea of the 'wedge diffuser'.   

 Still, I think your scheme involves more turns and twists in the airflow than is necessary or advantageous.  You can't find a more natural place to take in high pressure air than the front of the cowl.  It has the added advantage of not adding any frontal area to the airframe.  Even a 100 MPH airplane benefits from drag reduction.   I think Getting the air cleanly out of the upper sides of the cowl might be harder than it sounds.   To explain why is a much longer discussion.  

Again, I realize that compromises must be made so sometimes the theoretical "best" system isn't practical so you may have to sacrifice a bit of drag.

On short grass strips you usually have the advantage of no long taxi or waiting for traffic.   In this situation, don't wait for the engine to reach normal operating temps.  Take off at minimum oil temp (I use 120 F) and you will be far above the trees by the time temps reach max. even on a hot day.

Tracy

Sent from my iPad

On Oct 31, 2012, at 9:03 AM, Kenneth Johnson <kjohnsondds@yahoo.com> wrote:

Tracy,
Sorry to get back to you so late, but am now just getting caught up on emails.  When I have free time, I am usually out in my garage working on the plane.  If you have not read "How to Cool Your Wankel" by Paul Lamar, I would recommend it.  It would be worth your time.  

The suggestion to flow air from the bottom up was not made by Paul, but was my thoughts regarding the airplane I am building.  The Zenith 801 is the four passenger high wing STOL bush-type plane.  It's top speed is 110 MPH.  It's primary purpose is getting in and out of short, grass strips.  Where engine cooling is most needed is on short runway take-off with high obstacles such as trees at the runway's end.  Stall speed is about 40 MPH.  This just means there is very little air flowing through the cooling system on take-off.   The airplane is at a high angle of attack until obstacles are cleared.  And again, at this high angle of attack, cooling flow is different and airspeed is slow.
Having the cowl opening on the bottom front of the cowl where air flows directly through the radiators and having outlets on the top sides of the cowl would allow air to flow best when it is most needed to cool the engine.  At flat and level flying, the air would still flow, but the higher speed would provide more cooling.  

What makes this plane unique is it is not an RV where one is flying at 170 knots and has a mile long runway.   

Please read Paul's book and give me your thoughts.  Thanks for your comments. 

Ken Johnson




From: Tracy <rwstracy@gmail.com>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:21 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: flow path in conventional radiator



On Oct 24, 2012, at 10:14 AM, Kenneth Johnson <kjohnsondds@yahoo.com> wrote:

> A more efficient design would  have intake air entering the bottom anterior of the the cowl and to pass through the radiator.  As this air is heated by the radiator it rises and should exit the top sides of the cowl.  No one has done that because of the risk of engine oil on the windshield.


I haven't read Paul's book but if this is an example of his suggestions, I wouldn't have much confidence in it. 

Two basic rules of thumb for A/C cooling systems are:

1. Turning high speed air is hard to do and loss prone energy wise.

2.  The pressure represented by convection of rising hot air is not significant  and can safely be ignored for our purposes. 

Tracy
--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:  http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html


Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster