X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from imr-ma04.mx.aol.com ([64.12.206.42] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.1) with ESMTP id 5993898 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 15:27:51 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.206.42; envelope-from=ARGOLDMAN@aol.com Received: from mtaomg-mb03.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-mb03.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.41.74]) by imr-ma04.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id B1E201C00010F for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 15:27:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from core-dsc001c.r1000.mail.aol.com (core-dsc001.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.29.253.65]) by mtaomg-mb03.r1000.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id 3FE03E000090 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 15:27:16 -0500 (EST) From: ARGOLDMAN@aol.com Full-name: ARGOLDMAN Message-ID: <2bdba.5650f573.3e1743a3@aol.com> Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 15:27:15 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: turbo manifold To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_2bdba.5650f573.3e1743a3_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 9.7 sub 56 X-Originating-IP: [24.14.64.174] x-aol-global-disposition: G DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20121107; t=1357244836; bh=h0s/hsK9XTdImzLfoIcYqWA8HJ1hT4HwGJwueG604GE=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=gQlXOECngdCuOeDp7vps5XxEsymshqutJLVYAqOoLm4nIT2Vz7PDkVdUu4R7PV/0y uRdCGYoJanH2mxm/uX258iQ/EMZD7W5Z65GhFg77LBmXjmvGiuE+1PDQaUCfZqXRR6 Qqa5OpHXV1E4CxZNj2+ICPhrVHgYWZ0BfLuKDMIY= X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:493185920:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d294a50e5e9a44500 --part1_2bdba.5650f573.3e1743a3_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Still studying the chart What was the reason for stopping the testing on there renesis both NA and turbo AT 5600rpm? It's my understanding that the renesis is a higher revving engine than the standard 13B with it's lighter rotors etc. What was the limiting factor? Were these Dyno tests? Rich In a message dated 1/3/2013 2:17:01 P.M. Central Standard Time, bhughes@qnsi.net writes: Steve, Very interesting results. Did you have a muffler downstream of the turbo for the Renesis test? Bobby Hughes From: Rotary motors in aircraft [_mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net_ (mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net) ] On Behalf Of Steven W. Boese Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 12:24 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: turbo manifold Based on the relative insensitivity of the Renesis to backpressure, a turbo was installed on the test stand Renesis. I had previously installed the same stock 1988 RX7 turbo on the test stand 13B and observed a large penalty in efficiency at cruise power levels. As a result, I had lost interest in a turbo option. At the rotary gathering this fall, Bobby expressed an interest in how the Renesis would respond to a turbo. So some data was collected in this regard. Those present at the rotary gathering may recognize the plot of data that is attached. It showed the power generated with a 13B normally aspirated (NA, red), supercharged (SC, black), and turbocharged (TC, lighter blue). Data from the normally aspirated (NA, green) and turbocharged (TC, darker blue) Renesis has been added to this plot. The results seem remarkable in that there appears to be no penalty at cruise power for the turbo installation on the Renesis other than weight and complexity. The data by no means represents an extensive study, but the difference in response of the Renesis to the turbo compared to the 13B seems worthy of reporting. Field elevation here is 7200 ft with DA normally above 8000 ft which limits normally aspirated MAP to 23" Hg at WOT. An intercooler was installed on the test stand for both engines. No attempt to boost the Renesis above 30" MAP was made. It is also unlikely that the turbo tested would be the best match for this application. Any thoughts on identifying an appropriate turbo would be welcome. Steve Boese RV6A, 1986 13B NA, RD1A, EC2 ____________________________________ From: Rotary motors in aircraft [flyrotary@lancaironline.net] on behalf of Stephen Izett [steveizett@me.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 7:23 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: turbo manifold Steve Did that engine end up turboed? I have a Renesis, hopefully flying in the next 6 months but am seriously interested in turboing it down the road. Cheers Steve Izett Glasair SIIS RG Renesis --part1_2bdba.5650f573.3e1743a3_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Still studying the chart
 
What was the reason for stopping the testing on there renesis both=20 NA and turbo AT 5600rpm?
 
 It's my understanding that the renesis is a higher revving engin= e=20 than the standard 13B with it's lighter rotors etc.
 
What was the limiting factor? Were these Dyno tests?
 
Rich
 
In a message dated 1/3/2013 2:17:01 P.M. Central Standard Time,=20 bhughes@qnsi.net writes:
=

Steve,

 

Very=20 interesting results. Did you have a muffler downstream of the turbo for t= he=20 Renesis test?

 

Bobby=20 Hughes

 

 

From: Rotary mot= ors in=20 aircraft [mailto:flyr= otary@lancaironline.net] On Beh= alf Of=20 Steven W. Boese
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 12:24=20 AM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary]= Re:=20 turbo manifold

 

Based=20 on the relative insensitivity of the Renesis to backpressure, a= =20 turbo was installed on the test stand Renesis.  I had previously=20 installed the same stock 1988 RX7 turbo on the test stand 13B a= nd=20 observed a large penalty in efficiency at cruise power levels.&= nbsp;=20 As a result, I had lost interest in a turbo option.  At the rotary= =20 gathering this fall, Bobby expressed an interest in how the Renesis = would=20 respond to a turbo.  So some data was collected in this regard. = ;=20 Those present at the rotary gathering may recognize the plot of data that= is=20 attached.  It showed the power generated with a 13B normally=20 aspirated (NA, red), supercharged (SC, black), and turbocharged (TC, ligh= ter=20 blue).  Data from the normally aspirated (NA, green) and turbocharge= d=20 (TC, darker blue) Renesis has been added to this plot.  The res= ults=20 seem remarkable in that there appears to be no penalty at cruise power fo= r the=20 turbo installation on the Renesis other than weight and=20 complexity.

 

The=20 data by no means represents an extensive study, but the difference in res= ponse=20 of the Renesis to the turbo compared to the 13B seems worthy of= =20 reporting.  Field elevation here is 7200 ft with DA normally above 8= 000=20 ft which limits normally aspirated MAP to 23" Hg at WOT.  An interco= oler=20 was installed on the test stand for both engines.  No attempt to boo= st=20 the Renesis above 30" MAP was made.  It is also unlikely that t= he=20 turbo tested would be the best match for this application.  Any thou= ghts=20 on identifying an appropriate turbo would be welcome.

 

Steve=20 Boese

RV6A,=20 1986 13B NA, RD1A, EC2

     

From:=20 Rotary motors in aircraft [flyrotary@lancaironline.net] on behalf of Step= hen=20 Izett [steveizett@me.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 7:23= =20 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary]= Re:=20 turbo manifold

<= /DIV>

Steve

 

Did that engine end up= =20 turboed?

I have a Renesis, hopef= ully=20 flying in the next 6 months but am seriously interested in turboing it do= wn=20 the road.

 

Cheers

 

Steve=20 Izett

Glasair SIIS RG=20 Renesis

 <= /o:p>

 

 --part1_2bdba.5650f573.3e1743a3_boundary--