How are the folks with turbos handling the
plumbing? Where are you picking up the pressurized oil and where/how do
you return the oil to the crankcase? I read in the install instructions
that the oil drain line should be one inch in diameter, return above oil level
in the crankcase, and have no traps in it. That doesn’t seem
possible with the rotary?? How are you doing it?
How far would it be safe to boost the
Renesis with the compression at 10:1?
Where are you picking up the water for the
water cooling of the turbo?
Does anyone have any good pictures of the
installation that shows these things?
B2
From: Rotary motors in
aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On
Behalf Of Steven W. Boese
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013
5:53 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: turbo
manifold
Rich,
A load cell was installed on one side of the
engine mount to measure torque. HP was calculated from the torque and the
RPM. Most installations with a Renesis engine appear to be using a higher
gear ratio than the 2.18:1 ratio of the reduction drives that I have.
This lowers the limit the of engine RPM that I am able to achieve with a
prop suitable for flight.
The HP required to turn the prop at a given
static RPM does not change if the atmospheric conditions haven't changed.
At the highest MAP of 21.5" shown on the chart for the NA 13B, the 13B HP
is very close to the HP of the Renesis at that same MAP. The test data on
the chart was generated as a first pass at assessing the suitability of
turbocharging the Renesis compared to the 13B engine. None of
the configurations should be considered to be optimized.
RV6A, 1986 13B NA, RD1A, EC2
From: Rotary motors in
aircraft [flyrotary@lancaironline.net] on behalf of argoldman@aol.com
[argoldman@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013
2:43 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: turbo
manifold
I had assumed that these were dynamometer
results. By what method did you ascertain the HP listed?
Interesting results. If the blades stalled (overpowered) at such a low RPM
would it be correct to assume that at that RPM the engine was producing more
power than the non Renesis engines at the same RPM with the same prop???
I am so confused... interested also in perhaps turboing the renesis in the
future??
Please help
Rich
-----Original
Message-----
From: Steven W. Boese <SBoese@uwyo.edu>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Thu, Jan 3, 2013 2:55 pm
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: turbo manifold
I honestly don't know what the exhaust
sound was like. The control panel for the test stand is on the opposite
side from the exhaust outlet. Also, at RPM above 5200, the 3 blade Warp Drive prop
was stalled and the prop noise was just deafening. I could
feel what seemed to be ground vibrations in my feet so testing higher
power levels was disconcerting. At RPM below 5200, the noise was similar
to having the GM diesel truck muffler on the NA 13B.
From: Rotary motors in
aircraft [flyrotary@lancaironline.net]
on behalf of Bobby J. Hughes [bhughes@qnsi.net]
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013
1:33 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: turbo
manifold
How did it sound
without a muffler? I removed my belly muffler for a speed run and it was not
tolerable in the cockpit. Only picked up 1-2 mph so the muffler is back on.