X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.120] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.1) with ESMTP id 6070140 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 12:29:17 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=75.180.132.120; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Return-Path: X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=cYNQXw/M c=1 sm=0 a=g3L/TDsr+eNLfIieSKfGkw==:17 a=AHkS0RJitIMA:10 a=6-BYsL0Sf_AA:10 a=05ChyHeVI94A:10 a=ayC55rCoAAAA:8 a=xFjqug1CyF0A:10 a=3oc9M9_CAAAA:8 a=wtJ6AUfAAAAA:8 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=7g1VtSJxAAAA:8 a=oCcaPWc0AAAA:8 a=4AaOVIfBBIiYcFc6TQAA:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=Qa1je4BO31QA:10 a=U8Ie8EnqySEA:10 a=MSl-tDqOz04A:10 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 a=HHGDD-5mAAAA:8 a=kBEm12rAElRdckJeT44A:9 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10 a=i1zE5R4R5dEA:10 a=eYvyuojFl-Ut4u78:21 a=g3L/TDsr+eNLfIieSKfGkw==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Authenticated-User: X-Originating-IP: 174.110.170.10 Received: from [174.110.170.10] ([174.110.170.10:59548] helo=EdPC) by cdptpa-oedge03.mail.rr.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.3.46 r()) with ESMTP id DA/4B-11869-AC462215; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 17:28:43 +0000 Message-ID: From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Intake progress Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 12:28:19 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001A_01CE0DD3.6F3F6810" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01CE0DD3.6F3F6810 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable No, Rich, that is with the 2.85 gear box and new prop. With the old = 2.17 and 67/72 takeoff RPM was 5200-5600 depending on OAT. 5600 was on = a very good day. The large air mass pushed back by the larger but = slower turning prop with the 2.85 makes a very noticeable difference in = acceleration on take off. Great for the small field I operate out of. Ed From: ARGOLDMAN@aol.com=20 Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 10:59 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Intake progress Ed, going to the new gear box, are you still taking off at 6000-6200 RPM WOT = or did that change? Rich In a message dated 2/18/2013 7:22:54 A.M. Central Standard Time, = eanderson@carolina.rr.com writes: Never had it on a dyno, Steve, but based on fuel flow and performance, = I see 17.0 17.5 GPH WOT at take off (6000 rpm) which would equate to = roughly 175HP on a 70-90 F day. On a cold day <50F I see 19-20 gph (at = 6100-6200 RPM) WOT on Take off which would give approx 190 HP - increase = in performance is quite evident on the cold days. But, again no dyno time or data. But, when I went from my old 2.17 = gearbox and 67/72 prop to the 2.85 and 74/88 prop - that really is what = changed the performance dramatically - particularly for take off and = climbout, surprisingly top speed also increased around 4-6MPH TAS. = First take off took work to keep it on the runway (I'm glad Tracy warned = me) with all the right rudder I had. I have since learned in my RV-6a = that letting it get to around 40 mph before apply full throttle makes = take off less exciting {:>) Ed From: Stephen Izett=20 Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2013 6:17 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Intake progress Ed=20 What do you guestimate your HP to be and at what RPM? Cheers Steve Izett On 18/02/2013, at 7:03 AM, Ed Anderson wrote: Looks good, Charlie No welder myself, however when it came time to attach 0.049 wall = aluminum tubing to the cast aluminum stock manifold (see photo = attached), I found a brazing rod for aluminum that worked great. =20 Used a butane torch (more BTU/min the better) to first heat the = casting (your plate would be easier) and then brought the flame close to = the tubing - but not playing on the tubing. touched the brazing rod to = the intersection and it did a great job. Been flying for 8 years with = that throttle body (blue half moon) stuck out on the end without any = additional support and still OK. Here is the website for the rod I used successfully - before trying = this rod, I probably had 10 lbs or various rods that I never had any = luck with, but this worked. http://www.aluminumrepair.com/ Ed -------------------------------------------------- From: "Charlie England" Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2013 3:41 PM To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: [FlyRotary] Intake progress >=20 > Now that everyone's awake again, I thought I'd send a pic of my = intake=20 > progress (RV-7 Renesis with James Lyc cowl). I played with a = couple of=20 > different materials for the bell mouths. I tried gluing up some = 1/4"=20 > plexi from an old windshield, but used super glue instead of = proper=20 > plexi cement (which I wasn't able to find locally in a hurry). The = 1st=20 > try popped apart on the lathe; the 2nd turned out ok. Next effort = was=20 > with 3/4" MDF (medium density fiberboard). That went well, until I = put a=20 > little too much side pressure on the ring (homemade cutting tool) = after=20 > undercutting the center section. Overall tube lengths will be ~11 = 3/4"=20 > block surface to bell ends. The plenum is *much* bigger than most = tuning=20 > sites recommend. I figure that I can experiment with plenum size = by just=20 > stuffing it with rigid foam to take up some volume, if needed. = Going the=20 > other way wouldn't be so easy. :-) >=20 > Since I don't have Mark's TIG skills, I thought I'd ask what = others have=20 > used in joining thin wall tubing to 1/4" aluminum plate. Aluminum=20 > brazing rod? High temp epoxy? JB weld? I do intend to add bracing = from=20 > the plate to the plenum assembly to take some of the cantilever &=20 > vibration stress off the tubes. >=20 > I'm using this length and concept because Tracy has had great luck = with=20 > both HP & BSFC on his Renesis with a similar configuration. = However, I'm=20 > curious about how others have adapted the common Helmholtz intake = tuning=20 > formulas to the rotary. Would anyone care to 'show their (math) = work'?=20 > Renesis users would be better for me, but any calcs would do. When = I=20 > tried to adapt the common formulas to a rotary, I was getting=20 > 'interesting' results, so I'd like to know if I got lost somewhere = while=20 > trying to plug rotary 'valve' timing into the formulas. >=20 > Charlie > (Sorry for the sideways iphone pic; I guess you can pretend that = you're=20 > looking down on it...) > > -- > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > Archive and UnSub: = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6110 - Release Date: = 02/17/13 -- Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ Archive and UnSub: = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6110 - Release Date: = 02/17/13 No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6110 - Release Date: = 02/17/13 ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01CE0DD3.6F3F6810 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
No, Rich,  that is with the 2.85 gear box and = new=20 prop.  With the old 2.17 and 67/72 takeoff RPM was 5200-5600 = depending on=20 OAT.  5600 was on a very good day.  The large air mass pushed = back by=20 the larger but slower turning prop with the 2.85 makes a very noticeable = difference in acceleration on take off.  Great for the small field = I=20 operate out of.
 
Ed

Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 10:59 AM
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Intake progress

Ed,
 
going to the new gear box, are you still taking off at 6000-6200 = RPM WOT or=20 did that change?
 
Rich
 
In a message dated 2/18/2013 7:22:54 A.M. Central Standard Time, eanderson@carolina.rr.com=20 writes:
Never had it on a dyno, Steve, but based on = fuel flow=20 and performance, I see 17.0 17.5 GPH WOT at take off (6000 rpm) which = would=20 equate to roughly 175HP on a 70-90 F day.  On a cold day <50F = I see=20 19-20 gph (at 6100-6200 RPM) WOT on Take off which would = give approx=20 190 HP - increase in performance is quite evident on the cold=20 days.
 
But, again no dyno time or data.  But, = when I went=20 from my old 2.17 gearbox and 67/72 prop to the 2.85 and 74/88 prop - = that=20 really is what changed the performance dramatically - particularly for = take=20 off and climbout, surprisingly top speed also increased around = 4-6MPH=20 TAS.  First take off took work to keep it on the runway (I'm glad = Tracy=20 warned me) with all the right rudder I had.  I have since = learned in=20 my RV-6a that letting it get to around 40 mph before apply full = throttle makes=20 take off less exciting {:>)
 
 
Ed

Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2013 6:17 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Intake progress

Ed=20
What do you guestimate your HP to be and at what RPM?

Cheers

Steve Izett
On 18/02/2013, at 7:03 AM, Ed Anderson wrote:
Looks good, Charlie

No welder myself, however when it = came time=20 to attach  0.049 wall aluminum tubing to the cast aluminum = stock=20 manifold (see photo attached), I found a brazing rod for aluminum = that=20 worked great. 

Used a butane torch (more BTU/min the = better) to=20 first heat the casting (your plate would be easier) and then brought = the=20 flame close to the tubing - but not playing on the tubing.  = touched the=20 brazing rod to the intersection and it did a great job.  Been = flying=20 for 8 years with that throttle body (blue half moon) stuck out on = the end=20 without any additional support and still OK.

Here is the = website for=20 the rod I used successfully - before trying this rod, I probably had = 10 lbs=20 or various rods that I never had any luck with, but this=20 worked.


http://www.aluminumrepair.com/
 

Ed

---------------------------------------= -----------
From:=20 "Charlie England" <ceengland7@gmail.com>
Sent= :=20 Sunday, February 17, 2013 3:41 PM
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" = <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject:=20 [FlyRotary] Intake progress

>
> Now that everyone's = awake=20 again, I thought I'd send a pic of my intake
> progress (RV-7 = Renesis=20 with James Lyc cowl). I played with a couple of
> different = materials=20 for the bell mouths. I tried gluing up some 1/4"
> plexi from = an old=20 windshield, but used super glue instead of proper
> plexi = cement=20 (which I wasn't able to find locally in a hurry). The 1st
> = try=20 popped apart on the lathe; the 2nd turned out ok. Next effort was =
>=20 with 3/4" MDF (medium density fiberboard). That went well, until I = put a=20
> little too much side pressure on the ring (homemade cutting = tool)=20 after
> undercutting the center section. Overall tube lengths = will be=20 ~11 3/4"
> block surface to bell ends. The plenum is *much* = bigger=20 than most tuning
> sites recommend. I figure that I can = experiment=20 with plenum size by just
> stuffing it with rigid foam to = take up=20 some volume, if needed. Going the
> other way wouldn't be so = easy.=20 :-)
>
> Since I don't have Mark's TIG skills, I thought = I'd ask=20 what others have
> used in joining thin wall tubing to 1/4" = aluminum=20 plate. Aluminum
> brazing rod? High temp epoxy? JB weld? I do = intend=20 to add bracing from
> the plate to the plenum assembly to = take some=20 of the cantilever &
> vibration stress off the = tubes.
>=20
> I'm using this length and concept because Tracy has had = great luck=20 with
> both HP & BSFC on his Renesis with a similar=20 configuration. However, I'm
> curious about how others have = adapted=20 the common Helmholtz intake tuning
> formulas to the rotary. = Would=20 anyone care to 'show their (math) work'?
> Renesis users = would be=20 better for me, but any calcs would do. When I
> tried to = adapt the=20 common formulas to a rotary, I was getting
> 'interesting' = results,=20 so I'd like to know if I got lost somewhere while
> trying to = plug=20 rotary 'valve' timing into the formulas.
>
> = Charlie
>=20 (Sorry for the sideways iphone pic; I guess you can pretend that = you're=20
> looking down on it...)
>



> = --
>=20 Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> = Archive and UnSub:   http:= //mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
>

=

>=20 -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG = - www.avg.com
>=20 Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6110 - Release Date:=20 02/17/13
<Back6th.jpg>--
Homepage: =  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archi= ve=20 and UnSub:   http:= //mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html

No virus found in this=20 message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2899 / = Virus=20 Database: 2639/6110 - Release Date:=20 02/17/13

No virus found in this=20 message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2899 / = Virus=20 Database: 2639/6110 - Release Date: 02/17/13

------=_NextPart_000_001A_01CE0DD3.6F3F6810--