X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from imr-ma03.mx.aol.com ([64.12.206.41] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.1) with ESMTP id 6070198 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 12:46:13 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.206.41; envelope-from=ARGOLDMAN@aol.com Received: from mtaomg-db05.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-db05.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.51.203]) by imr-ma03.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id 5EF301C0000B2 for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 12:45:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from core-dse003b.r1000.mail.aol.com (core-dse003.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.29.227.201]) by mtaomg-db05.r1000.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id 83488E00008A for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 12:45:37 -0500 (EST) From: ARGOLDMAN@aol.com Full-name: ARGOLDMAN Message-ID: <3275f.7974da2b.3e53c2c0@aol.com> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 12:45:37 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Intake progress To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_3275f.7974da2b.3e53c2c0_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=1361209538; bh=cUeom6dA/d7RBeIk+PGk+N9MDWjuNwN2Tix6rfijX3M=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=zJlTJnR/lkl22VkOycLeIR8mbekAq5mdjxeTmruUC6AEmpdJLLgul4a90PzoZxl+T H367FuJ+yfsMGwJv1CeNF3hDVrlMvArSLPBSGCAgIgZpntqVHloOjz6cE49APgCqlw 2b4TsELKpHQgz3tOFsW562HFKzHJNRdlbGd8dbk0= X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:495938368:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d33cb512268c1187f --part1_3275f.7974da2b.3e53c2c0_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks Ed. Rich In a message dated 2/18/2013 11:29:22 A.M. Central Standard Time, eanderson@carolina.rr.com writes: 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_ (mailto:ARGOLDMAN@aol.com) Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 10:59 AM To: _Rotary motors in aircraft_ (mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net) 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_ (mailto: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_ (mailto:steveizett@me.com) Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2013 6:17 PM To: _Rotary motors in aircraft_ (mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net) Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Intake progress Ed 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. 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/_ (http://www.aluminumrepair.com/) Ed -------------------------------------------------- From: "Charlie England" <_ceengland7@gmail.com_ (mailto:ceengland7@gmail.com) > Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2013 3:41 PM To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <_flyrotary@lancaironline.net_ (mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net) > Subject: [FlyRotary] Intake progress > > Now that everyone's awake again, I thought I'd send a pic of my intake > progress (RV-7 Renesis with James Lyc cowl). I played with a couple of > different materials for the bell mouths. I tried gluing up some 1/4" > plexi from an old windshield, but used super glue instead of proper > plexi cement (which I wasn't able to find locally in a hurry). The 1st > try popped apart on the lathe; the 2nd turned out ok. Next effort was > with 3/4" MDF (medium density fiberboard). That went well, until I put a > little too much side pressure on the ring (homemade cutting tool) after > undercutting the center section. Overall tube lengths will be ~11 3/4" > block surface to bell ends. The plenum is *much* bigger than most tuning > sites recommend. I figure that I can experiment with plenum size by just > stuffing it with rigid foam to take up some volume, if needed. Going the > other way wouldn't be so easy. :-) > > Since I don't have Mark's TIG skills, I thought I'd ask what others have > used in joining thin wall tubing to 1/4" aluminum plate. Aluminum > brazing rod? High temp epoxy? JB weld? I do intend to add bracing from > the plate to the plenum assembly to take some of the cantilever & > vibration stress off the tubes. > > I'm using this length and concept because Tracy has had great luck with > both HP & BSFC on his Renesis with a similar configuration. However, I'm > curious about how others have adapted the common Helmholtz intake tuning > formulas to the rotary. Would anyone care to 'show their (math) work'? > Renesis users would be better for me, but any calcs would do. When I > tried to adapt the common formulas to a rotary, I was getting > 'interesting' results, so I'd like to know if I got lost somewhere while > trying to plug rotary 'valve' timing into the formulas. > > Charlie > (Sorry for the sideways iphone pic; I guess you can pretend that you're > looking down on it...) > > -- > Homepage: _http://www.flyrotary.com/_ (http://www.flyrotary.com/) > Archive and UnSub: _http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html_ (http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html) > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - _www.avg.com_ (http://www.avg.com/) > Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6110 - Release Date: 02/17/13 -- Homepage: _http://www.flyrotary.com/_ (http://www.flyrotary.com/) Archive and UnSub: _http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html_ (http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html) No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - _www.avg.com_ (http://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_ (http://www.avg.com/) Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6110 - Release Date: 02/17/13 --part1_3275f.7974da2b.3e53c2c0_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks Ed.
 
Rich
 
In a message dated 2/18/2013 11:29:22 A.M. Central Standard Time,=20 eanderson@carolina.rr.com writes:
=
No, Rich,  that is with the 2.85 gear box and ne= w=20 prop.  With the old 2.17 and 67/72 takeoff RPM was 5200-5600 dependi= ng on=20 OAT.  5600 was on a very good day.  The large air mass pushed b= ack=20 by the larger but slower turning prop with the 2.85 makes a very noticeab= le=20 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
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Intake progress

Ed,
 
going to the new gear box, are you still taking off at 6000-6200 RPM= WOT=20 or 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 fue= l flow=20 and performance, I see 17.0 17.5 GPH WOT at take off (6000 rpm) which w= ould=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= =20 approx 190 HP - increase in performance is quite evident on the cold=20 days.
 
But, again no dyno time or data.  But, whe= n I=20 went from my old 2.17 gearbox and 67/72 prop to the 2.85 and 74/88 prop= -=20 that really is what changed the performance dramatically - particularly= for=20 take off and climbout, surprisingly top speed also increased aroun= d=20 4-6MPH TAS.  First take off took work to keep it on the runway (I'= m=20 glad Tracy warned me) with all the right rudder I had.  I hav= e=20 since learned in my RV-6a that letting it get to around 40 mph before a= pply=20 full throttle makes take off less exciting {:>)
 
 
Ed

From: Step= hen=20 Izett
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 cam= e=20 time to attach  0.049 wall aluminum tubing to the cast aluminum = stock=20 manifold (see photo attached), I found a brazing rod for aluminum tha= t=20 worked great. 

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

Here i= s the=20 website for the rod I used successfully - before trying this rod, I= =20 probably had 10 lbs or various rods that I never had any luck with, b= ut=20 this 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"= =20 <flyrotary@lancaironline.n= et>
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= =20 Renesis with James Lyc cowl). I played with a couple of
> diff= erent=20 materials for the bell mouths. I tried gluing up some 1/4"
> p= lexi=20 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 1s= t=20
> try popped apart on the lathe; the 2nd turned out ok. Next e= ffort=20 was
> with 3/4" MDF (medium density fiberboard). That went wel= l,=20 until I put a
> little too much side pressure on the ring (hom= emade=20 cutting tool) after
> undercutting the center section. Overall= tube=20 lengths will be ~11 3/4"
> block surface to bell ends. The ple= num=20 is *much* bigger than most tuning
> sites recommend. I figure = that=20 I can experiment with plenum size by just
> stuffing it with r= igid=20 foam to take up some volume, if needed. Going the
> other way= =20 wouldn't be so easy. :-)
>
> Since I don't have Mark's T= IG=20 skills, I thought I'd ask what others have
> used in joining t= hin=20 wall tubing to 1/4" aluminum plate. Aluminum
> brazing rod? Hi= gh=20 temp epoxy? JB weld? I do intend to add bracing from
> the pla= te to=20 the plenum assembly to take some of the cantilever &
>=20 vibration stress off the tubes.
>
> I'm using this lengt= h and=20 concept because Tracy has had great luck with
> both HP & = BSFC=20 on his Renesis with a similar configuration. However, I'm
> cu= rious=20 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= .=20 When I
> tried to adapt the common formulas to a rotary, I was= =20 getting
> 'interesting' results, so I'd like to know if I got = lost=20 somewhere while
> trying to plug rotary 'valve' timing into th= e=20 formulas.
>
> Charlie
> (Sorry for the sideways ip= hone=20 pic; I guess you can pretend that you're
> looking down on=20 it...)
>



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


>=20 -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG = - www.avg.com
> Version: 2013.0.= 2899 /=20 Virus Database: 2639/6110 - Release Date:=20 02/17/13
<Back6th.jpg>--
Homepage:= =20  http://www.flyrotary.com/
A= rchive=20 and UnSub:   h= ttp://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 / Vi= rus=20 Database: 2639/6110 - Release Date:=20 02/17/13

--part1_3275f.7974da2b.3e53c2c0_boundary--