X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com From: "cbeazley" Received: from [216.254.140.143] (HELO tor-smtp-01.primus.ca) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.1.7) with ESMTP id 8181823 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 21 Nov 2015 18:04:50 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.254.140.143; envelope-from=cbeazley@innovista.net Received: from cpe0015f275ecd5-cm00195edd810c.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com ([99.224.129.102] helo=[192.168.0.100]) by tor-smtp-01.primus.ca with esmtpa (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1a0HCs-00039v-6h for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 21 Nov 2015 18:04:34 -0500 To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] 20B with RD-1C Prop Options Message-ID: <5650F881.3090107@innovista.net> Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 18:04:33 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------090201030402030202050603" X-Authenticated: cbeazley - cpe0015f275ecd5-cm00195edd810c.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com ([192.168.0.100]) [99.224.129.102] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------090201030402030202050603 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi James; Was the compression taken cold & dry? Per an old Factory Service Manual, the min compression limit is 85psi / 21 max difference - taken warm @ 250rpm. FSM Procedures: http://foxed.ca/index.php?page=rx7manual Some of the compression losses are probably slightly sticking seals. It should run fine. Lube with some light oil, get it up to temp, run it hard under load and retest. As you mentioned, I would run it as is and monitor it. If you take it apart a large street port is another alternative. IIRC, the 20B porting was relatively restrictive. PPort construction and tuning is a more involved option. There are pics of various ports and other bits around that may help identify the components. You could post pics here as well. Where did you buy the engine? Cheers Cary > From: James R. Osborn > Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] 20B with RD-1C Prop Options > Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 09:36:56 -0800 > To: Rotary motors in aircraft > > Message Header > > > Undecoded Message > > > Hi Jeff, > > Yes no time pressure at all. This will be a test stand development. > > We don’t know the full providence of this motor. It appears that it > has been rebuilt and there is rumor that Bruce Turrentine was involved > with that. He has a reputation, but I don’t know if it true he > rebuilt it or wishful thinking. And I don’t know what kind of porting > was done - it looks more like just cleanup than porting from the > outside inspection, but I wouldn’t know for sure until and if I take > it apart. > > I am not too afraid of rebuilding it as I have plenty of 13B > experience. But if the numbers seemed acceptable, I was thinking I > would try avoid it. Peak HP considerations aside (as Bobby > mentioned), I am inclined to go PP if I tear it apart - I always > wanted one! This would eliminate unknown factors about porting > altogether too. > > — James > > > On Nov 19, 2015, at 5:03 AM, Jeff Whaley > wrote: > > > > My gut feeling is if you are confident in the engine's history then > run the engine for several hours and retest the compression numbers. > > Don't know where your engine came from, how long it has been > sitting, or what preservation treatment it received. In general terms > it is always best to overhaul an automotive engine prior to > installation in an aircraft. My guess is if you are building an RV10, > you are still a long way from actually flying? - If that is true you > will have plenty of time to perform an overhaul - it takes about 1-2 > weeks real time. > > Jeff > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: James R. Osborn [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] > > Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 9:05 PM > > Subject: Re: 20B with RD-1C Prop Options > > > > So I finally got a dynamic pressure test done on this 20B. Here is > what I got: > > > > Front: 105-125-105 > > Center: 105-101-87 > > Rear: 130-125-120 > > > > This is in PSI and was done with all spark plugs out except the > rotor being tested. That one got one spark plug and the compression > fitting with pressure transducer attached in the other. I used the > RD-1C installed, but not engaged - I bolted up the flex plate without > the adapter and bolted up the RD-1C with a starter to be able to crank > it over. So the redrive was not slowing things down when I cranked it > over. Then I recorded the pressure wave on a laptop and looked at > three bumps in a row. I did this a few times for each rotor with a > pause in between and took the highest readings of any three successive > peaks to estimate the health of the three faces on each rotor. > > > > My understanding is that higher numbers are better and the same > numbers across all faces in the motor is better. I am unclear what an > unacceptable low number might be. The actual values you get are > dependent on a number of factors including how fast you are cranking > (how well charged your battery is, how beefy the cables are, what kind > of porting, other losses like the PSRU if it were engaged, etc.) and > if the motor is broken in or not. I don’t know if this motor was > broken in, or if any seals were replaced. It looks clean inside and > there is evidence of porting, but I don’t know exactly what (this is a > side port configuration motor). > > > > When I lost a side seal on my 13B REW in my RX-7, I got something > like 118-120-50 on the rotor that had the problem. So that was > clearly not good. When I rebuilt that motor that time, I had the > plates ground as they were beyond the wear limit and I used all new > side and corner seals and springs. After that rebuild, I got > uniformly 120 to 130 on all faces which I think is very good. > > > > So, what do you guys think of my 20B numbers? Is that low face on > the Center rotor bad enough to warrant tearing the motor completely > apart? If I decide to do that, I might very well go PP. Though Bobby > at least thinks that is a bad idea due to noise and tuning > difficulties with the PP. Or I could just live with it with these > numbers, go side port, and break it in and start checking this > periodically to see if there is any improvement or further deterioration. > > > > Thoughts or opinions? > > > > — James > > > >> On Oct 29, 2015, at 1:22 PM, James R. Osborn wrote: > >> > >> Hi guys, > >> > >> So I am going to be building an RV-10. I sourced Bobby’s spare 20B > / RD-1C combo and my plan is to work on the motor first, kind of > bass-ackward but that is what I am doing. My plan is to build a > motor/mount test stand and work everything out on the ground before I > ever put it in an airframe. I plan to set it up NA using the existing > side port configuration. I don’t know if it is ported - I am going to > attempt to determine this by inspection without cracking it open and > doing a dynamic compression test to evaluate the health of the motor. > If it is necessary to entirely rebuild the motor, I would probably go > PP. So I am thinking the target HP as it is would be in the 275 HP > range and probably 325 HP if it ends up being a PP. How do these > numbers sound to you all? > >> > >> I will be looking for a way to dyno it, hopefully borrow one to get > some data. But I was also thinking about just getting an appropriate > fixed pitch prop and working through the bugs based on static run ups. > I like the idea of a three blade prop. I like the idea of optimizing > for cruise at 75%, say 5800 rpm which would put full throttle at 7733 > rpm on the 20B. At 5800 rpm, the prop would be spinning 2035 rpm and > at full throttle 2713 rpm (using the 2.85 ratio RD-1C PSRU). Do all > these numbers sound about right? > >> > >> If so, then how do I choose a prop that will result in 2713 rpm > static run up at full throttle, but be tuned for efficiency at 2035 > rpm cruise? I am assuming at these reasonable RPMs that it will be a > larger swing and the three blade makes sense - what do you think? Is > there a convenient way to find props out there that will work at the > target full throttle HP of 275 or 325? Also if you guys have any good > resources to learn about how to figure these things out (books, web > pages, online calculators, etc.) that would be great! > >> > >> Another option might be to go with something like the IVOPROP > Magnum, either ground adjustable or electric inflight adjustable. > What do you guys think of these? Would the adjustability really help > me adapt to however my power plant turns out? Would the extra > complexity be worth it? For the ground adjustable one, I am thinking > the process would be: 1. select the “correct” swing (how?) and go for > three blades, 2) use ground adjustability and work up to THE pitch > while I tune the motor until I achieve full throttle static run up > around 7700 RPM. Will this result in a reasonably efficient setting > for 75% cruise? Am I thinking about this clearly? All opinions are > welcome. > >> > >> There’s a lot for you to chew on! > >> > >> — James > >> > > > > This message, and the documents attached hereto, is intended only > for the addressee and may contain privileged or confidential > information. Any unauthorized disclosure is strictly prohibited. If > you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately > so that we may correct our internal records. Please then delete the > original message. Thank you. > > > > -- > > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > > Archive and UnSub: > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html --------------090201030402030202050603 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="------------000601050508090704060900" --------------000601050508090704060900 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi James;

Was the compression taken cold & dry?

Per an old Factory Service Manual, the min compression limit is 85psi / 21 max difference - taken warm @ 250rpm.
FSM Procedures:
  http://foxed.ca/index.php?page=rx7manual

Some of the compression losses are probably slightly sticking seals.  It should run fine.
Lube with some light oil, get it up to temp, run it hard under load and retest.
As you mentioned, I would run it as is and monitor it.

If you take it apart a large street port is another alternative.  IIRC, the 20B porting was relatively restrictive.
PPort construction and tuning is a more involved option. 
There are pics of various ports and other bits around that may help identify the components.  You could post pics here as well.
Where did you buy the engine?

Cheers
Cary

From: James R. Osborn <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] 20B with RD-1C Prop Options
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 09:36:56 -0800
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Message Header

Undecoded Message
Hi Jeff,

Yes no time pressure at all.  This will be a test stand development.

We don’t know the full providence of this motor.  It appears that it has been rebuilt and there is rumor that Bruce Turrentine was involved with that.  He has a reputation, but I don’t know if it true he rebuilt it or wishful thinking.  And I don’t know what kind of porting was done - it looks more like just cleanup than porting from the outside inspection, but I wouldn’t know for sure until and if I take it apart.

I am not too afraid of rebuilding it as I have plenty of 13B experience.  But if the numbers seemed acceptable, I was thinking I would try avoid it.  Peak HP considerations aside (as Bobby mentioned), I am inclined to go PP if I tear it apart - I always wanted one!  This would eliminate unknown factors about porting altogether too.

— James

> On Nov 19, 2015, at 5:03 AM, Jeff Whaley <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:
>
> My gut feeling is if you are confident in the engine's history then run the engine for several hours and retest the compression numbers.
> Don't know where your engine came from, how long it has been sitting, or what preservation treatment it received. In general terms it is always best to overhaul an automotive engine prior to installation in an aircraft. My guess is if you are building an RV10, you are still a long way from actually flying? - If that is true you will have plenty of time to perform an overhaul - it takes about 1-2 weeks real time.
> Jeff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James R. Osborn [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 9:05 PM
> Subject: Re: 20B with RD-1C Prop Options
>
> So I finally got a dynamic pressure test done on this 20B.  Here is what I got:
>
> Front: 105-125-105
> Center: 105-101-87
> Rear: 130-125-120
>
> This is in PSI and was done with all spark plugs out except the rotor being tested.  That one got one spark plug and the compression fitting with pressure transducer attached in the other.  I used the RD-1C installed, but not engaged - I bolted up the flex plate without the adapter and bolted up the RD-1C with a starter to be able to crank it over.  So the redrive was not slowing things down when I cranked it over.  Then I recorded the pressure wave on a laptop and looked at three bumps in a row.  I did this a few times for each rotor with a pause in between and took the highest readings of any three successive peaks to estimate the health of the three faces on each rotor.
>
> My understanding is that higher numbers are better and the same numbers across all faces in the motor is better.  I am unclear what an unacceptable low number might be.  The actual values you get are dependent on a number of factors including how fast you are cranking (how well charged your battery is, how beefy the cables are, what kind of porting, other losses like the PSRU if it were engaged, etc.) and if the motor is broken in or not.  I don’t know if this motor was broken in, or if any seals were replaced.  It looks clean inside and there is evidence of porting, but I don’t know exactly what (this is a side port configuration motor).
>
> When I lost a side seal on my 13B REW in my RX-7, I got something like 118-120-50 on the rotor that had the problem.  So that was clearly not good.  When I rebuilt that motor that time, I had the plates ground as they were beyond the wear limit and I used all new side and corner seals and springs.  After that rebuild, I got uniformly 120 to 130 on all faces which I think is very good.
>
> So, what do you guys think of my 20B numbers?  Is that low face on the Center rotor bad enough to warrant tearing the motor completely apart?  If I decide to do that, I might very well go PP.  Though Bobby at least thinks that is a bad idea due to noise and tuning difficulties with the PP.  Or I could just live with it with these numbers, go side port, and break it in and start checking this periodically to see if there is any improvement or further deterioration.
>
> Thoughts or opinions?
>
> — James
>
>> On Oct 29, 2015, at 1:22 PM, James R. Osborn <rxcited@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> So I am going to be building an RV-10.  I sourced Bobby’s spare 20B / RD-1C combo and my plan is to work on the motor first, kind of bass-ackward but that is what I am doing.  My plan is to build a motor/mount test stand and work everything out on the ground before I ever put it in an airframe.  I plan to set it up NA using the existing side port configuration.  I don’t know if it is ported - I am going to attempt to determine this by inspection without cracking it open and doing a dynamic compression test to evaluate the health of the motor.  If it is necessary to entirely rebuild the motor, I would probably go PP.  So I am thinking the target HP as it is would be in the 275 HP range and probably 325 HP if it ends up being a PP.  How do these numbers sound to you all?
>>
>> I will be looking for a way to dyno it, hopefully borrow one to get some data.  But I was also thinking about just getting an appropriate fixed pitch prop and working through the bugs based on static run ups.  I like the idea of a three blade prop.  I like the idea of optimizing for cruise at 75%, say 5800 rpm which would put full throttle at 7733 rpm on the 20B.  At 5800 rpm, the prop would be spinning 2035 rpm and at full throttle 2713 rpm (using the 2.85 ratio RD-1C PSRU).  Do all these numbers sound about right?
>>
>> If so, then how do I choose a prop that will result in 2713 rpm static run up at full throttle, but be tuned for efficiency at 2035 rpm cruise?  I am assuming at these reasonable RPMs that it will be a larger swing and the three blade makes sense - what do you think?  Is there a convenient way to find props out there that will work at the target full throttle HP of 275 or 325?  Also if you guys have any good resources to learn about how to figure these things out (books, web pages, online calculators, etc.) that would be great!
>>
>> Another option might be to go with something like the IVOPROP Magnum, either ground adjustable or electric inflight adjustable.  What do you guys think of these?  Would the adjustability really help me adapt to however my power plant turns out?  Would the extra complexity be worth it?  For the ground adjustable one, I am thinking the process would be:  1. select the “correct” swing (how?) and go for three blades, 2) use ground adjustability and work up to THE pitch while I tune the motor until I achieve full throttle static run up around 7700 RPM.  Will this result in a reasonably efficient setting for 75% cruise?  Am I thinking about this clearly?  All opinions are welcome.
>>
>> There’s a lot for you to chew on!
>>
>> — James
>>
>
> This message, and the documents attached hereto, is intended only for the addressee and may contain privileged or confidential information. Any unauthorized disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately so that we may correct our internal records. Please then delete the original message. Thank you.
>
> --
> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html

--------------000601050508090704060900 Content-Type: image/gif; name="TextHeaders.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: Content-Disposition: inline; filename="TextHeaders.gif" R0lGODdhCgANAPcAAAAAAIAAAACAAICAAAAAgIAAgACAgMDAwMDcwKbK8AAAAAAAKgAAVQAA fwAAqgAA1AAqAAAqKgAqVQAqfwAqqgAq1ABVAABVKgBVVQBVfwBVqgBV1AB/AAB/KgB/VQB/ fwB/qgB/1ACqAACqKgCqVQCqfwCqqgCq1ADUAADUKgDUVQDUfwDUqgDU1CoAACoAKioAVSoA fyoAqioA1CoqACoqKioqVSoqfyoqqioq1CpVACpVKipVVSpVfypVqipV1Cp/ACp/Kip/VSp/ fyp/qip/1CqqACqqKiqqVSqqfyqqqiqq1CrUACrUKirUVSrUfyrUqirU1FUAAFUAKlUAVVUA f1UAqlUA1FUqAFUqKlUqVVUqf1UqqlUq1FVVAFVVKlVVVVVVf1VVqlVV1FV/AFV/KlV/VVV/ f1V/qlV/1FWqAFWqKlWqVVWqf1WqqlWq1FXUAFXUKlXUVVXUf1XUqlXU1H8AAH8AKn8AVX8A f38Aqn8A1H8qAH8qKn8qVX8qf38qqn8q1H9VAH9VKn9VVX9Vf39Vqn9V1H9/AH9/Kn9/VX9/ f39/qn9/1H+qAH+qKn+qVX+qf3+qqn+q1H/UAH/UKn/UVX/Uf3/Uqn/U1KoAAKoAKqoAVaoA f6oAqqoA1KoqAKoqKqoqVaoqf6oqqqoq1KpVAKpVKqpVVapVf6pVqqpV1Kp/AKp/Kqp/Vap/ f6p/qqp/1KqqAKqqKqqqVaqqf6qqqqqq1KrUAKrUKqrUVarUf6rUqqrU1NQAANQAKtQAVdQA f9QAqtQA1NQqANQqKtQqVdQqf9QqqtQq1NRVANRVKtRVVdRVf9RVqtRV1NR/ANR/KtR/VdR/ f9R/qtR/1NSqANSqKtSqVdSqf9SqqtSq1NTUANTUKtTUVdTUf9TUqtTU1AAAAAwMDBkZGSYm JjMzMz8/P0xMTFlZWWZmZnJycn9/f4yMjJmZmaWlpbKysr+/v8zMzNjY2OXl5fLy8v/78KCg pICAgP8AAAD/AP//AAAA//8A/wD//////ywAAAAACgANAAAINgDxCRw4EAC+fwgTIjT4DwCA AwIXHlSYkKHDhxEZUpTYEONEjRstOoR4ECRFkSQ5bux4saXDgAA7 --------------000601050508090704060900 Content-Type: image/gif; name="TextLetter.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: Content-Disposition: inline; filename="TextLetter.gif" R0lGODdhCgANAPcAAAAAAIAAAACAAICAAAAAgIAAgACAgMDAwMDcwKbK8AAAAAAAKgAAVQAA fwAAqgAA1AAqAAAqKgAqVQAqfwAqqgAq1ABVAABVKgBVVQBVfwBVqgBV1AB/AAB/KgB/VQB/ fwB/qgB/1ACqAACqKgCqVQCqfwCqqgCq1ADUAADUKgDUVQDUfwDUqgDU1CoAACoAKioAVSoA fyoAqioA1CoqACoqKioqVSoqfyoqqioq1CpVACpVKipVVSpVfypVqipV1Cp/ACp/Kip/VSp/ fyp/qip/1CqqACqqKiqqVSqqfyqqqiqq1CrUACrUKirUVSrUfyrUqirU1FUAAFUAKlUAVVUA f1UAqlUA1FUqAFUqKlUqVVUqf1UqqlUq1FVVAFVVKlVVVVVVf1VVqlVV1FV/AFV/KlV/VVV/ f1V/qlV/1FWqAFWqKlWqVVWqf1WqqlWq1FXUAFXUKlXUVVXUf1XUqlXU1H8AAH8AKn8AVX8A f38Aqn8A1H8qAH8qKn8qVX8qf38qqn8q1H9VAH9VKn9VVX9Vf39Vqn9V1H9/AH9/Kn9/VX9/ f39/qn9/1H+qAH+qKn+qVX+qf3+qqn+q1H/UAH/UKn/UVX/Uf3/Uqn/U1KoAAKoAKqoAVaoA f6oAqqoA1KoqAKoqKqoqVaoqf6oqqqoq1KpVAKpVKqpVVapVf6pVqqpV1Kp/AKp/Kqp/Vap/ f6p/qqp/1KqqAKqqKqqqVaqqf6qqqqqq1KrUAKrUKqrUVarUf6rUqqrU1NQAANQAKtQAVdQA f9QAqtQA1NQqANQqKtQqVdQqf9QqqtQq1NRVANRVKtRVVdRVf9RVqtRV1NR/ANR/KtR/VdR/ f9R/qtR/1NSqANSqKtSqVdSqf9SqqtSq1NTUANTUKtTUVdTUf9TUqtTU1AAAAAwMDBkZGSYm JjMzMz8/P0xMTFlZWWZmZnJycn9/f4yMjJmZmaWlpbKysr+/v8zMzNjY2OXl5fLy8v/78KCg pICAgP8AAAD/AP//AAAA//8A/wD//////ywAAAAACgANAAAIPgDxCRw4EAC+fwcQKjxgMCHD hAD+GUQYEcDDhhIzVjwIkSJDfA8zQjxYUWRDixVHmnSI0aHCiS5ZAphJs2ZAADs= --------------000601050508090704060900-- --------------090201030402030202050603--