X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:08:39 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: <5zq@cox.net> Received: from lakermmtao01.cox.net ([68.230.240.38] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c5) with ESMTP id 949166 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 18 May 2005 15:58:14 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.240.38; envelope-from=5zq@cox.net Received: from OFFICE ([68.110.249.147]) by lakermmtao01.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with SMTP id <20050518195720.CXOX11036.lakermmtao01.cox.net@OFFICE> for ; Wed, 18 May 2005 15:57:20 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: <019501c55be3$9f594a20$6401a8c0@OFFICE> From: "Bill&Sue" <5zq@cox.net> X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] IV fuel valve question X-Original-Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 15:55:58 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0190_01C55BC2.1534EBE0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0190_01C55BC2.1534EBE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Colyn, We're working on the same challenge with our IV. Andair doesn't make = (yet?) a 3 way duplex valve which is what would work best for both of = us. I was thinking about using 2 seperate 3 way valves, one 1/2 for fuel = and one 1/4 inch for return. Either way, I think that we'll be stuck = with 2 valves. Bill Harrelson 5zq@cox.net N5ZQ 320 1,000 hrs N6ZQ IV 1 1/2% I have a IVP with the usual left/right/off , supply + return, fuel = valve. I have a third tank to plumb in. My thought was to put a second valve on the way to the right tank. This would be exactly the same kind of valve and would select between = right (wing) tank and aux (baggage area) tank. So it would look like this: engine ^ | | | left wing -> main valve <--2nd valve--<- right wing ^ | aux tank So this is full retun on all tanks and I should be able to=20 run directly from any tank. Can anyone think of a reason why this valve arrangement would not work reliably? Colyn ------=_NextPart_000_0190_01C55BC2.1534EBE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Colyn,

We're working on the same challenge = with our IV.=20 Andair doesn't make (yet?) a 3 way duplex valve which is what would = work best=20 for both of us. I was thinking about using 2 seperate 3 way valves, = one 1/2=20 for fuel and one 1/4 inch for return. Either way, I think that we'll = be stuck=20 with 2 valves.

Bill Harrelson

5zq@cox.net

N5ZQ 320 1,000 = hrs

N6ZQ IV = 1=20 1/2%

I have a IVP with the usual = left/right/off ,=20 supply + return, fuel valve.

I have a third tank to plumb = in.

My thought was to put a second valve = on the way=20 to the right tank.

This would be exactly the same kind = of valve and=20 would select between right (wing) tank and

aux (baggage area) tank.

So it would look like = this:

          &nbs= p;    engine

          &nbs= p;     =20 ^

          &nbs= p;      |

          &nbs= p;      |

          &nbs= p;      |

left wing -> main valve = <--2nd=20 valve--<- right wing

          &nbs= p;            = ;      =20 ^

          &nbs= p;            = ;      =20 |

          &nbs= p;            = ;  =20 aux tank

So this is full retun on all tanks = and I should=20 be able to

run directly from any = tank.

Can anyone think of a reason why = this valve=20 arrangement would

not work reliably?

Colyn

------=_NextPart_000_0190_01C55BC2.1534EBE0--