Message

Return-Path: <13brv3@bellsouth.net> Received: from imf19aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.67] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c1) with ESMTP id 722013 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 09 Feb 2005 12:11:46 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.67; envelope-from=13brv3@bellsouth.net Received: from rd ([65.6.194.9]) by imf19aec.mail.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.11 201-253-122-130-111-20040605) with ESMTP id <20050209171054.MWKP2048.imf19aec.mail.bellsouth.net@rd> for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2005 12:10:54 -0500 From: "Russell Duffy" <13brv3@bellsouth.net> To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Ellison, the missing piece Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 11:11:08 -0600 Message-ID: <000001c50eca$5e0fe5d0$6101a8c0@rd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01C50E98.137575D0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C50E98.137575D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Isn't there a law of motor performance that says that two motors putting = out the same horsepower are consuming the same amount of air&fuel, assuming efficiency differences were not significant? =20 =20 I'm guessing that the problem is with that last assumption. I bet we're operating at an efficiency level that's unimaginable to the folks at Lycoming. =20 =20 I still like the Ellison, and think that anyone who doesn't believe it's = an injector, should set one up one day. Step one is to purge the air from = the system. You do this by blowing air at the venturi with the fuel pump = on. The shower of fuel that comes from that absolutely has to be seen to be believed! I would seriously consider using one on the single rotor, = since one would be plenty. In all of this Ellison discussion, someone = already pointed out that they don't recommend running auto fuel in them. I = think lots of people do, but the fuel you buy can change additives from one = tank to the next, and the next one you get might be the one that melts the diaphragm. =20 =20 Example- I restored a 65 Corvette years ago, and had a Holley double = pumper carb. I had a T fitting that split the fuel supply to go to both bowls. This fitting happened to be plastic, and worked fine for as long as I = owned the car. Eventually, I sold it, and build an AC Cobra replica, also = with a Holley double pumper, and the same T fitting. I drove this for a year = or so, then one day smelled fuel, and opened the hood to see fuel spraying = out of that fitting. The station I always bought gas from had a big sign = out front advertising some new wizbang additive, which apparently attacked = the plastic. Rest assured that I immediately made a frantic call to the guy = who bought my Corvette. =20 =20 Just wanted to give everyone something else to worry about :-) =20 Rusty=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C50E98.137575D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message

Isn't there a law of motor performance that says that two motors = putting=20 out the same horsepower are consuming the same amount of air&fuel, = assuming=20 efficiency differences were not significant?

I'm guessing that the problem is with that last=20 assumption. I bet we're operating at an efficiency level that's=20 unimaginable to the folks at Lycoming.

I still like=20 the Ellison, and think that anyone who doesn't believe it's an injector, = should=20 set one up one day. Step one is to purge the air from the = system. =20 You do this by blowing air at the venturi with the fuel pump on. = The=20 shower of fuel that comes from that absolutely has to be seen to be=20 believed! I would seriously consider using one on the single = rotor, since=20 one would be plenty. In all of this Ellison discussion, = someone=20 already pointed out that they don't recommend running auto fuel in = them. I=20 think lots of people do, but the fuel you buy can change additives from = one tank=20 to the next, and the next one you get might be the one that melts the=20 diaphragm.

Example- I=20 restored a 65 Corvette years ago, and had a Holley double pumper = carb. I=20 had a T fitting that split the fuel supply to go to both bowls. = This=20 fitting happened to be plastic, and worked fine for as long as I owned = the=20 car. Eventually, I sold it, and build an AC Cobra replica, also = with a=20 Holley double pumper, and the same T fitting. I drove this for a = year or=20 so, then one day smelled fuel, and opened the hood to see fuel spraying = out of=20 that fitting. The station I always bought gas from had a big sign = out=20 front advertising some new wizbang additive, which apparently attacked = the=20 plastic. Rest assured that I immediately made a frantic call = to=20 the guy who bought my Corvette.

Just wanted=20 to give everyone something else to worry about :-)

Rusty=20

------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C50E98.137575D0--