X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from [199.185.220.223] (HELO priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.4) with ESMTP id 986308 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:03:22 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=199.185.220.223; envelope-from=echolakeresort@telus.net Received: from boucher-oddle24 ([207.194.26.30]) by priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.04 201-2131-118-104-20050224) with ESMTP id <20050606180225.MKIY546.priv-edtnes27.telusplanet.net@boucher-oddle24> for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2005 12:02:25 -0600 Received: from 127.0.0.1 (AVG SMTP 7.0.323 [267.6.4]); Mon, 06 Jun 2005 11:02:23 -0700 Message-Id: <42A48FAB.000004.02760@BOUCHER-ODDLE24> Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 11:02:19 -0700 (Pacific Standard Time) X-Mailer: IncrediMail (3001609) From: "Echo Lake Fishing Resort (Georges Boucher)" References: To: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: EC2 problems - solved / rotary risks X-FID: FLAVOR00-NONE-0000-0000-000000000000 X-Priority: 3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=======AVGMAIL-42A48FAF6048=======" --=======AVGMAIL-42A48FAF6048======= Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; boundary="------------Boundary-00=_VRCOBHK0000000000000" --------------Boundary-00=_VRCOBHK0000000000000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On the other hand when I had my shop I found that the biggest cause of be= lt failure was belt tensioner bearing seizing up usually after the first bel= t was replaced(even though the tensioner felt free the sealed bearings had dried up) In my opinion the tensioner(s) should be replaced at the same t= ine as the belt(s) . One that sticks to mind was a Peugeot MY16 twin cam, the customer didn't go for the $100.00 + tensioner , 4000km later had $3000.0= 0 rebuild (valve to piston contact at high rpm). It's pretty hard to have redundancy on timing belts, I like the odds with a rotary!!=0D Georges B.=0D =0D -------Original Message-------=0D =0D From: Rotary motors in aircraft=0D Date: 06/06/05 08:50:33=0D To: Rotary motors in aircraft=0D Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EC2 problems - solved / rotary risks=0D =0D Hi Al, =0D =0D The timing belt risk on your Subaru may be lower then you think, in my experience timing belt failures occur at engine start 9 times out of 10.=20 Most Japanese manufacturers recommend a replacement interval of about 70,= 000 miles, if the oil seals are replaced at the same time and the belt is re-tensioned after the first heat cycle you should be quite safe. =0D =0D Ian=0D =0D (Convinced that you are NOT flying the highest risk aircraft ever made ;-= )=0D -----Original Message-----=0D From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]On Behalf Of al p wick=0D Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 9:58 AM=0D To: Rotary motors in aircraft=0D Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EC2 problems - solved / rotary risks=0D =0D =0D When we are pursuing a problem like Johns, we are eager to find the cause= =2E It's a great relief when we do. We say "Eureka!". We did it! We did it! T= his sense of relief is a root cause for failure. We are so eager to get the problem off our back, that we don't take the next step....=0D Yes, I know you firmly believe this connector was the problem. But if you can force yourself to pretend it WASN'T, then you can do this:=0D Is the cause logical? Like is that really the wire that causes that effec= t? If I remove that wire, does it have the same effect? What if I have two things causing the same thing? By pretending that really wasn't the cause= , then you will do some more testing, looking around. Looking for similar connector issues, stuff like that.=0D =0D Now I have to admit, this really does sound like he found the cause. But = I ve seen this scenario so often. So you use the disciplines I suggest to reduce your risk. Logical cause? Can I make it recur? =0D Repeat after me: "Al Wick is an idiot". "Al will jump to conclusions". If you believe that, then you start finding ways to prove your theory with facts instead of just accepting your first conclusion. My best asset is t= hat I know I'm an idiot.=0D =0D Yeah, yeah, I know, you guys already knew I was.=0D =0D We had a perfect example of this on Cozy list couple weeks ago. Subaru engine slipped 2 teeth on timing belt. Would no longer start. Keith talke= d to expert and the guy said:"You know, the engine normally is never rotate= d backwards. But you've been pushing your new prop backwards recently (installing new prop). I think you relaxed the belt tensioner when going backwards and caused it to skip tooth." So Keith said" Yes, all of that's true. That has to be it."=0D =0D But then one of the guys looked into it, guess what? The direction the be= lt slipped is the opposite of that theory. That could not have caused it. =0D The lesson? Prove all aspects of the theory are logical. Prove that all t= he various facts support the theory. Find a way to convert your theory to facts!=0D =0D Oh, by the way, if you look at my analysis of my engine risks....you will notice that timing belt is the highest risk item on this engine. So we ha= ve exposed another root cause for his problem. He didn't focus on the leadin= g cause for all engine failures. When we reviewed some facts he had, we fou= nd conclusive evidence he had loose belt from day one! It was installed wron= g.=0D =0D Regarding CAS risk. It's not just crank angle sensor that is the risk ite= m. Going to redundancy with the CAS will dramatically reduce risk of all ECM causes. Like this connector risk. I'm not always proponent of redundancy, but with my limited info on this item, I SUSPECT it's significant, positi= ve step.=0D =0D -al wick=0D Artificial intelligence in cockpit, Cozy IV powered by stock Subaru 2.5=0D N9032U 200+ hours on engine/airframe from Portland, Oregon=0D Prop construct, Subaru install, Risk assessment, Glass panel design info:= =0D http://www.maddyhome.com/canardpages/pages/alwick/index.html=0D =0D =0D =0D =0D On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 21:44:00 -0400 "Tracy Crook" writes:=0D Ahh.. Music to my ears John : )=0D =0D And this brings up the subject of risk (rotary & otherwise) that Al W. (a= nd every other builder I know) is concerned with. I agree with Al W. that getting to the major causes of failures is a (hell, THE) key issue. That= is why I have not spent much time on the crank angle sensor single point failure question. I have never seen or heard of a confirmed Mazda 13B CA= S failure. Can it happen? Of course. I am in the process of developing a dual CAS for the Renesis CAS but it is not a 'front burner' project.=0D =0D I'm reading between the lines of Al's posts but it seems that he is emphasizing the importance of leaving the engine as un-touched as possibl= e.=20 I once wrote an article for Light Plane World (EAA's ultralight magazine back in the late 80's) and advocated the same thing after noting that man= y Rotax failures occurred soon after the owner opened up the engine for maintenance. Decarboning the piston ring grooves was important but many builders were causing more problems than they fixed when they went inside= so I recommended some products and procedures that would do the job without opening the engine. =0D =0D That was the basic gist anyway but I eventually decided this was not a reasonable approach for builders who planned on installing an alternative engine in 200 mph category airplanes. There were simply far too many are= as where things could go wrong in this process. The root cause of the probl= ems had to be identified. One of the names I gave to the cause is a term I recently used on this list - Shopcraft (or lack of). This referred to t= he ability to identify the quality or suitability of virtually everything th= at goes into the plane. Yes, I know this is a generality of the highest ord= er but if we are to get to the root cause of failures in the field of alternative aircraft engines, this level of abstraction is required. =0D =0D It has been suggested that a collection of 'best practices' might be a solution. This may help but it is not a solution. There is an unlimited number of potential problem areas so a list of them could never be compil= ed. So, how do you learn to recognize what is or is not a 'good thing'? I= 'm getting so frustrated just trying to describe the problem that there may = not be a solution, at least not one that can be spelled out in something like= an email message. Damn, now I can't even criticize Al W. for not spelling = it out. =0D =0D The best I can do for now is to emphasize two things. Pay attention to every detail and admit to yourself when you don't have the ability to execute something well. Another version of these rules was given to me long ago:=0D =0D 1. Rules are for those who are not smart enough to make up their own.=20 (Author unknown)=0D 2. A man's got to know his own limitations. (Dirty Harry)=0D 3. Always follow BOTH rules 1 & 2.=0D =0D Small details like the problem of soldering thermocouple wire to a connec= tor that Al Gietzen mentioned can be critically important. He was able to recognize the problem (he made a lousy solder joint) and devise a solutio= n (acid flux) even though it violated one of the cardinal rules of electric= al wiring. He recognized that too and took the steps necessary to achieve satisfactory results (knowing when to make up his own rules).=0D =0D Out of time, I'll stop blathering now.=0D =0D Tracy =0D =0D Subject: [FlyRotary] EC2 problems - solved=0D =0D =0D Tracy and others. =0D Following more than 12 months of battling with EC2 issues I'm pretty sure= it s Eureka day!=0D After rewiring and testing for almost 4 weeks I plugged the EC2 in last night, and got exactly the same symptoms as before. NOP flashing indicati= ng no communication. I took the EC2 to Buly's plane and tried it in his installation. Same NOP, so I was thinking I'd fried it again. Before send= ing it back yet again I decided to install it my plane one more time and see = if there was a spark. =0D =0D To my amazement it worked. No NOP, and I could bring up the EC2 data. The only thing that changed overnight was that I moved the cable to unplug it= =2E I climbed in the back and found that I could make the NOP flash, or stop flashing, by moving the cable. I haven't taken the connector apart yet, b= ut I'm expecting to find a broken wire inside the insulation, probably near = a solder joint at the pin. Whenever I bent the connector outward for testin= g it made contact. When I bent it back to plug it in, contact was lost. =0D =0D Bingo!=0D John=0D =0D Just guessing, but maybe the new EC2 can't communicate with a pre-autotun= e EM2 like Buly's. ???=0D =0D =20 --------------Boundary-00=_VRCOBHK0000000000000 Content-Type: Text/HTML; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On the other hand when I had my shop I found that the biggest cause = of belt failure was belt tensioner bearing seizing up usually after = the first belt was replaced(even though the tensioner felt free the seale= d bearings had dried up) In my opinion the tensioner(s) should be replace= d at the same tine as the belt(s) . One that sticks to mind was a Pe= ugeot MY16 twin cam, the customer didn't go for the $100.00 + tensioner ,= 4000km later had $3000.00 rebuild (valve to piston contact at high rpm).= It's pretty hard to have redundancy on timing belts, I like the odds wit= h a rotary!!
Georges B.
 
-------Original Message-------
 
Date: 06/06/05 08:= 50:33
Subject: [FlyRotar= y] Re: EC2 problems - solved / rotary risks
 
Hi Al,
 
The timing belt risk on your Subaru= may be lower then you think, in my experience timing belt failures occur= at engine start 9 times out of 10.  Most Japanese manufacturers rec= ommend a replacement interval of about 70,000 miles, if the oil seals are= replaced at the same time and the belt is re-tensioned after the fi= rst heat cycle you should be quite safe. 
 
Ian
 
(Convinced that you are NOT fl= ying the highest risk aircraft ever made ;-)
-----Original Message-----
From: Rotary motors in aircraft = [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]On Behalf Of al p wick
S= ent: Monday, June 06, 2005 9:58 AM
To: Rotary motors in air= craft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: EC2 problems - solved / rotary r= isks

When we are pursuing a problem like Johns, we are eager to find= the cause. It's a great relief when we do. We say "Eureka!". We did= it! We did it! This sense of relief is a root cause for failure. We are = so eager to get the problem off our back, that we don't take the next ste= p....
Yes, I know you firmly believe this connector was the problem. But i= f you can force yourself to pretend it WASN'T, then you can do this:
Is the cause logical? Like is that really the wire that causes that = effect? If I remove that wire, does it have the same effect? What if I ha= ve two things causing the same thing? By pretending that really wasn't th= e cause, then you will do some more testing, looking around. Looking for = similar connector issues, stuff like that.
 
Now I have to admit, this really does sound like he found the cause.= But I've seen this scenario so often. So you use the disciplines I sugge= st to reduce your risk. Logical cause? Can I make it recur?
Repeat after me: "Al Wick is an idiot". "Al will jump to conclusions= ". If you believe that, then you start finding ways to prove your theory&= nbsp;with facts instead of just accepting your first conclusion. My best asset is that I know I'm an idiot.
 
Yeah, yeah, I know, you guys already knew I was.
 
We had a perfect example of this on Cozy list couple weeks ago. Suba= ru engine slipped 2 teeth on timing belt. Would no longer start. Keith ta= lked to expert and the guy said:"You know, the engine normally is never r= otated backwards. But you've been pushing your new prop backwards recentl= y (installing new prop). I think you relaxed the belt tensioner when goin= g backwards and caused it to skip tooth." So Keith said" Yes, all of that= 's true. That has to be it."
 
But then one of the guys looked into it, guess what? The direction t= he belt slipped is the opposite of that theory. That could not have cause= d it.
The lesson? Prove all aspects of the theory are logical. Prove that = all the various facts support the theory. Find a way to co= nvert your theory to facts!
 
Oh, by the way, if you look at my analysis of my engine risks....you= will notice that timing belt is the highest risk item on this engine. So= we have exposed another root cause for his problem. He didn't focus on t= he leading cause for all engine failures. When we reviewed some facts he = had, we found conclusive evidence he had loose belt from day one! It was = installed wrong.
 
Regarding CAS risk. It's not just crank angle sensor that is the ris= k item. Going to redundancy with the CAS will dramatically reduce risk of= all ECM causes. Like this connector risk. I'm not always proponent of re= dundancy, but with my limited info on this item, I SUSPECT it's sign= ificant, positive step.

-al wick
Artificial intelligence in cockpit, Cozy IV powered = by stock Subaru 2.5
N9032U 200+ hours on engine/airframe from Portland= , Oregon
Prop construct, Subaru install, Risk assessment, Glass panel = design info:
http://www.maddyhome.com/canardpages/pages/alwick/index.h= tml
 
 
 
On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 21:44:00 -0400 "Tracy Crook" <lors01@msn.com> writes:
Ahh..  Music to my ears John : )
 
And this brings up the subject of risk (rotary & otherwi= se) that Al W. (and every other builder I know) is concerned with.  = I agree with Al W. that getting to the major causes of failures is a (hel= l, THE) key issue.  That is why I have not spent much time on the cr= ank angle sensor single point failure question.  I have never seen o= r heard of a confirmed Mazda 13B CAS failure.  Can it happen?  = Of course.  I am in the process of developing a dual CAS for the Ren= esis CAS but it is not a 'front burner' project.
 
I'm reading between the lines of Al's posts but it seems tha= t he is emphasizing the importance of leaving the engine as un-touched as= possible.  I once wrote an article for Light Plane World (EAA's ult= ralight magazine back in the late 80's) and advocated the same thing afte= r noting that many Rotax failures  occurred soon after the owner ope= ned up the engine for maintenance.  Decarboning the piston ring groo= ves was important but many builders were causing more problems than they = fixed when they went inside so I recommended some products and procedures= that would do the job without opening the engine.  
 
 That was the basic gist anyway but I eventually decide= d this was not a reasonable approach for builders who planned on installi= ng an alternative engine in 200 mph category airplanes.  There were = simply far too many areas where things could go wrong in this process.&nb= sp; The root cause of the problems had to be identified.   One = of the names I gave to the cause is a term I recently used on this l= ist - Shopcraft (or lack of).   This referred to the ability to= identify the quality or suitability of virtually everything that goes in= to the plane.  Yes, I know this is a generality of the highest order=  but if we are to get to the root cause of failures in the field of = alternative aircraft engines, this level of abstraction is required. = ;
 
It has been suggested that a collection of 'best practices' = might be a solution.  This may help but it is not a solution.  = There is an unlimited number of potential problem areas so a list of= them could never be compiled.   So, how do you learn to recogn= ize what is or is not a 'good thing'?   I'm getting so frustrat= ed just trying to describe the problem that there may not be a solution, = at least not one that can be spelled out in something like an email = message.   Damn, now I can't even criticize Al W.&nbs= p;for not spelling it out.
 
The best I can do for now is to emphasize two things.  = Pay attention to every detail and admit to yourself when you don't have t= he ability to execute something well.   Another version of thes= e rules was given to me long ago:
 
1.  Rules are for those who are not smart enough to mak= e up their own.  (Author unknown)
2.  A man's got to know his own limitations.  (Dir= ty Harry)
3.  Always follow BOTH rules 1 & 2.
 
Small details like the problem of soldering thermocouple wir= e to a connector that Al Gietzen mentioned can be critically importa= nt.  He was able to recognize the problem (he made a lousy solder jo= int) and devise a solution (acid flux) even though it violated one of the= cardinal rules of electrical wiring.  He recognized that too and to= ok the steps necessary to achieve satisfactory results (knowing when to m= ake up his own rules).
 
Out of time, I'll stop blathering now.
 
Tracy 
 
Subject: [FlyRotary] EC2 problems - solved

= Tracy and others.
= Following more than 12 months of battling with EC2 issues I'm pretty= sure it's Eureka day!
= After rewiring and testing for almost 4 weeks I plugged the EC2 in last n= ight, and got exactly the same symptoms as before. NOP flashing indicatin= g no communication. I took the EC2 to Buly's plane and tried it in his in= stallation. Same NOP, so I was thinking I'd fried it again. Before sendin= g it back yet again I decided to install it my plane one more time and se= e if there was a spark.
=  
= To my amazement it worked. No NOP, and I could bring up the EC2 data. The= only thing that changed overnight was that I moved the cable to unplug i= t. I climbed in the back and found that I could make the NOP flash, or st= op flashing, by moving the cable. I haven't taken the connector apar= t yet, but I'm expecting to find a broken wire inside the insulation, pro= bably near a solder joint at the pin. Whenever I bent the connector = outward for testing it made contact. When I bent it back to plug it in, c= ontact was lost.
=  
= Bingo!
= John
=  
<= SPAN class=3D933492819-04062005>Just guessing, but maybe t= he new EC2 can't communicate with a pre-autotune EM2 like Buly's. ???
 
 
--------------Boundary-00=_VRCOBHK0000000000000-- --=======AVGMAIL-42A48FAF6048======= Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg=cert; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Content-Description: "AVG certification" No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.4 - Release Date: 6/6/2005 --=======AVGMAIL-42A48FAF6048=======--