Message

X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: <13brv3@bellsouth.net> Received: from imf23aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.71] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.5) with ESMTP id 1023520 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:13:53 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.71; envelope-from=13brv3@bellsouth.net Received: from ibm66aec.bellsouth.net ([65.6.194.9]) by imf23aec.mail.bellsouth.net with ESMTP id <20050627191306.UTGS2460.imf23aec.mail.bellsouth.net@ibm66aec.bellsouth.net> for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:13:06 -0400 Received: from rd ([65.6.194.9]) by ibm66aec.bellsouth.net with ESMTP id <20050627191306.XEMB5308.ibm66aec.bellsouth.net@rd> for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:13:06 -0400 From: "Russell Duffy" <13brv3@bellsouth.net> To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] NPG + use in aircraft?? Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 14:13:07 -0500 Message-ID: <000001c57b4c$404e9570$6101a8c0@rd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01C57B22.57788D70" 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_01C57B22.57788D70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Has anyone used the NPG+ coolant in an aircraft? What are the pros and cons? =20 =20 NPG+ is standard issue in the 912S, and perhaps the 912 also. If I'm = not mistaken, Dave Leonard is running NPG+ now, and I'm running NPG-R. =20 =20 The Evan's marketing folks can give you way more pros than I can think = of, but I do think it's working very well. The primary benefit is the fact = that it's native boiling point is in the 375F range, so you don't have to = worry about a cascade effect of boil over if you unexpectedly run hot, lose pressure, etc. It's also not supposed to be subject to localized = boiling around hot spots in the engine. Evan's claims this as a big benefit, = but others, such as Tracy, think this boiling helps remove heat. It's a bit more environmentally friendly too, so it won't hurt the rats in John's hanger. =20 =20 The high boiling temp means that you don't need to run a pressurized = system, which is my favorite part. There's less stress on the system, and any = leak that occurs, will be much slower (initially) than if there was pressure. = I added an air separator tank, with a level sensor inside, so if I get a = leak, I'll know about it before it gets to the level of the top of the engine. That was the best detection method I could think of.=20 =20 The down side is the cost, and the fact that it doesn't transfer heat as effectively as traditional EG/water mix. Your temps will almost = certainly go up some, but at least you won't boil over. =20 =20 If the oil temp is below 180 F but the coolant is above 220F, is this detrimental to the 13B??=20 =20 Define "above" :-) I don't think there's anything harmful about 220F, = or a bit over that for coolant, since cars do it all the time. I believe the power will be reduced a bit at those temps though, and perhaps there = will be more wear on the engine. I've heard that, but can't say if it's significant, or even true. =20 =20 Cheers, Rusty=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C57B22.57788D70 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message

Has anyone used the NPG+ coolant in an aircraft? What are the = pros=20 and cons?

NPG+ = is standard=20 issue in the 912S, and perhaps the 912 also. If I'm not=20 mistaken, Dave Leonard is running NPG+ now, and I'm running=20 NPG-R.

The=20 Evan's marketing folks can give you way more pros than I can = think of,=20 but I do think it's working very well. The = primary benefit is=20 the fact that it's native boiling point is in the 375F range, = so you=20 don't have to worry about a cascade effect of boil over if you = unexpectedly run=20 hot, lose pressure, etc. It's also not supposed to be subject to = localized=20 boiling around hot spots in the engine. Evan's claims this as a = big=20 benefit, but others, such as Tracy, think this boiling helps remove=20 heat. It's a bit more environmentally friendly too, so it = won't hurt=20 the rats in John's=20 hanger.

The high=20 boiling temp means that you don't need to run a pressurized system, = which=20 is my favorite part. There's less stress on the system, and any = leak that=20 occurs, will be much slower (initially) than if there was pressure.=20 I added an air separator tank, with a level sensor inside, = so if I=20 get a leak, I'll know about it before it gets to the level of the top of = the=20 engine. That was the best detection method I could think=20 of.

The down side is=20 the cost, and the fact that it doesn't transfer heat as effectively as=20 traditional EG/water mix. Your temps will almost certainly go up = some, but=20 at least you won't boil over.

If the oil temp is = below 180 F=20 but the coolant is above 220F, is this detrimental to the 13B??

Define = "above"=20 :-) I don't think there's anything harmful about 220F, or a = bit over=20 that for coolant, since cars do it all the time. I believe = the power=20 will be reduced a bit at those temps though, and perhaps there will be = more wear=20 on the engine. I've heard that, but can't say if=20 it's significant, or even true.

Cheers,

Rusty=20

------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C57B22.57788D70--