Ed, I just got in and found your message. I built a square exhaust system about two years ago. It was cool but I don't know if I even can find a picture. It was never tested so it may have been a bad idea. Just one of those things I did, liked it for awhile and then moved on to something else. I am going to try to find an old photo. Jerry


On Thursday, June 30, 2005, at 07:40 PM, Ed Klepeis wrote:

Dear Fellow Rotary people
      I emailed jerry I don't know if he got it. but for your own info yes there was a center tube I welded in place and we couldn't run the tail pipe on tracy's eng it hit his mounting system that is why I think it was louder than it sould be not a true test. I have been toying with the idea of a sq muffler because of the sound breaking down idea. does any one have any ideas good or bad on this subject.
                                                                  Regards
                                                             Ed KLepeis

----- Original Message -----
From: William
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 7:27 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: P Ports working on dyno

As I recall the old email's on the subject, I think the center tube was in place, but they removed the rear tube because of test stand interference. That destroyed the venturi effect (or at least minimized it) . someone else then took the muffler (Jerry Bass?) and adapted it to his engine, he found that at slow speed taxi, that some exhaust came out of the front of the tube. (as I recall)
Bill Schertz
KIS Cruiser # 4045

----- Original Message -----
From: wrjjrs@aol.com
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 2:52 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: P Ports working on dyno

Bill, I did get the jpeg and I really like the concept. I never saw the original VAM. Ed told me about how it was chopped up to fit Tracy's test engine. I asked what was inside it and he said "nothing."   Originally I can recall some discussion on the other list about putting a valve on the inlet to prevent exhaust gas from going the wrong way when the airplane was not moving. That probably came from a misunderstanding of your concept. I really like the version you posted today. Jerry 
Jerry,
 It is interesting how you find out about things after the fact. (ED if your monitoring please let me know if our info is correct) The entire idea of the VAM concept was to create a venturi to draw the cool air in! The reason for the donut fron section was it doubled as an end cap and an inlet bellmouth for the tube. Without the inside tube I am supprised the thing would draw air at all! I'll send you a close up drawing I sent PL's list off line. When you get your engine running it could be worth a re-try. I am supprised Ed missed the center tube, (if he did), he is a sharp guy and doesn't miss much. The other possibility is that he made it removable and they took it out prior to the test.
Bill Jepson