Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #41755
From: <wrjjrs@aol.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Cooling the 20B
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 11:02:14 -0500
To: <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Al, You are correct on all your points of course. The rotary DOES have a slightly higher heat rejection requirement but the Oil cooler usually is what is handling it. I like to advise people toward the high side and then if they duct very well they will have no problems. It agree that you can run 50% no problem. You also have a slipperier plane than most of us. It will be interesting to see how Mark's ES will compare to your plane. I've always been impressed with the efficiency of the canard designs. We are all re-learning about high speed duct work, sort of reverting to the end of WW2 just before the jets took over. Ed just linked one of those old wartime reports. I have several of them and many are informative. As our GA aircraft get better and start running over 200 MPH on a regular basis we are back in that range that the fighters were in at the start of WW2. Of course by the end they were all well over 300 with the fastest pushing 400 and that was the piston powered. I'm really glad that you are flying and getting such good numbers Al. I can't wait to get my 20B in the air. By the way that Spal fan IS one of the good ones. Do you remember what you paid for it? You may have a chaotic enough exit on your plane (exhausting through the prop) that the turbulence and any restriction is moot? It seems to me that the typical tractor exit will be harder to blend with the airstream, but I may be incorrect in that thought.
Bill Jepson 



-----Original Message-----
From: Al Gietzen <ALVentures@cox.net>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 9:43 am
Subject: [FlyRotary] Cooling the 20B

Bill; your point is valid, but I’ll take the liberty to add and clarify.
 
You will need to run between 75% and 100%  in your plane most of the time! The rotary is well up to the task, but you need to concern yourself with a totally different operation pattern. Radiator wise the rule of thumb is a minimum of 2ci of radiator per HP for piston engines, Rotaries like closer to 3 cubic inches per HP.
I actually find that with the extra power of the 20B, cruising at about 50% is just fine.  Unless you’re in a hurry, since speed goes up by the cube root of power, an extra 25% + dosesn’t get you that much.  I can fly 200 mph at 9.2 gph, or 210 mph at about 11.0 gph.  I tend to think it is not worth $7 of fuel to gain 3 minutes each hour of flight.  The numbers for a Lancair or Velocity will be different, but you get my drift.
 
But your right, of course; this is quite a different application than racing.  The limiting factor on cooling is takeoff and climb. If you get that done, then you’ll start wondering how to reduce the unnecessary cooling drag when cruising.
 Be really careful about fans in your plane. At the higher air speeds we see a fan can become a real restriction. Also not many fans, (only the REALLY expensive ones), are designed to be freewheeling in a 200 MPH airstream!
I use an auxiliary fan behind the in-cowl radiator (which is handling most of the coolant heat load) in my Velocity (rear engine, of course). It’s a 4-blade SPAL fan that covers about 65% of the radiator.  With the fan on I can sit and wait for takeoff for long periods of time without concern.  It gets turned off when I get clearance.  When I installed the fan, I did not notice any reduction in the cooling ability in the air, so I conclude that it does not restrict the airflow. The scoop inlet is about ¼ the rad area, so the air exiting the rad is 50 mph or less. I haven’t concerned myself about the fan spinning in flight, and it has operated for about 60 hours of flying and doesn’t show noticeable signs of wear.  Although I should perhaps rig the relay to short the fan terminals when turned off.
The fan has a secondary function which I think is also important.  I turn it on as I’m about to shutdown, and leave it running a few minutes after shutdown. It definitely reduces the in-cowl temps while things (especially the exhaust system) is cooling down.  Good for things like the coils and alternator.
Radiator wise the rule of thumb is a minimum of 2ci of radiator per HP for piston engines, Rotaries like closer to 3 cubic inches per HP.
Unless I’m overlooking something; except for a bit lower BSFC (maybe 10 – 15%) there is no reason to believe that a rotary takes any more cooling capacity per hp than a piston engine. The split between oil and coolant heat loads is quite different. The rotary puts close to 1/3 of the waste heat into the oil, whereas a piston engine may be more like 10% or less. So although the combined heat rejection requirement is a bit higher, the coolant side requirement (radiator) of the rotary is actually less; the oil cooler quite a bit more.
As my installation has turned out, the airflow through the oil cooler is less than anticipated, and the effectiveness of the in-cowl rad greater.  I typically see oil temps 20 to 40F higher than coolant – so I’m about to face some re-plumbing to put in an oil/water heat exchanger.
Al
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster