Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 05:34:31 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Four rotor based on two 13B's.
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
Info that could be useful!
Subject:        Re: 3 or 4 rotors
From:   "grant robbins" <grannys@sos.net>
 
I built a 4 rotor out of a couple of 13Bs a few years ago. Had to build-up
the eccentric shafts and machine in a coupling I designed. I stripped
everything off of the front of the rear engine's front housing and the two
engines mated with only a 3/8" aluminum plate between them. The oiling
system was near stock on the front engine except for a special sprocket and
chain I made to drive the big pump at twice speed and a bigger / longer
pickup tube. An oil pan was fab'd to fit across both engines to provide a
common sump.  An external manifold supplied oil to the rear engine. The
water pump was modified to pump into an external manifold and then y'd to
feed both engines from the top of the center housings. A large pilot dowel
was made to align the engines that centered the rear main seal bore of the
front engine with the front main bearing bore of the rear engine. The
eccentric shaft coupling passed thru the middle of it. 
 
The engines were
timed in sync with each other to cancel the effects of eliminating the
center balance weights. Only the front thrust bearing was used. The two ecc.
shafts had a drawbolt thru the front shaft that kept the coupling together.
The hard part was designing a coupling that could take the punishment and
still pass thru the ecc. shaft bearings (not easy). 
 
Several other minor mods
were made to oil / water passages to make it work. I used the stock
distributor on the front engine, modified it with a solid point plate and a
pair of accel points, and used it to fire only one plug per rotor. I spent 2
years making it all work and building a new car to put it in ( an 1800 lb
dirt late model ). 
 
I raced it off and on for a season and a half before I
got burned out. It was competitive against the Alky burning injected 700 hp
Chevys and Fords that are typical in the class. Had to use the lowest change
gears in the quickchange I could find. The biggest drawback for me was that
everything had to be hand made and I was working by myself and funding the
project. My business began taking off, and I had less and less time to put
into it.
 
The final straw was when I knocked off an oil fitting. Faced with
tearing the whole engine completely apart just to check the
damage and then building new shafts, I just built a Chevy like the rest of
'em cause I could just go buy the parts for that. I've got some pictures of
the engine in the car that I'll post on my website when I get them scanned.
 
When I do, I'll post to the group to let you know.
Grant
 
GRANNY'S SPEED SHOP
for more info on our Mazda RX-7 V-8 kits......
http://members.tripod.com/~grannys/index.html
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 05:36:54 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 13B on Dyke Delta
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
Anyone seen Tracy Crook's latest newsletter? In it there is a picture of Kelly
Troyer's 13B on his Dyke Delta. Looks like he used a plate between the
bellhousing and motor to mount the motor mount frame to. Looks real nice. More
of what I had in mind for a motor mount arrangement. Is he on the list?
 
On the subject of the constant speed PSRU, I called and was told the unit fits
Chev V8s and can be adapted to Ford V8s, and costs about $9000. Steep. When
Fred died it went to an outfit in Oregon who is now selling them. Looks like
we would need an adapter to make it work, or another bellhousing
cast..........more weight....
It uses a hivo chain. 
 
Paul, it is not the same outfit that made belt drives!
 
I stand corrected.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 05:29:54 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Single rotors.
 
LENSIMPSON@aol.com wrote:
 
is there a single rotor available for a hopped up par 103? 
thanx  len
 
See the NL web site for the Wankel web page and Paul Yaw's web page.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 05:47:24 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: EGT sensors for EFI
 
rws@altavista.net wrote:
 
I have also mentioned adding an EGT sensor to Tracy
on his computer.
 
Paul
 
I have considered this and may do it if I can find a way
around the problems that come up.  One is reliability.  EGT sensors 
are not very long lived at rotary EGTs.
I got about 200 hrs out of the low cost ones and hope to get 500 out   
of the expensive type but even that is not good enough in an airplane.
 
Have you tried moving them down the pipe to a cooler spot?
 
The other problem is response time.  Not a problem in a car when   
running relatively rich mixtures (compared to cruise in an airplane)  
but the delay would cause the engine to cough & die in some            
situations.
 
If the response time of the EGT sensor is slow the changes in mixture
have to be small. It would take some time to optimize. Not a problem
in cruise. The throttle position would probably have to
be taken into consideration by the software as well to determine
a rapid change in throttle position. [P]
 
In actual practice, I find that the manual mixture control on the EC1
and the "human closed loop" reading the EGT is not that big a deal.
What it boils down to is two adjustments per flight.  I set it to
mid-range for takeoff and landing and lean it once at altitude.  The  
work load is well worth the reliability gained with simplicity.
 
Tracy
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 05:50:35 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Mini 500 rotary
 
KHood wrote:
 
Hello Paul
 
    Spoke to Phil Williamson and he informs me that you have a
newsletter that you put out concerning the Wankle in aircraft
applications.Would it be possible to be put on your list?  I have a
mini-500 and am interested in any alternatives to the rotax. Should
you know of anyone who has already done this conversion or has any
info on it would you be so kind as to pass it on.
 
Thanks
KIRT HOOD
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 05:59:47 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Oil Temp Problem Solved?
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Hi Paul,
        Hope you had a Merry Christmas.  Thought I would report on the latest
(and hopefully the last) mod to cure the oil temp overheat problem I
have reported on several times.
 
I now have 3.5 hours flying time with the latest mod and am happy to say
I can now fly without keeping an eye on the oil temp all the time.
The 5" dia duct appears to bear out the calculations results and I make
take off for the first time without my oil temp going over 220F.  I
normally have to throttle back after hitting 120 IAS to permit the oil
temp to decrease below red line (210F).
 
This time I was able to maintain WOT (T.O at 5200 rpm) until I hit 180
IAS at 1500 ft (6000 rpm).  The oil temp did not increase beyond 200F
Yes!.  In fact, the oil temp on these two flights has ranged from 160F
to 210F (in a long climb at WOT).  Before, it would range from 190-240F,
with the higher temps at WOT.  Now, the OAT was only 15F so this was not
the 90F+ acid test, but with the previous 3" dia duct, it would not cool
even on 15F days.
 
So, it appears the calculations were worth the effort.  A 5" dia air
duct feeding a oil cooler plenum with duct entrance to the plenum 8"
from the surface of the oil cooler is optimum based on my calculations
from my size oil cooler (8x11x2).
 
Now that I can run WOT without melting down my 13B I have a question.
I notice at WOT at 5000 MSL I get around 6000-6100 rpms, but my manifold
pressure is 23 inches.  I would have expected to have it nearer 25-26
inches at WOT.  I have a foam filter, 3 feet of 3"dia duct and an airbox
over my throttle body.  The airbox covers two flared intake nozzels, one
for each throat of the throttle body and the top of the box is about
1.75 inches from the opening of the flared nozzels - could this be too
close.  I think I will try a flight with the top of the airbox open to
see if that makes any difference.  Any thoughts on the topic??
 
Have a Happy New Year
 
Ed Anderson
anderson_ed@bah.com
RV-6A 13B powered 15 hours flight time
 
What should it be at 5000 feet? I don't have the formula or a chart
in front of me at the moment. If it is much less it is indicative
of losses in the intake plumbing of course. You said that :-)
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 05:49:06 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: OIL COOLERS
 
Bulent Aliev wrote:
 
Oil Coolers for Experimentals....just got this out of a new magazine
Private Pilots "CustomPlanes" They make Oil/coolers of 4" to 6" header
to header...go to http://www.oil-coolers.com
 
Bulent
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 06:02:20 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Another Mustang II with 13B
 
Rosine, Steve wrote:
 
I'd like to be added to the mailing list.  My project is a Mustang II  
(80% complete) with non-turbo R13B.  I have been following Tracy Crook's
conversion guide, and have ordered his engine controller.
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 05:53:35 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: PC based glass cockpit
 
marc wrote:
 
For those who are interested, my brother has now posted on his webpage the
parts list and prices for the components that make up his company brewed
flatpanel cockpit PC for $1500.......of course this is not a "certified,
approved, and tested flight instrument" approved by those great FAA guys in
the avionics section! It is going in my Seawind (a kit), tho.......
Marc Wiese, C177RG, N34807
 
I'm very interested in having such a PC in my panel!
More info please?  How large a spot in the panel does it consume?
 
Paul, Berkeley
 
Hi,
I'll send the info off by the 2nd week in Jan.
 
               kahuna@cftnet.com     ( BearAir )
http://www.cftnet.com/members/kuhuna/bearair1.htm
****************************************
         "When facts are few, experts are many."
                           Donald R. Gannon
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 06:05:35 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: RV6 motor mounts/thrust line.
 
QmaxLLC@aol.com wrote:
 
Tracy's book suggests a thrust line position.  However, I asked Van of Van's
aircraft about the position and he shrugged stating that I should just center
it up and not worry about it.
 
Bob Fritz
RV6
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 06:15:54 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
CC: canard-aviators@canard.com
Subject: [Fwd: [canard-aviators]
 
Bulent Aliev wrote:
 
Hi Paul, the following email was posted on the canard aviators mailing
list. I think you are qualified to give the answer.
Hope your trip to FL was enjoyable.
Bulent in Ft Lauderdale FL
 
    ---------------------------------------------------------------
 
Subject: [canard-aviators] Re: Questions???
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 19:01:31 -0500
From: "Dorothy Dickey" <mreracer@primenet.com>
To: <canard-aviators@canard.com>
 
[The Canard Aviators's Mailing list]
 
I do not recommend rotory engines of any kind for experimental
aircraft.  They have numerous deficiencies as compared to other more
conventional engines...
 
After 12 years of experimenting with auto engines I have come to the
conclusion that you can not do a successful auto conversion for less
money than an aircraft engine, and the only way to improve performance
over an aircraft engine is to spend tons of money...  So why do it?
 
I define a successful auto conversion as one that is cheaper and
delivers greater performance and reliability than the A/C engine it
replaced.  There are a lot of auto engines flying out there, but not one
of them meets this criterion...
 
 Shirl
 
http://www.canard.com/ca-ending.html
 
Now here is a man with a lot of experience with auto piston engines 
in airplanes but not much with rotary engines. I agree with him about 
automotive piston engines but I disagree about the rotary engine.
 
Shirl Dickey meet Tracy Crook :-)
 
Paul Lamar
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 06:06:45 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Good reading about 13BT vs 13B-REW
 
Craig Pugsley wrote:
 
Hi guys,
http://www.engr.ucdavis.edu/~pko/13BTvs13BREW.html
Has a good article about the older 13B turbos and the newer 13B-REW (3rd
generation RX7 engines). Goes into detail about why the 13B-REW is
better for 400+ hp applications.
 
Cheers,
Craig.
clag@geocities.com
http://members.xoom.com/craigpage/INDEX.HTM
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 06:20:09 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Oil/water heat exchanger/pan fabrication.
 
Marvin Kaye wrote:
 
Hi Paul,
 
Just to let you know, my engine mount is coming along nicely, I've only got
about 6 more tubes to go, then it'll be time to run the whole shootin match
over to the welding shop to let them TIG over all my gas-applied tacks.
SPeaking of welding, I took a shot at welding those .035 wall AL tubes into
a sample of the .125 AL sheet stock.  They went together nicely!!  I
drilled the holes for the tubes their exact size, and when I inserted the
tubes into the flat stock I left about 3/16" of them protruding above the
sheet stock.  I heated the sheet stock only, and let the residual heat work
on the tubes.  My plan was that the 3/16" lip would soak up a little of the
heat, and then melt down into the puddles... as it turned out, I found that
I wound up using very little filler rod, as the protruding tubes wound up
filling themselves.  Tomorrow I"m going to practice on a mockup of pan
sides, just to see what will happend when I've got to deal with the spacing
between the tubes at only about 1/2".  If the real thing goes as nicely as
the experiment did, I"ll be very happy.
 
   <Marv>
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 06:27:53 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: My position
 
ckgurr wrote:
 
Paul
Last I heard you were blasting all auto conversions, What caused the change
of heart and caused you come on board with the Mazda crowd?
 
Regards,
Carlos
--
Carlos K. Gurr
micron Technology Inc.
Lehi, Utah
(801) 767-4832
mailto:ckgurr@micron.com
 
The perception was wrong. I have always thought the rotary would
make a good aircraft engine. 
 
Tracy Crook proved it.
 
I can send you some real old messages of mine  touting the rotary 
from  Genie if you wish :-).
 
Paul 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 06:31:21 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Old issues of the newsletter.
 
Gordon Haggard wrote:
 
Dear Sirs:
    In regards to a letter posted on the Matronics RV server, your
address was given as a source for a rotary engine newsletter update.
Having read Tracy Crooke's book and being a RV6 builder, I would like
to have my name added to your newsgroup. Is it possible to download
previous postings or have them sent?
 
Thanks,
 
Gordon Haggard
 
gordon@sssnet.com
 
Not at the moment Gordon. We are working on several books however.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 06:01:57 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: SWAG/Aero Steve Parkmans fatal crash.
 
We lost a brilliant engine system computer programmer in a crash
of an auto engine powered Vari-EZ.
 
Unfortunately Steve was taken in by all the hype around
automotive piston installations in expeirmental aircraft.
 
He had roughly a 90 cubic inch Geo Metro engine in a Vari-EZ
designed for a 200 cubic inch Continental  O-200 AC engine. 
 
Steve unrealistically believed you could get 87 real HP out of the
Geo engine and thought the weight would be roughly the same
as a 100 real HP Cont. O-200. Steve himself was no light weight.
 
His prop may also have been less than optimum for climb.
 
Here is the NTSB prelim report.
 
Paul
 
NTSB Identification: LAX99FA052
 
                           Accident occurred DEC-18-98 at TUCSON, AZ
                         Aircraft: Parkman VARI-EZE, registration: N81EZ 
                                      Injuries: 1 Fatal. 
 
This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain
errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the
final report has been completed.
 
On December 18, 1998, at 0815 hours mountain standard time, a
experimental Parkman Vari-Eze, N81EZ, collided with a
mesquite tree during a forced landing attempt in the desert just east of
Ryan Field, Tucson, Arizona. The aircraft, which was
constructed and owned by the pilot, was destroyed during the impact
sequence and subsequent postcrash fire. The pilot sustained
fatal injuries. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the local
flight. The pilot had just departed Ryan Field for the
maiden flight in the aircraft when he contacted the control tower and
told them that he had a problem and that he "had to put it
down here." Air traffic controllers who were interviewed after the crash
stated that the aircraft did not appear to gain much
altitude, only achieving about 100 feet of altitude above the terrain.  
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 06:22:39 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: EFIS
 
marc wrote:
 
Happy New Year! And take a look at this! Great EFIS stuff!
http://www.sierraflightsystems.com/index.html#anchor85334
Do the sim at http://www.sierraflightsystems.com/Demo.html
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 06:43:13 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Inverted aerobatic 13B conversion
 
G. A. Loeffler wrote:
 
Dear Paul,
 
I'm listening to your rotary list for a
while. My engine alternatives for
kitplane to be started soon (Italian
Storm 300 kitplane) would be either a:
MidWest 110R or b: doing my own 13B
conversion. 
 
My questions: 1. how much
money could be saved by own conversion?
 
Not much and it would be heavier.
 
2. what (special) tools are required for
conversion/cost of tools?
 
If you rebuild a Mazda some special tools are required
I would invest in a shop manual for a list of those 
that are needed.
 
3. Where can I
get a book/detailed instructions for
conversion. 
 
Tracy Crook at rws@altavista.net
 
4. The rotary's lubrication
and fuel injection looks quite good for
inverted flight. What other mods should
be done for aerobatics use?
 
You will need a dry sump oil system with scavenge pumps
at the top and bottom of the engine.
 
kind Regards
 
G. A. Loeffler
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 06:46:53 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Australia Rotor Craft with 13B's
 
Colin Smith wrote:
 
Goodmorning Paul,
 
I am a technical advisor for Aust. Sports Rororcraft Assoc., and am
designing/building (with help) a two place side by side gyro powered
with a 12A turbo rotary. Please put me on your rotary engine newsletter
mailing list.
 
I subscribe to Tracy Crook's R A N and meet him 1997 at Osh. This year
1999 I will be at Bensen Days and Sun'n'Fun. May meet you there.
 
Thanks, Colin
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 06:52:35 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Mazda 12A oil/water heat exchanger
 
Richard Sohn wrote:
 
Hi Paul!
I am back from my trip and have another 12A 1985 in my inventory. This
model has an oil/water cooler. What is the reason that nobody ever
mentions this in the related discussion?
Look forward to receiving the mail again.
Richard.
 
Consider it mentioned :-) 
Its fine for a one rotor but not up to the job
for a two rotor. The rotary engine used in an aircraft
generates a lot more continuous power than 
it does in a car so more oil cooling is required.
 
 Won't hurt for a plugs up 13 B
however as it sticks up too far  on an upright
13B. You will need additional oil cooling.
 
Paul 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 07:03:57 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Peak cyclinder pressure in diesel engines.
 
Jeff Spitzer wrote:
 
At 12:38 AM 12/21/98 -0800, you wrote:
 
I don't think the combustion pressure is quite that high Gerry.
 
Let's see four inch bore... 12 square inches... 315 tons. I think you
Have one extra zero there. 1000 psi should be more like it.
 
I checked my copy of Taylor "The Internal Combustionm Engine in
Theory and Practice" and the Cummins twin turbo 475 855ci listed
has a bmep of 210 psi. Thats sort of like average pressure.
Peak pressures for diesels are in the 800 to 1100 psi range.
Volume 2 page 100.
 
Paul
 
Those numbers are kinda low Paul.  Our engine is designed for 2000 psi peak
pressures which is more on the high side of average.  Most commercial
engines run 1800 or so.  Much higher and piston rings become a real
problem.  A turbo gas engine will exceed 1100 psi.
 
Jeff Spitzer
 
Jeff Spitzer is our resident engine design engineer.
He is project engineer on the General Atomics opposed piston
turbo charged aircraft diesel engine. He was also the project
engineer on the Moller Skycar rotary engine.
 
Thanks Jeff.
 
Paul 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 07:06:23 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Oil pan heat exchanger transfer rates
 
Jeff Spitzer wrote:
 
At 03:24 PM 12/21/98 -0800, you wrote:
 
Jeff brought this up some time ago.
 
Notice that the heat transfer can be increased by a
factor of ten if nucleate boiling is allowed to occur
in the coolant tubes.
 
In other words;
If the oil gets too hot & causes the coolant to boil
in the coolant tubes the heat transfer
jumps up and self regulates much more strongly.
 
This is from Marks tenth & latest edition MSH for ME's.
Page 4-87
 
Paul
 
" Boiling Liquids.
 
The nature of the heat transfer from a submerged
heater to a pool of boiling water is shown in Fig. 4.4.5. Other liquids
exhibit the same qualitative features. In the range AB, heat transfer to
the liquid occurs solely by natural convection, and evaporation occurs
at the free surface of the pool.
 
In the range BC, NUCLEAT BOILING occurs.
Bubbles form at active nuclei on the
heating surface, detach, and rise to the pool surface.
 
At point C, the heat flux passes through a maximum at a temperature
difference called the critical delta-t In the range CD, transitional
boiling occurs.
 
At point D, the transition is complete and the heating
surface is completely blanketed by a vapor film. This is the point of
minimum heat flux, or the Leidenfrost point.
 
In the range DE, the heating surface continues to be
blanketed by a vapor film.
 
The range AB is adequately correlated by the usual natural-convec-
tion equations.
 
No truly adequate correlation is available for the
range BC because the complex processes of nucleation and interfacial
interaction are only partially understood. However, the relation due to
Robsenow (Trans. ASME, 74, 1952, pp.969-976) is one of the best and can
be reliably used for modest extrapolations of existing data."
 
The chart you attached is for a stagnant situation where the vapor film is
not "washed away".  In the flowing case of a hybrid cooling system the heat
transfer was found to continue to rise exponentially for any reasonable
heat transfer rate.
 
Jeff Spitzer
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 07:11:17 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Wanted three rotor.
 
Mark Goodley wrote:
 
ok,
 
So where can I get a clean turbo 3-rotor.
 
--
Thank You,
Mark Goodley
Visit our web site at:
<www.agtechinternational.com>
 
Good question? Anybody have a three rotor for sale?
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 07:20:36 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Brice Dauney's phone/ e-mail address
 
Tom P. wrote:
 
Paul Lamar -
 
Peter Garrison referred me to you.  I'm trying to contact Brice Dauney
regarding his Mazda 20B installation in his Velocity, but have had
little luck.
 
I'm finishing the airframe of my Lancair ES, and am very interested in
a similar engine installation.  I'd prefer not to reinvent the wheel,
if you or he can provide any assistance.
 
Thanks,
 
Tom Parkes
 
Brice is on here perhaps he will respond.
Brice Daunay <Briceair@worldnet.att.net
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 11:11:38 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Manifold pressure drops in intake systems.
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
It drops approx 1" for each 1000 ft so I should read around 25" at 5000
ft, but can only get a max of 22-23.
 
Ed
 
I would think that is not too far off typical Ed.
Intake systems have losses. The Mooney has a flap
that bypassses the air cleaner for about a one inch gain
at altitude where you don't need the air cleaner.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 11:13:12 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: RV6 motor mounts/thrust line.
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Bob, on my 13B powered 13B, I offset the thrust 5/8" to the left
(looking from pilot's seat) from the center line shown in the plans for
the RV (look at the motor mount drawing).  I still need left rudder on
take off and lower speeds to keep ball centered so probably should have
offset a bit more.  But, at cruise 170 IAS plus the ball is centered
without any rudder input.  So 5/8" worked fine for me.
 
Ed Anderson
anderson_ed@bah.com
RV-6A N494BW 15 hours
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 11:14:27 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Wanted three rotor.
 
Gerry Hess wrote:
 
Ichiban Rotary in Austrailia has had 3 rotors listed at $3900. Their site
does not show one at present, but contact them and they will probably have
it. Aussie dollars are about 40 cents US!
They are at http://www.ozemail.com.au/~japeng/
 
Gerry Hess
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 11:18:17 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Oil Temp Problem Solved?
 
Jeff Spitzer wrote:
 
At 05:59 AM 1/6/99 -0800, you wrote:
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Now that I can run WOT without melting down my 13B I have a question.
I notice at WOT at 5000 MSL I get around 6000-6100 rpms, but my manifold
pressure is 23 inches.  I would have expected to have it nearer 25-26
inches at WOT.  I have a foam filter,
 
Start here.  The foam filters are the worst for pressure drop vs. cleaning
efficiency.  Best is K&N by a large margin followed by conventional paper
with foam a very distant third.  It is possible that if you don't have a
HUGE foam filter that it is you total problem.  Go to K&N.
 
Jeff Spitzer
 
What and where do we get "K&N" Jeff?
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 13:54:39 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Pressure drop in intake system.
 
Jeff Spitzer wrote:
 
What and where do we get "K&N" Jeff?
 
Paul
 
K&N Engineering
Riverside, CA
(909) 684-9762
www.knfilters.com
 
Or many aftermarket replacement filters for auto apps available at speed
shops.
 
Jeff Spitzer
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 13:52:07 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Pressure drop in intake system.
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Thanks Jeff,
 
 My filter is 3" dia with two 1" layers of fairly corase foam in the air
flow (I believe it is K&N, but not certain). This is followed by three
feet of 3" duct before dumping into the airbox.  Easy enough to check by
removing the lid from my airbox and allowing the air to flow directly
into the two air horns of my dual throat (50mm each) throttle body.
 
Paul, I got my K&N (if it is K&N -been a long time since I purchased it)
from Summit racing
 
Ed
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 13:53:31 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zz <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Pressure drop in intake system.
 
Carl Stevens wrote:
 
On Wed, 6 Jan 1999, Paul wrote:
 
HUGE foam filter that it is you total problem.  Go to K&N.
 
Jeff Spitzer
 
What and where do we get "K&N" Jeff?
 
Paul:
 
K&N are a group that make filters for allsorts of racing
applications. You can find them at most any speed shop and
they may even have a web page, I'll do a search later. They
are good filters, washable, and have a good life expectancy.
 
I used to run them on my Baja bug, a tough enviroment by
most anyone's standard.
 
Carl
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 21:30:43 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zzasmaa <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: My own design...
 
Ramon Collado. wrote:
 
Hello Paul,  I am building a four place, low wing, all wood airplane, that
I named myself SAREN.   I plan to install a 13b, which is already on the
overhaul bench, and one of my biggest design problem was the engine mount.
 
Thru your newsletters I have seeing differents mounts arrangements, and I
wish someone would show the tubings diameters and thickness being used on
these mounts.......They would really help me ....Thanks
 
Ramon
 
We have not been able to determine a tubing size for any of these mounts
so far. I am still negotiating for the use of an FEA program for this purpose.
If you don't mind a little extra weight 7/8 dia. by .065 wall 4130 should
be overkill for almost any configuration. The top tubes in tension could
be 3/4 by .049 wall. Wrap all joints with .049 sheet 4130.
 
Send me the dimensions of the mounting points on the firewall and I will
draw something up for you. I will also need the distance from the firewall
to the prop flange and the position of the thrust line.
 
BTW to test a motor mount you can use the whole airplane as a lever
to raise the front end of an average mid size car, wheels and all, clear 
of the ground. You do this by pushing down on the horzontal stablizer spar
near the root or loading 50 pound bags of cement on to the horz. stab
untill the wheels of the car are clear of the ground. 
 
The main landing gear will act as the fulcrum point.
 
For a canard the situation is reversed. You push down on the canard
spar.        
 
If your motor mount design can do this it should be strong 
enough for a  six G pull up. 
 
I came up with this apparently crazy idea after I tried to figure 
out where the average builder was going to get 1800 pound of dead weight 
to static test  his motor mount.
 
I will do a drawing of this soon and upload it to my web site.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 21:33:27 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zzasmaa <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Pressure drop in intake system.
 
Jeff Spitzer wrote:
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
 My filter is 3" dia with two 1" layers of fairly corase foam in the air
flow (I believe it is K&N, but not certain). This is followed by three
feet of 3" duct before dumping into the airbox.  Easy enough to check by
removing the lid from my airbox and allowing the air to flow directly
into the two air horns of my dual throat (50mm each) throttle body.
 
Ed
 
K&N may sell some foam units but when I say K&N I'm referring to the oiled
gauze (sp?) units.  If I understand your filter as air flowing through 2"
of foam with a 3" diameter then my reaction is OUCH!  That is definately
the 2" of pressure drop your looking for.  A foam filter for a 13B should
have 150++ sq in of cross section to flow through not 7 sq in.  Take the
filter out, find your missing pressure, then go find a proper K&N gauze
type filter.  BTW, the clearance you cited for airbox to trumpet height
doesn't sound restrictive.
 
Jeff Spitzer
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 21:39:09 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zzasmaa <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Mazda 12A oil/water heat exchanger
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
Even on the rx7 car that oil/water cooler was considered a bad design item.
Most have been replaced with the air oil cooler. I think even Tracy C even
tried it and found it was no good.
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 21:42:37 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zzasmaa <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: RV6 motor mounts/thrust line.
 
Finn Lassen wrote:
 
Sure, if you can live with a bigger "bulb" on top of the cowling for the alternator
( go with a smaller alternator).
 
An alternative I thought of is two small alternators: one in the standard position
and one mounted on the water pump housing (I think the air pump or some such
normally is mounted there on the RX-7).
 
Finn
 
Paul wrote:
 
QmaxLLC@aol.com wrote:
 
Tracy's book suggests a thrust line position.  However, I asked Van of Van's
aircraft about the position and he shrugged stating that I should just center
it up and not worry about it.
 
Bob Fritz
RV6
 
Or make a new bracket and mount the alternator on the side of the engine.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 21:51:38 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zzasmaa <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Turbocharging
 
V. E. Welch wrote:
 
I have been considering a 13B for an RV-8 project.  I would like a
turbocharged unit for altitude work.  Have any of you looked into this?  Is
Mazda's stock turbo workable or would I need to do some modification?
Should I look at a different type of turbo (non-automotive)?  Would a
supercharger be preferable to turbocharging?  Just trying to determine how
deep these waters are going to get before I jump *smile*
 
Vince
 
I would not use the stock turbo charger. I don't think it is durable
enough. Check with Turbonetics for a turbocharger with an Inconel 
turbine and fabricate an Inconel exhaust manifold.
There is a link on the NL web site for Turbonetics. Don't tell
them it is for an aircraft.
 
Make sure you use an intercooler. Detonation can break the apex
seals and scratch the rotor housing. The engine won't stop but
it will gradully lose power over time. Use a late turbo engine
with the knock sensors mounted on the rotor housing just above
the spark plugs.
 
A supercharger will work but the heat load on the engine will be higher
than a turbo for the same boost.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 21:57:57 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: zzasmaa <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Finn's 13B update
 
Finn Lassen wrote:
 
Welcome home Paul! And thanks for changing to my new e-mail address.
 
I purchased two new main bearings, two rotor bearings and a new oil
pump, all from mazdatrix. I managed to press the old main bearings out
and the new in simply using my vice. I took the two rotors to a auto
shop and used their press for the rotor bearings.
 
As for polishing the e-shaft, I could easily have done myself after
seeing how it done: the machine shop guy simply mounted it in a bench
that slowly rotated it. He then used a handheld 1" 350 grit (long) belt
sander on the journals.
 
I finished assemblying the engine and mounting it back on the RV-3
January 2nd, and ran it for the first (successful) time for about 15
secs at low RPM. Great sound from my homemade muffler and 2" exhaust
pipe!
 
The reason I didn't run it longer was that I still didn't get oil
pressure. I then spent most of the weekend debugging the pressure
problem (and replacing a leaking center carb float). I'm still not 100%
sure of the cause, but I changed my bigger oil filter to the standard
small filter. I also turned the engine with the starter (no spark plugs)
for a longer time (30 - 45 secs) and suddenly the pressure came up! I
had been afraid of damaging the starter and had only run it for 15 - 20
secs at a time in my previous attempts to prime the oil system.
 
Currently it's too cold (in the evening) for my taste, so I'll probably
not have any more news until the coming weekend.
 
Finn
 
What are you now using for an oil pressure gage?
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 22:19:19 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
CC: Dave Martin <dave@kitplanes.com>
Subject: My position on car piston engines verses the rotary
 
Perry Mick wrote:
 
I went to an EAA chapter meeting in January 1996, where Everett Hatch
gave a presentation.  He spent his whole life working on piston and
rotary engines for race cars and airplanes.  He gave the presentation on
the work they (Powersport) were doing on the rotary.  He said he would
never put an automotive piston engine in an airplane, they just weren't
designed for it.  But he said the rotary was a different story.  I'd
like to know what shortcomings Shirl Dickey thinks the rotary has.
 
Me too since, to my knowledge, he never tried one.
 
BTW I was thinking we ought to petition the EAA to give Everett Hatch 
and Tracy Crook awards for furthering the cause of general aviation. 
The way it looks now the rotary may be better and cheaper than a real 
aircraft engine.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 22:34:42 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Priming the oil pump.
 
Finn Lassen wrote:
 
Well, now I know why you guys mount your filters "upside-down". And  I
thought I was being smart in making a fitting to mount it the same way it's
"standardly" mounted on the engine.
 
Finn
 
Paul wrote:
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Glad to see Finn has got his engine back together after the incident.
 
Whenever I change my oil (like once so far), I fill the new oil filter
and the oil cooler with fresh oil before cranking the engine.  I also
disable the ignition and just use the starter to build up oil pressure
first.  It generally takes about 5 seconds of cranking when the oil
filter and cooler are prefilled.
 
Ed Anderson
RV-6A 13B powered
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 09:52:09 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: EAA awards for Tracy Crook and Everett Hatch
 
I think we need to include Allan Tolle as a candidate
for those awards as he did most of the test flying
for Everett.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 22:28:49 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: WAS SWAG/Aero fatal crash.---- static thrust test]
 
Bob and Marnie Falkiner wrote:
 
Story #1:
 
It should be mandatory to verify static thrust prior to first takeoff.  This
saved "my"  bacon once when I incorrectly set the pitch of a ground
adjustable prop.  I was going by static RPM.  The test runs seemed to lack
oomph, and  my test pilot didn't like the prop sound/noise.  We compared the
static thrust with a $2.99 black rubber "bungee cord" compared to the old
prop (test took about an hour) and decided something was wrong.  A quick
phone call to the manufacturer confirmed that I had dialed in way too much
pitch to get the static RPM down to "book" value, and the prop was probably
"stalling" at low/zero airspeed.
 
Moral:  when you got something new, it really really helps to have something
old that you know works to compare it to.
 
Story #2
 
My building partner was having engine problems akin to a stomach flu -- lots
of symptoms but nothing that stopped the head scratching.  Was it vapour
lock (like I had in spades), fuel mixture, fuel plumbing, bad cowling
cooling, ingnition, ignition timing.... really hard to diagnose these
"engine doesn't seem like its putting out" type problems.  The only way he
knew that something was wrong was a degradation from previous performance.
 
If it was first flight, it would have been "normal". The answer, by the way,
was missing copper gaskets on replacement lower plugs when the plans
adjustment came out for the "standoff" piece in the revmaster. If this prior
experience was not there, how would he have known?
 
There has to be a way that homebuilders can verify adequate thrust prior to
takeoff cheaply and easily.  I know that a bungee cord works.  any other
ideas?
 
Check out my low cost dyno and static thrust stand design on the NL web site.
I use a calibrated garage door spring as a static thrust sensor.
Everett Hatch built a similar dyno for his engine overhaul business.
The trick is to sneak up on the proper pitch while recording the static
thrust as small changes in pitch are made.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 04:51:28 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Engine pressure/temp sensors.
 
Finn Lassen wrote:
 
Paul wrote:
 
Finn Lassen wrote:
...
The reason I didn't run it longer was that I still didn't get oil
pressure. I then spent most of the weekend debugging the pressure
problem (and replacing a leaking center carb float). I'm still not 100%
sure of the cause, but I changed my bigger oil filter to the standard
small filter. I also turned the engine with the starter (no spark plugs)
for a longer time (30 - 45 secs) and suddenly the pressure came up! I
had been afraid of damaging the starter and had only run it for 15 - 20
secs at a time in my previous attempts to prime the oil system.
 
Finn
 
What are you now using for an oil pressure gage?
 
Paul
 
Some old mechanical gauge. I'm planning on building an engine monitor, and
have been looking at sources for pressure senders. I'd really like to avoid
routing oil and water into the cockpit. Seems the most sturdy and reliable
(for the price)  would be the SenSym 19mm 1/8"-27 NPT solid state steel sensor
@ $72 (page 530 DigiKey).  An alternative is the $22.20 100psi Mitchell,
AircraftSpruce  page 332 P/N 10-25045, but I don't know if that's a unreliable
mechanical sender. Anybody know? Or know of a cheap reliable alternative? Is
100 psi enough? (I have the standard 13B oil control and regulator valves.)
 
I'm also looking for a 30 or so psi water sender and 3 - 5 psi fuel sender.
 
Finn
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 04:49:08 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Priming the oil pump.
 
Paul Yaw wrote:
 
Finn Lassen wrote:
 
The reason I didn't run it longer was that I still didn't get oil
pressure. I then spent most of the weekend debugging the pressure
problem (and replacing a leaking center carb float). I'm still not 100%
sure of the cause, but I changed my bigger oil filter to the standard
small filter. I also turned the engine with the starter (no spark plugs)
for a longer time (30 - 45 secs) and suddenly the pressure came up! I
had been afraid of damaging the starter and had only run it for 15 - 20
secs at a time in my previous attempts to prime the oil system.
 
Finn
 
Hey Finn,
 
The oil pumps are normally very hard to prime unless you fill the pump
with oil, or use a heavy lube during assembly.  If you installed it dry,
that may explain your problem.
 
Paul Yaw
 
Wow! That explains the whole situation. For those who came lately
Finn's orginal problem came from starting the engine up with
throttles stuck wide open, no oil pressure and no prop load. The 
engine ran up  to 10,000 + RPM estimated before Finn could shut it off.
 
The main  bearings were moderately damaged and the e-shaft had
bearing residue soldered to it. The rotor bearings were almost
still useable.  
 
Thanks for the great tip Paul. We need to get that into a how-to file
on overhauling the rotary.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 04:55:06 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Wanted three rotor. & the Aussie dollar.
 
Mr Greg Poole wrote:
 
Gerry Hess wrote:
 
Ichiban Rotary in Austrailia has had 3 rotors listed at $3900. Their site
does not show one at present, but contact them and they will probably have
it. Aussie dollars are about 40 cents US!
They are at http://www.ozemail.com.au/~japeng/
 
Gerry Hess
 
We are not quite the banana republic - yet! Try 61 cents US to the Aussie $
 
Regards,
Greg
 
Greg Poole (Building a Std RG Elite Velocity - "down under")
 
Wow that's amazing. Just about par with the Canadian dollar. Do you 
suppose there is any connection?
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 06:03:45 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Steve Parkman
 
Ernesto Sanchez wrote:
 
I'm not sure.  It was reported on the Canard Aviators E-Mail list that he
took off on the maiden flight and after a few minutes he reported trouble.
 
Next, someone saw a smoking crash site.  Several folks are sending checks to
Mrs.. Steve Parkman to assist her in her time of need.  His hangar mate
volunteered to handle the checks:
 
Jeff Gilbert
7788 S. Iron Bark CT.
Tucson, AZ, 85747
(520)574.7959
 
If I get more info I'll pass it on.
Thanks,
Ernesto Sanchez
es12043@utech.net
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 06:44:13 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Pressure drop in intake system.
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Thanks Jeff,
        Clearly, I under estimated the restrictive nature of my air filter.  I
will remove the foam and take the aircraft for a flight.  Gaining 2" of
manifold pressure and the resulting power increase will then give me the
power level I believe I should be getting out of the engine.  Right now
I estimate based on aircraft performance that I am getting around 150
hp, gaining 2" should put it closer to 160HP or a tad more.
 
Ed
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 06:47:58 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Priming the oil pump.
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Glad to see Finn has got his engine back together after the incident.
Whenever I change my oil (like once so far), I fill the new oil filter
and the oil cooler with fresh oil before cranking the engine.  I also
disable the ignition and just use the starter to build up oil pressure
first.  It generally takes about 5 seconds of cranking when the oil
filter and cooler are prefilled.
 
Ed Anderson
RV-6A 13B powered
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 06:42:44 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Wanted three rotor.
 
David Morris wrote:
 
G'day to Mark.
 
DMRH down under here.
 
REDLINE rotary here in Sydney had 8 20B engines ordered a few months ago
but only 5 arrived. The Japanese contacts decided to sell 3 of them
after getting last minute BIG offers. REDLINE since sold all 5 for well
over U.S $5000 each (& they were all used).
 
I was down there the other day & they were excited. There Japanese
conact found another 5. (Do you realize how rare that is these days) So
they are now on there way. I'm sure REDLINE will be asking well over the
 
U.S $5,000 mark as the others went instantly at that price.
 
Check them out at the below URL if you wish & ask about supplying some
to the U.S.
 
                           http://www.3rotor.com/redline
 
REgards
              David Morris
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 07:00:54 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Engine pressure/temp sensors.
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Finn,
        I use a 0-135 psi oil gauge and sensor.  My nominal oil pressure range
is 70-85 psi and this scale puts the needle in the green about the
middle of the gauge.  I use a 0-30psi UMA fuel pressure sensor and gauge
for the coolant pressure.  The UMA folks made me a new placard inside
the gauge that reads "Water Pressure" instead of the normal "Fuel
Pressure".  I have a 24 psi radiator cap and my coolant pressure
generally runs between 15 and 20 psi.  Coolant pressure drops down
considerably when the coolant temp drops below 150F (I don't have a
thermostat).  In fact, all my engine instruments from tach,
oil-fuel-coolant parameters of pressure and temp use UMA.  I found their
appearance and scale width what I wanted and the cost fell between auto
type gauges and aircraft gauges.  However, they do have a permanet
magnet and therefore forced me to put my whiskey compass over on the
other side of the panel.  Clearly any of the digital readouts avoid this
problem.
 
Ed Anderson
anderson_ed@bah.com
RV-6A N494BW Mazda Powered
Vienna, VA
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 09:00:05 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: SWAG/Aero Steve Parkmans fatal crash.
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
I think we all feel a keener sense of our own mortality when a fellow
experimenter/flyer meets with misfortune.  Keenly sorry to hear about
Steve, I though some of his insights to EFI were helpful to many.
 
Unfortunately Paul, I must agree with you that - too many (not all,
certainly) espouse too much in terms of realistic performance of auto
conversions - some of whom have a $$ interest in presenting
unsubtantiated and/or unrealistic power claims to sell their "products".
 
As much as I would like to claim my 13B is producing 180-200 hp, the
peformance figures to-date clearly show that I am only getting about 150
hp at WOT.  While this is adequate for the RV-6 design, it is on the
bottom end of the desired engine HP for this platform and less than I
will settle for. However, I recognize that this is a limitation of my
design and subsystems and not a limitation of the 13B. I realistic
expect to get 165 to maybe 170HP when I get all the bugs worked out.
 
And in fact, suggestions from many on this list have greatly contributed
to the resolution of my auto conversion teething problems and my
personal safety.  From the fluctating oil pressure, foaming oil problem,
and now Jeff's insight into my overly restrictive air intake fitter set
up (which probably accounts for my missing 10-15 hp) have all benefitted
from the experience and knowledge of folks on the list.
 
Your list and the knowledge base available on it is the type of thing
that I believe any group interested in auto engine conversion needs to
have (regardless of the engine involved).
 
But ultimately, all of us who are experimenting with auto conversions
for aircraft use, have to acknowledge that it is not the same as
experimenting with a engine in a car (which itself can be dangerous)
which you can pull off the side of the road if it malfunctions.
 
There is no question that experimental engines in experimental aircraft
do increase the risk factor to some degree - mostly dependent, I
believe, on how seriously and well the experimenter assesses and plans
for the risks involved.  But, even given that done well - the risk will
always exist. My design philophy is to assume failure modes WILL happen
and then attemp to come up with feasible backup/redundancy that
minimizes risks during the most critical phases of engine operation.
 
  I could probably be rightly accused of being somewhat annal retentive
when it comes to my own butt {:>}.  At least, I think my ground crew may
have thought that when I handed out hatchets to them for breaking the
canopy should the need have arose, phone numbers of the closest fire and
resuce units, and the ER of the cloest hospital along with my blood
type,etc. Fortunately all unneeded on my first flight.
 
Thanks again Paul, for this forum.  Lets hope it contributes to
lessening the possiblity of such unfortunate events that caught Steve.
I think it will.
 
Ed
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 09:09:54 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Static test for motor mounts.
 
Here is my drawing for static testing your motor mount design
using your car as the 1800 pound test load.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 09:29:44 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: New page..
 
Craig Pugsley wrote:
 
Hi,
Apparently I've got hours on end to spend surfing the web (well, it is
3:20am and I'm at home on holidays).
Got a pointer to a new page today..
http://www.hurley-engineering.ltd.uk/
 
This guy was making multi (3+) rotor engines years before 20Bs were
available. He has a picture of a 6 rotor engine, Can't quite tell if it's
real or just a mock-up.
 
Cheers,
Craig.
http://members.xoom.com/craigpage
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 11:21:41 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Air filters & air consumption
 
Chuck Dunlap wrote:
 
I would like to use a K&N P/N R-1380 cone shaped air filter. 4" tall,4
1/2" minor dia., 5 1/2" major dia., 2 7/16"ID flange.It flows 377 CFM is
this enough for a N/A 13B?
 
Lets see... air density in pounds per cubic foot is 1.325 times pressure
in inches of Mercury divided by temperature in degrees Kelvin.
 
Air density in pounds per cubic foot = 1.325 X (in HG)/degrees Kelvin
Temp in Kelvin equals  temp in C plus 273 or about 295 for 72 degrees F
or about 22 degrees C.
 
At thirty inches of mercury dry air density would then be about 0.1 pound
per cubic foot. At a BSFC of 0.5 pounds of fuel per HP hour and 200 HP
or 100 pounds of fuel per hour or 1.7 pounds of fuel per minute.
 
With a twelve to one air fuel ratio you would need  roughly
twenty pounds of air per minute or about 200 CFM. 
 
Yes. Sounds about right. Did I make any arithmetic or other errors?
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 11:28:46 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 24 psi  Radiator cap
 
Chuck Dunlap wrote:
 
Ed, where did you get a 24 PSI cap? the highest I could find was 16 PSI.
 
I start getting water bubbling from the bypass after about 8 minutes of
just idling, after water temp reaches 160 degrees. I hope a 24 PSI cap
would help, or maybe I have other problems.
 
Ed?
 
As I recall Tracy made his own by shimming the spring in the cap.
 
Sounds like a rotor housing water O ring leak. Perhaps an overheated 
and consequently shrunk rotor housing. But then again I always look on
the dark side first as my wife Robin tells me.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 10:37:29 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Parkman engine
 
Frankly with this crude and untunned intake manifold I doubt 
the Parkman engine even had 78 HP.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 14:50:12 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 24 psi  Radiator cap
 
Marvin Kaye wrote:
 
Chuck Dunlap wrote:
 
Ed, where did you get a 24 PSI cap? the highest I could find was 16 PSI.
 
I start getting water bubbling from the bypass after about 8 minutes of
 
24psi caps (and to-die-for radiators) are available from Griffin (among
others)... check them out at http://griffinrad.com/
 
  <Marv>
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 14:52:58 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Air filters & air consumption
 
Brent Regan wrote:
 
Show off. I get 230 CFM by taking the displacement X RPM X volumetric
efficiency (1.0). Filter flow ratings are specified at a 1" H2O static
pressure drop (or 0.073" Hg). At sea level this translates to 0.25% horsepower
loss and at 10,000 feet it is 0.35 % of the available horsepower.
It gets more interesting in a turbo installation because the volumetric flow
through the filter goes up with altitude. At FL290 your volumetric flow is 3.2
times the sea level flow. In the Lancair I have two 800 CFM filters for an
engine that requires 492 CFM @ 350 Hp.
 
Brent
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 14:55:10 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Air filters & air consumption
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Paul, my calculations using the spreadsheet gives following:
        5500 RPM   225 CFM
        6000 RPM   250 CFM
        6500 RPM   270 CFM
        7000 RPM   290 CFM
that is for a 13.5:1 Air/fuel mixture
with intake manifold efficiency of 90% and WOT on 70F day
 
on a cold day 15F, I get
        5500 RPM   250 CFM
        6000 RPM   270 CFM
        6500 RPM   290 CFM
        7000 RPM   315 CFM
and the resulting increasing in HP that we all notice on cold days due
to increased density of the air.
 
Ed
 
One thing we got on here is.... technical expertize in DEPTH!
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 14:57:09 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 24 psi  Radiator cap
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Chuck,
        CR Racing at http://www.crracing.com/ has Stant racing radiator caps:
 
        22-24 psi $16.00
        29-31 psi $19.00
 
Or as Paul has suggested, Tracy has increased the capacity of a regular
radiator cap by shimming the spring.
 
Ed
 
Ask any question....... ANY QUESTION :-)
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 15:00:58 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Air filters & air consumption
 
Tracy Crook wrote:
 
I'd figure it like this:
80 CI  X  6000 rpm = 480,000 CI  per minute.
480,000 CI  /  1728  (ci in a cubic ft)  = 277.77  CFM
The rotary is capable of better than 100% volumetric efficiency (with tuned
intake) so I'd go with at least 320 cfm.
 
Still sounds like it would work.
 
Tracy Crook
 
Looks like your caught up moving Tracy.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 15:02:35 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 24 psi  Radiator cap
 
Tracy Crook wrote:
 
Remember that coolant expands a lot.  If the system is topped off when cold,
it is going to expel some coolant (& air if any in there ) no matter what
the pressure rating on the cap.  My engine pumps about 20 ounces into the
overflow bottle from cold to hot but of course it recovers it when it cools
off.
 
If the engine constantly vents steam at 160 degrees then yes, start thinking
about looking for ruptured coolant jacket O-rings.
 
Tracy
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 14:58:52 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Engine pressure/temp sensors. source
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Sorry, JB
        I forgot that little detail.  UMA is a company in Dayton,Va (yes
Virgina) that produces interestingly enough medical instrumentation and
aircraft instrumentation.  I don't have their address handy, but there
toll free phone number is: 800-842-5578.  I never tried to get the glass
off, but I am certain they are not "crimped" in, better quality than
bottom of the line, but cheaper than top of the line aircraft
instruments.  I found the firm to provide me with good service.  I would
suggest that you request their catalog of Aircraft Instruments.  They
have flight instruments, engine instruments, sensors and external light
brezels all at about 1/2 price of aircraft instruments.  You can get
less expensive instruments from the auto gauge places, but I believe you
would agree these are a level up from most of those.
 
Give them a try JB
 
Ed
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 16:35:29 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Air filters. Particle size.
 
Karl Szczypta wrote:
 
But isn't the K&N gauze/oil filter the worst for particle size filtering vs. foam or paper?
 
karl Szczypta
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 22:10:13 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Priming the oil pump.
 
George Moore wrote:
 
Ed,
  I thought your post about priming the oil pump after an oil / filter
change was a really good precaution to take. I was just curious if you
removed a spark plug from each rotor in addition to disabling the
ignition, thereby eliminating any cylinder pressure on dry seals and
allowing the oil pump to spin up faster ?
 
Paul,
  Have you given much thought to, or done any experimenting with the
various prelube systems on the market. There are versions with spring
loaded pressurized chambers and some that use small electric oil pumps
to build oil pressure before the ignition is energized. Of course they
also violate the K.I.S.S. principle !
 
 George
 
I have heard of them but have no personal experience.
I would think they might be useful with an aircraft 
engine that sometimes sits around for weeks without
running.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 22:31:50 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Air filters & air consumption
 
Paul Yaw wrote:
 
Paul wrote:
 
Tracy Crook wrote:
 
I'd figure it like this:
80 CI  X  6000 rpm = 480,000 CI  per minute.
480,000 CI  /  1728  (ci in a cubic ft)  = 277.77  CFM
The rotary is capable of better than 100% volumetric efficiency (with tuned
intake) so I'd go with at least 320 cfm.
 
Still sounds like it would work.
 
Tracy Crook
 
I'd figure it like that too.  Plain and simple.  Don't expect better
than about 90% VE unless you have a turbo, or some overlap.  To make
things really simple, just figure about 1.5 cfm per horsepower.  This is
not a guess, this is based on dyno testing as is the VE quote.  If for
instance your engine is making 160 hp, it is using about 240cfm of air
to do so.  As for the flow of the filter, it will be fine. If you wish
to mathematically determine the effect of the filter, you must know at
what pressure drop its airflow was measured. Manufacturers will say just
about anything to sell a product, and so keep in mind that airflow
numbers mean nothing without the test pressure.  The fact is that with a
large enough pressure differential that filter will flow 1000cfm or
more.  An earlier e-mail said that filters were measured at a pressure
drop of 1.0" H2o.  For the sake of comparison, each rotor on a stock
6-port induction system (From the intake port to the throttle body)
flows 128 cfm at 25" H2o.  At 1" it only flows 25.6 cfm.  Yuuk!  Happy
calculating.
 
Paul Yaw
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 22:58:26 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Static thrust & acceleration monitor
 
Speaking of static thrust there is a real cheap device all you 
computer/electronic types out there could build.
 
It is an accelleration sensor made with a car ABS wheel slotted ring
and mag pickup. The trick is to interrupt the PIC microcomputer 
every millisecond and disable, read, reset and re-enable an external 
or internal pulse counter. This should take less than 20 microseconds.
 
The value in the counter is velocity. If you subtract the last velocity
from the current velocity you have a measure of the acceleration.
 
If you accumulate the velocity you have the distance. No need 
for a distance sign along the side of the runway. You then enter
the runway length into the PIC somehow and it can warn you if
you will not be able to takeoff while you still have time to
stop. Good for short/high/hot fields.
 
BTW the beauty of this trick is there are no slow multiply or divide
operations required of the PIC firmware.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 23:07:03 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Static thrust & acceleration monitor
 
Also BTW I used a system like this with a 6502 for years measuring the
road performance of cars. Here is an IEEE paper I co-authored
on the system.  
 
Microprocessor-Based System for Roll-Down and Acceleration Tests
by D.K. Lynn, C.R. Derouin, and Paul Lamar
Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
Published in IEEE Proceedings 29th Vehicular Technology Conference
(The technical details of the Lamar Instrument  road test system.)
Arlington, Illinois, March 28-30, 1979
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 23:13:47 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Wanted three rotor.
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
Try Hayes Rotary in Redmond, Wa. That is where I bought mine.
 
See our NL web site for their phone number.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 23:12:17 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Pressure drop in intake system.
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
Whatever filter you use (I use the foam Bracket filters) make sure you install
a heavy ss wire screen (not window type) behind it to keep the engine from
injesting that filter. A new Seawind I know of was lost on its maiden flight
just for this reason!
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 12:30:05 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: GS motor mount
 
StJames515@aol.com wrote:
 
Paul,
I am considering other PSRU's in addition to the Ross unit.  Steve Parkman had
a 30# chain drive with a 4.5" offset to the output shaft.  Others vary to a a
7-8" offset.  In your view, how would the 13b fair in different mount
configurations?  Also, which type: gear, belt, or chain seems best?
Tommy James
 
Belt and Chain get the thrust line up but none of them
have demonstrated the durabilty of the Ross/Ford C6 planetary drive.
Not that it is perfect but at least Tracy got 600 hours out
of one before overhaul.
 
While I was in Florida I saw Tracy's prototype version of the Ford C6
planetary unit and it looked good. He has addressed the oil
supply to the sun gear by using a plain journal bearing
and pressure from the engine oil system. That should extend
the life of the planetary gears.
 
Its hard to beat a planetary gear box on a weight basis.
 
Picture of the prototype PSRU.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 17:15:52 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 13B REW twin turbo
 
Gordon Woodard wrote:
 
It looks like this would be the preferd block? Have there been any
problem areas with the twin turbo? And would twin turbos work? Im
getting ready to buy my motor and came across and deal on an 94 . I have
picked up alot of good imformation here but it seem to also bring up
more ? .
Gordon
 
I would not use the stock twin turbos. They were designed for throttle
Response and not durability at high continuous power levels. 
 
The block yes the twin turbos no.
 
I would get an Inconel turbine from Turbonetics. Don't tell them it is
for an aircraft. 
 
Throttle response is not as important in an airplane as it is in 
a car.
 
They are also heavy because of extensive use of cast iron in the 
exhaust manifold. Fabricate an exhaust manifold out of 0.040 or
0.050 Inconel sheet or tubing.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 17:35:12 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Parkman
 
RJohn15183@aol.com wrote:
 
In a message dated 1/9/99 10:55:34 AM Central Standard Time,
rotaryeng@earthlink.net writes:
 
Yes Bill what you say is very very true. But this MUST be balanced
 by some degree of reason. If Burt Rutan designed the airplane for
 100 HP minimum  then the FAA inspector should have a reasonable
 assurance that the engine being used will indeed generate at least 100
 HP and that the design gross weight of the airplane and CG location is
 not exceeded by just the pilot, a little fuel and the heavier engine.
 
~snip~
 
 This is giving every benifit of the doubt to the Geo engine
 that it did indeed generate 78 HP.
 
OOPS! The varieze was *designed* to use a VW conversion NOT an O-200. *If* he
was getting 78 horses then lack of power was not the problem.
 
Rob
 
Yes. Orginally it was but Burt found out the VW did not have enough
power so he recommended at least an O-200 with 100 HP.
 
Klaus has his O-200 souped up and he is not a real large guy.
Never-the-less he rufuses to take anyone aloft who weighs
over about 150 pounds for safety reasons.
 
Tucson can be in the category of hot and high even at 8:30 AM in
the morning.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 23:10:46 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Australia Rotor Craft with 13B's
 
Gary C. Buster LPT wrote:
 
Hello Colin... Glad to hear you are going to catch up with us at Bensen
Days...
SHOW ME THE PICS!!!  otherwise known as... "you show me yours and I'll show
you mine!!!"
 
Gary Buster   gbuster@ballistic.com
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 23:40:51 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A real cheap dyno
 
If you place two bathroom scales side by side underneath
each main tire with a plank between the scales you can determine the
torque the engine is generating at any RPM. You can change engine RPM at
WOT with a ground adjustable pitch prop. If you know the distance
between the wheels you know torque. Knowing torque and prop RPM you have
HP.
 
There will be some lift on the wing roots due to slip stream
effect so it is not a very good absolute measurement.
One wing root will be running at a higher angle of attack
than the other. Less so for a pusher than a tractor.
 
Tie the airplane's tail  to a tree and also tie it laterally so
it does not walk off the scales.
 
You need four scales because bathroom scales only go up to about
300 pounds each.
 
Paul  
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 07:12:45 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Priming the oil pump.
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Yes, George, forgot to mention that I do remove one plug from each rotor
chamber.  But, guess I was doing it for slighty different reason than
the excellent one you suggested.  It is common practice on two plug
aircraft engines to remove one plug when working on them.  This
minimizes the risk of any movement of the prop causing a magneto to fire
a cylinder or at least for that cylinder to have sufficient combustion
energy to spin the prop.  Second reason, is to reduce the load on the
starter.  In my case, with fuel injection and my oil mixed in with my
fuel (I don't use the stock oil injectors), no lubrication is provided
by the fuel since the injectors are not injecting when my ignition is
off.
 
Ed
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 07:17:51 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
CC: eaa editorial <editorial@eaa.org>
Subject: EAA awards for Tracy Crook and Everett Hatch
 
Paul wrote:
 
BTW I was thinking we ought to petition the EAA to give Everett Hatch
and Tracy Crook awards for furthering the cause of general aviation.
The way it looks now the rotary may be better and cheaper than a real
aircraft engine.
 
Paul
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
I second that motion
 
Ed
 
If any of you feel the same way send email to: 
eaa editorial <editorial@eaa.org>
directly.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 07:34:17 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Screen behind filter.
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Excellent suggestion.  I have SS mesh sandwiching my filter material
and then a piece of SS mesh over the throttle body throats as suspenders
(actually more to keep any bolts or nuts (or other stuff) from dropping
down the manifold when the butterflys are open.  Had it happen once - a
real pain.
 
Ed
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 07:32:20 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Static thrust & acceleration monitor
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Hey, I like the idea of a little toy car chip triggering a voice alerter
ditty during take off roll -"Hey Buddy, Your engine ain't too hot, the
accel too d___  low, better get ready to stop, 'cause I'm not about to
go".  Couldn't help myself
 
Ed
 
Somehow I get the impression you are kidding Ed :-)
Just a plain yes or no would be less ambiguous :-)
 
All airliners have something similar these days I think.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 08:07:06 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Miles per gallon
 
Tracy and I were sitting around talking about his new LCD
display for the EFI and the subject of miles per gallon 
came up. He had intended to display GPH but with a GPS
input one could calculate what you really want to know
and that is miles per gallon.
 
So I promised Tracy I would send him this program.
 
It is written in QB 4.5 so don't laugh. QB 4.5 running
under DOS has a direct hardware access and real time 
capability no other language or popular operating system
currently enjoys. This should work with any GPS on the
market that uses the NEMA 0183 protocol as most do.
 
SIDE BAR
 
Here is a short real time program that takes GPS data in from a
NEMA 0183 compatible GPS or Loran receiver and stores it on 
a hard disk.
 
This program will not work with Windows, OS/2 or any form of UNIX.
These operating systems do not allow direct hardware access or
real time interrupts. With Linux/UNIX you can probably treat the
interface as just another ASCII terminal and redirect it to a file.
 
This has been tested with a Rockwell GPS receiver as used in an Arnav 
panel instrument and Lowrance boat units and a Long Ranger aircraft
Loran unit. It has also been tested with a Garmin handheld aircraft
GPS.
 
This requires at least QuickBasic which came with DOS 5.0 or DOS 6.22 
If you want it compiled you need QB 4.5 or Power Basic. 
  
CLS     'Clear the screen
 
'Recieve buffer size in bytes------+
'                              +   |
'Open buffer & wait for-+      |   |
'# of stop bits-----+   |      |   |
'# of bits -------+ |   |      |   |
'Parity --------+ | |   |      |   |
'Baud ------+   | | |   |      |   |
'Port #+    |   | | |   |      |   |
'      |    |   | | |   |      |   |   
OPEN "COM1:4800,N,8,2,OP15000,RS,RB32000,CD0,DS0,CS0" FOR RANDOM AS #1
OPEN "NEMA.DAT" FOR APPEND AS #2
TIMER ON
 
ON TIMER(2) GOSUB DoIt2
'        |
'Time ---+  
 
'Two seconds is the optimum. Anything less and you lose characters.
'Anything more and you get redundant sentences.
 
BackGround:    'Loop! Monitor the esc key press.
 
IF INKEY$ = CHR$(27) THEN GOTO EndItAll    'esc key
 
'Check to see if the program is running.
x = x + .00001
LOCATE 22, 19: PRINT x
GOTO BackGround
 
DoIt2:      'Do this every 2 seconds.
TIMER STOP    
CLS : LOCATE 22, 51 : PRINT "Press ESC to quit."
LOCATE 1, 1
 
DO WHILE NOT EOF(1)    'Do while there are characters in the buffer.
TempLine$ = INPUT$(LOC(1), #1)
PRINT TempLine$;       'Print it on the screen
PRINT #2, TIME$        'Time stamp the file on hard disk
PRINT #2, TempLine$    'Put the data in the file.
LOOP : TIMER ON : RETURN
 
EndItAll: CLS : CLOSE : SYSTEM
 
Here is a sample of the output data from a Long Ranger NEMA 0183 Loran;
 
00:06:00
$LCGLL,3031.91,N,08252.80,W
$LCBWC,,3500.00,N,12000.00,W,288,T,290,M,882.7,N,099
$LCAPA,A,A,9.85,L,N,V,A,349,M,099
$LCVTX,258,M,177,N
 
00:06:02
$LCGLL,3031.88,N,08252.91,W
$LCBWC,,3500.00,N,12000.00,W,288,T,290,M,882.6,N,099
$LCAPA,A,A,9.78,L,N,V,A,349,M,099
$LCVTX,258,M,177,N
 
00:06:04
$LCGLL,3031.82,N,08253.19,W
$LCBWC,,3500.00,N
00:06:04
,120
00:06:06
00.00,W,288,T,290,M,882.4,N,099
$LCAPA,A,A,9.58,L,N,V,A,349,M,099
$LCVTX,258,M,178,N
 
Here is a sample of the output data from an NEMA 0183 GPS. 
This data was gathered once a second.
 
$GPRMC,143724.266702,V,2606.386,N,08009.915,W,0000.0,000,200493,,,*3B
18:37:11
 
$GPRMB,V,,,,,,,,,,,,*30
18:37:12
 
$GPGGA,143725.266701,2606.386,N,08009.915,W,0,0,001,,M,00043,M,,,
18:37:13
 
$GPGLL,2606.38,N,08009.91,W,143725.266701
18:37:14
 
        +-time       +-Valid Data
        |            |  +-Lat      +-Long      +-Knots
        |            |  |          |           |     +-True Heading
        |            |  |          |           |     |    +-Date
$GPRMC,143726.266701,V,2606.386,N,08009.915,W,0000.0,000,200493,,,*3A
18:37:15
 
$GPRMB,V,,,,,,,,,,,,*30
18:37:16
 
$GPGGA,143727.266700,2606.386,N,08009.915,W,0,0,001,,M,00043,M,,,
18:37:17
 
$GPGLL,2606.38,N,08009.91,W,143727.266700
18:37:18
 
$GPRMC,143728.266700,V,2606.386,N,08009.915,W,0000.0,000,200493,,,*35
18:37:19
 
In the $GPRMC sentence the first number is the GMT time from the 
atomic clock in the sat accurate to the nearest microsecond!!!.
 
-The NMEA interface transmits data organized
-into sentences defined as follows:
-Sentence length is 20 bytes.
-Update rate = 1 Hz.
-Format parameters:
-Bytes are encoded as 7 bit ASCII characters in an
- 8 bit byte with the most significant bit set to zero.
-No Parity bit.
-One start bit and one stop bit.
-4800 baud.
-The total number of bits per transmitted data byte is 10.
 
The sentence is:
 
$HCHDM,
abc.d,M,*&lt;checksumMS&gt;&lt;checksumLS&gt;&lt;cr&gt;&lt;lf&gt;
 
Where; 
a is the BCDhundreds digit of the heading. 
b is the tens digit. 
c is the ones digit. 
 
&lt;checksumMS&gt is an ASCII character in the range 0-9 or A-F that 
represents the most significant nibble of the checksum.
 
&lt;checksumLS&gt  represents the least significant nibble.
 
The checksum is calculated by XOR'ing together all the
characters in the sentence up to... but not including the
"*" character. i.e. XOR together "S", "H", "C", "H",
"D", "M", ",(comma)", "hundreds digit", "tens digit",
"ones digit", ".(decimal point)", "tenths digit", ",(comma)",
"M", ",(comma)"]
 
The 'header information' -- the letters before
the actual data -- tells which of the ten or so
possible types of data that NMEA0183 can transmit.
 
  National Marine Electronics Association  (NMEA)
  PO Box 50040, Mobile, AL 36605
  Phone:  (205) 473-1793
  Fax:     (205) 473-1669
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 08:19:45 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A real cheap dyno
 
Rogers, Bob J. wrote:
 
All of us dummies would appreciate the formula to calculate torque and
horsepower using the bathroom scale method you have described.   It
sounds like an elegant and inexpensive way to check the power output
of the engine and prop combination.  Thanks.
 
There is a real simple one that escapes me at the moment. I think
it is something like 5252/torqueis HP.
Anybody remember this?
 
The torque is the difference in scale readings divide by the distance
between the wheels in feet.
 
BTW if you makes some spoiler cuffs that slip over the wing
roots the accuracy of the data would probably be improved.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 08:52:08 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A real cheap dyno
 
Rogers, Bob J. wrote:
 
All of us dummies would appreciate the formula to calculate torque and
horsepower using the bathroom scale method you have described.   It
sounds like an elegant and inexpensive way to check the power output
of the engine and prop combination.  Thanks.
 
OK here it is: I forgot RPM.
 
Torque times RPM divided by 5252 equals HP.
 
(T X RPM)/5252 = HP
 
Paul 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 16:05:03 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Parkman
 
Ernesto Sanchez wrote:
 
>From a Tucson newspaper:
 
Flight was Stephen Parkman's first in homebuilt plane
 
A pilot was killed when his homebuilt aircraft crashed in the desert
shortly after takeoff from Ryan Airfield west of Tucson yesterday
morning.
 
It apparently war the first time Stephen Parkman, 51, had flown the
twoseater Vari-Eze. an experimental  aircraft, authorities said.
 
The crash occurred shortly after 8:17 a.m., when the aircraft took off
from runway 6 for a local flight, said Mitch Barker, a Federal Aviation
Administration spokesman in Seattle.
 
Parkman soon alerted the control tower at Ryan Airfield that he was
experiencing problems. He was cleared to return to land, Pima County
Sheriffs Lt. Oscar Miranda said.
 
Investigators have not determined what caused the crash.
 
"The pilot radioed he was 100 feet off the ground and then they lost
radio contact." Miranda said.
The aircraft caught fire on impact in the desert less than a
quarter-mile north of the  7600 block of West Valencia Road. The
wreckage was strewn about 100 yards among mesquite trees and chollas.
 
A pilot who was about two miles north of the airport when Parkman
radioed his distress call circled the area and found the wreckage about
three miles east of the airport following a thick black column of
smoke.   That pilot, an off7duty Department of Public Safety officer,
directed rescue crews to the wreckage.
 
Parkman's family could not he reached for comment yesterday.  According
to friends, his son had recently Left for boot camp with plans to
eventually  become Navy pilot.
 
The National Transportation Safety Board and the Pima County Sheriffs
Department were investigating the crash.  Investigators, who spent most
of the day at the site, were researching the specification of the
aircraft
 
An FAA incident report noted that it was the aircraft's initial flight.
 
Parkman's exact destination was unknown because only commercial aircraft
are required to file flight plans
 
The door to Parkman's hanger remained open a few hours the Crash, wrth
his Rambler station wagon, bearing a 'Fly Navy" bumper sticker, parked
out front Another  one  of  Parkman's homebuilt aircraft,  a World I
replica - could be seen in his hangar.
 
Word of the crash spread quickly at Ryan Airfield, where Parkman and his
aircraft were familiar sights. Some pilots had heard Parkman's radio
exchange with the control tower.
 
Many pilots expressed sadness but most did not want their names
published.
 
"Usually we lose our pilots to old age or sickness - It's a rarity to
have someone get killed," said pilot Henry LaCoree.
 
The general public may have been unfamiliar with experimental aircraft
until singer John Denver crashed in a privately built Long-EZE, a larger
version of the plane Parkman was flying. The October 1997 wreck remains
under investigation.
 
Authorities called the aircraft safe.
 
"Its like any other airplane, if it is properly built, properly
maintained and properly flown, it's just as safe  as  any other plane,"
 
Barker said.
 
He may not have known it had a Geo engine. If I were the FAA inspector I
would not have signed off on it.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 16:08:09 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A real cheap dyno
 
Brent Regan wrote:
 
Guys! Geezz. When you bolt a prop on backwards you will still go forward. It is
an air screw, remember. Also the two place Lancairs have stub wings with the
gear that don't come off.
 
Brent
 
But not as well :-) So there is less slip stream and more corkscrew 
for the same HP consumption :-)
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 17:33:35 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: John Larsen <jopatco@cyberhighway.net>
CC: Dave Martin <dave@kitplanes.com>
Subject: Feb. Kitplanes Engine Beat column.
 
I am sorry to inform you John that the two rotor Wankel
engine has only two power pulses per revolution rather
than three as stated in your Feb Engine Beat column.
 
If you are talking about a one rotor it obviously
only has one power pulse per revolution.
 
I wish it were so but unfortionately it is not.
 
BTW Tracy Crook recently discovered that the Mazda rotary
could and will run 100 degrees lean of peak somewhat reducing
the BSFC well below 0.50
 
Paul Lamar
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 19:01:22 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: new rx7-4th gen?
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
On page 33 of Car & Driver's Feb. 1999 edition:
 
"RX-7 will return: Mazda executives now say it's a matter of when, not
if, a sporty car called the RX-7 will return to the U.S. market. Our
first look will likely be at the Tokyo show later this year, with
production to begin in 2000. The best bet is that it will have a rotary
engine (although the Miller cycle motor, similar to the one in the
Millenia, is a long shot) and will be built on a stretched version of
the Miata platform. It won't be as exotic or fast as the late, lamented
third-generation RX-7 that slipped from these shores a few years ago,
but it will be less expensive."
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 21:03:46 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Ross PSRU-bellhousing?
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
A question; If one uses the Ross PSRU, does one also have to get a auto tranny
bellhousing to bolt it to, or is something else used? Will the manual tranny
bellhousing work? I know the counterweight/ring gear needs to be the auto
spec......
 
The Ross comes with a bell housing now.
It is not necessary to obtain a Mazda bell housing.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 23:32:24 -0500
From: jpr@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: REFLECTOR: Re: [c-a] Lightning strike
To: reflector@awpi.com, Dave Black <asterisk@EROLS.COM>
CC: "Andrew L. Judge" <AJudge1@Compuserve.com>,
        "Aviators .Canard" <canard-aviators@canard.com>
 
[The Canard Aviators's Mailing list]
 
Oddly enough, I saw the results of a lightning strike in almost the
exact same circumstance -  but as strange as it may seem, it struck the
Velocity at the middle rudder hinge while it was parked on the ramp
between several metal airplanes, which apparently were not hit (at
least, not damaged).
 
The lightning reportedly arced over from the hinge to one of the
antennas, exploding the rudder off the winglet and boiling the foam
enough to completely distort the entire winglet (I do have pictures). 
After traveling down the antenna lead, it went to the rudder cable and
traveled down that until it hit the aileron counterweight and voided a
bit of foam there.  The rudder was thrown off the airplane, and the
rudder return spring was stretched out straight.
 
The radios were completely zapped, and magnetized all the steel in the
engine, including the engine mount.
 
I agree, if it had occurred in flight, not much would be known about
it...  however, I'm not sure if  being struck in the air is as likely
(or more likely, or less likely) than being struck on the ground.  I
know that plastic airplanes can accumulate more charge than a metal
airplane, but where would the lightning go from there?  On the ground,
of course, it arcs over to ground.  In the air would it 'arc over' to
another cloud or something?
 
As for why it did not strike the other, metal airplanes, who knows? 
Perhaps the plastic plane had built up a charge that was more attractive
than the actual ground (would that be positive or negative - I forget..)
 
Anyway, lightning in the air is not good for any plane, and I recall
hearing of someone that this happened to who luckily survived - and I
think it was in a plastic plane..  I can't remember where I read it.. 
So, I guess the best thing to do is to stay away from areas of
lightning, as much as it can be predicted!
 
I wonder if the Glasair or Lancair or whomever is installing the
aluminum fiber mat, has really tested what a "typical" lightning bolt
can do to it..  Seeing the results of this, I really wonder if it would
possibly be worse (blow the skin off??)
 
-john rourke
 
Dave Black wrote:
 
Andy,
 
I had a bolt of lightning hit my plane while it was on the ramp.  
1) Glass planes are NO MORE attractive to lightning than metal ones.
2) Lightning strikes on glass planes causes MUCH MORE damage than to a metal
one. 
 
Dave Black
Velocity RG
 
                                                  \
->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>-|-
                                                  /
For details on sponsors of this list, copyrights, and how to remove
yourself from this list, please visit:
 
http://www.canard.com/ca-ending.html
 
(c) 1997,1998 Canard Aviators.     support@canard.com
        /
   -|-<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
        \
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 21:19:41 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Feb. Kitplanes Engine Beat column.
 
Carl wrote:
 
Now hold on. I thought the 2 rotor had 6 power pulses per revolution and
the single had 3 per revolution.  What am I missing here?
Three sides per rotor, three sparks per revolution. ??
 
Yes for the rotor rotation but no for the output shaft.
The rotor runs at 1/3 the revs of the output shaft.
 
Carl
To invent an airplane is nothing.
To build one is something.
To fly, is everything.
     -- Otto Leinthal   1848-1896
 
One spark (2 for dual plugs) per output shaft rev per rotor.
 
To further confuse the issue the rotor rotates at 1/3 the output
shaft speed. Amazing is it not?
 
Check the last web site link on the NL web site. There is a nice
animation on there.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 21:44:19 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: % power indicator, look at this company
 
marc wrote:
 
This company seeks new engine/instrument display ideas, and it seems this
group could give them some. My only problem with the instrument is that it
does not take EGT/TIT or actual fuel flow into account for LOP operation. I
guess % power is approximated from a programmed table using RPM and MP as
well as temp.
Anyhow take a look, and contact them on your ideas!
 
http://www.technologykitchen.com/index.htm
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 21:48:06 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Rotary engine rebuild tape
 
marc wrote:
 
BTW: Does anyone know who was selling the rotary engine rebuild tape? Has
anyone bought a copy yet or received it?
 
Since I spoke with the list, I have had a discussion with Bruce. He is a
voc ed teacher, works part time rebuilding rotories for a firm (Jemco, I
think he said?). Tape focuses on problem areas, and mostly the late madel
13B engine. He seems very on the up and up. Told me that the set has an
integral powerpoint presentation in the tape set! As he does all his own
tape duplicating, he is a little behind (his dup unit broke down), has
orders for 30 right now. Told me to expect my tape next week! can't wait to
see it as I have an 89 13B torn down in the garage right now awaiting
assembly!
If anyone has seen it by now, please let's hear your comments!
Here you go:
 
"4 hour, two tape set, (Bruce refused to accept the video quality loss
when using extended play recording) covers all the details of disassembly,
cleaning, wear evaluation and overhauling the 13B core. Highly
Recommended.
 
Send your orders along with a check for $29.95 to :
Bruce Turrentine
5337 Trestlewood Lane
Raleighg, NC 27610"
Note: this tape is the one I asked about interest on the list much
earlier..........
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 08:53:58 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A real cheap dyno
 
TERF Email wrote:
 
Hi Paul
 
    Nobody has mentioned this technique so I thought I would pitch in. As
you will recall we had that jet engine dyno test stand at Oshkosh last year.
I built a "load cell" unit for that out of a small (approx. 1" ID) hydraulic
cylinder and a oil pressure gauge.  Measure the inside surface area and
convert from psi linear force to psi hydraulic pressure and you are home
free.
 
    You might even use an electronic sending unit so that you can read the
gauge in the cockpit w/o a long hose on your gauge.  A little creativity in
the voltage conversion and the gauge will even read right.  For the
mechanical gauge I screwed the face off (ok it was a pretty nice gauge) and
laid out a new face on CAD and placed it behind the needle to get that "OEM"
look. (Bigger gauges are nicer.)   A lookup table is good if you don't mind
the trouble / delay in the conversion process.
 
    This is a nice solution because there is nothing moving or stretching.
It is fairly easy to get an inexpensive cylinder that is small enough to
keep the "stick friction" from being a problem (especially since the piston
doesn't really move much) and strong enough to keep your airplane from .....
shall we say .....  going on its merry way.   Remember to size the cylinder
and gauge for the correct resolution.   Many engine and brake test
dynamometers actually use this method because it is hard to break under
pounding and tugging vibrations.  Strain gauges and quartz sensors are
expensive and fragile.
 
    The one we have built has several hours at about 200# thrust in test and
development of the jet engine.  It came out within about 2% or so in
accuracy from the calculated gauge face.  We merely slid the laminated paper
around slightly in the gauge to get the offset calibration correct.  Double
face scotch tape works great to hold it in place.
 
P.s.  A bleeder valve is nice too...  gotta get the air out obviously.
Don't forget to subtract the area of the shaft if you use that side of the
cylinder.  Calibration can be done by hanging a weight from it like a fish.
 
                    Best Regards & Hope that this helps    Matthew Tait
 
Good ideas Matt. If you have a drawing of the cyl incorporated into
a rubber engine mount similar to the Qestair design please send it to 
my FAX number (310) 475 5517 before 8 AM your time if you can. My FAX
and modem line are one and the same.
 
Paul 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 09:00:40 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: New rx7-4th gen?
 
David Morris wrote:
 
For those interested in seeing pic's of the last version of the 3rd
generation (known as the series VIII), check out the DMRH site at the
below URL.
 
                                   http://www.3rotor.com/dmrh
 
REgards
               Dave Morris
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 08:59:07 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 3-rotor parts]
 
David Morris wrote:
 
G'day guys.
 
On the subject of 20B parts.
 
They are available "new" from Mazda but the bad news is there's no
eccentric shafts left. (thats the common problem with their
unreliability).
 
Thats interesting. What sort of problems are they having with the
shafts?
 
A contact at Mazdaspeed (Japan) said that demand is
getting stronger for them & they feel Mazda will do a new production run
of shafts in the near future.
 
However they will still have the inherent (flexing) problem. I have
heard of a NZ engineering firm making 3 rotor shaft for the 20B that are
of a higher quality steel. I'd suggest that if someone wanted to build
up a 3rotor from parts, they use the NZ built shafts instead of the
Mazda ones.
 
I'll endevour to find the contact details for the NZ company in the next
few days.
 
REgards
              Dave Morris..................DMRH special vehicles
 
                                         http://www.3rotor.com/dmrh
 
That's encouraging. I was hoping someone would start to make Mazda
engine parts.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 09:48:19 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Parkman
 
Bill Freeman wrote:
 
Paul,  Paul,    Paul,
 
We normally agree on most things, but I must object strenuously
to your comment about the Vari-Eze that (apparently) had a Geo
engine and crashed.  Please think a moment about the implications
of what you just said!  If any FAA inspector could decide what
was and what wasn't a "suitable" engine for a homebuilt, do you
think most would sign off on ANY auto engine, ESPECIALLY some
wierd engine that has no pistons and runs on some strange principle
the he doesn't really understand is NOT LIKE any other engine -
i.e. a rotary.   Remember, freedom means the freedom to succeed and
MUST implicitly include the freedom to fail, which sometime can
be fatal.  If failure is precluded by the gov't, all freedom is gone.
 
We need to hang together and keep an open mind about new ideas.
 
I probably agree that a Geo motor may be a poor choice for an
aircraft engine, and God knows if there is ANY airframe more
unsuited for an "iffy" engine than the Vari Eze, I can't think of it
right now.  New engine testing should take place in Kitfoxes or
J3s or similar low landing speed AC.
 
 Take care, and sorry to hear about your giant travel
debacle.   Been there, done that.  :-0
 
Bill
 
Yes Bill what you say is very very true. But this MUST be balanced
by some degree of reason. If Burt Rutan designed the airplane for 
100 HP minimum  then the FAA inspector should have a reasonable
assurance that the engine being used will indeed generate at least 100
HP and that the design gross weight of the airplane and CG location is
not exceeded by just the pilot, a little fuel and the heavier engine.
 
A poor choice of engine resulting in a fatal crash hurts the
experimental movement as much as excess oversite would.
 
This is giving every benifit of the doubt to the Geo engine
that it did indeed generate 78 HP. Steve never claimed it had
more HP than that.
 
Perhaps what we need is better qualified FAA inspectors. Maybe
one or two non AC engine experienced inspectors that can
fly around the country and inspect non AC engined experimental
aircraft.
 
The picture is of Steve's airplane.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 23:03:09 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Parkman
 
Rodger Hilyard wrote:
 
 Paul what a can of worms your are suggesting......
 When we build an aircraft,and the FAA inspects it,do you want them
to require a certified report from some approved testing lab that your
as intsalled engine provides a certain horse power with a specific
propeller?? What happens when your 0-200 only puts out 98 HP?
what if it puts out 110 HP,after all it doesn't comply with the designers
suggested 100HP.....What if you produce an engine that DOES make
100HP but at 19zillion rpm,is that OK?
  At this point we dont know,and may never know what caused are fellow
experimenter Steve Parkman's tragedy.It may well prove out that running
an automobile engine at power levels twice there original supplied HP
IS an unreliable way to do things.
 For your consideration...Rodger Hilyard
 
We do know the airplane refused to climb normally.
 
I will garantee that running an auto piston engine at twice its
orginal power levels continuously is an unreliable way to do
things. We have one hundread years and billions of auto piston engines
to prove it. The actual RPM it generates its power has only somewhat to
do with it.
 
The Wankel rotary is showing a lot of evidense, from auto racing and now
from use in aircraft, that it can take a least its rated power
for long periods of time.
 
Of course its an inexact science. Only gross violations should be
refused.
IMHO this one was a gross violation of accepted engineering principles.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 23:27:57 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 13B/20B turbos?
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
In a message dated 99-01-09 19:23:15 EST, you write:
 
<< I would get an Inconel turbine from Turbonetics. Don't tell them it is
 for an aircraft.  
 
Paul, which one would you pick for a 20B? In a normalized mode, which one
would give best performance at altitude? Alternatively, how about one for a
13B?
I'm not sure exactly how to pick one given all the variations available!
 
We kind of have a secret code with Turbonetics. If you tell the engineer
you are building a two or three rotor Pikes Peak racing car and you want x
amount of power at 14,000 feet he will make recommendations.
 
Also contact Chuck Harbert who has been there and done that.
 
chuck_harbert@arkwright.com 
 The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
 
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 23:35:59 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 13B REW twin turbo-reliability?
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
Gordon Woodard wrote:
It looks like this would be the preferd block? Have there been any
problem areas with the twin turbo? And would twin turbos work? Im
getting ready to buy my motor and came across and deal on an 94 . I have
picked up alot of good imformation here but it seem to also bring up
more ? .
 
Many (not all) of these engines suffer some sort of distress prior to 100,000
miles-could be the very low oil electonic injection rate, the intense heat of
the turbo engine, turbo manifold cracking, worn turbos, overboost leading to
apex seal failure and housing damage, or the very susceptible coolant system
(prone to failure, which overheats many engines, I''ve got experience with
this). I''ve got two 13Brew engines sitting in my garage right now, both
running (in 94 rx7s)! They are essentially the 13B 91 turbo engine with a few
mods and different turbos/computer. And the intercooler is way too
small.........
Check the compression on the engine and rotate it for sure before you buy it!
 
Hopefully you will not use any of these stock accessories in an aircraft.
 
Apex seal lube oil (2 cycle oil) is best mixed with the gas. Low oil quantity apex seal 
injection rate was done primarily for smog reasons.
 
However a lot of these issues have been addressed in the very latest RX7
introduced in Japan just a few weeks ago.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 23:49:59 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: hp of 13B unverified in stock cars?
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
86-88 na  145hp
86-88 T2   185hp
89-91 na    165hp
89-91 T2    200hp
 
Thanks for the list.
 
Many of the NA HP differences are due to minor porting differences
and intake and exhaust tuning.
 
There is very little internal differences in the engines themselves.
See the desertation on the NL web site for some of those
differences.
 
I do recommend paying detailed attention to intake and exhaust
tuning for NA engines. 
 
Make sure the engine will rev to at
least 6000 RPM in the climb mode by carefully chooseing the right
prop. With proper intake/exhaust tuning the HP curve around
6000 RPM is a stright line so small differences in increased 
RPM make large differences in increased HP.
 
Get Tracy's book for a start on the prop pitch/size and other details.
rws@altavista.net
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 01:13:44 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 13B REW twin turbo
 
David Morris wrote:
 
G'day from DMRH.
 
The problem with the factory Hitachi  HT-12 twin turbo's are their shaft
length. For the size of the turbo it's shaft is quite long & this
effects their reliability as the shafts start to go through their seals.
 
For automotive applications the maximum boost for the HT-12's should be
15 psi. Even at this level, their reliability is compromised.
 
For aircraft use you won't find too many people recomending you stick with
the Hitachi's.
 
REgards
                 David Morris
 
http://www.3rotor.com/dmrh
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:10:49 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 13B REW twin turbo OK?
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
Also--------
First thing to do is to do a compression check.
Or remove one sparkplug and listen to escaping gas sound, should have 3
whooshing sounds per rotation of rotor.  Do this separately for each rotor.
 
It may have a damaged apex seal.
 
Check out http://www.gate.net/~mrmazda/cfaqtext.html and look at "How do I
know if my engine's apex seals are OK?"
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:20:30 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Miles per gallon
 
Tracy Crook wrote:
 
Paul wrote:  
Tracy and I were sitting around talking about his new LCD
display for the EFI and the subject of miles per gallon
came up. He had intended to display GPH but with a GPS
input one could calculate what you really want to know
and that is miles per gallon.
 
Thanks for the tip on the available data in the GPS stream Paul.  I'll have
to write an assembly language version of the basic program but that  helps
get me get going down the right path.  I always wanted an MPG display so
will  definitely add it to the instrument.
 
Tracy Crook
 
While I have you on the line here do any of the new PIC models
have 16 bit pulse counters? My PIC books are temporarily up
at the hangar.
 
I am thinking of building a takeoff  acceleration monitor
using a slotted ring and mag pickup  from a junk yard 
auto ABS system. You would not consider adding that to your
display system would you? :-) Your PIC need not start monitoring
the engine untill the airplane was off the ground :-)
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:49:09 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Take off acceleration monitor.
 
Opps here it is in the Digi-Key catalog.
 
17C756/CL-ND EPROM $20.60 qyt. one. Page 145.
68 pin CLCC.
 
I believe in overkill with microcomputers.
You never can tell when you are going to need
a new feature. It has 50 I/O pins
 
16K by 16 EPROM 902 bytes RAM DC-33MHZ
 
Timer 3 is a 16 bit timer/counter. Can that be incremented
externally?
 
This would drive LED's directly. 
 
Which one are you planning on using?
 
HP has some real nice 4 digit
dot matrix very readable avionics type displays. Rather expensive
however at about $50 each as I recall.
 
I would use one of these for incrementing the runway length
in feet with an up/down toggle switch.
 
What are you going to use for your display?
 
For the acceleration monitor output a loud horn/klaxon/bright 
light  or as Ed suggested, a voice chip. 
 
You could of course kill the engine and apply the brakes
automatically. Maybe not :-)
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 13:12:26 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Climb
 
I got to thinking about climb and came up with what
I thought was a simple way of looking at it.
 
The orginal definition of HP was how fast a horse could
lift X amount of weight X amount of distance in X amount of
time.
 
The number was 550 pounds... one foot... in one second.
 
If you have an airplane with a gross weight of 1500
pounds and you have 25 HP left over after you subtract
the HP required to keep it flying at a fixed altitude
you should be able to calculate the potential rate of climb.
 
Let's see... 550 pound divided by 1500 pounds gross 
is  0.37 feet per second up.... per HP.
 
Times 25 HP is 9 feet per second or
540 feet per minute. About right. 
 
Feet per minute is  what is displayed on most 
aircraft rate of climb steam gages.
 
If it took 75 HP to fly the airplane
and you had 100 in the engine you would climb at
about 540 feet per minute.
 
If the engine was only developing 75 HP you would not
be able to climb.
 
This is a crude aproximation. I think the drag of the airplane
goes up due to the additional  lift required to climb and hence
so does the "CL^2 / pi X Aspect Ratio" induced drag factor so this
calculation is probably optimistic.
 
In other words its worse than this.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 08:40:51 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: New RX7 details.
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
In a message dated 99-01-10 01:42:46 EST, you write:
 
 However a lot of these issues have been addressed in the very latest RX7
 introduced in Japan just a few weeks ago.
 
Paul, where did you find the info on the latest 3rd gen 99 model on the
engine? I have not heard about this and would like to find out what has
actually been done to the engine! I do know it is NOT the MSPRE engine (yet)
in those Japanese spec 99s. Some airflow characteristics were changed (new
front end) and some accessories, but nothing major.............
 
>From this web site.
 
http://www.e.mazda.co.jp/Publicity/Public/9812/981215be.html
 
Here is part of the press release.
 
December 15, 1998
 
          The New Mazda RX-7 Powered by 280 PS Rotary Engine 
           - a pure sports car improved its "Fun to Drive" - 
 
   Mazda Motor Corporation today announced the long-awaited arrival of
   the new RX-7. Mazda's modern version of a pure sports car will be
   available beginning January 21 next year through Mazda Anfini dealers
    throughout Japan. 
 
   The RX-7 has a legendary tradition for offering driving enthusiasts
   the greatest "fun to drive" character. Building on that reputation, the
   new  RX-7 turns heads with its powerful, unique exterior, and Mazda's
   compact, lightweight, and high-powered rotary engine. 
 
   The main features of the new RX-7 are: 
1)                   Enhanced turbocharger efficiency and cooling performance that afford 
increased maximum engine power of 280PS (JIS net) for both the Type RS 
and Type R. models 
 
     -Higher engine power and the new RX-7's light weight achieve a
       power-to-weight ratio of 4.57 kg/PS for the Type RS model.
 
   Despite the enhanced driving performance and new equipment, the price
for the 280 PS top-of the line models barely increases. The 5-speed
manual transmission, type RB, with a maximum 265PS engine output costs
2,898,000 yen (one price nationwide), making the new RX-7 more
affordable than ever. 
 
   The monthly sales target is 500 units. 
 
   Highlights 
 
   1. IMPROVED DRIVING PERFORMANCE 
 
   Enhanced turbocharger efficiency and cooling performance due to
increased air-intake allows the new RX-7 to achieve a maximum output of
280  PS/6,500 rpm (Type RS, Type R) increased engine power combined with
the light weight of the type R model realizes a power-to-weight ratio of 4.5 kg/PS. 
 
   Along with greater output at high engine speeds and an extended top
end, the torque at medium engine speeds has been increased for better
   acceleration. Specific changes that have improved engine performance
include: 
 
    * The use of abradable seals and increased air flow provided by an
ultra-high-flow turbine achieves a turbocharger pressure approximately
1.2 times previous models.
 
    * Modifications to the internal structure of the main silencer have
reduced exhaust pressure, contributing to lower resistance.
    * In addition to increasing the aperture surface area of the
air-intake, including the radiator and intercooler.
    * The air cleaner uses a separate air duct that allows air to pass
over the vehicle for more efficient cooling. 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 08:51:59 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Parkman
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Paul,
        I must agree with the comments of Bill Freeman.  First, the FAA
inspection  - as I was told many times during my building process - only
makes you legal, it does not make you safe (although a good
knowledgeable, dedicate inspector is certainly a benefit). I eventually
had to retain the services of a DAR (Designated Airworthiness
Represenative) do my inspection because the local FAA inspector (nice
Gent) did not feel comfortable inspecting an aircraft with a Mazda
engine.  In fact, he orginally sent my package to the FAA maintenance
division - because "they have engineers there".  It took 3 months to
finally get my package back with no one willing to take action on it.
 
 I believe that responsibility for a safe aircraft/engine must and
should reside with the builder.  Bureaucrats and institutions are
inherently conservative (no value judgment here) and for the most part
resistant to change - why else did certification of an aircraft/engine
cost so much in the past.
 
I don't think any system is going to change human nature. We all from
time to time tend to ignore facts when they contrast with our beliefs or
even wishes. The principal things is DO YOU TRULY UNDERSTAND THE RISK
and are you willing to deal with the facts rather than perhaps
optimistic hoping things will work.  Each person perceives and deals
with risk differently, you can - with diligence, good advice from others
and willingness to listen and consider the cautions of others, minimize
the risk - but, can never eliminate it totally.
 
As you know, Paul, some folks assume that everything will work out all
right and other folks assume that anything that can - will fail.
I think the only prudent approach is to assume that anything that can
fail will fail and design fail safe/ redundancy/ recover actions for
critical items - where feasible. And THEN ask yourself, what are the
chances it will still fail and what are the final risk if it does.
 
There was no mention in the report of Steve having a ground crew
standing by and certainly not implying it would have made any difference
in this case.  But, I strongly urge anybody for their maiden flight to
have 2-3 folks with fire extinguishers, crash axes, and radios in four
wheel drive vehicles off each end of the runway.  Hope for the best, but
plan for the worst.
 
Ed Anderson
 
Some folks will convince themselves
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:05:02 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Climb
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Paul, thought I would throw in some "real" world data.  I have made one
time to climb data collection with the following results:
15F day with RV-6 Weighing 1600 lbs
 
at 3000 MSL 1450 fpm
at 5000 MSL 1230 fpm
at 7000 MSL 1000 fpm
 
I estimate based on the comparison of this data with designers data that
engine is producing approx 150hp. I have a 68x72 prop and can reach a
static rpm of 5000-5200 depending on ambient air temp.  Aircraft does
climb well at 120 IAS at 5800 rpm, but will hopefully do better now that
I have removed the 2" of foam I had in my air intake.  Several folks
have suggested that 2" of foam in the 3" dia duct was unduely
restricting airflow resulting in the 2" lower than expected manifold
pressure.  A gain of 10-15 more hp will give me what I have targetted
for performance. I currently can only get 6000 rpm when level flight,
but believe that will improve with tweaks to timing and fuel injection.
 
Ed Anderson
 
Obviously you have a lot more than 25 HP left over :-)
 
I think your prop is still a couple of inches too long and/or you need
better intake and exhaust tuning.
 
The HP should still be strongly increasing in the 6000 to 7000 RPM
range.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 15:57:54 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Climb
 
Brent Regan wrote:
 
So then if you shut off the engine, stopped the prop and and descended to
maintain cruse speed (in cruse configuration) you can calculate cruse
horsepower from the aircraft weight and rate of descent. Right?
 
Brent
 
The HP numbers mentioned are net out of the prop. Not the HP of the engine
let alone through the prop and PSRU.
 
In theory yes.. I would guess but I might want to think about that
for awhile :-)
 
The proplem with stopping the prop or even letting it windmill is... it adds
drag to make the airplane decend faster than it would if the prop merely
fell or flew off. (Assuming that did not put the CG too far aft).
 
The CAFE came up with an idea to make the prop net zero drag by
measuring or detecting crankshaft end play.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 20:09:48 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Getting your airplane signed off by the FAA
 
Perry Mick wrote:
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Paul,
        I must agree with the comments of Bill Freeman.  First, the FAA
inspection  - as I was told many times during my building process - only
makes you legal, it does not make you safe (although a good
knowledgeable, dedicate inspector is certainly a benefit). I eventually
had to retain the services of a DAR (Designated Airworthiness
Represenative) do my inspection because the local FAA inspector (nice
Gent) did not feel comfortable inspecting an aircraft with a Mazda
engine.  In fact, he orginally sent my package to the FAA maintenance
division - because "they have engineers there".  It took 3 months to
finally get my package back with no one willing to take action on it.
 
It looks like they're playing the same game with me.  I sent my
paperwork to the local Portland OR FSDO in early December.  After a few
days the airworthiness inspector sent me email saying he sent my file to
the MIDO office in Seattle.  I left a message on his phonemail, he
didn't call back.  Sent email to the guy at the MIDO office, he hasn't
responded.  So now I just decided to sit back and see how long it takes
these bureaucrats to come back with some type of response.
 
Guess I'd better find out who the local DAR's are.
 
Perry J. Mick
Mazda 13B-powered LongEz N7XR
 
Makes you wonder what we are paying these guys for.
 
Paul 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 21:29:24 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: How about a "certified engine" test??????]
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
Information to chew on seen on another list..........
It was said ..."I was told by their engineers that any
production aircraft engine has to go to TBO and 100%
power in order to meet certification requirements."
 
This is common folklore but has no basis in reality or
truth. One must be very careful when talking to
engineers. There is only one "bible" used in the engine
test cell, read on...
 
The document that governs any certification of any
aircraft engine (be it reciprocating piston engines or
turbine) is Advisory Circular AC33-2B, "AIRCRAFT ENGINE
TYPE CERTIFICATION HANDBOOK".
 
To cut to the chase; only 150 hours are required to
certify ANY aircraft engine! And so as not to bore y'all
I'll give you the pertinent sections (brutally and
severely edited). Every combination you can think of is
covered in the manual. Single-speed supercharged,
double-speed supercharged, turbocharged, gear driven,
helicopter engines, etc. are all covered in the manual.
Prop, accessories and other good stuff are all addressed
in testing.
 
Section 33.49 Endurance Test
 
a.) General...during the runs at rated takeoff power and
for at least 35 hours at rated maximum continuos power,
one cylinder, must be...not less than limiting temp, the
other cylinders must be operated at not less than 50 deg
below the limiting temp...
 
b.) Unsupercharged engines. . . (1) 30 hr run...alternate
periods of 5 minutes rated take off power...5 min best
economy (2) 20 hr...alternate periods 1.5 hr @max...1/2
hr @ 75%&91% (3) 20 hr...alternate periods 1.5 hr
@max...1/2 hr @ 70%&89% (4) 20 hr...alternate periods 1.5
hr @max...1/2 hr @ 65%&87% (5) 20 hr...alternate periods
1.5 hr @max...1/2 hr @ 60%&84.5% (6) 20 hr...alternate
periods 1.5 hr @max...1/2 hr @ 50%&79.5% (7) 20
hr...alternate periods 2.5 hr @max...2 1/2 hrs max best
economy...
 
c.) Gear driven engines...etc. (you get the idea...)
 
AC33-2B is more than 115 (double sided) pages. Make no
mistake, the FAA required testing in the manual is
severe. And of course, if any one of the tests failed it
would have to be repeated. Yes, an engine could have
thousands of hours on it during development, or in
preparation for the certification test. But, bottom line,
a certified engine only has to pass 150 hours of testing.
What I have listed above is a gross simplification of
what is required. For those that are interested in such
things you should get a copy...it makes for fascinating
reading!
 
BTW, TBO is a manufacturer's term. It has nothing to do
with Certification or AC33-2b.<<
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 07:01:59 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Getting your airplane signed off by the FAA
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Perry, hope you don't have to "hound" them to return your package as I
did.  They were not unfriendly, just appeared to be busy with "higher"
priority things. However, if you just wait for your package to be returned
- I suggest you don't hold your breath for that period of time.{:>}.
 
Ed
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 18:23:31 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Parkman-comments on the homebuilder movement
 
RJohn15183@aol.com wrote:
 
In a message dated 1/12/99 5:50:39 PM Central Standard Time,
rotaryeng@earthlink.net writes:
 
That being said, I know individual(s) who were either crazy or stupid
enough to go ahead blindly even after being given constructive advice from
genuinely knowledgeable EAA members, including some who looked at the
assembly of parts and said 'You will certainly kill yourself unless you do
 
such and such',
This is a bit of a sore point for me. Which "knowledgeable" person? Which
"expert"?
 
History books are absolutely chock full of highly educated experts who simply
could not "think outside the box." Every single new product ever made has had
some "expert" who said it would not work. For every Jeff Spitzer, there are a
hundred degree'd engineers that will tell you the rotary won't work in a
plane.
 
Ask Tracy Crook how many "experts" STILL tell him he is crazy even after the
hundreds and hundreds of hours he has on his machine.
 
Here's a good example. Two years ago, well before this newsletter got started,
Paul told Jim  Mederer about my plans for the 20B. Jim told Paul that a 20B
would never stand up to aircraft use. Now he is building one. 
 
Can you document that Rob? :-) I will see Jim shortly. As I recall
it was the rotary engine in general and not the 20B specifically and
you, as I recall, were not involved. This was well after Jim built up
an aircraft engine and had it displayed at Oskosh. So he is nothing
if not consistent.
 
That's nothing! I told him his first 3rd gen RX 7  land speed record car 
would crash at Bonnevile and it did :-) Don Sherman and Csaba Csere were there
and heard me tell him. He told me after the 238 MPH crash... that "I did not know 
it all!" :-) We are still friends. Sometimes even the best of us are blind.
 
Which time do you believe this expert? 
Should I have just shrugged my shoulders and gave up
on the project because that expert on rotaries (and he is! No doubt about it!)
said I could not do it?
 
Hmmm, on that note, in light of Parkman's extensive experience with auto
conversions. HE WAS an expert. Was he right? Did he screw up? Do we even know
what caused this crash yet?
 
Parkman was an expert in assembly langauge programming of engine computers.
I asked him at his talk at the Copperstate fly in what the BSFC of his engine was
and he told me (as I recall) 0.28. Wrong! We had a little go around about
it. He was not strong in other related areas.
 
Aren't all you Parkman bashers gonna feel real stupid if something like a
broken AN fitting (aircraft quality) caused this crash?
 
Yes. But probaly not. If the AN fitting broke it was probably not
properly supported. One of Steves engines had twisted safety wire holding
the fuel injectors in the intake manifold. The picture is below
and was taken at the last Copperstate fly in.
 
In the space program, we had the best of the best at work in all phases of the
project. How many rockets blew up before they got it right?  And every time a
rocket blew, there was some "expert" talking about how crazy NASA was to even
try.
 
I'll tell you Rob I don't buy it. You will always find at least one nay-sayer
on any subject. That does not mean you are allowed to ignore Newtonian
physical principles. They are not just a good idea.... they are the LAW. 
 
If one allows oneself to start thinking like this one is in danger
of ignoring a century of hard won aviation experience.
 
Paul
 
 The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 15:45:19 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A real cheap dyno
 
TERF Email wrote:
 
        I didn't really draw up any pictures of the design.  It is just a
hydraulic cylinder w/ a gauge attached.  It can be anchored to a tie down
(a really good one) and the craft to test the aircraft's net static thrust.
Or, as you mentioned, a cleverly designed engine mount with a fulcrum would
give you real time data all while you are flying, taxiing whatever.  A
safety catch would be necessary so a leak in the cylinder wouldn't result in
a significant movement of the engine.  Probably just using a very short
cylinder would work fine.   Now you have a way to confirm your net thrust /
power output.  Makes one less likely to "write a check that the engine can't
cash!"
 
                                            Take Care  Matthew
 
I'll give it some thought and draw something up.
One problem is the thrust load could put a side force on a torque cylinder
that might jam it. I have a few low friction ideas I will look into.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 22:32:42 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A real cheap dyno
 
TERF Email wrote:
 
Use "Hyme" joints?  Cables maybe?  Any of these should eliminate side
loading with some creativity.  Depends obviously on the engine mount, but
this stuff has been done for years in differnt types of brake dynos I have
seen while working for Kelsey - Hayes and large truck manufactureres.  ;-)
 
        Matthew Tait
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 22:37:34 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Glass Star motor mount.
 
Marvin Kaye wrote:
 
At 04:00 PM 1/10/99 -0800, you wrote:
 
I will calculate and post the firewall loads shortly. The tube
size for all these motor mounts are still up in the air.
I would like to do it with an FEA program.
 
For the record, I used 3/4" OD .049 wall 4130 tubing on the mount which I
just got back from the welder.  I chose that particular material thanks to
the recommendation of a few people who are in the business of welding these
things up for OEMs, also because that's what was used on the dynafocal
mount for the Lycoming O-/IO-360 which came with the [Lancair LC20] kit.  I
thought you'd be interested.
 
   <Marv>
 
PS... BTW, my professionally TIG welded mount looks super, is amazingly
stiff, and only weighs in at about 5#, excluding the fittings which get
attached to the engine to provide the mount points.  I'll get the entire
weight (mount plus 3 load attachment ears) tomorrow for you.  I suspect the
whole thing comes in right around 15-17#.
 
Take some pictures Marv.
 
Thanks.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 22:50:10 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A real cheap dyno
 
Brent Regan wrote:
 
For real time, in the plane data, wouldn't thrust be better. No rpm to factor in.
That way you can compare prop vs manifold for lowest fuel burn for a given thrust.
 
Brent
 
Thrust times velocity in feet per second divided by 550 *IS* HP
out of the prop. It would be good for prop development
*AND* engine development.
 
Hard do do with three or more rubber mounts sharing the thrust load
as Matt's last desertion on this subject implies.
 
Not to worry guys I have an idea. Drawing soon.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 22:54:34 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Tracy's location
 
facilitator1@juno.com wrote:
 
Where is TRACY in Fla ??  Virg
 
He is about 15 miles NW of Bell.
 
Contact him directly for directions.
 
rws@altavista.net
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 22:58:43 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Unproven airframes and non AC engines.
 
facilitator1@juno.com wrote:
 
        What is WOT ???
        Would one dare suggest that you prove the
        airframe before using an auto conversion
        for flight ?? Virg
 
WOT is Wide Open Throttle.
 
A non AC engine and  unproven airframe is more risk than
I would want to take on.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 23:03:44 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A real cheap dyno
 
facilitator1@juno.com wrote:
 
        Put prop on backwards and you still have positive
        thrust. Check it out!!  Virg
 
Yes but not as much. It would reduce the torque effect from
the slip stream flowing over the wings.
 
I am not saying that is the thing to do. Most ground adjustable
props can be moved to a negative angle of attack which will
reverse the slip stream. This also makes it a little more dificult
to tie the airplane down however.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 22:35:15 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: More on the force topic
 
TERF Email wrote:
 
    A thought just occurred to me (scary huh)!  To get thrust.  Say
your engine mount has 4 mounting points at the firewall.   Use a
cylinder at each one.  Plumb them all together and measure that
pressure (scratch that you may still need to keep them separate and
add the results other wise theoretically one would "bottom out" giving
you bogus results.)  They would each have to have a very short
displacement to prevent the line of thrust from moving around.  Use
Hyme joints on one end of each.  Ridged or rubber mount the cylinder
basically at the end where the shaft comes out to allow for some
directional normalization and binding but not allow the engine to
drift all over hells half acre.  Remember the pistons in these
cylinders shouldn't move much at all.  They just measure force.
 
    You could even use some orifice tricks to limit the instantaneous
fluid flow in and out of the cylinders creating a psudo dynamic liquid
vibration inhibitor.  (A little trick we learned while working on
semi-active automobile suspension shocks.)  Perhaps this can be done
on the "shaft side" of the cylinder while the measurement is taken
independently on the "non shaft side"?  Use a ambient pressure
accumulator on the "shaft side circuit" and an oil with a given
viscosity.  Then with an orifice at each "shaft side" cylinder port
the frequency response could be trimmed.  With 2 one way valves and 2
different orifices you could trim the cylinder to act with one freq.
in one direction and a completely different frequency response in the
other.  All of this combined with the rotary's already smooth profile
should make a really smooth system.  No more shaking the tail off of
your Cessna 152 when the engine passes through 700 RPM.
 
    To get engine torque should be much easier.  Picture a mount
simplified to this; a tube sticking strait out of the fire wall in the
upper LHS.  hang the engine on it so it can pivot.  Support the other
side of the engine into place with the cylinder.  Now by good ole
Newton you have rotational "push back" or the engine torque.  A little
math / calculation and whalla.   Over simplified obviously but I think
you get the idea.
 
            Best Regards Matthew Tait
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 05:57:42 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: What happens to the apex seals if the engine stops while 
flying.
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
JB, I really don't have a clue, others on the list may be able to give
you some feel.  However, it is my opinion that without combustion
pressures pressing the seals against the housing, that the amount of wear
due to a wind-milling prop due to a stopped engine will: 1. be so minimal
it would probably defy measurement, 2. Will be the last thing on you
mind and  will be the least of your worries, 3. will be over within 8
minutes or much less depending on your altitude.  
 
If you are super cool
dude and really concerned about this wear, you may be able to raise the
nose and lower your airspeed sufficiently to stop the prop from
windmilling {:>}.  Me, I will probably be praying too hard and hoping
the wind-milling engine will finally come to life again.
 
Serious, I do not believe the possiblity of seal wear due to a
windmilling engine should be a factor in any design decision due to no
combustion pressures and very short period of time involved.
 
Ed
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 07:43:15 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Feb. Kitplanes Engine Beat column.
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Paul, I was rather astonished to read your comment to John Larsen that a
rotary has only one power pulse per revolution.  I am certainly no
expert, but I thought that each face (combustion area) of the three
faces of the rotor goes thru a complete cyle of intake, combustion and
exhaust per revolution of the rotor.  While I agree that each face only
goes thru the complete cycle once per revolution of the rotor, with
three faces it seems to me that a rotor has three combustion events per
revolution.  What am I misunderstanding???
 
Ed
 
Even the best of us have trouble with this. One pulse per rotor,
per rev of the OUTPUT SHAFT.
 
 What fools one is intake, compression, 
expansion and exhaust are taking place simultanously.
 
BTW the real subtle beauty of the Wankel rotary is the loads
associated with these strokes are completly contained within
the rotor itself.
 
The rotor only runs at 1/3 the RPM of the OUTPUT SHAFT.
 
The Wankel rotary is the most elegant solution to the internal
combustion engine by an order of magnitude.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 08:04:34 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A real cheap in the airplane  dyno
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Oops, I stand corrected, Lb-Ft/Sec verses Ft-Lb
 
Ed
 
OK guys here it is. A real cheap dyno that will tell you the HP
your engine is generating while you are flying.
 
You will need a look up table.
 
 HP = RPM X Torque / 5252
 
This is Matt's idea of using a hydrulic cylinder to measure the torque
on an engine. I added the linear bearings to reduce the friction
caused by engine thrust.
 
The cylinder piston/bearing shaft must be hardened to Rockwell C
60 and finish ground. It is built in the form of a replaceable
over-haulable cartridge inserted into the motor mount
and retained by a sholder and a snap ring.
 
The cylinder size is one inch and the Barry rubber mounts are rated
at 100 pounds apiece. See the NL web site for the link to the
Barry site.
 
It can be calibrated by a large torque wrench.
 
dynomot.gif
 
BTW the rotary is so well accepted as a viable aircraft engine
that we find ourselves dealing with advanced engine monitoring and 
navigation devices like MPG and takeoff warning devices.
 
Eat your heart out general aviation :-).
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 08:40:51 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: New RX7 details.
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
In a message dated 99-01-10 01:42:46 EST, you write:
 
 However a lot of these issues have been addressed in the very latest RX7
 introduced in Japan just a few weeks ago.
 
Paul, where did you find the info on the latest 3rd gen 99 model on the
engine? I have not heard about this and would like to find out what has
actually been done to the engine! I do know it is NOT the MSPRE engine (yet)
in those Japanese spec 99s. Some airflow characteristics were changed (new
front end) and some accessories, but nothing major.............
 
>From this web site.
 
http://www.e.mazda.co.jp/Publicity/Public/9812/981215be.html
 
Here is part of the press release.
 
December 15, 1998
 
          The New Mazda RX-7 Powered by 280 PS Rotary Engine 
           - a pure sports car improved its "Fun to Drive" - 
 
   Mazda Motor Corporation today announced the long-awaited arrival of
   the new RX-7. Mazda's modern version of a pure sports car will be
   available beginning January 21 next year through Mazda Anfini dealers
    throughout Japan. 
 
   The RX-7 has a legendary tradition for offering driving enthusiasts
   the greatest "fun to drive" character. Building on that reputation, the
   new  RX-7 turns heads with its powerful, unique exterior, and Mazda's
   compact, lightweight, and high-powered rotary engine. 
 
   The main features of the new RX-7 are: 
   .1) Enhanced turbocharger efficiency and cooling performance that
afford increased maximum engine power of 280PS (JIS net) for both the
Type RS and Type R. models 
 
     -Higher engine power and the new RX-7's light weight achieve a
       power-to-weight ratio of 4.57 kg/PS for the Type RS model.
 
   Despite the enhanced driving performance and new equipment, the price
for the 280 PS top-of the line models barely increases. The 5-speed
manual transmission, type RB, with a maximum 265PS engine output costs
2,898,000 yen (one price nationwide), making the new RX-7 more
affordable than ever. 
 
   The monthly sales target is 500 units. 
 
   Highlights 
 
   1. IMPROVED DRIVING PERFORMANCE 
 
   Enhanced turbocharger efficiency and cooling performance due to
increased air-intake allows the new RX-7 to achieve a maximum output of
280  PS/6,500 rpm (Type RS, Type R) increased engine power combined with
the light weight of the type R model realizes a power-to-weight ratio of 4.5 kg/PS. 
 
   Along with greater output at high engine speeds and an extended top
end, the torque at medium engine speeds has been increased for better
acceleration. Specific changes that have improved engine performance
include: 
 
    *     The use of abradable seals and increased air flow provided by an
ultra-high-flow turbine achieves a turbocharger pressure approximately
1.2 times previous models.
    *     Modifications to the internal structure of the main silencer have
reduced exhaust pressure, contributing to lower resistance.
    *     In addition to increasing the aperture surface area of the
air-intake, including the radiator and intercooler.
    *     The air cleaner uses a separate air duct that allows air to pass
over the vehicle for more efficient cooling. 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:05:02 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Climb
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Paul, thought I would throw in some "real" world data.  I have made one
time to climb data collection with the following results:
15F day with RV-6 Weighing 1600 lbs
 
at 3000 MSL 1450 fpm
at 5000 MSL 1230 fpm
at 7000 MSL 1000 fpm
 
I estimate based on the comparison of this data with designers data that
engine is producing approx 150hp. I have a 68x72 prop and can reach a
static rpm of 5000-5200 depending on ambient air temp.  Aircraft does
climb well at 120 IAS at 5800 rpm, but will hopefully do better now that
I have removed the 2" of foam I had in my air intake.  Several folks
have suggested that 2" of foam in the 3" dia duct was unduely
restricting airflow resulting in the 2" lower than expected manifold
pressure.  A gain of 10-15 more hp will give me what I have targetted
for performance. I currently can only get 6000 rpm when level flight,
but believe that will improve with tweaks to timing and fuel injection.
 
Ed Anderson
 
Obviously you have a lot more than 25 HP left over :-)
 
I think your prop is still a couple of inches too long and/or you need
better intake and exhaust tuning.
 
The HP should still be strongly increasing in the 6000 to 7000 RPM
range.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 19:59:19 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Feb. Kitplanes Engine Beat column.
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Aha! I understand - one power pulse per face per rotor revolution = 3
power pulses per ROTOR revolution.  Divided by gear ratio of 1:3 between
rotor and eccentric shaft = 3/3= 1 power pulse per Eccentric Shaft
Rotation.
 
Thanks
 
Ed
 
Good way of explaining it. I'll have to remember that.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 20:06:11 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Climb
 
Jeff Spitzer wrote:
 
Paul wrote:
 
This is a crude aproximation. I think the drag of the airplane
goes up due to the additional  lift required to climb and hence
so does the "CL^2 / pi X Aspect Ratio" induced drag factor so this
calculation is probably optimistic.
 
In other words its worse than this.
 
Paul
 
Actually, no.  The method you describe is commonly used to estimate R/C.  I
think you already recognize that the HP's you are talking about are net
after PSRU and prop efficiency.  As to your last point about error it is
actually the opposite.  An A/C will actually have less lift in a climb due
to elevation of the flight path.  In a vertical climb you need no lift at
all.  The error is usually rather small for GA A/C but not if its a rocket
ship.
 
Jeff Spitzer
 
Good point Jeff. There is an slight upward slope to the thrust vector.
 
On the other hand high aspect ratio airplanes always seem to climb better
for some strange reason. They certainly have higher ceilings.
 
One may have to run the numbers on these second order effects. 
 
Paul 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 20:11:43 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Feb. Kitplanes Engine Beat column.
 
Marvin Kaye wrote:
 
At 07:43 AM 1/11/99 -0800, you wrote:
 
Even the best of us have trouble with this. One pulse per rotor,
per rev of the OUTPUT SHAFT.
 
What fools one is intake, compression,
expansion and exhaust are taking place simultanously.
 
Anyone wanting to get straight in their heads what goes on inside that
trochoid should read Paul Yaw's December Tech Notes.  I feel much more
comfortable thinking about these things now that I read through that short
dissertation.  It's an article that shouldn't be missed by anyone
interested in the rotary.  Thanks, Paul, the fog is lifted.
 
    <Marv>
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 20:13:00 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: What happens to the apex seals if the engine stops while flying.
 
RJohn15183@aol.com wrote:
 
Windmilling of an auto conversion has been a bull session topic at our local
EAA. Most seem to feel that with the PSRU, there will be no windmilling at all
due to the gear reduction.
 
I have no opinion myself but it seems a plausible theory. I'll let you know in
about a year. ;-)
 
Rob
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 20:22:04 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Rotary engine core prices
 
BCGARDNER@aol.com wrote:
 
Paul,
 
What are people paying for rotary engine cores these days? Here's an ad I saw
today on the Team FC3S email listserve. I'm sure I'd want to rebuild it before
using in an aircraft but...
 
Barry Gardner
 
Name: Jim Krupnik
Email: jkrupnik@usa.net
Phone: 678-445-6783
Location: Kennesaw. Ga
For sale or wanted: forsale
Item: 1987 TII runs real well 150k miles, red, needs paint work. Grey int. V
good mech cond. CHEAP for CASH $1,500.
 
Buying a first or 2nd gen rx7 is a good way to make sure you are getting
a good engine. The down side is it is not quite state of the art for
turbo charging. Would make a fine normaly aspirated A/C engine however.
 
Paul 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 21:20:49 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 20B output shaft flex.
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
 >Dave Morris wrote:
 
However they will still have the inherent (flexing) problem. I have
heard of a NZ engineering firm making 3 rotor shaft for the 20B that are
of a higher quality steel. I'd suggest that if someone wanted to build
up a 3rotor from parts, they use the NZ built shafts instead of the
Mazda ones.
 
               Dave Morris..................DMRH special vehicles
 
Here is the mention of the "troubles" the output shaft of the 20B have. This
is news to me; I thought Mazda had conquered the forces on that shaft by
adding an intermediate support. And your analyses of this above seems to bear
out the forces acting on the shaft.  Any thoughts on this? Where did that info
come from, hugely modified 20B racing engines?
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 21:29:24 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: How about a "certified engine" test??????]
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
Information to chew on seen on another list..........
 
It was said ..."I was told by their engineers that any
production aircraft engine has to go to TBO and 100%
power in order to meet certification requirements."
 
This is common folklore but has no basis in reality or
truth. One must be very careful when talking to
engineers. There is only one "bible" used in the engine
test cell, read on...
 
The document that governs any certification of any
aircraft engine (be it reciprocating piston engines or
turbine) is Advisory Circular AC33-2B, "AIRCRAFT ENGINE
TYPE CERTIFICATION HANDBOOK".
 
To cut to the chase; only 150 hours are required to
certify ANY aircraft engine! And so as not to bore y'all
I'll give you the pertinent sections (brutally and
severely edited). Every combination you can think of is
covered in the manual. Single-speed supercharged,
double-speed supercharged, turbocharged, gear driven,
helicopter engines, etc. are all covered in the manual.
Prop, accessories and other good stuff are all addressed
in testing.
 
Section 33.49 Endurance Test
 
a.) General...during the runs at rated takeoff power and
for at least 35 hours at rated maximum continuos power,
one cylinder, must be...not less than limiting temp, the
other cylinders must be operated at not less than 50 deg
below the limiting temp...
 
b.) Unsupercharged engines. . . (1) 30 hr run...alternate
periods of 5 minutes rated take off power...5 min best
economy (2) 20 hr...alternate periods 1.5 hr @max...1/2
hr @ 75%&91% (3) 20 hr...alternate periods 1.5 hr
@max...1/2 hr @ 70%&89% (4) 20 hr...alternate periods 1.5
hr @max...1/2 hr @ 65%&87% (5) 20 hr...alternate periods
1.5 hr @max...1/2 hr @ 60%&84.5% (6) 20 hr...alternate
periods 1.5 hr @max...1/2 hr @ 50%&79.5% (7) 20
hr...alternate periods 2.5 hr @max...2 1/2 hrs max best
economy...
 
c.) Gear driven engines...etc. (you get the idea...)
 
AC33-2B is more than 115 (double sided) pages. Make no
mistake, the FAA required testing in the manual is
severe. And of course, if any one of the tests failed it
would have to be repeated. Yes, an engine could have
thousands of hours on it during development, or in
preparation for the certification test. But, bottom line,
a certified engine only has to pass 150 hours of testing.
What I have listed above is a gross simplification of
what is required. For those that are interested in such
things you should get a copy...it makes for fascinating
reading!
 
BTW, TBO is a manufacturer's term. It has nothing to do
with Certification or AC33-2b.<<
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 06:51:13 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 20B output shaft flex.
 
David Morris wrote:
 
Regarding the experiance with the 20B's.
 
Firstly the 1st 1000 engines off the production line are the worst.
Every JC Cosmo (20B optioned) that I have imported into Australia with
the VIN of JCESE-100001 through to JCESE-101000 have had either a dead
engine or a replaced one. (regardless of mileage).
 
Each time, it's the centre rotor gone with usually a cracked seal or
two. WHY? becuase of the flexing problem, Mazda knew this before hand
which is why the centre bearing ( & thus housing) is so thick. It was a
genourous attempt but failed & Mazda had to replace hundreds & hundreds
of 20B's under warranty due to this. (which explains the surplus of
{used} engine's floating around a few years back). The engines were
usually letting go around the 50k miles area as many of my Japanese
friends have told me.
 
Because of this embarassing problem the dealerships (once the car died)
had to send the engine's back to Hiroshima for a direct replacement.
They wern't allowed to pull them apart for a re-build like the normal
12A - 13B engines they had done to for years before.
 
For cars above 1000 (VIN) the shafts must have a different composition
because I have cars floating around with 60K + miles on them & there
still going strong.with original engines. Still this doesn't mean it's
gone away totally. My friends report that when one of the better engines
come in for whatever reason (usually to be installed in a race car) it's
always rebuilt & they find shaft always needs replacing as it's out of
tolerance. Hence the "NIL STOCK" of shafts at Mazda for the time being.
 
As for the better shafts being made in NZ. My contact there reports he
gets the steel from "British areospace" (if that means anything to you)
as it's the strongest around. They look very simialar to the Mazda ones
& are a direct replacement. I am endevouring to get a pic of one from NZ
to show everyone. As for supply. The team at REDLINE rotary here in
Sydney are about to sign him up as a supplier & distribute his shafts
throughout the world.
 
REgards
                David Morris
 
The only thing that bothers me about all this is high strength steels all have
the same modulas of rigidity. There must be a machining issue here.
Perhaps there was a resonent conditon in the early shafts. 
 
Notice the unusual lighting holes
drilled in the eccentrics of this picture of a 3 rotor that Jim Mederer
of RB is now building up. Some simple change like this could change the
dynamics. I will ask Jim about it the next time I see him. (soon)
 
3rotshaf.jpg
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 07:05:57 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: What happens to the apex seals if the engine stops while flying.
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Rob,
        Having experienced engine failure at 8000 ft in my 13B powered RV-6A
with at 68x72 prop, I can tell you in my case that even after setting up
best glide airspeed of 90 MPH, the prop did continue to windmill.  I was
just as happy that it did as when I finally realized that my fuel gauge
was indicating fuel from the selected tank, but the fuel pressure gauge
said Zero fuel pressure- and I switched tanks the engine caught and
started running.  If the prop had stopped then I would have had to
remember to press the starter button {:>}.  Clearly, it depends on the
prop, PSRU and engine, but again, I think that for the few minutes you
may be windmilling that it is unlikely any damage would be done.  But,
just a personal opinion.
 
Ed Anderson
 
Such is the life of a pioneer :-)
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 07:36:12 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A better way of lubing the tip seals?
 
What do all of you think of these apples?
 
http://www.hurley-engineering.ltd.uk/
 
tipsealslube.gif
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 08:33:53 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A better way of lubing tip seals?
 
http://www.hurley-engineering.ltd.uk/contents-Tip_Seals.htm
 
Opps lets try that again.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 08:37:08 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A beter way of lubing the tip seals..
 
Sorry guys one more time delete previous.
 
I hope this will work this time.
 
Paul
 
http://www.hurley-engineering.ltd.uk/HME_Direct_Tip_Seal_Lubrication_System.htm
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 08:42:50 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A better way of lubing the tip seals?]
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Looks simple and like it would be effective.  I wonder how the valve is
controlled ? Centrifical force against a spring?, metered hole??
However, at $400 per rotor set, Exchange.  I think I will keep adding
oil to my fuel even if 99% is simply burned.
 
Ed
 
This could be the needed breakthrough in the burned oil smog
problem which may keep the rotary alive as a car engine.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
 
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 08:46:03 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 20B output shaft flex.
 
ingenuir@ix.netcom.com wrote:
 
Hello, Paul.
 
On the subject of alternate suppliers for shafts:
To oversimplify the fatigue life expectancy of "similar" engine parts:
 
Fatigue life is the sum of cycles to crack initiation and cycles of crack growth.
Fracture mechanics analysis assumes all specimens have initial flaws, probably in
the most critical locations. FMA predicts whether the flaw will propagate and how
rapidly. Fracture control requires inspection of the part to guarantee flaws are
below some critical size. Flaws may be either of the surface or internal.
 
Effects of different steels on the life of engine parts is mainly due to strength
and toughness of the alloy. You're right, even cobalt steels have only a small
increase in their elastic modulus. Also, vibration modes are dominated by the cross
section areas that are based on bearing sizes and similar fixed parameters in a
given engine.
 
Aircraft quality parts have to be right all the time, be sure you know your
supplier understands his processes and conforms to them.
 
 Gary Moir
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 10:09:43 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Climb
 
Jeff Spitzer wrote:
 
At 08:06 PM 1/11/99 -0800, you wrote:
 
On the other hand high aspect ratio airplanes always seem to climb better
for some strange reason. They certainly have higher ceilings.
One may have to run the numbers on these second order effects.
 
Paul
 
These are not "second order" effects.  Higher aspect ratio airplanes have
much less induced drag at climb speeds.  This results in less drag and more
reserve power for climb.  The same is true at high altitudes where
indicated airspeeds are low (CL is high) but TAS is high resulting in
higher power requirements.  That is why the U2 wing is long and skinny.
 
Jeff Spitzer
 
Thats what I said: "CL^2/pi X Aspect Ratio" :-)
 
Second order I was referring to the thrust vector angle.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 10:19:31 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Improved real cheap in the airplane dyno
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Paul,
looking at your Real cheap dyno design and thinking about how to adapt
it to an aircraft with the power plant in the plane.  If I understand
the design the load has to be in compression, but rather than reverse
the prop {:>}, I was wondering why you could not design a bracket
arrangement whereby, you could place the dyno to the rear of the
aircraft (tractor prop) with the front of dyno facing aft.  Then a cable
could be attached to a each side of the bracket which is placed over the
front of the dyno placing a compression load on the dyno.
 
Ed
 
No need to reverse the prop.
 
I think I was not too clear on this. It is much simpler than it looks.
This is based on the Questair type engine mount where the two front
rubber bushings react all torque load. One is under compression and
the other is under tension. Choose one based on your prop rotation.
Could be the left side looking forward if your prop is rotating
clockwise looking forward... or... the right side if counter clockwise.
 
The thrust load is reacted by both front mounts in the pure
manifestation of the Questair type motor mount. In most of
the ones I have drawn so far it is reacted by all three rubber mounts.
 
Now if you have a dyno focal type mount forget it :-)
It becomes too complicated.
 
rv6motm.gif
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 16:37:38 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Take off monitor.
 
Tracy Crook wrote:
 
Several versions of the PIC have 16 bit counters, but why not use one of the
monolithic G sensors now available and skip all the mechanical stuff?
Incorporate this in my instrument too?  I sense "feature creep" coming on.
:-)
 
Tracy
 
Funny you should mention that. I have been fighting that battle since 1975.
The thing about accelerometers is they need a stable reference plane.
AKA a stable table. Aircraft pitch changes are not allowed without
a stable table. The next thing that happens is you need a conditioning 
amplifier. Then an analog to digital converter. Are we having fun yet?
 
On the other hand here is the psuedo code:
All pulse or digital.
 
Background program.
....
....
Loop to background.
 
#Routine to be executed every one millisec.
#Upon one millisec interrupt do this:
 
Disable input to counter...\
............................\
Read counter.................\
..............................\ 
Reset counter..................| 20 micro seconds in 1 MHz 6502
............................../
Re-enable input to counter.../
 
Add counter value to distance accumulator.
 
Subtract counter value from old counter value.
 
If distance accumulator is greater than decision distance
and new counter value minus old counter value is less
than acceleration threshold, abort takeoff and end program.
If not.... continue.
 
Store current counter value in old counter value.
 
Return to background.
 
#End of program.
#The runway length can be merely the distance down the runway you
#want to abort if the accel. is below par AKA decision distance.
 
Yes i guess it is feature creep :-) But you can do it Tracy :-). 
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 16:44:07 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Ignition Timing
 
StJames515@aol.com wrote:
 
In a message dated 1/11/1999 9:18:40 PM Central Standard Time, Marvin wrote:
 
 Anyone wanting to get straight in their heads what goes on inside that
 > trochoid should read Paul Yaw's December Tech Notes.  I feel much more
 > comfortable thinking about these things now that I read through that short
 > dissertation.  It's an article that shouldn't be missed by anyone
 > interested in the rotary.  Thanks, Paul, the fog is lifted.
 >
 >     <Marv>
 
Read the Jan article too,  Paul Yaw really opened my eyes to the whole idea of
timing the rotary.  Now all I need is a little "exactly how do I do that?"
 
Tommy
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 16:42:52 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 20B output shaft flex.
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
Would this person know the id of the engine numbers of the affected engines?
Vin number of the 20B Cosmo does one no good as the importers send only the
engine! I'm curious about the 20B in my garage! It tests ok........
In a message dated 99-01-12 08:59:06 EST, you write:
 
<< > Firstly the 1st 1000 engines off the production line are the worst.
 
 > Every JC Cosmo (20B optioned) that I have imported into Australia with
 > the VIN of JCESE-100001 through to JCESE-101000 have had either a dead
 > engine or a replaced one. (regardless of mileage).
 
Or what to look for in subtle differences in the shaft.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 16:40:26 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Parkman-comments on the homebuilder movement
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
I don't think anyone has mentioned the EAA as a source of "oversight" in the
kit building process! They offer this informal sort of service as a deterrent
to just the kind of thing that happened.....it does not help the industry/EAA
or anyone if someone kills himself because of lack of knowledge or advice.
 
That being said, I know individual(s) who were either crazy or stupid enough
to go ahead blindly even after being given constructive advice from genuinely
knowledgable EAA members, including some who looked at the assembly of parts
and said 'You will certainly kill yourself unless you do such and such', so I
guess it is "survival of the fittest" so to speak.....
 
 
Aviation has been compared to a self cleaning oven.
Too bad you don't get to fly before you have children.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 16:51:08 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: ROTARY  ENGINE NEWSLETTER
 
DAVID TAYLOR wrote:
 
DEAR SIRS,
     I WOULD LIKE TO RECEIVE COPIES OF YOUR NEWSLETTER (PAST, PRESENT,
AND FUTURE) ABOUT THE USE OF ROTARY ENGINES IN HOMEBUILT AIRCRAFT.
     I AM CURRENTLY WORKING IN PANAMA ON A CONTRACT THAT ENDS DECEMBER,
'99.  IN AUGUST OF 99, I INTEND TO ORDER A ZENAIR CH-701 AND AM
CONSIDERING A ROTARY ENGINE CONVERSION FOR THE POWERPLANT.  THE CH-701
WILL ACCEPT ENGINES UP TO 100hp AND INSTALLATION WEIGHTS UP TO 170lbs.
     ANY INFORMATION SENT WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED AND A POINT OF
CONTACT FOR ANYONE WHO HAS SUCH AN AIRFRAME/POWERPLANT COMBINATION WOULD
BE MOST USEFUL.
     THANKING YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND SERVICE
 
                                        SINCERELY,
 
                                        DAVID TAYLOR
 
Unfortunately we don't have back issues. They would be way too much
to download. We are talking hundreds of megs here. We are working 
on books however.
 
The CH-701 sounds great for a one rotor. See the NL website
for a source of one rotors. The source has only up to
80 HP but with some intake and exhaust tuning and running 
on gasoline you could get 100 HP.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 17:01:04 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: What happens to the apex seals if the engine stops while 
flying.
 
RJohn15183@aol.com wrote:
 
In a message dated 1/12/99 8:12:34 AM Central Standard Time,
rotaryeng@earthlink.net writes:
 
Rob,
 
 >   Having experienced engine failure at 8000 ft in my 13B powered RV-6A
 > with at 68x72 prop, I can tell you in my case that even after setting up
 > best glide airspeed of 90 MPH, the prop did continue to windmill.  I was
 > just as happy that it did as when I finally realized that my fuel gauge
 > was indicating fuel from the selected tank,
 
That's good news as the nature of the EAA bull session no windmilling was seen
as a negative for the very reasons you describe. I'm glad I can dispel that
myth at the next meeting.
 
Thanks for the first hand observation!
 
Rob
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 17:18:28 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Take off monitor.
 
OK I going to brag a little. My 6502 road test equipment was used
by the Rutan Voyager team to measure the acceleration
performance of the Voyager fully loaded to see if
it could really take off and climb.
Cover Article in Road & Track.
 
BTW first bug fix :-).
 
"Subtract counter value from old counter value".
 
Should read: "Subtract old counter value from new counter value."
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 18:52:32 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A better way of lubing tip seals?
 
George Moore wrote:
 
Paul,
   In studying the Hurley Engineering, direct tip seal lubrication
system, many questions came to mind. First, hasn't this been tried
before ? 
 
Not to my knowledge. I have three or four books on the Wankel rotary
and a couple of dozen technical papers and I do not recall 
seeing it.
 
The whole idea of a very small diameter hole(s) from the tip
seal slot, to the rotor inside bore, where oil is sprayed, just seems
too logical and simple not to have been tried before !  My second
question was, how much blowby can be expected between the seals and the
seal slot, in other words, what could be expected in terms of
compression loss and resulting cranckcase overpressure and
contamination, as a result of a small diameter hole by itself ?  
 
Very very good question and Mr. Hurley is out of town for a few days.
I will ask him when he comes back. Or you can ask him yourself.
His email address is on there someplace. No! wait! here it is.
"Eamon Hurley" <eamon@ehurley.force9.co.uk>
 
Which brings me to my third question. Do you think that the heart of their
"system" is the tiny control valve, which to satisfy my above worries
would be a miniature check valve that would let oil to the seals, but
close on compression ! Or is it merely an orifice to control the
compression bleed-down rate?
 
Another good question. I think I would at least TRY the check valve.
 
    I am really curious if you know of any experimentation done by
others on this simple (and probably too good to be true) concept !
    Also, I would really enjoy hearing your opinion on the other 2
Hurley tip seal designs, the duplex tip seals and the swing tip seals,
which obviously require a fair amount of maching to the rotor at the tip
seal slot . The duplex seemed to have possibilities, but I thought that
splitting it in to 2 pieces horizontally would make it weaker, but at
the same time I saw an advantage in terms of of twisting flexibility.
Damn, I wish I could make up my mind and these abstract analysis !
 
I don't think much of the swing design for several reasons.
It looks like two line contacts on the rotor houseing surface. 
If it wears down to some average radius it might lift off due 
to an aerodynamic air bearing effect. The big problem is
it does not look like it can move in and out of the slot.
Might work. I am not saying it won't. I would like to hear 
what Jeff says about all of it.
 
He is a much better person for the job than I.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 18:59:26 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: More drag... prop rotating or stopped?
 
Fred Zapponi wrote:
 
Given the following:
1.  Fixed pitch prop
2.  Closed throttle
3.  Descent mode
 
If a butterfly type valve was installed in the exhaust system to choke
the exhaust flow down, could the prop be slowed to provide an airbrake
effect, thereby increasing rate of descent?
 
Regards.
 
Thats a good question I don't have an answer for. I think, as 
I recall, you get more drag with the fixed pitch prop wind milling
rather than stopped.
 
I am probably wrong. It has been a long time since I took
the PP exam.
 
Never the less it sounds like what you are driving at is
a truck type exhaust brake.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 19:09:09 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Chuck Harbert progress report and 13B/20B turbos?
 
Chuck_Harbert@arkwright.com wrote:
 
Paul, I finally got the turbo 20B running last Friday. It started right up
and although I'm using some incorrect senders (water and air temp), it
actually ran very smoothly. The interesting part was how quiet it was at
higher rpms (no discernable pulses). At lower rpms (under 1,500), you can
hear the pulses, but it is still much quieter that a normal a/c engine.
 
I've got a couple of small bugs to work out, but nothing of consequence (I
hope).  Also, I can't adjust the engine computer (Microtech) until I get
the correct sensors. The engine computer has a 4"-4 line, 10 item direct
readout that gives you continuously what the computer is sensing (rpm,
water/air temp, tps %, timing, inj msecs, man press, a/f ratio, etc) which
sure makes it easy to tune. I don't have the prop on yet, so I can't load
the engine to bring the boost up. I'll get back to you after I get it
further along.
 
I just saw the memo on the 20B e-shaft problems which obviously has me
concerned. I've got 2-20B's, one with engine numbers and one w/o. Is there
any way of identifying which engines I have?
 
p.s. I happened to talk to Ola (Tech Engr) at Turbonetics yesterday and
he's okay with airplanes, as long as he knows it's "experimental". He will
help you size it for the application, but you'll need to know some of the
technical jargon because he can't stay on the phone too long. The other
alternative if you're not a "motorhead"is to have Dave Atkins, Paul Yaw, or
somebody in the business help you develop the powerplant.
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 21:36:17 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A better way of lubing tip seals?
 
George Moore wrote:
 
Paul,
   Since the rotor tip seals have always been a major source of
discussion in the Rotary design, I was hoping that we could get some
input from Jeff, Tracy, Matthew Tait, Paul Yaw and all of the Engine
experts that we are fortunate enough to learn from on this Newsletter.
     I keep thinking, that if prolonged tip seal life is as simple as a
very small hole drilled from seal notch to rotor bore, this would be a
tremendous fix !  The more I think about the Hurley "control valve", the
more I am convinced, that it would be impossible to build a mini check
valve, that small, that it would survive in the dirty carbon building
environment of an internal combustion engine, and therefore this control
valve is nothing more than a calibrated orifice !
     Well Paul, I think you presented us with a really interesting topic
on a day that every was out to lunch !
 
I can think of one way of doing it with a rotary valve built into
the rotor bearing in the form of a slot that shuts off the oil
supply during the combustion phase and part of the exhaust stroke.
There would be a column of oil that had no where to go that would
be subjected to combustion pressure on its top end.
 
I agree. If this works it could be a real breakthrough in emmissions
reduction.  
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 07:29:16 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: More drag... prop rotating or stopped?
 
Charlie and Tupper England wrote:
 
Paul wrote:
 
Fred Zapponi wrote:
 
Given the following:
1.  Fixed pitch prop
2.  Closed throttle
3.  Descent mode
 
If a butterfly type valve was installed in the exhaust system to choke
the exhaust flow down, could the prop be slowed to provide an airbrake
effect, thereby increasing rate of descent?
 
Regards.
 
Thats a good question I don't have an answer for. I think, as
I recall, you get more drag with the fixed pitch prop wind milling
rather than stopped.
 
I am probably wrong. It has been a long time since I took
the PP exam.
 
Never the less it sounds like what you are driving at is
a truck type exhaust brake.
 
Paul
 
Fred & Paul:
 
I'm no aero engineer, but the empirical proof is easy. Think autogyro.
 
Charlie
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 07:32:45 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 20B output shaft flex. Identification part numbers.
 
David Morris wrote:
 
G'day from DMRH
 
Regarding the 20B shafts. This is what I've worked out for the 20B
production runs.
 
If the rotor housings have a number from 001 to 999 then it's the first
series.( the real problem ones)
If it's got A-001 to A-999 then it's from the 2nd series
If it's B-001 to B-999 then it's the 3rd series, etc.
 
Chances of it making to the D series are very slim as they simply didn't
make that many 20B powered Cosmo's.
 
REgards
             David Morris
 
                             http://www.3rotor.com/dmrh
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 07:41:49 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Powersport Rotary
 
Cole and/or Carol Smith wrote:
 
I keep waiting for someone to comment on the Powersport R&D.  I had
a'couple of conversations with Everett Hatch before his sad accident but
have not heard much about his engine since.  Thanks, Cole Smith
 
Ray Richardson Jr bought the assets of Power Sport.
So far I have heard nothing about his plans.
 
His email address is:  
 
"Ray Richardson Jr." <ratech@earthlink.net>
 
You might want to try contacting him directly.
 
Paul 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 07:51:15 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: More drag... prop rotating or stopped?
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
The answer is a windmilling fixed pitch prop almosts acts as a flat
plate drag area and your drag is higher than a fixed pitch prop that is
not rotating.  My prop may have continued windmilling because I had the
throttle near WOT when the tank ran out of fuel - I did not close the
throttle.  I guess even if the closed butteryfly would cause the prop to
act more as an airbrake, I personnally would want to know why you want
to do that.  If the engine is quiet, I would think you want all the glide
distance you can get and not the addition of a "drag brake".
 
Ed
 
I think he was thinking of using the engine to increase the rate of decent.
Real clean airplanes have a problem coming down and spoilers or
speed brakes sell quite well for those types of airplanes.
 
I am somewhat surprised that more pilots don't use forward slips.
 
It was not taught to me when I got my formal pilot training
20 or so years ago. When I was a kid hanging around Falls Church
Airpark 50 years ago and informally learning to fly, all those young 
ex WW II pilots taking me for rides in J3's and Champ's always slipped 
just for the fun of it.
 
The academic question is: do you get more drag if the prop is rotating
faster or more drag if it is rotating slower, because of increased retarding
torque one the prop shaft?
 
I would guess the HP required to rotate the higher retarding force engine
at the same RPM would be greater so that would translate into increased
drag. On the other hand if the engine rotated slower the drag might
be the same. My guess is we will never know until someone tries it. 
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 10:02:03 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: More drag... prop rotating or stopped?
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Having learned to fly in an Aeronical Champ without flaps, the forward
slip was the standard "Flap Deployment" manuever.  Not needed often in
aircraft with flaps, but while flying with FAA examiner (who pulled the
power off on a Piper Warrior at 2000 MSL over a small airfield and told
me to land it without touching the throttle), I came in with a little too
much altitude and even with full flaps was going to touch down about 1/3
down the runway.  So, to kill a little more altitude, I threw in a
little forward slip and that did the job.  However, from the sharp
intake of breath from the young (former F-15) Pilot who was riding OJT
in the back seat, I don't think he was familar with the maneuver.
 
Ed Anderson
 
Great story Ed. :-)
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 09:58:28 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Wish list 13B
 
Karl Szczypta wrote:
 
Paul,
 
Have you any "spec" info put together regarding a "typical" 13B install. Perhaps
Tracy's and Ed's config's. At this time my interest is mostly in FWF weights and fuel burn.
I've seen the O-320 comparisons but it would be nice to narrow it down. I would like
to work out some calculations regarding range and cruse. You know the typical
08FL at 75%, 65%, etc type numbers.
 
I will leave these questions to Tracy and Ed. The horses mouths so to
speak.
 
A way of estimating it of course is using the BSFC number of 0.5 pounds
of fuel burned per HP hour. Tracy thinks he is getting around 180 HP max
as I recall and Ed is estimating 150 HP max. Calculate the percentages
of power you are interested in and then multiply by 0.5 which will
give you the pounds of fuel burned per hour. Then divide by six for
six pounds per gallon fuel weight and that will give you gallons per
hour.
 
Do you have a wish list 13B engine you would love to put together? 
 
IMHO Almost any year after 1989 is fine.
 
I would choose a four port engine for simplicity in fabricating
an intake manifold. For normally aspirated pay particular attention 
to tuning the intake and exhaust pipes for max power at about 6000 RPM. 
 
Don't be fooled by car racing type manifolds.
They are optimized for 7000 to 8000 RPM. 
See the web site for 
suggestions for intake and tuned exhaust systems. Generally you need pipe 
lengths of around 31 inches. 
 
Tracy is experimenting with another type of 
tuned intake manifold that is somewhat more compact. 
 
I would get Tracy's
injection system since he is adding MPG display and an abort take-off 
warning monitor (I hope. I wish?) :-)
 
On that topic
how about a 13B turbo version. What about the weight differences between the two?
 
Yes it is heavier by about 50 pounds I would guesss. Make sure you get a late engine
(1991 up) with the knock sensors on the rotor housing. Also plan on a very effective
intercooler. Get an Inconel tubo charger from Turbonetics and fab an Inconel
exhaust manifold. 
 
Has anyone done any investigating here? After following the info on the forum it
sounds like the turbo would quiet things down needing a smaller muffler.
 
The muffler is not that big a deal. A VW aircooled bug  type tangential input
muffler works well and can weigh as little as six pounds using Inconel.
 
All "I" would be interested in is normalizing not HP gain. For my project a Vision
all I would need is a 160hp or so.
 
 Thanks,
 Karl Szczypta
 
Yes. Several people are flying rotaries. Tracy probably has the most hours
in an airplane going on about 1000 any day now.
 
160 HP should not be that hard to get out of a normally aspirated 13B.
 
People have obtained 700 HP for short periods of time from a turbo 13B.
250 HP A/C use out of a 13B turbo should be no problem. 
 
Therefore normalizing is no problem at all but don't be fooled into thinking
you can do without the intercooler. You will need it at high
altitude to reduce the chance of detonation. 
 
Detonation has been known to crack apex seals. 
The engine won't stop running but the rotor housing will
be scratched with an eventual degradation of power. New rotor housings
are expensive. Robust ceramic apex seals are available from Ianette at about
$1200 an engine set. IMHO they won't be needed if you are careful about
detonation.
 
The key to a successful rotary aircraft engine is the cooling system.
As much heat goes out the cooling system as what comes out of the prop
in terms of HP. One HP is 746 watts. Therefore your cooling system
must disipate 160 HP times 746 watts or 119,360 watts or  about
one hundread 1200 watt electric room heaters. Stop and think about that
for awhile.
 
BTW any internal combustion engine has the same relationship more or less.
Not just the rotary. The reason it is so easy to cool a car engine is
they only generate 30 to 40 HP on average. An aircraft engine is another
matter entirely.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 18:55:28 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 900 HP Raqcing Beat 3 rotor.
 
This is Jim Mederer Racing Beat's new 900 HP three rotor.
The rear and one intermediate housings are aluminum.
The turbo charger is the largest available
and is the same as the one used on the Orenda A/C V8.
The turbine is Inconel. I have some pictures
of the Inconel exhaust manifold which I will upload
shortly.
 
The water pump is used on sprint cars and pumps about
60 gallons per minute at 7500 RPM.
 
The dry sump oil system will run at 150 PSI and pump
about 20 gallons per minute.
One of the scavenge pumps is used to scavenge the turbo
oil supply.
 
Target HP is 900 at 7500 RPM. The engine is actually
a 13G three rotor and not a 20B. The differences are minor.
 
Boost will be 20 to 30 psi.
 
Wait till you see the size of the intercooler :-)
 
I was wrong about two of these engines going into
a scale jet fighter. The airplane they are intended
for is a six passenger business jet type airplane.
 
The cost of the engines are roughly 1/20th of an equavalent
turbofan and burn less than half the fuel.
 
Further more the throttle response will be five or ten 
times faster than a turbofan.
 
As you can see the turbo charger will be partially
in the fan duct for cooling, air intake supply and
heat recovery reasons.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 20:22:52 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Wish list 13B
 
Rodger Hilyard wrote:
 
 Thirty one inches long and what inside tube diameter?
Rodger
 
Inch and a half to an inch and three quarter.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 20:29:23 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 900 HP Racing Beat 3 rotor.
 
Here is a picture of the fan end. There is some serious air
going into that serious tubocharger.
Good view of the alloy end housing.
Note the Racing Beat peripheral intake ports.
 
Note also the four studs for each exhaust port similar
to the Everett Hatch concept.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 20:46:41 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 900 HP Racing Beat 3 rotor. Exhaust manifold
 
Be sitting down when you ask Jim how much he wants
to build another one of these Inconel exhaust
manifolds.
 
Jim had 0.065 wall 625 Inconel tubing custom made for this job
using a tubing mill.
It was then sent out to be bent into three
inch radius 180 degree bends. the manifold was then welded
up from short sections of the bends and stright sections.
 
The wrinkle belly's are off the shelf rocket fuel
or turbo jet hot section plumbing flex sections.
 
The round outlet is the exhaust blow off valve mounting
and the rectangle is the turbo input to the turbine.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 05:50:50 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: More drag... prop rotating or stopped?
 
Michael McGee wrote:
 
Hi, just an old Physics major on the sidelines here.
If you think of the windmilling prop problem in terms of energy:
 
1) The engine requires a small amount of energy to idle or to turn the prop
at windmilling rpm.  When the engine is running or making power that energy
comes from the gas in your fuel tank.  That is potential energy in the fuel
converted to kinetic energy in the air the prop is moving.
 
2) If the engine is not making power and the prop is windmilling the energy
of the turning propellor and engine (friction) and pumping losses (open or
closed throttle) has to come from somewhere.  That somewhere is the
potental energy of altitude  or more precisely altitude loss.  Therefore if
you stop the prop you will stop the energy drain in your altitude, the gas
tank for the windmill.
 
Now as an owner of Continental powered vehicles I'm not willing to risk
cracked cylinders to prove this.  If one of you water cooled folks were to
do some test descents, say an average of five runs from 10,000 down to
5,000 in each of the two test modes (windmilling vs. stopped) over a nice
looonnng runway in case you didn't get a relight, my bet is that you will
see a difference in the descent times at a given airspeed held constant for
the test runs.
 
Well that got a little long winded ;)
 
Mike McGee   N6358G    Vancouver, WA   jmpcrftr@teleport.com
"There is something fascinating about science.
 One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture
 out of such a trifling investment of fact."
                            Mark Twain
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 05:59:03 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Dyno tuning.
 
TERF Email wrote:
 
Paul Yaw
 
    I agree whole heartedly with your dyno statements.  This is why I don't
have any engines in the air yet.  I have a couple of the kit plane
manufacturers chomping at the bit to get one of my new 3 rotor jobs, but
until I have the full firewall "forward" package proven on dyno they aren't
getting anything.  I have had to grow a bit of a thick skin when people
chuckle and don't take me seriously because "I don't have any in the
air"......  However I haven't had any come out of the air and I don't intend
to if I can help it.
 
     I have been delayed by the unfortunate breakup of my marriage and sale
of my house but the dyno goes back on the top of the list in the beginning
of Feb.  I will try to make (interesting) progress reports as things start
running if Y'all are interested.  I am good for 850 HP, 10,000 RPM steady
state.  I designed the dyno to heat the intake air and simulate altitude
among other things.  I can also tilt the engine +/- 45 deg in roll while it
is running under power.  I went to great pains to design a special aircraft
dyno that could simulate virtually any flight condition........  
 
Before the thing hits the air.  I want to hook a video, and infrared video to the
system to get more elaborate temp measurements and look for hot spots.
Please be patient I am getting there..
 
            Matthew Tait
 
Matt. Don't worry too much about 45 degree in either direction.
Only race cars and aerobatic airplanes have that problem. The
gravity vetor always stays pointed stright down in a properly
flown airplane. 
 
BTW Jim Mederer of Racing Beat and I were discussing that yesterday.
He was rather surprised that a plugs up rotary would work given the drain
back passages in the front housing.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 06:05:01 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 900 HP Racing Beat 3 rotor. Exhaust manifold
 
Paul Yaw wrote:
 
Hey Paul,
 
Any idea where I could get the "wrinkle belly's"  Are they made of
inconel as well?
 
Paul Yaw
 
I forgot to ask. 
Call Jim. Tell him you saw the picture on my news letter and
you would like to know. He is very up front about this stuff.
Please let us know when you find out.
 
Yes. They too are made of 625 Inconel.
 
Paul Lamar
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 07:07:32 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: More drag... prop rotating or stopped?]
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Having had a fortunately, temporary experienced with the windmilling
prop, I for one am going to forego the suggested experiment by Michael.
 
 I regret that I was unable to focus on the data collection aspects that
the opportunity unexpectedly offered, but lets just say - I was
otherwise occupied at the time.  I am certain that a cooler head would
have thought "what a great opportunity to collect impirical data.  
 
Now, if I can just get the prop to come to a complete stop, I can get the
other data set". Alas, that panicie little voice in the back of my head
gibbering about "Oh, my gosh, the engine has quit, Oh, my gosh, your
going to crash, Do something you Lard head, don't just sit there with
your eyes all agog and your thumb in an inappropriate location!, You
should have worn the parachute!,etc!..".  Maybe next time.{:>}
 
 However, everything, I have read and heard definitely confirms 
Michaels analysis.  A Non-feathered (or fixed pitch prop) windmilling will
substantially increase your rate of decent.  I am sure all (most) of you
have seen movie thrillers involving pilots trying desperately to feather
windmilling props to: 1. Minimize drag to maintain controllability on
multi engine aircraft, 2. Minimize drag so as to keep/gain just enough
altitude to get over that next ridge line, 3.  Stop the engine from
rotating so that the oil starved crankshaft won't have the windmilling
prop twist off when the crankshaft locks up.etc, etc.
 
But, in all seriousness, it is recommend by some that a test program
include just that set of tests, so that you will know just how far you
can glide with prop stopped vs windmilling.  Not many do it
(intentionally that is) to my knowledge.
 
Ed Anderson
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 08:05:44 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A better way of lubing tip seals?
 
Jim and I discussed the Hurly Engineering oiling system for apex
seals and his thoughts on the subject were it is an answer
to a question that nobody asked. He feels the problems
people are having with the third generation RX7 electronicaly
controlled apex seal oiling pump are due to owners
cranking up the boost. He feels if the engine is 
allowed to run the stock boost the tip seals outlast
the rotor housings. In other words for a couple of 
hundread thousand miles. The apex seal oiling must
be matched to the power output of the engine as the
oil cools the seals.
 
He has never had a problem with short
term apex seal or rotor slot wear on endurance racing
engines despite some of them running the entire season.
No competive piston racing engine can make that claim.
 
The only worn apex seals he has seen are those from an abused
engine, a failed apex seal oiling pump or an engine
with well over 150,000 miles.
 
I still think it has applications in street engines if
it can reduce the amount of oil burned in the combustion
chamber for smog reasons. Matching the oil flow to to the
apex seal  with HP remains the major problem.
 
For aircraft just mix one or two onces of two cycle
oil with each gallon of gas and forget about.
 
Paul 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 15:58:06 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A better way of lubing tip seals?
 
Alfonso Lebron wrote:
 
Reading the last two paragraphs made me think about just the opposite
of air... water.
 
For one, "Matching the oil flow to to the apex seal  with HP..."
reminded me of some of the new two stroke outboard engines being
produced by Evinrude/Johnson. Instead of mixing the oil with the gas
or using an oil injection pump, they use the Fitch fuel injection
system which injects gasoline and a metered (by pump) amount of oil
together into the cilinder/s. I was guessing this could be a good
departure point, since outboards, especially in bass boats are used a
great deal of the time at full power.
 
On the other hand, "mix one or two onces of two cycle oil with each
gallon of gas" seems to me that it gives a very large variation in the
final amount (minus 50% to 100% increase). Maybe the above could fine
tune a bit the final correct amount. I will try to get mode specifics
about the oiling in this system, time permitting.
 
Anybody adding some knowledge on this?
 
Alfonso Lebron
 
Matching the oil flow to HP was for smog reasons. 
I was not too clear on that point.
A little extra oil won't hurt the aviation rotary.
 
In fact better too much than too little.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 15:59:36 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: More drag... prop rotating or stopped?
 
facilitator1@juno.com wrote:
 
EAA test showed that a stopped prop was like getting a boost in airspeed.
Much less drag from a stopped prop, better glide length.
 Virgil
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 15:54:50 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Rotory in Mini 500
 
bryan.wilkinson wrote:
 
On Thu, 24 Dec 1998, Paul wrote:
 
P.A. Williamson wrote:
 
Paul,
 
   Myself, and a few of my friends, are having a small (as in getting
killed) problem with a kit helicopter we enjoy. I'm sure you've seen
it... the Mini500. What's happening is that stinkin' Rotax is going tits
up at the worst time...about 50 to 100 ft AGL.
 
SNIP
 
  Our "biggest" problem is that dang Rotax.
 
SNIP
 
Over here the problem  would apear to be the big & small ends letting go
- rotax have a special tool to check on bearing play IIRC.
Maybe  a helo is the worst - case scenario for dynamic stress ?
 
Bryan
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 23:49:15 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A real cheap dyno
 
Frank Davis wrote:
 
Paul,
 This falls under the catagory of "little known but useless bits of
information", or "there's nothing new under the sun".  The A-1 Skyraider
(aka AD to those of a Naval persuasion) has a Torquemeter or Torque Oil
Pressure gage which gives the pilot a direct indication of HP or BMEP
prouduced by the R3350-26WD engine.  The USAF Flight Manual (-1) states
that the torquemeter "provides a reading of propellor shaft torque oil
pressure calibrated in pounds per square inch".  Unfortunately no
further information is given as to how the pressure is generated.  I
guess dumb pilots don't need to know stuff like that.  Conversion from
TP (psi) to HP is by the formula:  BHP=TPxRPM/142.  Manual leaning for
cruise is done by setting rpm and leaning for max TP.  Torquemeters for
homebuilts (or not-homebuilts) is a good idea.
Cheers, Frank
 
Sounds exactly what we have in mind here. the 142 is going to 
vary with the size of the hydrulic cylinder.
 
The sketch is now on the NL web site for those new subscribers.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 00:04:39 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A better way of lubing tip seals?
 
Paul Yaw wrote:
 
Paul wrote:
 
Jim and I discussed the Hurly Engineering oiling system for apex
seals and his thoughts on the subject were it is an answer
to a question that nobody asked. He feels the problems
people are having with the third generation RX7 electronicaly
controlled apex seal oiling pump are due to owners
cranking up the boost. He feels if the engine is
allowed to run the stock boost the tip seals outlast
the rotor housings. In other words for a couple of
hundread thousand miles. The apex seal oiling must
be matched to the power output of the engine as the
oil cools the seals.
 
I have had the same experience.  If the engine is built to withstand the
additional heat loads, the apex seals live quite well.  I do feel
however that metering too much oil into the combustion chamber of a
turbo engine can cause problems of its own.  Engine oil will reduce the
octane rating of the fuel which could lead to detonation, or require
that the engine run with less ignition advance to avoid detonation.
This will reduce BSFC.  Supplying additonal cooling oil inside of the
rotor, and modifying the water jackets in the hot area of the rotor
housing will, in my opinion do more to reduce seal and groove wear than
additional oil in the chamber ever could.  I disagree that the injected
oil cools the seals.  Its purpose is simply to lubricate.  Oil itself
does not have better cooling properties than gasoline.  The apex seals
are cooled through their contact with the rotor housing, and the rotor.
 
He has never had a problem with short
term apex seal or rotor slot wear on endurance racing
engines despite some of them running the entire season.
No competive piston racing engine can make that claim.
 
The only worn apex seals he has seen are those from an abused
engine, a failed apex seal oiling pump or an engine
with well over 150,000 miles.
 
I still think it has applications in street engines if
it can reduce the amount of oil burned in the combustion
chamber for smog reasons. Matching the oil flow to to the
apex seal  with HP remains the major problem.
 
For aircraft just mix one or two onces of two cycle
oil with each gallon of gas and forget about.
 
The two stroke guys are really on top of this.  Many synthetic two
stroke oils do not lower the octane rating appreciably, and it is
designed to go into the combustion chamber.  My preference is Yamalube
R, available at most motorcycle shops.  I suspect that Mazda has reduced
metered oil over the years for the sake of reducing carbon buildup
inside of the engine, and extending the life of the catalytic
converters.  You would be amazed at the crud you will get from burning
engine oil.  An engine run with a two stroke premix will stay as clean
as any piston engine assuming that the mixture is correct.  An engine
with an increased amount of engine oil injected into it will show a
great deal of carbon buildup in just twenty or thirty passes on the
dyno.  Yuk!
 
Paul Yaw
 
Before you came on on the NL Paul we ran a bunch of test on different
oils in an industrial oven at 500 degrees F. Synthetics were right up 
there with two stroke oil and turbine oil. Ordinary engine oil
is about the worse thing you can lube and cool the apex seals with.
There is one other but out of deference to Tracy I won't mention it :-)
 
BTW Mazda wrote a SAE paper on the apex seal temp verses the apex
seal oil supply. I will look it up for you shortly.
 
Oh wait here is a chart from that paper.
 
apextemp.jpg
 
This is why Mazda injects more oil at high HP. To cool the seal.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 00:12:57 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Tracy Crook's
 
Paul Yaw wrote:
 
Hi everybody,
 
I need to contact Tracy Crook. (Good thing he is not a car
salesman!...That goes for Dave Lemon too!)
 
I need to know what your engine management package is capable of, and
how it works.  If it is appropriate for a turbocharged engine, I will
need one within a few weeks.  Hope to hear from you soon.  Thank you.
 
Paul Yaw
 
"Tracy 2 rws@altavista.net" <rws@altavista.net>
 
Unfortunately I don't think it does. There are others
on the market so check the NL web site.
When you find one that monitors the knock sensors
please let us know.
 
I need to talk to Abel Ibbarra about what he is using
as he told me he monitors the the knock sensors
closely on his turbo, alcohol and laughing gas 730 HP
turbo 13B drag racing engine.
 
Abel is using one MSD ignition system for each spark 
plug as I recall.
 
Paul Lamar 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 00:21:24 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A better way of lubing tip seals?
 
BTW the mechanism is... if the apex seal is cool oil will not
coke in the apex seal slot.
 
The SAE paper is 860560 Material Technology Development
Applied to Rotary Engines at Mazda.
 
I hate those  long titles :-)
 
Takumi Muroki and Jun Miyate
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 00:52:52 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A better way of lubing tip seals?
 
Here is an old newsletter message on this subject Paul
The date on this was 09/09/98 17:08
 
--Tracy Crook wrote:
 
Message text written by Neil:
 
I have a question for those in the know.  What's the optimum ratio for
mixing 2 stroke oil with fuel?  I've been using 1 oz / 1 gal but I think
this  is on the high side.
 
Neil
 
I use 1 oz Marvel mystery oil per gal of fuel which I agree is on the high
side.  I hear figures between 3 & 5 oz per 5 gallons of gas from the rotary
car racers.
I just got an RX-7 to drive so I'll experiment on that instead of on the
plane.  I plan to tear down the engine (on the plane) and carefully measure
wear at 1000 hours so I'll have a better idea then.  Now at 700 on the
Hobbs.
 
Tracy
 
Good for you Tracy. You have been doing some flying!
 
According to SAE paper 860560 Mat. Tech. etc. Mazda recommends 300 cc
per hour at full power  to keep the temp down on the apex seals. Since
the tip seal temp can get to 240 degrees C or 465 degrees F. no wonder
oil sometimes cokes in the tip seal slot. Too little oil can cause
cokeing. Ironic is it not?
 
300 cc per hour is about 10 fluid ounces per hour. The conversion I have
is 0.0338 fluid oz's per one cubic centimeter. 
 
So Tracy burns about eight or ten gallons an hour as I recall and runs
at somewhat less than peak power so he is using about the right amount
of oil. Maybe a little on the low side. 
 
I would not go less than one ounce per gallon. One ounce per gallon is
easy to measure so it is not quite so error prone.
 
The stock pump puts out .68 to .85 fluid ounces per hour at 2000 RPM on
the early engines up to 1985 according to the Haynes manual and my 1976
Cosmo shop manual. 
 
According to the Mazda rotary engine bible by Yamamoto the ratio at full
power is 1 oz of oil  to 150 oz of fuel on the early engines. Since
there are 128 oz in one gallon one oz per gallon is a little on the high
side. Ironically the book shows 50% more oil cruising at 100 MPH. All of
this was probably with the early carbon aluminum tip seals. 
 
The 1986 to 1991 Haynes manual won't say??? The information is missing
for some strange reason. They tell you how to measure it but they don't
say how much???
 
The early engines only fed oil into the carb. Later engines fed it to
the carb and the housing. The oil injected is not only a function of RPM
but it is also a function of throttle opening.
 
If I were running it hard I would use two onces per gallon. Other than
cost and oil all over the bottom of the airplane I see no real
drawbacks. (Lower your muffler pipe :-)) Keep them tip seals cool!
 
I will keep my eyes open on this and see if I can get some later
information.
 
Paul 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 01:44:08 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: CH601 Zodiac rotary?
 
Patrick Simpson wrote:
 
Hi,
 
        I'm considering building a CH601, and I'm looking for about 125 hp to
put into it.  Are there any rotary engines out there that are around
that HP, and that weigh less than 260 lbs. with everything on?
 
        Where do the HP and torque curves peak on most rotarys and what do I
need in line of a redrive. Of course that would have to be within the
260 lbs.  I know that's asking a lot of an engine, but thought it was
worth a try asking.
 
Thanks,
Patrick Simpson
Parksville, BC,
currently driving a Challenger II,
 
The dry weight of a two rotor is about 200 pounds but by the time
you get the rads, PSRU, prop and all it is more like 300 pounds.
 
If you put the rads in the back of the fuse it might work.
 
125 HP is no problem. Even with untuned intake and exhaust pipes
you will get more like 150 HP.
 
They don't really peak. The HP keeps going up depending on porting
and manifold tuning to about 9500 RPM. Most rotaries for A/C use
are tuned for about 6000 RPM.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 08:49:48 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 900 HP Racing Beat 3 rotor ducted fan airplane.
 
Jim was a little surprised when I suggested the plugs
up configuration for his 900 HP turbo three rotor ducted fan
engine.
 
He was unaware that Neil, Ed and others had been successfully
running this configuration for several years.
 
His reasons for placing the large turbo in the duct
and accepting the duct blockage are the intake is
pressurised to a certain extent by the duct. Two; the
waste heat of the turbo is added to the duct flow
in theory adding to the thrust. Three; the turbo is
cooled in the process. Four; the exhaust goes right
into the duct as well adding additional energy to
the duct flow. Five; the exhaust manifold is short
keeping the energy loss in the pipes minimised.
(That never bothered Orenda with the V8 or GE with the P38,
B17, P47 and other world war II turbo charged
airplanes. I suspect the World War II guys were right.)
 
IMHO I don't think the increased duct blockage is going 
to be worth it so I drew up a plugs up design with the
turbo out of the main duct and into an aux smaller
duct below the engine. The 17 inch dimension is for
the inner "core cowling" and the 28.8 inch dimension
is the inner diameter of the main ducted and is based 
on a fan tip speed of 650 MPH at 7500 RPM. I know not
what the real dimensions will be in the actual airplane.
 
The reason for the plugs up in my configuration
is the engines are to be mounted in pods and there
would be a big bulge on the left engine looking 
forward from the rear to accomadate the turbo on an 
upright installation. The right engine could have  
the turbo located in the aft fuselage with the pipes
running through the pylon. I am really
guessing about all this as I have not seen plans
for the actual airplane.
 
I had another look at the drain back in the front 
housing and it is indeed the least suitable for
a plugs up configuration. It does flow a minor amount
of oil compared to the center housing as all it handles
is excess oil from the front main bearing. The center housing
handles a larger quantity of rotor cooling oil  from both 
rotors but it is designed such that plugs up should be no
problem.  
 
Never-the-less the separate turbo duct design will
still see dynamic intake pressure and air can be bypassed
to cool the turbo. The exhaust from the turbo can
be used in an augmenter device to enhance the cooling
air flow through the turbo duct. The energy remaining in
in the exhaust out of the turbo should be low at this
point so an augmentor may not work all that well.
The exhaust pipes from the engine and the intake pipes 
to the engine can be streamlined within the main duct.
 
The question is; which system will work better? 
Any of you bright people out there want to take
a stab at this?
 
I think buried engines in a fuselage-blended-wing
design would work the best as there would be room 
for the turbos in the fuselage on the right upright engine
and the wing root on the left upright engine.
Perhaps with a canard configuration.
 
Yet another configuration is place the turbos behind
the engines within the ducts and accept the resulting 
long pipe lengths as in the Orenda V8. The exhaust 
pipes could be insulated with some miracle material 
that would withstand 2000 degrees :-).
 
Paul Lamar
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 13:06:52 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: More drag... prop rotating or stopped?
 
Dale Smith wrote:
 
Gentlemen, I wish to assure you (from personal flying experience!), that a stopped
prop is MUCH less drag than a windmilling one.  (Think "circle of drag")  It
remains a very high drag situation, however,  with just an (unfeathered, seized)
propeller.  So much drag that we were barely able to stay in the air with the
other engine at full METO and indeed, drifted down to ground effect altitudes ...
less than 100 feet above the ocean ... to be able to maintain altitude in an
otherwise "clean" configuration.  Aircraft: C-123B enroute to Wake Island.
Engines: 2 Pratt & Whitney R2800, w/ 3 bladed props @15' prop circle, if I recall.
 
Paul wrote:
 
Now there is a place you don't want to ditch.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 13:12:31 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: ceramic coatings
 
Alivic@wport.com wrote:
 
Paul,
 
I read an article published in Contact last year written by a Chrysler
engineer who alluded to exotic coatings that Detroit was applying to
various components within their engines.  I was curious if you believe
that doing a ceramic coating on the combustion surfaces of the 13B
rotors would allow more of the combustion energy to do work or would you
worry that this process would only increase the temperatures within the
rotor housings and exhaust??
 
I appreciate the work you are doing in making rotary engine technology
available to the masses.   Tony Livic
 
Mazda did some experimenting with this on the Lemans engines.
It payed off as BSFC was very important as fuel mileage
was important in this race. The gains were way down in the
single digit percentasge points so it would not be worth
it for your average A/C engine.
 
What would be important is a ceramic wear surface coating
that would be durable enough to use on aluminum end housings
assuming one can solve all the other problems with alloy
end housing.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 17:41:39 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 900 HP Racing Beat 3 rotor ducted fan airplane.
 
900 HP requires  a serious intercooler. Jim is shown holding
the intercooler for the turbo three rotor. Where they are
going to find room for this in the airplane is another matter.
 
Actully I am pulling your leg a bit. This intercooler is intended
for dyno use only and it is from a 300 HP tractor trailer
truck engine. It will be sprayed with cold water on the dyno
to simulate the intercooler in the airplane.
 
If it looks a little big for only 300 HP that is because
there is a big difference between 300 HP in a real
truck or aircraft engine and the 300 HP in your Corvette.
 
The truck engine and the airplane engine has to generate 
all 300 horses continuously while hauling 55,000 pounds 
over the Grapevine out here is sunny So Cal while only
moving about 45 MPH. Not a lot of air going through
that intercooler at 45 MPH.
 
The AC aircraft engine is all the more remarkable as it
weighs only about 400 pounds while the truck engine weighs
2000 pounds.
 
Don't let anybody tell you todays aircraft engines are 
obsolete.
 
The Wankel type rotary engine is equally remarkable.
 
rbinterc.jpg
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 09:12:46 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: More drag... prop rotating or stopped?
 
ingenuir@ix.netcom.com wrote:
 
facilitator1@juno.com wrote:
 
EAA test showed that a stopped prop was like getting a boost in airspeed.
Much less drag from a stopped prop, better glide length.
 Virgil
 
Hello, Paul.
  When I was looking through von Mises' Theory of Flight for propeller
characteristics and composing my "aero engineer's response" to this
question, I kept striking out the phrase, "But I haven't looked at the
energy extracted from the airstream. Proof can only come from either a wind
tunnel or free flight test." If Virgil can provide the reference, I
respectfully defer to the EAA test.
 
  Careful with the decription, though. A stopped prop is still stopping the
airplane, not giving a boost in airspeed. (Such things are relative ;-> )
 
  Wish I had emphasized more that this was my speculation from the curves.
 
Gary
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:22:26 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Water pump
 
Gerry Hess wrote:
 
Paul, the 12A water pump is 19 pounds and the 12A short block without pump
is 190 lbs. I have an aluminum pump outer housing and a cast iron centre on
my single rotor. (vintage 1986 6 port) The centre piece weighs 9 lbs. This
resulted in a longblock minus PSRU of 155 lbs, and total firewall weight of
202.
 Even a complete factory aluminum pump is a godawfull abortion and I believe
a pump could be built out of a billet of T6 using only the factory shaft,
bearing, and impeller, that would be lighter and lower for cowling comfort.
I have a thing about modifications. I do them all the time, but always try
to use the stock critical componants as they are time tested and readily
available.
 
Gerry
 
Did you see that pump Jim Mederer is using on his three rotor.
He said that pump is the finest water pump he has ever seen.
It is small and compact.
He forgot where he got it but some place in Tenn. sells
it for sprint cars. I have been keeping my eye out for it
as I get Performance Racing Industry mag.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 13:04:20 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: More drag... prop rotating or stopped?
 
kwalsh@inhale.com wrote:
 
The EAA, and CAFE more specifically, tested the stopped prop, versus
windmilling prop, versus the slowly rotating prop on a cessna 152.  What
they wanted was a way to measure the drag characteristics of planes without
having the stopped prop problem.  The solution was to put a sensor on the
crankshaft that could measure end play (0.002" if memory serves).  Using
this sensor they could then adjust the throttle until the propeller was
providing zero thrust.  This was correlated by removing the propeller and
replacing it with a tow hook.  They then towed the 152 as a glider,
released it, and calculated the drag in flight (by measuring the rate of
descent at fixed velocities).
 
I am unsure of what the drag difference was between the windmilling prop
and the stopped prop, but I remember the windmilling pro was more drag.
 
Adding to the confusion-
Kevin Walsh
 
I want to spool this subject down. Not too important in the
overall scheme of things.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 17:02:58 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 900 HP Racing Beat 3 rotor ducted fan airplane.
 
JBullens wrote:
 
Paul, I've always been interested in ducted fans.. How far has your research
gone.. I'm more interested in the 13B and ducted fan, but all the
information I can gather, the ducted fan only works well at low speeds of
130 mph or less.. I haven't really kept up with new progress,, can you bring
me up to speed on fan technology. Would love to run a 13B direct to a fan
and run in the 200 mph range.. should be a direct trade off in the weight
department.. Considering the weight of the reduction unit and prop. compared
to the shaft, shroud and fan casting. Plus the canard configuration lends
itself to a fan installation naturally.. But I may be wrong.. Was once but
can't remember when.
 
Actually it is the other way around. Ducted fans work well at high speed
and not so well at low speed. If you think about it... every time you 
fly in a airliner these days you are flying in a ducted fan airplane.
The only difference between Jim Mederer's 900 HP turbo three rotor
ducted fan and a turbofan jet engine is the core engine. The turbofan
uses a gas turbine.
 
The reason airliners work on takeoff is they have an excess of HP. 
Enough HP in fact to go 500 MPH.
 
Jim is shooting for the same thing. His engines are going in a six
place airplane with a total of 1800 HP. Not your average Piper
Malibu.
 
Why couldn't you place one large turbo in the fuse with a NASA scoop for
supply and exit to feed both engines supplied by long pipes that will help
cool the intake charge anyway.. seems like some free intake charge cooling
with the long pipes and wisker ducts for cooling that could be ducted to the
cabin for some additional heat. The long run of piping and the natural
cooling the turbo would last longer anyway for the 2000 degree direct pulses of
the engine hence a stock high-performance turbo that would cost less and of
sufficient capacity could be used..
 
Good idea.
 
Who is Neil and Ed?
 
Who is Neil and Ed?!!! You have got to be kidding :-). 
 
Neil, Ed introduce yourselves to the new guy.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 00:12:10 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: rotary seal condition & differential cylinder pressure gauges
 
Gordon Woodard wrote:
 
Will a differential cylinder pressure gauge work on the rotary ? If so
what pressures are you looking for , the motor is pulled allready and I
would like to get and idea on seal condition before I purchase it
     Gordoni
 
Very good question. I don't know the answer.
Most people use an automotive type compression tester. 85 psi
at 250 RPM is the spec for 1979 to 1991 models.
With a 21 psi allowable difference between rotors. 
 
I have one of those differential cylinder pressure gauges myself.
Never used it on my rotaries and they have been sitting around
so I don't think the numbers I would get now are representative,
Great tool.
 
Has anybody used  an aircraft type differential cylinder pressure gauge
on a rotary?
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 16:07:16 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Getting your airplane signed off by the FAA
 
Tracy Crook wrote:
 
Perry J. Mick wrote:
 
So now I just decided to sit back and see how long it takes
these bureaucrats to come back with some type of response.
 
Guess I'd better find out who the local DAR's are.
 
Perry J. Mick
Mazda 13B-powered LongEz N7XR
 
Makes you wonder what we are paying these guys for.
 
Paul
 
There is yet another level to this game the FAA is playing.  Remember that
the DAR positions are handed out to retired FAA types.   The FAA guys do not
want to cut into this "retirement benefit" by inspecting your plane for
free.  The DAR's typically charge $300 - 500 to bless your plane.   I knew
the game from past airplane inspections so I skipped the FAA, called the DAR
& wrote the check.
 
So do I want to give this wonderful agency more power than they already have
and make the standards for granting an airworthiness certificate more
difficult?
 
Tracy
 
I take it that's a NO!  :-)
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 08:58:38 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Who is Neil and Ed?
 
Neil A. Kruiswyk wrote:
 
Paul,
 
    It might not be a bad idea to compile a list of who is actually flying
behing a rotary, model of aircraft and first flight date.  Total hours might
be interesting but that is dynamic and time consuming to maintain.  Pictures
would be a nice touch as well.  The list should get bigger and better in the
next few years.  I would have done this myself years ago but my ISP doesn't
provide space for web pages.
 
    I'll start it off with myself and Jim.
 
Name:    Neil Kruiswyk    neilk@sprint.ca
Local:    Near Toronto Canada
Aircraft:    Lancair 235
Engine:    4 port 13B natuarlly asperated fuel injected
First Flight: Sep 1988
 
Name: Jim Mosur    jmosur@interlog.com
Local:    Near Toronto Canada
Aircraft:    Vans RV-6
Engine:    4 port 13B natuarlly asperated carburated
First Flight: July 1998
 
    I'll see about a pic of Jim's plane and send it along.
    Now what about Ed, Tracey, Alan and the rest....
 
Neil
 
Jim is news to me Neal. Thanks. Good suggestion. When we get
a nice list I will put it on the newsletter web site.
I figured you were too busy shoveling snow up there :-).
 
BTW Earthlink tech supports Linux as well as Mac and Windows
and gives you a 6 meg web site  for $19.95 US. 
I have had real good luck so far with Earthlink.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 09:08:37 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: End housing repair.
 
Jim Mederer of Racing Beat designed and built this end housing
lapping machine. If you have a scratched or worn
end housing or center housing call Racing Beat and get a
quote.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 09:21:08 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: IVO root cuffs.
 
Neil, I just noticed you are running an IVO prop.
Tracy is thinking of fabricating non-structural prop root
cuffs to convert the negative lift coeficient near
the hub to a positive lift coefficent. He mentioned
that to me when I was there at Christmas time.
 
You and he would probably pick up 10 to 20 miles per hour
when using the IVO prop with cuffs.
 
BTW is Jim Mosur using plugs up on his RV? Does he want to be
on the Newsletter list?
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 09:42:50 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Ceramic coatings
 
Wood Family wrote:
 
I talked to a guy at Arlington last year that has an amphib. Coot with 
a 13B mounted up on a pylon. He runs nitrous
to get a quick boost out of the water and so doing had been 
overheating. He said he had his rotors ceramic coated and this brought
his oil temp way down. He also had a stock Mazda oil cooler mounted on
the top surface of each wing with no ducting. I do not recall his name
but could find out if anybody is interested.
 
Lonnie
 
Yes I am very interested. I was in Arlington last year
on the first day but i missed it unfortunately.
 
The no ducting part could be the real problem.
It is probably destroying lots of lift on the wing making
it harder to take off.
 
If he put them in a better place and properly 
ducted them he might not need the nitrous
and the ceramic coating.
 
See the newsletter web site link list for a desertion
on the proper place and configuration for cooling
ducts.
 
Thanks for this very interesting information.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 10:54:27 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Ceramic insulation
 
Bulent Aliev wrote:
 
[From Canard Aviators's Mailing list]
 
I have been using ceramic insulation blankets developed for furnace
repairs for about 15 years. In it's virgin state it's heavy with
whatever liquid they use for curing it to shape. It comes in a sealed
plastic envelope and in varying thicknesses.
 
I buy mine in half-inch blankets, cut then to shape with ordinary
scissors.  I then wrap them around the exhaust system. While still wet,
I make a  few wraps of fly screen and finish off with a spiral wound
stainless wire.
 
The fly screen reinforces the ceramic. It's it cured state it's hard but
somewhat brittle. Since it's not inside a protective shield like a
furnace where it's more commonly used, it runs the risk of breaking. The
fly screen becomes actually imbedded in the ceramic matrix during the
cure.  The wire wrap is just to hold things in place until they cure.
 
You can cure the ceramic by simply using heat from the engine. My
experience has been that while this works OK, you are better off
preheating the material with a high output electric heat gun. You can't
burn this stuff, at least not easily.
 
I lost the data I stored in my pc but on one engine I did, A
turbocharged Ford V8, the technician had to re-adjust the overboost
values because the inlet side of the turbine was getting significantly
higher pressures.  Since the only thing I did was wrap the manifold with
ceramic, the cause and effect are easily demonstrated. The discoloration
in adjacent painted areas has also ceased.
 
I haven't done this process in about 6 years and some price increase is
to be expected. I'd be very surprised if the entire installation ran you
over $20.oo for a four cylinder engine, ceramic, screening, wire, clamps
and all.
 
PS: Don't over tighten the wraps or you'll squeeze out the curing
liquid.  Just follow the instructions that come with it. Most boiler
repair companies stock the stuff and/or can tell you where to buy it.
 
ABianconi
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 10:38:34 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: More drag... prop rotating or stopped?
 
TERF Email wrote:
 
    For what it is worth anti lock brake theory says that the wheel wants to
be going 85% of what ground speed is for best stop.  I imagine that this
would hold true for propellers as well??  If it were spinning at full speed
you would get nothing, faster it would speed up.  Therefore it must go
slower to some extent.....  The gyro analogy is correct, no spin, very
little drag.  Ask anyone who has ever stalled a gyro copter and survived.
 
For what it is worth.
 
                Matthew Tait
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 16:11:06 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: A better way of lubing tip seals? & dyno tuning.
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
 Hi Paul,
        I would have been delighted to have my 13B tuned on a dyno and checked
for power output.  Considering what I have invested in my aircraft (not
to mention my butt), I would have been delighted to have my engine
dynoed for $750.  The problem was I could not find anyone on the mid
east region that could or would do it.  Even when I was in the early
stages of thinking about having Mazdatrix build me an engine, Dave
stated he did really want to do the dyno test citing noise created in
the local where he had his shop.  The best I could do was give my prop
manufacture the static rpm I could generate on the test stand.  He then
calculated that with the specs of my prop the engine would be capable of
producing 165HP.  Right now, I estimate based on aircraft performance I
am actually getting around 150hp.  But, it was pointed out on this net
that my 2" of foam filter in a 3" dia duct was too restrictive.  So, I
plan to fly this weekend with the foam removed and see if I gain about
2-3" of manifold pressure.
If I had had access to the expertise on this list back when I started
the project in 1992, things would have gone much faster and better.  I
for one really appreciate the knowledge you, Paul, Tracy and many others
are willing to share.
 
Ed Anderson
 
For you new guys its not too late to build your own. Check the NL web
site.
 
Paul 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 17:52:47 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: IVO root cuffs.
 
Neil A. Kruiswyk wrote:
 
Thanks for the info Paul,  I'll have a word with Tracey.  I like the prop
but I've lost top end with it.  I was going to buy a new wood, fixed pitch
one in the spring but maybe Tracey has the right idea.
 
Yes, add Jim.  He's running plugs up.
 
Neil
 
You too eh? Don Bates predicted that with his prop optimiser program
and now we have several confirmations. See the web site link list for
his email address.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 23:32:15 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
CC: Dennis Simanaitis <enged@aol.com>
Subject: Take off monitor.
 
I was wrong about a few things in my last article
on this subject. The Voyager was never tested with
full fuel and my test equipment did not make
the cover of that issue. It was the center spread.
 
Dennis Simanaitis was kind enough to dig up an orginal
copy of the May 1987 issue of Road & Track complete with
all cardboard  and send it to me.
 
Thank you very much Dennis.
 
Hopefully I can convince Tracy to add a takeoff monitor,
using the same software technology used in this Lamar Instrument
test equipment, which was used to test the Voyager, to
his EFI instrument panel display computer.
 
Here is an excerpt from R&T page 53. The article was written
by Peter Egan and the photo was by John Lamm. 
 
Note how close the left wing tip is to the ground.
 
"opened its throttles and rolled down the pavement. The wings went 
from full droop to upswept arc, the Voyager gathered speed and- And 
left the pickup in the dust. The truck couldn't keep up. It stayed 
with the airplane up to about 60 mph, then the Voyager simply 
pulled away, rotated skyward and flew off on Test Flight Number 48. 
 
"We didn't anticipate how quick it would be on the top end," Glenn 
Maben said later. "Maybe next time you should bring your Corvette." 
Which we did. Five more times, five more lovely desert sunrises 
and test flights, from September through early December. There was a 
ground acceleration test where the Voyager cooked its front brake 
trying to stop 5600 lb of fuel at the end of the runway while Glenn 
tried to slow it down by grabbing the Voyager's tail from the 
Corvette window. The airplane did the quarter mile in 26.5 seconds 
at 42 mph on that run. 
 
Near the end of September, on Flight 51, the 
1858 lb craft (empty) lifted 3600 lb of fuel off the ground while 
turning in a 25.5 sec quarter mile at 63.7 mph, and a 0-60 time of 
23 sec. On that flight I had my first truly vivid insight as to the 
seriousness of what Rutan and Yeager were doing. On the takeoff 
roll Glenn was driving the Corvette, tucked in just behind the 
Voyager's right wing, and I was in the passenger seat, my elbow 
sticking out the open window, cruising style. As we hit 70 mph on 
the runway I watched that long, gasoline filled wing flex and 
shimmy in front of our windshield and suddenly realized that if Burt 
Rutan had been a few notches off on the old slide rule, or if 
brother Dick didn't live up to his "velvet arm" flying reputation, 
we'd be swimming in a few hundred gallons of gasoline before you 
could say melting fiberglass. Almost with a will of its own, my 
left hand crept over to the center console and hit the electric 
window lifts. Closed. Glenn watched the windows go up and grinned. 
The slide rule and the velvet arm came through, however, and the 
Voyager rose gracefully from the runway. 
 
These are very brave 
people, I thought to myself. Armed with the latest acceleration 
data, I went back to the office and checked the R&T test archives 
for performance comparisons with cars. (This is a car magazine, 
after all, and we've gotta tie it in somehow.) I discovered that the 
Voyager was almost exactly as fast in the quarter mile as an MG-TC, 
but not quite as quick. In all fairness, however, it should be noted 
that the TC could carry only about 16 gal. of fuel, versus the 
Voyager's 590 gal., on this particular run. Also the TC ran out of 
steam at 75 mph, while the Voyager's average speed for the world 
flight was 115.8 mph, and at one point it hit a 165-mph ground 
speed, with tailwind. Voyager's around-the-world mileage was 21.0 
mpg, a little worse than the 23.6 mpg I recorded on my last 
cross-country TC trip, but then the Voyager is capable of 50 mpg 
when nearly empty as opposed to a TC best of about 26 mpg."
 
End of quote.
 
Paul Lamar
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 23:44:15 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Ceramic coating 13B powered Coot
 
Wood Family wrote:
 
Paul,
 
I just called a guy that is building a Coot with a 13B that know the
other guy with the Coot that has ceramic coated rotors.
 
His name is Ken Welter and his phone number is 360-834-4089.
 
He does not have a computer. At Arlington he was very open
and willing to talk about his experience with the 13B.
 
He has been flying his plane for a number of years and has some good
stories to tell.
 
On one occasion the spring disk from his Ross re-drive flew apart, came
out the side of the drive and put holes in his wing.
 
He said he has solved this by putting on a heavy flywheel, 35 lbs. if I
remember right.
 
I think he did not get to Arlington until Friday so that's why you
missed him.
 
Lonnie
 
Thanks Lonnie. 
 
Thats the first I have heard of one of those clutch disk comming 
apart. He may be running a 3:1 Ross PSRU and he has higher
than 6000 takeoff RPM. He has a strange way of solving problems:-)
 
BTW could you turn your word wrap on or
use shorter lines. Which email program are you using?
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 23:54:55 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Tracy Crook's EFI system and turbo's
 
Tracy Crook wrote:
 
My EFI/ ignition controller is OK for turbo installations with up to 25
inches of boost if ordered with the 2 BAR MAP sensors.   Naturally it will
require injectors with sufficient flow rate.
 
Tracy
 
 rws@altavista.net
 
Tracy, please add your email address to your signature.
Will save me a lot of work :-)
 
After I get you to add that takeoff monitor I am going
to start working on you to add a knock sensor :-)
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 23:50:53 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Ceramic coating 13B powered Coot
 
If Lonnie can't get ahold of him , I may be able to. He belongs to our
local PRA club (chapter 73) and most always flies his Coot to the
meeting. Other than Everett Hatch, this is the only 13b I've seen in the
air.
 
Phil
 
Lonnie found him Phil thanks.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 00:44:01 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Ceramic coating
 
This is a jpg of a paragraph from "Mazda 4-Rotor Rotary Engine for the
Le Mans 24-Hour endurance Race. SAE paper 920309
 
One must differentiate ceramic coating for wear reduction and
ceramic coating for heat insulation.
 
No where in this paper did Mazda mention any heat insulation 
or fuel consumption advantages or lower oil temp advantages 
of ceramic coating. It was done strictly for wear reduction
and even then it was a less than a 15 percent improvement
over a nitrided cast iron.
 
The down side is you risk exfoliation  with probable serious damage
to your engine.
 
Not only that Mazda used the very expensive "detonation gun" 
technique to apply the coatings. Not your average hot rod
technique. On alloy housing you have no choice. You have
to use ceramics.
 
In short... save your money or put it elsewhere to improve
the rotary such as ceramic tip seals.
 
Sorry about the jpg. My OCR does not work too well with
these bad copies of SAE papers.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 08:38:14 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: HP and torque curve differences
 
BCGARDNER@aol.com wrote:
 
Paul,
 
Can I ask you a question that isn't strictly a rotary related one? 
It relates to the difference between aircraft engines and auto engines in
where they develop peak horsepower and torque.
 
I was out running the pattern yesterday in a C-172 and its four cylinder
Lycoming O-320-E2D is redlined at 2700 rpm, where it develops 150 BHP when in
tune and in like-new condition. And of course we know that one of the great
advantages of such rpms for aircraft is that you want to keep your prop tip
speed below supersonic in order to maintain prop efficiency (though it seems
like air racers regularly crank up the rpms quite a bit).
 
I'm also the proud owner of a Dodge chassis motor home that has the venerable
eight cylinder Chrysler "A" small block 318 cu. in. engine in it, which also
develops 150 BHP-but at 5000 rpm.
 
So, of course, every guy that's thought about putting an auto engine in an
aircraft wrestles with the best way to keep the rpms down via some kind of
reduction drive-geared, belt, chain. And some people, like Steve Wittman, put
in an auto engine, ran it direct drive and just accepted the lower HP
available at aircraft-type rpms.
 
My question is: What are the engineering differences that make or allow the
320 cu. in. Lycoming to develop its horsepower at lower rpm? Bore and stroke?
Camshaft profile?
 
Or is the Lycoming somehow a more efficient /more powerful engine in which we
have truncated the HP curve by running it at lower rpm in order to increase
its reliability? What would the Lycoming put out at 5000 rpm? And would the
cost of that simply be a reduction in TBO?
 
Please don't get alarmed here. I've never even thought of putting a really
heavy small block Chrysler in an aircraft; I'm still devoted to my Mazda 13B.
But I thought it was a near-perfect example of two comparable displacement
engines that developed the same HP at different rpm ranges.
 
I'm a financial guy, so this question takes me beyond my self-taught shade-
tree-mechanic engineering expertise. I'm still working on filling in the gaps
in my education.
 
Thanks.
 
Barry Gardner
 
I think this is a very good article Barry and you have brought
up some very good points.
 
In a word breathing. Not only the cam but the exhaust and the intake
of the aircraft engine is optimised for 2700 RPM as well as the
structure.
 
The Chrysler was orginally designed to generate a lot more HP as a car
engine. Chrysler decided to limit the breathing by installing a cam & a 
small throat diameter carb. They did this to limit the HP and extend
the life of what was basically a car engine for use as a light duty
truck engine. There may be other heavy duty changes in the engine
as well such as a forged crankshaft rather than cast iron and higher
quality exhaust valves. (The Lyc has very expensive sodium cooled exhaust 
valves indeed, currently running about $250 to $300 each.)
Other changes may have been made to the Chrysler such as forged pistons
instead of cast.
 
The automotive state of the art today is... the manufacturers are much 
better at making a product whose cost is matched to the end use.
In other words there is not one bit of excess cost in a car engine that
does not need to be there given the worst case use that 90 or 95
percent of the buyers will put it too. That means an average HP of somewhere
around 30 to 40 HP for a car engine and 40 to 100 HP for a light duty
truck engine such as the Chrysler you mentioned. Minor changes in these
numbers can occur over long periods of time. 
 
Even in Germany, where
most speeds on the autobahn are unlimited, manufactures, such as Mercedes
and BMW, are intalling speed goveners to limit the top speed to 150 MPH 
and hence the continuous HP required. HP required is roughly proportional
to the cube of the speed. There are other factors at work in Europe
to limit high HP use such as traffic and short distances. 
 
Another trend is to monitor the engine temp, RPM and one or two other 
factors with the engine computer and shut down the fuel supply or 
ignition timing to limit the continuous HP used for warrantee reasons.
By this method too a lower cost engine can be built.
 
Robin and I helped test the last generation Corvette at Willow Springs
for Popular Science. We were in a convoy with six other sports cars and 
Robin was driving the Corvette. She inadvertantly left it in a lower gear 
too long and the computer shut down the engine on her. It was a 
preproduction engine so the software may have been changed since then.
 
Now to answer your question about the Lycoming. It would put out a bunch
of HP for a short period of time but would soon blow up because the structure
was specifically designed for 2700 RPM.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 11:30:59 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Coot Redrive
 
Wood Family wrote:
 
Paul,
 
If I remember right Ken Welter Is running a reduction of 3.7 or 3.8 to 1.
 
When I told him I had built my drive at 2.48 to 1 he claimed I would
never get it off the ground.
 
I am using Internet Explorer, I think it is version 3.?
If there is a way to turn on wordwrap please let me know.
I did download the latest I.E. version but it is just too slow on this old computer.
 
Let me know if these shorter lines are any better.
 
Lonnie
rwood@iceinternet.com
 
This message seems OK Lonnie.
I don't run Internet Exploader so I could not tell you :-)
I run Netscape.
 
As far as getting off the ground what airplane are you putting it in?
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 11:33:04 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Ceramic insulation
 
Archie Frangoudis wrote:
 
In essence, when reading your ceramic insulation messages, I was reminded of
the use we have in Combustion chambers and Piston tops. It does not last as
long in Nitromethane fueled engines, and is being abandoned by some. It is
largely used as a heat barrier rather than wear protection in this case.
Previous message: I build drag and circle track racing engines, and have found measurable
increases in engines that have had their exhausts thermo wrapped. (not pretty, but effective).
It is most significant in turbo'd engines with improvements in throttle
response and HP showing up on the dyno.
Archie
 
This we can read Archie. Thanks.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 11:36:02 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: What happens to the apex seals if the engine stops while 
flying.
 
TerryBuild@aol.com wrote:
 
From my experience starting at 800' agl during the slightly more than one
minute to the ground, the prop did not windmill.  Apex seals are cheap
compared to .............!
 
Thank you for the interesting discussions.  I will try to inject comments from
my experiences as appropriate.  Nice to hear from Neil again.
Engine mount tubing - I used 5/8 .049 wall and it meets the crash test.
 
Terry, care to share more details on that crash? What kind of engine
and airplane? what happened? Hope you did not get hurt.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 15:52:49 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: HP and torque curve differences & book list.
 
BCGARDNER@aol.com wrote:
 
Paul,
 
Thanks for the explanation about the effect of changing the breathing on an
engine. I thought that might be the direction your answer would take, inasmuch
as I had taken that Chrysler 318 and made a few changes on my own. I replaced
the OEM 2 bbl carb with a Carter 4 bbl AFB, put on an Edelbrock dual plane
manifold, put on tube headers, and full dual exhaust with a crossover pipe.
 
Though the motor home weighs 10,000 lbs, it does demonstrate more oomph using
the seat of the pants G meter though it sounds as though I may have shortened
my motor home's TBO.
 
One follow-up question: What effect, if any, does it have to be a four
cylinder vs. eight cylinder engine with the same displacement?
 
Well for cars smoothness is highly valued so eights are smoother than
fours. Eights burn more fuel for the same power than fours. More internal
friction. For the same displacement you can get more power out of an
eight because you can turn it faster for the same internal stresses.
And of course eights cost more than fours.
 
I've never really pursued this question for aircraft engines before, though
I'm aware that big one-cylinder dirt motorcycles (say, 500cc in a single
cylinder) are supposedly renowned for torque. Is it the size of the fuel-air
charge being burned all at once?
 
Generally you can more low speed torque with fewer cylinders. Why I
don't know.
 
In aircraft engines, you have to go to about 180 HP before you see six
cylinders (a la the Franklin or, a bit more powerful, the Continental). And in
spite of the history of high output four cylinder auto racing engines (Offys,
for example) most auto magazine writers are pretty skeptical when they review
a tweaked four cylinder engine compared to a six cylinder alternative. 
 
So, the financial guy (me) puzzles why supposedly knowledgeable auto writers would be
so disdainful of four cylinder auto engines when four cylinder aircraft
engines are very typical and very reliable.
 
There is a limit to the bore of about 5 or 6 inches for an aircooled
cylinder. Really big... air cooled  cylinders don't cool well. If you cannot
get enough power out of four five inch cylinders you go to six or up to
forty eight five =13inch cylinders.... =14the corncob engines used in  B36
and other large piston engine aircraft.
 
One of the disadvantages of having virtually only two aircraft engine
suppliers and the FAA's making it difficult to change certificated aircraft is
that nobody talks much about these engineering trade-offs except people
interested in experimentals. And financial guys trying to learn more about
engineering.
 
Thanks. I'll return the favor if you have a business you need to value
someday.
 
Barry Gardner
 
Looks like it is time for my book list again.
 
 * I can highly recommend a book by Herschel Smith called "A History
of Aircraft Piston Engines" published by Sunflower University Press
Inc. 1531 Yuma, Manhattan, Kansas 66502-4228. ISBN 0-07-058472-9.
629.134'352 in a good library. This is a reprint of a book
originally published by McGraw Hill in 1981. Fourth printing 1993.
There are 250, 8.5 by 11 pages. It chronicles the evolution of the
aircraft engine from early days to the present. There are many
tables listing every engine ever put in an airplane with all
important specifications including weight, horsepower, RPM,
configuration and in some cases BSFC. There are many photos and
drawings of all types of aircraft engines. This is as close to a
bible of aircraft engine history that I have found so far. About
$22.
 
* Schneider Trophy Racers by Robert S. Hirsch. Motorbooks
International Osceola WI. Excellent history of the water cooled V12
leading up to the Merlin. Lots of good drawings done by the author
and photos.
 
* Thompson Trophy Racers. Roger Huntington. Motorbooks
International. 1989 ISBN 0-87938-365-8. $19.95. 8.5" by 11" 188
pages. Fascinating reading. Lots of good mechanical drawings, photos
and cut-aways on aircraft engines plus a good history of the
development of aircraft engines for air racing.
 
* Allied Aircraft Piston Engines of World War II by Grame White
published by the Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. 400 Copyright
1995. Commonwealth Drive Warrendale PA 15096-0001 (412) 7765 4841
Fax (412) 776 5760  8.5" by 11" hard bound 400 pages. ISBN 1-56091-
655-9.  Lots of good drawings, excellent  cutaways and illustrations
as well as photographs. Surprisingly not technical despite the
publisher. This is a well researched book with  extensive references
but rather disappointing to me as I would like to see a lot more
technical information about power curves verses BSFC, engine
weights, TBO's  and such. I expected a lot more from the SAE.
Therefor this expensive book is NOT recommended.
 
* Smithsonian Air & Space magazine article "Power Struggle" by Don
Sherman, January 1997, page 72. Excellent ten page  article (with
many pictures) about auto engines in airplanes. A brief history of
all auto engines in airplanes and a more detailed history of the
twenty year, twenty million dollar  development of the Chevy V8
based, all aluminum Orenda liquid cooled aircraft engine. At this
time (Jan 1997) and well after the article was written the engine
failed its FAA 150 hour full power certification test due to a
crankshaft problem after 20 years of very expensive development.
 
Extensive changes have been made to the basic Chevy big block engine
including a parallel cooling system with dual coolant pumps as
opposed to the serial cooling system with single pump as typically
found in automotive engines. Parallel cooling systems were
considered to be essential in the 1920's on liquid cooled aircraft
engines.
 
Engine length is almost everything to a car designer. Engine cooling
compromises are made by simezing the cylinder walls in automotive
engines. Crankshaft life at high continuous power is compromised by
shortening the length, leaving too little room for adequate size
journal fillet radii. In my opinion this engine will not be
successful until it is re-designed from a clean sheet of paper to be
a real aircraft engine. If that happens they might as well go to a
horzontal opposed configuration for lighter weight.
 
Orenda is now in the process of moving the project to Nova Scotia
and injecting another 32 million dollars of mostly Canadian
government money.
 
"Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
 
* Sky Ranch Engineering Manual. This book presents an excellent
overview of the problems of aircraft engines. It is 500  pages and a
bargain at only $23. There are many details on the materials and
processes used to build a successful aircraft engine. There is a
very good and exhaustive discussion of destructive  torsional
vibrations and fatigue. The telephone number  to buy this book is
(916) 421 7672. The author is John Schwaner. John is highly thought
of in the experimental aircraft community.
 
* For those of you with an engineering degree or equivalent Taylor's
series of books is the best there is. The bible of engine design.
 
The Internal Combustion Engine in Theory and Practice.
 
Volume 1: Thermodynamics, Fluid Flow, Performance. Second Edition
Revised.
 
Volume 2: Combustion, Fuels, Materials, Design. Revised. Charles
Fayette Taylor. The MIT Press Cambridge Massachusetts, and London
England.  AutoBooks in Burbank CA.
 
* Introduction to the Study of Aircraft Vibration and Flutter by
Robert H. Scanlan & Robert  Rosenbaum, Dover Publications touches
on crankshaft design. Lib Cong 68-22341.
 
* The definitive book on the rotary is simply called "ROTARY ENGINE"
by Kenichi Yamamoto published by Toyo Kogyo Co. Ltd. (Mazda) in
1969. This is a highly technical book chronicling the development of
the wankel by Mazda. Kenichi is an engineer and has risen to  CEO of
Mazda.
 
* Another technical book on the Wankle rotary engine is; "The Wankel
RC Engine Design and Performance" by R.F.Ansdale Published by A.S.
Barnes & Company Lib of Cong 69-18692
 
* The Wankel engine Design Development Application by Jan P. Norbye.
Chilton Book Company. ISBN 0-8019-5591-2 Published in 1971. A little
history and results of the Wankel engine development by NSU,
Mercedes, Mazda and others and some results of work by
Curtiss-Wright.  Also some history on all rotary engines. Not as
technical as I would like but not bad.
 
These books will be easier to find then the Toyo Kogyo book.
 
* Curtiss Wright published quite a few SAE papers back in the 60's
and 70's on their development of the rotary for aircraft use.
 
* The development of Piston Aero Engines by Bill Gunston 1993, 1994,
1995. ISBN 1 85260 385 2. Patrick Stevens Limited/Haynes Publishing
Sparkford Nr Yeovil, Somerset, BA227JJ. Hard bound 213 pages. $39.95
at the Wright Pat Airforce Museum.
 
The first half of the book is on basic principles and engine design.
For the most part this is very well done for the non-physicist
non-engineer reader.
 
The middle is a history of of the development of aircraft engines.
The author criticizes Fiat compared to Rolls-Royce for not
developing high HP per cubic inch while still acknowledging that the
V24 Fiat powered Macchi MC.72 still holds the world's seaplane
record set in 1934 at 440 MPH! Sounds like a little British Empire
envy to me. HP per cubic inch is irrelevant when it comes to
aircraft engines. What really counts is continuous  HP per pound and
continuous HP per square foot of engine frontal area.  There is no
replacement for displacement.
 
The last chapter;  "Chapter 8 Piston Engines Today and Tomorrow"
categorizes engines by air cooled, liquid cooled, diesels  and
unconventional. All engines are included world wide no matter how
obscure  starting with low power engines for ultra-lights through
auto engine conversions. The major fault with this chapter is all
engines are listed from PR information regardless if they have flown
or even run for that matter. Teledyne Continental is given almost
equal weight with TTL (UK). Ever hear of TTL (UK)?
 
In the case of auto engine conversions he quotes Blanton with his
Ford V6 powered Cessna  175 that supposedly cruised faster than the
GO-300 (geared opposed) model and unrealistically burned 6.8 gallons
an hour (90 HP at 0.45 BSFC) instead of 12 gallons per hour for the
GO-300 (157 HP at 0.45 BSFC) without checking the numbers. Bill
Gunston should know better.
 
I think Bill  Gunston is a little gullible. Other than that the
book seems to be excellent.
 
* SAE Paper # 871042    0148-7191/87/0428-1042 $2.50 Design and
Development of the Voyager 200/300 Liquid Cooled Aircraft Engine by
R.E. Wilkinson. Twenty pages. Published in 1987. This paper is about
the engine used in the Rutan Voyager around-the-world un-refueled
record holder. If you never read anything else about any kind of
engine you must read this paper. It is by far the most informative
and up to date information on liquid cooled engines there is.
 
The real critical limitations of the aluminum head engine are
thoroughly explored. That is; the temperature of the metal
immediately adjacent to the combustion chamber. Aluminum loses half
of it's fatigue life when the temperature goes up from 250 degrees
to 500 degrees F. Therefor this temperature limits the amount of
continuous power obtainable from any engine whether air-cooled or
liquid cooled. Just because the coolant temp. is less than 220
degrees F does not mean the metal next to the combustion chamber is
anywhere near that at high power levels. The continuous HP
requirements are far higher for an aircraft engine than they are for
an auto engine or pickup truck engine.
 
The Automotive manufacturers rarely publish any real information
about engines in the SAE due to the highly competitive nature of the
automobile marketplace.  This paper is an outstanding exception for
the SAE. A must read bargain of real information.
 
* SAE Paper 690302. Designing Cast Components for V8 Engines. J.L.
Fitz et. al. Central Foundry Division of GM. Written before GM
clamped a lid on all real information published by their engineers
in the form of SAE papers. This paper is about the trials and
tribulations of making an engine work as designed by the stylist
and using chewing gum materials as specified by the bean counters.
 
* SAE paper 841221 Development of Powder-Forged Connecting Rods
by K. Imaahashi, C. Tsumuki, & I. Nagare.  Toyota Motor Corp.
The conversion of Kg/mm^2 to P.S.I is by multiplying Kg/mm^2 by 1.45.
The Toyoto rods, according to this paper, are about as good as forged
SAE 10L55. Aircraft engine rods are made from forged 4340 which has
at least a 25% better fatigue life than forged SAE 10L55.
 
* Photo-Elastic Analysis by A. W. Hendry, Pergamon Press investigates
stress concentrations in complex machine parts such as crankshafts
and connecting rods. Lib of Cong # 65-29062. Only recently has
computer finite element analyses developed to the point of
perhaps doing a better job on crankshafts than these techniques
invented in the 30's. The book has a great bibliography on the
subject.
 
* V-6 BUICK FORD & CHEVY 90 deg./60 deg. Performance. by Pat Ganahl
CARTECH 1988 ISBN 0-931472-13-X $18.95 I normally don't recommend
books of this genre as they do not have the detailed and factual
engineering information such as BSFC, stress and heat rejection
information necessary to successfully adapt and auto engine to
aircraft use. What this book does, in it's introduction and
crankshaft chapters, is discuss the myriad compromises that led to
the 90 degree V6 auto engine.
 
The real reason such a fundamentally mechanically unbalanced and
problematical design is used in cars is revealed. I.E. the properly
designed, high displacement, 60 degree V6 is too tall for modern car
styling and the 90 deg. V6 can be made on the same production line
as the V8. Consider this book one that should be read on why you
should not put a 90 degree V6 in your airplane. Besides, all V and
in-line engines are trying to jam their crankshafts out the bottom
of their blocks anyway. This is one of the reasons they are
inevitably heavier than opposed engines.
 
* Hotrod Magazine. GEN III. The first look at the all new GM
small-block V8 LS1. By Jeff Smith. Page 50, September 1996. Normally
auto magazines do not publish the material specifications for auto
engine parts. This article on the AL alloy block Chevy V8 LS1 engine
is an exception. Crank, rods and main bearing caps are specified as
either cast iron or powdered metal. Chevy actually went down on the
valve stem diameter to reduce the valve weight. This is not what is
needed for good heat rejection in high duty cycle engines.  Lots of
other engine details are included.
 
* Metallurgy Fundamentals Daniel A. Brandt The Goodhart Willcox
Comp. Inc 1992 ISBN 0-87006-922-5 Lib of Congress 91-22280 Lots of
data on heat treating, hardness, properties of steel, crystal
structure, failure & deformation, microscopic structure, surface
hardening, etc. and stress.
 
* GM Performance Parts 1997 Parts Catalog. $6.95 at your friendly GM
dealer. GM may put chewing gum cast iron and powdered metal parts
in their light duty engines installed in their passenger cars and
trucks but they will be glad to sell you the 4340 chrome molly  good
stuff in the parts catalog. Of course all other manufactures are
putting chewing gum parts in their passenger car engines as well. I
am not singling out GM.
 
I have nothing to do with any of these publishers.
 
Feel free to send this list of books and papers to anyone who may be
interested in engines.
 
Paul Lamar
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 16:00:05 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: HP and torque curve differences
 
Marvin Kaye wrote:
 
Hi Paul,
 
I noticed your comments to Barry about the Lyc/Chrysler comparison, very
interesting...
 
In a word breathing. Not only the cam but the exhaust and the intake
of the aircraft engine is optimised for 2700 RPM as well as the
structure.
 
I was under the impression that a lot had to do with the bore and stroke as
well... the auto engine probably has a smaller bore and uses a long stroke,
where the Lyc has a pretty large bore and uses a short stroke.  Is this not
true?
 
   <Marv>
 
Big bore short stroke helps the breathing as you can get bigger valves
for the same displacement or engine weight.
 
The over riding thing to always remember is:... HP per pound of engine weight
is way more important than HP per cubic inch. Only in car racing
does HP per cubic inch matter.
 
Here is another place where the rotary engines shines.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 15:54:16 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Coatings Resources]
 
StJames515@aol.com wrote:
 
Hi Paul,
With the thread going on ceramics and coatings, I though some would be
interested in a list of sites on these ideas that I have collected over time.
Try the first site --TechLine as they have a good FAQ page for "automotive"
use.  Their products can be ordered from a dealer, powerhouseproducts.com
 
I hope these resources will help someone
Tommy James
 
http://www.goracing.com/techline/index.html
http://www.hpcoatings.com
http://www.zypcoatings.com/
http://www.vaportech.com/noframes/auto.htm
http://www.cyberhost7.net/performa/index.html
http://www.airborncoatings.com/index.html
http://www.swaintech.com/sindex.html
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 16:02:26 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Water pump weight and FWF weight for rotary.
 
Tracy Crook wrote:
 
Gerry Hess wrote:
 
Paul, the 12A water pump is 19 pounds and the 12A short block without pump
is 190 lbs. I have an aluminum pump outer housing and a cast iron center on
my single rotor. (vintage 1986 6 port) The centre piece weighs 9 lbs.
 
This resulted in a longblock minus PSRU of 155 lbs, and total firewall weight of 202.
Even a complete factory aluminum pump is a godawfull abortion and I believe
a pump could be built out of a billet of T6 using only the factory shaft,
bearing, and impeller, that would be lighter and lower for cowling comfort.
 
I have a thing about modifications. I do them all the time, but always try
to use the stock critical componants as they are time tested and readily
available.
 
Gerry
 
19 pounds!  Yikes!  Another reason to choose the 13B instead of the 12A.  I
just measured the 13B pump including housing at 8.75 pounds(1988 model).
Sounds like the 13B block is a bit lighter too.  Mine was 180 as I recall.
 
My FWF weight is 340 pounds (everything except prop).   Compare this to a
typical 0 - 320 installation (on Cessna 172 or similar) at 355 to 385.  I
was able to find 3 examples that people had actually unbolted from the plane
and weighed.   The Lycoming book lists the total engine weight as about 276
pounds but that does not include a lot of stuff found in a typical engine
installation.
 
Tracy
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 16:12:02 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Tracy Crook's EFI Installation and Tuning guide
 
Tracy Crook wrote:
 
Paul Yaw wrote:
 
Hi everybody,
 
I need to contact Tracy Crook. (Good thing he is not a car
salesman!...That goes for Dave Lemon too!)
 
I need to know what your engine management package is capable of, and
how it works.  If it is appropriate for a turbocharged engine, I will
need one within a few weeks.  Hope to hear from you soon.  Thank you.
 
Paul Yaw
 
Paul Yaw,  if you will send me your snail mail address I'll send you the
installation and tuning guide for the engine controller I make.  That is
probably the best way to get an idea of what its about.   I haven't tried it
but I doubt that it would work very well on an automotive application.
Boats and airplanes would work fine with it though.
 
Tracy Crook
 
       "Tracy Crook" <rws@altavista.net>
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 20:59:51 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Intake and Exhaust Manifold Tuning
 
V. E. Welch wrote:
 
Thank you for the information.  You said in your reply:
 
If you have room a rolled up exhaust manifold/muffler will work.
Again there are plans on the NL web site. >
 
I took a look at the sketch an have a couple of questions.  Is there
anything inside of the muffler or is it just a hollow 6" tube with the ends
welded closed and the inlet and outlet pipes welded to it?  How should this
be modified to accept the turbocharger?  Would you recommend inconel for the
tube and stainless for the muffler or should the entire assembly be inconel?
 
Vince
 
Yes! Quite empty. You won't need it with a turbo as a turbo extracts
so much energy from the exhaust it is quiet enough.
 
Just a function of cost and weight. If you make it all out
of Inconel you can use 0.049 and it will weigh less.
If you use 0.049 Inconel down pipes and 0.065 ss can and exhaust 
pipe it will be heavier and cost less.
 
If all 0.065 ss it will cost even less and be even heavier. 
 
In other words mixing and matching is acceptable if you find the
right welder.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 21:13:43 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Compact Intake Manifold
 
V. E. Welch wrote:
 
Paul,
 
I was just looking at your intake manifold sketch on your site.  Is there
any material specification for the tube that encloses the intake tubes?
 
The subtle beauty of that design is the rolled up tubes act as ribs
so 0.040 aluminum can be used as a plenum chamber and wrapped
around the tubes. If this was not the case the plenum would collapes
if the throttle was suddenly closed due to a high vacume in the 
intake manifold. The end of the tubes should be flared slightly.
 
The end covers should be dommed by hamering
over a wood block form or spun on a lathe. 6061-o should be used 
for the ends and 6061 T6 for everything else as 6061 is a 
weldable aluminum alloy.
 
On your muffler sketch you gave an O.D. of 6" but no length is mentioned,
does it matter or can any convenient length the fabricated?
 
Thanks,
 
Vince
 
Any convient length with about an eight inch minimum. 
 
BTW I will advertise these on here for free
if you wish to make up several for sale.
Perhaps Paul Yaw or Matt would like to test these on his dyno so
a prototype might be wise.
 
Paul 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 21:29:24 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Plane for reduction drive.
 
Wood Family wrote:
 
Paul,
 
My 2.48 to 1 reduction drive is going in a Wag Aero Sportsman.
The plans call for any where from 125 to 180 H.P. Empty weight
is 1100 and gross is 2200 lbs.  I carved a
75-60 prop for it. According to my calculations this should keep
the prop tip speed below 80% mach at a reasonable rpm. I think
I was figureing on 6500 but it has been a while.
 
Excellent! 6500 RPM will buy you quite a bit more power.
2.48 to one is almost ideal for that type of airplane.
The only thing better would be a variable pitch prop.
How wide is your chain?
 
On the spring disk comeing apart in a ross re-drive I have heard
of others developeing cracks and advice was given to change
them at 1000 hrs. On my drive I have used a heavy duty truck
clutch disk but I am not sure it was really necessary. It is believed
that the Hi-Vo chain takes care of the torsional vibration thru the
dampening effect of the chain throwing out in an arc.
 
Lonnie
rwood@iceinternet.com
 
I would stick with the disk. Tracy has at least 650 hours on his
disk and maybe 900 if he did not change it when he sent the PSRU
back to Ross for overhaul at 650 Hours. 
 
Did you change that clutch disk Tracy?
 
Other people have not reported any failures so far as I know.
 
As I recall the ones I saw were Ficthel(s) and Sachs(s) and
probably came from a high power BMW manual transmission car.
 
Paul 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 21:44:48 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: HP and torque curve differences
 
facilitator1@juno.com wrote:
 
        HP fine Torque important. Older cars & Aircraft use
        big bore, long stroke. Long stroke =large crank
        radius=twist power.
        Short stroke small bore = more hp &rpm to get same
        thing. RPM important therefore PSRU used+weight
        penalty. Are we making progress ??
        Rotary Rules !!
                        Virg
 
Terse!
 
P
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 21:41:57 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Sleep.
 
Archie Frangoudis wrote:
 
Paul, I have been on this rotary site for about a week now, and being a
neophyte in the rotary realm.
(most of my product is between 800 and 5000hp)
Every time I check in to see what's new, you are there.
Do you ever sleep?
Archie
 
Off and on :-) I do odd jobs around the house and drive up
to the hangar 60 miles away. Yesterday I put new front brake pads
in the Cougar at the hangar. 
 
This week I hope to install the new engine in the 182 if 
I finally get the throttle, prop and flap control 
cables I ordered from AC Spruce.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 21:43:08 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Tracy Crook's EFI Installation and Tuning guide
 
facilitator1@juno.com wrote:
 
        Tracy, What eng for KR-1??
        Original was 36hp WV. Then went to 2100cc
        turbo. Like to keep it to 40/65hp.
 
        THX, Virg
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 07:16:43 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: 900 HP Racing Beat 3 rotor ducted fan airplane.
 
Richard White wrote:
 
Paul wrote:
 
If I were doing it this is the way I would do it.
 
Jeez, you must have been reading my mind.  That's eerily similar to my
plan for a single engine high speed ducted fan.  Except my intake and
exhaust runs are bit shorter, as allowed by the shape of the fuselage at
that point.  And my engine cooling goes on the spark plug side to
balance it out.
 
Happy Times Upon You,
Richard.
 
There is usually only one right way :-)
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 07:33:09 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Free cooling calculations spreadsheet.
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
 >
 > Paul,
 >         I have worked up a spreadsheet that provides:
 > 1st Order Estimates (calculations based on energy content of fuel) of
 > power for 1,2,or 3 rotor engines as well as cooling requirements at
 > those by horse power produced.  You can change A/F ratio, Rpm
 > range/increments, throttle setting, altitude Sea-level/8000 MSL, and OAT
 > temp (determines air density) as well as fuel injection subsystem
 > parameters.
 >
 > The results are Horsepower by rpm, fuel burn, BTU rejection needed thru
 > radiators and oil cooler (and it does calculations for injector timing
 > as well).
 >
 > It is not a Load compensating simulation but simply a set of
 > calculations, but it appears to give within first order approximation
 > the power outputs being reported.  Sort of fun to play with in any case.
 >
 > I removed the oil cooler part as it was germain only if you used my oil
 > cooler and required too many links. However, it does provide a perhaps
 > useful data on the BTUs you need to shed via radiator or oil cooler.
 >
 > Unfortunately, it uses a "Lookup" function that won't translate to
 > Lotus. I have tried and check with some spreadsheet experts.
 > Someone, Lotus knowledgeable would probably be able to come up with a
 > substitute function, but I can't.
 >
 > I know you only have Lotus, I offer it for free to folks on the news 
 > letter who have Excel who might want to play with it.  I am certain
 > numerous refinements could be made to make it more "real" world, but
 > like I said for first order calcuations it may be close enough.
 >
 > Ed  My e mail is anderson_ed@bah.com
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 09:11:54 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Plan for reduction drive.
 
Tracy Crook wrote:
 
On the spring disk comeing apart in a ross re-drive I have heard
of others developeing cracks and advice was given to change
them at 1000 hrs. On my drive I have used a heavy duty truck
clutch disk but I am not sure it was really necessary. It is believed
that the Hi-Vo chain takes care of the torsional vibration thru the
dampening effect of the chain throwing out in an arc.
 
Lonnie
rwood@iceinternet.com
 
I would stick with the disk. Tracy has at least 650 hours on his
disk and maybe 900 if he did not change it when he sent the PSRU
back to Ross for overhaul at 650 Hours.
 
Did you change that clutch disk Tracy?
 
Have seen no problem with the clutch damper and still using the same one at
800+ hours.   I can't imagine how the amphib driver broke one.  May have
been a fluke.  As far as I know, only one person has put 1000 hours on a
Ross drive so there really is no valid TBO data on this drive.   Another
reason for this is that I don't think any two of them are exactly alike.
 
Tracy Crook   rws@altavista.net
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 09:34:38 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
CC: Paul Yaw <yawpower@theriver.com>
Subject: Paul Yaw email address
 
StJames515@aol.com wrote:
 
Hi Paul,
Can you give me Paul Yaw's email address?
I tried one on his website, but got no response.
TIA
Tommy James
 
Paul Yaw <yawpower@theriver.com>
 
I have not heard from him for awhile either. He might
be out of town.
 
Paul 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 09:18:41 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: One rotor in a KR1? Source for one rotors.
 
Tracy Crook wrote:
 
facilitator1@juno.com wrote:
 
        Tracy, What eng for KR-1??
        Original was 36hp WV. Then went to 2100cc
        turbo. Like to keep it to 40/65hp.
 
        THX, Virg
 
Hate to sound like I'm deserting the rotary camp here but for that plane I'd
install a 503 Rotax (52 HP) and learn the proper care & feeding of it.  I
have over 730 hours on my 503 powered Twinstar.  Only the piston rings have
been replaced.  The 13B is way too heavy and even a one rotor would be a bit
much if they were available off the shelf (which I don't think they are).
 
Tracy Crook   rws@altavista.net
 
You can get them. Try http://www.onerotor.com
Opps you will need a browser. juno.com won't work. No browser.
 
Here is the address and phone number.
Eco-Max Systems, Inc.
 13320 Southridge Industrial Drive
 Tavares, Florida  32778
 Phone: (352)  742-7757
 Fax:     (352)  742-8308
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 09:39:34 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Flying list.
 
Anderson Ed wrote:
 
Add me to the list
Will send photo later
Ed
 
Name:           Ed Anderson   anderson_ed@bah.com
Local:          Vienna, VA (Near Washington D.C.)
Aircraft:       RV-6A
Engine:         4 port 13B naturally asperated fuel injected
First Flight:   Sep 21 1998
Total hours:    16 as of 17 Jan 99
 
Name:    Neil Kruiswyk    neilk@sprint.ca
Local:    Near Toronto Canada
Aircraft:    Lancair 235
Engine:    4 port 13B natuarlly asperated fuel injected
First Flight: Sep 1988
 
Name: Jim Mosur    jmosur@interlog.com
Local:    Near Toronto Canada
Aircraft:    Vans RV-6
Engine:    4 port 13B natuarlly asperated carburated
First Flight: July 1998
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 15:29:03 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Plan for reduction drive.
 
Gerry Hess wrote:
 
Hi Tracy
I was in the Ross Aero shop when your redrive was in for overhaul. The unit
looked good except for spalling on the gears which Chris determined to be
from the oil spray not correctly focused on the gears. He corrected this, as
I'm sure you know. You are correct in the use of a Sachs spring unit, part
#BBD0107UL Driven plate assembly. Your unit looked very good when I saw it.
Unfortunately, as in most experimental things (planes included) no two units
are exactly alike, as Chris tries to incorporate improvements or knowledge
gained into them. Someday it would be nice if a proven experimental design
could be sent to an engineering firm for debugging and design analysis.
There are a lot of Ross drives out there and it would be nice to know the
strengths and weaknesses and what is over or under designed.
 
    Lou Ross was experimenting with a gearset from a Chevy Turbo 400 trans
when he took sick, and I like the gearset as the teeth are much thicker, and
the material is softer. As I'm not an engineer, my assesment is only from
experience, and I think the course teeth will stand up better to dirt, and
miss-alignment, and will heat less as there is more space at the root for
oil to be carried, instead of compressed. The softer teeth will be less
subject to spalling. The drag race crowd loves this tranny, too.
 
So does the off shore boat racers. Art Carr rates his PowerGlide version
at 1000 HP. It looks harder to adapt to a PSRU and may be heavier.
 
The planet carrier is steel rather than aluminum.
 
Any idea Gerry, what the ratios are with this planet set?
Art Carr does not seem to be able to tell me. Only the overall
ratio in each gear.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 15:41:02 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Ignition Timing
 
Rodger Hilyard wrote:
 
Paul, I am running a 1974 RX-4,13B direct drive to prop at
3200 to 4000 rpm.
     I would like to use the trailing plugs as a true second ignition
source, however the power output with factory timing settings
does not provide full power with trailing ignition only. The engine
responds well to trail ignition only advance, however various
sources (Racing Beat etc.) warn of engine distruction sensitivity
to trailing ign timing. Is this destruction tendency reduced/eliminated
if the over advance of trail ign. is applied only when lead ign is
inoperative??
 
  Thanks for making this forum available. Rodger N222EX D-Fly
 
I don't know. I would believe Jim Mederer of Racing Beat as he
has decades of expierence with rotaries. I just saw a rotor
from an engine with a failed apex seal. It was not pretty.
The broken seal jammed in the exhaust port and tore the housing
up as well as the rotor slot.
 
What kind of airplane is this engine going in? I have always
wanted to try direct drive but with a turbo charger to
boost the HP back up at only 3500 RPM. One does not get much HP at
3500 RPM in a normally aspirated rotary. I think the turbo combination
has the potential to lower the BSFC or increase the MPG to put it
another way.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
 
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 15:45:32 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: One rotor in a KR1? Source for one rotors.
 
facilitator1@juno.com wrote:
 
        Tracy, THX for info. being a diehard, i am going to
        use 36 hp VW. Thot 1 rotor would be same wt.
        Better over all. Fun etc.   Virg
        Say hi to Don, Beltronics, 1239 Main St
 
Along as you don't ask for more than 36 HP 
and use a very light weight prop that VW ought to last
as long as any aircraft engine. Back in the days when I owned
a split window you could run that thing day in and day out
at its top speed of 72 MPH. :-)
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 18:14:46 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: End housing repair.
 
MAR34807@aol.com wrote:
 
mazdatrix also does this when they get a batch in- I recently had it done for
the rear end housing, took about a month-cost is on their web site.......
 
I would not be a bit surprised if they don't farm it out to Jim at RB
just across town. I have been in Mazdatrix shop and saw no such lapper.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
 
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 19:06:04 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Silent Chain Design
 
Bill Freeman wrote:
 
Paul,
 
Looking up "Chain Drives" in my Shigley "Std
Hdbk of Machine Design" (**highly recommended**,
Shigley is one of the great authors in Mech Eng).
 
The first point is the assumptions:
     1) 20,000 hr life
     2) ideal conditions of lubrication
     3) no shocks or load variations
 
First point - no way does a prop drive qualify as
"no shocks or load variations" **especially** if you
insist on spins and acro - like some of these
big HP V8 powered birds are likely to be used.
 Is your lube going to be "IDEAL"??
 
A few examples from the tables:
 
3/8"  pitch chain
no: of teeth on small sprocket:  27
small sprocket RPM:   6000 (max in table)
HP per inch of face width:   16
 
1/2 " pitch chain
no: of teeth on small sprocket:  27
small sprocket RPM:   4000 (max in table)
HP per inch of face width:   23
 
5/8" pitch chain
no. teeth (small) :  27
small sprocket RPM:  3500 (max in table)
HP per inch of face:  26
 
So, you want a 200 hp silent chain,
and use 1/2" pitch chain;  figure on
making the sprockets 8+" face width.
HEAVY and BIG.
 
I calculated that one of  the well known chain
drives used on many AC with BIG V8 motors is
rated at about 55-65 HP by the factory method,
 ( I had to estimate the pitch from photos) and
the owners are claiming about 10X this HP.
 
I would not bet MY life  that the 20,000 hr life
rating scales linearly.  My guess is the life of
the 65 HP rated drive when operated at 650 HP
TO & climb  plus 400 hp cruise is going to be alot
closer to 200 hrs than 2000 hrs.
 
Y'all be careful out there.  A little bit of knowledge
is a dangerous thing.    And as Paul has said:
The laws of physics will be strictly enforced.
Nobody gets a waiver    :-)
 
Bill
 
-- 
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 19:02:36 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Chain specs
 
Wood Family wrote:
 
Paul,
 
  Here are some of the specs on the Hi-Vo chain. Ultimate tensile strength
for 1" wide, 3/8 pitch is 7,500 lbs. 1.5" chain is 11,250 lbs.
There are 8 plates across the 1" chain and 12 on the 1.5", each plate .060"
There are two concentric pins per joint, they look like this when in their hole: )(
and the hole looks like a round cookie with a bite out of it. Each pin in
cross section measures .060 x .150.
Small sprocket 23 tooth and 2.754" pitch. Large 57T and 6.807" pitch.
I roughly figured that at 200 ft.lbs torque(probably high) that the chain would
have about 1275 pounds tension on it, but then I am not an engineer, nor do
I play one on TV.
 
Thanks for your thoughts on this.
Lonnie
rwood@iceinternet.com
 
200 ft pounds of torque is a tangential or tension force of 200 pounds 
on a one foot radius.
 
If the small sprocket has a diameter of 2.754... divide by 2 or
a radius of 1.377. So 12/1.377 times 200 pounds is a tension force
of 1743. Actually  that is the average torque so 500 pound is more
like the peak torque. So the peak tension in the chain is more
like 4400 pounds.
 
The clutch disk should moderate this peak torque somewhat. If nothing
else it should extend the chain life.
 
Certainly seems like it can handle it. Just keep checking the 
backlash for chain wear.
 
Paul
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org
 
______________________________________________________
 
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 19:13:16 -0800
From: Paul <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: z <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
Subject: Chain and Belt Drive Cantilever redux
 
Bill Freeman wrote:
 
Paul,
 
Probably time to reiterate the fundamental problem
with all belt or chain drive systems that cantilever
the pulley/sprocket on the end of the crank.  High
bending stresses in the crank.
 
You've got a lot of newbys that may not have
seen that one --- and it IS important if someone
is planning to make their own redrive.