Mike Wills wrote:

At 11:31 AM 10/21/1999 -0700, you wrote:

An airplane can use such a low drag radiator if it is mounted at an
acute angle to the general airflow. In that case the air must turn
almost 90 degrees to go through the core. This will work and is
working very well in Jim Mosur's and other people's airplanes
but we need to do some more work on the duct to even the flow
through the rads.

Paul Lamar

Paul,

 Id like to see Jim Mosur respond to this. I'll agree that his rads arent
perpendicular to the airflow, but nearly 90 degrees? No way from the many
pictures of Jims install that Ive seen. I'd guess maybe as much as 45
degrees but then how sure can you be looking at a picture? How about it Jim?

 Who are the "others" using a core requiring a 90 degree turn that are
successfully flying the engine? The only other example that I'm aware of is
Tracy's stock Mazda oil cooler installation. And even with the addition of
his oil pan coolant loop his oil cooler installation doesnt seem to work as
well as Jim's and Ed's who are using the same cooler oriented perpendicular
to the airflow. Feel free to correct me but Jim and Ed are the only guys
Ive ever heard of with too much oil cooler capacity.

Jim Mayfield has a rad under his Wankel engine and Chuck Harbert's
main radiator is flat under his engine. Both have crude sheet metal 
scoops with no boundry layer air bleed. I have pictures of both.
 

 Believe me Paul, I want to believe cause it sure would make my
installation easier but prove it to me by pointing me to a successfully
flying example.

Mike Wills

I used "almost 90 degrees" loosely :-) Here is a picture of Jim's set
up.
There are two rads like this one on either side.

Due to the taper of the cowl it looks like about 60-30 degrees to
the internal airflow  rather than 90 degrees.

Paul Lamar
 
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter.              Powered by Linux.

http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org