> Let's not imply that shock mounts will allow a radiator to be mounted to
 > something that is moving (like a Lamar special firewall shock mount engine
 > truss)  Radiators should be mounted to stationary structures lest they
crack
 > and fail.
 >
 > Jeff Spitzer

 I don't follow you Jeff. I was planing on mounting mine to
 a stationary motor mount with the above rubber mounts and with
 the wiggins couplings. In the case of "Lamar special firewall shock
 mount engine truss" yes it is moving but the rad could be mounted
 to it with the same rubber mounts. What is wrong with that
 except perhaps for sympathetic vibration modes? The rad will be up
 around 20 or 30 cps with respect to the engine while the
 mount should be much lower than that but maybe not.

 Paul Lamar >>

Now I don't follow you.  The Lamar special truss is vibrating with the same
accelerations as the engine 'cause they are hard mounted together.  

Given.

I would
not suggest mounting a rad to such a truss even with shock mounts.  Just
because the shock mounts have a resonant frequency of 5/7/10 hz whatever says
nothing of the vibration that exists on the engine side of the isolators.
Mount your radiator to the "airframe" and not the "engine".

Jeff Spitzer

Well in Perry's case that is going to be hard to do. Currently his
engine is rigidly mounted to the airframe and at least one end of
the rad is mounted to the back of the engine. Any leaks so far Perry?
It might be better than what he has now.

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

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