Subject: John Andrich's turbo Long EZ cooling
From: Rotary Engine
Date: 10/24/2007, 10:26 AM
To: AARotary Engine



             John and his partner have been working on this for a long
   time.
             Something like
             20 years. Just recently did they get it flying. The first
   thing
        that
             happened was they lost an apex seal. Probably due to
   detonation.
             They over hauled the engine and then the turbo let go. Nothing
        new here
             as that is probably about the 8th 2nd gen turbo to let go. The
        turbo
             caught fire when it failed. Fortunately not a lot of
   damage and
        John
             was able
             to glide to a safe landing back at Camarillo. The turbo is
   being
             modified
             to Dave Leonards spec. Hopefully we will get a report
   after his
        5000
             to 6000
             mile trip.

             I was unaware they were flying. The last time I saw the
        airplane was
             about five or six years
             ago. If I had known about it I could have warned them
   about the
             detonation
             and the 2nd gen turbo. You MUST monitor the intake charge air
             temperature and keep
             it below 140 F or you WILL get detonation sooner rather
   than later.
             We have known about and discussed  the 2nd gen turbo problems
        for at
             least two years
             and maybe three.

             The PSRU is a home made belt unit built according to Blanton's
             plans. The ratio
             is 2:1 so they need a lot of boost to get the HP. They had
   the
        large
             pulley custom
             made by a broach shop in LA.

             They are running 50 inches Hg MAP for take off and 45
   inches of
             HG  MAP for climb
             out.  Max rpm for climb out is 4500.  Static engine RPM is
   5100
        RPM.
             The turbo is working hard.  Cruise is 4000 RPM with 42 inches
        of Hg.
             TAS is 160 MPH. Fuel burn on take off and climb out is about
        7.5 gallons
             an hour extrapolated from the last short trip when the
   turbo failed
             so they are not making very much power despite the high
   manifold
             pressure. The manifold itself is stock without the mass
   air flow
             sensor. Just the stock TB. You can get away with that if you
        use a belt
             drive as the engine sits lower. They are using Tracy's EFI
   unit
        instead
             of the stock computer.

             During prior cruise flights they were burning 4.6 to 5.0
        gallons and
             hour.
             More about the cooling system shortly.

             Did I get all this right John?

             Paul Lamar ...No rotor no motor.



        Courageous, but it seems that people insist on working too hard on
        things that they don't need to and skip taking care of some
   important
        stuff.  Buy the PSRU.  Build (or buy) a P-Port.  _Everyone's_
   time is
        worth something.

        I think all new installs need to run on a test stand at high power
        settings - takeoff power - for at least 50 hours .  If not a
   test stand,
        on the chained down airplane with fan cooling.  People make too
   many
        rosey assumptions about how much better things will go once
   there's
        slipstream cooling air through the system.  I'd make exceptions
   to this
        if an install is a _direct_ copy of another which already works
        reliably.  In that case, only spend 25 hours on the
   stand.  There are no
        direct copies!!  Hah.  :)  Lots of useful stuff will be learned
   in the
        process of making it run well on the ground.  It's a tough pill to
        swallow because lots of builders really want to be fliers instead.

        I don't think they're undergeared so much as overpropped.  It's
   not all
        that unusual for a LongEz to cruise with the prop at 3000RPM.  They
        aren't supposed to have props with diameter greater than 62"
   (though
        some aircraft do), so I think 3000RPM is no big deal, and that
   would
        allow a 6000RPM engine speed.  They need less pitch, less diameter,
        and/or a better prop airfoil.  Do these guys have any other EZ
        experience?  Oh wait, are they running an IVO or Warp drive - I
   think I
        can see it in one of the pics.  How fast are they allowed to
   turn?  And
        at what RPM does that blade get really inefficient?


        Matt-

        I think you are being a bit hard on them Matt. A lot of these
   decisions
        were made over ten years ago. Probably before one could buy a PSRU
        off the
        shelf. These guys are true rotary engine pioneers along with Yvon
        Cournoyer
        and Ken Welter with a similar belt drive PSRU's. We have come a
   long
        way since
        1997. Turbo chargers have advantages at high altitude (12K to 14K)
        cruise.

        Here is the cooling stuff. The original configuration was a
   real thick
        (5 or 6 inches) custom rad core in the nose. I did not think it
        would work when
        I first saw it and of course it did not work. They adopted the
   super
        simple, super
        quick under the fuse mounted  heat exchanger with Kays & London
   wedge
        shaped diffuser. Works like a charm. Super slick cowl. So far
   water temp
        is 205 F take off and 185 F cruise.

        Oil cooling in the nose is two Earl's supply oil coolers back to
        back in the
        cross counter flow configuration. In other words the back cooler
        gets the
        hot oil first. Oil temp is 205 F on take off and climb out and
   192 F
        in cruise.
        --
        Paul Lamar ...No rotor no motor.


   Yeah Paul,  you're right..  I was at work when I wrote that.  I still
   think they are over-propped..


   Matt-

   They could be. We will see when they get the new turbo charger.
   One bit of evidence against that is the 5100 static RPM.

   Perry Mick, what is your static RPM again? I think the Andrich turbo
   Long EZ MPG
   might work out to be exceptional. It is showing some signs of that
   already.
   John and I discussed the reasons for the new 16B. I think we both
   agree Mazda
   made it larger with more torque so they could raise the RX8 axle
   ratio and
   cut the 80 MPH cruise RPM to reduce engine friction. What would be
   ideal of
   course is a constant speed prop.

   --
   Paul Lamar ...No rotor no motor.


I just want to reiterate my apology for being down and grumpy on the
Andrich's LongEZ - my last apology was more of an excuse, really (lame).

The Andrichs have a real, flying rotary powered airplane.  That has
obviously taken a lot of smarts, ingenuity, and a ton of effort.  I
applaud their capability and dedication and wish them the best of luck.
I hope we are able to keep abreast of their development process and
contribute good ideas when we can.


Best regards,

Matt-



The Rotary Engine NewsLetter. Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site. http://www.rotaryeng.net
Copyright 1998-2007 All world wide rights reserved.