Subject: Second flight
From: rotaryeng
Date: 6/27/2012, 1:06 AM
To: AAAA Put this in the To box



 As loyal viewers may recall in my first flight two weeks ago my
 oil temps   were higher   than desired. So, after using the fine
 guys and gals here as a resource   and some fact   checking I
 determined I was measuring the oil temps at the wrong location.   Since
     coolant was measured coming out of the engine, I assumed the oil
 would be   measured   coming out too. Wrong.

     So, over the last two weeks I moved one of my oil temp sensors location
     after the
     coolers just before it goes into the engine.

     Ideally, I would have made it to the airport really early while still
     somewhat cool
     but my hostess and I lingered a bit this am. Then I had to drive
 home to   check on mom   who is fighting cancer.

     I finally made to the hangar about1:30pm<x-apple-data-
 detectors://0. Yep.   Hot ad   hell. Called the tower on the phone
 to let them know intent. Same as last   time.   Desire to climb to
 about 1700 and fly around the field testing base flight   and engine
    characteristics.

     I did a slow preflight. Cranked up the engine which cooperated nicely.
     Taxied from my
     hangar and called tower on the radio. Was cleared to Echo on 35L.
     Proceeded to echo.
     Ran-up. Temps were sweet at about 160 coolant and 140 oil. Tower informed
     me a C-130
     was on final and asked how long I needed on the runway. I told
 him I could   roll and   go. I was cleared for immediate take off
 and to track the C-130. I applied   power,   lined up and added more
 power. Leaned the mixture slightly and power came   in. I had
   coursed the prop a bit as to not again reach 3100 rpm. Airspeed was
 slower   to build   but was developing. When I hit 70 kts I pulled
 back and started flying.   Wow. It was   much more sluggish today
 but I was climbing while maintaining around 90   kts. I   flattened
 the prop a bit and climbed a bit better. The prop was turning
   about 2800   rpm now. Turned to crosswind and kept climbing. Turned
 to downwind. I was   around 1500   on downwind. Well, kinda. My
 altitude was all over the place between 1400   and 1700.   Really
 bumpy today...not too surprising with ramp OAT showing 109. Hey, in
   Houston,   ya gotta test in the heat cuz ya gonna be flying in the heat.

     I then started flying around in circles. Checking engine
 parameters a lot   while   flying the airplane. Good news. Neither
 the oil or water ever broke 203   that I saw.   That was only on
 climb. I seconded from 1700, this time on purpose and   noted the
   decreasing trend of both oil and coolant temps. Pressures were in
 the   middle of the   green bands. EGT's were green too. The engine
 sounded strong and steady.

     I turned right, I turned left and low and behold, the dang thing turned
     almost like
     it was designed to do so brought back power and it actually kept flying.

     Okay, the Dynon is telling me I have been FLYING working on 20 minutes.
     Time to land.
     Called tower and cleared to land but watch the jet wash of the
 NASA T-38   taking off   and the C-130 doing touch and goes with the
 option. Damn, busy airport. I   lined up   MUCH better with the
 runway this time. Nice shallow approach just like the   folks at
 the factory showed me in Florida back in April. A bit fast as I test
 some   throttle   response. 120 on final slowed to 90 at the
 numbers. Pulling power to a bit   above 80   and settling nicely but
 a little fast. Pulled nose up SLIGHTLY. Whoa,   floated up.   Engine
 to idle and settled to the runway only a little hard, but pretty
 smooth. No   bounce. Rolled out. Exited Delta. Checked temps. Damn.
 Oil at 165, coolant   175. Nice.

     Taxied back. Temps played nicely. Shut down engine and no gushing
 or   hissing sounds.   Big smile on pilots face

     The engine even started back up a few minutes later ;-)

     Not a bad flight, if I do say so myself. Now to finish my test
 cards to   help remember   more stuff such as map relating to RPM etc.

     Chris Barber
     Velocity N17010
     Turbo rotary

     You make me jealous Chris. Good work. I have been so busy that I haven't
   been able to work on my plane for almost 2 weeks now. I sit for my
   Instrument at the end of this coming week, and I am hoping that in
 the next 2 weeks I can work on mine for 1 or 2 days per week to try
 to catch  up.

   Fly off your 40, and enjoy the plane!

   What turbo did  you use? Soon I will be mounting the ancillary
 parts on mine, and I will be installing a turbo.

   Kevin Alderman

   These first flight experiences is really an inspiration to me when
 I have still a long way to go. I've forwarded your first experience
 to all my friends and relatives changing the Subject heading to "My
 time will also come!" I got cheers all around!

   Pierre
   Future Vision Pilot In Command!

   Pierre Swanepoel
   Logistics Co-ordinator
   GoReefers Logistics Cape Town

 You did not say what you mean by high oil temp. I think oil should be
 around 195- 210 min., enough to evaporate any moisture from the oil.
 In your hot, dry climate, you would have less problem than I would
 at the north in the winter. I would be comfortable with oil temp around
 230-240F. Oil temp can exceed the coolant's temp boil limit,which is
 256 F at 50/50 mix and 15 PSI, unless you are using Evans Radiator fluid
 which is 375 F, it also depends on what oil you are using. My Chevron
 book says the flash point of aviation oil is 450-478F, best you stay
 well clear of that. As oil get near its operating limits, the useful
 life expectancy of the oil decrease.

 Oil at a higher temp transfer heat better than at lower temp. The
 key is the difference in temp with the cooling air. It will
 stabilize at some point, and if you don't like that point, you will
 have to get a bigger cooler, more oil capacity, or better ducting or
 a combination of each.

   You had it right the first time measuring oil at the hottest point.
 All fluids have limits. Of course the temp would drop if you switch the
 probe as you did. If you dunk it into the fuel tank, it would be
 lower still ! The idea is to know the hottest temp the oil is
 subjected to, not to make you feel good. For overheated oil have all
 kind of nasty effects. Tony Lam

 We don't need to use aviation oil. Synthetic oil like Mobil 1 can
 function at a higher temp. Idmitsu makes a synthetic rotary engine
 oil specifically for the Mazda rotary.

 Paul Lamar


 Petroleum oils are a witches brew of hydro carbons. Some are light ends that
 boil off at a fairly low temp. Some do not boil off until considerably higher
 temps. A 10W-30 oil subjected to 250F will boil off or evaporate the light
 ends and it will tend to become a 15W-30 or 20W-30 oil. Also affecting the oil
 is the close tolerances and rotational speed differences of the internal
 components. This tends to shear the viscosity improves that make the 10W base
 oil act like a 30 oil when hot. When this happens the oil looses its hot
 qualities and becomes a 20 or 25 oil. This all leaves it as a 15W-25 oil for
 example. When doing oil analysis on used oil, this seems to be a common result
 that comes back. Synthetics or more expensive petroleum oils that have better
 additive packages are more resistant to this. Synthetics are blended of single
 hydro carbon base stocks. The blend gives a lot of the qualities required of
 the finished product combined with high quality additive packages that stand
 up better and longer. That is why synthetics are more expensive. Remember the
 Fram filter ad from years ago, "pay me now or pay me later". Av oils fit the
 same idea.

 For conventional oils, I would feel much more comfortable with a max oil temp
 of about 210 - 220F. This leaves a better safety margin to the 250F start of
 oil break down. The temps measured are oil pan or out to the cooler. The temp
 at some point in the internal components like cylinder wall to ring interface
 will be higher. The bearing temps can also be higher. Many of the industrial
 engines now monitor bearing shell temps to catch imminent failure before it
 costs big happy cabbage. These use a thermocouple on the steel shell backing,
 so the wear surface can be hotter at the point of maximum bearing load. This
 is also where the shear happens.

 Dale Davies


 Just a simple question on oil sumps. As we have to manufacture our own in any
 case to
 carry more oil or in my case to incorporate the nosegear. Wouldn't cooling fins,
 added to the exterior of the sump, aid in cooling? It seems to work for
 electronics.

 Pierre Swanepoel

 Its been tried over and over again without much effect. It all depends on
 contact
 surface area of the metal between the oil and the air. The surface area in a
 heat
 exchanger is 10 or more times the surface area of a finned pan. The stock cooler
 has
 at least five tubes about 3 inches wide and about 20 inches long. That is 120
 square
 inches for both sides. There are five tubes. 600 square inches. Soldered to the
 tubes
 are 100's of tiny fins each about 3 inches wide and .5 inch high each with an
 area of
 1.5 square inch for a total of at least 750 square inches.


 The overall heat transfer coefficient for a wall or heat exchanger can be
 calculated as:

     1 / U A = 1 / h1 A1 + dxw / k A + 1 / h2 A2         (1)

     where

     U = the overall heat transfer coefficient (W/m2K)

     A = the contact area for each fluid side (m2)

     k = the thermal conductivity of the material (W/mK)

     h = the individual convection heat transfer coefficient for each fluid
 (W/m2K)

     dxw = the wall thickness (m)

 http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/overall-heat-transfer-coefficient-d_434.html

 Here is an oil pan with a heat exchanger built in.

 Paul Lamar


 I thought I would mention putting a very dense finned radiator in the wing.  I
 have done a little research on this concept, including a patent.  In summary,
 the pressure difference between the upper surface of the wing and lower surface
 of the wing can be several times the pressure differential from placing a
 radiator normal to the airstream.  If you take advantage of the increased
 pressure differential available, by packing several time as much fin area, you
 can transfer more heat.  We did a wind tunnel test with conventional radiators
 and got the same heat transfer, but reduced the drag by 80 %.  The idea has
 application to race cars, but I have not found anyone interested in designing a
 race car with no radiators increasing the frontal area.
 I enjoy your website and I am trying to find time to design a home built
 aircraft, probably with a rotary engine and my radiator concept
 Ken

Since C sub l is at best one, during take off, that is were you need cooling the
most.  At 65 mph dynamic pressure is 10 pounds per square foot. A 200 square foot
wing will lift 2000 pounds at a C sub l of one at 65 MPH. Thereafter the pressure
difference continues to drop maintaining the 2000 pound lift on the wing. At high
speed C sub l drops to below .1. A vertical radiator however would see full dynamic
pressure at all speeds depending on its porosity. The only time pressure rises
significantly across a wing is when fowler flaps are in use during landing. The C sub
L at that point approaches 2.5. That is when you don't need cooling.

This is why it has never worked in the past. Do you think this has not been thought
of in the last 100 years.

Do you understand how C sub l relates to the pressure differences across the wing?

Paul Lamar

-- The Rotary Engine News Letter. Powered by Linux. ACRE NL web site. http://www.rotaryeng.net You Tube key word PaulLamar2 Copyright 1998-2012 All world wide rights reserved.