Hi All, It?s been a while since I?ve been on the newsletter between work
 and trying
 to make progress on the Long EZ.
 Anyway, it?stimefor the Fuel system and I wanted to get feedback from
 thegroup onmy
 design. I attached a PDF of my concept whichutilizes 2different sumps, 1
 rear cockpit
 thigh support/fuelsump and a 2ndsump in the hell Hole. The reason for the
 addedsumps
 is to try torecover some of the fuel I will be losingdue to installing
 Infinityretractable gear.Anyway, myassumption was a P-Ported 13B with aTO4
 turbo so
 the linesneed to be able to keep that thirsty puppy humming at WOT. Iguess
 it would
 make about 350hp at WOT. Anyway, can you guystake a look and shoot holes
 and make
 recommendations. I lookat the fuel system and Engine installation design as
 themostcritical systems we develop so I want it to be right.

 Thanks

 Mike C.

 I'd put a fuel drain in the lowest part of each sump where lowest iswhen
 the ship is
 parked.

 I'd put the pumps in the last sump.

 I don't see provision for fuel return.

 tc

 --
 Thanks TC, cant believe I forgot the return line. I decided to do away
 with the Hell
 hole sump, seems like I would be creating a lot of work for little gain. I
 did add a
 fitting to the thigh sump so Icould add an Aux Tank if it was ever needed.
 Could just
 strap itinto the GIB seat. Anyway, I have a couple of questions about
 thefuel return.
 Will it have enough pressure to overcome the headpressure in the sumps
 from the
 Strake tanks? And the thigh sump isprobably only 2-3 Gallons so should I
 be worried
 about hot fuel inthe sump? Or should I just return the fuel to the
 strakes? If
 Ireturn it to the strakes is there a chance I could empty the sumpfaster
 than the
 gravity fill line can return it to the sump? Thanksagain for all the help
 guys. I
 attached an updated diagram, throw arrows!

 Mike C.

 Paul
 I'm resending this because I never saw it posted, Might have gotten lost
 in the ether.

 Thanks

 Mike C.

 Now you are talking my language as an instrument tech (industrial) . Why
 use cad
 plated carbon steel fittings. This is designated by the single S prefix. I
 would use
 either SS (stainless) there is a a couple of different stainless types
 available or
 alloy. Also a couple of options. Use the SS ferrule sets. With time the
 cadmium
 plating seems to let the nut stick to the fitting and it takes some effort
 to break
 it loose. SS does not have the same problem. Its problem lies with a lack
 of
 tolerance to cross threading. Proper tightening of the fittings is
 important. Start
 with the nut just finger tight on the fitting and then tighten 1 1/4
 turns. Use a
 felt pen to mark it to get it right.Also, I would use 1/2" return line to
 make sure
 there is no restriction there.What is the method of connecting to the
 sumps. You show
 tube unions
 (600-6) with the tube coming out of the sump. Another fitting available is
 SS-6-TA-1-? i Left a question mark for the pipe thread size; 1/4,3/8, or
 1/2"NPT.
 These would be 4, 6, or 8 like AN designations. This would then allow the
 use of the
 tube unions directly. A better option is SS-600-1-? tube adapter. If you
 need a
 90* then SS-600-2-?. There is also 45* available. This would eliminate a
 possible
 leak source or two. You know every joint will leak eventually.Swagelok has
 available
 a small catalogue that is about 6" x 3" and about 3/8" thick that lists a
 lot of this
 and explains the codes for it's fittings. Also pressure ratings for tubing
 sizes and
 materials.

 Dale

 Hi Dale
 Thanks for the info, I only chose the Steel because they were a lot
 cheaper, I'll
 change to SS. I will also increase the size of the return line to 1/2". My
 plan is to
 use Al tubing which will be floxed into the sumps and Swagelok fittings to
 connect
 the lines toe the stub tubes in the sump. It seemed like a simple
 solution. I did
 look at the Swagelok fittings with NTP -600-2 on one end but thought if I
 used Al
 tubing I could bend the tubes in the sump to the location (lowest point
 for the fuel
 feed and highest point for the fuel supply and vent) that they needed to
 be at. Then
 flox them in place through the sump walls with a stub tub protruding which
 will allow
 me to use a union to attach to the rest of the supply lines and vents. Now
 that I
 think about it I could use a ss-600-2-8 for the return lines and a
 SS-600-2-12 for
 the Sump feed and increase the feed line size to 3/4". Then use the
 original plan for
 the fuel pick up lines to the Andair valve.Keep shooting arrows, I really
 want a
 bullet proof Fuel System. No fuel = no thrust = BAD DAY!

 Thanks

 Mike C.

 Hi Mike,

 Another option for the lines instead of floxing them is to put a pipe
 fitting into
 the tank as required. You can get bore through fittings from Swagelok.
 These do not have the smaller bore down from the nut and ferrule area that
 stops the
 tube from going farther through. If you put a 3/4" NPT fitting in the
 tank, you can
 put a suction screen on a tube and have the tube bent to where you need
 the end at.
 Then you slip the fitting over the tube and tighten the fitting in. Once
 the
 fitting(tube adapter in Swagelok speak) is tight, you tighten the tube nut
 to lock
 the tube in place. Then you can cut the tube off an inch from the nut and
 can then
 use a tube union to connect to it.
 There is
 also available reducing unions. An example of the part number for these is;
 SS-810-6-6. This would connect a 3/8" tube to a 1/2" tube.

 Also there is Alloy fittings for different applications to deal with some
 chemicals.
 Some of these may be lighter, but also more costly. Once you finalize the
 fittings
 required you can contact the local Swagelok people and compare the costs.
 I do not
 think the weight savings would be a lot, but a kitchen scale would answer
 that quickly.

 The fitting to put in the tanks are readily available for welding into
 pipe or thin
 wall tanks made of sheet metal. Known as weld-o-let. To flox, protect the
 threads and
 use a course sand blast to rough up the surface. Fiberglass tanks use this
 method and
 have 2" to 4" fittings with no problem. Grounding cables are commonly
 attached here
 also as a stud can be welded to the fitting before glassing that the
 ground can be
 attached on to. Very common in the oil patch for produced tanks to catch
 water. Of
 course there is always some hydrocarbons with the water that could ignite
 with a
 static build up.

 Dale Davies

 Hi Dale
 Attached is the diagram for an Aluminum Sump, Can you check out the
 fittings I
 identified to make sure they make sense? I thought a lot about it and I
 think Al is
 the right way to go for the Sump. I can just cut out the parts and have
 them all
 welded together and have the fittings welded on which will eliminate a
 possible leak
 source. It also solves any grounding issues.

 Thanks

 Mike C.

 Mike,

 Here is a link to a Marine (Boat) fuel valve that may be appropriate for
 your use and
 a lot cheaper than the "Andair" valve.....FWIW


 http://www.discountmarinesupplies.com/Groco_FV65038_6_Port_Fuel_Valve.html

 Kelly Troyer

 I have one of those things. It is solid brass and it weighs a lot. However
 it is
 cannon proof.

 There is another way of doing the EFI fuel system that does not use the
 double layer
 valve. Mike Wills used one pump per tank and a solenoid valve to switch
 the return lines.
 Two switches on the panel selected the pumps/tanks  and the solenoid valve
 then
 operated automatically. Both tanks could be selected. The one way valves
 in the pumps
 prevent cross flow.

 Paul Lamar

 I like the Andair because it is lite and it has an optional remote
 extension for the
 valve.  I'm thinking that might allow me to actually locate the valve in
 the back and
 have the control in the Left Consol.  My plan is to have the Sump below
 the strake
 level as a thigh support the fuel pumps located in the hell hole which
 will be about
 level with the sump or slightly below.  I was planning on using Tracy's
 Fuel pumps
 but if there is a better option, what would you recommend?

 Thanks

 Mike C.

 The Tracy/Walbro peripheral pumps are OK if the pump is mounted low
 adjacent to the fuel sump. They have trouble drawing fuel from a "head".

 The AirTex/MSD  roller vane pumps can suck fuel but they have nylon
 fittings so mount  them so they are unlikely to break in a crash. The nylon
 fittings have been known to fail in a crash.

 Carter roller vane pumps and gerotor pumps are all metal I think.

 http://www.carterfueldelivery.com/fuelpumps/universal_fp.php


 http://www.jegs.com/p/JEGS-Performance-Products/JEGS-HP-Electric-Fuel-Pump/1713915/10002/-1


 http://www.jegs.com/i/JEGS-Performance-Products/555/159010/10002/-1?parentProductId=1713915#moreDetails


 http://www.ebay.com/itm/Carter-P5000-Universal-EFI-Inline-Fuel-Pump-/250948434496

 http://www.summitracing.com/parts/crt-p4070/media/images


 Paul Lamar

Paul,

The Carter pump says the max pressure is 6 psi.  So, would only work on
carburetor apps.

One other option is the Holley HP series "gerotor" pump, ref. p/n 12-700
that should work for efi systems.
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/hly-12-700.

Mark

Carter make EFI pumps too.

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.