Subject: Long EZ Fuel System
From: rotaryeng
Date: 10/29/2012, 12:06 PM
To: AAAArotaryeng 



 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

Wow Mark, they really like those pumps $250 bucks each... need 2 $500!

Mike C



-- 
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.