Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:16 AM - Re: roller rocker arms,Lycoming (Archie)
2. 06:44 AM - A generic fluid for threadlocker? (cecilth@juno.com)
3. 07:27 AM - Re: Mazda rotary (Tracy Crook)
4. 07:37 AM - (Gary Casey)
5. 09:01 AM - Re: A generic fluid for threadlocker? (Cy Galley)
6. 10:43 AM - Re: Re: roller rocker arms,Lycoming (Aucountry@aol.com)
7. 06:51 PM - Re: Mazda rotary (Ben Baltrusaitis)
8. 08:53 PM - Re: Mazda rotary (Tracy Crook)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | re: roller rocker arms,Lycoming |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Archie" <archie97@earthlink.net>
> > I have found cases where the valve guides were not accurately bored,
> > and caused side loading on the valve which resulted in premature guide
> > wear. I have also found rockers that had inaccurate ratios, and were
> > improperly ground, causing the same results. (more in Cont. than Lyc.)
> > I do not know of anyone currently STC'ng them for aircraft.
> > Archie
> >
>
> Do you have your own shop? Do you do cars or planes or both?
Yes, I have my own shop. (NH)
Racing engines only, and an occasional antique.
Lost interest in aircraft engines. (primitive, boring, restrictive).
Even a modern lawnmower engine contains more sophistication.
Even when flowing O-200 cylinders, found that flow could be increased by
reducing and reshaping the intake port, as well as reducing valve & seat
sizes.
I blame most of this on the major manufacturers who have a captive audience
for parts resale, and are outsourcing to subs that are not following 9000
series quality standards. Many blame the FAA, but not true. The
improvements,
(or lack of), begin with the manufacturer.
I had better stop now, or you will be scrolling through pages of my
rhetoric.
Archie
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | A generic fluid for threadlocker? |
--> Engines-List message posted by: cecilth@juno.com
Does anyone know of a source for a generic fluid like threadlocker?
Maybe for $7 a pint instead of $7 for a dab called .08 oz.?
If not, maybe I should give them some competition by selling something
like that myself.
Really tho, I feel like I've been held up when I shell out so much for so
little. Maybe I'm missing something here. I feel like it.
Cecil
RV6A
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Mazda rotary |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Tracy Crook" <lors01@msn.com>
> --> Engines-List message posted by: Nielsenbe@aol.com
>
> Do you think that HP rating could go over 300 safely with a super charger?
I
> am really looking for a 350-400HP motor. Thanks, Brad
For that power level you'll need the 20B three rotor engine. Rated 325 -
350 HP turbocharged in automotive trim. When supercharged, 400 HP for
takeoff & climb would be no problem. Continuous power from the Mazda rotary
should still be limited to 90 HP per rotor (180 for 13B, 270 for 20B) to
achieve 2000+ TBO.
Tracy
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Gary Casey" <glcasey@adelphia.net>
<<Can your solid state transducers (Kavilco) be
mounted directly on a Lycoming engine or must they be remote mounted
like the standard sensors due to vibration problems (risk of
separation and loss of oil/fuel pressure)?
Reply:
The Kavlico senders can be mounted directly to the engine. But if heat
is an issue ( over 250 deg like froman exhaust manifold ) then remote
mounting is recommended.
THANK YOU PETE CORNELIUS TECH SUPPORT
WESTBERG MFG. WESTACH
All the a/c mechanics that I talked to told me to mount the senders
remotely, but they had never seen a solid state sender.
I am not at all an expert, but IF these senders are designed to
be mounted directly on our engines and they are guarantied not to snap
off,
I would think that this would simplify the installation, bring the
weight and parts count down and improve safety!
The specs for Kavlico's P165 Pressure Transducer (from their web site)
state:
Vibration: 10G's peak to peak sinusoidal.
Shock: 75G's 1/2 sine wave.
I won't even pretend to understand what this means, but maybe someone
can.>>
I'll have to make some corrections here: To say "Kavlico senders can be
mounted directly to the engine" is going a little too far. I stated that
some manufacturers ARE mounting them directly to the engine, but those are
OEM's that have taken the responsibility for knowing the vibration spectrum
to which they are exposed. The sensors will tolerate the vibration levels
stated in the website, but nothing is forever. If you expose the sensor to
10G's it might eventually fail, so less vibration is better, as with all
environmental stresses. That was a long-winded way to say that while the
sensors are capable of withstanding typical engine vibrations, to just
categorically say they CAN be engine-mounted is going a little too far.
Incidentally, the failure mode is unlikely to be one resulting in a leak,
but is more likely to the failure of an electrical connection, resulting in
loss of output. All automotive customers have failure detection
methodologies that separate most of these failures from normal readings. To
my knowledge, out of maybe 50+ million sensors in the field, none have
failed from vibration in a way that compromised the sealing integrity.
Air-cooled aircraft engines have typically high vibration levels that change
dramatically depending on where they are measured. The cylinder heads move
a lot more than locations closer to the crank centerline.
Finally, the "shock test" is a simulation of a drop test where the sensor is
exposed to only a few high-amplitude impulses and never repetitively, so
that a resonance is not excited.
Should you engine-mount the sensor? One thing for sure; I would NEVER
direct-mount a sensor with an intermediate adaptor. That reduces the
strength and stiffness of the mounting and moves the center of mass further
from the source of vibration. A very bad thing. If the proposed adapter
were to reduce the thread from 1/4 at the engine to 1/8 at the sensor then
maybe - if it were brass, not aluminum. Better to get a sensor with the
right thread in the first place. Also, we find that the typical mating
connector is not capable of withstanding typical engine vibration for long
periods of time. One good way to help the situation is to loop the wires
back over the connector and tie-wrap the whole thing. Certainly reducing
the number of fluid connections and hoses is a very good thing. One thing
you might consider for an oil pressure sensor if you have a airframe-mounted
oil cooler is to mount the sensor on a tee on the upstream side of the
cooler. Airframe vibrations are much lower than engine vibrations.
Gary Casey
Director of Engineering
Kavlico, a Solectron Company
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: A generic fluid for threadlocker? |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
If you use more than half the little tube on your airplane...You used way
too much!
A single drop on a thread is more adequate.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley@qcbc.org or experimenter@eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: <cecilth@juno.com>
Subject: Engines-List: A generic fluid for threadlocker?
> --> Engines-List message posted by: cecilth@juno.com
>
>
> Does anyone know of a source for a generic fluid like threadlocker?
> Maybe for $7 a pint instead of $7 for a dab called .08 oz.?
> If not, maybe I should give them some competition by selling something
> like that myself.
> Really tho, I feel like I've been held up when I shell out so much for so
> little. Maybe I'm missing something here. I feel like it.
> Cecil
> RV6A
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: re: roller rocker arms,Lycoming |
--> Engines-List message posted by: Aucountry@aol.com
In a message dated 01/26/03 06:17:52 AM, archie97@earthlink.net writes:
> Yes, I have my own shop. (NH)
> Racing engines only, and an occasional antique.
> Lost interest in aircraft engines. (primitive, boring, restrictive).
> Even a modern lawnmower engine contains more sophistication.
> Even when flowing O-200 cylinders, found that flow could be increased by
> reducing and reshaping the intake port, as well as reducing valve & seat
> sizes.
> I blame most of this on the major manufacturers who have a captive audience
> for parts resale, and are outsourcing to subs that are not following 9000
> series quality standards. Many blame the FAA, but not true. The
> improvements,
> (or lack of), begin with the manufacturer.
> I had better stop now, or you will be scrolling through pages of my
> rhetoric.
> Archie
>
Thanks Archie. You sound like someone I'd like to know. I agree with you
about manufactures. I would like to see someone perfect a roller rocker for
a Lycoming. I see electronic fuel injection is finally getting into
aircraft. I think it's amazing that aircraft engines are stuck in the 50's.
Talk to you later
Gary
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Mazda rotary |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Ben Baltrusaitis" <ben@gmpexpress.net>
Tracy,
Do you have information on what the weight of the Mazda with turbo totals?
Ben
----- Original Message -----
From: Tracy Crook
To: engines-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2003 10:25 AM
Subject: Re: Engines-List: Mazda rotary
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Tracy Crook" <lors01@msn.com>
> --> Engines-List message posted by: Nielsenbe@aol.com
>
> Do you think that HP rating could go over 300 safely with a super charger?
I
> am really looking for a 350-400HP motor. Thanks, Brad
For that power level you'll need the 20B three rotor engine. Rated 325 -
350 HP turbocharged in automotive trim. When supercharged, 400 HP for
takeoff & climb would be no problem. Continuous power from the Mazda rotary
should still be limited to 90 HP per rotor (180 for 13B, 270 for 20B) to
achieve 2000+ TBO.
Tracy
>
>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Mazda rotary |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Tracy Crook" <lors01@msn.com>
> --> Engines-List message posted by: "Ben Baltrusaitis"
<ben@gmpexpress.net>
>
> Tracy,
> Do you have information on what the weight of the Mazda with turbo totals?
>
> Ben
Weight can vary a lot depending on builder choices. The bare block with
water pump of 2 rotor is 180, 3 rotor is 247lb. My total FWF weight on the
three rotor installation on RV-8 is running around 400lb with all
accessories, reduction drive, engine mount, exhaust system, coolant & oil.
No turbo on mine. My 13B RV-4 installation is around 325lb FWF.
Tracy
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tracy Crook
> To: engines-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2003 10:25 AM
> Subject: Re: Engines-List: Mazda rotary
>
>
> --> Engines-List message posted by: "Tracy Crook" <lors01@msn.com>
>
>
> > --> Engines-List message posted by: Nielsenbe@aol.com
> >
> > Do you think that HP rating could go over 300 safely with a super
charger?
> I
> > am really looking for a 350-400HP motor. Thanks, Brad
>
> For that power level you'll need the 20B three rotor engine. Rated
325 -
> 350 HP turbocharged in automotive trim. When supercharged, 400 HP for
> takeoff & climb would be no problem. Continuous power from the Mazda
rotary
> should still be limited to 90 HP per rotor (180 for 13B, 270 for 20B) to
> achieve 2000+ TBO.
>
> Tracy
>
> >
> >
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|