Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 10:24 AM - Re: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion (Curtis Jaussi)
2. 10:35 AM - Re: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion (Frans Veldman)
3. 11:15 AM - Re: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion (Curtis Jaussi)
4. 12:54 PM - Re: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion (ALAN YERLY)
5. 01:31 PM - Re: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion (Frans Veldman)
6. 01:50 PM - Re: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion (Curtis Jaussi)
7. 02:31 PM - Re: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion (ALAN YERLY)
8. 02:54 PM - Fuel injection (Jason here) (jason Parker)
9. 03:55 PM - Re: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion (craig bastin)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion |
I have been in the process of installing Jason's engine on my
Europa..N6125A trigear now for close to a year. That does not mean
that there are problems with it. During that year, I have sold my
home, put the plane in storage, built a new home and shop, taken the
plane out of storage and also gone back to work full time, temporary!
In spite of all that, the install is almost complete. There have been
a few issues such as one exhaust mainfold pipe that almost is in
contact with the front of the cowel and other small things which are
only to be expected with the first intall of this engine in this
airframe. I have yet to determine the proper location of the
intercooler and mount it. I hope to have the install pretty much
completed in the next week or two and then am planning on having Jason
come to my place for the first engine start and final computer tuning
as I am really much of a beginner in the whole concept of fuel
injection, but have been learning a lot. Isn't that what homebuilding
is all about anyway? I am really quite impressed with the engine and
what I expect to have when it is all finished. I have the Quinti
variable pitch prop that is rated for up to 160 HP that should work
well with th engine. I flew the plane two years ago with a 912 UL and
am amazed at how it flies and handles. However, my home field is at
5800 ft. elev. and the surrounding mountains require 10,000 ft or
higher to get out of the valley and the 912 was just not enough to
handle it, especially at high density altitude. I am looking forward
to getting back in the air and will be glad to report back on
performance as I am able.
Curtis
On 5/12/09, ALAN YERLY <budyerly@msn.com> wrote:
> Craig,
> Not for aircraft. Just the auto gyro which is running at normal 5-7 gph
> depending on throttle setting. What we high speed aircraft are looking for,
> is savings at altitude where the Bing really doesn't hack it. Low altitude
> won't be that much of a difference. As we see in autos, the fuel flows for
> a fuel injected engine are slightly lower than the same engine in its carbed
> version. My biggest concern is getting a prop to absorb the extra power.
> If you crank the boost down to 3-4 psi (40 inches of MP) verses 5 psi (55
> inches), no problem. Crank the boost up and the gas goes out the back and
> the prop must be cranked to a very high pitch to absorb the power, which
> cuts efficiency. With the Europa limited to 64 inches of prop (66 max, but
> watch that nose pant), even the Airmaster will be maxed out trying to absorb
> the power.
>
> Personally, a Europa at 34 inches of boost is pretty economical (from normal
> Rotax 914 experience). Right now the guys using the Jason Parker engine are
> low and slow types (Just Aircraft, Auto Gyro, Titan Tornado, Kitfox) so they
> don't care because their airframe is so draggy, they want takeoff power for
> high field elevations and mountain crossing ability. Most of us want the
> cruise performance and low maintenance.
>
> I am looking for the typical 8- 10% fuel savings fuel injection gives, so
> figure a normal 6 gph will be more like 5.5. With our tank it only makes
> 20-30 minutes difference in cruise time. See the SDS website
> http://www.sdsefi.com/<http://www.sdsefi.com/>. The fuel map done on the
> RV-6 with a Subaru, which is a notorious gas hog (I've flown two). The
> O-320 conversion flies at 6.5 gph verses a normal 8 gph, when leaned, and an
> O-200 at about 4.85 verses 5.5 to 6 with the carb. Not bad, so 10% is
> reasonable for a normally aspirated engine.
>
> The nice thing about the turbo is it is inter-cooled, so more efficient. No
> operational altitude restriction on the engine. It has adjustable boost so
> you can save your engine and fly what I called turbo normalized with just a
> few inches of boost and the longevity of the engine will be much improved,
> more like a 912 than a 914. I also like the shorter muffler, which allows a
> more esthetic exhaust pipe exit for the creative builder. The alternator on
> the rear makes maintenance of the belt a snap. No prop removal, and any
> Denso will work. Like any other alternator, do put an over-voltage
> protection device on it as it puts out 55 amps and if the internal regulator
> goes out it can fry your electrics. Jason even manufactures a mount ready
> to bolt to the gear frame of the Europa (about two inches shorter because
> his ring mount is slightly farther aft for the alternator) so the footprint
> fits our cowl nearly perfectly. EFI does require competent wiring skills.
> Use good quality PIDG connectors and ensure proper strain relief. One bad
> ground and the system is dead. Two fuel pumps is a must, and a backup
> battery for one system may be useful. Finally, there is the safety of
> knowing the SDS electronics will retard the spark and fuel flow to prevent
> over speed and or over boost. If the waste gate sticks on my 914, it will
> over boost and as others have found, blow a cylinder or two. If my next
> deal doesn't work out I will probably take the top off my 914 and put on
> Jason's system and hook the vacuum dash pot to the existing turbo arm.
>
> We will have to wait for the Europa owners to get flying and see what the
> actual fuel flows for our plane and prop combinations are.
>
> I just spent two days troubleshooting another 914 with problems. Good news
> is my DOS programming skills came back, and the electronic troubleshooting
> program didn't tell me a thing about how to tweak the engine back to working
> normal. With the SDS EFI it works or it doesn't. Once the engine is mapped
> (which Jason's done) just check you have oil pressure, fuel pressure, spark,
> and fire it up, it will run.
>
> Just my opinion. But I'm biased.
>
> Bud
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: craig bastin<mailto:craigb@onthenet.com.au>
> To: europa-list@matronics.com<mailto:europa-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 6:27 PM
> Subject: RE: Europa-List: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion
>
>
> Just wondering if you got any fuel useage figures, and whether there is
> any significant difference
> in cruise flight useage.
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com<mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com>
> [mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of ALAN YERLY
> Sent: Wednesday, 13 May 2009 8:04 AM
> To: europa-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion
>
>
> If you don't have an engine yet for your project, consider this:
>
> At Sun 'n Fun, I talked with Gunter Rund, an Auto Gyro owner, using
> Jason Parker's fuel injected Rotax 914 with intercooler. He is enthusiastic
> about it's smooth operation over the entire range and throttle response. He
> has nearly 100 hours of trouble free operation so far. These 914s use
> military technology from the Predator Drone program, and Jason converts them
> to fit the experimental market. The engine footprint is virtually the same
> as a stock 914 for tractor operations (turbo underneath) and pusher
> operations (turbo on the top for bed mounting). In the past, Jason's
> engines required some skill and attention to detail that limited me from
> being comfortable with the setup for just anyone to install. Now that the
> engine is in its fourth generation and is set up for user friendly
> installation, it looks like a winner.
>
> My involvement, to be honest, has been to give advice on engine mounting
> and footprint. I insisted the engine must fit as close as possible to a
> stock 914 setup. I spent a number of hours with Jason over the last two
> years making the engine fit the Europa and finally it is as close to plug
> and play as you can get.
> He has gone to a fuel system similar to a Lycoming or Continental
> engine. It has a fuel block on the top side of the engine with both the
> supply and return lines flared for AN6 fittings. Just install an AN fitting
> on an Aeroequip hose with fire sleeve and the firewall forward is as safe as
> you can make it. Of course you must follow the instructions as your fuel
> filters and fittings must hold up to 40 psi, so, no cheap fittings or
> hardware shortcuts South of the pumps can be tolerated. He's moved the
> engine wiring to the bottom side of the manifolds and fuel rails, and
> properly secured them to make the engine very easy to inspect and very neat
> looking. The computer (or computers for redundancy) for the electronic fuel
> injection should be protected, although they are set up for cowl
> installation (the SDS Fuel injection system is normally used under the hood
> in racing) and all the sensor wiring is plug and play. Each engine is run
> by him and the fuel map setup programmed. The SDS programming is a breeze
> also, plus you can adjust mixture ratios on the fly based on your fuel
> octane by a knob on the panel. (Although this knob should have a resistance
> lock on it to prevent inadvertent actuation by a grandson with fast hands.)
>
> He says he is wiling to sell the 914 turbocharged and intercooled
> engines for $21000. That's a bargain.
>
> Although I have spent time and money to help develop the idea, I do not
> make sales commissions from his engine sales, I just want to see the idea
> become a reality because of the great success of the military version of the
> 914, and selfishly, I plan to use one on my next project to give me some
> better options for efficient operations at altitude. I just introduced him
> to the right people and added my inputs, as other manufacturers and dealers
> have, in an effort to make his product ideal for the experimental market.
> Besides, tuning carbs and needing DOS computer programs to maintain an
> engine today seems archaic.
>
> See his new website at:
> http://www.extremeaircraftengines.com<http://www.extremeaircraftengines.com/>
>
>
> Bud Yerly
> Custom Flight Creations.
>
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List">http://www.matronhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>
>
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: | Re: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion |
ALAN YERLY wrote:
> If you don't have an engine yet for your project, consider this:
> http://www.extremeaircraftengines.com<http://www.extremeaircraftengines.com/>
I have been looking quite some times to this website in the past.
Problem is that this guy appears to be an "engine-guy", and not a pilot.
Lots of pictures, lots of hurray talk about fuel injection, but no real
"pilot information."
What I would like to know, before considering to use such an engine is:
1) What is the weight penalty compared to a standard rotax 914?
2) How does the injection system cope with avgas? Will the injectors
clog due to the lead over time? Who is going to find out what happens then?
3) What do they mean with "redundancy"? Nice to have two computers, but
if they use one set of sensors, one set of cables, and one set of
injectors, well, it actually doesn't provide much redundancy at all.
4) How much electrical power do you need to operate the engine in case
of alternator failure? I assume that the high pressure fuel pump uses a
lot more juice than the standard low pressure rotax fuel pumps. How
large (and heavy) has the battery to be to provide one hour of flight?
5) How does the engine behave if it swallows an air bubble in the fuel?
Not much of a concern for a car engine, but aviation engines see quite
some air. It is common practice to run one tank empty, and then switch
to reserve. Also, with a partially filled tank, in turbulence there is
quite some sloshing of fuel, and as a result quite some air suspended in
the fuel. If the injectors/high pressure pump can not handle air bubbles
(as is common in fuel injection systems), well, one day you are going to
have a problem, or you can only fly with a tank at least halfway filled
to stay out of problems.
Well, actually I do have many more questions, but it would be nice to
see some of this covered on the website. At least, this would give the
impression that the engine builder is aware about what is important for
us pilots.
Also, keep in mind that the engine setup is changed significantly, and
that users are the genuia pig. Even with the standard rotax, there have
been unforseen surprises (hence all the service bulletins). Stupid parts
like rubber carburetor flanges can cause an engine failure. In case of
fuel injected engines, one has to start all over again with experiments.
Nothing wrong with that, if you really understand the risks and are
willing to take them.
Having said all this, I think that fuel injection is the way to go. It
just has to mature a little for aviation use. And I would really love to
see a website with important information *for pilots*.
--
Frans Veldman
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: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion |
Lots of good questions. I can address some of them. Jason is well aware of
the problem of potential air in the fuel and has designed the fuel flow
through the system and back to the tank so that any air should be pumped on
through quite quickly. This part makes sense to me. As for redundency, it
is totally redundant with two complete systems: two fuel pumps, two sets of
injectors, two sets of sensors,separate electrical systems, etc. Only one
system is in operation at one time and you manually switch from one to the
other if needed.
Curtis
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Frans Veldman <frans@paardnatuurlijk.nl>wrote:
> >
>
> ALAN YERLY wrote:
>
> > If you don't have an engine yet for your project, consider this:
> > http://www.extremeaircraftengines.com<
> http://www.extremeaircraftengines.com/>
>
> I have been looking quite some times to this website in the past.
> Problem is that this guy appears to be an "engine-guy", and not a pilot.
> Lots of pictures, lots of hurray talk about fuel injection, but no real
> "pilot information."
>
> What I would like to know, before considering to use such an engine is:
>
> 1) What is the weight penalty compared to a standard rotax 914?
> 2) How does the injection system cope with avgas? Will the injectors
> clog due to the lead over time? Who is going to find out what happens then?
> 3) What do they mean with "redundancy"? Nice to have two computers, but
> if they use one set of sensors, one set of cables, and one set of
> injectors, well, it actually doesn't provide much redundancy at all.
> 4) How much electrical power do you need to operate the engine in case
> of alternator failure? I assume that the high pressure fuel pump uses a
> lot more juice than the standard low pressure rotax fuel pumps. How
> large (and heavy) has the battery to be to provide one hour of flight?
> 5) How does the engine behave if it swallows an air bubble in the fuel?
> Not much of a concern for a car engine, but aviation engines see quite
> some air. It is common practice to run one tank empty, and then switch
> to reserve. Also, with a partially filled tank, in turbulence there is
> quite some sloshing of fuel, and as a result quite some air suspended in
> the fuel. If the injectors/high pressure pump can not handle air bubbles
> (as is common in fuel injection systems), well, one day you are going to
> have a problem, or you can only fly with a tank at least halfway filled
> to stay out of problems.
>
> Well, actually I do have many more questions, but it would be nice to
> see some of this covered on the website. At least, this would give the
> impression that the engine builder is aware about what is important for
> us pilots.
>
> Also, keep in mind that the engine setup is changed significantly, and
> that users are the genuia pig. Even with the standard rotax, there have
> been unforseen surprises (hence all the service bulletins). Stupid parts
> like rubber carburetor flanges can cause an engine failure. In case of
> fuel injected engines, one has to start all over again with experiments.
> Nothing wrong with that, if you really understand the risks and are
> willing to take them.
>
> Having said all this, I think that fuel injection is the way to go. It
> just has to mature a little for aviation use. And I would really love to
> see a website with important information *for pilots*.
>
> --
> Frans Veldman
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion |
Paul, Curtis, Frans, and others,
Jason was raised as a car guy and now is becoming a pilot... His
experience with the Predator drone is where I found him. Yes it has
been an uphill battle getting him to understand the mindset of the
pilot, and as time goes on, he is learning. Just got to get him away
from the power drinks. I've never been around a more energetic can do
person since I left the military. He's the mechanical engineer, I'm the
pilot. I want 1200 hour overhauls and low boost. In Kentucky there is
a guy that tows gliders that's happy to get a few hundred. Not for me.
Hence, most of the adaptations on the engine as time went on are my
suggestions or demands for ease of installation and longevity. He is
very safety conscious and that I am most appreciative of. Of course his
engine needed time to grow and to make adaptation kits for each type
aircraft. As far as power, yes it can take 5-7 pounds of boost, but for
how long. That's why 3-5 pounds and limiting the 5 pounds of boost to
takeoff only, is the smart way to run this engine.
As for fitting in our cowl, the 914 of any type doesn't fit the Europa
exactly. We all have problems with front exhaust pipe clearance and any
intercooler can be a plumbing nightmare. The intercooler plumbing is a
nightmare to do because we are shooting for a one size fits all. Other
users need it where he has it (Kitfox, Just A/c, Gyros etc.). Any final
plumbing will take some fitting. I'd prefer the intercooler over the
passenger foot well or behind the engine as intake and exit air would be
great. Oh well, go without and save a bundle. Jason's ring mount makes
me have to cut the passenger foot well corner off to give clearance, but
the alternator on the back of the engine is really nice to have. I just
needed a little clearance for the belt, which pushed the ring out, which
made the mount shorter, and many other compromises along the way.
I can't tell you how much fun this has been doing, but clearly you see
why I didn't blow the horn until, I could see it as close to plug and
play as possible. If you paid for the development of all these engines
(10 of them), the redo's and adaptations, adjustments, manufacturer
inputs, and client inputs it is hard to keep a cheery disposition.
Jason just takes it in stride. He works alone as the William Winns and
other engine developers have done making the engines better every day.
I just admire his youthful stamina. Maybe I should try the power
drinks...
Where are you going to find someone from Rotax to come to your shop and
tune your engine if you need it.
He will for transportation only, a room to stay in and a free meal.
Off to take a chainsaw to this stupid 914 that won't go to boost.
Bud
----- Original Message -----
From: Curtis Jaussi<mailto:cjaussi@gmail.com>
To: europa-list@matronics.com<mailto:europa-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: Europa-List: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion
<cjaussi@gmail.com<mailto:cjaussi@gmail.com>>
I have been in the process of installing Jason's engine on my
Europa..N6125A trigear now for close to a year. That does not mean
that there are problems with it. During that year, I have sold my
home, put the plane in storage, built a new home and shop, taken the
plane out of storage and also gone back to work full time, temporary!
In spite of all that, the install is almost complete. There have been
a few issues such as one exhaust mainfold pipe that almost is in
contact with the front of the cowel and other small things which are
only to be expected with the first intall of this engine in this
airframe. I have yet to determine the proper location of the
intercooler and mount it. I hope to have the install pretty much
completed in the next week or two and then am planning on having Jason
come to my place for the first engine start and final computer tuning
as I am really much of a beginner in the whole concept of fuel
injection, but have been learning a lot. Isn't that what homebuilding
is all about anyway? I am really quite impressed with the engine and
what I expect to have when it is all finished. I have the Quinti
variable pitch prop that is rated for up to 160 HP that should work
well with th engine. I flew the plane two years ago with a 912 UL and
am amazed at how it flies and handles. However, my home field is at
5800 ft. elev. and the surrounding mountains require 10,000 ft or
higher to get out of the valley and the 912 was just not enough to
handle it, especially at high density altitude. I am looking forward
to getting back in the air and will be glad to report back on
performance as I am able.
Curtis
On 5/12/09, ALAN YERLY <budyerly@msn.com<mailto:budyerly@msn.com>>
wrote:
> Craig,
> Not for aircraft. Just the auto gyro which is running at normal 5-7
gph
> depending on throttle setting. What we high speed aircraft are
looking for,
> is savings at altitude where the Bing really doesn't hack it. Low
altitude
> won't be that much of a difference. As we see in autos, the fuel
flows for
> a fuel injected engine are slightly lower than the same engine in
its carbed
> version. My biggest concern is getting a prop to absorb the extra
power.
> If you crank the boost down to 3-4 psi (40 inches of MP) verses 5
psi (55
> inches), no problem. Crank the boost up and the gas goes out the
back and
> the prop must be cranked to a very high pitch to absorb the power,
which
> cuts efficiency. With the Europa limited to 64 inches of prop (66
max, but
> watch that nose pant), even the Airmaster will be maxed out trying
to absorb
> the power.
>
> Personally, a Europa at 34 inches of boost is pretty economical
(from normal
> Rotax 914 experience). Right now the guys using the Jason Parker
engine are
> low and slow types (Just Aircraft, Auto Gyro, Titan Tornado, Kitfox)
so they
> don't care because their airframe is so draggy, they want takeoff
power for
> high field elevations and mountain crossing ability. Most of us
want the
> cruise performance and low maintenance.
>
> I am looking for the typical 8- 10% fuel savings fuel injection
gives, so
> figure a normal 6 gph will be more like 5.5. With our tank it only
makes
> 20-30 minutes difference in cruise time. See the SDS website
>
http://www.sdsefi.com/<http://www.sdsefi.com/<http://www.sdsefi.com/<http
://www.sdsefi.com/>>. The fuel map done on the
> RV-6 with a Subaru, which is a notorious gas hog (I've flown two).
The
> O-320 conversion flies at 6.5 gph verses a normal 8 gph, when
leaned, and an
> O-200 at about 4.85 verses 5.5 to 6 with the carb. Not bad, so 10%
is
> reasonable for a normally aspirated engine.
>
> The nice thing about the turbo is it is inter-cooled, so more
efficient. No
> operational altitude restriction on the engine. It has adjustable
boost so
> you can save your engine and fly what I called turbo normalized with
just a
> few inches of boost and the longevity of the engine will be much
improved,
> more like a 912 than a 914. I also like the shorter muffler, which
allows a
> more esthetic exhaust pipe exit for the creative builder. The
alternator on
> the rear makes maintenance of the belt a snap. No prop removal, and
any
> Denso will work. Like any other alternator, do put an over-voltage
> protection device on it as it puts out 55 amps and if the internal
regulator
> goes out it can fry your electrics. Jason even manufactures a mount
ready
> to bolt to the gear frame of the Europa (about two inches shorter
because
> his ring mount is slightly farther aft for the alternator) so the
footprint
> fits our cowl nearly perfectly. EFI does require competent wiring
skills.
> Use good quality PIDG connectors and ensure proper strain relief.
One bad
> ground and the system is dead. Two fuel pumps is a must, and a
backup
> battery for one system may be useful. Finally, there is the safety
of
> knowing the SDS electronics will retard the spark and fuel flow to
prevent
> over speed and or over boost. If the waste gate sticks on my 914,
it will
> over boost and as others have found, blow a cylinder or two. If my
next
> deal doesn't work out I will probably take the top off my 914 and
put on
> Jason's system and hook the vacuum dash pot to the existing turbo
arm.
>
> We will have to wait for the Europa owners to get flying and see
what the
> actual fuel flows for our plane and prop combinations are.
>
> I just spent two days troubleshooting another 914 with problems.
Good news
> is my DOS programming skills came back, and the electronic
troubleshooting
> program didn't tell me a thing about how to tweak the engine back to
working
> normal. With the SDS EFI it works or it doesn't. Once the engine
is mapped
> (which Jason's done) just check you have oil pressure, fuel
pressure, spark,
> and fire it up, it will run.
>
> Just my opinion. But I'm biased.
>
> Bud
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: craig
bastin<mailto:craigb@onthenet.com.au<mailto:craigb@onthenet.com.au>>
> To:
europa-list@matronics.com<mailto:europa-list@matronics.com<mailto:europa-
list@matronics.com<mailto:europa-list@matronics.com>>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 6:27 PM
> Subject: RE: Europa-List: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion
>
>
> Just wondering if you got any fuel useage figures, and whether
there is
> any significant difference
> in cruise flight useage.
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
>
owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com<mailto:owner-europa-list-server@ma
tronics.com<mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com<mailto:owner-eu
ropa-list-server@matronics.com>>
> [mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of ALAN
YERLY
> Sent: Wednesday, 13 May 2009 8:04 AM
> To: europa-list@matronics.com<mailto:europa-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion
>
>
> If you don't have an engine yet for your project, consider this:
>
> At Sun 'n Fun, I talked with Gunter Rund, an Auto Gyro owner,
using
> Jason Parker's fuel injected Rotax 914 with intercooler. He is
enthusiastic
> about it's smooth operation over the entire range and throttle
response. He
> has nearly 100 hours of trouble free operation so far. These 914s
use
> military technology from the Predator Drone program, and Jason
converts them
> to fit the experimental market. The engine footprint is virtually
the same
> as a stock 914 for tractor operations (turbo underneath) and pusher
> operations (turbo on the top for bed mounting). In the past,
Jason's
> engines required some skill and attention to detail that limited me
from
> being comfortable with the setup for just anyone to install. Now
that the
> engine is in its fourth generation and is set up for user friendly
> installation, it looks like a winner.
>
> My involvement, to be honest, has been to give advice on engine
mounting
> and footprint. I insisted the engine must fit as close as possible
to a
> stock 914 setup. I spent a number of hours with Jason over the last
two
> years making the engine fit the Europa and finally it is as close to
plug
> and play as you can get.
> He has gone to a fuel system similar to a Lycoming or
Continental
> engine. It has a fuel block on the top side of the engine with both
the
> supply and return lines flared for AN6 fittings. Just install an AN
fitting
> on an Aeroequip hose with fire sleeve and the firewall forward is as
safe as
> you can make it. Of course you must follow the instructions as your
fuel
> filters and fittings must hold up to 40 psi, so, no cheap fittings
or
> hardware shortcuts South of the pumps can be tolerated. He's moved
the
> engine wiring to the bottom side of the manifolds and fuel rails,
and
> properly secured them to make the engine very easy to inspect and
very neat
> looking. The computer (or computers for redundancy) for the
electronic fuel
> injection should be protected, although they are set up for cowl
> installation (the SDS Fuel injection system is normally used under
the hood
> in racing) and all the sensor wiring is plug and play. Each engine
is run
> by him and the fuel map setup programmed. The SDS programming is a
breeze
> also, plus you can adjust mixture ratios on the fly based on your
fuel
> octane by a knob on the panel. (Although this knob should have a
resistance
> lock on it to prevent inadvertent actuation by a grandson with fast
hands.)
>
> He says he is wiling to sell the 914 turbocharged and
intercooled
> engines for $21000. That's a bargain.
>
> Although I have spent time and money to help develop the idea, I
do not
> make sales commissions from his engine sales, I just want to see
the idea
> become a reality because of the great success of the military
version of the
> 914, and selfishly, I plan to use one on my next project to give me
some
> better options for efficient operations at altitude. I just
introduced him
> to the right people and added my inputs, as other manufacturers and
dealers
> have, in an effort to make his product ideal for the experimental
market.
> Besides, tuning carbs and needing DOS computer programs to maintain
an
> engine today seems archaic.
>
> See his new website at:
>
http://www.extremeaircraftengines.com<http://www.extremeaircraftengines.c
om/<http://www.extremeaircraftengines.com<http://www.extremeaircraftengin
es.com/>>
>
>
> Bud Yerly
> Custom Flight Creations.
>
>
>
>
>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List">http://www.matron
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com<http://w
ww.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List">http://www.matronhref="http://f
orums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com>
>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
<http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c>
>
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List<http://www.matronics.com/N
avigator?Europa-List<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List<http:
//www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List>>
>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on<http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contrib
ution>>
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List<http://www.matronics.com/N
avigator?Europa-List>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on>
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: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion |
Curtis Jaussi wrote:
> Lots of good questions. I can address some of them. Jason is well aware of
> the problem of potential air in the fuel and has designed the fuel flow
> through the system and back to the tank so that any air should be pumped on
> through quite quickly. This part makes sense to me.
Yes, but it is still possible that some air will make it into the
injectors. And then? Furthermore, it doesn't has to be air, it can also
be vaporized fuel. Although any engine hates that, a fuel injected
engine especially hates it. With the tight and warm Europa cowling, and
high altitude capability, and the use of Mogas, I think some fuel vapor
can hardly be avoided.
Also, this system will make it impossible to run a tank dry, before
switching to the reserve side. So, this poses the problem that one has
to decide at what level to switch over. 5 Liters at least remaining
seems to be the minimum to me, and one should not forget to switch over
in time. (if the reminder is in the form of a sputtering engine, like it
normally is, it is probably to late for the fuel injection system). With
5 liters, one has about 10 minutes left (considering the fact that the
very last liter will probably have so much air in it that it will be
unusable anyway). This will cut the usable amount of fuel considerably.
Any fuel savings due to the fuel injection is offset by the fact that
you can't risk to run the main side of the tank dry, so effectively you
can't increase the endurance.
> As for redundency, it
> is totally redundant with two complete systems: two fuel pumps, two sets of
> injectors, two sets of sensors,separate electrical systems, etc. Only one
> system is in operation at one time and you manually switch from one to the
> other if needed.
Ok, sounds good.
I think that Jason will probably draw more customers if he puts all this
kind of information on his website. I could do with less pictures.
Some more information about an upgrade kit for existing 914's would be
great as well.
--
Frans Veldman
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: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion |
As I said, I am new to fuel injection and learning a lot. The air in the
fuel problem has to have been dealt with before. My sons are currently
flying a Mooney 20-J that is fuel injected so it can be done.
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Frans Veldman <frans@paardnatuurlijk.nl>wrote:
> >
>
> Curtis Jaussi wrote:
> > Lots of good questions. I can address some of them. Jason is well aware
> of
> > the problem of potential air in the fuel and has designed the fuel flow
> > through the system and back to the tank so that any air should be pumped
> on
> > through quite quickly. This part makes sense to me.
>
> Yes, but it is still possible that some air will make it into the
> injectors. And then? Furthermore, it doesn't has to be air, it can also
> be vaporized fuel. Although any engine hates that, a fuel injected
> engine especially hates it. With the tight and warm Europa cowling, and
> high altitude capability, and the use of Mogas, I think some fuel vapor
> can hardly be avoided.
>
> Also, this system will make it impossible to run a tank dry, before
> switching to the reserve side. So, this poses the problem that one has
> to decide at what level to switch over. 5 Liters at least remaining
> seems to be the minimum to me, and one should not forget to switch over
> in time. (if the reminder is in the form of a sputtering engine, like it
> normally is, it is probably to late for the fuel injection system). With
> 5 liters, one has about 10 minutes left (considering the fact that the
> very last liter will probably have so much air in it that it will be
> unusable anyway). This will cut the usable amount of fuel considerably.
> Any fuel savings due to the fuel injection is offset by the fact that
> you can't risk to run the main side of the tank dry, so effectively you
> can't increase the endurance.
>
> > As for redundency, it
> > is totally redundant with two complete systems: two fuel pumps, two sets
> of
> > injectors, two sets of sensors,separate electrical systems, etc. Only
> one
> > system is in operation at one time and you manually switch from one to
> the
> > other if needed.
>
> Ok, sounds good.
> I think that Jason will probably draw more customers if he puts all this
> kind of information on his website. I could do with less pictures.
>
> Some more information about an upgrade kit for existing 914's would be
> great as well.
>
> --
> Frans Veldman
>
>
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: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion |
Frans,
Your concern was the first thing I worked on with Jason.
The fuel comes in and is under pressure through the manifold then to the
regulator just like a car. Any air passes through so quickly as it is
the path of least resistance out of the manifold that it is not a
problem unless the tank runs dry...and you don't have another full tank.
That's another problem. For those of you worried about switching
tanks, install a header tank as used to be a common thing. As fuel
injection matured and dumb things like putting the regulator at the pump
was changed, air in the system became less of a problem as witnessed
with our current fuel injected cars and trucks. Once one side runs dry
just like in a diesel truck with two tanks, the pump reprime is quick
and the air bubbles pass quick. A couple of sputters and your off.
Just don't get into that problem on final...Of course that is a pilot
problem. The Riley Rocket Cessna 310 used two fuel injected
Continentals and we would run until the first hickup and scramble to
switch from the aux tanks. If you weren't quick, you were single engine
for about 10 seconds. The fuel pressure was the key. Set the warning
system, (which we didn't have) to alert you of a drop of fuel pressure
from the manifold and switch tanks. Also, I have learned from the car
guys that you put the filters aft of the pumps to lower the suction
problems.
If you insist on running a tank dry. Do this:
Install a fuel pump on each tank that is low pressure high flow.
Install optional shutoff valves in a header tank to keep the pumps from
running constantly.
Install an overflow on the header with one way check valve back to the
main tank.
Put a pair of high pressure fuel pumps in series with shutoff valves
from the header tank with inverted pickup in case of turbulence.
Install a header low fuel warning system to alert of impending fuel
exhaustion to warn of tank changing.
Install the SDS system as designed with the regulator after the
injectors with the return back to the header.
See off road racers set ups it is virtually the same.
It just takes time.
Bud
----- Original Message -----
From: Frans Veldman<mailto:frans@paardnatuurlijk.nl>
To: europa-list@matronics.com<mailto:europa-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: Europa-List: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion
<frans@paardnatuurlijk.nl<mailto:frans@paardnatuurlijk.nl>>
Curtis Jaussi wrote:
> Lots of good questions. I can address some of them. Jason is well
aware of
> the problem of potential air in the fuel and has designed the fuel
flow
> through the system and back to the tank so that any air should be
pumped on
> through quite quickly. This part makes sense to me.
Yes, but it is still possible that some air will make it into the
injectors. And then? Furthermore, it doesn't has to be air, it can
also
be vaporized fuel. Although any engine hates that, a fuel injected
engine especially hates it. With the tight and warm Europa cowling,
and
high altitude capability, and the use of Mogas, I think some fuel
vapor
can hardly be avoided.
Also, this system will make it impossible to run a tank dry, before
switching to the reserve side. So, this poses the problem that one has
to decide at what level to switch over. 5 Liters at least remaining
seems to be the minimum to me, and one should not forget to switch
over
in time. (if the reminder is in the form of a sputtering engine, like
it
normally is, it is probably to late for the fuel injection system).
With
5 liters, one has about 10 minutes left (considering the fact that the
very last liter will probably have so much air in it that it will be
unusable anyway). This will cut the usable amount of fuel
considerably.
Any fuel savings due to the fuel injection is offset by the fact that
you can't risk to run the main side of the tank dry, so effectively
you
can't increase the endurance.
> As for redundency, it
> is totally redundant with two complete systems: two fuel pumps, two
sets of
> injectors, two sets of sensors,separate electrical systems, etc.
Only one
> system is in operation at one time and you manually switch from one
to the
> other if needed.
Ok, sounds good.
I think that Jason will probably draw more customers if he puts all
this
kind of information on his website. I could do with less pictures.
Some more information about an upgrade kit for existing 914's would be
great as well.
--
Frans Veldman
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List<http://www.matronics.com/N
avigator?Europa-List>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on>
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: | Fuel injection (Jason here) |
Frans,
Fuel injection has been used on the predator for 300,000 hours. If you talk
to any mechanics that worked on the aircraft before 2001 and after, they w
ill all tell you that fuel injection increases performance, much less maint
enance, longevity, throttle response, reduces vibration 1/2- 2/3, fuel cons
umption ect. All my systems use a fuel rail. If air gets into the fuel rail
, it just circulates out and back to the tank via the fuel pressure regulat
or. Fuel injection is under 40psi of pressure, you will never get vapor (du
e to the-fuel vaporizing)-in the fuel system. If you are getting really
low on fuel, you might suck some air, and then some fuel, then some more a
ir. The air will drop your fuel pressure untell the pump sucks more fuel. O
nce the fuel gets flowing again, the air will be pushed out of the fuel sys
tem in just a second or two.--My fuel systems have been modeled paralle
l to what the military has done. If it was a- problem, they would have
addressed it. the predator is as tight of a cowling as you can get one, an
d in a pusher configuration.
Thanks everyone for your support
Jason
--- On Wed, 5/13/09, Frans Veldman <frans@paardnatuurlijk.nl> wrote:
From: Frans Veldman <frans@paardnatuurlijk.nl>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion
Curtis Jaussi wrote:
> Lots of good questions.- I can address some of them.- Jason is well a
ware of
> the problem of potential air in the fuel and has designed the fuel flow
> through the system and back to the tank so that any air should be pumped
on
> through quite quickly.- This part makes sense to me.
Yes, but it is still possible that some air will make it into the
injectors. And then? Furthermore, it doesn't has to be air, it can also
be vaporized fuel. Although any engine hates that, a fuel injected
engine especially hates it. With the tight and warm Europa cowling, and
high altitude capability, and the use of Mogas, I think some fuel vapor
can hardly be avoided.
Also, this system will make it impossible to run a tank dry, before
switching to the reserve side. So, this poses the problem that one has
to decide at what level to switch over. 5 Liters at least remaining
seems to be the minimum to me, and one should not forget to switch over
in time. (if the reminder is in the form of a sputtering engine, like it
normally is, it is probably to late for the fuel injection system). With
5 liters, one has about 10 minutes left (considering the fact that the
very last liter will probably have so much air in it that it will be
unusable anyway). This will cut the usable amount of fuel considerably.
Any fuel savings due to the fuel injection is offset by the fact that
you can't risk to run the main side of the tank dry, so effectively you
can't increase the endurance.
>- As for redundency, it
> is totally redundant with two complete systems: two fuel pumps, two sets
of
> injectors, two sets of sensors,separate electrical systems, etc.- Only
one
> system is in operation at one time and you manually switch from one to th
e
> other if needed.
Ok, sounds good.
I think that Jason will probably draw more customers if he puts all this
kind of information on his website. I could do with less pictures.
Some more information about an upgrade kit for existing 914's would be
great as well.
--
Frans Veldman
le, List Admin.
=0A=0A=0A
Message 9
| 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: | 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion |
Frans, I am curious to know your reasoning with regard to not being able to
"run a tank dry"
before switching to reserve. Granted if you run an EFI fuel pump without
fuel it wont
last more than a couple of minutes, however the engine would have "gone
quite" long before
the pump was damaged, and as you say, rough running or surging engine should
tell you
you are out of fuel in the main tank, and virtually all EFI systems these
days that use electric
injectors dont need bleeding, as the system is designed for continuous flow
to help with cooling
so any air in the system is pushed through the pressure regulator and back
to the tank. Most of the EFI
systems I have worked on had a return rate (back to the tank) of about 5
litres a minute. Also given that
most modern car engines run at around 95deg C to help meet emission targets
(hence the need to have all the
pressure bottles etc for radiators these days) in VERY cramped engine bays I
cant see that as an issue either.
In fact it would seem that an an EFI setup that uses a fuel return line
would be less susceptible to vapourisation
than an engine with carbs.
Diesel engines on the other hand are a different story, run out of fuel and
in most cases you HAVE to bleed
and re-prime the whole system. I believe the really new diesels dont have
this problem, but i have yet to
work on any of that style.
Having said that, if you have had such and experience where a Mogas EFI
engine did require bleeding after
being run out of (or low) fuel, I would love to hear about it.
craig
Do Not Archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Frans
Veldman
Sent: Thursday, 14 May 2009 6:27 AM
Subject: Re: Europa-List: 914 Fuel Injected Update & Opinion
Curtis Jaussi wrote:
> Lots of good questions. I can address some of them. Jason is well aware
of
> the problem of potential air in the fuel and has designed the fuel flow
> through the system and back to the tank so that any air should be pumped
on
> through quite quickly. This part makes sense to me.
Yes, but it is still possible that some air will make it into the
injectors. And then? Furthermore, it doesn't has to be air, it can also
be vaporized fuel. Although any engine hates that, a fuel injected
engine especially hates it. With the tight and warm Europa cowling, and
high altitude capability, and the use of Mogas, I think some fuel vapor
can hardly be avoided.
Also, this system will make it impossible to run a tank dry, before
switching to the reserve side. So, this poses the problem that one has
to decide at what level to switch over. 5 Liters at least remaining
seems to be the minimum to me, and one should not forget to switch over
in time. (if the reminder is in the form of a sputtering engine, like it
normally is, it is probably to late for the fuel injection system). With
5 liters, one has about 10 minutes left (considering the fact that the
very last liter will probably have so much air in it that it will be
unusable anyway). This will cut the usable amount of fuel considerably.
Any fuel savings due to the fuel injection is offset by the fact that
you can't risk to run the main side of the tank dry, so effectively you
can't increase the endurance.
> As for redundency, it
> is totally redundant with two complete systems: two fuel pumps, two sets
of
> injectors, two sets of sensors,separate electrical systems, etc. Only one
> system is in operation at one time and you manually switch from one to the
> other if needed.
Ok, sounds good.
I think that Jason will probably draw more customers if he puts all this
kind of information on his website. I could do with less pictures.
Some more information about an upgrade kit for existing 914's would be
great as well.
--
Frans Veldman
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
18:03:00
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! --
|