Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:35 AM - Re: Intercooler for 914 (Frans Veldman)
2. 04:39 AM - Thoughts about the intercooler for 914 (Frans Veldman)
3. 05:45 AM - Cooling issues, the solution, with pictures. (Frans Veldman)
4. 07:28 AM - Battery Cable sizing (Fergus Kyle)
5. 07:37 AM - Address Expalnation - off topic (Fergus Kyle)
6. 07:39 AM - exhaust augmentor (Frans Veldman)
7. 07:48 AM - Re: Intercooler for 914 (rparigoris)
8. 08:05 AM - Re: Thoughts about the intercooler for 914 (rparigoris)
9. 08:05 AM - Re: Re: Intercooler for 914 (Frans Veldman)
10. 08:23 AM - Re: Re: Thoughts about the intercooler for 914 (Frans Veldman)
11. 08:32 AM - Re: Intercooler for 914 (rparigoris)
12. 09:09 AM - Re: Re: Intercooler for 914 (Frans Veldman)
13. 02:43 PM - Ktiplanes Video Clip (Erich Trombley)
14. 04:04 PM - Re: Ktiplanes Video Clip (Tim Houlihan)
15. 07:24 PM - Re: Ktiplanes Video Clip (Martin Tuck)
16. 11:08 PM - Popham International flyin (Steven Pitt)
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: Intercooler for 914 |
On 06/10/2010 03:24 AM, rparigoris wrote:
> Has anyone measured the air-box temperature drop (if any) when using the inter
cooler (Bell?) installed as per Factory instructions (John Hurst)?
Furhter investigation revealed that measuring the airbox temperature is
not an easy task. The sensor has to be mounted in the metal heat
conducting airbox, and measure the temperature of a very bad heat
conductor inside. It appears to be difficult to prevent heat from the
airbox itself to influence the sensor.
I prepared a special temperature sensor for this, but even this sensor
appears to leak some heat from the mounting thread to the tip.
I have asked UMA to make a special airbox temperature sensor for me. If
anyone is interested, I can ask them to make a few more of these.
Frans
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: | Thoughts about the intercooler for 914 |
The more I think about it, the more I wonder whether I should have an
intercooler at all.
(Apart from the fact that I think that the commonly used Bell
intercooler behind the naca inlet isn't doing much at all). Let's
suppose we have a proper setup, and the intercooler functions as intended.
There are three reasons for having an intercooler:
1) It reduces thermal strain on the engine by cooling the inlet air.
2) It allows the engine to produce a bit more power, as cooled air is
denser and thus contains more oxygen per volume. Cooling the air lowers
the pressure as well, so the TCU will boost up the pressure a bit more
until it reaches the target pressure in the airbox again. Thus, you will
end up with more dense air containing more oxygen per volume (and at the
same time of a lower temperature). The carbs will automatically squirt
more fuel in this denser air. You will end up with more power, but of
course to make this power you need more fuel as well. These HP's are not
for free.
3) If the OAT is extremely high, it could be possible that the heat
generated by boosing the pressure causes the inlet temperature to reach
the limit programmed into the TCU. The TCU will then reduce boost
pressure to stay below this temperature limit. This is 72C in older
TCU's, 88C in newer TCU's. The intercooler will prevent this
TCU-intervention from happening.
The downside of the intercooler:
1) Weight. This one is obvious. But of course in HP per weight these are
still "light-weight" HP's.
2) Drag. Intercoolers need loads of air to work well. The flow of air
the engine needs is high, and the temperature difference is small. So
you need to cool a lot of stuff that is just above ambient temperature.
This needs a lot of cooling air. Dragging air through a radiator is a
costly process. It might well be that the intercooler will cost you a
few knots cruise speed.
Do we actually need an intercooler?
No doubt, a properly setup intercooler will gain you a few HP's. The
commonly used Bell intercooler is worth 5 to 7 HP's (provided the setup
allows sufficient cooling air through it).
But, we use these HP's only during the take off run, when we run the
engine at 115%. It doesn't make sense to make more HP's when the
throttle is partially open: the throttle is partially open with a
reason, and if the intercooler increases the power of the engine, you
have to throttle back a bit more to stay at your intended fuel
consumption, MAP, speed and altitude.
Apart from this, the intercooler only works if the turbo is actually
boosting the pressure. Without boost, the air won't heat up so there is
nothing to cool at all.
During the cruise at moderate altitudes, as long as MAP is lower than
the ambient pressure, the turbo is not doing much, so the intercooler is
useless here. Even if MAP is slightly higher, the heat produced by
boosting up the pressure this tiny amount doesn't produce enough heat to
justify even thinking about it.
At high altitudes, let's say 10.000 feet or higher, the turbo is
probably working quite a bit during the cruise, for any higher MAP than
the ambient pressure can provide. Still, if you don't fly with wide open
throttle, the HP gain itself is useless. We then of course still have
the advantage of cooling the air, reducing thermal stress of the engine.
But how warm is the air actually at 10.000+ feet to begin with? Does it
actually make sense to cool it? Maybe the increase of temperature is
even beneficial, as this reduces the chances of icing and promotes
better fuel atomization.
The 5 to 7 HP gain allow you to take off in a bit shorter distance. This
would be great, but the fact that an Europa with a 914 can take off
already at a shorter distance than it needs to land, so this makes this
a theoretical advantage only. To practically benefit from the ability to
take off from an extremely short runway, you first have to land there,
which is impossible.
Then the final advantage is that it could be theoretically possible to
reach the warning limit of the TCU, 88 Celcius of the inlet temperature,
and if that happens the TCU will reduce boost and hence power. It must
be awfully warm if this happens, and I wonder if anyone has ever
experienced this loss of power in extremely hot OAT's.
So, to summarize:
1) During the cruise at low altitude the turbo isn't heating up the air,
so the intercooler is worthless.
2) During the cruise at high altitude the turbo is heating up the air,
but at that altitude the air is not very warm to begin with so it is not
a stress for the engine anyway.
3) During all this cruising we are carrying the weight of the
intercooler, and dragging loads of air through it. The intercooler is
costly in terms of cooling drag.
4) During take off we have 5 to 7 more HP's available, and cooler air
for the engine. But it doesn't allow us to take off from shorter runways
as the landing distance is already larger than the take off distance.
So.... I'm in serious doubt whether I should take out the intercooler.
Another option is to have a flap on it, to close off the useless air
flow through it during the cruise. An interesting way to achieve this is
to operate this flap by a piston, fed by the manifold pressure. As soon
as the manifold pressure is higher than the ambient pressure, it pushes
the flap open. So the intercooler is only producing drag when it
actually makes sense do to so. We could also achieve this with a servo
operated flap, controlled by a differential pressure sensor (combined
with a lower temperature limit). All this of course is quite a fuss for
a small gain in HP's, only used (not needed) during a fraction of the trip.
Opinions?
Frans
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: | Cooling issues, the solution, with pictures. |
As I received quite a few requests for pictures of my experimental
cooling setup, I decided to post them here.
Many of us experience cooling problems. Quite some people believe that
getting more air through the cowling is the solution. But as our Rotax
engine is fluid cooled, and not primarily air cooled like a lycosaurus,
I had my reservations against using more air to cool the engine. Sure it
will work, but at quite some costs. Air used for cooling shows up as
cooling drag into the equation. According to some literature, cooling
drag can account for 40% of the total airplane drag! So it is worth to
find a solution that works with minimal "air consumption".
A lot of people told me that lowering the oil radiator made quite an
improvement. I decided not just to lower the oil cooler, but to take it
out of the duct completely, and give it its own air inlet. And that made
an unbelievable change!
Picture 1:
The oil cooler, now mounted on the starboard footwell. A better place
would be in front of the port footwell, but as I have an intercooler, I
had to put the oil tank there, leaving not enough space for the oil
cooler there.
As first tests indicate, now the oil cooler is fed with cold air, it is
oversized. A smaller oil cooler would probably do as well.
The oil cooler has an aluminium wedge shape diffuser added to it. Air is
blown into this diffuser with a 2 inch scat tube.
The exit air of the radiator is just dumped inside the cowling.
The use of a scat tube makes it very easy to add a butterfly valve to
it, so to prevent the oil from cooling too much (or to allow it to warm
up quicker). I consider this a better option than to use an oil
thermostat: Thermostat's require more oil hose connections, and when you
don't need to cool the oil, precious air is still dragged through the
cooler. The valve is not yet installed here.
Picture 2:
The original 3 inch inlets are closed off by an aluminium plate. (Guess
some people will wonder whether I should be building RV's instead of
Europa's because of my liberal use of aluminium constructions. ;-) ) Two
small naca ducts in the top cowling (not shown) provide air for cooling
the cylinders. They are more efficient than the round inlets because
they are aimed on top of the cylinders, forcing the air from top to bottom.
The smaller front opening just above the original air inlet is the inlet
for the oil cooler. This appears to be all that is needed! Can climb out
at 75 knots with 115% power, without the oil temperature increasing.
It is tale telling that such a small opening for air provides better
cooling than the original Europa setup with the two radiators in tandem.
Please keep in mind that all this is built as a "quick fix" to allow us
to keep flying. Cowling rework is scheduled for another time.
Picture 3:
The reason why I could not just lower the oil cooler. My cooling duct is
trimmed down considerably. It should perform better than the standard
Europa XS dog house, but of course it took out the option of "lowering
the oil radiator". I misunderstood the fragment in the build manual,
that lowering the oil radiator was an "option" for "hot climates". I
didn't consider our Dutch climat as a "hot climat".
The cooling duct is equipped with a servo controlled cowl flap.
Anyway, I have plenty of cooling now, with a very low drag setup.
Frans
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: | Battery Cable sizing |
Cheers,
Per my message same subject sent late 08JUN=A1=AF10 (Canada) wherein I
promised backup calcs for aft battery cabling -
These are my calcs for using household copper tubing as container and
ground return for both aft-cited batteries. I wanted to know if I was in
the =A1=AEballpark=A1=AF for amp-carrying capacity. I suggest following
it through
if you plan similar as a phone-call or doorbell might have interrupted
the
incredibly complex math. AS for European/Brit equivalents, caveat
emptor.
Apologies to most US types but calc=A1=AFed in mm for greater
accuracy(?):
COPPER TUBING - =A8=F6=A1=B1 x 96=A1=B1 - TYPE =A1=AEM=A1=AF - CURRENT
EQUIVALENT
Method #1 - Cross-sectional area
(1) OD=D1=0.624=A1=B1
(2) r1=D1/2=.312=A1=B1=7.9248mm.
(3) A1=197.29956 mm2
(4) ID = 0.570=A1=B1
(5) r2 = D2/2 = .285=A1=B1 = 7.239mm
(6) A2 = 164.62912 mm2
(7) A3 = A1-A2 = 197.29956mm2 - 164.62912 mm2 = 32.67044 mm2
(8) D3 = (=A1=EEA3/=AC=B1)x2 = 6.449599mm
(9) According to POCKET REF manual (Sequoia Publishing, Colorado),
page 113 (or p.810 of the Handbook of Applied
Mathematics), the diameter
in millimetres of AWG2 is 6.544 mm. Therefore the
current-carrying capacity of thin-wall copper tubing is roughly
equivalent to AWG2, which for type T or TW gives an Ampacity of just
under
110A at 40deg C. Two tubes electrically-attached should carry the
equivalent of AWG000 cable.
Since this is the design for battery contacts
used, the ground return capabilities satisfy electrical loads very well.
Method #2 - Weight per 1000 feet
(1) Measured weight of tube sample gives equivalent of 87.1 gm/ft
(2) This is equal to 87,100 gm per 1000ft
(3) 87100 gm = 87100 x 0,0022 = 191.62 lb/1000ft
(4) Referring to the reference manual in item (9) above, this gives an
AWG
equivalent to just 4% under AWG2, or about
110A, to 40deg C.
(5) See 2nd paragraph, item (9) above for double tubing.
Both these methods are in general agreement
as to sizing.
Cheers, Ferg
PS: I used #4CCA from Perihelion, with double layer of heatshrink for
security in pipe plus electrical tube end protectors on entry/exit. The
tubing exceeded the CCA capacities.
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: | Address Expalnation - off topic |
Perhaps this is not new, so forgive, but having been asked I thought
I should 'splain:
The 'To' line (and several others) as above have funny numbers to
start the address. Since address lists on my email program start with
numbers, I have assigned same to commonly-used addresses since they are now
all at the top - the often-er, the lesser the value. I apologise if
Europalist is number 5 but there are family pressures.
Happy Landings
Ferg
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: | exhaust augmentor |
Some people asked me for pictures about my exhaust augmentor. I think it
might be worth discussing about this on the forum, so here we go.
What is an exhaust augmentor?
An exhaust augmentor is a construction that makes use of the kinetic
energy of the exhaust flow to suck out air from the cowling. There are
of course other ways to promote air flow through the cowling, but they
come with a price, usually paid in drag. The use of exhaust energy to
suck out cowling air is free, and as an additional benefit, it also
works when the aircraft is on the ground, without airflow.
How does it work?
When the diameter of the exhaust suddenly increases, the exhaust flow
should reduce in speed to keep the same volume per time travelled. As
exhaust gas has inertia, it will try to keep the same speed, so the
larger volume has to be filled with something else. This is the same as
how a venturi works. It generates a vacuum at the other end.
All this is simply realised by hiding the exhaust inside a duct, and
then to make the exhaust somewhat shorter than the duct, so the exhaust
flow "sees" a sudden increase in diameter, and generates a vacuum in
this area. The other (front) end of the duct is connected to the space
inside the cowling. With some work one could duct it to specific places,
but I opted to keep it simple and just end it where the exhaust curves
upward to the silencer.
Why do you need an exhaust augmentor?
1) Negative drag, or propulsion. Exhaust gas contains precious energy.
The outflow of exhaust can be a propulsive force (jet engines work that
way). But you have to aim it in the proper direction, and to mix it
properly with the air flow around the airplane. Mixing hot air and cold
air will provoke turbulence; the lower the temperature of the exhaust,
the less drag is associated with it.
By mixing exhaust air with cowling air, the exhaust flow is reduced in
temperature and increased in volume at the same time. It can then be
release safely without burning the airplane, and without creating excess
turbulence. Also the aluminium duct is cooled by air flow from the
outside, providing an ever more gradual temperature difference between
inside and outside.
2) Cooling. The exhaust augmentor sucks out the air of the cowling. This
is in some setups the main cooling for ground operations. The Long-Eze
people often cool their engines with the use of an exhaust augmentor.
Most Europa's can benefit from additional ground cooling as well.
3) Elimination of exhaust drag. The exhaust is normally a round tube
poking out of the side of the cowling. Round tubes are among the worst
aerodynamic profiles, with other words, they produce a lot of drag. An
exhaust augmentor allows the exhaust to be streamlined, eliminating yet
another source of drag.
4) To exit the exhaust of the cowling, you have to make a hole in the
cowling, with enough space to allow for engine vibrations. It is unclear
in the Europa setup whether this hole allows air out of the cowling, or
lets air in, but both options are unwelcome as they hinder cooling and
produce unnecessary drag. With an exhaust augmentor, the exhaust hole is
fully functional.
5) Exhausts produce "dirt". In the original Europa setup, carbon and oil
is deposited on the leading edge of the port wing, the wheel pants of a
tri gear, the flap hinges, etc. With an exhaust augmentor, the dirt is
deposited on the underside of the plane, where it is out of sight.
6) Noise. The source of the exhaust noise is heat. Cool down the gasses
inside the exhaust, and you won't hear the noise anymore, at least no
more than the exhaust of a vacuum cleaner. Of course the exhaust
augmentor will not cool down the exhaust completely, but the reduction
in sound is probably measurable.
About the pictures.
Keep in mind that this is an experimental setup. I had to rework the
cowling anyway because of cooling modifications, so I decided that this
was the time to experiment with an exhaust augmentor. The setup is not
yet painted or anything.
The first thing you need is a new exhaust tube. A company specialized in
building stainless steel exhausts was willing to weld one on my
directions. The new exhaust was 200 grams heavier than the original one.
Then you need a duct, an enclosure. I make one of a sheet of aluminium,
bended with a 8 cm diameter, into a U-shape. The top of the U is closed
with an aluminium heat shield, allowing some space between the foot well
and the shield. Cool air is drawn through this space as well, to keep
the bottom of the foot well cool.
The exhaust should be shorter than this duct to generate the sucking
effect. I made it 5 cm shorter, but this was just guessing. The best
length can be found with experimentation, but is a bit cumbersome to do.
I noticed just a slight discolourisation at the end of the inside of the
duct, so obviously the exhaust fumes have expanded there just enough to
reach the duct. I think this means that this is about the optimum shape.
If the duct is discoloured over a longer distance, there is no vacuum
effect anymore in that area, if it doesn't touch the duct, some air
might even enter via the exit in opposite direction to fill up the void.
In front of the duct is a shape, attached to the cowling, to make a
smooth transition between the cowling and the exhaust augmentor. It is
not yet fully sanded, nor painted, but a rough representation about how
it is going to look like.
To protect the fuselage in the direct vincinity of the exhaust, I put a
small aluminium plate against the underside of the airplane, spaced
3mm's off the underside, to allow air to circulate between it. This
proves to work well.
As the Europa classic also exits the exhaust on the underside of the
airplane, I consider this as safe to do.
Test results:
1) The foot well doesn't run hot, not even with full power on the ground.
2) The aluminium duct feels hot over its entire length, despite the fact
that it is in the propeller stream and gets a lot of cooling. In my
opinion this can't be contributed to radiant heat alone, it means that
hot air from inside the cowling is rushing out via this duct.
Keep in mind that I have closed off the front 3 inch round inlets, so I
have no ram air. Instead, I have two naca ducts in the top cowling aimed
at the cylinders, but due to their location they are out of the
propeller wash. This means on the ground I have little airflow inside
the cowling. It appears that the augmenter is making up for this.
3) If I open up the coolant access door after a ground test session, it
normally feels like opening a furnace. This is no longer the case: it
feels relatively cold inside, but after a few seconds, suddenly hot air
exits the access door opening. Hot air starts to rise up. This might
indicate that as long as the engine is running, there is quite some
airflow through the cowling.
4) In flight I could not see an obvious increase in speed. This means
that if there is a speed difference, it is probably low. Unfortunately,
I have also changed the inlet of the radiator at the same time (this was
a failed attempt to get the two radiators in tandem working) and this
new setup is likely to have more drag. It could be that the augmentor is
making up for the drag penalty of the new radiator inlet. The latter I
will revert back to its original shape soon.
Frans
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: Intercooler for 914 |
Hi Frans
I ordered a while back one of UMAs senders for their air box probe without anything
inside. Ends up it fits my 3-TO-92 package (-55 to 150C) perfectly:
http://www.europaowners.org/forums/gallery2.php?g2_itemId=78342
Make sure you get their special sealing washer.
Ron Parigoris
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=300812#300812
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: Thoughts about the intercooler for 914 |
Hi Frans
I agree that measuring temperature of air is not an easy thing to do without being
influenced by mount.
My bottom line question to install intercooler or not was based on function of
Bell intercooler. If it is not doing job or extremely limited job, then may not
be worth it.
It seems to me you are in the perfect situation to measure actual performance difference.
Perhaps if you don't mind you can perform a few tests to measure performance
now:
**In climb have intercooler flap opened and set up climb using 115% power, try
maintaining climb to let things normalize, then set prop manually to hold RPM,
note MP, then close intercooler flap. If the intercooler is doing anything then
you should see a drop in RPM as you are now dumping warmer air into engine.
Leave flap closed to long enough to normalize, then open flap again and note
if there is a RPM increase.
**Perform same test at 10K with full throttle in cruise.
If you do see a change then there is a good chance your air box sender is speaking
with a forked tongue.
One major reason for not dumping air that is too warm through a 914 is for a given
octane fuel detonation will occur a lot sooner than with cooler air. That
I believe is primary reason for TCU intervention.
Ron Parigoris
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=300816#300816
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: | Re: Intercooler for 914 |
On 06/10/2010 04:47 PM, rparigoris wrote:
> I ordered a while back one of UMAs senders for their air box probe without anything
inside. Ends up it fits my 3-TO-92 package (-55 to 150C) perfectly:
> http://www.europaowners.org/forums/gallery2.php?g2_itemId=78342
> Make sure you get their special sealing washer.
I'm not sure if I understand this correctly. The UMA sender I got was
all metal. It was just measuring the temperature of the airbox, not from
the air inside. The airbox itself is probably a lot warmer than the air
inside.
So, I filed off the metal surrounding the protruding part of the sensor.
There it was, the sensor itself embedded in epoxy. Now it worked much
better, but still it looks like the airbox temperature is influencing
the measuring of the air temperature. UMA agreed that this setup is not
working well, so they are willing to make a sensor with a much more
protruding tip.
So, the problem is not the sensor, but how to mount the sensor without
heat leak from the metal thread to the sensor itself.
Frans
Message 10
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: Thoughts about the intercooler for 914 |
On 06/10/2010 05:04 PM, rparigoris wrote:
> It seems to me you are in the perfect situation to measure actual
> performance difference. Perhaps if you don't mind you can perform a
> few tests to measure performance now: **In climb have intercooler
> flap opened and set up climb using 115% power, try maintaining climb
> to let things normalize, then set prop manually to hold RPM, note MP,
> then close intercooler flap.
I will do so as soon as the cloud base will rise enough. ;-)
> One major reason for not dumping air that is too warm through a 914
> is for a given octane fuel detonation will occur a lot sooner than
> with cooler air. That I believe is primary reason for TCU
> intervention.
That's right. But I might assume that Rotax has set this temperature
limit to a specific value, and below this limit there is no risk of
detonation. I think it is quite a challenge to get the inlet temperature
up to the limit of 88C...
Frans
Message 11
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: Intercooler for 914 |
Hi Frans
Now I too am confused a little. I figured UMA had it figured out how to best measure
air box air temperature. They offer a Rotax 914 air box sender. I can't
use their sender output, so I ordered one of their senders without anything inside.
It is a hex head probe made out of brass with a perhaps 1" or 1+1/4" thin
extension that protrudes into air box stream. It comes with a nice black rubber
seal (think steel or aluminium washer covered with rubber). I was going to
make one, but figured if they have it figured out, just use theirs and install
my electronic sender in it. Making a longer and thinner probe has more probability
of breaking off.
Are you saying this is the sender you purchased from UMA originally that is not
working too well? Now they are making you another with a longer probe tip?
Thx.
Ron Parigoris
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=300822#300822
Message 12
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: Intercooler for 914 |
On 06/10/2010 05:31 PM, rparigoris wrote:
> Now I too am confused a little.
It gets more confusing all the time!
> I figured UMA had it figured out how
> to best measure air box air temperature. They offer a Rotax 914 air
> box sender.
Well, when I ordered it, I asked specifically for something like this,
but they didn't have it. I could buy the carb temp stuff instead. So
that is what I bought, although the upper limit of the scale is with
+60C less than I wanted, and the low limit of -60C is somewhat less than
I ever hope to encounter with my Europa!
> I can't use their sender output, so I ordered one of
> their senders without anything inside. It is a hex head probe made
> out of brass with a perhaps 1" or 1+1/4" thin extension that
> protrudes into air box stream.
Do you have a part number or anything else I can refer to?
> Are you saying this is the sender you purchased from UMA originally
> that is not working too well?
Yep. It was all metal. So essentially it was measuring the temperature
of the metal airbox itself.
Frans
Message 13
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: | Ktiplanes Video Clip |
Below is a link to Kitplanes video clip of Kim Prout and his lovely bird
. The video is about 5 min long. Good stuff. Enjoy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0et96eefLM
Erich Trombley
N28ET Classic Mono 914
____________________________________________________________
Single and 21+ Women
Find men near you. Free to browse profiles.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4c115c1e6b220389805st01vuc
Message 14
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: Ktiplanes Video Clip |
It is also on the Europa club web site at
http://www.europaclub.org.uk/
Tim
Erich Trombley wrote:
> Below is a link to Kitplanes video clip of Kim Prout and his lovely
> bird. The video is about 5 min long. Good stuff. Enjoy.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0et96eefLM
>
> Erich Trombley
> N28ET Classic Mono 914
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> *Single and 21+ Women*
> Find men near you. Free to browse profiles.
> <http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3132/4c115c1e6b220389805st01vuc>online-date.org
> <http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3132/4c115c1e6b220389805st01vuc>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 15
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: Ktiplanes Video Clip |
Great video - what is going on with those wings at around the 4:20 mark?
Is that flutter or just a shaky camera.
I'd edit that bit out.
Regards,
Martin Tuck
Europa N152MT
Wichita, Kansas
Erich Trombley wrote:
> Below is a link to Kitplanes video clip of Kim Prout and his lovely
> bird. The video is about 5 min long. Good stuff. Enjoy.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0et96eefLM
>
> Erich Trombley
> N28ET Classic Mono 914
> *
> *
Message 16
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: | Popham International flyin |
YOUR CLUB NEEDS YOU!!!!!
The airfield is waiting.................................
The Marquee is erected.............................
5 Europas await their brothers ...................
Where will you be this weekend??????
The Europa Club is looking forward to welcoming you to Popham over the
next three days to enjoy a feast of Europas and guests from all over the
UK and Europe (weather permitting). The AGM will be held Saturday
afternoon.
See you soon.
Regards
Steve Pitt
on behalf of the Europa Club
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! --
|