Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:09 AM - 82 UL MOGAS (Guerner Remi)
2. 03:29 AM - Re: 82 UL MOGAS (houlihan tim)
3. 05:24 AM - Re: MG Airbrake question (Karl Heindl)
4. 08:21 AM - Re: 82 UL MOGAS (Frans Veldman)
5. 08:41 AM - Fw: Cooling modifications (Frans Veldman)
6. 09:03 AM - Re: 82 UL MOGAS (David Joyce)
7. 11:32 AM - Re: Fw: Cooling modifications (Bud Yerly)
8. 12:14 PM - Re: Fw: Cooling modifications (Frans Veldman)
9. 06:05 PM - Europa Sounds in Flight (Troy Maynor)
10. 06:15 PM - Rough River Up-Date # 9 (JEFF ROBERTS)
11. 07:36 PM - Re: Europa Sounds in Flight (Tim Ward)
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 |
|
Hi all,
Landing at Sywell last September for the LAA rally, I was surprised
they had both 100LL Avgas and 82UL Mogas. I decided to take 20 liters
of this -unknown to me- 82UL. This small quantity being mixed with
about 50 liters of the fuel remaining, I thought I was not taking a
big risk.
Later I did some research on the internet and among available
publications. This is what I found:
82UL has a MON (Motor Octane Number) of 82 and AKI (Anti Knock Index)
of 87, which translate into a RON (Research Octane Number) of 92, as
AKI=(RON+MON)/2.
In their Operator's Manuals and applicable SI, Rotax provides the
following instructions regarding the suitable fuels:
912 UL: minimum RON: 90 or minimum AKI: 87
912 ULS and 914UL: minimum RON: 95 or minimum AKI: 91
So it is clear that 82UL is not suitable for the 912 ULS and 914.
In order to confirm this conclusion, could anyone provide a detailed
specification of this 82UL Mogas as supplied in the UK?
Other questions: is there any ethanol in this fuel? Why they do not
supply Premium or Premium Plus / Super, whatever they call it, which
would offer the higher octane rating we need for the 912S and 914,
with only a slight cost increase?
Comments please!
Regards
Remi Guerner
F-PGKL
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 |
|
Hi Remi.
Thanks for the Mogas availability information at Sywell that is good to know
as I plan to be there next weekend.
In answer to your point about the higher octane fuel at higher cost all I
can say is thanks for letting me know that it is suitable for my 912 engine
!.
Tim
On 29 August 2010 11:07, Guerner Remi <air.guerner@orange.fr> wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Landing at Sywell last September for the LAA rally, I was surprised they
> had both 100LL Avgas and 82UL Mogas. I decided to take 20 liters of this
> -unknown to me- 82UL. This small quantity being mixed with about 50 liters
> of the fuel remaining, I thought I was not taking a big risk.
> Later I did some research on the internet and among available publications.
> This is what I found:
> 82UL has a MON (Motor Octane Number) of 82 and AKI (Anti Knock Index) of
> 87, which translate into a RON (Research Octane Number) of 92, as
> AKI=(RON+MON)/2.
> In their Operator's Manuals and applicable SI, Rotax provides the following
> instructions regarding the suitable fuels:
> 912 UL: minimum RON: 90 or minimum AKI: 87
> 912 ULS and 914UL: minimum RON: 95 or minimum AKI: 91
> So it is clear that 82UL is not suitable for the 912 ULS and 914.
> In order to confirm this conclusion, could anyone provide a detailed
> specification of this 82UL Mogas as supplied in the UK?
> Other questions: is there any ethanol in this fuel? Why they do not supply
> Premium or Premium Plus / Super, whatever they call it, which would offer
> the higher octane rating we need for the 912S and 914, with only a slight
> cost increase?
>
> Comments please!
>
> Regards
> Remi Guerner
> F-PGKL
>
>
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: | MG Airbrake question |
Hi Bud=2C
Thanks for your input again. It will be interesting to see what Europa will
come up with. I especially like your attachments.At the moment I am still
learning to fly this thing properly=2C and approach/landing without any air
brake. I am getting very close to the adjacent cornfield=2C then the fence
=2C and I am still touching down way too far down the runway. When a goarou
nd is called for=2C I just open the throttle a little bit and I am off agai
n. No flaps=2C prop or trim to worry about.I don't really have the official
approval (Special CofA) yet to fly the motorglider=2C but hope to get it s
oon.On the airbrake issue=2C I am going to start with putting in a couple o
f holes in each airbrake=2C drilled horizontally in the max open position
=2C and re-enforced with a ring of flox.As you said=2C in the worst case it
is easy to fill them in again or put tape over it.
Karl
From: budyerly@msn.com
Subject: Re: Europa-List: MG Airbrake question
Karl=2C
I normally get 57 degrees and can tweak 60 but usually don't bother for the
last 3 degrees.
See the notes from my shop instructions attached.
I have not minded the pull effort=2C as they stay at 50% for landing
normally. Above 85 knots it is a heck of a pull past 50%. John
Bolyard and I have discussed putting holes in his airbrake trailing edge to
decrease the deployment effort (as in the Dauntless) or lengthening the
leading edge and fitting holes to prevent rapid pressure build up or they w
ill
flop wildly open. Unfortunately it will be manual research and trial
and error on my part until the factory planes are finished and
tested... NASA=2C or NACA more accurately=2C and the Air Ministry documents
(see one example above in .pdf) are far and few between on air brake
analysis as dive or airbrake research was proprietary data of manufacturers
who
used hydraulics to move their airbrake. Our airbrake is a copy of a
Slingsby design which was quite successful=2C but something went wrong in t
he
translation.
Just a note to the others=2C the MG wings (about 34 sets) were sold only by
the original company to the US/North American market ( I think the last set
was produced in 2004) but unable to be flown in Europe until
recently. Today=2C Europa is ready to begin new MG
wing production certified under JAR-VLA and CS 22 requirements which make
them stronger and saleable world wide. It took Dave Stanbridge to make
this happen. Now the factory has two MGs being constructed and will be
evaluated for these kind of fixes. First a computerized aerodynamic
evaluation was made=2C followed by a detailed structural test=2C currently
the rigging and building is being evaluated=2C which will be followed by
flight test and airbrake fixes will surely follow.
Doesn't help your situation now I'm afraid. The airbrakes are not
dangerous as is but are very inconvenient to use without pumping up the
muscles. You can tell a MG pilot by the size of his right bicep.
I know we all are going as fast as time and money permit.
Bud
----- Original Message -----
From: Karl Heindl
To: europa-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday=2C August 28=2C 2010 6:50
PM
Subject: Europa-List: MG Airbrake
question
Hi motorglider guys.
Has anyone made any changes to their airbrakes ? I find they requires a
lot of force to hold them in the fully open position. The air pressure on
the
bottom half far exceeds that on the top.
Because of that it is also impossible to get the maximum deflection of 60
degrees. I mounted an angle indicator=2C and it shows about 45-50=2C whic
h
severely degrades their performance.
I don't understand why nothing was ever done about this. They have been
producing these wings for about 11 years now.
The obvious solution to me is to reduce the area of the bottom half=2C
either by putting in holes=2C or trimming back the trailing edge.
These brakes are not really necessary with the engine running=2C but are
essential when I get to making dead stick landings.
Karl
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List">http://www.matronhr
ef="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
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 |
|
On 08/29/2010 12:07 PM, Guerner Remi wrote:
> Other questions: is there any ethanol in this fuel? Why they do not
> supply Premium or Premium Plus / Super, whatever they call it, which
> would offer the higher octane rating we need for the 912S and 914, with
> only a slight cost increase?
One way to increase the octane rating is by... adding ethanol.
So, take the lowest suitable RON number you can find. There is no
benefit to use higher octane ratings than the engine needs. The higher
the octane rating, the higher chance that the fuel contains ethanol, or
other similar unwanted additives.
I always use Euro 95 fuel, and never experienced any problems with it.
Frans
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: | Fwd: Cooling modifications |
Hi everyone,
The message below was my reply in a private discussion regarding cooling
of the Rotax 914. I thought that maybe some other people are interested
in this as well, so I decided to share this contribution on the list.
Just a reminder: After initial problems with the cooling of the 914 in
my Europa, I decided (after many hints from other list members to lower
the oil cooler) to take the oil cooler completely out of the cooling
duct. At the moment I have flown 50+ hours with the oil cooler on the
passenger foot well, fed via a 2 inch air opening next to one of the
original 3 inch openings. The 3 inch openings are closed. That solved
most of my problems. The discussion below is about a further
optimization of the cooling, what I consider the ultimate cooling
solution. Ultimate, because it offers good temperature control in all
circumstances, in summer and winter, and comes with the least "air
consumption". The less air is taken in for cooling, the less cooling
drag. Cooling drag is one of the major sources of drag of the Europa.
==
Hi Paul,
> Well I test flew my airplane this evening and disappointingly, my set up
> over heats as well.
Yep, I feared that this was going to be the case. The stacked radiator
setup reduces the air flow too much, no inlet or diffuser can change this.
I have now flown quite a lot with my split radiator setup, including in
mediterran countries with temperatures around 100F and prolonged climb outs.
My findings are:
1) The water temperature is no longer an issue. Never. Can't get it over
100 Celcius no matter what I try. This includes long slow speed climbs
in high ambient temperatures with the cowl flap closed! It is a dramatic
difference. Before I splitted the radiators, the water had a tendency to
reach the boiling point, even in low power level flight.
As I did not change anything else regarding the water cooling, it is an
obvious conclusion that the oil radiator was just blocking the air
stream too much. With the oil radiator out of the way, the water
radiator gets enough air flow and even appears to be oversized. I fear
that in the winter I won't be able to get the water temp up high enough,
unless I change my cowl flap design.
2) The oil temperature takes a long time to climb up high enough to
allow me to take off. Far too long. I have to wait for a long time, and
take off as soon as the oil finally reaches 60 degrees Celcius. (which
is much lower than I actually want, but I can't get the oil temp up
higher than that in a reasonable time. Off course, once take off power
is applied, the oil temp comes up in a short time). Water temp comes up
almost instantly after starting, but oil temp takes a very very long time.
It is obvious that I won't be able to fly this winter, unless I find out
a way to heat up the oil.
Again, it is obvious that impeded air flow was the problem in the
stacked radiator design. The stacked radiator design had one advantage
though: the oil radiator was receiving pre-heated air, allowing for a
reasonable warm up time.
3) The oil temperature still climbs too high in prolonged climbs. It
more or less stabilises just a tad before the red line, in warm weather.
This indicates that the oil cooler is not setup efficiently enough. The
air inlet is a meager 2 inch via a scat tube, and the diffuser is a
simple wedge shape, and testing shows that most of the air leaves the
radiator near the far end, and the front end is not doing much. Still,
it is impressive that an air inlet of just 2 inches provides better
cooling than the standard huge XS "mouth".
4) Forget about directing air through the cowling. The cylinders /
engine core are not a great heat source. I have completely closed off
the round air inlets since I splitted the radiators. All mentioned
testing has been done with these inlets sealed. Attempts from other
people to solve the cooling problem by increasing the air flow over the
engine are just ill attempts to air cool an engine which is designed to
be cooled by liquids instead, just like a car engine. Blowing loads of
air over it might work but it is inefficient and comes with a lot of
cooling drag. It is simply the wrong route.
Needless to say, with 85 hours on the hobbs, I have no signs of elevated
cowling temperatures. The spark plug labels are still bright yellow,
cable ties have not melted, there is just nothing wrong with the cowling
temperature. Note that I still have the Naca ducts in the top cowling,
which are my only cowling air sources. Gills were never opened at all. I
have no shroud over the cylinders.
Keep in mind that I have the oil cooler mounted on the foot well. All
hot air from the oil cooler is dumped inside the cowling without any
routing. If I optimize this, cowling temperature will drop even further.
Cooling air for the cowling is just not an issue once the radiators are
de-stacked.
So.... After thinking a while about it, I'm going to try the following
solution:
I will reduce the oil cooler radiator to a fairly small size. Yes,
something that has equal dimensions as the intercooler would be
sufficient, although my intention is to put the oil rad somewhere on the
port side. This allows for an easier routing of oil and air.
Then, the oil that leaves the radiator is fed through an oil-to-water
heat exchanger, fitted in the hot side of the water radiator hose.
I figure that this will give me optimal performance in all situations:
1) During startup, the oil radiator isn't doing much as there is hardly
any air flow, so the oil temperature is dominated by the heat exchanger.
The warm water is heating up the oil, so it will reach take off
temperature much sooner.
2) During slow hot climbs, the oil radiator is probably not sufficient
to keep the oil cool. Here, the excess heat is transferred to the water,
and as the water radiator has now surpluss capacity, I have no doubt
that this isn't going to have a bad influence on the water temperature.
(Remember, max heat dissipation of the oil is 7kW, while the max heat
dissipation of the water is over 30kW. The pre-cooled oil maybe needs to
exchange just an additional 3 kW or so to the water, which is only 10%
of the water cooling capacity. )
This setup also prevents over cooling of the oil. The water stabilizes
the oil temperature to a comfortable 100 to 110 degrees Celcius.
3) During the cruise in winter time, the heat exchanger prevents the oil
from cooling down too much. Several people have reported a problem with
the oil temp in winter, and I can easily believe it from what I have
seen now. Of course I have to close the cowl flap to prevent the water
temperature going down too much.
4) This setup eliminates the need for an oil thermostat. I hate oil
thermostats with their complicated routing, lots of connections, and
valves waiting to fail. Coupling the oil temp to the water temp is a
more elegant solution, and allows for a faster warming up of the oil
than a thermostat could achieve.
Of course I have to change my water radiator inlet and outlet once
again. The whole duct has previously been optimized for more and more
cooling, and with the oil radiator out of the way, the thing simply
cools too much and the cowl flap can not be closed far enough. I foresee
a reduction in cooling drag as well with my new setup. :-)
Maybe you wonder why I still want to have a small oil radiator, as the
whole setup is going to work probably well enough with the heat
exchanger alone. There are a few reasons for this:
1) reduncancy. I don't want to fry my entire engine if I loose the water
cooling, because of a coolant leak or whatever. It is acceptable if I
bake my cylinder heads, but as long as I keep some oil cooling I can
spare the rest of the engine during the flight to the forced landing spot.
2) I'm not sure how high the oil temperature is at the exit of the
engine. Oil temperature is measured at the oil inlet, AFTER cooling, so
I don't know what it is before the radiator. At least I want to get the
oil temperature down to 130 Celcius before it is allowed to go the heat
exchanger, to prevent localised boiling of the water. I know, some
Finnish folks fly with the heat exchanger alone and report good results,
even in hot weather, but I think it is safer to pre-cool the oil a bit.
I figure that a small radiator is enough to get the oil temp down just a
tad, as the temperature difference between oil and air is very large at
that point. The water takes then care of cooling the oil further down.
> I have a TIG welder and I can custom make my own but I have not had any
> luck finding a suppler for blank cores. Have you had any luck in
> finding different radiator cores ?
No, but I haven't tried very hard, as it is not my goal to get the
radiator stacked with the intercooler. This would make routing of the
oil line too long, given the fact that it has to be routed back to the
in line heat exchanger as well. And I have developed an aversion against
stacked radiators. ;-) It didn't do much good for the water cooler, and
I fear that a stacked oil cooler will also spoil the air flow through
the intercooler, which isn't great to begin with.
What do you think about all this?
BTW, I still have no luck with the intercooler. Airbox temperature is
still high. Optimizing the air flow through the intercooler is one of my
other winter projects. ;-)
Frans
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 |
|
Remi/Tim, For what it's worth the LAA website seems to call for 95RON mogas
for 912 as well as 912S & 914. I can't say I have ever come across 82UL, and
would certainly be reluctant to feed it to my 914!
Regards, David Joyce, G-XSDJ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Guerner Remi" <air.guerner@orange.fr>
Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2010 11:07 AM
Subject: Europa-List: 82 UL MOGAS
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Landing at Sywell last September for the LAA rally, I was surprised they
> had both 100LL Avgas and 82UL Mogas. I decided to take 20 liters of
> this -unknown to me- 82UL. This small quantity being mixed with about 50
> liters of the fuel remaining, I thought I was not taking a big risk.
> Later I did some research on the internet and among available
> publications. This is what I found:
> 82UL has a MON (Motor Octane Number) of 82 and AKI (Anti Knock Index) of
> 87, which translate into a RON (Research Octane Number) of 92, as
> AKI=(RON+MON)/2.
> In their Operator's Manuals and applicable SI, Rotax provides the
> following instructions regarding the suitable fuels:
> 912 UL: minimum RON: 90 or minimum AKI: 87
> 912 ULS and 914UL: minimum RON: 95 or minimum AKI: 91
> So it is clear that 82UL is not suitable for the 912 ULS and 914.
> In order to confirm this conclusion, could anyone provide a detailed
> specification of this 82UL Mogas as supplied in the UK?
> Other questions: is there any ethanol in this fuel? Why they do not
> supply Premium or Premium Plus / Super, whatever they call it, which
> would offer the higher octane rating we need for the 912S and 914, with
> only a slight cost increase?
>
> Comments please!
>
> Regards
> Remi Guerner
> F-PGKL
>
>
>
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: Fwd: Cooling modifications |
Frans,
One note though on ram air to the engine, please see the Rotax
specifications for that need. It is hard for me not to do as the
manufacturer recommends.
On a personal note, I have operated N12AY for 40 hours with the Evans
coolant (I'll be changing that out soon) and all temps even in full
turbo climbs for 3-4 minutes are fine.
My oil in cruise does run a bit cooler than I prefer (175F on a 95F
day). Even I have thought about a glycol to oil heat exchanger for a
time when I have nothing to do but tinker on her.
We will all be interested in your data...
Best Wishes
Bud Yerly
----- Original Message -----
From: Frans Veldman<mailto:frans@privatepilots.nl>
To: europa-list@matronics.com<mailto:europa-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2010 11:40 AM
Subject: Europa-List: Fwd: Cooling modifications
<frans@privatepilots.nl<mailto:frans@privatepilots.nl>>
Hi everyone,
The message below was my reply in a private discussion regarding
cooling
of the Rotax 914. I thought that maybe some other people are
interested
in this as well, so I decided to share this contribution on the list.
Just a reminder: After initial problems with the cooling of the 914 in
my Europa, I decided (after many hints from other list members to
lower
the oil cooler) to take the oil cooler completely out of the cooling
duct. At the moment I have flown 50+ hours with the oil cooler on the
passenger foot well, fed via a 2 inch air opening next to one of the
original 3 inch openings. The 3 inch openings are closed. That solved
most of my problems. The discussion below is about a further
optimization of the cooling, what I consider the ultimate cooling
solution. Ultimate, because it offers good temperature control in all
circumstances, in summer and winter, and comes with the least "air
consumption". The less air is taken in for cooling, the less cooling
drag. Cooling drag is one of the major sources of drag of the Europa.
==
Hi Paul,
> Well I test flew my airplane this evening and disappointingly, my
set up
> over heats as well.
Yep, I feared that this was going to be the case. The stacked radiator
setup reduces the air flow too much, no inlet or diffuser can change
this.
I have now flown quite a lot with my split radiator setup, including
in
mediterran countries with temperatures around 100F and prolonged climb
outs.
My findings are:
1) The water temperature is no longer an issue. Never. Can't get it
over
100 Celcius no matter what I try. This includes long slow speed climbs
in high ambient temperatures with the cowl flap closed! It is a
dramatic
difference. Before I splitted the radiators, the water had a tendency
to
reach the boiling point, even in low power level flight.
As I did not change anything else regarding the water cooling, it is
an
obvious conclusion that the oil radiator was just blocking the air
stream too much. With the oil radiator out of the way, the water
radiator gets enough air flow and even appears to be oversized. I fear
that in the winter I won't be able to get the water temp up high
enough,
unless I change my cowl flap design.
2) The oil temperature takes a long time to climb up high enough to
allow me to take off. Far too long. I have to wait for a long time,
and
take off as soon as the oil finally reaches 60 degrees Celcius. (which
is much lower than I actually want, but I can't get the oil temp up
higher than that in a reasonable time. Off course, once take off power
is applied, the oil temp comes up in a short time). Water temp comes
up
almost instantly after starting, but oil temp takes a very very long
time.
It is obvious that I won't be able to fly this winter, unless I find
out
a way to heat up the oil.
Again, it is obvious that impeded air flow was the problem in the
stacked radiator design. The stacked radiator design had one advantage
though: the oil radiator was receiving pre-heated air, allowing for a
reasonable warm up time.
3) The oil temperature still climbs too high in prolonged climbs. It
more or less stabilises just a tad before the red line, in warm
weather.
This indicates that the oil cooler is not setup efficiently enough.
The
air inlet is a meager 2 inch via a scat tube, and the diffuser is a
simple wedge shape, and testing shows that most of the air leaves the
radiator near the far end, and the front end is not doing much. Still,
it is impressive that an air inlet of just 2 inches provides better
cooling than the standard huge XS "mouth".
4) Forget about directing air through the cowling. The cylinders /
engine core are not a great heat source. I have completely closed off
the round air inlets since I splitted the radiators. All mentioned
testing has been done with these inlets sealed. Attempts from other
people to solve the cooling problem by increasing the air flow over
the
engine are just ill attempts to air cool an engine which is designed
to
be cooled by liquids instead, just like a car engine. Blowing loads of
air over it might work but it is inefficient and comes with a lot of
cooling drag. It is simply the wrong route.
Needless to say, with 85 hours on the hobbs, I have no signs of
elevated
cowling temperatures. The spark plug labels are still bright yellow,
cable ties have not melted, there is just nothing wrong with the
cowling
temperature. Note that I still have the Naca ducts in the top cowling,
which are my only cowling air sources. Gills were never opened at all.
I
have no shroud over the cylinders.
Keep in mind that I have the oil cooler mounted on the foot well. All
hot air from the oil cooler is dumped inside the cowling without any
routing. If I optimize this, cowling temperature will drop even
further.
Cooling air for the cowling is just not an issue once the radiators
are
de-stacked.
So.... After thinking a while about it, I'm going to try the following
solution:
I will reduce the oil cooler radiator to a fairly small size. Yes,
something that has equal dimensions as the intercooler would be
sufficient, although my intention is to put the oil rad somewhere on
the
port side. This allows for an easier routing of oil and air.
Then, the oil that leaves the radiator is fed through an oil-to-water
heat exchanger, fitted in the hot side of the water radiator hose.
I figure that this will give me optimal performance in all situations:
1) During startup, the oil radiator isn't doing much as there is
hardly
any air flow, so the oil temperature is dominated by the heat
exchanger.
The warm water is heating up the oil, so it will reach take off
temperature much sooner.
2) During slow hot climbs, the oil radiator is probably not sufficient
to keep the oil cool. Here, the excess heat is transferred to the
water,
and as the water radiator has now surpluss capacity, I have no doubt
that this isn't going to have a bad influence on the water
temperature.
(Remember, max heat dissipation of the oil is 7kW, while the max heat
dissipation of the water is over 30kW. The pre-cooled oil maybe needs
to
exchange just an additional 3 kW or so to the water, which is only 10%
of the water cooling capacity. )
This setup also prevents over cooling of the oil. The water stabilizes
the oil temperature to a comfortable 100 to 110 degrees Celcius.
3) During the cruise in winter time, the heat exchanger prevents the
oil
from cooling down too much. Several people have reported a problem
with
the oil temp in winter, and I can easily believe it from what I have
seen now. Of course I have to close the cowl flap to prevent the water
temperature going down too much.
4) This setup eliminates the need for an oil thermostat. I hate oil
thermostats with their complicated routing, lots of connections, and
valves waiting to fail. Coupling the oil temp to the water temp is a
more elegant solution, and allows for a faster warming up of the oil
than a thermostat could achieve.
Of course I have to change my water radiator inlet and outlet once
again. The whole duct has previously been optimized for more and more
cooling, and with the oil radiator out of the way, the thing simply
cools too much and the cowl flap can not be closed far enough. I
foresee
a reduction in cooling drag as well with my new setup. :-)
Maybe you wonder why I still want to have a small oil radiator, as the
whole setup is going to work probably well enough with the heat
exchanger alone. There are a few reasons for this:
1) reduncancy. I don't want to fry my entire engine if I loose the
water
cooling, because of a coolant leak or whatever. It is acceptable if I
bake my cylinder heads, but as long as I keep some oil cooling I can
spare the rest of the engine during the flight to the forced landing
spot.
2) I'm not sure how high the oil temperature is at the exit of the
engine. Oil temperature is measured at the oil inlet, AFTER cooling,
so
I don't know what it is before the radiator. At least I want to get
the
oil temperature down to 130 Celcius before it is allowed to go the
heat
exchanger, to prevent localised boiling of the water. I know, some
Finnish folks fly with the heat exchanger alone and report good
results,
even in hot weather, but I think it is safer to pre-cool the oil a
bit.
I figure that a small radiator is enough to get the oil temp down just
a
tad, as the temperature difference between oil and air is very large
at
that point. The water takes then care of cooling the oil further down.
> I have a TIG welder and I can custom make my own but I have not had
any
> luck finding a suppler for blank cores. Have you had any luck in
> finding different radiator cores ?
No, but I haven't tried very hard, as it is not my goal to get the
radiator stacked with the intercooler. This would make routing of the
oil line too long, given the fact that it has to be routed back to the
in line heat exchanger as well. And I have developed an aversion
against
stacked radiators. ;-) It didn't do much good for the water cooler,
and
I fear that a stacked oil cooler will also spoil the air flow through
the intercooler, which isn't great to begin with.
What do you think about all this?
BTW, I still have no luck with the intercooler. Airbox temperature is
still high. Optimizing the air flow through the intercooler is one of
my
other winter projects. ;-)
Frans
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: | Re: Fwd: Cooling modifications |
On 08/29/2010 08:28 PM, Bud Yerly wrote:
> One note though on ram air to the engine, please see the Rotax
> specifications for that need. It is hard for me not to do as the
> manufacturer recommends.
I do that to. I have naca ducts in the top cowling. This probably is
more efficient than the Europa round inlets, while it consumes less air
at the same time. I have never calculated how large (small?) the air
inlets need to be to conform to the Rotax specifications. Did you?
Commercial aircraft with the Rotax 914 have even less cowling ventilation.
The main point I want to make is that the solution for the cooling
problem needs to be sought by optimizing the cooling of the water and
oil, and not so much by cooling the engine core. It collects
surprisingly little heat once the water cooling and oil cooling are
working ok. In fact, I can't think of many reasons why the engine block
would heat up. Combustion takes place in the cylinder heads, and the oil
takes away all friction heat. The engine block itself is just a holder
for the various components and has no reason to heat up by itself.
> We will all be interested in your data...
I will keep you updated, although it will take a while before this is
finished and tested in both winter and summer temperatures.
Frans
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: | Europa Sounds in Flight |
Hi All,
Long ago in the original Europa factory video, there is a segment where
the two factory planes do a low pass. When they pull up and bank you can
hear a whirring sound or a cry similar to the sound a bird or something.
I know this may sound ridiculous but maybe some of you have heard it
yourself. I watched a short clip of my Europa do a fast low pass last
Thursday and heard it coming from mine also. You can't detect anything
inside the cockpit that I'm aware of, and I'm certain I didn't go
supersonic. The first time I flew over my brothers home a couple months
ago his wife later said (with an unknowing worried look on her face)
that she had heard a screaking sound. At the time I didn't lend much
creedance to her comment. It happened again while flying over another
friends house, so now I am curious. Has anyone else experienced this? Is
it coming from the engine? Prop? Somewhere along the airframe? I don't
think it's anything to worry about but I just want to know if others
have heard this. On all occasions, the aircraft was in a banking climb.
It actually sounded pretty cool. Just wondering....
Troy Maynor
Monowheel Classic UK120
47 fun hours so far!
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: | Rough River Up-Date # 9 |
Hello All,
I've been out of state at my sons graduation from the Army basic and
AIT training. I was away from my computer so haven't had a chance to
up-date the list.
Looks like this will be the place to be for any Europa builder / flyer
in north America. 15 and possible 16 Europas! Now this is going to be
FUN!
If anyone is missing from this list or wants to be added to it let me
know.
Best regards,
Jeff R.
Jeff & Mary Buhrans - N55XS Flying Baby Blue in.
Jeff & Karen Roberts - N128LJ Gold Rush Flying In
Troy & Donna Maynor - Flying his brand new Mono Classic ;o)..
Jim & Lynne Puglise - Driving the air conditioned control tower, beer
bar, meeting place/motor home. ;o)
Fred Kline.... All the way from Orcas Island, WA
John & Susan Lawton - N245E Flying his Jab powered Europa
Bob & Maureen Borger N914XL Flying In from Texas in... Little Dragon
Lady.
Paul McAllister... N378PJ Back in the country and getting new cowl
mods ready.
Jim & Heather Butcher - Flying in
Bud Yearly - N12AY Flying in... Yea Bud!
Jim Brown - N398JB - AKA JimBob. Flying up with Bud in formation. Keep
em separate boys!
John & Paddy Wigney - Flying in the good ship N262WF
Plus as you all know here are some fun loving, die hard, Europa
owners / fans / previous dealer from California! Bring em on boys!
Bob Lindsay - Flying in N77EU Turbo Toy. Flight of 3 maybe 4
Erich Trombley - Flying in N28ET Classic mono 914. Flight of 3 maybe 4
Kim Prout - Flying in N111EU The classic mono featured in July Kit
Planes Magazine Flight of 3 maybe 4
And Here's to Kevin Klinefelter N211KA getting in on the fun!! Let us
know Kevin when you can... Maybe the 4th of the 3 ;0)
Annual Rough River Fly In. September 17th & 18th 2010 and beyond!
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: Europa Sounds in Flight |
Troy,
Airbus wings do the same thing compared to the Boeing wing. Always tell,
without looking, whether it is an Airbus flying overhead by the noise of
the wings. My children can tell me!!
Maybe Mr Dykins got it "perfect" after all. Just a thought in my
jetlagged state, back from Perth flying all night!!
Tim
Tim Ward
12 Waiwetu Street'
Fendalton,
Christchurch.
NEW ZEALAND
Ph. 64 3 3515166
Mob 021 0640221
Email ward.t@xtra.co.nz
----- Original Message -----
From: Troy Maynor
To: europa-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 1:04 PM
Subject: Europa-List: Europa Sounds in Flight
Hi All,
Long ago in the original Europa factory video, there is a segment
where the two factory planes do a low pass. When they pull up and bank
you can hear a whirring sound or a cry similar to the sound a bird or
something. I know this may sound ridiculous but maybe some of you have
heard it yourself. I watched a short clip of my Europa do a fast low
pass last Thursday and heard it coming from mine also. You can't detect
anything inside the cockpit that I'm aware of, and I'm certain I didn't
go supersonic. The first time I flew over my brothers home a couple
months ago his wife later said (with an unknowing worried look on her
face) that she had heard a screaking sound. At the time I didn't lend
much creedance to her comment. It happened again while flying over
another friends house, so now I am curious. Has anyone else experienced
this? Is it coming from the engine? Prop? Somewhere along the airframe?
I don't think it's anything to worry about but I just want to know if
others have heard this. On all occasions, the aircraft was in a banking
climb. It actually sounded pretty cool. Just wondering....
Troy Maynor
Monowheel Classic UK120
47 fun hours so far!
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! --
|