Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:08 AM - Re: Mylar seals and stall speed? (Frans Veldman)
2. 12:14 AM - SV: Vapour lock? Why? (Sidsel & Svein Johnsen)
3. 12:41 AM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (Frans Veldman)
4. 12:59 AM - Re: Re: Heavy Landing on Tri Gear. (Peter Jeffers)
5. 01:12 AM - Re: SV: Vapour lock? Why? (tennant)
6. 01:28 AM - Re: Heavy Landing on Tri Gear. (Alan Carter)
7. 01:32 AM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us)
8. 01:37 AM - Re: SV: Vapour lock? Why? (Frans Veldman)
9. 01:56 AM - Re: Re: SV: Vapour lock? Why? (Frans Veldman)
10. 02:26 AM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (Frans Veldman)
11. 02:33 AM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (JonSmith)
12. 03:01 AM - Re: SV: Vapour lock? Why? (tennant)
13. 03:42 AM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us)
14. 04:46 AM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (Frans Veldman)
15. 05:08 AM - door weather seals (Bill Henderson)
16. 05:52 AM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (Paul McAllister)
17. 06:08 AM - Proposal fuel system enhancement for mogas (Frans Veldman)
18. 06:31 AM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (Frans Veldman)
19. 07:08 AM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us)
20. 09:14 AM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (Frans Veldman)
21. 10:51 AM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (klinefelter.kevin@gmail.com)
22. 10:59 AM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (Terry Seaver (terrys))
23. 11:58 AM - SV: Vapour lock? Why? (Sidsel & Svein Johnsen)
24. 12:14 PM - cameras and mounting (graeme bird)
25. 12:27 PM - Re: cameras and mounting (jimpuglise@comcast.net)
26. 12:54 PM - Re: SV: Vapour lock? Why? (Frans Veldman)
27. 01:04 PM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (Frans Veldman)
28. 01:15 PM - Re: SV: Vapour lock? Why? (GRAHAM SINGLETON)
29. 01:33 PM - Re: cameras and mounting (Robert Borger)
30. 01:55 PM - Re: cameras and mounting (pestar)
31. 02:29 PM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (klinefelter.kevin@gmail.com)
32. 02:48 PM - Re: cameras and mounting (Carl Pattinson)
33. 03:09 PM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (Paul McAllister)
34. 03:10 PM - Re: Proposal fuel system enhancement for mogas (jonathanmilbank)
35. 05:28 PM - Re: cameras and mounting (Martin Tuck)
36. 05:36 PM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (h&jeuropa)
37. 05:42 PM - Re: Vapour lock? Why? (h&jeuropa)
38. 06:07 PM - Re: cameras and mounting (Pete)
39. 07:55 PM - Re: cameras and mounting (Robert Borger)
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: Mylar seals and stall speed? |
On 07/30/2012 10:57 PM, Karl Heindl wrote:
> Hi Frans,
>
> Talking about fuel consumption again, I am surprised to learn that you
> can get 4 1/2 hour legs.
No, I didn't say that (sorry if I gave that impression). I made one
tankstop. 4 1/2 hour was the total flying time to get home. The point I
tright to make was that the engine behaved normally for the 4 1/2 hours
flown after the fuel pressure drop.
> You mentioned that in your optimum cruise at
> 125 kts the engine uses 18l/hour,
Well, actually slightly less than 18l/hour, and the 125 kts is the
indicated airspeed, so at FL85 on this trip I was looking at ground
speeds close to 140 kts. But still I need to make one stop, not only to
refuel the airplane, but also because my personal "range" is also about
3 hours. It feels good to get out of that cramped cockpit once in a
couple of hours. ;-)
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: | Vapour lock? Why? |
Frans,
If vapour is formed anywhere in the fuel line, the bubbles will move towards
the carbs as soon as a pump is switched on. I do not know the length of the
fuel line from the pump to the carbs, but let us for argument's sake assume
3 m. This mean an internal volume of 0.15 liter, plus say 0.05 liter for
one filter and a gascolator (if fitted). This means that when a total
volume of 0.2 liter has been pumped through the line, there should be no
more vapour bubbles (with one exception, see below).
I do not know how much fuel is returned to the tank in a 914 installation
during ground operation. Engine consumption is also unknown, but I am sure
it is at least "some liters" per hour. At consumption of 1 liter/hour it
takes 12 minutes for 0,2 liter to flow through; at 5 liter/hour it takes 2.4
minutes. Any fuel return flow reduces this time. With some idling for
warm-up, taxi to holding, run-up and line-up, I believe that much more than
0.2 liter is pumped through the line before you begin the take-off roll.
Theoretically, bubbles may get "stuck" in the filter or gascolator (if
fitted) at low flow, and then "torn loose" when the flow increases at full
throttle. My 912ULS consumes abt. 33 liters/hour at full take-off
RPM/power. At this flow, it would take 24 seconds for a bubble to pass
through the entire 3 meter long system, less if it had been trapped
somewhere closer to the engine.
What does the transient pressure drop that you observed indicate? There
will be a pressure drop just when a bubble coming from upstream of the pump
passes through it, and when a bubble passes through the pressure regulator
and into the fuel return line (I do not know the details of the 914
installation, so I may be mistaken here). Both drops will be of very short
duration, however.
A pressure drop in itself will not cause any change in engine performance,
but reduced pressure may cause too low fuel flow to the carb bowls. A fuel
vapour bubble reaching a carb has of course the same effect - too little
fuel.
What speaks against vapour lock as the cause is your observation that the
engine afterwards ran fine at low/medium throttle but not at high, and that
the fuel pressure then dropped. This would indicate that the fuel flow is
restricted (as already suggested on this forum). Later on all was fine, you
report. Has the restriction migrated to the filter, where it does not do
so much harm? Hmmmmm...
Your question regarding AVGAS vs. MOGAS: Wikipedia states that "Avgas has
a lower and more uniform vapor pressure than automotive gasoline so it
remains in the liquid state despite the reduced atmospheric pressure at high
altitude, thus preventing vapor lock."
Regards,
Svein
LN-SKJ
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
On 07/31/2012 06:24 AM, Bill Sisley wrote:
> Have you checked the finger filter in the entry side of the fuel pump?
Good point. I didn't.
Since home I have digged deeper into this subject. I didn't mention that
I topped off the tank with 40 liters of mogas. I just assumed that apart
from the ethanol and lower octane rating and absence of lead that the
fuel would have a similar boiling point. I now learned that this
assumption is totally wrong. Given the altitude and temperature it is
fully understandable that I experienced vapor lock, mogas just has to
vaporize in these conditions.
So, this is a lesson learned. I should have learned more about it
instead of blindly pouring in mogas because it is best for the engine
and so far always worked very well.
Which now poses a dilemma. I try to avoid using avgas as much as
possible because of the lead. But now I should try to avoid using mogas
when the temperatures are high and the altitude is high. Given my
personal preferences regarding weather and flying altitude this applies
to most of the longer trips.
It looks like the vapour lock develops at the inlets of the electrical
fuel pumps. The fuel has to be sucked through the fuel filters and this
drop in pressure causes formation of bubbles. I have actually observed
this happening when I was building the airplane and put the fuel system
in use on a hot day: I spent a lot of time searching for a supposed air
leak because of all the bubbles I saw passing the fuel filters, which in
the end turned out to be "just" fuel vapor bubbles.
Reading more about this subject I have learned that the best way to
prevent this from happening is to put a fuel pump *inside* the fuel tank
to get the pressure up before the fuel even leaves the tank, and not to
suck fuel through the filter but to push it through the filter. This way
one prevents the pressure drop which causes the fuel to vaporize.
It seems that this is a common practice in cars with fuel injection, to
have the fuel pump literally inside the tank or at least directly at the
tank outlet.
Of course such a fuel pump could fail (especially because it lacks a
fine filter before the inlet) so it is an additional risk. Then again it
is possible to use it only on one of the fuel tank outlets. Switching to
the other outlet then bypasses the failed pump.
I now just wonder how many of us are actually using mogas in hot
weather? Am I the only one struggling with this dilemma?
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: | Re: Heavy Landing on Tri Gear. |
Hi Alan,
Since the dent, as shown in your photo, could just have resulted from a
movement of the leg socket, I personally would want to very carefully
inspect the leg socket securing structure.
My suggestion is that you need to get a Europa experienced inspector to
check it out for you. I believe David Lloyd at Shobdon used to look after
your aircraft so in the first instance I would talk to him.
Pete
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan Carter
Sent: 31 July 2012 01:17
Subject: Europa-List: Re: Heavy Landing on Tri Gear.
Hello Peter.
Sorry for taking so long, lost the camera/computer cable, but here are the
pictures.
The hollow is about 4" in front of the main gear leg, No cracks or surface
damage in the hollow. And no damage in the area all looks symmetrical.
The trouble is i can,t remember if it was there before.!!
I did have a bird strike, a Crow came up from underneath on that side, i
heard a thud and thought it have been swept round and hit the tail plane on
the other side,? i did not look under the aircraft at the time.
But just can,t remember if the hollow was there when i first gave the
aircraft a polish.
Hope the photo,s are good enough.The sealant looks a mess in the photo but
its all intact. My finger will give you some scale of size.
Alan
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=379646#379646
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/cimg0848_124.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/cimg0849_115.jpg
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
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: SV: Vapour lock? Why? |
Hi Franz,
I had a very scary episode about 12 years ago with my Europa taking off from a
glider site in Germany.
1500 ft elevation & 36 deg C temps. I had to taxi through long grass at quite high
power to get to a short tarmac runway. Take off roll was fine and only when
I was in the air did the stuttering and power loss begin. Luckily the glider
site is on a hill so I could get up some speed descending into the valley.
She stuttered her way up to about 1000 ft above the field and I waited to see if
the "vapor lock" would clear but after 5 mins landed again to change my pants!!
There was no pressure loss, or at least my warning lamp did not come on which
is quite sensitive.
I took the cowling off straight away and removed one of the fuel lines from the
carbs. Fuel spit me in the face so I was sure at that time that it was a vapor
lock. I had had enough for one day and called someone to bring my trailer.
The next day I tried a run up on the trailer. Everything was OK until I tried full
power then the stuttering began again, no vapor lock this time!!
I searched for the problem for a month before in frustration I wanted to measure
the fuel flow from the pumps and found that about 50% of what was coming out
of the fuel line at a carb was air!!
I had no obvious fuel leaks but air was getting into the system.
I changed all the fuel hoses (Europa originals), re-routed them with insulation,
changed the clips and no more air.
I am still not sure that it was a vapor lock on that day but it certainly made
me re think my fueling strategy. I now always fill with Avgas when the temperature
is approaching 30 deg C or bellow 0 deg C.
No idea and not suggesting that it ha anything to do with your case. Just an experience.
Barry
--------
Barry Tennant
D-EHBT
At EDLM - Germany
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=379670#379670
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: Heavy Landing on Tri Gear. |
Thanks Peter.
I have raised the aircraft on a air bag and checked for movement all was OK.
However I want to get a Europa Inspector to check all the aircraft out,and go
over it with me, which will be very useful. So will get onto the LAA for one in
my area. i will also speak to David.
Many thanks Alan
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=379671#379671
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
Hi Frans
I have a 914, not flying yet. I purchased a tool from the guy who makes
the lead scrubber additive (not TCP, the one not for use with certified
aeroplanes, but you can transport in cabin) that measures at what
altitude you can fly to with the brew in your fuel tank. It takes into
consideration temp, % of avgas, % of mogas and % of alcohol. It's a
syringe that you pull a specific vacuum on a scale, let it sit for a
short time and you can read then to what altitude you are safe to fly to.
It is very possible on a hot day at a high temperature, you get a stay on
the ground reading. I noticed he stopped selling them a while back
though.
That said, do you have a differential pressure gauge on your 914? Direct
fuel pressure reading does not provide very useful info unless you do the
calculations to see how you are doing. Did you do the math to determine
if you are in the differential limits?
It's worth it to do I think it's in Europas test, cheat your fuel
pressure regulator to thinking you are at ~ 18K (I think that was the
approx. test), then do a fuel flow test, monitor differential fuel
pressure as well and make sure you are where you want to be. The thinner
the outside air and the thicker (inside your engine MP) air, the more
fuel pressure you will need. Something marginal will usually show itself
at this time. A restriction in your fuel system will also show. Do you
have a single point of failure or restriction in your system like a
gasculator? Or do you have a system when you turn on pump #2 it sucks
from a separate fuel filter? What happened when you turned on pump two,
did it not make a change? Rotax recommends cleaning the fuel pump intake
side filter socks once a year, they say that this is the leading cause of
fuel pump failures.
On a 914 the float bowl gasket sealing is critical, differential fuel
pressure being positive only means you will be able to force the fuel
into the float bowls, if there is not airbox pressure that is maintained
in the float chamber (or higher than airbox pressure in the case you are
asking more than 108% power and the hand in the breeze is plumbed into)
your carbs with be providing a serious lean mixture condition.
If you are flying out of a tight field with a 914, if you are asking more
than what a 912 can produce it's prudent to follow Rotax 914 users
manual and do a DO, I forget if it's a 178 or something in the 170s
take off. In other words turn off the TCU with the wastegate in the
closed position and adjust you MP with the throttle. Once you reach a
safe altitude then turn back on the TCU, this prevents the TCU for
whatever reason from turning the 914 into a straight 912 at just the
wrong moment.
For a short period of time using the throttle to control MP is not going
to cause much harm, but doing this trick for long periods of time is bad
for the turbo, the turbo is working overtime and you are now forcing
it's cool side output into a restriction.
I don't know if your mogas has alcohol in it, but flying up high and
into colder conditions can make the alcohol that has commingled with
water to precipitate out and cause problems. I for one will probably
follow my vapor pressure tools suggestion, and if I plan on flying high
will add 2 or 3% Isopropyl Alcohol to my mix in an attempt to keep water
in solution. The more alcohol you run the richer your mixture needs to
be. I will make sure when I do the required by Rotax (but not many folks
do this great test) CO test to make sure your leanest cylinder is running
rich enough at War Emergency power (I will also test between 85 and 100%
too), I will do this with 10% Ethanol and 5% Isopropyl. I am installing
the ability to lean along with an O2 sensor driven display to see how the
mixture is doing in addition to EGTs.
Ron P.
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
Hi Svein,
> I do not know how much fuel is returned to the tank in a 914
> installation during ground operation.
The 914 has no mechanical fuel pump, only two electrical pumps. These
pumps pump at least 60 liters per hour through the system. Always,
including during idle. So the vast majority of the fuel returns to the
tank after passing the pressure regulator which is mounted on top of the
air box.
> consumption of 1 liter/hour it takes 12 minutes for 0,2 liter to flow
> through; at 5 liter/hour it takes 2.4 minutes.
For a 914 we are talking about seconds here.
> A pressure drop in itself will not cause any change in engine
> performance, but reduced pressure may cause too low fuel flow to the
> carb bowls.
On a 914 the fuel pressure is regulated over the airbox pressure. So, if
at full power the turbo kicks in and the carbs are pressurised, the fuel
pressure has to go up with it. On this particular mountain field the
ambient pressure was about 24" (this was indicated by my manifold
pressure gauge before starting the engine). The 914 has 40 inch of
manyfold pressure on take off power, slightly more in the airbox. The
fuel pressure has to remain 6 psi above this. See where this is going?
What I think has happened is that the mogas vaporised in the fuel
filters, due to the pressure drop, caused by the flow resistance of the
filters. The filters are before the fuel pumps. So any vaopur forming in
the fuel filters will flow to the pumps, which then turn into a void.
At lining up, I switched on both fuel pumps. Now two pumps where sucking
on the fuel filters, probably releasing a lot of bubbles at the instant
I switched on the second fuel pump. About 5 to 10 seconds later, the
engine hesistated. I think this was the moment where the vapour bubbles
reached the pressure regulator, at the very same time the turbo reached
maximum pressure and the fuel pressure had to go up in a similar fashion.
The only way to prevent this from happening (except for using avgas or
avoiding high and hot take offs) is to use a fuel pump mounted inside
the fuel tank, to get the pressure up before the fuel even leaves the
tank and avoiding the pressure drop at the suction side and filters
altogether.
> What speaks against vapour lock as the cause is your observation that
> the engine afterwards ran fine at low/medium throttle but not at high,
> and that the fuel pressure then dropped.
My fuel pressure gauge indicates relative fuel pressure, i.e. fuel
pressure on top of the airbox pressure. The pressure regulator keeps the
pressure at 6 psi above the airbox pressure at all times. So, regardless
of airbox pressure, turbo pressure or throttle setting, all I should see
is 6 psi of fuel pressure (which is the same as the carbs are seeing
because they live in a pressurised world; their vent lines are connected
to the airbox). In reality though the absolute fuel pressure has to go
up with the turbo pressure to maintain this relative pressure. This
relative fuel pressure could no longer be maintained when the turbo
pressure went up, hence the indicated pressure drop on the gauge. The
absolute pressure probably remained the same because it was during idle
already on the max that the pumps could deliver in this particular
circumstance. The vent line of the carbs is connected to the airbox, so
if the airbox pressure goes up but the fuel pressure doesn't follow, the
fuel will stop flowing into the carbs.
Hmm, the explanation is a bit chaotic but I think you will understand it
anyway.
If I had become airborn, I could probably have saved the day by
throttling back to a throttle setting where the airbox pressure would
fall below the fuel pressure. At worst this would have been 24" because
this was the ambient pressure at that altitude. I think I can maintain
altitude with 24" and probably even climb a bit, but sure it won't have
been fun. Provided of course that I had enough common sense to throttle
back against instinct before the engine stalled due to lack of fuel.
> Your question regarding AVGAS vs. MOGAS: Wikipedia states that /"Avgas
> has a lower and more uniform vapor pressure than automotive gasoline so
> it remains in the liquid state despite the reduced atmospheric pressure
> at high altitude, thus preventing vapor lock."/
Yep. I have seen that too. Lesson learned.
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: | Re: SV: Vapour lock? Why? |
Hi Barry,
> 1500 ft elevation & 36 deg C temps. I had to taxi through long grass
> at quite high power to get to a short tarmac runway. Take off roll
> was fine and only when I was in the air did the stuttering and power
> loss begin. Luckily the glider site is on a hill so I could get up
> some speed descending into the valley. She stuttered her way up to
> about 1000 ft above the field and I waited to see if the "vapor lock"
> would clear but after 5 mins landed again to change my pants!! There
> was no pressure loss, or at least my warning lamp did not come on
> which is quite sensitive.
Must have been a scary experience!
Do you have a 914? The only correct way to measure fuel pressure in that
case is to measure relative fuel pressure, i.e. fuel pressure compared
to airbox pressure. The 914 has no "static" fuel pressure. Sufficient
fuel pressure for a low throttle setting may be insufficient for higher
throttle settings.
> time!! I searched for the problem for a month before in frustration I
> wanted to measure the fuel flow from the pumps and found that about
> 50% of what was coming out of the fuel line at a carb was air!! I had
> no obvious fuel leaks but air was getting into the system.
Are you sure it was air? I had the very same problem and spent almost a
whole frustrating day searching for the air leak. There wasn't any, the
bubbles where fuel vapor bubbles, which form inside the suction line and
fuel filter due to the pressure drop caused by the fuel pump.
> I changed
> all the fuel hoses (Europa originals), re-routed them with
> insulation, changed the clips and no more air.
Maybe it was a colder day, or different fuel...
> I am still not sure
> that it was a vapor lock on that day but it certainly made me re
> think my fueling strategy. I now always fill with Avgas when the
> temperature is approaching 30 deg C or bellow 0 deg C.
Well, most of my flying is at higher temperatures or at higher
altitudes, so this pretty much bans the use of mogas unless I solve this
problem.
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
Hi Ron,
> I have a 914, not flying yet. I purchased a tool from the guy who makes
> the lead scrubber additive (not TCP, the one not for use with certified
> aeroplanes, but you can transport in cabin)
Decalin?
> that measures at what
> altitude you can fly to with the brew in your fuel tank. It takes into
> consideration temp, % of avgas, % of mogas and % of alcohol. It's a
> syringe that you pull a specific vacuum on a scale,
Hey, great idea!
An easy way to do this is to measure the pressure drop inside the
suction line (fuel pump inlet, downstream fuel filters) (you have to
measure this only once, preferably on fuel filters at the end of their
life) and pull this amount of vacuum on your fuel sample and see if it
starts to "boil" in that condition. If you take a sample of the fuel in
the tank, you already have the correct temperature and %avgas and
altitude applying to your situation.
I could even make a built in device that does so automatically and
registers whether bubbles develop, and gives an alarm.
Or, even much more simple: install a piece of glas in the fuel line (the
standard Europa fuel filter with its internals removed will do) and
detect if any bubbles are passing. It could give an instant alarm when
bubbles are detected "Vapor lock! Vapor lock!". Just as with boiling
water, micro bubbles will start forming some time before hell turns loose.
Regardless of changing circumstances (altitude, throttle setting, fuel
temperature) it would instantly alert for dangerous conditions.
> That said, do you have a differential pressure gauge on your 914?
Yep. I'm one of the guys stressing the importance of such a gauge.
> Do you
> have a single point of failure or restriction in your system like a
> gasculator?
No, I have two filters, each connected to one fuel pump.
> What happened when you turned on pump two,
> did it not make a change?
I had already two pumps on when it happened, but I think that one pump
had performed better in this situation due to the lower pressure drop
over the fuel filter.
> I don't know if your mogas has alcohol in it, but flying up high and
> into colder conditions can make the alcohol that has commingled with
> water to precipitate out and cause problems.
I only buy fresh mogas and pour it in just before flight.
> I will make sure when I do the required by Rotax (but not many folks
> do this great test) CO test to make sure your leanest cylinder is
> running rich enough at War Emergency power (I will also test between 85
> and 100% too),
I plan on installing an injection system this winter, to get rid of the
carbs, and getting the correct mixture in all cylinders all the time.
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
Hi Frans, Just for interest - the UK LAA's website contains some useful info on
Mogas and the LAA requirements. It's under the tab "LAA aircraft" and sub tab
"Mogas". There's general requirements for all LAA aircraft (that wish to use
Mogas) plus some specific requirements for particular types, ie Rotaxes, Europas
etc. Amongst other things, each individual aircraft has to be approved, placcarded
and signed off by an inspector to use Mogas, we have to have fuel return
lines, fuel drains etc etc..
There is a lot of emphasis on the volatility of Mogas compared to Avgas and we
must only use BS EN228 95 RON and the mandatory operating limitations are specified
as a maximum altitude of 6000 feet and a maximum fuel temperature of 20
deg C.
I have only experienced one episode of vapour locking on my Europa (912ULS).
In the UK it seems to be impossible now to obtain ethanol-free mogas (we are not
approved to use it if it does contain ethanol). My local garage sells the higher
octane "excellium" grade (98 RON) which I tested to be ethanol free. My
completely uneducated thinking at the time said - sounds good stuff - that will
be great! I did not know at the time that this fuel is also completely not
authorised for use as Mogas due to its (even) higher volatility, according to
the LAA notes. I used it 3 or 4 times with no probs until one day, after a long
taxy back through long grass where the engine got quite warm I tried to start
it again after a few minutes and it just would not fire at all. After a few
attempts there was a very strong smell of fuel and I could hear it boiling.
So I left it for a couple of hours with the cowl off and later it bust into
life at the first go!
Now I try to use the new 91UL where possible.
Cheers,
--------
G-TERN
Classic Mono
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=379676#379676
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: SV: Vapour lock? Why? |
Hi Frans,
As I said previously, my case is surely different to your experience.
I have a humble 912 - 80 hp.
It was definitely air and since I changed the hoses it has gone. The original Europa
hoses in the mid 90's were not compatible with Mogas and they split at the
ends after 2 or 3 years on Mogas.
I think that my problem was a combination of vapor and porous hoses, it is only
strange that it showed itself at the same time, or one caused the other.
Barry
--------
Barry Tennant
D-EHBT
At EDLM - Germany
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=379677#379677
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: | Re: Vapour lock? Why? |
Hi Frans
It was Decalin, I just did a quick search and found a pretty good article
you may want to read, it has the fuel tester on the bottom with the name
of the place that sells it, I don't know if they still do.:
http://www.eaa.org/autofuel/autogas/articles/1Autogas%20vs%20Avgas.pdf
Fresh mogas can have a lot of water already attached to the alcohol that
you will never see or know about until you fly in thinner and colder
air.
I did quite a bit of fooling with my fuel system in controlled conditions
and was very surprised at all the bubbling going on, it was at sea level,
room temp and 100LL, see:
http://contrails.free.fr/engine_914_fuel_syst_test_en.php
Here's some information about my 914 fuel system:
http://www.europaowners.org/main.php?g2_itemId=28612
Download and read about the 914 fuelpump pre filter.
Did you check the vent for your fuel tank making sure no nasty bug
clogged it up on you?
Ron P.
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
On 07/31/2012 12:41 PM, rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us wrote:
> It was Decalin, I just did a quick search and found a pretty good
> article you may want to read,
Good article indeed!
> http://contrails.free.fr/engine_914_fuel_syst_test_en.php
This web page mentions "air" in the filters, which should be "fuel
vapor". This is caused by the pressure drop in the fuel filters due to
the flow resistance. The fuel pumps not only increase the fuel pressure
at the output, they also decrease the fuel pressure at the inlet.
As we all (should) know, lower pressure lowers the boiling point.
So, to get rid of the bubbles, you have to prevent the pressure drop in
the fuel filter and/or pump inlet.
One way of achieving this is to install a pre-pump directly at one of
the tank outlets.
I found some interesting pumps at ebay for a low cost (35$). They have
no diaphragms or other rubber or wearable parts but just a piston pulled
by a magnetic coil. If the pump stalls it is just a go-through.
Alternatively one can make a bypass with a check valve. The pumps
deliver 5 GPH, enough for a Rotax, at a pressure of 2 PSI. The pressure
is enough to cancel out the pressure drop of the filters, valves and
hoses and pump inlet, and thus prevent the formation of bubbles (or
vapor lock in more severe cases).
Frans
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: | door weather seals |
Just wonder if anyone has a source in the US for weather stripping for
the doors.
Still not finish building and the weather stripping has started to come
apart.
Thanks,
Bill A010 Monowheel Classic Rotax 912S
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: | Re: Vapour lock? Why? |
Hi All,
I don't know if this helps or not, but in 1000 hours of operation I have
never experienced a vapor lock like Frans has described using Mo Gas. I
have operated my aircraft on days that are 35c ~ 40c, which have included
long taxi runs. My experience may not translate because most of my take
off and landings are at around 1000' MSL. On hot days this equates to
about 3000' density altitude.
What I have seen is the engine will not start on a hot day after sitting
for a while and what I do in this situation is to turn the fuel pumps off,
start the engine and then turn the pumps on.
I have a single gascolator, with dual pumps + check valves in parallel and
this sits under the baggage bay. I also have a UMA differential fuel
pressure sensor.
Paul
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 7:38 AM, Frans Veldman <frans@privatepilots.nl>wrote:
>
> On 07/31/2012 12:41 PM, rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us wrote:
>
> > It was Decalin, I just did a quick search and found a pretty good
> > article you may want to read,
>
> Good article indeed!
>
> > http://contrails.free.fr/engine_914_fuel_syst_test_en.php
>
> This web page mentions "air" in the filters, which should be "fuel
> vapor". This is caused by the pressure drop in the fuel filters due to
> the flow resistance. The fuel pumps not only increase the fuel pressure
> at the output, they also decrease the fuel pressure at the inlet.
> As we all (should) know, lower pressure lowers the boiling point.
>
> So, to get rid of the bubbles, you have to prevent the pressure drop in
> the fuel filter and/or pump inlet.
>
> One way of achieving this is to install a pre-pump directly at one of
> the tank outlets.
>
> I found some interesting pumps at ebay for a low cost (35$). They have
> no diaphragms or other rubber or wearable parts but just a piston pulled
> by a magnetic coil. If the pump stalls it is just a go-through.
> Alternatively one can make a bypass with a check valve. The pumps
> deliver 5 GPH, enough for a Rotax, at a pressure of 2 PSI. The pressure
> is enough to cancel out the pressure drop of the filters, valves and
> hoses and pump inlet, and thus prevent the formation of bubbles (or
> vapor lock in more severe cases).
>
> Frans
>
Message 17
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: | Proposal fuel system enhancement for mogas |
Ok everyone,
After my recent problems with mogas I digged into this subject and it
looks like that with some minor changes the Rotax 914 fuel system can be
made more suitable for mogas.
There are two problems with the use of mogas concerning the Rotax 914:
1) Vapor pressure.
The boiling point of mogas is often lower than that of avgas. With
higher temperatures and lower pressures (altitude) the fuel vaporizes
inside the fuel system. It starts with small bubbles, but eventually it
leads to a complete stoppage of the fuel flow (vapor lock).
2) Ethanol.
Ethanol in the fuel can bind water and keep it in suspension. At lower
temperatures (like after climbing to altitude) the water can precipitate
out of the fuel. Eventually this can lead to freezing or other water
related problems.
For both problems there are solutions:
1) In the 914, the fuel system is pressurised, and there is a high
return flow of fuel. The pumps are located outside the engine bay.
Consequently, there is almost no heating of the fuel, and bubbles are
transferred back to the fuel tank because of the return flow and
pressure regulator.
There is one weak point, and that is the fuel pump inlet. The suction of
the fuel pump causes a pressure drop in the inlet, especially if the
inlet system contains a fuel filter. The drop of pressure invites the
fuel to vaporize instantly. Once vaporized, it will not easily revert
back to a liquid state, even if the pressure is increased again.
In cars, to minimeze vapor lock problems, fuel pumps are often located
inside the tank, to eliminate/minimize the suction (low pressure) area.
In the 914, I think a good solution would be to install a high flow/low
pressure pump at the main tank outlet, combined with a bypass check
valve. Such a pump will eliminate the flow resistance of the fuel valve,
the filters, the hoses, the various joints, and thus eliminate the low
pressure area. If the pressure in the entire fuel system is kept higher
than in the tank, the fuel will not vaporize.
Should the pump fail, the bypass check valve will allow the system to
operate as before.
I found this on ebay:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/320954771747
"THIS PUMP IS A FREE FLOW the solenoid pump uses a piston actuated by
an electromagnetic coil to generate fuel pressure and flow. By using
only short pulses of electricity, the solenoid pump is very
energy-efficient. It is also long-lasting, with no internal rubber parts
or bellows to wear out."
2) The precipitation of water out of the fuel can be prevented by
keeping the fuel on its initial temperature. If, before the flight, no
water can be found at the bottom of the tank, no water will form if the
fuel is kept at the same temperature.
For the Rotax 914, the fuel return line flows at least 30 liters per
hour. Heating this fuel should be sufficient to prevent the fuel from
cooling down at altitude, especially if the return line enters the tank
at the bottom. The easiest way is to install an electrical fuel heater
with thermostat as often found on diesel engines. Another way would be
to use the coolant as a heat source, via a thermostatic valve and heat
exchanger.
Heating the fuel may look a contradiction to 1) where we want to prevent
vapor lock. However if the fuel is not heated but merely kept on the
take off temperature, vapor lock should not be an issue. It the fuel
temperature was good enough for a full power take off, it certainly is
enough for maintaining cruise power.
On Ebay I found this:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/120928913405
Any comments or further ideas on this subject?
Frans
Message 18
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
Hi Paul,
> I don't know if this helps or not, but in 1000 hours of operation I have
> never experienced a vapor lock like Frans has described using Mo Gas. I
> have operated my aircraft on days that are 35c ~ 40c, which have
> included long taxi runs. My experience may not translate because most
> of my take off and landings are at around 1000' MSL. On hot days this
> equates to about 3000' density altitude.
This field was on about 4000' MSL... I took off quite a few times from
this field before, using Mogas. Never had any problems until the last time.
What was/might be different than previous times:
I refueled in the morning but took off in the afternoon.
I had a black carpet on the bagage floor instead of white.
Maybe the fuel itself (although purchased at the same store) might have
had a different formula.
Maybe the fuel filter has a bit more resistance than previous times
(maybe a bit more clogged?).
There are many variables.
Anyway, this event shows that it CAN happen, despite previous positive
experiences, for whatever reason. The engine ran fine after a night
waiting, so even if there is a technical problem (partially clogged
filter) it might wait to show up until a hot and high airfield (which
tend to be the most unforgiving fields for technical problems).
I think with a few minor improvements the fuel system can be made more
mogas proof. See my other posting.
> What I have seen is the engine will not start on a hot day after sitting
> for a while and what I do in this situation is to turn the fuel pumps
> off, start the engine and then turn the pumps on.
I now always switch the fuel pump off during the turbo cool down period,
and let the engine idle until the carbs are drawn empty (this usually
takes about 1 minute). The starting problems are gone, and I think the
carbs will stay cleaner (the fuel inside the bowls will otherwise
vaporize anyway, but then leave some solid residue behind).
Frans
Message 19
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
Hi Frans
The "air" bubbles were indeed vaporizing 100LL. I did introduce
air, by ever so slightly pushing on the quick drains mounted on the
bottom of either Andair 375, WOW foam city, that was air introduction. I
am very concerned when I see drain valves seeping on Europas, especially
914s.
The pre-pump you are talking about would help the bubbling a little, but
don't think it's needed. I tested the ability to prime with
various heads and also introducing intake restriction, and was very
satisfied with the results.
If you are hell bent on a pre-pump, I actually have one that would work.
I was planning on using it to transfer fuel. I had a fleet of 3 Volvo 740
Turbo Station Wagons (two 1992 and one 1990), I finally switched them out
a few years ago. The main Bosch fuel pump would consistently fail between
~ 85 and 125K. I always stocked one. I also stocked a pre-pump that lives
in the fuel tank. It's a small thing about the size of the 914 pump
(I just weighed it and it's 242 grams) that is very low pressure and
lots of volume taking a 12 volt input. I always checked the output of
this pump when changing the main pump or filter and never had a failure.
I'm not complaining because it meant dropping the fuel tank.
Anyway if you look up 1992 Volvo 740 turbo with a 2.5 liter turbo engine,
then the in fuel tank pre-pump (not exactly sure what they call it) it
could be a good choice. It has a slight necked down area on the OD of the
the intake side of the outer case with an OD of 1.430" x .675"
long, nice and smooth and looks to be very robust. If you wanted to use
it inline, that would be a good area to put a piece of rubber coupler
over with a clamp, then the other side could have an adapter. The output
side has a.312" (5/16") hose barb. The main pump although I
have tried aftermarket once when I was in a pinch, it did not fit
perfectly and the wiring connections were not the same, so I stuck with
the Bosch. I saw the pre-pump on special once so I bought one just in
case. I suspect the one I have is aftermarket? It's in a clear
plastic bag that's staples closed, on the bag (Bosch always comes in
a nice graphics box and it says Bosch everywhere):
3517845
F/Pump in tank
700 Turbo 85 - 95
You may be able to cross the numbers on the pump (no Mfg. name I can
see):
6443270(V3517845) then under that number : C3435-2
Just a quick note, both pumps ran off of a fuel pump relay, after between
~ 85K and ~ 125K they too would fail. What would happen is because solder
is such a bad conductor (solder is between ~ 4 and 5% the conductivity of
annealed copper 110 that has 100% conductivity) the joint that carried
the high current would fracture fail from the long period cycling between
cold and hot. You would get the tell tale ring that many suspect is a
"cold solder joint" but in fact a fractured solder joint.
Anyway the relays were cheap enough, but not cheap enough for my liking,
so I kept a spare in every car (only takes a few minutes to change)
and would re-solder them every few years (all 3 at once). They came apart
really easily and the contacts still looked fine so I just kept on
re-soldering. I actually solder sucked out the solder that fractured, and
re-flowed with model aeroplane racing solder, what racing solder is,
it's a fairly low temp solder with some silver in it, so I would
re-solder and suck a few times to get as much new in the joint, it holds
up a little better than 63-37 or 60-40. Again getting off track, it was
not possible on this joint, but if there is enough tail on whatever it is
you are re-soldering to a board that failed from fracturing, if you can
make a wrap of wire around the tail and solder the two ends of that wire
to another part of the copper land, you will greatly reduce the chance of
failure later on. On many an occasion if I had a troublesome joint, I
would purchase a new component, not because the component failed, but for
it's longer tail and do whatever to make more solder surface area of
solder that is conducting that would prevent a lot of heating and cure
the malady, or at least greatly increase the time between failures.
Anyway if you do go to two pre-pumps (or even one) be cognizant that two
pumps in parallel draws enough amps that over time any solder joint that
may flow electrons to the two pumps could in fact be a failure point. The
first time it happened to me it was a drive you crazy malady to figure.
First time, didn't hear the pump working with a stuck car. Come back
and it runs fine? OK replace the pump and all is well, for a week or two,
then the same thing, get stuck, come back and all is well. Depending on
heating and cooling the fool joint would make or break. Hard to
troubleshoot, easy to fix once you know.
Ron P.
Message 20
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
Hi Ron,
> The pre-pump you are talking about would help the bubbling a little, but
> don't think it's needed.
Think about the bubbles again. Why are they there? They are not in the
tank, right? So somewhere down the line the fuel starts vaporizing. Why
is that, and how can you prevent that? This is where the pre-pump comes
in. No pressure drop = no bubbles. No bubbles = no vapour lock.
> If you are hell bent on a pre-pump, I actually have one that would work.
It sounds interesting. I have to measure to see if it can be made to fit
the tank outlet. Also I would prefer a pump that is "open" if switched
off. This way I can only activate it when using mogas, hot and/or high,
during take off. Or I have to use an external bypass with check valve,
but for an in-tank pump this is complicated.
I will come back to this once I have made up my mind, will let you know.
> Just a quick note, both pumps ran off of a fuel pump relay, after
> between ~ 85K and ~ 125K they too would fail. What would happen is
Fun isn't it, these modern cars? My daily driver is a 1972 Mercedes 300
SEL (V8, running on propane, all options) and it just keeps going,
almost no maintenance. :-) Imagine the looks of people every time I use
it to tow the Europa back and forth to the airport. Have been
photographed a lot of times. ;-)
> Anyway if you do go to two pre-pumps (or even one) be cognizant that two
> pumps in parallel draws enough amps that over time any solder joint that
> may flow electrons to the two pumps could in fact be a failure point.
This is why I want to make the pre-pump optional and give it its own
wiring. Also, this way I can check to see before startup that it is
working, to use it to "prime" the fuel system and get confirmation on
the gauge that it is developing some pressure.
> The first time it happened to me it was a drive you crazy malady to
> figure. First time, didn't hear the pump working with a stuck car. Come
> back and it runs fine? OK replace the pump and all is well, for a week
> or two, then the same thing, get stuck, come back and all is well.
> Depending on heating and cooling the fool joint would make or break.
I had the same thing with the EFI of my car (yes, the good old Merc.
Well, after 40 years of service I can accept this).
Frans
Message 21
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
I have the same system Paul describes. I have not experienced the problem Fra
ns had. But I operate consistently at far higher density altitudes and temps
than described.
Frans, perhaps you are on to something regarding the filters before the pump
s causing vaporization of the auto fuel at high density altitude/temp, and p
erhaps that is the part of the system that is need of redesign. I wonder if t
rying larger filters and fuel lines would mean less resistance and therefor n
o vaporization?
Kevin
PS- it was great to see few Europa drivers at Oshkosh!
On Jul 31, 2012, at 5:51 AM, Paul McAllister <paul.the.aviator@gmail.com> wr
ote:
> Hi All,
>
> I don't know if this helps or not, but in 1000 hours of operation I have n
ever experienced a vapor lock like Frans has described using Mo Gas. I have o
perated my aircraft on days that are 35c ~ 40c, which have included long tax
i runs. My experience may not translate because most of my take off and lan
dings are at around 1000' MSL. On hot days this equates to about 3000' den
sity altitude.
>
> What I have seen is the engine will not start on a hot day after sitting f
or a while and what I do in this situation is to turn the fuel pumps off, st
art the engine and then turn the pumps on.
>
> I have a single gascolator, with dual pumps + check valves in parallel and
this sits under the baggage bay. I also have a UMA differential fuel pressu
re sensor.
>
> Paul
>
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 7:38 AM, Frans Veldman <frans@privatepilots.nl> wr
ote:
>
> On 07/31/2012 12:41 PM, rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us wrote:
>
> > It was Decalin, I just did a quick search and found a pretty good
> > article you may want to read,
>
> Good article indeed!
>
> > http://contrails.free.fr/engine_914_fuel_syst_test_en.php
>
> This web page mentions "air" in the filters, which should be "fuel
> vapor". This is caused by the pressure drop in the fuel filters due to
> the flow resistance. The fuel pumps not only increase the fuel pressure
> at the output, they also decrease the fuel pressure at the inlet.
> As we all (should) know, lower pressure lowers the boiling point.
>
> So, to get rid of the bubbles, you have to prevent the pressure drop in
> the fuel filter and/or pump inlet.
>
> One way of achieving this is to install a pre-pump directly at one of
> the tank outlets.
>
> I found some interesting pumps at ebay for a low cost (35$). They have
> no diaphragms or other rubber or wearable parts but just a piston pulled
> by a magnetic coil. If the pump stalls it is just a go-through.
> Alternatively one can make a bypass with a check valve. The pumps
> deliver 5 GPH, enough for a Rotax, at a pressure of 2 PSI. The pressure
> is enough to cancel out the pressure drop of the filters, valves and
> hoses and pump inlet, and thus prevent the formation of bubbles (or
> vapor lock in more severe cases).
>
> Frans
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
Message 22
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: | Vapour lock? Why? |
Hi Frans,
We had a problem with vapor lock in our XS mono-wheel with 912S, which caused the
engine to run rough. I happened several times, only in the winter months.
This happened several times on take off after a cold start of the engine, at
or near sea level. We use auto fuel, and here in the US, they put more volatiles
in the fuel in the cold months to help starting. It seemed to create a bubble
of vapor at or near the carbs that would slowly (tens of minutes) go away.
On one occasion I was doing some glide tests (at about 8000 feet) with the
engine shut down, when I restarted the engine it ran rough, I turned on the electric
boost pump and it killed the engine completely. What I think happened
is the extra boost 'blew' the entire bubble into the carbs all at once and killed
the engine. I restarted the engine and it ran better in a few minutes.
We put aluminum coated insulation around the float bowls and nearby lines and never
had the problem again.
Regards,
Terry Seaver
A135 XS
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Frans Veldman
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 8:06 AM
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Vapour lock? Why?
Jeff,
> My own experience with vapor lock was nerve wracking. After fighting it
> for months, I finally figured it out. The carb bowls were getting hot.
This is not the problem I have. The engine was still relatively cold,
and I saw the fuel pressure drop. The fuel pressure is measured before
the carbs. A vapor lock inside the carbs doesn't result in a pressure
drop before the carbs.
I also got some private mails, but not everyone seems to know that I
have a Rotax 914. The 914 has two electrical pumps, mounted under the
bagage bay. If there is a fuel pressure drop, something is wrong outside
of the engine bay (unless it is the fuel pressure regulator itself).
I appreciate your advice, but I don't think it applies to my ship. It
can't have been the carbs.
Frans
Message 23
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: | Vapour lock? Why? |
Frans,
In the tank bottom there are no bubbles at the temperature in question
(otherwise it would be boiling). Fuel pressure here is atmospheric pressure
plus static pressure (negligible) from the fuel column above. At the fuel
pump inlet, suction means lower pressure than in the tank, and here you
could get bubbles if the fuel temperature is not too far from the phase
shift point liquid-to-vapour, especially as the filter is upstream of the
pump (between the tank and the pump) since the filter restricts the flow a
little.
If the fuel pressure after the pump is equal to or higher than the pressure
in the bottom of the tank, and there is no heating of the fuel on its way so
far, the bubbles will disappear. The transition from liquid to vapour or
from vapour to liquid is virtually instantaneous. This phase shift follows
a certain temperature/pressure curve - there is no hysteresis (no difference
going from liquid to vapour, compared to from vapour to liquid). With the
pressure you state in one of your postings, meaning considerably higher
pressure after the pump than at the bottom of the tank, I cannot see how a
gas bubble created due to suction can "survive" the passage through the
pump, unless heated up on its way through the pump/hose.
My posting earlier today described the movement of a vapour bubble that
exists downstream of (after) the pump. If the heat downstream is such that
gas bubbles will form despite the relatively high pump pressure, then gas
bubbles will of course reach the carbs unless vented back through the return
line.
Given the composition/characteristic of the fuel on board and given the fuel
pressure, the only variable we can do anything with is the fuel temperature.
In addition to fire sleeves on all engine compartment fuel and oil hoses and
good shielding from direct exhaust pipe heat, I also use heat protection
sleeves (silvery outer layer over insulation layer) placed outside the fire
sleeve forward of the fire wall. Also T and X metal joints are insulated.
Aft of the fire wall I have used the heat sleeve several places as wear
protection, but it is so lightweight that one may use it all over. You can
buy these at auto supply stores.
Given a choice of fuel, Avgas in hot weather/high altitude seems to be the
best option to avoid vapour lock, as also confirmed by the very interesting
posting today regarding LAA's restriction on Mogas use. Replacing engine
oil and filter more frequently is an inexpensive consequence of using Avgas.
And never use Mogas purchased in the winter during the warmer period of the
year.
Regards,
Svein
LN-SKJ
Message 24
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: | cameras and mounting |
Any advice on video or time lapse camera types and mounting on the plane. The Go
Pro looks popular and good but far from aerodynamic in shape although it could
go in front of the mono outrigger. Taking pictures from the cockpit is frustrating
due to the perspex.
--------
Graeme Bird
G-UMPY
Mono Classic/XS FWFD 912ULS/Woodcomp 3000/W
Newby: 35 hours
g(at)gdbmk.co.uk
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=379718#379718
Message 25
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: cameras and mounting |
Graeme-
John Lawton built a streamlined case and mouted a time lapse on top of his
rudder.=C2- The pictures weren't good, they were SPECTACULAR!=C2- You m
ay want to e-mail him for details.=C2- He does not follow Matrinics.
Jim Puglise
----- Original Message -----
From: "graeme bird" <graeme@gdbmk.co.uk>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2012 3:13:45 PM
Subject: Europa-List: cameras and mounting
Any advice on video or time lapse camera types and mounting on the plane. T
he Go Pro looks popular and good but far from aerodynamic in shape although
it could go in front of the mono outrigger. Taking pictures from the cockp
it is frustrating due to the perspex.
--------
Graeme Bird
G-UMPY
Mono Classic/XS FWFD 912ULS/Woodcomp 3000/W
Newby: 35 hours =C2-
g(at)gdbmk.co.uk
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=379718#379718
===========
===========
MS -
===========
e -
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2--Matt Dralle, List Admin.
===========
Message 26
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
Svein,
> If the fuel pressure after the pump is equal to or higher than the
> pressure in the bottom of the tank, and there is no heating of the fuel
> on its way so far, the bubbles will disappear. The transition from
> liquid to vapour or from vapour to liquid is virtually instantaneous.
I thought (but I'm in no way an expert) that for a fluid to boil you
need some contamination which acts as some sort of trigger. Just like
bubbles in a glass of cola seem to form at certain spots. Once just a
bit of vapour has accumulated, other molecules hook in and the bubble
keeps growing.
So if the fuel temp is on the edge, once vapour bubbles exist it is
easier for other molecules to take the same route.
On the other hand, I see what you are saying. If there is no hysteresis
then bubbles should disappear under pressure. Then again, it would be
impossible to get vapor lock unless you heat the fuel. (Which is what
you are saying).
> My posting earlier today described the movement of a vapour bubble that
> exists downstream of (after) the pump.
Ok, I believe you. Then the problem would only be at the pump inlet and
not beyond. Still, the pump would then turn into a void. With a bubble
inside the pump the pump can not maintain pressure, so the transition
from gas to fluid doesn't take place.
> Given the composition/characteristic of the fuel on board and given the
> fuel pressure, the only variable we can do anything with is the *fuel
> temperature*.
The engine was just started. The oil temp was about 60 degrees. We where
anxious to take off because of the heat in the cockpit. There was no
heat anywhere in the fuel system except for heat created by the sun.
Again, this is a 914 with a very high fuel return flow. Any heat
somewhere in the system will be carried away quickly.
The only thing remaining is the fuel pressure drop inside the suction
area, i.e. the fuel filters.
> In addition to fire sleeves on all engine compartment fuel and oil hoses
> and good shielding from direct exhaust pipe heat, I also use heat
> protection sleeves (silvery outer layer over insulation layer) placed
> outside the fire sleeve forward of the fire wall.
I have this too. Keep in mind that the 914 has no mechanical fuel pump.
The fuel enters the engine compartment to the airbox where the pressure
regulator is, and then returns back to the firewall. It is a very short
route, and fuel is flowing there with a rate of 1 liter per minute.
Vapor lock between the regulator and carbs is of no consequence, as the
needle valves of the carb just let any gaseous fuel through until some
fluid matter raises the floats.
> Given a choice of fuel, Avgas in hot weather/high altitude seems to be
> the best option to avoid vapour lock, as also confirmed by the very
> interesting posting today regarding LAAs restriction on Mogas use.
> Replacing engine oil and filter more frequently is an inexpensive
> consequence of using Avgas.
Despite changing the oil and filter, the engine contaminates
nevertheless. There are some interesting documents with pictures on the
internet from the British Rotax dealer. Avgas is just bad for the Rotax.
And it is more expensive. Enough reasons to investigate how we can
operate more reliably on mogas.
Thanks for sharing your insight.
I guess it is time to wait for an exceptional hot day, pour some mogas
in the poor thing, switch on the electric pumps, and then make some
pictures at various places in the fuel system about what is travelling
through the fuel lines. With our insights combined we would see a lot of
bubbles in the fuel pump inlet, and less (or none) after the fuel pump.
Frans
Message 27
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
On 07/31/2012 07:50 PM, klinefelter.kevin@gmail.com wrote:
> I have the same system Paul describes. I have not experienced the
> problem Frans had. But I operate consistently at far higher density
> altitudes and temps than described.
This is interesting. I think I have the same system as Paul and you
(With the Andair gascolator) except that I have an additional disposabel
filter for the secondary fuel pump. We are talking here about the series
configuration, right?
> Frans, perhaps you are on to something regarding the filters before the
> pumps causing vaporization of the auto fuel at high density
> altitude/temp, and perhaps that is the part of the system that is need
> of redesign.
Well, it could be that the fuel filters are contaminated (although I
cleaned/replaced them just 40 hours ago) causing enough restriction in
harsh conditions but not enough to cause a fuel pressure drop at lower
temps/altitudes. Or I just had a bad batch of fuel.
I will check the system thoroughly and see if I can find any abnormalities.
Frans
Message 28
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
Frans=0Aif the fuel boils in the carb bowls where does the vapour go? On a
912 it goes into the inlet manifold anyway so will cause rich mixture.=0AAn
d displace some air. In the 914 it will be at manifold pressure so may forc
e its way into the needle jet and again cause rich mixture.=0AGraham=0A=0A
=0A________________________________=0A From: Frans Veldman <frans@privatepi
lots.nl>=0ATo: europa-list@matronics.com =0ASent: Tuesday, 31 July 2012, 21
:47=0ASubject: Re: SV: Europa-List: Vapour lock? Why?=0A =0A--> Europa-List
message posted by: Frans Veldman <frans@privatepilots.nl>=0A=0ASvein,=0A
=0A> If the fuel pressure after the pump is equal to or higher than the=0A>
pressure in the bottom of the tank, and there is no heating of the fuel=0A
> on its way so far, the bubbles will disappear.=C2- The transition from
=0A> liquid to vapour or from vapour to liquid is virtually instantaneous.
=0A=0AI thought (but I'm in no way an expert) that for a fluid to boil you
=0Aneed some contamination which acts as some sort of trigger. Just like=0A
bubbles in a glass of cola seem to form at certain spots. Once just a=0Abit
of vapour has accumulated, other molecules hook in and the bubble=0Akeeps
growing.=0ASo if the fuel temp is on the edge, once vapour bubbles exist it
is=0Aeasier for other molecules to take the same route.=0A=0AOn the other
hand, I see what you are saying. If there is no hysteresis=0Athen bubbles s
hould disappear under pressure. Then again, it would be=0Aimpossible to get
vapor lock unless you heat the fuel. (Which is what=0Ayou are saying).=0A
=0A> My posting earlier today described the movement of a vapour bubble tha
t=0A> exists downstream of (after) the pump.=0A=0AOk, I believe you. Then t
he problem would only be at the pump inlet and=0Anot beyond. Still, the pum
p would then turn into a void. With a bubble=0Ainside the pump the pump can
not maintain pressure, so the transition=0Afrom gas to fluid doesn't take
place.=0A=0A> Given the composition/characteristic of the fuel on board and
given the=0A> fuel pressure, the only variable we can do anything with is
the *fuel=0A> temperature*. =0A=0AThe engine was just started. The oil temp
was about 60 degrees. We where=0Aanxious to take off because of the heat i
n the cockpit. There was no=0Aheat anywhere in the fuel system except for h
eat created by the sun.=0AAgain, this is a 914 with a very high fuel return
flow. Any heat=0Asomewhere in the system will be carried away quickly.=0AT
he only thing remaining is the fuel pressure drop inside the suction=0Aarea
, i.e. the fuel filters.=0A=0A> In addition to fire sleeves on all engine c
ompartment fuel and oil hoses=0A> and good shielding from direct exhaust pi
pe heat, I also use heat=0A> protection sleeves (silvery outer layer over i
nsulation layer) placed=0A> outside the fire sleeve forward of the fire wal
l.=0A=0AI have this too. Keep in mind that the 914 has no mechanical fuel p
ump.=0AThe fuel enters the engine compartment to the airbox where the press
ure=0Aregulator is, and then returns back to the firewall. It is a very sho
rt=0Aroute, and fuel is flowing there with a rate of 1 liter per minute.=0A
Vapor lock between the regulator and carbs is of no consequence, as the=0An
eedle valves of the carb just let any gaseous fuel through until some=0Aflu
id matter raises the floats.=0A=0A> Given a choice of fuel, Avgas in hot we
ather/high altitude seems to be=0A> the best option to avoid vapour lock, a
s also confirmed by the very=0A> interesting posting today regarding LAA
=99s restriction on Mogas use. =0A> Replacing engine oil and filter more
frequently is an inexpensive=0A> consequence of using Avgas.=0A=0ADespite
changing the oil and filter, the engine contaminates=0Anevertheless. There
are some interesting documents with pictures on the=0Ainternet from the Bri
tish Rotax dealer. Avgas is just bad for the Rotax.=0AAnd it is more expens
ive. Enough reasons to investigate how we can=0Aoperate more reliably on mo
gas.=0A=0AThanks for sharing your insight.=0A=0AI guess it is time to wait
for an exceptional hot day, pour some mogas=0Ain the poor thing, switch on
the electric pumps, and then make some=0Apictures at various places in the
fuel system about what is travelling=0Athrough the fuel lines. With our ins
ights combined we would see a lot of=0Abubbles in the fuel pump inlet, and
=========================0A
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2
===================
Message 29
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: cameras and mounting |
Graeme,
FWIW, I acquired a Go Pro Hero2. I acquired this primarily to use on a Little
Toot Sport Biplane not the Europa. But I'm trying to come up with a means to
use in the Europa as well.
Pros: It's very nice. Takes excellent video/pictures (up to 1080P video or 10MP
pics). Is easy to use (once you rtfm). Has tons of accessories to do all kinds
of good stuff. Has lots of settings for the specific application you want
to do. All kinds of mounts for darn near anything. Comes with an environmental
case impervious to just about anything short of gun fire. Other cases for
other applications are available. Free S/W for Mac or PC. Extremely easy to
download video/pics on my Mac. Can't speak to PC but probably as easy.
Cons: It's as aerodynamic a (small) brick and would be a B**** to mount on the
exterior of a Europa. You'll need extra batteries for anything over a couple
hours. Each hour of operation requires about an hour of recharge. Recharge is
only done with the battery in the camera via USB connection. No external battery
recharger available. So you can't recharge one battery while using a 2nd
battery in the camera.
Maybe with some effort you could gin-up a mount for in front of the outrigger/outer
flap bracket. There's a remote control package (US$100) that might work
to operate it out there. If you are still under construction and have not put
the tip of the tail on, you might do something with that. Maybe in a wing tip?
There's a suction mount and/or various sticky mounts you might use inside
the windscreen. A couple different head mounts are available. More thought needed...
If it were only more aero!
A couple pics:
The Motorsport configuration comes with all this:
Blue skies & tailwinds,
Bob Borger
Europa XS Tri, Rotax 914, Airmaster C/S Prop.
Little Toot Sport Biplane, Lycoming Thunderbolt AEIO-320 EXP
3705 Lynchburg Dr.
Corinth, TX 76208-5331
Cel: 817-992-1117
rlborger@mac.com
On Jul 31, 2012, at 2:13 PM, graeme bird wrote:
Any advice on video or time lapse camera types and mounting on the plane. The Go
Pro looks popular and good but far from aerodynamic in shape although it could
go in front of the mono outrigger. Taking pictures from the cockpit is frustrating
due to the perspex.
--------
Graeme Bird
G-UMPY
Mono Classic/XS FWFD 912ULS/Woodcomp 3000/W
Newby: 35 hours
g(at)gdbmk.co.uk
Message 30
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: cameras and mounting |
I have been looking for a camera for my MCR-4S and have been looking at the Go-Pro but I am tending towards the Replay XD1080 www.replayxd.com/cameras/replay-xd1080-camera/ for the same reason as most.
Its shape is a lot more conducive to fitting inside an aircraft and it has the
ability to be remotely controlled by a panel mounted hardware start stop kit that
also has a 3.5mm audio input allowing my headset audio to be incorporated
into the video.
As I have a MGL Voyager G2 I am looking at a HDMI -> Video converter and feeding
the video into the back of my Voyager and Voila I have a monitor on my EFIS
of my camera. The Voyager takes up to 4 video inputs.
Trust this helps.
Cheers Peter
--------
Peter Armstrong
Auckland, New Zealand
DynAero MCR-4S (Do not shoot me :) ).
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=379728#379728
Message 31
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
I have an Andair mini gascolator followed by a Y splitting to Andair check valves
before the pumps in parallel.
I was chatting with Rob Seaton ( of Rotech in canada) at the Rotax display in Oshkosh.
He recently purchased a 914 powered Europa to use as a test vehicle for
the 912iS. We were talking about fuel system design, how the new 912iS has two
electric pumps like the 914 except higher pressure for the fuel injection.
He said he learned how too small a fuel line and/or tortured routing can cause
"cavitation" at the pumps.
I think that's the same thing, cavitation vs vapor lock? So maybe your fuel filter(s),
on the suction side of the pump,are causing cavitation in the pump(s).
Maybe due to the size (restriction of flow) of the filter, even if they are clean.
I do not like the fact that I have a single point of failure in one gascolator.
But if I redesign, I am going to go with less restriction, larger diameter tubing.
Kevin
On Jul 31, 2012, at 1:57 PM, Frans Veldman <frans@privatepilots.nl> wrote:
>
> On 07/31/2012 07:50 PM, klinefelter.kevin@gmail.com wrote:
>> I have the same system Paul describes. I have not experienced the
>> problem Frans had. But I operate consistently at far higher density
>> altitudes and temps than described.
>
> This is interesting. I think I have the same system as Paul and you
> (With the Andair gascolator) except that I have an additional disposabel
> filter for the secondary fuel pump. We are talking here about the series
> configuration, right?
>
>> Frans, perhaps you are on to something regarding the filters before the
>> pumps causing vaporization of the auto fuel at high density
>> altitude/temp, and perhaps that is the part of the system that is need
>> of redesign.
>
> Well, it could be that the fuel filters are contaminated (although I
> cleaned/replaced them just 40 hours ago) causing enough restriction in
> harsh conditions but not enough to cause a fuel pressure drop at lower
> temps/altitudes. Or I just had a bad batch of fuel.
>
> I will check the system thoroughly and see if I can find any abnormalities.
>
> Frans
>
>
>
>
Message 32
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: | cameras and mounting |
http://www.vio-pov.com/
The VIP pov camera is ideally suited to mounting anywhere on the airframe -
the camera unit is small and with an extension lead can be mounted on the
wingtips if required. The angle of view is 140 degrees so easy to fit the
whole cockpit into frame.
Only problem I have found is that any camera mounted in the cockpit needs
substantial anti vibration mounting. Alternately cameras with built in image
stabilisation work well though not as compact.
I am currently experimenting with a gel type mount which will hopefully
dampen out the worst of any vibrations.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of graeme bird
Sent: 31 July 2012 20:14
Subject: Europa-List: cameras and mounting
Any advice on video or time lapse camera types and mounting on the plane.
The Go Pro looks popular and good but far from aerodynamic in shape although
it could go in front of the mono outrigger. Taking pictures from the cockpit
is frustrating due to the perspex.
--------
Graeme Bird
G-UMPY
Mono Classic/XS FWFD 912ULS/Woodcomp 3000/W
Newby: 35 hours
g(at)gdbmk.co.uk
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=379718#379718
_______________________________________
No infections found in this incoming message Scanned by iolo System ShieldR
http://www.iolo.com
_______________________________________
No infections found in this outgoing message
Scanned by iolo System Shield
http://www.iolo.com
Message 33
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
Frans,
Just to clarify. I have the original pump configuration, two pumps in
parallel. I have an Andair check valve in series with each pump. Several
years after I built my airplane the recommendation was to put the pumps in
series. I did quite a bit of research and I could not come up with a
compelling reason to change something that wasn't broken. With that said,
I doubt if the series pump configuration is contributing to your issue.
I have a single gascolator on the inlet side and nothing else. Like Kevin
I don't particularly care for a single point of failure, however it would
difficult to install a second gascolator now. If I were to do it over
again I would have a gascolator for each pump.
Regards, Paul
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 4:27 PM, <klinefelter.kevin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have an Andair mini gascolator followed by a Y splitting to Andair check
> valves before the pumps in parallel.
>
> I was chatting with Rob Seaton ( of Rotech in canada) at the Rotax display
> in Oshkosh. He recently purchased a 914 powered Europa to use as a test
> vehicle for the 912iS. We were talking about fuel system design, how the
> new 912iS has two electric pumps like the 914 except higher pressure for
> the fuel injection. He said he learned how too small a fuel line and/or
> tortured routing can cause "cavitation" at the pumps.
> I think that's the same thing, cavitation vs vapor lock? So maybe your
> fuel filter(s), on the suction side of the pump,are causing cavitation in
> the pump(s). Maybe due to the size (restriction of flow) of the filter,
> even if they are clean.
> I do not like the fact that I have a single point of failure in one
> gascolator. But if I redesign, I am going to go with less restriction,
> larger diameter tubing.
> Kevin
>
Message 34
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: Proposal fuel system enhancement for mogas |
An apposite saying "If it ain't broke, don't fix it !"
The UK CAA advice for use of mogas has worked very well for me for more than a
decade:
1) Don't fly above 6000 ft p.a. with mogas
2) Don't fly if the temperature of fuel inside the tank exceeds 20C
3) Don't use mogas if alcohol can be detected in it
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=379735#379735
Message 35
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: cameras and mounting |
I like the look of the Drift HD camera. It has a small LCD screen which
will allow you to compose your shot and a rotatable lens which allows
you to straighten the picture even if mounted at an angle. Even has a
remote which would allow you to turn it on and off even when mounted
externally.
www.Driftinnovation.com/camera/drift-hd/
Martin Tuck
Europa N152MT
Wichita, Kansas
On 7/31/2012 4:48 PM, Carl Pattinson wrote:
> --> Europa-List message posted by: "Carl Pattinson"<carl@flyers.freeserve.co.uk>
>
> http://www.vio-pov.com/
>
> The VIP pov camera is ideally suited to mounting anywhere on the airframe -
> the camera unit is small and with an extension lead can be mounted on the
> wingtips if required. The angle of view is 140 degrees so easy to fit the
> whole cockpit into frame.
>
> Only problem I have found is that any camera mounted in the cockpit needs
> substantial anti vibration mounting. Alternately cameras with built in image
> stabilisation work well though not as compact.
>
> I am currently experimenting with a gel type mount which will hopefully
> dampen out the worst of any vibrations.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of graeme bird
> Sent: 31 July 2012 20:14
> To: europa-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Europa-List: cameras and mounting
>
> --> Europa-List message posted by: "graeme bird"<graeme@gdbmk.co.uk>
>
> Any advice on video or time lapse camera types and mounting on the plane.
> The Go Pro looks popular and good but far from aerodynamic in shape although
> it could go in front of the mono outrigger. Taking pictures from the cockpit
> is frustrating due to the perspex.
>
> --------
> Graeme Bird
> G-UMPY
> Mono Classic/XS FWFD 912ULS/Woodcomp 3000/W
> Newby: 35 hours
> g(at)gdbmk.co.uk
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=379718#379718
>
>
> _______________________________________
> No infections found in this incoming message Scanned by iolo System ShieldR
> http://www.iolo.com
>
>
> _______________________________________
> No infections found in this outgoing message
> Scanned by iolo System Shield
> http://www.iolo.com
>
>
Message 36
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
Hi Frans,
We have the same system as you have, the series pumps with check valves as specified
by Rotax. We feed one pump from a Andar gasolator and the other thru a
Purolator filter, the one Europa supplied.
Never a problem like you describe in 400 hours. This summer we have been operating
a lot at density altitudes of 12,000 to 18,000 ft using MOGAS with no problem.
Did a trip to Colorado in June and again no problem with MOGAS at 16,000
ft density altitude. In fact, there is a flight school in Colorado Springs
with Flight Design aircraft (912ULS) using exclusively MOGAS. Colorado Springs
is 6000 ft MSL.
So we're pretty confident the problem is not MOGAS.
Jim & Heather
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=379746#379746
Message 37
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: Vapour lock? Why? |
Frans,
Forgot to mention, you talk of differential fuel pressure of 6 psi. Rotax specifies
differential fuel pressure to be 3.63 psi nominal, 5.08 psi max and 2.18
psi min. It's easy to adjust the fuel pressure regulator using a mechanical gauge.
Don't know if this has any bearing on your situation.
Jim & Heather
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=379748#379748
Message 38
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: cameras and mounting |
Just a clarification, there is a "battery backpack" which comes with a larg
er back cover, which doubles the battery life, and the backpack can also be u
sed as a charger separate from the camera. I just bought one and it works g
reat.
As you said, there are a crazy number of accessories, one of which is also t
he wifi backpack, allowing one to control multiple remote gopro cameras from
the cockpit.
The vid and picture quality of the hero2 is the best out there for these typ
es of cameras. No image stabilization however.
Cheers,
Pete
On Jul 31, 2012, at 4:30 PM, Robert Borger <rlborger@mac.com> wrote:
> Graeme,
>
> FWIW, I acquired a Go Pro Hero2. I acquired this primarily to use on a Li
ttle Toot Sport Biplane not the Europa. But I'm trying to come up with a me
ans to use in the Europa as well.
>
> Pros: It's very nice. Takes excellent video/pictures (up to 1080P video o
r 10MP pics). Is easy to use (once you rtfm). Has tons of accessories to d
o all kinds of good stuff. Has lots of settings for the specific applicatio
n you want to do. All kinds of mounts for darn near anything. Comes with a
n environmental case impervious to just about anything short of gun fire. O
ther cases for other applications are available. Free S/W for Mac or PC. E
xtremely easy to download video/pics on my Mac. Can't speak to PC but proba
bly as easy.
>
> Cons: It's as aerodynamic a (small) brick and would be a B**** to mount on
the exterior of a Europa. You'll need extra batteries for anything over a c
ouple hours. Each hour of operation requires about an hour of recharge. Re
charge is only done with the battery in the camera via USB connection. No e
xternal battery recharger available. So you can't recharge one battery whil
e using a 2nd battery in the camera.
>
> Maybe with some effort you could gin-up a mount for in front of the outrig
ger/outer flap bracket. There's a remote control package (US$100) that migh
t work to operate it out there. If you are still under construction and hav
e not put the tip of the tail on, you might do something with that. Maybe i
n a wing tip? There's a suction mount and/or various sticky mounts you migh
t use inside the windscreen. A couple different head mounts are available.
More thought needed...
>
> If it were only more aero!
>
> A couple pics:
>
> <IMG_3551em.jpg>
>
> <IMG_3555em.jpg>
>
> The Motorsport configuration comes with all this:
> <IMG_3556em.jpg>
>
>
> Blue skies & tailwinds,
> Bob Borger
> Europa XS Tri, Rotax 914, Airmaster C/S Prop.
> Little Toot Sport Biplane, Lycoming Thunderbolt AEIO-320 EXP
> 3705 Lynchburg Dr.
> Corinth, TX 76208-5331
> Cel: 817-992-1117
> rlborger@mac.com
>
> On Jul 31, 2012, at 2:13 PM, graeme bird wrote:
>
>
> Any advice on video or time lapse camera types and mounting on the plane. T
he Go Pro looks popular and good but far from aerodynamic in shape although i
t could go in front of the mono outrigger. Taking pictures from the cockpit i
s frustrating due to the perspex.
>
> --------
> Graeme Bird
> G-UMPY
> Mono Classic/XS FWFD 912ULS/Woodcomp 3000/W
> Newby: 35 hours
> g(at)gdbmk.co.uk
Message 39
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: cameras and mounting |
Pete,
I missed the documentation that the "battery bacPac" (US$50) could also double
as an off-camera charger. I guess I'll eventually have to invest in one of them
and the Wi-Fi BacPac + Wi-Fi Remote.
Thanks.
Blue skies & tailwinds,
Bob Borger
Europa XS Tri, Rotax 914, Airmaster C/S Prop.
Little Toot Sport Biplane, Lycoming Thunderbolt AEIO-320 EXP
3705 Lynchburg Dr.
Corinth, TX 76208-5331
Cel: 817-992-1117
rlborger@mac.com
On Jul 31, 2012, at 8:07 PM, Pete wrote:
Just a clarification, there is a "battery backpack" which comes with a larger
back cover, which doubles the battery life, and the backpack can also be used
as a charger separate from the camera. I just bought one and it works great.
As you said, there are a crazy number of accessories, one of which is also the
wifi backpack, allowing one to control multiple remote gopro cameras from the
cockpit.
The vid and picture quality of the hero2 is the best out there for these types
of cameras. No image stabilization however.
Cheers,
Pete
On Jul 31, 2012, at 4:30 PM, Robert Borger <rlborger@mac.com> wrote:
> Graeme,
>
> FWIW, I acquired a Go Pro Hero2. I acquired this primarily to use on a Little
Toot Sport Biplane not the Europa. But I'm trying to come up with a means to
use in the Europa as well.
>
> Pros: It's very nice. Takes excellent video/pictures (up to 1080P video or 10MP
pics). Is easy to use (once you rtfm). Has tons of accessories to do all
kinds of good stuff. Has lots of settings for the specific application you want
to do. All kinds of mounts for darn near anything. Comes with an environmental
case impervious to just about anything short of gun fire. Other cases
for other applications are available. Free S/W for Mac or PC. Extremely easy
to download video/pics on my Mac. Can't speak to PC but probably as easy.
>
> Cons: It's as aerodynamic a (small) brick and would be a B**** to mount on the
exterior of a Europa. You'll need extra batteries for anything over a couple
hours. Each hour of operation requires about an hour of recharge. Recharge
is only done with the battery in the camera via USB connection. No external
battery recharger available. So you can't recharge one battery while using a
2nd battery in the camera.
>
> Maybe with some effort you could gin-up a mount for in front of the outrigger/outer
flap bracket. There's a remote control package (US$100) that might work
to operate it out there. If you are still under construction and have not put
the tip of the tail on, you might do something with that. Maybe in a wing
tip? There's a suction mount and/or various sticky mounts you might use inside
the windscreen. A couple different head mounts are available. More thought
needed...
>
> If it were only more aero!
>
> A couple pics:
>
> <IMG_3551em.jpg>
>
> <IMG_3555em.jpg>
>
> The Motorsport configuration comes with all this:
> <IMG_3556em.jpg>
>
>
> Blue skies & tailwinds,
> Bob Borger
> Europa XS Tri, Rotax 914, Airmaster C/S Prop.
> Little Toot Sport Biplane, Lycoming Thunderbolt AEIO-320 EXP
> 3705 Lynchburg Dr.
> Corinth, TX 76208-5331
> Cel: 817-992-1117
> rlborger@mac.com
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! --
|