Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:19 AM - Too much snow in the Catskills (Airgriff2@aol.com)
2. 05:25 AM - fuel systems (Jim Gerken)
3. 06:09 AM - Re: Too much snow in the Catskills (Richard Pike)
4. 06:29 AM - Re: Pull Start 503 (johnjung@compusenior.com)
5. 07:43 AM - Re: Kolb-List Digest: 30 Msgs - 01/09/03 (Jeffrey Jones)
6. 08:02 AM - Re: Pull Start 503 (H MITCHELL)
7. 08:37 AM - Re: Trailer building (H MITCHELL)
8. 09:27 AM - Re: fuel systems (CaptainRon)
9. 10:26 AM - Re: Pull Start 503 (Richard Pike)
10. 10:36 AM - Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability (Jack & Louise Hart)
11. 11:14 AM - Re: Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability (John Hauck)
12. 11:32 AM - Re: Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability (Christopher Armstrong)
13. 11:37 AM - Re: Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability (John Hauck)
14. 01:07 PM - Re: Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability ()
15. 01:50 PM - Re: Re: Kolb-List Digest: 30 Msgs - 01/09/03 (Johann G.)
16. 02:33 PM - Re: Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability (Jack & Louise Hart)
17. 03:21 PM - Re: Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability (GeoR38@aol.com)
18. 04:37 PM - Re: Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability (GeoR38@aol.com)
19. 04:46 PM - Lakeland already ! (H MITCHELL)
20. 06:15 PM - BARNSTORMERS FREE CLASSIFIED ADS (Bob Bean)
21. 06:33 PM - sun-n-fun (Wayne)
22. 06:41 PM - Builder/Pilot Database Monthly Annoucement (dama)
23. 07:09 PM - Re: Trailer building (Gary robert voigt)
24. 07:15 PM - Re: sun-n-fun (Larry Bourne)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Too much snow in the Catskills |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Airgriff2@aol.com
A few of us guys spent last Sunday removing snow from our hangars at our
small field, after a 20" storm. One hangar we put up this past summer is a
quanset style, made of metal, and appeared very strong. Because of the height
and shape, it was'nt accessible to reach the snow. Yesterday the owner of a
beautiful Flight Star got the phone call, "you better get on down to the
airport". The center of the hangar caved in compleatly to the ground
destroying the plane. It seems that the snow was ok until it warmed for a
couple days and then it obsorbed alot of moisture and became real heavy. We
all would have bet anything that this style structure would have carried 10'
of snow ? Each panel had 250 nuts and bolts attaching it to the next one. We
can all look back with hindsight, but Dave didn't have insurance.
You can guess that "insurance " seems to be the main topic at the field,
other than wondering how much galvanized metal is bringing these days. I
was wondering if some on the list who think they are getting a good price on
insurance, for a 2 place exp., pass on information as far as: Company:
Ground or in air
coverage
Cost
Phone #
This may be benificial to others also.
Thanks in advance
Fly Safe
Bob Griffin
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 |
|
01/10/2003 07:24:40 AM
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Jim Gerken" <gerken@us.ibm.com>
With all the discussion of fuel pumps and systems, I thought I'd share
what I have been using. Currently I have a pair of gascolators feeding a
filter manifold. The manifold has three spin-on fuel filters each feeding
their own 3/4" fuel log to two faucet inline pumps (six faucets total),
which routes to the engine mounting plate where there are two Mikuni Pulse
pumps, "T"d together to feed two carbs after two more filters. As a
backup, I have a 2" trash pump with 9 hp honda engine with direct pickup in
the left tank, output nozzle aimed at the carb air inlets.
OK, if you're still reading and not laughing I should tell you this is a
joke before you head down to Northern to buy a trash pump.
To maybe reassure some of us who are using less elaborate fuel systems
than others, in all honesty I am still using the stock Kolb solution with
perfect track record. This is as dead-simple as a two-tank fuel system
gets. ONE Pulse pump, fed by TWO filters (one from each tank pickup), one
top-mounted pickup per tank, no in-tank dangling screen, leaving water in
bottom of tank. There are NO selector valves or shutoff valves in the
system, so the only way to run the engine out of fuel is to actually use it
all up. There is NO squeeze bulb primer in the system, and the choke
cables were also removed. Instead I run the push/pull primer fed by 1/8
line, fed from its own seperate fuel tank pickup tube and filter. The
primer used to be "T"d into the main system after the filters and before
the Pulse pump, but it dawned on me that if the 1/8 line fell off anywhere,
the Pulse pump would lose its prime since it could then suck air into the
lines where the 1/8 line fell off. So now the primer line is independent.
My Pulse pump is fed fuel stabilizer when left inactive for more than a
month, and the Pulse is rebuilt with the Mikuni kit every other winter.
This year it was replaced since the casting was found to have cracks in it
(see Matronics photoshare page or previous post in Archives by me for
details). The tanks are vacuumed with the squeeze primer/fuel line/copper
tube extension deal I made up, this is done every couple weeks and
resulting gallon of fuel is run thru pickup. Filters are changed yearly
although that is probably overkill. All low pressure lines (before the
pump) are clamped with plastic squeeze clamps, black ones which I reuse a
couple times. After the pump (higher pressure) the lines are clamped with
stainless Oetiker stepless clamps.
I wonder if the stock solution was a single faucet electric pump, would
guys be adding Mikuni Pulse pumps?
Jim
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: Too much snow in the Catskills |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike <rwpike@preferred.com>
I went with EAA's new carrier, Falcon Insurance, the phone # is 512-891-8473.
Costing $600 a year to get $1,000,000 liability, $100,000 each passenger,
and $15,000 coverage on the MKIII for not in flight, not in motion coverage.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
At 07:18 AM 1/10/03 -0500, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: Airgriff2@aol.com
> You can guess that "insurance " seems to be the main topic at the field,
>other than wondering how much galvanized metal is bringing these days. I
>was wondering if some on the list who think they are getting a good price on
>insurance, for a 2 place exp., pass on information as far as: Company:
> Ground or in air
>coverage
> Cost
> Phone #
>This may be benificial to others also.
>Thanks in advance
>
>Fly Safe
>Bob Griffin
>
>
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: Pull Start 503 |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "johnjung@compusenior.com" <johnjung@compusenior.com>
David,
The 377 can be difficult to pull-start from inflight, but I did it many
times. The 503 is so difficult to start from a seated position, that I
never shut mine down in flight. I have electric now and I really like it.
John Jung
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: Kolb-List Digest: 30 Msgs - 01/09/03 |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Jeffrey Jones <jeffrey.jones@fuse.net>
> >
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 06:49:37 AM PST US
> From: dixieshack@webtv.net (Mike and Dixie Shackelford)
> Subject: Kolb-List: Re: fuel pump plumbing
> message of Wed, 8 Jan 2003 23:56:10 -0800
>
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: dixieshack@webtv.net (Mike and Dixie Shackelford)
>
> 'Morning guys.....haven't noticed anyone mention a fuel "manifold"
> when using a Facet
> and Mikuni either in series or parallel.
> Buddy of mine recently sold his FS that had a manifold just under
> the carbs on his 503. The manifold received fuel from the pulse and the
> Facet both (when the Facet was operating).
> Each carb received its fuel from the manifold.
> The pulse pump was located as per Kolb prints, and the Facet mounted on
> the fuse tube just ahead of the fuel tank(s). He planned to operate the
> Facet on take-off and landing only and to prime the carbs prior to
> engine start.
> His 503 had the E box with electric start, allowing the possibility of
> an in-flight restart should the pulse pump fail. His thinking NOT mine.
> Any system being only as strong as the weakest link, the possibiity
> of a pulse pump diaphragm failure flooding the crankcase still exists.
> Only way to eliminate THAT possibility that I can see would be to
> eliminate the Mikuni altogether and use two Facets.....and on, and
> on....
>
>
> Flame away.....it's cold here in WV....
>
> Mike
>
> do not archive
>
>
>
> Mike/Others,
I'm the guy that bought the "beautiful" Fire Star you are referring to. On my
return home to Northern Kentucky from Florida, I stopped by the Fly In. Beauford
was kind enough to take some pics of the Fire Star loaded in the cargo trailer.
He poster them around Oct. 16th 02. Here are some of the links. I have
since removed the two fuel filters as shown in the photos, changed over to the
heel brakes and added the full encloser per the plans.
The seller did a wonderful job on the plane and I really enjoy having the E box
w/electric start and gaining a new friend. Coming from an Ultra Star....it
certainly was a step up.
As John H. and others have mentioned, the electric start is wonderful. A couple
primers and just turn the key!
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/beauford@tampabay.rr.com.A.10.12.2002/dsc00584.jpg
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/beauford@tampabay.rr.com.A.10.12.2002/dsc00585.jpg
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/beauford@tampabay.rr.com.A.10.12.2002/dsc00580.jpg
Jeff
Burlington Ky
BTW......have an Ultra Star for sale.
Do Not Archive
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: Pull Start 503 |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "H MITCHELL" <mitchmnd@msn.com>
David et al,
Three of my four Rotax engines have been 503 pull starts. I used them because they
saved the weight and complexity of a battery, solenoid, cabling and starter
motor. This was critical if you are trying to make the FireFly UL weight limit.
I suspect it amounted to ~ 10 Lbs. To make it easier to pull I rigged a nylon
fairlead in the starter rope ring to reduce friction. It helped but I was
still not able to pull start from the seat because the engine has to be turning
fairly fast to start. I also designed a retrofit pulley to fit in the ring but
never got to test it. Yes, my FireFly made the weight limit and I have a weight
ticket to prove it.
Bottom line: if weight is not a major problem, go with the starter. Safety, convenience
and the ability to air-start make the extra weight acceptable.
Duane the plane Mitchell, FireFly 447, SN 007, Ivo, 130 Hrs, Mk3/912 in hangar.
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: TAILDRAGGER503@aol.com
Subject: Kolb-List: Pull Start 503
--> Kolb-List message posted by: TAILDRAGGER503@aol.com
Hello Kolb Flyers, is it easy enough to pull start in flight in the FSII with
the 503 or do you recommend the electric starters for someone that is in good
shape?
David Snyder
Building FSII
Happy NewYear
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: Trailer building |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "H MITCHELL" <mitchmnd@msn.com>
Ed et al,
Sorry I was not able to get back to you sooner but today was the first chance I
had to weigh the tongue of my trailer. With my Firefly and the loading ramps
(probably 30# loaded at rear of trailer) on board the tongue weighs 328#. This
is a lot more than I would have guessed but she tows so well behind my Ford 150
I keep forgetting she is back there.
This rig is two years old now and I have not had a bit of trouble with any of it.
Duane the plane Mitchell, FireFly, 477, Ivo, 130 hours.
----- Original Message -----
From: DAquaNut@aol.com
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Trailer building
--> Kolb-List message posted by: DAquaNut@aol.com
Thanks to all who who responded to my Trailer questions:
Now that I have made some final decisions I will need to find the least
expensive place to purchase some F78 -14 trailer Tires.
Thanks Again to All
Ed Diebel
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: fuel systems |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: CaptainRon <CaptainRon@theriver.com>
1/10/03 6:24Jim Gerken
> I wonder if the stock solution was a single faucet electric pump, would
> guys be adding Mikuni Pulse pumps?
====================================
Heck yes, and some would probably install an engine gravity fed header
tank,,, just to make sure!!
Of course the safest thing would be to install all the Kolb factory pilot
controls next to a Lazy-Boy seat, set it up in front of the TV watch the
Discovery channel, listening to elavator music and making engine noises
through the lips.
:-)
do not archive.
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: Pull Start 503 |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Richard Pike <rwpike@preferred.com>
I have used the Rotax 503 pull start system in the Maxair Drifter with good
success. You run the cord along the floorboards to a point near your right
knee, then around a pully, so that you pull toward yourself instead of over
your shoulder. Don't know if this is feasable with a Kolb.
Richard Pike
MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
At 11:02 AM 1/10/03 -0500, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "H MITCHELL" <mitchmnd@msn.com>
>
>David et al,
>
>Three of my four Rotax engines have been 503 pull starts. I used them
>because they saved the weight and complexity of a battery, solenoid, cabling
>and starter motor. This was critical if you are trying to make the FireFly
>UL weight limit. I suspect it amounted to ~ 10 Lbs. To make it easier to
>pull I rigged a nylon fairlead in the starter rope ring to reduce friction.
>It helped but I was still not able to pull start from the seat because the
>engine has to be turning fairly fast to start. I also designed a retrofit
>pulley to fit in the ring but never got to test it. Yes, my FireFly made the
>weight limit and I have a weight ticket to prove it.
>Bottom line: if weight is not a major problem, go with the starter. Safety,
>convenience and the ability to air-start make the extra weight acceptable.
>
>Duane the plane Mitchell, FireFly 447, SN 007, Ivo, 130 Hrs, Mk3/912 in
hangar.
>
>do not archive
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: TAILDRAGGER503@aol.com
>To: kolb-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Kolb-List: Pull Start 503
>
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: TAILDRAGGER503@aol.com
>
>Hello Kolb Flyers, is it easy enough to pull start in flight in the FSII with
>the 503 or do you recommend the electric starters for someone that is in good
>shape?
>
>David Snyder
>
>Building FSII
>Happy NewYear
>
>
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: | Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart@ldd.net>
This has been an interesting thread.
There seems to be some worry about diaphragm rupture. The only a few reasons a
diaphragm would rupture. Excessive force being applied to the diaphragm could
happen in two ways, and both are controlled by engine crankcase pressure. So
it is very unlikely that the pulse line will ever supply such a high or low pressure
to rupture the diaphragm. The most likely reason for failure would be
fatigue of the diaphragm which would be dependent upon the stretching and flexing
of the diaphragm.
If one is running a Rotax 447 at 5,500 rpm, Rotax says it will burn 3.25 gallons
per hour. At 231 cubic inches per gallon this is 750.75 cubic inches per hour.
In an hour the engine is going to turn a deliver 60 x 5,500 = 330,000 pulses
to the fuel pump diaphragm. If one divides this number into the fuel pumped,
you get the fuel delivered per pulse, which is, 3.25 / 330,000 = .002275
cubic inches. Using a conservative measurement of one inch for the diaphragm
diameter, the diaphragm area that is going to do the pumping is .785 inches squared.
Dividing this into the fuel pulse volume gives a diaphragm displacement
of .0035 inches. The diaphragm thickness is .0055 of an inch so the diaphragm
is moving a little more than half of its thickness.
The small displacement per pulse is why these pumps seem to last forever.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
do not archive
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart@ldd.net
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: Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck <jhauck@sw.rr.com>
> The small displacement per pulse is why these pumps seem to last forever.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
Jack/Gents:
The inlet and outlet flapper valves will go long
before the diaphram has a chance to ruture.
john h
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: | Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475@CenturyTel.net>
Dividing this into the fuel pulse volume gives a diaphragm displacement of
.0035 inches. The diaphragm thickness is .0055 of an inch so the diaphragm
is moving a little more than half of its thickness.
The small displacement per pulse is why these pumps seem to last forever.
good analysis but I think you ought to multiply by some pumping efficiency
factor. lets say the pump and check valves and the drag of all the tubing
and the resistance of the fuel to being increased in pressure results in an
efficiency of 20%... then you would have to multiply your deflections by 5
giving .175 of more then 1/8 inch... probably more close to reality.
These SWAGs are so fun, another way to do this would be to use the know
crank case pressure differential times the diaphragm area to get the force
on the diaphragm and then using the elastic modulus of the diaphragm
material and its thickness calculate the strain required to get that stress
force... of course the strain in a disk of material constrained at the
periphery and pulled sideways by pressure force is probably a bit tricky to
calculate, lots of calculus would be involved...anybody game?
Topher
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: Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Hauck <jhauck@sw.rr.com>
> force... of course the strain in a disk of material constrained at the
> periphery and pulled sideways by pressure force is probably a bit tricky to
> calculate, lots of calculus would be involved...anybody game?
>
> Topher
Topher/Gang:
Not really.
Think I'll go out and do some user testing on the
diaphram instead. :-)
john h
DO NOT ARCHIVE
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: Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: <rowedl@highstream.net>
> Psych!!
Do not archive
>
>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 30 Msgs - 01/09/03 |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Johann G." <johann-g@talnet.is>
Hello Jeff.
I would like to ask you about the E type gearbox on your 503 Firestar.
Did you or the builder have to do any modifications to the engine mount to
fit the E-box ?
I had heard that this was required.
Very interested to add the electric starter on the back instead of the front
side of engine. I also have the VLS BRS system in the front of engine, and
no space for the standard recoil electric starter from Rotax.
Best regards,
Johann G.
Iceland.
Firestar II.
http://www.gi.is/fis/
Do not Archive
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: | Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Jack & Louise Hart <jbhart@ldd.net>
At 01:32 PM 1/10/03 -0600, you wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Christopher Armstrong" <cen33475@CenturyTel.net>
>
> Dividing this into the fuel pulse volume gives a diaphragm displacement of
>.0035 inches. The diaphragm thickness is .0055 of an inch so the diaphragm
>is moving a little more than half of its thickness.
>
>The small displacement per pulse is why these pumps seem to last forever.
>
>
>good analysis but I think you ought to multiply by some pumping efficiency
>factor. lets say the pump and check valves and the drag of all the tubing
>and the resistance of the fuel to being increased in pressure results in an
>efficiency of 20%... then you would have to multiply your deflections by 5
>giving .175 of more then 1/8 inch... probably more close to reality.
>
Topher,
At 20% efficiency diaphragm displacement would be .0035 x 5 = .0175 inches which
is a little greater than 1/64th of an inch.
The thing one must remember is that the pump can only supply the fuel that the
carburetor float valves will let pass on into the engine. There will be some
volume absorbed on the high pressure side due to pulse pump output pressure expanding
the tubing connecting the pump to the carburetor and this expanded volume
may reflow into the pump to close the high pressure valve. Since the pump
cannot supply more volume than demanded by the engine, the diaphragm will engorge
on the pump side and extend toward the pulse fitting side of the housing,
but even so the diaphragm displacements are going to be very small. At these
low flow rates, the tubing friction losses are probably not significant.
Thanks, helping to smooth along a slow, cold, windy, non-flying day.
Jack B. Hart FF004
Jackson, MO
do not archive
Jack & Louise Hart
jbhart@ldd.net
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: | Re: Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: GeoR38@aol.com
In a message dated 1/10/03 1:37:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, jbhart@ldd.net
writes:
> If one is running a Rotax 447 at 5,500 rpm, Rotax says it will burn 3.25
> gallons per hour. At 231 cubic inches per gallon this is 750.75 cubic
> inches per hour. In an hour the engine is going to turn a deliver 60 x
> 5,500 = 330,000 pulses to the fuel pump diaphragm. If one divides this
> number into the fuel pumped, you get the fuel delivered per pulse, which
> is, 3.25 / 330,000 = .002275 cubic inches. Using a conservative
> measurement of one inch for the diaphragm diameter, the diaphragm area that
> is going to do the pumping is .785 inches squared. Dividing this into the
> fuel pulse volume gives a diaphragm displacement of .0035 inches. The
> diaphragm thickness is .0055 of an inch so the diaphragm is moving a little
> more than half of its thickness.
>
> The small displacement per pulse is why these pumps seem to last forever.
>
> Jack B. Hart FF004
> Jackson, MO
>
>
To this I merely say, Jack, God bless your mathmatical hart.
George Randolph
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: Mikuni Pulse Pump Reliability |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: GeoR38@aol.com
In a message dated 01/10/2003 2:33:48 PM Eastern Standard Time,
cen33475@centurytel.net writes:
>
> Dividing this into the fuel pulse volume gives a diaphragm displacement of
> .0035 inches. The diaphragm thickness is .0055 of an inch so the diaphragm
> is moving a little more than half of its thickness.
>
> The small displacement per pulse is why these pumps seem to last forever.
>
>
> good analysis but I think you ought to multiply by some pumping efficiency
> factor. lets say the pump and check valves and the drag of all the tubing
> and the resistance of the fuel to being increased in pressure results in an
> efficiency of 20%... then you would have to multiply your deflections by 5
> giving .175 of more then 1/8 inch... probably more close to reality.
>
> These SWAGs are so fun, another way to do this would be to use the know
> crank case pressure differential times the diaphragm area to get the force
> on the diaphragm and then using the elastic modulus of the diaphragm
> material and its thickness calculate the strain required to get that stress
> force... of course the strain in a disk of material constrained at the
> periphery and pulled sideways by pressure force is probably a bit tricky to
> calculate, lots of calculus would be involved...anybody game?
>
> Topher
>
E=LDi/dt......its about all I remember now....does it help?
George Randolph
........sorry :-)
Do not archive
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: | Lakeland already ! |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "H MITCHELL" <mitchmnd@msn.com>
Johann, are we going to see you at the Lakeland fly-in this year? I'm planning
to be there during the first few days and looking forward to seeing the whole
gang. It's not too early to start planning. Anticipation is half the fun.
Duane the Plane
do not archive
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: | BARNSTORMERS FREE CLASSIFIED ADS |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Bob Bean <slyck@frontiernet.net>
Must have been a heck of a "ground loop" -good fixer-upper though..
-BB, frozen in the northwoods , do not archive
http://www.barnstormers2000.com/
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Wayne" <boyter@mcsi.net>
"HI Gang"
I'm planning a trip to SUN-N-FUN this year, And I live on the west coast.
I fly a mark III, I'm very interested to meet some fellow kolb pilots.
And to look at some more kolbs, There is not very many on the west coast.
What are the best days & time to attend?
Wayne Boyter
Kolb Mark III
Rotax 582
255 Hrs.
P.S. My kolb was a tri gear when I first bought it with 2' feet cut off the tail
boom,
I flown it that way for 100 hrs. and then converted back to stock, .
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: | Builder/Pilot Database Monthly Annoucement |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "dama" <dama@mindspring.com>
Don't forget about the database located at...
http://www.springeraviation.net/
for finding others that share your fine taste of flying contraptions.
Kip
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: | Re: Trailer building |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Gary robert voigt" <johndeereantique@qwest.net>
Hello gang and all... that tounge weight as you know is ok...a rule to remember
is your tounge weight is always suppose to be 10 to 15 % of your gross weight...
that means you should be hauling around
3200 - 4800 lbs of gross weight which i dought you are. your truck and trailer
are not probably level with the ground and are in some type of a pitch at the
tag or ball, if you had a 3/4 ton it would be ok but you don't. as i said you
will get by in life this way but it is harder on the truck... you might even look
into load levelers at some point in
time. just my advice and still pulling john deere tractors...
thanks,
Gary r. voigt
H MITCHELL wrote:
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "H MITCHELL" <mitchmnd@msn.com>
>
> Ed et al,
>
> Sorry I was not able to get back to you sooner but today was the first chance
I had to weigh the tongue of my trailer. With my Firefly and the loading ramps
(probably 30# loaded at rear of trailer) on board the tongue weighs 328#. This
is a lot more than I would have guessed but she tows so well behind my Ford
150 I keep forgetting she is back there.
>
> This rig is two years old now and I have not had a bit of trouble with any of
it.
>
> Duane the plane Mitchell, FireFly, 477, Ivo, 130 hours.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: DAquaNut@aol.com
> To: kolb-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Trailer building
>
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: DAquaNut@aol.com
>
> Thanks to all who who responded to my Trailer questions:
> Now that I have made some final decisions I will need to find the least
> expensive place to purchase some F78 -14 trailer Tires.
>
> Thanks Again to All
> Ed Diebel
>
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Larry Bourne" <biglar@gogittum.com>
Where do you live on the Best Coast, Wayne ?? I also plan to attend
SnF......................gotta visit the Least Coast once in a while, ya
know. Lar. Do not Archive.
Larry Bourne
Palm Springs, CA
Kolb Mk III - Vamoose
www.gogittum.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne" <boyter@mcsi.net>
Subject: Kolb-List: sun-n-fun
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Wayne" <boyter@mcsi.net>
>
> "HI Gang"
>
> I'm planning a trip to SUN-N-FUN this year, And I live on the west coast.
> I fly a mark III, I'm very interested to meet some fellow kolb pilots.
> And to look at some more kolbs, There is not very many on the west coast.
> What are the best days & time to attend?
>
> Wayne Boyter
> Kolb Mark III
> Rotax 582
> 255 Hrs.
>
>
> P.S. My kolb was a tri gear when I first bought it with 2' feet cut off
the tail boom,
> I flown it that way for 100 hrs. and then converted back to stock, .
>
>
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! --
|