Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:21 AM - Re: Static RPM - 912UL (Thom Riddle)
2. 04:39 AM - Re: Initial oil fill on new engine (Thom Riddle)
3. 06:50 AM - Re: Static RPM - 912UL (sonny)
4. 02:23 PM - Re: Static RPM - 912UL (NYTerminat@aol.com)
5. 03:19 PM - Re: Static RPM - 912UL (Duncan McFadyean)
6. 03:19 PM - Re: Static RPM - 912UL (sonny)
7. 03:57 PM - Re: Static RPM - 912UL (Dave)
8. 08:29 PM - Propeller Hub Attachment (Hugh McKay III)
9. 08:34 PM - Re: Initial oil fill on new engine (Hugh McKay III)
10. 09:12 PM - Re: Initial oil fill on new engine ()
11. 09:36 PM - Re: Propeller Hub Attachment (Jack Kuehn)
12. 09:53 PM - Re: Propeller Hub Attachment (NYTerminat@aol.com)
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: Static RPM - 912UL |
--> RotaxEngines-List message posted by: Thom Riddle <jtriddle@adelphia.net>
Sonny,
It is all a compromise. Think of a fixed pitch (or ground adjustable)
prop sort of like a single speed transmission in your car. If your
drive in low gear (low pitch) you can accelerate and climb hills like
crazy but your top speed is very limited. If you drive off in top gear,
the engine will lug and you will accelerate and climb hills slowly. In
some intermediate gear you will have a compromise between acceleration
and cruise speed. If you are driving a dune buggy then the top speed is
not important but if you are driving a faster car on the Autobahn, then
cruise speed is important. Same with airplanes with fixed pitch props.
The "proper" static rpm depends mostly on two things, one of which is
how fast your airplane is. The other is whether you want the best
cruise performance, best climb performance or a compromise between the
two. Lockwood's flat statement about static rpm of 5,500 rpm is
nonsense and does not take into account either of these two very
important variables.
I fly an Allegro 2000 with the 912UL (80 hp) engine and three blade
Woodcomp composite prop. Our prop is set for best cruise (5,500 rpm
with wide open throttle in straight and level flight) at density
altitudes below about 7,000'. Under these conditions our Allegro
reaches a top speed of 126 mph TAS which is about 15-16 mph over our
normal cruise speed at 75% power. WIth the prop set like this it gets
about 4,950 rpm static (no wind, which is important) and has decent
climb performance. If we reduced the pitch so that the static rpm was a
little higher, the climb would improve but we would not be able to fly
with wide open throttle in straight and level flight without exceeding
the 5,500 rpm max. cruise rpm and our normal cruise speed of 110 mph
would require a little higher rpm and a bit more fuel consumption.
However, we would be able to get 5,500 rpm at higher altitudes.
Your airplane is a bit faster than the Allegro and a lot faster than a
SkyRanger. The faster the airplane, the lower the static rpm (higher
the pitch) must be to reach best cruise speed in S&L flight. So I think
if you set your static rpm for initial flight at around 4,900-5,000 rpm
(no wind) then this will be a compromise setting that is good enough
for the first flight. If you ultimately want the prop to be set at best
cruise at low DAs then adjust the prop so that you get 5,500 rpm with
wide open throttle at low DA. Since you are moving to a higher
elevation airport, the best cruise pitch will probably be just a little
less (higher static rpm) than at sea level. If you want better climb
then the static rpm no more than 100 rpm for each test until you find
the ideal pitch for your most common flight profile. Good luck.
Thom in Buffalo
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Initial oil fill on new engine |
--> RotaxEngines-List message posted by: "Thom Riddle" <jtriddle@adelphia.net>
Hugh,
The three liters is the capacity of the Rotax Oil Tank to the full mark on the
dipstick. At a normal oil and filter change the oil cooler is not emptied and
it takes three liters to refill the tank. I normally put just three quarts in
which puts it roughly in the middle of the full/add range marks on the oil dipstick.
Do NOT overfill.
--------
Thom in Buffalo
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=50117#50117
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: Static RPM - 912UL |
--> RotaxEngines-List message posted by: sonny <lostpilot28@yahoo.com>
Jack & Thom,
Thanks to both for your replies. I really would have a difficult time (mentally)
if I set my static RPM to 5500, because my top speed would drop from the mid
150's to about 120 mph. I'd be burning a lot more fuel, and the worst part
is the possibility of engine damage from overspeed.
I think what I'm going to do is set my prop as Thom suggests at the new elevation.
It will be a bit finer, but I can live with that. Just for the record, I
flew into Big Bear (elev. is about 6500 and it was a warm day) and flying out
I had absolutely no problem climbing out with the (relatively) low static RPMs.
I was almost 200 lbs under gross, however.
Best regards,
Sonny W.
----- Original Message ----
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 4:19:57 AM
--> RotaxEngines-List message posted by: Thom Riddle <jtriddle@adelphia.net>
Sonny,
It is all a compromise. Think of a fixed pitch (or ground adjustable)
prop sort of like a single speed transmission in your car. If your
drive in low gear (low pitch) you can accelerate and climb hills like
crazy but your top speed is very limited. If you drive off in top gear,
the engine will lug and you will accelerate and climb hills slowly. In
some intermediate gear you will have a compromise between acceleration
and cruise speed. If you are driving a dune buggy then the top speed is
not important but if you are driving a faster car on the Autobahn, then
cruise speed is important. Same with airplanes with fixed pitch props.
The "proper" static rpm depends mostly on two things, one of which is
how fast your airplane is. The other is whether you want the best
cruise performance, best climb performance or a compromise between the
two. Lockwood's flat statement about static rpm of 5,500 rpm is
nonsense and does not take into account either of these two very
important variables.
I fly an Allegro 2000 with the 912UL (80 hp) engine and three blade
Woodcomp composite prop. Our prop is set for best cruise (5,500 rpm
with wide open throttle in straight and level flight) at density
altitudes below about 7,000'. Under these conditions our Allegro
reaches a top speed of 126 mph TAS which is about 15-16 mph over our
normal cruise speed at 75% power. WIth the prop set like this it gets
about 4,950 rpm static (no wind, which is important) and has decent
climb performance. If we reduced the pitch so that the static rpm was a
little higher, the climb would improve but we would not be able to fly
with wide open throttle in straight and level flight without exceeding
the 5,500 rpm max. cruise rpm and our normal cruise speed of 110 mph
would require a little higher rpm and a bit more fuel consumption.
However, we would be able to get 5,500 rpm at higher altitudes.
Your airplane is a bit faster than the Allegro and a lot faster than a
SkyRanger. The faster the airplane, the lower the static rpm (higher
the pitch) must be to reach best cruise speed in S&L flight. So I think
if you set your static rpm for initial flight at around 4,900-5,000 rpm
(no wind) then this will be a compromise setting that is good enough
for the first flight. If you ultimately want the prop to be set at best
cruise at low DAs then adjust the prop so that you get 5,500 rpm with
wide open throttle at low DA. Since you are moving to a higher
elevation airport, the best cruise pitch will probably be just a little
less (higher static rpm) than at sea level. If you want better climb
then the static rpm no more than 100 rpm for each test until you find
the ideal pitch for your most common flight profile. Good luck.
Thom in Buffalo
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: Static RPM - 912UL |
Sound like you would be a great candidate for an in flight adjustable pitch
prop.
Bob Spudis
N701ZX
CH701/912S
do not archive
In a message dated 7/27/2006 7:22:33 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
jtriddle@adelphia.net writes:
the engine will lug and you will accelerate and climb hills slowly. In
some intermediate gear you will have a compromise between acceleration
and cruise speed. If you are driving a dune buggy then the top speed is
not important but if you are driving a faster car on the Autobahn, then
cruise speed is important. Same with airplanes with fixed pitch props.
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: Static RPM - 912UL |
--> RotaxEngines-List message posted by: "Duncan McFadyean" <ami@mcfadyean.freeserve.co.uk>
My climb out rpm is 4800. How can this be "lugging" the engine when it
develops maximum torque and is at its maximum efficiency at hits point?!
But this is with the ULS engine that has a surfeit of power. If your
airframe is a bit marginal on 80hp then this may not work for you.
By happy coincidence, the prop setting that allows this also results in
5800rpm at Vne (Europa, 172mph), but who wants to hold Vne for more than 5
minutes.
Another factor to consider is balanced field performance (i.e. being able to
take off in a similar distance to the distance it takes to land). What's the
point of not being able to land back where you took off from? Or worse, vice
versa!
Duncan McF.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 3:52 AM
> --> RotaxEngines-List message posted by: sonny <lostpilot28@yahoo.com>
>
> Hello,
> I have a Pulsar XP with a Rotax 912UL. When I first bought the plane it
> had a GSC 2-blade prop but I switched it to a 3-blade carbon fiber prop
> (made by the same company as Kiev props). After installing the new prop,
> I initially set the static RPM for 5200 like the old prop, however on
> takeoff I nearly over sped the engine when I started to level out. I
> believe it was set at 22 degrees or so (it was a long time ago). So I
> tried several different settings to get the max in-flight RPM of about
> 5700.
>
> OK, here's the downside: My static RPM is about 4400. During takeoff it
> still accelerates quickly...the RPMs are usually around 4800 - 4900 on
> climb out. I would much rather prefer the RPMs to be in the higher range
> to maximize takeoff power, but so far I haven't noticed a problem with the
> lower RPMs.
>
> My questions are, do any of you have your static RPMs set this low? Does
> anyone think it's a problem that they're that low? I'm getting ready to
> move from sea-level to an airport that's at about 4000 ft. Should I set
> the static to be around 4800 RPMs and be careful not to over speed the
> engine at cruise? I don't like this idea as it's easy to get distracted,
> and Rotax recommends tearing the engine down in the event of an over
> speed. Any recommendations or advice is welcome. Thanks.
>
> Best regards,
> Sonny W.
> Pulsar XP N912SS
>
>
>
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: Static RPM - 912UL |
I agree...now if I could just find one that was inexpensive.
Regards,
Sonny W.
----- Original Message ----
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 2:21:46 PM
Sound like you would be a great candidate for an in flight adjustable pitch prop.
Bob Spudis
N701ZX
CH701/912S
do not archive
In a message dated 7/27/2006 7:22:33 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jtriddle@adelphia.net
writes:
the engine will lug and you will accelerate and climb hills slowly. In
some intermediate gear you will have a compromise between acceleration
and cruise speed. If you are driving a dune buggy then the top speed is
not important but if you are driving a faster car on the Autobahn, then
cruise speed is important. Same with airplanes with fixed pitch props.
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: Static RPM - 912UL |
--> RotaxEngines-List message posted by: "Dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
Duncan,
At 4800 rpm are you WOT ? If so you are infact lugging your engine.
http://www.rotec.com/engines/4sf.htm
How do you figure this ? <<develops maximum torque and is at its maximum
efficiency at hits point?!
>>
Dave
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 6:18 PM
> --> RotaxEngines-List message posted by: "Duncan McFadyean"
> <ami@mcfadyean.freeserve.co.uk>
>
> My climb out rpm is 4800. How can this be "lugging" the engine when it
> develops maximum torque and is at its maximum efficiency at hits point?!
> But this is with the ULS engine that has a surfeit of power. If your
> airframe is a bit marginal on 80hp then this may not work for you.
>
> By happy coincidence, the prop setting that allows this also results in
> 5800rpm at Vne (Europa, 172mph), but who wants to hold Vne for more than 5
> minutes.
>
> Another factor to consider is balanced field performance (i.e. being able
> to take off in a similar distance to the distance it takes to land).
> What's the point of not being able to land back where you took off from?
> Or worse, vice versa!
>
> Duncan McF.
> ----- Original Message -----
> Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 3:52 AM
>
>
>> --> RotaxEngines-List message posted by: sonny <lostpilot28@yahoo.com>
>>
>> Hello,
>> I have a Pulsar XP with a Rotax 912UL. When I first bought the plane it
>> had a GSC 2-blade prop but I switched it to a 3-blade carbon fiber prop
>> (made by the same company as Kiev props). After installing the new prop,
>> I initially set the static RPM for 5200 like the old prop, however on
>> takeoff I nearly over sped the engine when I started to level out. I
>> believe it was set at 22 degrees or so (it was a long time ago). So I
>> tried several different settings to get the max in-flight RPM of about
>> 5700.
>>
>> OK, here's the downside: My static RPM is about 4400. During takeoff it
>> still accelerates quickly...the RPMs are usually around 4800 - 4900 on
>> climb out. I would much rather prefer the RPMs to be in the higher range
>> to maximize takeoff power, but so far I haven't noticed a problem with
>> the lower RPMs.
>>
>> My questions are, do any of you have your static RPMs set this low? Does
>> anyone think it's a problem that they're that low? I'm getting ready to
>> move from sea-level to an airport that's at about 4000 ft. Should I set
>> the static to be around 4800 RPMs and be careful not to over speed the
>> engine at cruise? I don't like this idea as it's easy to get distracted,
>> and Rotax recommends tearing the engine down in the event of an over
>> speed. Any recommendations or advice is welcome. Thanks.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Sonny W.
>> Pulsar XP N912SS
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RotaxEngines-List
> http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
>
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: | Propeller Hub Attachment |
Gentlemen:
I am attaching the prop to my Rotax 912UL engine. The engine is installed in
an Allegro 2000. The prop is a WoodComp Klassic three blade, 63 dia. I also
am attaching a prop spinner that is supplied by the Allegro 2000
manufacturer. As I started the assembly I noticed that I seemed to have an
extra item, or maybe it is not an extra item. That is the reason for this
message. The item in question is a 5? diameter aluminum disc that has a
combination of holes at various diameters. There is no large hole in the
center of this item, so it cannot go on to the propeller flange that is on
the gearbox shaft. The WoodComp instruction manual does not show this item.
I have assembled the WoodComp prop hub as follows:
1. Spinner flange is placed against the gearbox flange.
2. The WoodComp hub is placed against the spinner flange.
3. The six attaching bolts are then inserted, tourqed
appropriately, and safety wired.
4. The spinner is then attached to the spinner flange.
This leaves the disc. What do I do with it? Help!
Hugh McKay
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: | Initial oil fill on new engine |
--> RotaxEngines-List message posted by: "Hugh McKay III" <hgmckay@bellsouth.net>
Ron: I am following what I believe is the correct up dated manual,
"Installation Manual for Rotax 912UL Aircraft Engine", Edition 2 of 1997 03
26. It came with my engine. What do you mean "There are a few things where
following your manual is not the best thing to do"?
Hugh McKay
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-rotaxengines-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 1:39 AM
--> RotaxEngines-List message posted by: <rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us>
Hello Hugh
I think if you follow the manual, there is potential to damage your motor.
Search here:
http://www.rotax-owner.com/sdocs.htm
SB-912-036 Inspection for Correct Venting Of The Oil System For Rotax 912
& 914 Rev. 1 8/2002 206
It has been established that damage of the engine valve train on the
ROTAX(r) 912/914 series engines may be possible due to incorrect venting of
the lubrication system. Click Here for more info.
Allocate yourself some time, and search "ALL" information on your motor.
Read a few a day and update your manuals as you go.
There are a few things where following your manual is not the best thing
to do. You need to follow an updated manual.
Ron Parigoris
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: | Initial oil fill on new engine |
--> RotaxEngines-List message posted by: <rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us>
Hello Hugh
"Ron: I am following what I believe is the correct up dated manual,
> "Installation Manual for Rotax 912UL Aircraft Engine", Edition 2 of 1997 03
> 26. It came with my engine. What do you mean "There are a few things where
> following your manual is not the best thing to do"?"
You are not going to like what I am going to say because it means more
work than you would care to put towards updating your manual.
Rotax, just like Continental and Lycoming do not offer a manual that is up
to date when you get your engine. They expect you to search out all
updates and pertinent information and incorporate. I spelled out how to do
it.
For 1 thing as I explained in prior E-Mail is their updated way of venting
(or priming) your engine with oil. Make absolute sure your manual is up to
date on this, if you follow their old recommendation you could hurt motor!
There is all sorts of things you should be aware of not in your manual,
using Whacker silicon based thermal conductive compound on spark plugs,
and proper torque, make sure you have updated float pivot pins, your
ignition trigger pickup coils are not defective ones, you have updated
kevlar reinforced boots for carb to manifold, you have latest recommended
jets and jet needle settings, just recent bad hardware check, check
trigger coil gap, read on their recommendation to use a oil thermostat,
read on proper pressure radiator caps, read on how to use Evans coolant
and how to flush and how to change manual if using traditional coolant, if
using traditional coolant exact what type to not cause corrosion, how you
should only use distilled water, make sure you have oil connections on
bottom of motor set for tractor or pusher, newest information on gearbox,.
BTW you do understand that the helical gears on gearbox side load springs
during cylinder firing, and give back some energy when not firing,
critical to long life to have motor run smooth, follow bulletin for cold
weather carb settings, importance of getting float bowl vent in static
air, read about heavy duty starter (if you have S replace old style before
you start), make sure you have new style dipstick, read about how to
tighten carb boots or install spacers so no over tightening, read about
bad oil filters.
This is just what fell out my head, probably 90% accurate, there is alot
more in my updated manual.
Ron Parigoris
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: Propeller Hub Attachment |
--> RotaxEngines-List message posted by: Jack Kuehn <jkuehn@mountaintime.myrf.net>
I think that is the disk that Rotax sends with the engine, and the only
thing I know about it is: Don't use it! I have no idea why they send it.
Jack
Hugh McKay III wrote:
> Gentlemen:
>
> I am attaching the prop to my Rotax 912UL engine. The engine is
> installed in an Allegro 2000. The prop is a WoodComp Klassic three
> blade, 63 dia. I also am attaching a prop spinner that is supplied by
> the Allegro 2000 manufacturer. As I started the assembly I noticed
> that I seemed to have an extra item, or maybe it is not an extra item.
> That is the reason for this message. The item in question is a 5
> diameter aluminum disc that has a combination of holes at various
> diameters. There is no large hole in the center of this item, so it
> cannot go on to the propeller flange that is on the gearbox shaft. The
> WoodComp instruction manual does not show this item. I have assembled
> the WoodComp prop hub as follows:
>
> 1. Spinner flange is placed against the gearbox flange.
>
> 2. The WoodComp hub is placed against the spinner flange.
>
> 3. The six attaching bolts are then inserted, tourqed appropriately,
> and safety wired.
>
> 4. The spinner is then attached to the spinner flange.
>
> This leaves the disc. What do I do with it? Help!
>
> Hugh McKay
>
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: Propeller Hub Attachment |
Hugh,
That is how I installed my Klassic on a Zenith 701. The part you described
came with the Rotax engine, looks to me like some kind of template.
Bob Spudis
N701ZX CH-701/912ULS
Do not archive
In a message dated 7/27/2006 11:30:18 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
hgmckay@bellsouth.net writes:
Gentlemen:
I am attaching the prop to my Rotax 912UL engine. The engine is installed i
n
an Allegro 2000. The prop is a WoodComp Klassic three blade, 63=9D di
a. I also
am attaching a prop spinner that is supplied by the Allegro 2000
manufacturer. As I started the assembly I noticed that I seemed to have an
extra item,
or maybe it is not an extra item. That is the reason for this message. The
item in question is a 5=85=9B=9D diameter aluminum disc that has a
combination of
holes at various diameters. There is no large hole in the center of this it
em, so
it cannot go on to the propeller flange that is on the gearbox shaft. The
WoodComp instruction manual does not show this item. I have assembled the
WoodComp prop hub as follows:
1. Spinner flange is placed against the gearbox flange.
2. The WoodComp hub is placed against the spinner flange
.
3. The six attaching bolts are then inserted, tourqed
appropriately, and safety wired.
4. The spinner is then attached to the spinner flange.
This leaves the disc. What do I do with it? Help!
Hugh McKay
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! --
|