Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:25 AM - Re: Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? (Bruce Swayze)
2. 12:53 AM - Re: ELT antenna mounting RV8A (Jack Lockamy)
3. 01:21 AM - Re: RV3-List: RV-3 Alieron bracket (Bruce Stewart)
4. 01:29 AM - Re: RV3-List: RV-3 Alieron bracket (Bruce Stewart)
5. 01:44 AM - Re: Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? (Bob U.)
6. 04:15 AM - Re: Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? (Dana Overall)
7. 04:22 AM - Re: Chicago Pneumatic air drill (Rick Galati)
8. 04:34 AM - Re: Re: Prop indexing (WFACT01@aol.com)
9. 04:52 AM - Re: Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? (ray sheffield)
10. 04:58 AM - Re: Re: Prop indexing How to ?? (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
11. 05:51 AM - Re: RV-3 Alieron bracket (Doug Gray)
12. 05:54 AM - Sun 100 Air Race (RV_8 Pilot)
13. 06:08 AM - Aux Oil Pump (Vincent Welch)
14. 06:12 AM - Specific Fuel Consumption (n6jx@earthlink.net)
15. 06:22 AM - Re: Prop indexing - reply (P M Condon)
16. 07:09 AM - Re: Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? (Wiethe, Philip (P.J.))
17. 07:17 AM - Re: Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption] (Trampas)
18. 07:20 AM - Re: Aux Oil Pump (Wiethe, Philip (P.J.))
19. 07:32 AM - Re: Aux Oil Pump (linn walters)
20. 07:55 AM - Re: Specific Fuel Consumption (Denis Walsh)
21. 08:10 AM - Re: Carb Vs Fuel Injection (Shemp)
22. 08:14 AM - Re: Exiting an RV in Flight - Ideas (cecilth@juno.com)
23. 08:16 AM - Re: Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption] (Bob U.)
24. 08:17 AM - Re: Aux Oil Pump (Scott Bilinski)
25. 08:50 AM - LightSpeed Engineering Ignition coil mounting (Vince Himsl)
26. 08:50 AM - Christian Inverted Oil System (Scott Brown)
27. 08:54 AM - Re: ELT antenna mounting RV8A (glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com)
28. 08:54 AM - Re: Fuel selector was airspeeds of RV8/8A with 0-320 engine (glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com)
29. 08:54 AM - Re: ELT antenna mounting RV8A (glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com)
30. 08:59 AM - Re: airspeeds of RV8/8A with 0-320 engine (glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com)
31. 09:00 AM - Re: Specific Fuel Consumption (Vic Jacko)
32. 09:01 AM - Re: LightSpeed Engineering Ignition coil mounting (RGray67968@aol.com)
33. 09:06 AM - Lord Engine Mount Torque (Vince Himsl)
34. 09:09 AM - Re: Specific Fuel Consumption (kempthornes)
35. 09:15 AM - Re: LightSpeed Engineering Ignition coil mounting (Vic Jacko)
36. 09:25 AM - Re: LightSpeed Engineering Ignition coil mounting (Scott Bilinski)
37. 09:34 AM - Re:Prop Indexing (Joe & Jan Connell)
38. 09:35 AM - Re: Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption] (n6jx@earthlink.net)
39. 09:58 AM - Microair 760 (GMC)
40. 10:09 AM - Re: Re: Prop indexing (SportAV8R@aol.com)
41. 10:14 AM - Re: Microair 760 (N13eer@aol.com)
42. 10:14 AM - Re: Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption] (Michael McGee)
43. 10:18 AM - Re: propeller indexing and engine smoothness (czechsix@juno.com)
44. 10:24 AM - Re: Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption] (Trampas)
45. 10:41 AM - Re: ELT antenna mounting RV8A (HCRV6@aol.com)
46. 10:55 AM - propeller indexing: Lycoming response (SportAV8R@aol.com)
47. 10:57 AM - Re: Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? (HCRV6@aol.com)
48. 10:59 AM - Re: Microair 760 (Joe Hine)
49. 11:20 AM - Re: Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption] ()
50. 11:20 AM - Re: Microair 760 (RVEIGHTA@aol.com)
51. 11:26 AM - Garage Sale has Ended (czechsix@juno.com)
52. 11:37 AM - Re: Microair 760 (Jim Daniels)
53. 11:53 AM - Re: Re: Prop indexing - reply (Pat Perry)
54. 12:15 PM - Re: Microair 760 (Vic Jacko)
55. 12:15 PM - Re: Microair 760 (Vic Jacko)
56. 12:32 PM - Re: Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? (kempthornes)
57. 01:07 PM - Re: Specific Fuel Consumption (Mickey Coggins)
58. 01:08 PM - Re: Prop indexing (Stucklen, Frederic IFC)
59. 01:15 PM - Re: Prop indexing (Stucklen, Frederic IFC)
60. 01:43 PM - Re: Microair 760 (Bob U.)
61. 01:59 PM - Re: Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption] (Bob U.)
62. 02:04 PM - Re: Microair 760 (PASSPAT@aol.com)
63. 02:18 PM - Re: Re:Prop Indexing (smoothweasel@juno.com)
64. 02:45 PM - Test (Jim Bower)
65. 03:03 PM - horizontal stab and shim to level (RV8ter@aol.com)
66. 03:07 PM - Exiting an RV in Flight - Ideas (cecilth@juno.com)
67. 03:25 PM - Re: Re: Prop indexing (Harvey Sigmon)
68. 04:29 PM - Re: Re: Prop indexing (Tim Bryan)
69. 04:42 PM - Re: Re: Prop indexing (Harvey Sigmon)
70. 04:54 PM - Re: Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption] (Michael McGee)
71. 04:58 PM - Re: horizontal stab and shim to level (Ed Holyoke)
72. 05:00 PM - EIS-4000 Fuel Senders ()
73. 05:09 PM - Re: Microair 760 (RV6 Flyer)
74. 05:37 PM - Re: Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? (Ed Holyoke)
75. 05:59 PM - Re: EIS-4000 Fuel Senders (Ed Perry)
76. 06:18 PM - Re: Re: Prop indexing ()
77. 06:43 PM - Re: Prop Indexing (Altoq)
78. 06:50 PM - Re: Re:Prop Indexing (William Davis)
79. 07:16 PM - Re: propeller indexing: Lycoming response (Richard Sipp)
80. 07:55 PM - Re: Prop Spacers? (Pat Perry)
81. 08:11 PM - Re: Drill bit for cutting lightening holes in aluminum 1" (Charlie & Tupper England)
82. 09:56 PM - Re: Christian Inverted Oil System (Vanremog@aol.com)
83. 11:34 PM - Re: Re: Prop indexing (j1j2h3@juno.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: | Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bruce Swayze <swayze@europa.com>
Thanks, everyone, for your input.
I looked at this again and realized the guy has about 20 of them for sale,
if anyone else wants one. There is more information as well as a nice
picture here:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2585079013&category=31482&rd=1
The price is $72.50 plus only $4.95 for shipping. I heard from one builder
privately who bought this exact drill, and he loves it. There are less
than 12 hours left on this item, but hopefully he will re-list the item if
he doesn't sell all of them.
Bruce Swayze
DO NOT ARCHIVE
---
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: ELT antenna mounting RV8A |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy@att.net>
Mike (and others),
I used the same type ELT antenna (rubber duck) and also mounted it under the empennage
fairing, mounted facing aft off the rear bulkhead. Same results.....
tower reported LOUD and CLEAR. The antenna is there to stay. In most crashes,
the tail is likely to survive better than the fuse or wing.... IMHO.
Final note. I was unfortunate in that I crashed my previous aircraft (Sonex) on an airport shortly after take-off (prop hub disconnected from the crankshaft on take-off at 400 FT AGL) (see http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id20020913X01607&key1 ). The installed ELT (Ameri-King AK-450) DID NOT activate! Maybe I didn't hit the ground hard enough... but the aircraft was totaled and I spent a week in ICU.....
An ELT is an FAA requirement. Mine is onboard for that reason alone. I always
use Flight Following or IFR filing so I will be talking to someone when a forced
landing may be inevitable
Jack Lockamy
Camarillo, CA
DO NOT ARCHIVE
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 |
|
rv-list@matronics.com
| Subject: | Re: RV3-List: RV-3 Alieron bracket |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bruce Stewart <Bruce.Stewart1@bigpond.com>
Lee,
I've had a look at the drawings and the photos, seems to me you
have just drilled a hole in the wrong place maybe......
Can you post some more photos that arn't so close and more general
views?
Bruce
Downunder.
At 10:37 PM 8/01/2004 -0500, Leesafur@aol.com wrote:
>--> RV3-List message posted by: Leesafur@aol.com
>
>I have a clearance problem with the inboard a-304 aileron rib and the
>outboard AN-3 bolt for the a-305 aileron bracket. I have built these parts and
>drilled the holes exactly to the plans please take a look at the pictures
>that I
>have and let me know what you think and if you built these bugger can you
>let me
>know what you did because I haven=E2=80=99t a clue. Please note the bolt
>holes are not
>final drilled to 3/16 yet.
>
>http://www.angelfire.com/mech/rv-3/aileron.html
>
>
>Lee
>Anoka MN
>RV-3 wing
>
>
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 |
|
RV-3@yahoogroups.com, rv-list@matronics.com
| Subject: | Re: RV3-List: RV-3 Alieron bracket |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bruce Stewart <Bruce.Stewart1@bigpond.com>
Second take,
yeah I see the problem! mmmmmmmm
ummm errrrr
Haven't a clue.........yet.
Bruce
>Lee,
>
>I've had a look at the drawings and the photos, seems to me you
>have just drilled a hole in the wrong place maybe......
>
>Can you post some more photos that arn't so close and more general
>views?
>
>Bruce
>
>Downunder.
>
>
>At 10:37 PM 8/01/2004 -0500, Leesafur@aol.com wrote:
>>--> RV3-List message posted by: Leesafur@aol.com
>>
>>I have a clearance problem with the inboard a-304 aileron rib and the
>>outboard AN-3 bolt for the a-305 aileron bracket. I have built these
parts and
>>drilled the holes exactly to the plans please take a look at the pictures
>>that I
>>have and let me know what you think and if you built these bugger can you
>>let me
>>know what you did because I haven=E2=80=99t a clue. Please note the bolt
>>holes are not
>>final drilled to 3/16 yet.
>>
>>http://www.angelfire.com/mech/rv-3/aileron.html
>>
>>
>>Lee
>>Anoka MN
>>RV-3 wing
>>
>>
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: Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob U." <rv3@comcast.net>
Bruce Swayze wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Bruce Swayze <swayze@europa.com>
>
>Thanks, everyone, for your input.
>
>I looked at this again and realized the guy has about 20 of them for sale,
>if anyone else wants one. There is more information as well as a nice
>picture here:
>
>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2585079013&category=31482&rd=1
>
>The price is $72.50 plus only $4.95 for shipping. I heard from one builder
>privately who bought this exact drill, and he loves it. There are less
>than 12 hours left on this item, but hopefully he will re-list the item if
>he doesn't sell all of them.
>
>Bruce Swayze
>
>DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
For more info about Chicago Pneumatic, check their web site....
http://www.chicagopneumatic.com/
Bob
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: | Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dana Overall" <bo124rs@hotmail.com>
Bruce, I guess if I were starting over again on another "snap together" 7,
I'd bid on one of those. Remember, as has been stated previously, the drill
usage on the new kits amounts to 99% reaming rather than drilling. The days
of buying the big expensive double throw me down, never to experience a
warped wobbler $$$$$$ drills are a thing of the past.........unless you just
want to own the most expensive air drill in the neighborhood.
My drill.............El Cheapo Delta, abused due to lack of oiling but got
the emp, wings, fuselage and finish kit drilling accomplished.
Heck, for that price I'm almost willing to bid on one:-)
Dana Overall
Richmond, KY
RV-7 slider, Imron black, "Black Magic"
Finish kit
Buying Instruments. Hangar flying my Dynon.
http://rvflying.tripod.com
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: Chicago Pneumatic air drill |
--> RV-List message posted by: Rick Galati <rick6a@yahoo.com>
Chicago Pneumatic is a major vendor of air tools used at McBoeing in St. Louis.
That is a fairly good datapoint because only the most reliable tools are purchased
for daily shop floor use. My experience was the drill motors are highly
reliable, but like anything else, some motors ran more smoothly than others. The
drills were not often sent to the air tool maintenance department for repair,
and even then the problem was often traced to the worker neglecting the obligatory
daily drop of oil. Be careful though. Counterfeit CP's and CP clones
are out there. The name alone does not guarantee that the specific drill motor
you seek is a bargain. Even if it is the real deal, you have no idea of its work
history. Caveat emptor.
Rick Galati RV-6A "finishing"
---------------------------------
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: Prop indexing |
--> RV-List message posted by: WFACT01@aol.com
Lycoming has already done all this testing for HORMONIC-VIBRATIONS- I think
you could call them experts-you can call them and tell them what your doing and
see there reaction-TOM- DO NOT ARCHIVE
Tom Whelan
Whelan Farms Airport
President EAA Chapter 1097
wfact01@aol.com
249 Hard Hill Road North
PO Box 426
Bethlehem, CT 06751
Tel: 203-266-5300
Fax: 202-266-5140
EAA Technical/Flight Advisor
RV-8 540 LYC (Engine Runs, Taxi-Tests)
S-51 Mustang Turbine (Under Construction)
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: Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "ray sheffield" <rv8a@csranet.com>
Very pleased with the cp drill.
ray
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Swayze" <swayze@europa.com>
Subject: RV-List: Chicago Pneumatic air drill ??
> --> RV-List message posted by: Bruce Swayze <swayze@europa.com>
>
> Fellow Listers,
>
> Chicago Pneumatic #CP-7300 1/4" capacity mini air drill 2800 rpm
>
> I have an opportunity to purchase this drill at a nice discount from the
> "normal" price. I checked the biggest tool sellers, Avery and Cleaveland,
> and neither of them sell this exact drill. I'm looking for any feedback
> from someone who uses it. Anyone out there have one? Do you like it?
Would
> you buy it again? I'm building my tool collection and I'm wondering if it
> would be worth spending roughly $150 more to get the Sioux.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Bruce Swayze
>
>
> ---
>
>
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: Prop indexing How to ?? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
Folks, let me just toss this in as food for thought regarding all the concern
over removing your propeller and changing its position on the crank-
When you first installed the prop, how did you know which hole to go over
which bushing? If you took it off after flying for a while, changed the
position, why is that any different than having put it in that position to begin
with?
Of course, if you had it balanced and THEN re-indexed without a re-balance,
that would be different................
An interesting experiment for someone that balances props (and is having a
slow day!) would be to check a typical prop/engine combo in each position and
compare- (please pass the safety wire...)
From The PossumWorks in TN
Mark -6A damn near done!!!! do not archive
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: RV-3 Alieron bracket |
--> RV-List message posted by: Doug Gray <dgra1233@bigpond.net.au>
Don't you just hate that.
The RV-6 ailerons have a mouse hole shown on the end rib (A-304 for you)
rather than the circular hole. The hole is relatively small but
sufficient to get a spanner onto the bolt. The base of the mouse hole
is against the aileron spar.
Doug Gray
Leesafur@aol.com wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Leesafur@aol.com
>
> I have a clearance problem with the inboard a-304 aileron rib and the
> outboard AN-3 bolt for the a-305 aileron bracket. I have built these parts and
> drilled the holes exactly to the plans please take a look at the pictures that
I
> have and let me know what you think and if you built these bugger can you let
me
> know what you did because I haven=E2=80=99t a clue. Please note the bolt holes
are not
> final drilled to 3/16 yet.
>
> http://www.angelfire.com/mech/rv-3/aileron.html
>
>
> Lee
> Anoka MN
> RV-3 wing
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Sun 100 Air Race |
--> RV-List message posted by: "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot@hotmail.com>
Apparently, the race is still on for 2004. I got a .pdf format entry form
from ACS yesterday. Write them at info@aircraftspruce.com or email me off
the list and I'll forward you a copy. Scanning over the document,
everything sounds like what was done in years past.
Bryan Jones -8
www.LoneStarSquadron.com
Houston, Texas
Working moms: Find helpful tips here on managing kids, home, work and
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Vincent Welch" <welchvincent@hotmail.com>
Gentlemen,
I would like to use an electric oil pump to pre-oil the engine prior to
every
start (like the one on the Infinity stick grip site
www.infinityaerospace.com). They have a little sketch
(www.infinityaerospace.com/Installation.jpg) of a possible connection
method. I am writing to ask the engine Guru's among you if their sketch is
the best method or should I be considering another way of plumbing the pump.
I think that I would prefer to plumb in the oil pressure
switch (firewall mounted) with a 1/4" hose from the usual location (right
rear oil galley).
I have an IO360-A1A with an Airwolf remote mounted oil filter (mounted on
the
firewall). I have a constant speed prop if that matters and I will be
returning
the air/oil seperator to the location that Mr. Mahon suggested on the
Lycoming list a
few weeks ago (removing a plug in the lower right rear, facing forward,
quadrant of the accessory case).
Vince Welch
Expand your wine savvy and get some great new recipes at MSN Wine.
http://wine.msn.com
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: | Specific Fuel Consumption |
--> RV-List message posted by: n6jx@earthlink.net
Recent discussion on the RV list have touched on the topic of different engine
/ prop combinations, and the impact on performance. Tom, Kevin and other have
pointed out that to go a given speed, a given horsepower is required, and it
really doesn't matter what size engine you have (as long as it is big enough
to produce the required horsepower). Along with that, to produce a given horsepower,
a given amount of fuel is required, which is the "Specific Fuel Consumption"
of the engine. Doing some research on this, I found that there actually
is a fairly small range of SFC that efficient internal combustion engines
fall into, that being .42 to .47 pounds of fuel per horsepower per hour. With
this information, it is possible to calculate a power to fuel burn chart as attached
below.
Testing this out in my RV I have found this to be right on with the actual performance
I am getting when compared to the Lycoming power charts in my engine's
operating manual. My plane is an RV-6A with a Fuel injected 180 hp Lyc O-360
and a CS prop. At 7000 feet, Running 23.5" Manifold Press and 2400 RPM, if
I lean to 8.2 Gal/hour (EGT 50 degrees lean of peak), I get 164kts TAS and if
I richen the mixture to 9.8 Gal/Hour (EGT 75 degrees rich of peak), I get 172kts
TAS. Looking in my Lyc manual at the power charts, these figures align
pretty well with the % power vs fuel flow charts in the manual. Given this,
it can be seen that Man. Press and RPM do not always equal horsepower. Horsepower
is RPM and Torque, and by varing the fuel load, we can vary the torque at
any given RPM and thus vary the horsepower. With a fixed pitch prop, as you
adjusted the mixture, the RPM would change, but with a Constant Speed prop, the
pitch of the prop changes, which is not reflected on any guages other than fuel
flow.
This makes it interesting to set a speed. Since I can't run the mixture between
50 degrees lean and 75 degrees rich of peak, and as the throttle is already
wide open, 172kts at 9.8 Gal/Hr is close to max speed at that altitude. To go
slower than 172 but faster than 164, I must run a richer mixture than 9.8 Gal/Hr,
so in fact I burn more fuel to go slower, which makes sense as a richer fuel/air
mixture reduces power. So in actual practice, I either cruise at 172kts
or at or below 164kts. If an additional column was added to the table below
for kts speed, it would be very easy to find the best economy cruise. I get
17.6 nm/Gal at 172kts and 20 nm/Gal at 164kts. I haven't bothered to take
reading at other setting yet, but will do so one of these days.
Of course, 135hp equals 75% power in a 180hp motor, 85% power in a 160hp and only
50% power in a 270hp rocket. So it is quite reasonable that a formation of
RVs flying together will be close to each other in fuel burn regardless of engine
size, the biggest variable being the ability of the pilot to lean the engine
to the best possible fuel/air mixture. Of couse differences in airframe drag
and prop efficiency will aslo play a role, but probably pretty minor given
the same aircraft model and a reasonably efficient prop.
Would appreciate any feedback on these numbers and how other feel they fit with
their expierence.
Mel Jordan
Tucson
Specific Fuel Consumption
SFC Min Max
LB/HP 0.4300 0.4600
GAL/HP 0.0717 0.0767
Fuel Weight 6 LB/GAL
HP % PWR GAL/HR GAL/HR
180 100% Min Max
50 28% 3.58 3.83
55 31% 3.94 4.22
60 33% 4.30 4.60
65 36% 4.66 4.98
70 39% 5.02 5.37
75 42% 5.38 5.75
80 44% 5.73 6.13
85 47% 6.09 6.52
90 50% 6.45 6.90
95 53% 6.81 7.28
100 56% 7.17 7.67
105 58% 7.53 8.05
110 61% 7.88 8.43
115 64% 8.24 8.82
120 67% 8.60 9.20
125 69% 8.96 9.58
130 72% 9.32 9.97
135 75% 9.68 10.35
140 78% 10.03 10.73
145 81% 10.39 11.12
150 83% 10.75 11.50
155 86% 11.11 11.88
160 89% 11.47 12.27
165 92% 11.83 12.65
170 94% 12.18 13.03
175 97% 12.54 13.42
180 100% 12.90 13.80
185 103% 13.26 14.18
190 106% 13.62 14.57
195 108% 13.98 14.95
200 111% 14.33 15.33
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: Prop indexing - reply |
--> RV-List message posted by: P M Condon <pcondon@mitre.org>
(for the archives and future searching....thanks Jim...)
In a message dated 1/8/04 7:12:20 AM Pacific Standard Time,
pcondon@mitre.org writes:
Also, a few days ago someone related to the group how the longest
drive
lug is used to determin the proper prop placement on the crank
flange.
That didn't make sence either because the longest lug is STILL the
longest lug once you put the flywheel on......right...??
The "longest lug"??? I believe the lugs are the same length. One of
them has a "step" which lines up with the O marked hole on the
starter ring gear. I do not believe that it has anything to do with
prop indexing, other than to allow a starting point at which to
determine
when #1 cylinder is at TDC. The physical indexing is determined by how
you install the spinner backplate.
Jim Nice
WA State
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: Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Wiethe, Philip (P.J.)" <pwiethe@ford.com>
I bought the Chicago Pneumatic CP-7300 air drill a couple weeks ago from a local
industrial tool shop that sells CP stuff for $74.00 and I Iove it. It replaced
a Taylor 3/8 air drill in which the runout had become excessive due to one
too many drops. The CP spins faster and the runout is very tight. The drill
is very light and compact and the rubber coated grip feels nice.
Phil Wiethe
8A Fuselage
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: | Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption] |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Trampas" <tstern@nc.rr.com>
The way I view things is that fuel produces power. Therefore based on your
engine's efficiency the amount of fuel you burn is proportional to the
horsepower, with in reason. By reason I mean if you dump all gas and no air,
you get no power...
So if we go back to engine theory and say that we want to have a 14.7:1 air
fuel ratio, then by measuring the air entering the engine we can calculate
the fuel burned, again assuming 14.7:1. So to calculate the mass of the air
entering the engine we can get close by measuring the RPMs, Air temperature,
Barometer pressure, and MAP, this is called speed density calculations.
Now what most people do for calculating percentage of horsepower is realize
that the air temperature and barometer pressure cancel out, removed from
equation. Thus you can estimate percentage of horsepower based on MAP and
RPM, again assuming constant fuel mixture. This the problem, if you change
air fuel ratio/mixture you change the maximum horsepower and thus you may
still read 75% horsepower but your 100% horsepower level may have changed.
A better method would be to calculate real horsepower estimates. That is by
measuring the fuel flow, and the air flow you can actually calculate the
fuel to air ratio. Then by knowing the efficiency of the engine you can get
a pretty good estimate of real horsepower, however the efficiency of the
engine will be variable and not easy to estimate, thus you will always have
some inaccuracies. Even better is to use a fuel injected engine with an O2
sensor such that the computer maintains a constant air fuel ratio.
Regards,
Trampas Stern
Stern Technologies
4321 Waterwheel Dr
Raleigh NC 27606
919-832-8441 Ext. 12 (voice)
919-832-8441 (fax)
www.sterntech.com
tstern@sterntech.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of n6jx@earthlink.net
Subject: RV-List: Specific Fuel Consumption
--> RV-List message posted by: n6jx@earthlink.net
Recent discussion on the RV list have touched on the topic of different
engine / prop combinations, and the impact on performance. Tom, Kevin and
other have pointed out that to go a given speed, a given horsepower is
required, and it really doesn't matter what size engine you have (as long as
it is big enough to produce the required horsepower). Along with that, to
produce a given horsepower, a given amount of fuel is required, which is the
"Specific Fuel Consumption" of the engine. Doing some research on this, I
found that there actually is a fairly small range of SFC that efficient
internal combustion engines fall into, that being .42 to .47 pounds of fuel
per horsepower per hour. With this information, it is possible to calculate
a power to fuel burn chart as attached below.
Testing this out in my RV I have found this to be right on with the actual
performance I am getting when compared to the Lycoming power charts in my
engine's operating manual. My plane is an RV-6A with a Fuel injected 180
hp Lyc O-360 and a CS prop. At 7000 feet, Running 23.5" Manifold Press and
2400 RPM, if I lean to 8.2 Gal/hour (EGT 50 degrees lean of peak), I get
164kts TAS and if I richen the mixture to 9.8 Gal/Hour (EGT 75 degrees rich
of peak), I get 172kts TAS. Looking in my Lyc manual at the power charts,
these figures align pretty well with the % power vs fuel flow charts in the
manual. Given this, it can be seen that Man. Press and RPM do not always
equal horsepower. Horsepower is RPM and Torque, and by varing the fuel
load, we can vary the torque at any given RPM and thus vary the horsepower.
With a fixed pitch prop, as you adjusted the mixture, the RPM would change,
but with a Constant Speed prop, the pitch of the prop changes, which is not
reflected !
on any guages other than fuel flow.
This makes it interesting to set a speed. Since I can't run the mixture
between 50 degrees lean and 75 degrees rich of peak, and as the throttle is
already wide open, 172kts at 9.8 Gal/Hr is close to max speed at that
altitude. To go slower than 172 but faster than 164, I must run a richer
mixture than 9.8 Gal/Hr, so in fact I burn more fuel to go slower, which
makes sense as a richer fuel/air mixture reduces power. So in actual
practice, I either cruise at 172kts or at or below 164kts. If an
additional column was added to the table below for kts speed, it would be
very easy to find the best economy cruise. I get 17.6 nm/Gal at 172kts and
20 nm/Gal at 164kts. I haven't bothered to take reading at other setting
yet, but will do so one of these days.
Of course, 135hp equals 75% power in a 180hp motor, 85% power in a 160hp and
only 50% power in a 270hp rocket. So it is quite reasonable that a
formation of RVs flying together will be close to each other in fuel burn
regardless of engine size, the biggest variable being the ability of the
pilot to lean the engine to the best possible fuel/air mixture. Of couse
differences in airframe drag and prop efficiency will aslo play a role, but
probably pretty minor given the same aircraft model and a reasonably
efficient prop.
Would appreciate any feedback on these numbers and how other feel they fit
with their expierence.
Mel Jordan
Tucson
Specific Fuel Consumption
SFC Min Max
LB/HP 0.4300 0.4600
GAL/HP 0.0717 0.0767
Fuel Weight 6 LB/GAL
HP % PWR GAL/HR GAL/HR
180 100% Min Max
50 28% 3.58 3.83
55 31% 3.94 4.22
60 33% 4.30 4.60
65 36% 4.66 4.98
70 39% 5.02 5.37
75 42% 5.38 5.75
80 44% 5.73 6.13
85 47% 6.09 6.52
90 50% 6.45 6.90
95 53% 6.81 7.28
100 56% 7.17 7.67
105 58% 7.53 8.05
110 61% 7.88 8.43
115 64% 8.24 8.82
120 67% 8.60 9.20
125 69% 8.96 9.58
130 72% 9.32 9.97
135 75% 9.68 10.35
140 78% 10.03 10.73
145 81% 10.39 11.12
150 83% 10.75 11.50
155 86% 11.11 11.88
160 89% 11.47 12.27
165 92% 11.83 12.65
170 94% 12.18 13.03
175 97% 12.54 13.42
180 100% 12.90 13.80
185 103% 13.26 14.18
190 106% 13.62 14.57
195 108% 13.98 14.95
200 111% 14.33 15.33
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: Aux Oil Pump |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Wiethe, Philip (P.J.)" <pwiethe@ford.com>
Vince,
You might want to try this simpler approach. Have your starter on a separate button
from your ignition(s). When you go to start the engine, hold down the starter
button with the ignition(s) off until you see the oil pressure come up
to normal on your oil pressure gauge, then turn on the ignitions. You are getting
cylinder pressure without oil initially, however, this is much lower than
the cylinder pressures during combustion. We do this on a very expensive, 13:1
compression, 600 Hp race motor (that won the Baja 1000 two years ago). There
are also some other benefits in having your starter separated instead of using
the traditional key start Off-L-R-IGN switch.
Phil Wiethe
8A fuse
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: Aux Oil Pump |
--> RV-List message posted by: linn walters <lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
Vincent Welch wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Vincent Welch" <welchvincent@hotmail.com>
>
>Gentlemen,
>
>I would like to use an electric oil pump to pre-oil the engine prior to
>every
>start (like the one on the Infinity stick grip site
>www.infinityaerospace.com). They have a little sketch
>(www.infinityaerospace.com/Installation.jpg) of a possible connection
>method. I am writing to ask the engine Guru's among you if their sketch is
>the best method or should I be considering another way of plumbing the pump.
>I think that I would prefer to plumb in the oil pressure
>switch (firewall mounted) with a 1/4" hose from the usual location (right
>rear oil galley).
>
>I have an IO360-A1A with an Airwolf remote mounted oil filter (mounted on
>the
>firewall). I have a constant speed prop if that matters and I will be
>returning
>the air/oil seperator to the location that Mr. Mahon suggested on the
>Lycoming list a
>few weeks ago (removing a plug in the lower right rear, facing forward,
>quadrant of the accessory case).
>
>
>Vince Welch
>
Vince, Even though I don't fancy myself as an 'engine guru', I'll answer
your question first: There is no 'best' method. That method will work
just fine. I'm not one to talk anybody out of what the want, but I have
a question: WHY? What is your reasoning in adding the additional
plumbing, weight, etc? Are you planning on letting your airplane sit
idle for months at a time? If so, then I guess the pump may be of
marginal use. I don't see the value in hauling around a pump that
really doesn't do much ..... unless you have a mechanical oil pump
failure ...... at which time the elec. pump just may get you to an
airport safely. the problem with pre-oilers is that those areas most
subject to rust and corrosion such as the cam and cam followers won't
get any additional oil, as well as the rocker arms. The pre-oiler will
get oil to the cam and crank bearings as well as the con-rod crank
bearings. The pistons, cylinders etc. won't benefit. So, without
knowing your reasons, I can't address those concerns. As you can see, I
don't see having a back-up oil pump sufficient reason.
Also, you're installing an air-oil separator. Not a real good idea, in
my opinion. There is quite a lot of acid and water generated during
combustion that ends up in the oil. That acid and water needs to boiled
off if you expect your engine to go to TBO or beyond. That means flying
for an hour or more. Returning that moisture back to the engine doesn't
come under the heading of being 'good to your engine'. Short hops around
the patch are more harmful than beneficial. The separator will keep the
belly cleaner, but you cover up a good engine diagnostic tool. The
excess blowby is caused by worn or broken rings, and if the separator is
really working great, you'll miss the warning signs. Catastrophic
failures aren't fun.
Think about your reasons for your wish list ...... and the consequences
........ before you jump.
Linn
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: Specific Fuel Consumption |
--> RV-List message posted by: Denis Walsh <denis.walsh@comcast.net>
Excellent post. I too use 2400 RPM and almost full throttle for cruise.
My data is not as precise as yours by any means; however, my end result is
remarkable similar. Bases on my 6.5 years of flying my RV-6A, 180 C/S, I
flight plan for 165K and fly above 8,000 feet, prefer 8.5 to 12.5. I can
count on 7.5 GPH at the higher altitude.
Of course I frequently want to go faster, so I add RPM, up to 2600 as
required, and re-lean.
I don't pay any attention to my EGTs any more. I lean to sputter then, rich
to smooth running. This definitely yields a decrease in speed from rich of
peak.
I surmise that my slightly less fuel flow is due to my electronic ignition,
and to more leaning.
Thanks again for the good data.
Denis
> From: n6jx@earthlink.net
> Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 08:12:15 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
> To: rv-list@matronics.com, vansaircraft@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RV-List: Specific Fuel Consumption
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: n6jx@earthlink.net
>
> Recent discussion on the RV list have touched on the topic of different engine
> / prop combinations, and the impact on performance. Tom, Kevin and other
> have pointed out that to go a given speed, a given horsepower is required, and
> it really doesn't matter what size engine you have (as long as it is big
> enough to produce the required horsepower). Along with that, to produce a
> given horsepower, a given amount of fuel is required, which is the "Specific
> Fuel Consumption" of the engine. Doing some research on this, I found that
> there actually is a fairly small range of SFC that efficient internal
> combustion engines fall into, that being .42 to .47 pounds of fuel per
> horsepower per hour. With this information, it is possible to calculate a
> power to fuel burn chart as attached below.
>
> Testing this out in my RV I have found this to be right on with the actual
> performance I am getting when compared to the Lycoming power charts in my
> engine's operating manual. My plane is an RV-6A with a Fuel injected 180 hp
> Lyc O-360 and a CS prop. At 7000 feet, Running 23.5" Manifold Press and 2400
> RPM, if I lean to 8.2 Gal/hour (EGT 50 degrees lean of peak), I get 164kts TAS
> and if I richen the mixture to 9.8 Gal/Hour (EGT 75 degrees rich of peak), I
> get 172kts TAS. Looking in my Lyc manual at the power charts, these figures
> align pretty well with the % power vs fuel flow charts in the manual. Given
> this, it can be seen that Man. Press and RPM do not always equal horsepower.
> Horsepower is RPM and Torque, and by varing the fuel load, we can vary the
> torque at any given RPM and thus vary the horsepower. With a fixed pitch
> prop, as you adjusted the mixture, the RPM would change, but with a Constant
> Speed prop, the pitch of the prop changes, which is not reflected !
> on any guages other than fuel flow.
>
> This makes it interesting to set a speed. Since I can't run the mixture
> between 50 degrees lean and 75 degrees rich of peak, and as the throttle is
> already wide open, 172kts at 9.8 Gal/Hr is close to max speed at that
> altitude. To go slower than 172 but faster than 164, I must run a richer
> mixture than 9.8 Gal/Hr, so in fact I burn more fuel to go slower, which makes
> sense as a richer fuel/air mixture reduces power. So in actual practice, I
> either cruise at 172kts or at or below 164kts. If an additional column was
> added to the table below for kts speed, it would be very easy to find the best
> economy cruise. I get 17.6 nm/Gal at 172kts and 20 nm/Gal at 164kts. I
> haven't bothered to take reading at other setting yet, but will do so one of
> these days.
>
> Of course, 135hp equals 75% power in a 180hp motor, 85% power in a 160hp and
> only 50% power in a 270hp rocket. So it is quite reasonable that a formation
> of RVs flying together will be close to each other in fuel burn regardless of
> engine size, the biggest variable being the ability of the pilot to lean the
> engine to the best possible fuel/air mixture. Of couse differences in
> airframe drag and prop efficiency will aslo play a role, but probably pretty
> minor given the same aircraft model and a reasonably efficient prop.
>
> Would appreciate any feedback on these numbers and how other feel they fit
> with their expierence.
>
>
> Mel Jordan
> Tucson
>
>
> Specific Fuel Consumption
>
> SFC Min Max
> LB/HP 0.4300 0.4600
> GAL/HP 0.0717 0.0767
>
> Fuel Weight 6 LB/GAL
>
> HP % PWR GAL/HR GAL/HR
> 180 100% Min Max
> 50 28% 3.58 3.83
> 55 31% 3.94 4.22
> 60 33% 4.30 4.60
> 65 36% 4.66 4.98
> 70 39% 5.02 5.37
> 75 42% 5.38 5.75
> 80 44% 5.73 6.13
> 85 47% 6.09 6.52
> 90 50% 6.45 6.90
> 95 53% 6.81 7.28
> 100 56% 7.17 7.67
> 105 58% 7.53 8.05
> 110 61% 7.88 8.43
> 115 64% 8.24 8.82
> 120 67% 8.60 9.20
> 125 69% 8.96 9.58
> 130 72% 9.32 9.97
> 135 75% 9.68 10.35
> 140 78% 10.03 10.73
> 145 81% 10.39 11.12
> 150 83% 10.75 11.50
> 155 86% 11.11 11.88
> 160 89% 11.47 12.27
> 165 92% 11.83 12.65
> 170 94% 12.18 13.03
> 175 97% 12.54 13.42
> 180 100% 12.90 13.80
> 185 103% 13.26 14.18
> 190 106% 13.62 14.57
> 195 108% 13.98 14.95
> 200 111% 14.33 15.33
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Carb Vs Fuel Injection |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Shemp" <shempdowling@earthlink.net>
Im not touching the debate about fuel inj vs carb, however, I can tell you
about my exp with putting a -7 fuel inj kit in a -6. I bought the AP/Vans
fuel inj pump/filter kit that fits the -7. It took a bit of modifying but
still was worth the time savings. I just ran my fuel line along the outside
of the right center floor angle. The 7 has a floor in the center and runs
it under that. You can do the same but it was recommended not to run it up
the center because of the potential problems with running a fuel line under
the battery. If your battery is not in the standard place, just run the
fuel line directly up the middle to the firewall.
Good luck with the decision.
on with the onslaught
Jeff Dowling
RV-6a/ 2 hours
Chicago/ Louisville
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: | Re: Exiting an RV in Flight - Ideas |
--> RV-List message posted by: cecilth@juno.com
If you have a slider, look at how the two rollers are fastened to the
canopy frame.
Instead of a bolt here, use pull pins with small rings attached. (A Good
Hardware Store has them)
In an emergency, 1. pull both pins. 2. unlatch canopy. 3. push up into
slip stream.
Cecil Hatfield
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 21:13:02 -0800 j1j2h3@juno.com writes:
> --> RV-List message posted by: j1j2h3@juno.com
>
> Would you please explain how to jettison the canopy. I was not
> aware
> that this could be done.
>
> Jim Hasper - RV-7 just starting empennage (setting up shop in
> Franklin,
> Tennessee)
>
> Do not archive
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: Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption] |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob U." <rv3@comcast.net>
Trampas wrote:
>A better method would be to calculate real horsepower estimates. That is by
>measuring the fuel flow, and the air flow you can actually calculate the
>fuel to air ratio. Then by knowing the efficiency of the engine you can get
>a pretty good estimate of real horsepower, however the efficiency of the
>engine will be variable and not easy to estimate, thus you will always have
>some inaccuracies. Even better is to use a fuel injected engine with an O2
>sensor such that the computer maintains a constant air fuel ratio.
>
>Regards,
>Trampas Stern
>
How do you get an O2 sensor to survive aviation 100LL?
Bob
Do not archive
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: | Re: Aux Oil Pump |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Bart at AeroSport Power recommends a pre-heater over a pre-oiler. I have
one of the pumps from Infinity Aerospace. There is a lot of plumbing
envolved and one way valves. I have not installed it. I can sell it to you
for half price if your interested.
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
do not archive
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: | LightSpeed Engineering Ignition coil mounting |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Vince Himsl" <vhimsl@turbonet.com>
Hello,
I am trying to install the LSE Plasma II ignition coils that were shipped with
my Aerosport dynafocal O-360 engine and I
need to know if it is ok to remove the engine hoist/lift bracket and install the
LSE bracket in its place. As near as I can
tell, that is the only place it can go.
OK?
If Ok, is there any problems with removing and retorque the one bolt involved or
do I have a specific procedure I have to
go through as it is a case bolt?
Thanks,
Vince Himsl
Moscow, ID
RV8 Finish
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: | Christian Inverted Oil System |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Scott Brown" <scottbrown@precisionjet.com>
Listers,
I have a Christian Inverted Oil system on my RV4. I do not fly inverted so
much that I would need such a thing. If anyone is interested in this system
send emails to: scottbrown@precisionjet.com
Cheers!
Scott
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: ELT antenna mounting RV8A |
01/09/2004 10:16:01 AM
--> RV-List message posted by: glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com
I agree it is a requirement and hopefully I never have to use the thing.
However I am erring on the side of caution that if my aircraft goes down
and I am in a remote area that I have an alternate means of communication
other than the aircraft radios, my cellular phone, and as a last means my
ELT. I know the odds of being in a remote area are very slim. I come from
the 6p era. PRIOR PLANNING PREVENTS PISS POOR PERFORMANCE. So I at least
will have my communications bases covered. Sorry to hear about your sonex.
If you dont mind me asking, what happened? You see I am not being morbid
or anything I just believe we can all learn from someones previous
experience and if it is preventable, discussing it has benefits to our
flying.
Have a great day and thanks for your input
Regards
Glenn Williams
do not archive
"Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy@att.net>@matronics.com on 01/09/2004 02:50:32
AM
Please respond to rv-list@matronics.com
Sent by: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
cc:
Subject: Re: RV-List: ELT antenna mounting RV8A
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy@att.net>
Mike (and others),
I used the same type ELT antenna (rubber duck) and also mounted it under
the empennage fairing, mounted facing aft off the rear bulkhead. Same
results..... tower reported LOUD and CLEAR. The antenna is there to stay.
In most crashes, the tail is likely to survive better than the fuse or
wing.... IMHO.
Final note. I was unfortunate in that I crashed my previous aircraft
(Sonex) on an airport shortly after take-off (prop hub disconnected from
the crankshaft on take-off at 400 FT AGL) (see
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id20020913X01607&key1 ). The
installed ELT (Ameri-King AK-450) DID NOT activate! Maybe I didn't hit the
ground hard enough... but the aircraft was totaled and I spent a week in
ICU.....
An ELT is an FAA requirement. Mine is onboard for that reason alone. I
always use Flight Following or IFR filing so I will be talking to someone
when a forced landing may be inevitable
Jack Lockamy
Camarillo, CA
DO NOT ARCHIVE
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: Fuel selector was airspeeds of RV8/8A with 0-320 engine |
01/09/2004 10:16:21 AM
--> RV-List message posted by: glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com
You are correct: the Jist of my message is I want a simple airplane. Of
course I am using vans fuel selector and pump.
thanks
Glenn
do not archive
Michael McGee <jmpcrftr@teleport.com>@matronics.com on 01/08/2004 11:51:14
AM
Please respond to rv-list@matronics.com
Sent by: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
cc:
Subject: RV-List: Fuel selector was airspeeds of RV8/8A with 0-320 engine
--> RV-List message posted by: Michael McGee <jmpcrftr@teleport.com>
Now Glenn, I trust you are NOT talking about using an ON-OFF fuel selector
like a C-152. Not to be picky but some might think this is what you are
doing, just want to clarify this for them. With the wing on the bottom we
need the OFF-RIGHT-LEFT type of fuel selector.
Mike (iced-in in Portland)
Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Hillsboro, OR
13B in gestation mode
At 08:03 2004-01-08, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com
>
>
>I am using the KISS philosophy on my airplane. I am setting it up just
like
>a Cessna 152 as far as simplicity go and a maintenance standpoint. I want
>to fly when I am finished building. I do not want to continue to tinker
>away at some high dollar mods and such. So I will be going fixed pitch
>normal aspirated (carb) and day night VFR instrumentation. I do want to
>play C.D.'s in flight though. and I have a hard on for the MX-20.
>
>Glenn
>
>do not archive
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: | ELT antenna mounting RV8A |
01/09/2004 10:16:27 AM
--> RV-List message posted by: glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com
Mike Robertson:
Is it possible for you to send me
digital photos of your ELT antenna and mounting installation?
Thanks in advance
Glenn
do not archive
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: airspeeds of RV8/8A with 0-320 engine |
01/09/2004 10:21:20 AM
--> RV-List message posted by: glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com
Kevin I understand. As my previous post stated that I know all airframes
and systems are built differently and I do not want to stat a debate. I
just wanted relative numbers. Thanks though for your comments.
Glenn
do not archive
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: Specific Fuel Consumption |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Vic Jacko" <vicwj@earthlink.net>
Mel, What would the addition of twin CDI ignition systems do to your
performance figures as these systems would increase the efficiency of the
engine especially if you ran a little less manifold pressure to allow more
than 25/28 degrees of spark advance?
Vic
----- Original Message -----
From: <n6jx@earthlink.net>
Subject: RV-List: Specific Fuel Consumption
> --> RV-List message posted by: n6jx@earthlink.net
>
> Recent discussion on the RV list have touched on the topic of different
engine / prop combinations, and the impact on performance. Tom, Kevin and
other have pointed out that to go a given speed, a given horsepower is
required, and it really doesn't matter what size engine you have (as long as
it is big enough to produce the required horsepower). Along with that, to
produce a given horsepower, a given amount of fuel is required, which is the
"Specific Fuel Consumption" of the engine. Doing some research on this, I
found that there actually is a fairly small range of SFC that efficient
internal combustion engines fall into, that being .42 to .47 pounds of fuel
per horsepower per hour. With this information, it is possible to calculate
a power to fuel burn chart as attached below.
>
> Testing this out in my RV I have found this to be right on with the actual
performance I am getting when compared to the Lycoming power charts in my
engine's operating manual. My plane is an RV-6A with a Fuel injected 180
hp Lyc O-360 and a CS prop. At 7000 feet, Running 23.5" Manifold Press and
2400 RPM, if I lean to 8.2 Gal/hour (EGT 50 degrees lean of peak), I get
164kts TAS and if I richen the mixture to 9.8 Gal/Hour (EGT 75 degrees rich
of peak), I get 172kts TAS. Looking in my Lyc manual at the power charts,
these figures align pretty well with the % power vs fuel flow charts in the
manual. Given this, it can be seen that Man. Press and RPM do not always
equal horsepower. Horsepower is RPM and Torque, and by varing the fuel
load, we can vary the torque at any given RPM and thus vary the horsepower.
With a fixed pitch prop, as you adjusted the mixture, the RPM would change,
but with a Constant Speed prop, the pitch of the prop changes, which is not
reflected !
> on any guages other than fuel flow.
>
> This makes it interesting to set a speed. Since I can't run the mixture
between 50 degrees lean and 75 degrees rich of peak, and as the throttle is
already wide open, 172kts at 9.8 Gal/Hr is close to max speed at that
altitude. To go slower than 172 but faster than 164, I must run a richer
mixture than 9.8 Gal/Hr, so in fact I burn more fuel to go slower, which
makes sense as a richer fuel/air mixture reduces power. So in actual
practice, I either cruise at 172kts or at or below 164kts. If an
additional column was added to the table below for kts speed, it would be
very easy to find the best economy cruise. I get 17.6 nm/Gal at 172kts and
20 nm/Gal at 164kts. I haven't bothered to take reading at other setting
yet, but will do so one of these days.
>
> Of course, 135hp equals 75% power in a 180hp motor, 85% power in a 160hp
and only 50% power in a 270hp rocket. So it is quite reasonable that a
formation of RVs flying together will be close to each other in fuel burn
regardless of engine size, the biggest variable being the ability of the
pilot to lean the engine to the best possible fuel/air mixture. Of couse
differences in airframe drag and prop efficiency will aslo play a role, but
probably pretty minor given the same aircraft model and a reasonably
efficient prop.
>
> Would appreciate any feedback on these numbers and how other feel they fit
with their expierence.
>
>
> Mel Jordan
> Tucson
>
>
> Specific Fuel Consumption
>
> SFC Min Max
> LB/HP 0.4300 0.4600
> GAL/HP 0.0717 0.0767
>
> Fuel Weight 6 LB/GAL
>
> HP % PWR GAL/HR GAL/HR
> 180 100% Min Max
> 50 28% 3.58 3.83
> 55 31% 3.94 4.22
> 60 33% 4.30 4.60
> 65 36% 4.66 4.98
> 70 39% 5.02 5.37
> 75 42% 5.38 5.75
> 80 44% 5.73 6.13
> 85 47% 6.09 6.52
> 90 50% 6.45 6.90
> 95 53% 6.81 7.28
> 100 56% 7.17 7.67
> 105 58% 7.53 8.05
> 110 61% 7.88 8.43
> 115 64% 8.24 8.82
> 120 67% 8.60 9.20
> 125 69% 8.96 9.58
> 130 72% 9.32 9.97
> 135 75% 9.68 10.35
> 140 78% 10.03 10.73
> 145 81% 10.39 11.12
> 150 83% 10.75 11.50
> 155 86% 11.11 11.88
> 160 89% 11.47 12.27
> 165 92% 11.83 12.65
> 170 94% 12.18 13.03
> 175 97% 12.54 13.42
> 180 100% 12.90 13.80
> 185 103% 13.26 14.18
> 190 106% 13.62 14.57
> 195 108% 13.98 14.95
> 200 111% 14.33 15.33
>
>
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: | Re: LightSpeed Engineering Ignition coil mounting |
--> RV-List message posted by: RGray67968@aol.com
Vince,
You have to do a complete engine tear down to install the coils.
Sorry, couldn't resist......I left my chrome bracket in place and put my coil
mount on the next bolt to the rear....plenty of room and 'looks' nice. Just
remove the bolt and retorque with a bolt long enough for the bracket.
Rick Gray RV6 in Ohio at the Buffalo Farm
do not archive
Hello,
I am trying to install the LSE Plasma II ignition coils that were shipped
with my Aerosport dynafocal O-360 engine and I
need to know if it is ok to remove the engine hoist/lift bracket and install
the LSE bracket in its place. As near as I can
tell, that is the only place it can go.
OK?
If Ok, is there any problems with removing and retorque the one bolt involved
or do I have a specific procedure I have to
go through as it is a case bolt?
Thanks,
Vince Himsl
Moscow, ID
RV8 Finish
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: | Lord Engine Mount Torque |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Vince Himsl" <vhimsl@turbonet.com>
Hello,
In setting the torque for the "Lord" mounts on my dynafocal engine, I have encountered
a problem.
I cannot get a torque wrench on the nut so have it on the bolt itself. With this
arrangement, the instructions say that
you can increase the torque on a castle nut (310) by the amount of drag on the
bolt when trying to align the bolt hole.
Given above, is the true torque on the castle nut equal to the total torque minus
the drag (measured)?
For numbers: Total torque on wrench = 60 ft/lbs. & measured drag=30 ft/lbs. This
implies that the true torque on the an310
is 60-30= 30 ft/lbs. Is this correct?
Thanks,
Vince Himsl
RV-8 SB Finish
RV8432 (rsvrd)
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: Specific Fuel Consumption |
--> RV-List message posted by: kempthornes <kempthornes@earthlink.net>
Good testing I guess as long as it is for one aircraft and one engine
etc. I don't think it works well comparing one plane to another for
several reasons.
Even if both have Lycoming O360A1A's for example. One has 60 hours the
other 1200. The older engine is looser so less power is lost to moving the
engine parts. I picture the two engines on stands driven as if they were
pumps. One is loose and consumes less power - seems reasonable. If the
loose engine has poor compression then maybe it puts out less power.
I saw somewhere once that a 180hp Lyc puts out between 171hp and
189hp. That is, each engine coming off the production line will be within
+- 5% of the rated hp.! So one guy has a 160hp O320 that puts out 105%
and the other has an O360 that puts out 95% - that makes it 168 and
171. Now suppose the guy with the O320 has the newer fat wheelpants or a
better exhaust system or a prop pitched a hair off towards the speed side?
It is all very complicated.
K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
RV6-a N7HK - Three trips to OSH now.
PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA)
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: LightSpeed Engineering Ignition coil mounting |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Vic Jacko" <vicwj@earthlink.net>
Vince, I installed the LSE the exact same way on a Lycoming 0-235 L2C with
no difficulty. You can still apply the same torque as before using a
slightly longer bolt with steel washers against the brackets.
Vic
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vince Himsl" <vhimsl@turbonet.com>
Subject: RV-List: LightSpeed Engineering Ignition coil mounting
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Vince Himsl" <vhimsl@turbonet.com>
>
> Hello,
>
> I am trying to install the LSE Plasma II ignition coils that were shipped
with my Aerosport dynafocal O-360 engine and I
> need to know if it is ok to remove the engine hoist/lift bracket and
install the LSE bracket in its place. As near as I can
> tell, that is the only place it can go.
>
> OK?
>
> If Ok, is there any problems with removing and retorque the one bolt
involved or do I have a specific procedure I have to
> go through as it is a case bolt?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Vince Himsl
> Moscow, ID
> RV8 Finish
>
>
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: LightSpeed Engineering Ignition coil mounting |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Thats where I, and others I have seen have been mounted. As far as the bolt
goes replace the lock washer and re torque per specs.
At 08:49 AM 1/9/04 -0800, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Vince Himsl" <vhimsl@turbonet.com>
>
>Hello,
>
>I am trying to install the LSE Plasma II ignition coils that were shipped
>with my Aerosport dynafocal O-360 engine and I
>need to know if it is ok to remove the engine hoist/lift bracket and install
>the LSE bracket in its place. As near as I can
>tell, that is the only place it can go.
>
>OK?
>
>If Ok, is there any problems with removing and retorque the one bolt
>involved or do I have a specific procedure I have to
>go through as it is a case bolt?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Vince Himsl
>Moscow, ID
>RV8 Finish
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
do not archive
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:Prop Indexing |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Joe & Jan Connell" <jconnell@rconnect.com>
I've been watching this thread with a lot of interest.
Would the reduction of vibration have something to
do with the prop's relationship to the airframe when it
receives the major portion of the power pulse from
the engine? Perhaps the effect on the prop from the
cowling, canopy, wing roots, and nose gear (and vise-
versa) when the prop is reacting to the power surge
might be part of the mystery. I dunno...
Joe -- RV-9A, N95JJ, finishing kit
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: Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption] |
--> RV-List message posted by: n6jx@earthlink.net
Trampas,
I agree with your points. An engine is a big air pump. At a given MP and RPM,
it is going to ingest a set quantity of air. If we hit the perfect stociometric
fuel/air ratio, we are going to deliver the max possible power. Thus, if
one sets a specific MP and RPM and fuel/air ratio, power is also predictiable.
Modern automobile engines do this very effectively as you point out using
mass airflow sensors, O2 sensors and computers. Things most of us don't have
in our RVs.
With our aircraft engines, we have to control mixture and my post was intended
to point out that by looking at the fuel flow it is possible to estimate horsepower
being produced, which in turn can be converted to % of power depending on
the size engine you start out with. I agree that the further away from the
optimum stociometric ratio you get, the less accurate this becomes, so if you
pump in a lot more fuel than you can effectivly combust, you will not get any
additional power, and will in fact get less power. I am not really sure about
the impact of running either slightly rich of peak or slightlylean of peak
(+75 to -50) on the power output per gallon used. So this weekend I will try
an experiment. I will set up a TAS of 164kts by running wide open throttle,
2400 rpm and lean of peak and record fuel flow, and then keep the RPM at 2400,
and find the MP required to get 164kts at 75 degrees rich of peak, and see what
fuel flow results. Going 164kts will take the same horsepower, so any change
in fuel flow will be due to efficiencies in the combustion of the fuel.
Mel Jordan
RV-6A
Tucson
Subject: RE: Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption]
From: Trampas (tstern@nc.rr.com)
--> RV-List message posted by: "Trampas" <tstern@nc.rr.com>
The way I view things is that fuel produces power. Therefore based on your
engine's efficiency the amount of fuel you burn is proportional to the
horsepower, with in reason. By reason I mean if you dump all gas and no air,
you get no power...
So if we go back to engine theory and say that we want to have a 14.7:1 air
fuel ratio, then by measuring the air entering the engine we can calculate
the fuel burned, again assuming 14.7:1. So to calculate the mass of the air
entering the engine we can get close by measuring the RPMs, Air temperature,
Barometer pressure, and MAP, this is called speed density calculations.
Now what most people do for calculating percentage of horsepower is realize
that the air temperature and barometer pressure cancel out, removed from
equation. Thus you can estimate percentage of horsepower based on MAP and
RPM, again assuming constant fuel mixture. This the problem, if you change
air fuel ratio/mixture you change the maximum horsepower and thus you may
still read 75% horsepower but your 100% horsepower level may have changed.
A better method would be to calculate real horsepower estimates. That is by
measuring the fuel flow, and the air flow you can actually calculate the
fuel to air ratio. Then by knowing the efficiency of the engine you can get
a pretty good estimate of real horsepower, however the efficiency of the
engine will be variable and not easy to estimate, thus you will always have
some inaccuracies. Even better is to use a fuel injected engine with an O2
sensor such that the computer maintains a constant air fuel ratio.
Regards,
Trampas Stern
Stern Technologies
4321 Waterwheel Dr
Raleigh NC 27606
919-832-8441 Ext. 12 (voice)
919-832-8441 (fax)
www.sterntech.com
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "GMC" <gmcnutt@intergate.ca>
I am planning on adding a second Com radio to my RV-6A for IFR redundancy
and would like any feedback, good or bad, from anyone using the Microair 760
Com radio. I am worried about the low 3 1/2 watt Tx power and repair
service.
I have considered Becker AR4201 (5 watt tx) but it is longer and requires
moving wire bundle and cutting a hole in the sub panel.
Have also been watching the Xcom 760 web site, sounds great but shipping
date has slipped almost a year and it is still not approved and available.
Thanks
George in Langley BC.
6A - 230 hrs
Message 40
| 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: Prop indexing |
--> RV-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
I have an email inquiry sent in to Ed Zercher at Sensenich and will let everyone
know what he says. I also plan to call Lycoming this afternoon. Details to
follow.
-Bill B
re-indexed for now :-)
do not archive
Message 41
| 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: Microair 760 |
--> RV-List message posted by: N13eer@aol.com
George,
I have a Microair 760 as my only radio, it is a great performer. I have a bent
whip antenna mounted on bottom of the plane with about a 4' coax cable run to
it. I have never had any problems being able to reach ATC. During my flight
test I called up from as far out as 75 NM and the radio was reported loud and
clear. While flying x-country with another RV who has a Garmin gps-com I can
pick up ATIS several miles farther out than he can.
Hope this helps,
Alan Kritzman
Cedar Rapids
RV-8 120 hours
In a message dated 1/9/2004 12:58:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, "GMC" <gmcnutt@intergate.ca>
writes:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "GMC" <gmcnutt@intergate.ca>
>
>
>I am planning on adding a second Com radio to my RV-6A for IFR redundancy
>and would like any feedback, good or bad, from anyone using the Microair 760
>Com radio. I am worried about the low 3 1/2 watt Tx power and repair
>service.
>
>I have considered Becker AR4201 (5 watt tx) but it is longer and requires
>moving wire bundle and cutting a hole in the sub panel.
>Have also been watching the Xcom 760 web site, sounds great but shipping
>date has slipped almost a year and it is still not approved and available.
>
>Thanks
>George in Langley BC.
>6A - 230 hrs
Message 42
| 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: Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption] |
--> RV-List message posted by: Michael McGee <jmpcrftr@teleport.com>
At 08:17 2004-01-09, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob U." <rv3@comcast.net>
>
>Trampas wrote:
>
> >A better method would be to calculate real horsepower estimates. That is by
> >measuring the fuel flow, and the air flow you can actually calculate the
> >fuel to air ratio. Then by knowing the efficiency of the engine you can get
> >a pretty good estimate of real horsepower, however the efficiency of the
> >engine will be variable and not easy to estimate, thus you will always have
> >some inaccuracies. Even better is to use a fuel injected engine with an O2
> >sensor such that the computer maintains a constant air fuel ratio.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Trampas Stern
> >
>
>
>How do you get an O2 sensor to survive aviation 100LL?
>
>
>Bob
>
>Do not archive
They don't die with leaded fuel use, they just react slower and slower over
time. Too slow to be useful for engine control computers, particularly for
smog control. If you are using an O2 sensor to drive an air/fuel ratio
meter on your panel for visual indication of A/F ratio it will still
work. After a while it may react too slow for your personal
preference. Then you just swap out the sensor for a new one.
Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Hillsboro, OR
13B in gestation mode
Message 43
| 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 indexing and engine smoothness |
--> RV-List message posted by: czechsix@juno.com
Randy, I noticed on my new Hartzell that it can only be mounted one way (or 180
degrees the other way) as you have found. The difference with the Sensenich
IIRC is that the spacer has recesses of equal size on all 6 bolt positions so
you can mount it any way you want in 60 degree increments...
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D Sensenich sold, Hartzell ready to mount...
From: "Randy Lervold" <randy@rv-8.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: propeller indexing and engine smoothness
--> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Lervold" <randy@rv-8.com>
This is a very interesting concept but I'm wondering how you guys are doing
this? The prop flange on my O-360 A1A has raised bosses on four of the six
holes that are designed to mate up with recesses on the prop hub. The two
that don't are 180 opposite each other. I've had a Hartzell and three
different Whirl Wind propellers on there and there's only two possible
positions to install it and they are 180 degrees apart so you don't have any
way to "index" the prop as is being described. Please clue me in, and what
do the engine building gurus such as Aero Sport Power or Lycon have to say
about all this?
BTW, here's some additional trivia for you: My Hartzell stopped at
10:00/4:00 as viewed from the front just like everyone elses. Then I
installed the Whirl Wind 200C and later the 200RV and they both stopped at
9:00/3:00 (dead horizontal). I asked WW about this and guessed it had
something to do with the mass of the propeller and he laughed. Seems
McCauley, who makes the hub for these two models, just indexes it in a
different place than Hartzell and he didn't know why. Hmm, maybe this is one
reason why the WW props feel smoother?
Inquiring minds want to know more.
Randy Lervold
RV-8
Message 44
| 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: | Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption] |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Trampas" <tstern@nc.rr.com>
Your right O2 sensors will not work with 100LL, but they will work with
unleaded pump gas. Of course most 'traditional' airplane engines do not use
pump gas and O2 sensors. However if you have a conversion engine...
Regards,
Trampas Stern
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob U.
Subject: Re: RV-List: Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption]
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob U." <rv3@comcast.net>
Trampas wrote:
>A better method would be to calculate real horsepower estimates. That is by
>measuring the fuel flow, and the air flow you can actually calculate the
>fuel to air ratio. Then by knowing the efficiency of the engine you can get
>a pretty good estimate of real horsepower, however the efficiency of the
>engine will be variable and not easy to estimate, thus you will always have
>some inaccuracies. Even better is to use a fuel injected engine with an O2
>sensor such that the computer maintains a constant air fuel ratio.
>
>Regards,
>Trampas Stern
>
How do you get an O2 sensor to survive aviation 100LL?
Bob
Do not archive
Message 45
| 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: ELT antenna mounting RV8A |
--> RV-List message posted by: HCRV6@aol.com
In a message dated 1/8/04 12:52:14 PM Pacific Standard Time,
mrobert569@hotmail.com writes:
<< I replaced the antenna that came with the ELT with a shorter wire-wound
rubber covered ELT antenna >>
Mike: Where did you get the shorter ELT antenna you used? Thanks.
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, firewall forward
Message 46
| 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 indexing: Lycoming response |
--> RV-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
Me: "Good afternoon, John. I am calling to ask if there are any technical concerns
with re-indexing a fixed-pitch metal prop to be at 3 and 9 o'clock at TDC
on an O-320 mounted on an RV, to reduce perceived vibration levels."
John at Textron.Lycoming tech support: "No."
Me: "There was some concern on our internet RV List that this might cause some
unforseen vibration issues with the prop or the engine..."
John (patiently): "No."
Unless Ed Z. from Sensenich weighs in here, pulling his hair out and screaming,
I am going to consider this the final word on the matter- indexing is a matter
of personal preference :-) I like the suggestion that a prop balancer with
time on his hands run some field tests for us and post the results.
-Bill B
Message 47
| 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: Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? |
--> RV-List message posted by: HCRV6@aol.com
In a message dated 1/8/04 8:28:08 PM Pacific Standard Time,
bicyclop@pacbell.net writes:
<< I've bought a lot of tools over the years and it seems that I usually end
up buying them again if I don't get high quality tools the first time. It's
not a good way to save money. >>
Ditto!
Do not archive
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, firewall forward
Message 48
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Joe Hine" <joehine@rogers.com>
Hi George
I don't have a Microair myself but the helicopter I was a passenger in at
work a lot had one as a second radio and they were very happy with it. The
helicopter has been traded (C-GMPT, great buy for someone....always well
looked after). I have sent and received on the radio and couldn't tell the
difference with the main radio. No complaints from any other stations
either. Mostly used to monitor though.
Joe Hine
C-FYTQ RV4
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of GMC
Subject: RV-List: Microair 760
--> RV-List message posted by: "GMC" <gmcnutt@intergate.ca>
I am planning on adding a second Com radio to my RV-6A for IFR redundancy
and would like any feedback, good or bad, from anyone using the Microair 760
Com radio. I am worried about the low 3 1/2 watt Tx power and repair
service.
I have considered Becker AR4201 (5 watt tx) but it is longer and requires
moving wire bundle and cutting a hole in the sub panel.
Have also been watching the Xcom 760 web site, sounds great but shipping
date has slipped almost a year and it is still not approved and available.
Thanks
George in Langley BC.
6A - 230 hrs
Message 49
| 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: Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption] |
--> RV-List message posted by: <klwerner@comcast.net>
Mike,
Would a product called "TCP" (a Lead Scavenger) solve this slow death of an O2-sensor?
Does anyone on this list have any practical experience with "TCP" ?
I sure would like to hear any Pro's & Con's about its usage with 100LL.
Thanks,
Konrad
>>>
They don't die with leaded fuel use, they just react slower and slower over
time. Too slow to be useful for engine control computers, particularly for
smog control. If you are using an O2 sensor to drive an air/fuel ratio
meter on your panel for visual indication of A/F ratio it will still
work. After a while it may react too slow for your personal
preference. Then you just swap out the sensor for a new one.
Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Hillsboro, OR
13B in gestation mode
Message 50
| 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: Microair 760 |
--> RV-List message posted by: RVEIGHTA@aol.com
I also have the Microair 760 as my only radio and the range, transmission and
reception qualities are very crisp and clear. The built in sidetone intercom
however, is another matter. With it you have a hot mike which picks up the
ambient noise in the cockpit making communications with my passenger almost
impossible. I've ordered the Flighttech two place noise eliminating intercom.
Walt Shipley RV-8A 56 hrs
Message 51
| 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 |
|
aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
| Subject: | Garage Sale has Ended |
--> RV-List message posted by: czechsix@juno.com
Thanks guys, everything is SOLD!
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D baffles and other stuff....
Subject: Garage Sale
Guys, I have some stuff for sale. Everything came from Vans except the
VSI that I bought at Oshkosh. All prices are subject to negotiation so
if you think I'm a cheap tightwad (which is probably true), don't be
upset or insulted, just make me a reasonable offer. Buyer pays shipping.
Please respond OFF LIST if interested in anything!
VA-149-360-PC, Throttle/Mixture Bracket for O-360 carb, *FREE* to anyone
who is buying something else that I can ship it with. Vans price is $18,
this one has been slightly modified (long story) but should still work
just fine for the intended purpose....
IE F-385B and IE F-385C Stewart Warner Sending Units (left and right),
these were carefully bent to fit my RV-8A tanks (which should fit any
RV-7/8 wings, not sure about other models). I installed them and gooped
some proseal around the mount/gasket to help seal them, then removed them
when I put Princeton Capacitive probes in later. They won't win a beauty
constest but work fine and will save you some installation
time....they've never touched fuel but I verified them with an ohm meter
for proper operation. Vans price is $46 (or $23 each), asking $20 for
both of them together.
CT 82F, RV-8/8A 2-lever Throttle/Mixt Quadrant, was briefly installed in
my plane before I upgraded to CS prop. One of the aluminum plates on the
outboard side of the quadrant is painted with grey Rustoleum which could
be repainted, but it's mostly hidden when installed in the side console.
Vans price $39, asking $25.
EA CARB HEAT MUFF, new in the bag. Vans price $22.50, asking $17.
FAB-360, Filtered Airbox for O-360, Marvel Carb; IO-320/360 (180 hp)
Bendix Injection. New and unassembled. Vans price $120, asking $100.
IF-UMA-16-311-241D, RV-7/8 Air Speed Indicator, 3 1/8" diameter, outer
scale knots, inner mph. New in box. Vans price $143, asking $120.
IF BG-3B Altimeter, 3 1/8" diameter. New in box. Vans price $198,
asking $175.
UMA #8-310-30 Vertical Speed Indicator, +/- 3000 fpm scale, 3 1/8"
diameter. New in box. Pacific Coast Avionics price was $125, asking
$100.
Thanks for your interest and apologies for cluttering the List with this
stuff...
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D would be flying by now if I'd quit changing stuff!
Do Not Archive
Message 52
| 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: Microair 760 |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jim Daniels <jwdanie@comcast.net>
> I've ordered the Flighttech two place noise eliminating intercom.
>
> Walt Shipley RV-8A 56 hrs
Hi Walt,
Can you report on your experiences with the FlightTech ENRI intercom
after you get it running? I'm curious how well this works and I have
not found any other reviews.
Thanks!
Jim Daniels
RV8
jwdanie@comcast.net
http://home.comcast.net/~jwdanie/
do not archive
Message 53
| 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: Prop indexing - reply |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Pat Perry" <pperryrv@hotmail.com>
My hub has an enlarged lug that matched an enlarged hole on my flywheel.
This foces the flywheel to be installed in only one possible position which
makes the TDC mark on the flywheel correct. I'm not sure but I don't think
the enlargement extends beyond the thickness of the flywheel. Either way
the prop is not next in line but the extention is.
On my assembly the prop can be positioned in any position on the extension.
The prop isn't mounted directly to the flange. There is a flywheel,
extension, (3) 1/8" spacers, and a spinner plate before the prop.
Pat Perry
Dallas, PA
RV-4 N154PK Flies great!
>From: P M Condon <pcondon@mitre.org>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: Re: Prop indexing - reply
>Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 09:25:27 -0500
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: P M Condon <pcondon@mitre.org>
>
>(for the archives and future searching....thanks Jim...)
>
>
>In a message dated 1/8/04 7:12:20 AM Pacific Standard Time,
>pcondon@mitre.org writes:
>
> Also, a few days ago someone related to the group how the longest
>drive
> lug is used to determin the proper prop placement on the crank
>flange.
> That didn't make sence either because the longest lug is STILL the
> longest lug once you put the flywheel on......right...??
>
>
>The "longest lug"??? I believe the lugs are the same length. One of
>them has a "step" which lines up with the O marked hole on the
>starter ring gear. I do not believe that it has anything to do with
>prop indexing, other than to allow a starting point at which to
>determine
>when #1 cylinder is at TDC. The physical indexing is determined by how
>you install the spinner backplate.
>
>Jim Nice
>WA State
>
>
Message 54
| 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: Microair 760 |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Vic Jacko" <vicwj@earthlink.net>
George, I had good performance with the Microair. I would not worry about
the 3 1/2 watts power output. Just put a high quality antenna and coax on
it and keep the lead- in short. You may want to consider using the antenna
now mounted on the airplane for this new radio and use your new antenna for
your current radio if this shortens the lead-in!
Vic
----- Original Message -----
From: "GMC" <gmcnutt@intergate.ca>
Subject: RV-List: Microair 760
> --> RV-List message posted by: "GMC" <gmcnutt@intergate.ca>
>
>
> I am planning on adding a second Com radio to my RV-6A for IFR redundancy
> and would like any feedback, good or bad, from anyone using the Microair
760
> Com radio. I am worried about the low 3 1/2 watt Tx power and repair
> service.
>
> I have considered Becker AR4201 (5 watt tx) but it is longer and requires
> moving wire bundle and cutting a hole in the sub panel.
> Have also been watching the Xcom 760 web site, sounds great but shipping
> date has slipped almost a year and it is still not approved and available.
>
> Thanks
> George in Langley BC.
> 6A - 230 hrs
>
>
Message 55
| 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: Microair 760 |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Vic Jacko" <vicwj@earthlink.net>
I agree on the use of the intercom provision however a simple push on/off
switch to ground takes care of this problem. If you want to talk to the
other passenger just bump the button once then bump it again when finished.
A similar switch could be place on the control stick.
Vic
----- Original Message -----
From: <RVEIGHTA@aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Microair 760
> --> RV-List message posted by: RVEIGHTA@aol.com
>
> I also have the Microair 760 as my only radio and the range, transmission
and
> reception qualities are very crisp and clear. The built in sidetone
intercom
> however, is another matter. With it you have a hot mike which picks up the
> ambient noise in the cockpit making communications with my passenger
almost
> impossible. I've ordered the Flighttech two place noise eliminating
intercom.
>
> Walt Shipley RV-8A 56 hrs
>
>
Message 56
| 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: Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? |
--> RV-List message posted by: kempthornes <kempthornes@earthlink.net>
><< I've bought a lot of tools over the years and it seems that I usually end
>up buying them again if I don't get high quality tools the first time.
So, you should always buy high quality tools. Most builders should not,
however. I get on my high horse about these high quality tool admonitions
because I believe that many prospective builders are put off by them.
Some of my training as an Industrial Engineer involved tool design. Just
defining what quality means is a giant task. I'll write more on that if
anyone cares. For now, I'll just tell what I did and lived to tell about it.
I built my RV6a with some used tools, some cheap tools, some expensive
tools and some home made tools. I am not wealthy so I have to allocate my
funds with care. My plane N7HK first flew in December 2000. Since then
has flown over 160 hours with three trips to Oshkosh with ZERO problems due
to less than the best tools. I suffered no health impairment etc
either. I did save a bunch of money so that I may soon be able to paint
and finish details on my plane.
I bought the cheap little Terry right angle drill rather than the really
nice expensive ones. Savings - about $125. Will the Terry last as
long? I am sure it will not but so what, it lasted thru N7HK and looks as
if it could last thru another. My alignment tools for installing the
ailerons and elevators are bent nails.
I would liked to have had a small sheet metal brake but have been
frightened off by their cheapness, maybe rightfully so. I had the use of a
50 inch Tensmith. Doing it again I will get a air powered squeezer - a
used one will do. I might bid on one of the little CP drills but my
cheapies worked fine. As an experienced builder, I know what I need, however.
If I had more money to toss into it, I'd probably buy better tools. They
can be resold when you are done. One air drill and several cheap electrics
will have a good payback.
K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
RV6-a N7HK - Three trips to OSH now.
PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA)
Message 57
| 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: Specific Fuel Consumption |
--> RV-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
If you have not already, I recommend reading John Deakin's
"Pelican's Perch" articles here:
http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182146-1.html
He's written a lot about getting the most out of your
aviation engine. Start from the bottom of the list
and work your way up.
He explains how to run your engine *lean* of peak,
why it is good, and explains why we have always heard
that LOP is bad.
Major issues for him are good EGT gauges, and good injectors.
Worth the effort to read these articles!
Mickey
>I don't pay any attention to my EGTs any more. I lean to sputter then, rich
>to smooth running. This definitely yields a decrease in speed from rich of
>peak.
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
Message 58
| 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: Prop indexing |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <Fred.Stucklen@UTCFuelCells.com>
James,
My RV-6A has an O-320D1A engine with a Sensenich prop....
Fred Stucklen
RV-6A N926RV
135+ hrs since Aug 03
--> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark"
Fred,
What engine/prop combination was this?
James
Message 59
| 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: Prop indexing |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <Fred.Stucklen@UTCFuelCells.com>
My guess is that the vibration magnitude direction changes... More of their
effect is in a horizontal direction, instead of a vertical direction. Since
engine vibrations are mainly horizontal magnitudes, the props imbalance
magnitudes add/subtract with the engines, thus canceling some vibration out
Fred Stucklen
RV-6A N926RV
135+ Hrs since Aug 03....
--> RV-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net
<mailto:lhelming@sigecom.net>> Sure I got a theory. I notice that anytime I
wash and wax my car, or vac the insides, that it runs and rides much
smoother next time I drive it. My theory is the vehicle appreciates the
attention and responds in a kindly manner. Honestly, I been following this
thread and have been wondering what physics are at play here to induce those
who make the change respond there is less vibration/more smoothness. I think
I'd be much more on board for doing it myself if someone would measure the
vibration before and after rather than make statements like, "It was much
smoother running." What type of device could be used to measure the
vibrations to do such a test? Do not archive this trivial. Indiana Larry,
RV7 Tip-up TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak On Finish Kit -----
Original Message ----- From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net
<mailto:alexpeterson@usjet.net>> Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: Prop indexing >
--> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net
<mailto:alexpeterson@usjet.net>> > > > John, > > > > I just re-indexed my
prop before a trip to Florida (from > > Ct) over the Christmas/New Years
break. I originally had it > > such that the compression (#1 > > TDC)
occurred at the 10 o'clock position (viewed from the > > front), and changed
it to the 9 o'clock position. > > I would say that the vibration levels
(experienced inside > > the cockpit) were reduced by at least 50%. (I do not
having > > any instrumentation to accurately quantify vibration levels, > >
but based my estimations on observed vibrations in the > > compass which is
mounted on the brow screen....) > > I think my next step will be to have the
prop balanced..... > > Does anyone have a theory as to why this would be the
case? (Paul > Petersen, I know you will think about this one!) The engine
can't sense > where the prop is, so it would have to be airflow related. I'm
> skeptical about that, though. I could imagine on specific engine/props >
that some imbalance offset could be occuring when the prop is rotated >
relative to the crank, making for a smoother operation. > > Alex Peterson >
Maple Grove, MN > RV6-A N66AP 425 hours > www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
> >
Message 60
| 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: Microair 760 |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob U." <rv3@comcast.net>
GMC wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "GMC" <gmcnutt@intergate.ca>
>
>
>I am planning on adding a second Com radio to my RV-6A for IFR redundancy
>and would like any feedback, good or bad, from anyone using the Microair 760
>Com radio. I am worried about the low 3 1/2 watt Tx power and repair
>service.
>
I have about 1 watt for transmit and can talk 100 miles if need be.
Doubling or tripling the power increases range very little. A good
antenna is a must to hear and talk any practical distance. To talk
farther, altitude is far more important than power.
Bob
Do not archive
Message 61
| 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: Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption] |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob U." <rv3@comcast.net>
Trampas wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Trampas" <tstern@nc.rr.com>
>
>Your right O2 sensors will not work with 100LL, but they will work with
>unleaded pump gas. Of course most 'traditional' airplane engines do not use
>pump gas and O2 sensors. However if you have a conversion engine...
>
>Regards,
>Trampas Stern
>
Flying cross country, good luck getting QUALITY mogas at the majority of
airports for an auto 'conversion'. Where mogas is available, there is a
good chance it will be old and stale. My home airport quit selling mogas
because of slow sales and such problems.
Bob - burning mogas in my 150 hp 0-320 where I can trust the source.
Message 62
| 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: Microair 760 |
--> RV-List message posted by: PASSPAT@aol.com
Hi Guys:
I have used the Microair products in at least four different
applications with sucess every time. I have had some problems and they were
taken care of asap by the Microair folks everytime . My T-2000 trans spit the
bit and I e-mailed Microair they sent return instructions so I did that. Next
e-mail stated the trans would be replaced with a new unit right off the shelf
and that I had recieved and early model that had a bug or two.
However I agree with the comment that the hot mike intercom is very
far from tolerable in the cockpit. Hope this helps with you pick of equipment
Pat Patterson RV-10
Message 63
| 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:Prop Indexing |
--> RV-List message posted by: smoothweasel@juno.com
I to have been watching this thread and Joe I think you might have part
of the answer but was wandering IF! it REALLY does cause less vibration?
Could it be that if you think of a four cylinder four cycle engine while
it is running it fires two times on every revolution. In between these
"fire" points the rotation speed is decreasing to some small measure ( I
realize when a cylinder fires at say 25 degrees that it continues to make
power for a certain amount of degrees resulting in not just a power pulse
) the flywheel helps it to not slow down as much. But maybe this has
something to do with the prop "speeding up " and " slowing down " at a
certain place in relation to the airframe mass........???????
DISCLAIMER: I am not a engineer.......in fact I don't even have a college
education so use these ideas only as ones thinking and not knowing.
do not archive
Joel "Weasel" Graber
-4 small detail work
On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 11:33:43 -0600 "Joe & Jan Connell"
<jconnell@rconnect.com> writes:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Joe & Jan Connell"
> <jconnell@rconnect.com>
>
> I've been watching this thread with a lot of interest.
>
> Would the reduction of vibration have something to
> do with the prop's relationship to the airframe when it
> receives the major portion of the power pulse from
> the engine? Perhaps the effect on the prop from the
> cowling, canopy, wing roots, and nose gear (and vise-
> versa) when the prop is reacting to the power surge
> might be part of the mystery. I dunno...
>
> Joe -- RV-9A, N95JJ, finishing kit
>
>
>
=
>
=
>
=
> ===========================================
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 64
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Bower" <rvbuilder@hotmail.com>
Gang,
If this gets through, please accept my apologies for junking up your
in-baskets. If not, I am having problems. I'll wait and see if this
bounces back to me.
Jim Bower
St. Louis
RV-6A - Fuselage (Finish kit on order)
Tired of slow downloads? Compare online deals from your local high-speed
providers now. https://broadband.msn.com
Message 65
| 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: | horizontal stab and shim to level |
--> RV-List message posted by: RV8ter@aol.com
My horizontal stab requires about an extra 1/8 shim on the left side to get
it to be level with the QB fuse. That seems like a lot but maybe not.
Is that more or less in the ballpark as *not unusual*?
thanks,
lucky
do not archive
Message 66
| 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: | Exiting an RV in Flight - Ideas |
--> RV-List message posted by: cecilth@juno.com
If you have a slider, look at how the two rollers are fastened to the
canopy frame.
Instead of a bolt here, use pull pins with small rings attached. (A Good
Hardware Store has them)
In an emergency, 1. pull both pins. 2. unlatch canopy. 3. push up into
slip stream.
Cecil Hatfield
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 21:13:02 -0800 j1j2h3@juno.com writes:
> --> RV-List message posted by: j1j2h3@juno.com
>
> Would you please explain how to jettison the canopy. I was not
> aware
> that this could be done.
>
> Jim Hasper - RV-7 just starting empennage (setting up shop in
> Franklin,
> Tennessee)
>
> Do not archive
Message 67
| 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: Prop indexing |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Harvey Sigmon" <rv6hes@comcast.net>
Fred: In response to your post about prop indexing, after reading the many
post about repositioning prop to a different position. Yesterday I
experimented with my 0-320B1A with a Senenich -79 prop. Prior to moving
to the position of 8&2:00 O'clock my prop was at the normal position of
1&5:00. I had a vibration at 1,000, 1,500, 2,000 RPM. Above this value it
was smooth. After moving to the position of 8:00 o'clock the vibration went
away at 1,000, 1,500 and 2,000 RPM. But above 2100 it was very vibration
prone, at 2400 it was really shaking to the point I did not like the
outcome. Today I reset to the original position, all things considered my
thinking as the engine is timed to fire at 25degrees before top dead center
on # 1 the rotation of the propeller is very close to the Horizontal
position we were seeking. I talked to Ed Zelky at Senenich and his
engineers said as far as they are concerned it should not make any
difference about the prop as it is balanced. I think in my case when I
have the prop balanced all my vibration will go away with the prop set at
the standard position. This is my ideas only and what I discovered , I hope
this does not start a negative flame. It seems every case is a little
different.
Harvey Sigmon RV-6A N602-RV flying 290HRS.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <Fred.Stucklen@UTCFuelCells.com>
Subject: RV-List: Re: Prop indexing
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Stucklen, Frederic IFC"
<Fred.Stucklen@UTCFuelCells.com>
>
> James,
>
> My RV-6A has an O-320D1A engine with a Sensenich prop....
>
> Fred Stucklen
> RV-6A N926RV
> 135+ hrs since Aug 03
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark"
> Fred,
> What engine/prop combination was this?
> James
>
>
Message 68
| 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: Prop indexing |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Tim Bryan" <Tim@bryantechnology.com>
Harvey,
You said:
Prior to moving to the position of 8&2:00 O'clock my prop was at the normal
position of
1&5:00
If this is really true, you had better get a new prop or have more than 2
blades.
All in fun
Do Not Archive
-------Original Message-------
From: rv-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Prop indexing
--> RV-List message posted by: "Harvey Sigmon" <rv6hes@comcast.net>
Fred: In response to your post about prop indexing, after reading the many
post about repositioning prop to a different position. Yesterday I
experimented with my 0-320B1A with a Senenich -79 prop. Prior to moving
to the position of 8&2:00 O'clock my prop was at the normal position of
1&5:00. I had a vibration at 1,000, 1,500, 2,000 RPM. Above this value it
was smooth. After moving to the position of 8:00 o'clock the vibration went
away at 1,000, 1,500 and 2,000 RPM. But above 2100 it was very vibration
prone, at 2400 it was really shaking to the point I did not like the
outcome. Today I reset to the original position, all things considered my
thinking as the engine is timed to fire at 25degrees before top dead center
on # 1 the rotation of the propeller is very close to the Horizontal
position we were seeking. I talked to Ed Zelky at Senenich and his
engineers said as far as they are concerned it should not make any
difference about the prop as it is balanced. I think in my case when I
have the prop balanced all my vibration will go away with the prop set at
the standard position. This is my ideas only and what I discovered , I hope
this does not start a negative flame. It seems every case is a little
different.
Harvey Sigmon RV-6A N602-RV flying 290HRS.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <Fred.Stucklen@UTCFuelCells.com>
Subject: RV-List: Re: Prop indexing
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Stucklen, Frederic IFC"
<Fred.Stucklen@UTCFuelCells.com>
>
> James,
>
> My RV-6A has an O-320D1A engine with a Sensenich prop....
>
> Fred Stucklen
> RV-6A N926RV
> 135+ hrs since Aug 03
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark"
> Fred,
> What engine/prop combination was this?
> James
>
>
.
Message 69
| 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: Prop indexing |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Harvey Sigmon" <rv6hes@comcast.net>
I never did say I was perfect, as you see I can't type either.
Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Bryan" <Tim@bryantechnology.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Prop indexing
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Tim Bryan" <Tim@bryantechnology.com>
>
> Harvey,
>
> You said:
> Prior to moving to the position of 8&2:00 O'clock my prop was at the
normal
> position of
> 1&5:00
>
> If this is really true, you had better get a new prop or have more than 2
> blades.
>
> All in fun
> Do Not Archive
>
>
> -------Original Message-------
>
> From: rv-list@matronics.com
> Date: Friday, January 09, 2004 04:06:44 PM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Prop indexing
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Harvey Sigmon" <rv6hes@comcast.net>
>
> Fred: In response to your post about prop indexing, after reading the many
> post about repositioning prop to a different position. Yesterday I
> experimented with my 0-320B1A with a Senenich -79 prop. Prior to moving
> to the position of 8&2:00 O'clock my prop was at the normal position of
> 1&5:00. I had a vibration at 1,000, 1,500, 2,000 RPM. Above this value it
> was smooth. After moving to the position of 8:00 o'clock the vibration
went
> away at 1,000, 1,500 and 2,000 RPM. But above 2100 it was very vibration
> prone, at 2400 it was really shaking to the point I did not like the
> outcome. Today I reset to the original position, all things considered my
> thinking as the engine is timed to fire at 25degrees before top dead
center
> on # 1 the rotation of the propeller is very close to the Horizontal
> position we were seeking. I talked to Ed Zelky at Senenich and his
> engineers said as far as they are concerned it should not make any
> difference about the prop as it is balanced. I think in my case when I
> have the prop balanced all my vibration will go away with the prop set at
> the standard position. This is my ideas only and what I discovered , I
hope
> this does not start a negative flame. It seems every case is a little
> different.
> Harvey Sigmon RV-6A N602-RV flying 290HRS.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <Fred.Stucklen@UTCFuelCells.com>
> To: <james@nextupventures.com>
> Subject: RV-List: Re: Prop indexing
>
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: "Stucklen, Frederic IFC"
> <Fred.Stucklen@UTCFuelCells.com>
> >
> > James,
> >
> > My RV-6A has an O-320D1A engine with a Sensenich prop....
> >
> > Fred Stucklen
> > RV-6A N926RV
> > 135+ hrs since Aug 03
> >
> > --> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark"
> > Fred,
> > What engine/prop combination was this?
> > James
> >
> >
>
>
> .
>
>
Message 70
| 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: Percent horsepower [was Specific Fuel Consumption] |
--> RV-List message posted by: Michael McGee <jmpcrftr@teleport.com>
Re: O2 sensors, leaded fuel, and TCP
At 11:20 2004-01-09, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: <klwerner@comcast.net>
>
>Mike,
>Would a product called "TCP" (a Lead Scavenger) solve this slow death of
>an O2-sensor?
>
>Does anyone on this list have any practical experience with "TCP" ?
>I sure would like to hear any Pro's & Con's about its usage with 100LL.
>
>Thanks,
>Konrad
No idea, never used the stuff. I've been running a 150 HP O-320 for 200
hours on 100LL and a couple dozen hours on 130 (high lead) when 110LL
wasn't available and never had any problems.
Mike
Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Hillsboro, OR
13B in gestation mode
> >>>
>They don't die with leaded fuel use, they just react slower and slower over
>time. Too slow to be useful for engine control computers, particularly for
>smog control. If you are using an O2 sensor to drive an air/fuel ratio
>meter on your panel for visual indication of A/F ratio it will still
>work. After a while it may react too slow for your personal
>preference. Then you just swap out the sensor for a new one.
>
>Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Hillsboro, OR
>13B in gestation mode
Message 71
| 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: | horizontal stab and shim to level |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
Lucky,
On my QB 6, I shimmed the h. stab also. I don't remember if it was an
eighth or not. Mine has about 1/4" twist in the cabin area and a nice
little gink just forward of the tail on the right side. I think those
guys in the Philippines probably don't check their jigs for straight and
level. The matched hole QB's (7 and 9) shouldn't have any problems. The
main thing is to have the wings and tail aligned with each other and
with the proper relative incidence. The fuselage is pretty much just
along for the ride. At least that's what they told me at Van's.
Ed Holyoke
6 (slow) QB canopy skirts
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV8ter@aol.com
Subject: RV-List: horizontal stab and shim to level
--> RV-List message posted by: RV8ter@aol.com
My horizontal stab requires about an extra 1/8 shim on the left side to
get
it to be level with the QB fuse. That seems like a lot but maybe not.
Is that more or less in the ballpark as *not unusual*?
thanks,
lucky
do not archive
==
==
==
==
Message 72
| 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: | EIS-4000 Fuel Senders |
--> RV-List message posted by: "" <tx_jayhawk@excite.com>
All,
I've decided on the Grand Rapids EIS-4000 for fuel monitoring, and I was needing
some help on the fuel sender decision. I think I am going to go with the Princeton
capacitive probes that GRT sells, but I am having a hard time understanding
what they look like. Does anyone have a picture of the Princeton capacitive
and the Stewart Warner float type senders for comparison? Those using the
Princeton...do they seem to be closer to the float-type or the Van's capacitive
plates in accuracy?
For others interested...I thought I'd share what I know (details below applicable
to the EIS). Order of accuracy would be as follows:
1) Van's capacitive plates - require a separate converter ($95 x 2), must be built
into tanks, plates are $60 through vans (total)
2) Princeton capacitive probes - no converters required, sell for $95 each, mount
through access plate, can be purchased pre-bent for RVs, are calibrated during
installation by filling and acknowledging levels
3) Float-type senders - cheapest ($23 per side), unit is calibrated during install,
no converters required
THanks,
Scott Haskins
7A WIngs
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
Message 73
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "RV6 Flyer" <rv6_flyer@hotmail.com>
George:
There is a gal that purchased an RV-6A with a Microair that flys formation
with us. She now has the radio out of the airplane a second time to send
back to Australia for repair. Are there any others that have had problems
with this radio? This is the only one that I know of with a problem. Most
of the people that have them have had few if any problems. One bad report
like this would not keep me from purchasing one of these radio.
Wattage output is not the most important thing on range of a radio. A good
antenna installation is important but altitude is the most important factor.
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
1,424 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
http://SoCAL_WVAF.rvproject.com
----Original Message Follows----
From: "GMC" <gmcnutt@intergate.ca>
Subject: RV-List: Microair 760
--> RV-List message posted by: "GMC" <gmcnutt@intergate.ca>
I am planning on adding a second Com radio to my RV-6A for IFR redundancy
and would like any feedback, good or bad, from anyone using the Microair 760
Com radio. I am worried about the low 3 1/2 watt Tx power and repair
service.
I have considered Becker AR4201 (5 watt tx) but it is longer and requires
moving wire bundle and cutting a hole in the sub panel.
Have also been watching the Xcom 760 web site, sounds great but shipping
date has slipped almost a year and it is still not approved and available.
Thanks
George in Langley BC.
6A - 230 hrs
Message 74
| 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: | Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
Hi Hal,
I understand your point of view and I agree that one doesn't necessarily
have to spend a fortune on tools to get results. I have Craftsman
instead of Snap-On hand tools, for example. I don't usually buy hand
tools out of a tub, and when I do, I'm generally sorry I did soon after.
My attitude toward tool quality is based on years of making a living
with carpentry tools. Good ones paid for themselves in time savings. The
inexpensive (read cheaply make) ones tend to make it difficult to do
high quality (or quantity) work and then break and/or hurt you. That
kind of aggravation is worth avoiding as far as I'm concerned. I'm an
admitted tool snob, but I came by it honestly.
Pax,
Ed Holyoke
Charter member of the tool of the week club
--> RV-List message posted by: kempthornes <kempthornes@earthlink.net>
><< I've bought a lot of tools over the years and it seems that I
usually end
>up buying them again if I don't get high quality tools the first time.
>So, you should always buy high quality tools. Most builders should
not,
however. I get on my high horse about these high quality tool
admonitions
because I believe that many prospective builders are put off by them.
Message 75
| 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: EIS-4000 Fuel Senders |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Perry" <eperry@san.rr.com>
Here's what I know...
I have the EIS4000 and use it to monitor fuel levels. I set it 120 hours ago
and it has accurately and consistently shown fuel within a gallon per tank.
I am using the S/W float senders and am very happy with this set up. For the
complexity and cost I would do it again. I get to watch the fuel disappear
and I have the alarm set to 3 gallons in either tank.
Ed Perry
RV8 180/CS
EIS4000
----- Original Message -----
From: <tx_jayhawk@excite.com>
Subject: RV-List: EIS-4000 Fuel Senders
> --> RV-List message posted by: "" <tx_jayhawk@excite.com>
>
>
> All,
>
> I've decided on the Grand Rapids EIS-4000 for fuel monitoring, and I was
needing some help on the fuel sender decision. I think I am going to go
with the Princeton capacitive probes that GRT sells, but I am having a hard
time understanding what they look like. Does anyone have a picture of the
Princeton capacitive and the Stewart Warner float type senders for
comparison? Those using the Princeton...do they seem to be closer to the
float-type or the Van's capacitive plates in accuracy?
>
> For others interested...I thought I'd share what I know (details below
applicable to the EIS). Order of accuracy would be as follows:
>
> 1) Van's capacitive plates - require a separate converter ($95 x 2), must
be built into tanks, plates are $60 through vans (total)
> 2) Princeton capacitive probes - no converters required, sell for $95
each, mount through access plate, can be purchased pre-bent for RVs, are
calibrated during installation by filling and acknowledging levels
> 3) Float-type senders - cheapest ($23 per side), unit is calibrated during
install, no converters required
>
> THanks,
> Scott Haskins
> 7A WIngs
>
> Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
> The most personalized portal on the Web!
>
>
Message 76
| 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: Prop indexing |
--> RV-List message posted by: <klwerner@comcast.net>
Dear Tim,
They call this layout a "Boomerang Prop" in Australia.
It wobbles a little, but it always brings you back to were you took off from.
Please> Do Not Archive <this theory at all.
(Sorry, but I just could not resist the urge!)
----- Original Message -----
From: Tim Bryan
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 5:25 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Prop indexing
--> RV-List message posted by: "Tim Bryan" <Tim@bryantechnology.com>
Harvey,
You said:
Prior to moving to the position of 8&2:00 O'clock my prop was at the normal
position of
1&5:00
If this is really true, you had better get a new prop or have more than 2
blades.
All in fun
Do Not Archive
-------Original Message-------
From: rv-list@matronics.com
Date: Friday, January 09, 2004 04:06:44 PM
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Prop indexing
--> RV-List message posted by: "Harvey Sigmon" <rv6hes@comcast.net>
Fred: In response to your post about prop indexing, after reading the many
post about repositioning prop to a different position. Yesterday I
experimented with my 0-320B1A with a Senenich -79 prop. Prior to moving
to the position of 8&2:00 O'clock my prop was at the normal position of
1&5:00. I had a vibration at 1,000, 1,500, 2,000 RPM. Above this value it
was smooth. After moving to the position of 8:00 o'clock the vibration went
away at 1,000, 1,500 and 2,000 RPM. But above 2100 it was very vibration
prone, at 2400 it was really shaking to the point I did not like the
outcome. Today I reset to the original position, all things considered my
thinking as the engine is timed to fire at 25degrees before top dead center
on # 1 the rotation of the propeller is very close to the Horizontal
position we were seeking. I talked to Ed Zelky at Senenich and his
engineers said as far as they are concerned it should not make any
difference about the prop as it is balanced. I think in my case when I
have the prop balanced all my vibration will go away with the prop set at
the standard position. This is my ideas only and what I discovered , I hope
this does not start a negative flame. It seems every case is a little
different.
Harvey Sigmon RV-6A N602-RV flying 290HRS.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <Fred.Stucklen@UTCFuelCells.com>
To: <james@nextupventures.com>
Subject: RV-List: Re: Prop indexing
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Stucklen, Frederic IFC"
<Fred.Stucklen@UTCFuelCells.com>
>
> James,
>
> My RV-6A has an O-320D1A engine with a Sensenich prop....
>
> Fred Stucklen
> RV-6A N926RV
> 135+ hrs since Aug 03
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark"
> Fred,
> What engine/prop combination was this?
> James
>
>
.
Message 77
| 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: Prop Indexing |
--> RV-List message posted by: Altoq <altoq@direcway.com>
The best static and dynamic balance having been achieved, let's consider all the
things we know about this subject.
(1) Horizontally Opposed 4 Cyl engines vibrate, mostly in a side to side yawing
mode.
(2) No kind of balance method, no matter how precisely applied, can compensate
totally. This vibration is caused by acceleration of the pistons in sympathy with
the combustion pulses. If the prop is horizontal when this pulse occurres,
the blades will flex or flap and later in the rotation they will reflex or unflap.
This adds to the uncompensated vibrations. If the prop is vertical when
the pulse occurres the affects are minimal.
I can't explain better than this without using my
hands. If you want to figure it out and let us know, I'm warning you It will
over shadow, Primer Wars, Which end the training wheel goes on Debates, and throw
Canopy Tint Discussion into Oblivion.
(3) What ever is left over is, for the most part, absorbed by the engines mounts.
Their efficiency depending on their design and the resilience of their components.
(A) Conical Mounts restrict the engine from any yawing or rocking and only
allow it to move laterally. They transmit the most vibration to the airframe.
Least noticeable benefit from reindexing the prop.
(B) Dyno I Mounts allow the engine to move laterally and to rotate around
a point just behind the plane of #1 connecting rod. This point is considerably
in front of the CG for the engine and prop assembly with a light prop to, very
close to the CG with a heavy prop on an extension. Transmission of vibration
varies depending how close this point of rotation is to the CG. Closer is better.
Most noticeable benefit from reindexing prop.
(C) Dyno II Mounts allow Restricted lateral movement and rotation around a
point dead center on the CG of a heavy or constant speed prop without any extension.
Dynamic balance problems are most noticeable with this mount. Engine balance
problems are least noticeable. Overall transmits the least vibration to
the airframe. (Now read this twice) Most benefit but least noticeable reaction
from reindexing the prop.
(4) Lycoming approves.
(5) If for these reasons or others not discussed here, It works to varying degrees
and has long before we found out about it.
(6) These are Experimental Aircraft so experiment, all experiments are successful,
some just done have the results we expect ! Be careful and do your home work.
John D.
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Message 78
| 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:Prop Indexing |
--> RV-List message posted by: "William Davis" <rvpilot@access4less.net>
The answer to this is found in the Sky Ranch Engineering manual. Engine
vibration stays the same no matter where the propeller is indexed, however
when the prop blades are in line with the crank pins,"transmitted"(to the
airframe) vibration is minimized. This is the point of minimum crankshaft
rotation inertia. At top dead center positions, small torsional oscillations
can occur without any movement in the reciprocating mass. At the 90 or 270
crank positions, torsional oscillations of the crankshaft result in almost
equal movements of the reciprocating mass.
Bill, N48WD Tiger-Kat
----- Original Message -----
From: <smoothweasel@juno.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re:Prop Indexing
> --> RV-List message posted by: smoothweasel@juno.com
>
> I to have been watching this thread and Joe I think you might have part
> of the answer but was wandering IF! it REALLY does cause less vibration?
> Could it be that if you think of a four cylinder four cycle engine while
> it is running it fires two times on every revolution. In between these
> "fire" points the rotation speed is decreasing to some small measure ( I
> realize when a cylinder fires at say 25 degrees that it continues to make
> power for a certain amount of degrees resulting in not just a power pulse
> ) the flywheel helps it to not slow down as much. But maybe this has
> something to do with the prop "speeding up " and " slowing down " at a
> certain place in relation to the airframe mass........???????
>
> DISCLAIMER: I am not a engineer.......in fact I don't even have a college
> education so use these ideas only as ones thinking and not knowing.
>
> do not archive
>
> Joel "Weasel" Graber
> -4 small detail work
>
> On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 11:33:43 -0600 "Joe & Jan Connell"
> <jconnell@rconnect.com> writes:
> > --> RV-List message posted by: "Joe & Jan Connell"
> > <jconnell@rconnect.com>
> >
> > I've been watching this thread with a lot of interest.
> >
> > Would the reduction of vibration have something to
> > do with the prop's relationship to the airframe when it
> > receives the major portion of the power pulse from
> > the engine? Perhaps the effect on the prop from the
> > cowling, canopy, wing roots, and nose gear (and vise-
> > versa) when the prop is reacting to the power surge
> > might be part of the mystery. I dunno...
> >
> > Joe -- RV-9A, N95JJ, finishing kit
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > ===========================================
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 79
| 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 indexing: Lycoming response |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Richard Sipp" <rsipp@earthlink.net>
> Unless Ed Z. from Sensenich weighs in here, pulling his hair out and
screaming, I am going to consider this the final word on the matter-
indexing is a matter of personal preference :-) I like the suggestion that
a prop balancer with time on his hands run some field tests for us and post
the results.
>
> -Bill B
Bill & List:
When we re-indexed the RV-8 prop I reported on last week we had a balancer
and took the following readings:
The prop had been previously balanced to .05 IPS with 9 grams of weight.
This is a low compression O-360 with the standard fixed pitch Sensanich
metal prop mounted on Van's extension.
First run for base line .04 IPS (this is considered very good)
Second run, weight removed .09 IPS
Third run after re-indexing to align blades with crank throws per Sky Ranch
Manual .05 IPS. (no weights)
As indicated previously this airplane exhibited iritating vibrations to the
owner and while the balance readings from the front of the engine did not
show significant improvement, the pilots subjective judgement of the
airframe vibrations in flight was significantly improved.
As indicated by others constant speed props can not be re-indexed (other
than 180 degrees) without removing and re-installilng the crankshaft drive
bushings in a new location. With the warnings against this in both Hartzell
and Lycoming tech data I would not recommend doing this without better
information on the potential problems this may produce.
I understand that anything below .6 IPS is considered acceptable per FAA
standards so in the above case all tests at least with our low tech balancer
were in the "very good" category. I can't offer an explanation why the
percieved inflight vibrations were so much improved with no significant
change to the balance readings.
Dick Sipp
RV4 250DS
RV10 110DV
Message 80
| 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: Prop Spacers? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Pat Perry" <pperryrv@hotmail.com>
You're right Konrad.......tough crowd.
It's been one of those long days where thinking isn't working anymore.
To make sure nobody does what I wrote let me correct myself and try again...
Deep breath and here it goes-
hub
flywheel
flywheel harmonic balancer support disc(Mark Landol type)
extension
rear spinner bulkhead
prop
(3) 1/8" spacers to compensate for thin sensenich wood prop
forward spinner bulkhead
crush plate
bolts
and a spinner to cover it all up!
Point is the prop doesn't bolt direct to the hub and should be effected by
the enlarged lug.
Pat Perry
Dallas, PA
RV-4 N154PK Flies great!
>From: <klwerner@comcast.net>
>To: <pperryrv@hotmail.com>
>Subject: Prop Spacers?
>Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 13:07:15 -0700
>
>On my assembly the prop can be positioned in any position on the extension.
> The prop isn't mounted directly to the flange. There is a flywheel,
>extension, (3) 1/8" spacers, and a spinner plate before the prop.
>
>Dear Perry,
>Why are there "3" 1/8" spacers in addition to the prop extension?
>I thought the prop should be in direct contact with the extension.
>Konrad
Let the new MSN Premium Internet Software make the most of your high-speed
Message 81
| 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: Drill bit for cutting lightening holes in aluminum 1" |
and bigger
--> RV-List message posted by: Charlie & Tupper England <cengland@netdoor.com>
Will & Lynda Allen wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Will & Lynda Allen" <linenwool@comcast.net>
>
>I need to cut lightening holes in some spacers for the wing and need to buy
>some drill bits for doing this. What can anyone recommend for drilling 1"
>and bigger holes into aluminum? I saw someone had an adjustable bit on a
>web site but don't remember where I saw it and what it was. I can't seem
>find anything that would work at Lowe's or Sears.
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>
>-Will Allen
>
>North Bend, Wa
>
>RV8 wings
>
If you don't like the flycutter idea, find the nearest air conditioning
supply house & take a look at their circle cutter. It looks like a beam
compass but it uses a rotary cutting drill bit (like the 'Roto-zip'
tool) to do the cutting. These tools are made to cut sheet steel, so
aluminum should be a piece of cake.
Charlie
Message 82
| 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: Christian Inverted Oil System |
--> RV-List message posted by: Vanremog@aol.com
In a message dated 1/9/2004 8:55:27 AM Pacific Standard Time,
scottbrown@precisionjet.com writes:
I have a Christian Inverted Oil system on my RV4. I do not fly inverted so
much that I would need such a thing.
Do you also happen to have an agnostic one?
GV (RV-6A N1GV flying 675 hrs)
Message 83
| 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: Prop indexing |
--> RV-List message posted by: j1j2h3@juno.com
McMaster-Carr sells a hand held vibration analyzer for $680. It will
measure vibration acceleration, displacement, and velocity
http://www.mcmaster.com/
Jim Hasper - RV-7 just starting empennage (setting up shop in Franklin,
Tennessee)
Do not archive
--> RV-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming"
<lhelming@sigecom.net>
(snip)
>What type of device could be used to measure the vibrations to do such a
test?
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! --
|