---------------------------------------------------------- RV-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Mon 11/23/09: 11 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 06:56 AM - Re: Re: elevator trim, manual vs electric (Glenn Bell) 2. 07:30 AM - Re: Re: elevator trim, manual vs electric (John Bright) 3. 07:38 AM - Re: Gretz Heated Pitot Tube attaching (Johnson) 4. 03:24 PM - CHT update (Ralph E. Capen) 5. 03:59 PM - Re: CHT update (Charles Kuss) 6. 04:04 PM - Re: CHT update (Robin Marks) 7. 04:36 PM - Re: CHT update (Carl Froehlich) 8. 04:54 PM - Re: CHT update (Kelly McMullen) 9. 08:01 PM - Rate of climb and CHT (rv6n@optonline.net) 10. 09:04 PM - Re: Rate of climb and CHT (Vanremog@aol.com) 11. 09:14 PM - Re: Rate of climb and CHT (kboatright1@comcast.net) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 06:56:58 AM PST US From: "Glenn Bell" Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: elevator trim, manual vs electric We had planned on using manual trim on our 8A.. When we ran it , we went by the shelf where we are putting the ahars for the dynon skyview.we put a boy scout compass on the shelf and found that the last 4 feet or so or the trim cable was magnetized.we were limited on the shelf location and the routing of the cable.so.we are installing the electric trim.anyone installing a remote compass sensor may want to check this out before everything is buttoned up. From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of PeterHunt1@aol.com Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 11:49 AM Subject: RV-List: Re: elevator trim, manual vs electric Manual trim is far more precise when setting the trim. It gives a good "touch" making it far easier to get the perfect trim. That is, it gives an excellent feel for where the trim is or needs to be. Electric trim really begs for a motor speed reducer to minimize overrunning (chasing) the desired trim. I love my manual trim and would do it again. I moved mine from between the seats (RV-6) over to the left of the cockpit mounted against the fuselage left wall. I operate it with my left hand. The cable slopes down from the control knob on a 45 degree angle and then loops up along the fuselage wall (near my left knee) and reward running under the left longeron to the rear of the airplane. Neat and out of the way. Pete in Clearwater RV-6, Reserve Grand Champion S 'n F and other awards ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 07:30:37 AM PST US From: John Bright Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: elevator trim, manual vs electric i suppose you could demagnetize the trim cable=0A=0A Thanks,=0A=0A=0AJohn B right=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: Glenn Bell =0ATo: rv-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Mon, November 23, 2 009 9:54:35 AM=0ASubject: RE: RV-List: Re: elevator trim, manual vs electri c =0A=0A =0AWe had planned on using manual trim on our 8A.. When we ran it ,=0Awe went by the shelf where we are putting the ahars for the dynon skyvi ewwe=0Aput a boy scout compass on the shelf and found that the las t 4 feet or so or=0Athe trim cable was magnetizedwe were limited o n the shelf location and=0Athe routing of the cablesowe a re installing the electric trimanyone=0Ainstalling a remote compas s sensor may want to check this out before everything=0Ais buttoned up =0A =0AFrom:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list- server@matronics.com] On=0ABehalf Of PeterHunt1@aol.com=0ASent: Sunday, Nov ember 22, 2009 11:49 AM=0ATo: rv-list@matronics.com=0ASubject: RV-List: Re: elevator trim, manual vs electric =0A =0AManual=0Atrim is far more precise when setting the trim. It gives a good=0A"touch" making it far easier to get the perfect trim. That is,=0Ait gives an excellent feel for where the trim is or needs to be. Electric=0Atrim really begs for a motor speed redu cer to minimize overrunning (chasing)=0Athe desired trim. I love my manual trim and would do it again. I=0Amoved mine from between the seats (RV-6) over to the left of the cockpit=0Amounted against the fuselage left wall. I operate it with my left=0Ahand. The cable slopes down from the control k nob on a 45 degree=0Aangle and then loops up along the fuselage wall (near my left knee) and=0Areward running under the left longeron to the rear of t he airplane. Neat=0Aand out of the way.=0A =0APete=0Ain Clearwater=0ARV-6, =0AReserve Grand Champion S 'n F and other awards=0A =0A =0Awww.aeroelect ric.com=0Awww.buildersbooks.com=0Awww.homebuilthelp.com=0Ahttp://www.matron ics.com/contribution=0Ahttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List=0Ahttp:// ===================0A=0A=0A ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 07:38:29 AM PST US From: "Johnson" Subject: Re: RV-List: Gretz Heated Pitot Tube attaching Loosen the screws holding the mast (mount) to the wing and push it up inside the wing. This will leave the end of the tubing exposed where the flare nut is so you can attach the pitot to it. Then pull the mast back down and reattach it. Thats how mine works...hope this is your answer. Evan ----- Original Message ----- From: "emrath" Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 4:29 PM Subject: RV-List: Gretz Heated Pitot Tube attaching > > Nice installation Matt, but my Pitot was purchased long ago without the > electronic module and the tube sticking up from the pitot is only about > 1.5" > long, terminating in a AN4 tube fitting. > Marty > > > Time: 10:07:44 AM PST US > From: Matt Dralle > Subject: Re: RV-List: Gretz Heated Pitot Tube attaching > > > At 08:26 PM 11/20/2009 Friday, you wrote: >> >>Folks, >>I have a Gretz Heated Pitot Tube and mount. Unfortunately the pitot tube >>fitting does not extend far enough to be able to attach the line to the > tube >>once the tube is in the mount. I'd like to hear from anyone that has >>found >>the solution to this problem so I don't have to "reinvent the wheel". >>Marty in Brentwood TN, RV-6A finish assembly. > > > Hi Marty, > > Here are some detailed pictures of my Gretz Heated Pitot in the RV-8. > Might > give > you some ideas: > > > http://www.mattsrv8.com/users/display_log.php?user=MattsRV8&project=638&cate > gory=2982&log=81655&row=151 > > > http://www.mattsrv8.com/users/display_log.php?user=MattsRV8&project=638&cate > gory=2982&log=81656&row=150 > > > http://www.mattsrv8.com/users/display_log.php?user=MattsRV8&project=638&cate > gory=2982&log=81657&row=149 > > > http://www.mattsrv8.com/users/display_log.php?user=MattsRV8&project=638&cate > gory=2982&log=81658&row=148 > > > Matt Dralle > RV-8 #82880 N998RV > http://www.mattsrv8.com > Windscreen Installation (ack)... > > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 03:24:16 PM PST US From: "Ralph E. Capen" Subject: RV-List: CHT update As many of you may know, I have been obsessing a bit about my CHT's...to get them consistent. Here's the setup: IO360B1F6 9.2:1 pistons AFP Fuel Injection LASAR Ignition with CHT sender relocated to allow for testing Vetterman Dual Crossover Heater/Mufflers SamJames cowl and plenum Advanced Flight Systems 3400 Engine Monitor Oil Cooler mounted behind #4 cylinder Air for both Heater/Mufflers behind #3 cylinder For constant power setting, here's the consistency that I have achieved: #1 and #3 cylinders run within three degrees (avg) of each other #2 and #4 cylinders run within three degrees (avg) of each other The #1/#3 cylinders run 8.5 degrees hotter (avg) than the #2/#4 cylinders With the members of the sets of cylinders running this close each other, I'm thinking that I have the balance (front to rear) for each side pretty well matched. I'm trying to wrap my head around what could be causing the right side to run hotter than the left. Here's some of what I'm thinking...: With this plenum set-up, I'm thinking that the pressure/volume should equalize from left to right. This would leave me with not much to change to cause more cooling air to go from the left to the right - meaning that I probably have to live with the differences. Alternatively, maybe it's not really hotter...the two sets of CHT wires for the left side (both equal length) are about three feet longer than the ones for the right side (again, both equal length). Could the difference in the lengths of the wires account for the reported temperature difference? I'm pretty close to thinking that this is as good as it gets...but I would really like to know why... Thanks, Ralph ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 03:59:06 PM PST US From: Charles Kuss Subject: Re: RV-List: CHT update Ralph, Have you installed an AN960 washer between the rear baffle & cylinder head on the #3 cylinder? The #2 & #3 cylinders have very thin fins between the head itself and the [front on #2] rear baffle. By installing a single washer between the above mentioned parts, for the bolt that holds the rear baffle onto #3, you will reduce the temp on #3. You will then have to cut down the air dam in front of #1 to even out that side. This should help to reduce the side to side variation you have. See http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showpost.php?p=31012&postcount=40 Charlie Kuss --- On Mon, 11/23/09, Ralph E. Capen wrote: > From: Ralph E. Capen > Subject: RV-List: CHT update > To: rv-list@matronics.com, LycomingEngines-list@matronics.com, AeroElectric-list@matronics.com > Date: Monday, November 23, 2009, 6:22 PM > > > > > > > > As many of you may know, I have been obsessing a bit > about my CHT's...to > get them consistent. > > Here's the setup: > IO360B1F6 > 9.2:1 > pistons > AFP Fuel Injection > LASAR Ignition with CHT sender relocated to > allow for testing > Vetterman Dual Crossover Heater/Mufflers > SamJames cowl > and plenum > Advanced Flight Systems 3400 Engine Monitor > > Oil Cooler > mounted behind #4 cylinder > Air for both Heater/Mufflers behind #3 > cylinder > > For constant power setting, here's the consistency that > I have > achieved: > #1 and #3 cylinders run within three degrees (avg) of each > other > #2 and #4 cylinders run within three degrees (avg) of each > other > The > #1/#3 cylinders run 8.5 degrees hotter (avg) than the #2/#4 > > cylinders > > With the members of the sets of cylinders running this > close > each other, I'm thinking that I have the balance (front > to rear) for each side > pretty well matched. > > I'm trying to wrap my head around what could be > causing the right side to run hotter than the left. > Here's some of what > I'm thinking...: With this plenum set-up, I'm > thinking that the pressure/volume > should equalize from left to right. This would leave > me with not much to > change to cause more cooling air to go from the left to the > right - meaning that > I probably have to live with the differences. > Alternatively, maybe it's > not really hotter...the two sets of CHT wires for the left > side (both equal > length) are about three feet longer than the ones for the > right side (again, > both equal length). Could the difference in the > lengths of the wires > account for the reported temperature difference? > > I'm pretty close to > thinking that this is as good as it gets...but I would > really like to know > why... > > Thanks, > Ralph > > > > > > > provided > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 04:04:39 PM PST US Subject: RE: RV-List: CHT update From: "Robin Marks" Ralph, As one who has been perplexed by temperatures (RV-10, James Cowl, Plenum etc...) I would sleep quite well at night with your numbers. If you are looking for reasons why one bank is different that the other you can consider the oil cooler asymmetry or prop rotation or maybe some differences on the lower portion of the fire wall forward making exit air asymmetrical or you can put some of this on the sensors ability to resolve these very small differences in relative temperature. As far as the "pressure volume equalizing left to right" maybe yes, maybe no. I suspect proving this may be very difficult w/o extensive R&D for what benefit? Cutting the difference in half so you are within 4 degrees left/right. I tend to think of the air under the Cowl/Plenum as a frantic tumbling & crashing of molecules with a large amount of air reversing course and exiting out the front of the cowl. It is not a smooth aerodynamic "flow through" environment under the hood. I think even with your numbers you can retain bragging rights over 99% of aircraft flying today. An alternative solution is to revert back to a single CHT/EGT probe and consider them all the same. Wa-la perfect balance! EFIS = Eliminate Further Ignorance Systems Well done, Robin From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ralph E. Capen Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 3:23 PM AeroElectric-list@matronics.com Subject: RV-List: CHT update As many of you may know, I have been obsessing a bit about my CHT's...to get them consistent. Here's the setup: IO360B1F6 9.2:1 pistons AFP Fuel Injection LASAR Ignition with CHT sender relocated to allow for testing Vetterman Dual Crossover Heater/Mufflers SamJames cowl and plenum Advanced Flight Systems 3400 Engine Monitor Oil Cooler mounted behind #4 cylinder Air for both Heater/Mufflers behind #3 cylinder For constant power setting, here's the consistency that I have achieved: #1 and #3 cylinders run within three degrees (avg) of each other #2 and #4 cylinders run within three degrees (avg) of each other The #1/#3 cylinders run 8.5 degrees hotter (avg) than the #2/#4 cylinders With the members of the sets of cylinders running this close each other, I'm thinking that I have the balance (front to rear) for each side pretty well matched. I'm trying to wrap my head around what could be causing the right side to run hotter than the left. Here's some of what I'm thinking...: With this plenum set-up, I'm thinking that the pressure/volume should equalize from left to right. This would leave me with not much to change to cause more cooling air to go from the left to the right - meaning that I probably have to live with the differences. Alternatively, maybe it's not really hotter...the two sets of CHT wires for the left side (both equal length) are about three feet longer than the ones for the right side (again, both equal length). Could the difference in the lengths of the wires account for the reported temperature difference? I'm pretty close to thinking that this is as good as it gets...but I would really like to know why... Thanks, Ralph ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 04:36:07 PM PST US From: "Carl Froehlich" Subject: RE: RV-List: CHT update I'd guess you are well be within the accuracy of the temperature probes themselves. In other words, you are way close enough. Carl Froehlich RV-8A (500 hrs) RV-10 (installing systems) From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ralph E. Capen Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 6:23 PM AeroElectric-list@matronics.com Subject: RV-List: CHT update As many of you may know, I have been obsessing a bit about my CHT's...to get them consistent. Here's the setup: IO360B1F6 9.2:1 pistons AFP Fuel Injection LASAR Ignition with CHT sender relocated to allow for testing Vetterman Dual Crossover Heater/Mufflers SamJames cowl and plenum Advanced Flight Systems 3400 Engine Monitor Oil Cooler mounted behind #4 cylinder Air for both Heater/Mufflers behind #3 cylinder For constant power setting, here's the consistency that I have achieved: #1 and #3 cylinders run within three degrees (avg) of each other #2 and #4 cylinders run within three degrees (avg) of each other The #1/#3 cylinders run 8.5 degrees hotter (avg) than the #2/#4 cylinders With the members of the sets of cylinders running this close each other, I'm thinking that I have the balance (front to rear) for each side pretty well matched. I'm trying to wrap my head around what could be causing the right side to run hotter than the left. Here's some of what I'm thinking...: With this plenum set-up, I'm thinking that the pressure/volume should equalize from left to right. This would leave me with not much to change to cause more cooling air to go from the left to the right - meaning that I probably have to live with the differences. Alternatively, maybe it's not really hotter...the two sets of CHT wires for the left side (both equal length) are about three feet longer than the ones for the right side (again, both equal length). Could the difference in the lengths of the wires account for the reported temperature difference? I'm pretty close to thinking that this is as good as it gets...but I would really like to know why... Thanks, Ralph ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 04:54:49 PM PST US From: Kelly McMullen Subject: Re: RV-List: CHT update If your end results are all cylinders staying below 400 in climb and preferably below 380, your balance between cylinders, both front to rear and side to side is more than adequate. As for reasons the right side is hotter, it is last in the oil delivery plumbing, so the lifters and rocker boxes get about 1/2 what the left side gets. Most Lycomings have #2 and #3 run hottest because of too tight cowling in front of #2 and behind #3, where there are no fins on the intake side of head, so only with a little spacing, perhaps 1/8" will you get airflow over that side of the cylinder. The spacer is worth about 30 degrees cooler. Ralph E. Capen wrote: > As many of you may know, I have been obsessing a bit about my CHT's...to > get them consistent. > > Here's the setup: > IO360B1F6 > 9.2:1 pistons > AFP Fuel Injection > LASAR Ignition with CHT sender relocated to allow for testing > Vetterman Dual Crossover Heater/Mufflers > SamJames cowl and plenum > Advanced Flight Systems 3400 Engine Monitor > > Oil Cooler mounted behind #4 cylinder > Air for both Heater/Mufflers behind #3 cylinder > > For constant power setting, here's the consistency that I have achieved: > #1 and #3 cylinders run within three degrees (avg) of each other > #2 and #4 cylinders run within three degrees (avg) of each other > The #1/#3 cylinders run 8.5 degrees hotter (avg) than the #2/#4 cylinders > > With the members of the sets of cylinders running this close each other, > I'm thinking that I have the balance (front to rear) for each side > pretty well matched. > > I'm trying to wrap my head around what could be causing the right side > to run hotter than the left. Here's some of what I'm thinking...: With > this plenum set-up, I'm thinking that the pressure/volume should > equalize from left to right. This would leave me with not much to > change to cause more cooling air to go from the left to the right - > meaning that I probably have to live with the differences. > Alternatively, maybe it's not really hotter...the two sets of CHT wires > for the left side (both equal length) are about three feet longer than > the ones for the right side (again, both equal length). Could the > difference in the lengths of the wires account for the reported > temperature difference? > > I'm pretty close to thinking that this is as good as it gets...but I > would really like to know why... > > Thanks, > Ralph > > * > > > * ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 08:01:07 PM PST US From: rv6n@optonline.net Subject: RV-List: Rate of climb and CHT Just curious, is there any consensus as what typical rate-of-climb helps the most in keeping the CHTs to a minimum. Bob ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 09:04:56 PM PST US From: Vanremog@aol.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Rate of climb and CHT 120 mph -GV In a message dated 11/23/2009 8:02:30 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, rv6n@optonline.net writes: Just curious, is there any consensus as what typical rate-of-climb helps the most in keeping the CHTs to a minimum. ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 09:14:07 PM PST US From: kboatright1@comcast.net Subject: Re: RV-List: Rate of climb and CHT I usually climb at 110-120 knots and the CHT's stay below 400F.=C2- Pull the nose up in a big way and they start going up... Weight and temperature dependant, a 110-120 knot climb delivers 800-1500 fp m.. KB ----- Original Message ----- From: rv6n@optonline.net Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 10:24:15 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: RV-List: Rate of climb and CHT Just curious, is there any consensus=C2-as what typical rate-of-climb hel ps the most in keeping the CHTs=C2-to a minimum. Bob ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message rv-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/rv-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/rv-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.