Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:43 AM - Re: Final Drill before assembly (Jim Wade)
2. 03:43 AM - Re: Engine Mount Clearance Update (Patrick Thyssen)
3. 03:55 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (linn walters)
4. 04:15 AM - Re: Engine Mount Clearance Update (Tim Olson)
5. 04:30 AM - Re: static ports (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
6. 04:30 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
7. 04:42 AM - Re: Finished Painting (Phillips, Jack)
8. 04:54 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (Robert E. Lynch)
9. 05:31 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
10. 05:42 AM - Re: static ports (David McNeill)
11. 06:02 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
12. 06:22 AM - Re: Finished Painting (Tim Olson)
13. 06:29 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com)
14. 06:30 AM - Canopy Dorr Trimming (Doerr, Ray R [NTK])
15. 06:56 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (Jerry Grimmonpre)
16. 07:11 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
17. 07:56 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
18. 08:06 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (John Jessen)
19. 08:09 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (Kelly McMullen)
20. 08:19 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (Kelly McMullen)
21. 09:06 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (Jesse Saint)
22. 09:10 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (Jesse Saint)
23. 09:18 AM - Re: Finished Painting (Jesse Saint)
24. 09:44 AM - Re: Canopy Dorr Trimming (Tim Olson)
25. 10:01 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto)
26. 10:01 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
27. 10:03 AM - Re: Finished Painting (Tim Olson)
28. 10:14 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (Kelly McMullen)
29. 10:37 AM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (Jesse Saint)
30. 10:40 AM - Re: Finished Painting (Jesse Saint)
31. 10:40 AM - New RV-10 Seat Page (Mike Lauritsen - Work)
32. 11:08 AM - Re: New RV-10 Seat Page (Bobby J. Hughes)
33. 11:19 AM - Re: Finished Painting (Tim Olson)
34. 11:25 AM - Re: 540 fadec? (Chris Johnston)
35. 11:34 AM - Tim's comments about painting (John Jessen)
36. 12:23 PM - Re: Tim's comments about painting (Jesse Saint)
37. 12:54 PM - Re: Tim's comments about painting (Tim Olson)
38. 01:21 PM - Re: Tim's comments about painting (John Jessen)
39. 03:57 PM - TruTrak AP (John Hasbrouck)
40. 05:37 PM - Re: TruTrak AP (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
41. 06:23 PM - Re: Tim's comments about painting (Richard Sipp)
42. 06:49 PM - Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection (linn walters)
43. 06:55 PM - the 10 list (brian bollaert)
44. 07:28 PM - Re: static ports (ddddsp1@juno.com)
45. 07:30 PM - Re: TruTrak AP (Tim Lewis)
46. 08:13 PM - Re: TruTrak AP (David McNeill)
47. 08:54 PM - Placards/Nameplate (Tim Olson)
48. 09:36 PM - Re: Tim's comments about painting (Rick)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Final Drill before assembly |
<!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAlepyTF8JxEGejHj3Vvc4SeKAAAAQAAAAYBuMcvLyNUeqkGl774cs8gEAAAAA@itecusa.org>
On some jobs it works great. Sometimes you have to mostly assemble to get a
feel for fit and such. I find the fit is ultimately better drilled first and
put together, no hole slightly out of round. Predrilled and dimpled the
fuselage halfs and the tail cone. All went together perfectly. Also have
done the top wing skins that way.
Jim Wade
-------Original Message-------
From: Jesse Saint
Subject: RV10-List: Final Drill before assembly
A while ago a couple of you mentioned that you were final drilling, deburing
dimpling and painting before assembling first, so the first time of
assembly you were riveting. How is this going? Any updates on potential
problems?
Thanks.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
F: 815-377-3694
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: Engine Mount Clearance Update |
One thing after a few years the engine mounts, rubber isolators, will start to
sag, and so you will need to watch this for vibration rub on the mount. We see
this on all types of AC esp on C-182 with the front cowling and c-206's left
front.
Pat #257
Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com> wrote:
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson
I got my engine mount back later last week and installed it. Van's did
pretty good job of fixing it up. The service on this repair/mod. was
fantastic, thanks to Bruce and Scott at Van's. The mount now has better
clearance, although I think if they made the new curved section about
1 to 1.5" wider, it would be even better to clear the corners of the
sump. It will absolutely be better than before though, as now there is
1/4" to 3/8" clearance, which is over double what I had before.
I have some photos at:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/engine/20051022/index.html
--
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:
> if you do this then you do not have a purge line rather a parallel
> feed line, both lines will carry pressure, as the return line will
> have less pressure in it, so it will be overcome by the feed
HUH? The feed lines all the way to the first pump in the system are at
ambient pressure, and teeing anywhere prior to the pump should
accomplish what you need. I wouldn't plumb the return into one tank
feed though, as times change and you may get a fuel controller that
needs an 'overflow' path. If you've teed into one side and are burning
fuel from the other, then you'll be slowly filling that one side .....
requiring you to burn off fuel in the 'return tank' after filling up or
the fuel will be pumped overboard. This will also produce a 'heavy
wing' after some time in the air ....... more than normal when burning
from one tank. However, if the tee is after the fuel selector and
before the pump, you'll have a return that's trnasparent. Just my
thought. I've never had to deal with the problem ....... yet.
Linn
do not archive
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jerry
> Grimmonpre
> Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 7:00 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
>
> Michael ...
> Another option, an easier one, tie the purge line into the left or
> right tank feeder line.
> Jerry Grimmonpre'
> RV8A
>
> Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 3:34 PM
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
>
> Environmental concerns aside, it seem a lot easier than trying
> to get another bulkhead into a finished tank.
>
> Michael Sausen
>
>
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>
>
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine Mount Clearance Update |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
I'm not sure if sagging will be a problem in that area or not. If the
top ones sag from the weight more than the bottom, it may tilt the
engine down in front and lift the back up a litttle on the bottom,
actually helping. If they sag together more, it might hurt. Either
way, unless someone has lots of clearance, I don't know if I'd be
comfortable routing my cables thru that small gap.
Thanks for the comment, by the way.
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Patrick Thyssen wrote:
> One thing after a few years the engine mounts, rubber isolators, will
> start to sag, and so you will need to watch this for vibration rub on
> the mount. We see this on all types of AC esp on C-182 with the front
> cowling and c-206's left front.
> Pat #257
>
>
> */Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>/* wrote:
> he many
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 |
|
SPAM: If the email is for spam, please report to abuse@dnsExit.com
-By mail relay service at:
http://www.dnsExit.com/Direct.sv?cmd=mailRelay
Accounts will be suspended immediately if found spamming.
Check the archives on this, I went through a series of emails on whether or not
we would see an error. No definitive answer on it. The tubing he uses is SAE
air line used for air brakes in semi's. I did get the Safair system and it
will do the job fine but I still haven't seen a reason to not use polyethylene
tubing (ice maker) and push connectors that you can get from Home Depot. I routinely
use this for up to 100psi water and air which is more than adequate for
what we do.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Waiting on Fuselage
do not archive
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ddddsp1@juno.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: static ports
Putting the ptiot-static system from Safeair1 in this week. Tony was great to
work with and knows what a RV10 needs. Safeair static port require a smaller
hole cut in the skin versus the one Cleavland sells. Safeair uses a different
tubing than normal...something to consider.
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 |
|
SPAM: If the email is for spam, please report to abuse@dnsExit.com
-By mail relay service at:
http://www.dnsExit.com/Direct.sv?cmd=mailRelay
Accounts will be suspended immediately if found spamming.
| Subject: | Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
Linn, I agree with your assessment. I would probably also add a check valve in
the return line as an added measure against any reverse flow problems. Anyone
see any problems with cavitating the fuel pump from vapor? Again I would only
be concerned about using this as a vapor purge mechanism. If I really did
need a return line I would go with the 6 port andair and return to the respective
tank.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Waiting on Fuselage
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of linn walters
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:
if you do this then you do not have a purge line rather a parallel feed
line, both lines will carry pressure, as the return line will have less pressure
in it, so it will be overcome by the feed
HUH? The feed lines all the way to the first pump in the system are at ambient
pressure, and teeing anywhere prior to the pump should accomplish what you need.
I wouldn't plumb the return into one tank feed though, as times change and
you may get a fuel controller that needs an 'overflow' path. If you've teed
into one side and are burning fuel from the other, then you'll be slowly filling
that one side ..... requiring you to burn off fuel in the 'return tank' after
filling up or the fuel will be pumped overboard. This will also produce a
'heavy wing' after some time in the air ....... more than normal when burning
from one tank. However, if the tee is after the fuel selector and before the
pump, you'll have a return that's trnasparent. Just my thought. I've never
had to deal with the problem ....... yet.
Linn
do not archive
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jerry Grimmonpre
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 7:00 PM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
=09
=09
Michael ...
Another option, an easier one, tie the purge line into the left or right
tank feeder line.
Jerry Grimmonpre'
RV8A
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 3:34 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
Environmental concerns aside, it seem a lot easier than trying
to get another bulkhead into a finished tank.
Michael Sausen
=09
________________________________
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
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: | Finished Painting |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips@cardinal.com>
Beautiful job, Tim.
As for registering your homebuilt, I followed the recommendations from
the EAA's Homebuilders Headquarters when I finished my Pietenpol Air
Camper last year. Registration and inspection went off without a hitch.
You can find all the information you need on the EAA website, under
"Members Only", then select Homebuilders Headquarters, then select
"Registering" and "Articles".
I had an inspector from the local FSDO come out and inspect mine. He
spent several hours poking and prodding the airplane, before signing it
off. The only paperwork he was interested in looking at was the
registration (which you obviously already have since you've got your
numbers painted on), and the weight and balance calculations. The
inspection was free. It required about a 3 weeks notice to get the
inspection lined up, where a DAR could have done it on a couple of days
notice, but the DAR in our area wanted $500 to perform the inspection.
Jack Phillips,
Raleigh, NC
Pietenpol Air Camper NX899JP
RV-4 N18LR
RV-10 on the wish list (hope to start building next winter)
-----Original Message-----
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
...If anyone has a link to a good guide to getting your airworthiness
certificate, I'd love to start reading. I don't think I'm all that
far from needing to start getting paperwork together. I don't know
how early I can start the registration process, but now that my
N-Number is painted on, I feel much closer. ;)
Tim
--
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
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: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
Jerry, if you still want the exhaust I have , get in touch.
Bob
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 |
|
SPAM: If the email is for spam, please report to abuse@dnsExit.com
-By mail relay service at:
http://www.dnsExit.com/Direct.sv?cmd=mailRelay
Accounts will be suspended immediately if found spamming.
| Subject: | Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
And Jerry, you can always find this in the archives by searching for fuel injection
if you forget.
DO NOT ARCHIVE
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert E. Lynch
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
Jerry, if you still want the exhaust I have , get in touch.
Bob
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: static ports |
I used the Nylaflow fittings and the tubing from Aircraft Spruce. What ever you
use make sure it will last and the fittings don't leak. You don't want to repair/replace
this line when doing the first pitot static test.
----- Original Message -----
From: RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 5:30 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: static ports
Check the archives on this, I went through a series of emails on whether or not
we would see an error. No definitive answer on it. The tubing he uses is
SAE air line used for air brakes in semi's. I did get the Safair system and it
will do the job fine but I still haven't seen a reason to not use polyethylene
tubing (ice maker) and push connectors that you can get from Home Depot. I
routinely use this for up to 100psi water and air which is more than adequate
for what we do.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Waiting on Fuselage
do not archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ddddsp1@juno.com
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 10:46 PM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: static ports
Putting the ptiot-static system from Safeair1 in this week. Tony was great to
work with and knows what a RV10 needs. Safeair static port require a smaller
hole cut in the skin versus the one Cleavland sells. Safeair uses a different
tubing than normal...something to consider.
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: | Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
I thought the original post was also concerning a return line for fuel
injection? and in this case it would not work, because if you fed back
to the opposite tank, you could overfill and send fuel out the vent. The
way to plumb for a return line is to the same tank you are feeding from,
to prevent overfilling, and in this situation you can not just plumb it
back into the feed line because of parallel paths for the fuel pump.
another question, in your scenario what keeps fuel from flowing into the
purge line during normal ops? if nothing, what keeps it from overfilling
the tank?
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jerry
Grimmonpre
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
When the engine is shutting down or purged, it has to be fed from the
tank opposite the one the purge line is connected to. The purge fuel,
on shut down, will go into the tank but opposite the normal flow
direction. The flow,in the purge line, would be whatever is being put
out by the engine driven pump, with engine running, or whatever the
boost pump is putting out for purging, when the engine is not running.
Since the purge fuel is going into the unused tank there is really no
pressure ... just flow. Hope this helps.
Jerry Grimmonpre'
RV8A
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 9:21 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel
injection
if you do this then you do not have a purge line rather a
parallel feed line, both lines will carry pressure, as the return line
will have less pressure in it, so it will be overcome by the feed
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Finished Painting |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Thanks Jack, I'll check out the EAA site. I don't go there too often,
but this is a perfect time. I don't actually have my registration
done, but I have had the number reserved for the last nearly 2 years...
right when I started the project. I'm just kind of wondering when
I can actually send in some paperwork to make the registration
official.
My current plan is to use a DAR, just because of that timeline
issue, and my proximity to the FSDO (100 miles or so). I won't
be getting a weight and balance done until about January, so if
that's required before I register, then I'll be waiting for that.
It's really getting exciting now.
Thanks Jack!
Tim
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Phillips, Jack wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips@cardinal.com>
>
> Beautiful job, Tim.
>
> As for registering your homebuilt, I followed the recommendations from
> the EAA's Homebuilders Headquarters when I finished my Pietenpol Air
> Camper last year. Registration and inspection went off without a hitch.
> You can find all the information you need on the EAA website, under
> "Members Only", then select Homebuilders Headquarters, then select
> "Registering" and "Articles".
>
> I had an inspector from the local FSDO come out and inspect mine. He
> spent several hours poking and prodding the airplane, before signing it
> off. The only paperwork he was interested in looking at was the
> registration (which you obviously already have since you've got your
> numbers painted on), and the weight and balance calculations. The
> inspection was free. It required about a 3 weeks notice to get the
> inspection lined up, where a DAR could have done it on a couple of days
> notice, but the DAR in our area wanted $500 to perform the inspection.
>
> Jack Phillips,
> Raleigh, NC
> Pietenpol Air Camper NX899JP
> RV-4 N18LR
> RV-10 on the wish list (hope to start building next winter)
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>
>
> ...If anyone has a link to a good guide to getting your airworthiness
> certificate, I'd love to start reading. I don't think I'm all that
> far from needing to start getting paperwork together. I don't know
> how early I can start the registration process, but now that my
> N-Number is painted on, I feel much closer. ;)
>
> Tim
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
I mis-understood that we were talking the feedline to the pump, I
thought we were talking about teeing back in after the pump, which would
take the internal check valve in the pump out of the loop and give you
parallel lines. but if you do it before then you have the check valve in
the pump right?
I agree with the comment below about the six port valve and is what I am
planning on. It is too easy to put a return back to the same tank you
draw from, why go to the opposite tank and risk overflow?
_____
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder
(Michael Sausen)
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
Linn, I agree with your assessment. I would probably also add a check
valve in the return line as an added measure against any reverse flow
problems. Anyone see any problems with cavitating the fuel pump from
vapor? Again I would only be concerned about using this as a vapor
purge mechanism. If I really did need a return line I would go with the
6 port andair and return to the respective tank.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Waiting on Fuselage
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of linn walters
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:
if you do this then you do not have a purge line rather a
parallel feed line, both lines will carry pressure, as the return line
will have less pressure in it, so it will be overcome by the feed
HUH? The feed lines all the way to the first pump in the system are at
ambient pressure, and teeing anywhere prior to the pump should
accomplish what you need. I wouldn't plumb the return into one tank
feed though, as times change and you may get a fuel controller that
needs an 'overflow' path. If you've teed into one side and are burning
fuel from the other, then you'll be slowly filling that one side .....
requiring you to burn off fuel in the 'return tank' after filling up or
the fuel will be pumped overboard. This will also produce a 'heavy
wing' after some time in the air ....... more than normal when burning
from one tank. However, if the tee is after the fuel selector and
before the pump, you'll have a return that's trnasparent. Just my
thought. I've never had to deal with the problem ....... yet.
Linn
do not archive
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jerry
Grimmonpre
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 7:00 PM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel
injection
=09
=09
Michael ...
Another option, an easier one, tie the purge line into the left
or right tank feeder line.
Jerry Grimmonpre'
RV8A
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 3:34 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel
injection
Environmental concerns aside, it seem a lot easier
than trying to get another bulkhead into a finished tank.
Michael Sausen
=09
_____
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
10/28/05
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: | Canopy Dorr Trimming |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr@sprint.com>
I'm currently at the stage of trimming the lip on the canopy for
the door opening. The plans don't state which direct the cut is suppose
to be. Along the bottom of the door lip, I trimmed it with the cut edge
facing the opposite door, but on the vertical lip of the door, you could
cut it facing the other door or you could cut it where the cur edge
faces the front of the plane. Can someone please explain which way this
is supposed to be cut? I can see the lines just fine, just need to know
which way the cut surface is suppose to be.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
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: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
When the purge valve is opened to cool the injection plumbing or to purge cavitating
bubbles, it requires very little fuel to accomplish the cooling. If the
purging time is extended it is possible to over fill the receiving tank and experience
a fuel loss out the venting system of the receiving tank.
When the purging is completed by closing the purge valve, the purge plumbing path
to the receiving tank is closed at the purge valve as well. Hope this helps.
Jerry Grimmonpre'
From: Lloyd, Daniel R.
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 8:01 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
I thought the original post was also concerning a return line for fuel injection?
and in this case it would not work, because if you fed back to the opposite
tank, you could overfill and send fuel out the vent. The way to plumb for a
return line is to the same tank you are feeding from, to prevent overfilling,
and in this situation you can not just plumb it back into the feed line because
of parallel paths for the fuel pump.
another question, in your scenario what keeps fuel from flowing into the purge
line during normal ops? if nothing, what keeps it from overfilling the tank?
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jerry Grimmonpre
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 11:17 PM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
When the engine is shutting down or purged, it has to be fed from the tank opposite
the one the purge line is connected to. The purge fuel, on shut down,
will go into the tank but opposite the normal flow direction. The flow,in the
purge line, would be whatever is being put out by the engine driven pump, with
engine running, or whatever the boost pump is putting out for purging, when
the engine is not running. Since the purge fuel is going into the unused tank
there is really no pressure ... just flow. Hope this helps.
Jerry Grimmonpre'
RV8A
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 9:21 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
if you do this then you do not have a purge line rather a parallel feed line,
both lines will carry pressure, as the return line will have less pressure
in it, so it will be overcome by the feed
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 |
|
SPAM: If the email is for spam, please report to abuse@dnsExit.com
-By mail relay service at:
http://www.dnsExit.com/Direct.sv?cmd=mailRelay
Accounts will be suspended immediately if found spamming.
| Subject: | Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
The internal pump check valve would probably be fine but I would still put one
in the return line. Mainly a gut reaction, no sound science behind the thought.
:-)
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Waiting on Fuselage
do not archive
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd, Daniel R.
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
I mis-understood that we were talking the feedline to the pump, I thought we were
talking about teeing back in after the pump, which would take the internal
check valve in the pump out of the loop and give you parallel lines. but if you
do it before then you have the check valve in the pump right?
I agree with the comment below about the six port valve and is what I am planning
on. It is too easy to put a return back to the same tank you draw from, why
go to the opposite tank and risk overflow?
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
Linn, I agree with your assessment. I would probably also add a check valve in
the return line as an added measure against any reverse flow problems. Anyone
see any problems with cavitating the fuel pump from vapor? Again I would only
be concerned about using this as a vapor purge mechanism. If I really did
need a return line I would go with the 6 port andair and return to the respective
tank.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Waiting on Fuselage
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of linn walters
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:
if you do this then you do not have a purge line rather a parallel feed
line, both lines will carry pressure, as the return line will have less pressure
in it, so it will be overcome by the feed
HUH? The feed lines all the way to the first pump in the system are at ambient
pressure, and teeing anywhere prior to the pump should accomplish what you need.
I wouldn't plumb the return into one tank feed though, as times change and
you may get a fuel controller that needs an 'overflow' path. If you've teed
into one side and are burning fuel from the other, then you'll be slowly filling
that one side ..... requiring you to burn off fuel in the 'return tank' after
filling up or the fuel will be pumped overboard. This will also produce a
'heavy wing' after some time in the air ....... more than normal when burning
from one tank. However, if the tee is after the fuel selector and before the
pump, you'll have a return that's trnasparent. Just my thought. I've never
had to deal with the problem ....... yet.
Linn
do not archive
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jerry Grimmonpre
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 7:00 PM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
=09
=09
Michael ...
Another option, an easier one, tie the purge line into the left or right
tank feeder line.
Jerry Grimmonpre'
RV8A
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 3:34 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
Environmental concerns aside, it seem a lot easier than trying
to get another bulkhead into a finished tank.
Michael Sausen
=09
________________________________
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
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: | Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
It does, I did not realize there is a valve that is opened and closed.
That makes more sense. I have not flown behind an IO engine, just
standard. Now maybe you can explain to me, is it like in an auto, where
there is allot more fuel going to the rail then is used, causing a
return line to be necessary? or does it only pump what is required/
used? I thought fuel injection meant a looped system, where only the
portion of fuel that went to the injectors was used and the rest sent
back to the tank?
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jerry
Grimmonpre
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
When the purge valve is opened to cool the injection plumbing or to
purge cavitating bubbles, it requires very little fuel to accomplish the
cooling. If the purging time is extended it is possible to over fill
the receiving tank and experience a fuel loss out the venting system of
the receiving tank.
When the purging is completed by closing the purge valve, the purge
plumbing path to the receiving tank is closed at the purge valve as
well. Hope this helps.
Jerry Grimmonpre'
From: Lloyd, Daniel R. <mailto:LloydDR@wernerco.com>
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 8:01 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel
injection
I thought the original post was also concerning a return line
for fuel injection? and in this case it would not work, because if you
fed back to the opposite tank, you could overfill and send fuel out the
vent. The way to plumb for a return line is to the same tank you are
feeding from, to prevent overfilling, and in this situation you can not
just plumb it back into the feed line because of parallel paths for the
fuel pump.
another question, in your scenario what keeps fuel from flowing
into the purge line during normal ops? if nothing, what keeps it from
overfilling the tank?
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jerry
Grimmonpre
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 11:17 PM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel
injection
=09
=09
When the engine is shutting down or purged, it has to be fed
from the tank opposite the one the purge line is connected to. The
purge fuel, on shut down, will go into the tank but opposite the normal
flow direction. The flow,in the purge line, would be whatever is being
put out by the engine driven pump, with engine running, or whatever the
boost pump is putting out for purging, when the engine is not running.
Since the purge fuel is going into the unused tank there is really no
pressure ... just flow. Hope this helps.
Jerry Grimmonpre'
RV8A
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 9:21 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel
injection
if you do this then you do not have a purge line rather
a parallel feed line, both lines will carry pressure, as the return line
will have less pressure in it, so it will be overcome by the feed
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: | Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
This might be one of those times that you go buy (or borrow) the fuel line
routing schematic from a low wing certified with a similar engine / fuel
injection as the one you want to use. Or even the time to call up the fuel
injection folks for a schematic. Not something to guess about. Kinda
critical stuff. Certified guys been doing this for awhile now.
Just $0.00002 worth of obvious advice.
John Jessen
'328 Elevators (HS idle while awaiting tools)
do not archive
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd, Daniel R.
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
I mis-understood that we were talking the feedline to the pump, I thought we
were talking about teeing back in after the pump, which would take the
internal check valve in the pump out of the loop and give you parallel
lines. but if you do it before then you have the check valve in the pump
right?
I agree with the comment below about the six port valve and is what I am
planning on. It is too easy to put a return back to the same tank you draw
from, why go to the opposite tank and risk overflow?
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder
(Michael Sausen)
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
Linn, I agree with your assessment. I would probably also add a check valve
in the return line as an added measure against any reverse flow problems.
Anyone see any problems with cavitating the fuel pump from vapor? Again I
would only be concerned about using this as a vapor purge mechanism. If I
really did need a return line I would go with the 6 port andair and return
to the respective tank.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Waiting on Fuselage
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of linn walters
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:
if you do this then you do not have a purge line rather a parallel feed
line, both lines will carry pressure, as the return line will have less
pressure in it, so it will be overcome by the feed
HUH? The feed lines all the way to the first pump in the system are at
ambient pressure, and teeing anywhere prior to the pump should accomplish
what you need. I wouldn't plumb the return into one tank feed though, as
times change and you may get a fuel controller that needs an 'overflow'
path. If you've teed into one side and are burning fuel from the other,
then you'll be slowly filling that one side ..... requiring you to burn off
fuel in the 'return tank' after filling up or the fuel will be pumped
overboard. This will also produce a 'heavy wing' after some time in the air
....... more than normal when burning from one tank. However, if the tee is
after the fuel selector and before the pump, you'll have a return that's
trnasparent. Just my thought. I've never had to deal with the problem
....... yet.
Linn
do not archive
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jerry Grimmonpre
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
Michael ...
Another option, an easier one, tie the purge line into the left or right
tank feeder line.
Jerry Grimmonpre'
RV8A
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
Environmental concerns aside, it seem a lot easier than trying to get
another bulkhead into a finished tank.
Michael Sausen
_____
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
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: | Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Kelly McMullen" <kellym@aviating.com>
I still don't understand the concern or need for a purge/return line. None
of the certified aircraft I'm familiar with that have Bendix RSA fuel
injection have any kind of purge or return line. If hot starting is the
issue, proper start procedure and light weight high-speed starters
virtually eliminate that issue.
RV Builder (Michael Sausen) said:
> The internal pump check valve would probably be fine but I would still put
> one in the return line. Mainly a gut reaction, no sound science behind
> the thought. :-)
>
> Michael Sausen
> -10 #352 Waiting on Fuselage
> do not archive
>
> ________________________________
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Kelly McMullen" <kellym@aviating.com>
It depends on the brand fuel injection used. TCM and Bendix do not use a
common rail, they send fuel to a distributor that sends it to individual
injectors. Bendix regulates the fuel flow at the fuel servo, and only fuel
needed goes to the distributor and injectors. Fuel pumps are self
limiting, returning excess pressure to their low pressure side. TCM
(Continental) is different, and does use a return loop. I don't know what
aftermarket systems use.
There isn't much in common between aircraft injection systems and auto
systems. Aircraft still use continuous injection, most cars use individual
timed injection for better emissions control. Aircraft distributors are
pressure controled, so when pressure drops below a preset minimum, no fuel
goes to the injectors, allowing idle cutoff.
Lloyd, Daniel R. said:
> It does, I did not realize there is a valve that is opened and closed.
> That makes more sense. I have not flown behind an IO engine, just
> standard. Now maybe you can explain to me, is it like in an auto, where
> there is allot more fuel going to the rail then is used, causing a
> return line to be necessary? or does it only pump what is required/
> used? I thought fuel injection meant a looped system, where only the
> portion of fuel that went to the injectors was used and the rest sent
> back to the tank?
>
> _____
>
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: | Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@itecusa.org>
I am a little confused as well. We have a Bendix injection system. We
haven't put a return line in. We do have an overflow line that just runs
out the back of the cowling. The system can't be pumping much more fuel
that it is using or our fuel flows would be higher. When burning 6.5-7gph @
17,500, I can't imagine that we are actually burning less than that and
wasting a significant amount. Is the main issue here vapor lock? Would
this system not work the same way whether you have a return line or an
overflow drain line? Running the boost pump is going to do the same thing
any, right. I am not much of an engine guy, so please let me know where I
am wrong. Also, if vapor lock mainly a startup issue, or are we needing to
worry about this while we are flying? We certainly haven't had any issues
with the system during our 150 hours in the air, but if it is an accident
waiting to happen, it doesn't matter how many hours we have flown the wrong
way, we want to fix it.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
F: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Kelly McMullen" <kellym@aviating.com>
It depends on the brand fuel injection used. TCM and Bendix do not use a
common rail, they send fuel to a distributor that sends it to individual
injectors. Bendix regulates the fuel flow at the fuel servo, and only fuel
needed goes to the distributor and injectors. Fuel pumps are self
limiting, returning excess pressure to their low pressure side. TCM
(Continental) is different, and does use a return loop. I don't know what
aftermarket systems use.
There isn't much in common between aircraft injection systems and auto
systems. Aircraft still use continuous injection, most cars use individual
timed injection for better emissions control. Aircraft distributors are
pressure controled, so when pressure drops below a preset minimum, no fuel
goes to the injectors, allowing idle cutoff.
Lloyd, Daniel R. said:
> It does, I did not realize there is a valve that is opened and closed.
> That makes more sense. I have not flown behind an IO engine, just
> standard. Now maybe you can explain to me, is it like in an auto, where
> there is allot more fuel going to the rail then is used, causing a
> return line to be necessary? or does it only pump what is required/
> used? I thought fuel injection meant a looped system, where only the
> portion of fuel that went to the injectors was used and the rest sent
> back to the tank?
>
> _____
>
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: | Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@itecusa.org>
I am a little confused as well. We have a Bendix injection system. We
haven't put a return line in. We do have an overflow line that just runs
out the back of the cowling. The system can't be pumping much more fuel
that it is using or our fuel flows would be higher. When burning 6.5-7gph @
17,500, I can't imagine that we are actually burning less than that and
wasting a significant amount. Is the main issue here vapor lock? Would
this system not work the same way whether you have a return line or an
overflow drain line? Running the boost pump is going to do the same thing
any, right. I am not much of an engine guy, so please let me know where I
am wrong. Also, if vapor lock mainly a startup issue, or are we needing to
worry about this while we are flying? We certainly haven't had any issues
with the system during our 150 hours in the air, but if it is an accident
waiting to happen, it doesn't matter how many hours we have flown the wrong
way, we want to fix it.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
F: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Kelly McMullen" <kellym@aviating.com>
It depends on the brand fuel injection used. TCM and Bendix do not use a
common rail, they send fuel to a distributor that sends it to individual
injectors. Bendix regulates the fuel flow at the fuel servo, and only fuel
needed goes to the distributor and injectors. Fuel pumps are self
limiting, returning excess pressure to their low pressure side. TCM
(Continental) is different, and does use a return loop. I don't know what
aftermarket systems use.
There isn't much in common between aircraft injection systems and auto
systems. Aircraft still use continuous injection, most cars use individual
timed injection for better emissions control. Aircraft distributors are
pressure controled, so when pressure drops below a preset minimum, no fuel
goes to the injectors, allowing idle cutoff.
Lloyd, Daniel R. said:
> It does, I did not realize there is a valve that is opened and closed.
> That makes more sense. I have not flown behind an IO engine, just
> standard. Now maybe you can explain to me, is it like in an auto, where
> there is allot more fuel going to the rail then is used, causing a
> return line to be necessary? or does it only pump what is required/
> used? I thought fuel injection meant a looped system, where only the
> portion of fuel that went to the injectors was used and the rest sent
> back to the tank?
>
> _____
>
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: | Finished Painting |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@itecusa.org>
Tim,
Did you just tape all of those lines by hand or did you have some sort of
form? LOOKS AWESOME! What's the durability of the basecoat clearcoat PPG
stuff compared to something like Imron, which doesn't seem to be a big
choice in this group. PPG seems to be what everybody is using.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
F: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Finished Painting
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Thanks Jack, I'll check out the EAA site. I don't go there too often,
but this is a perfect time. I don't actually have my registration
done, but I have had the number reserved for the last nearly 2 years...
right when I started the project. I'm just kind of wondering when
I can actually send in some paperwork to make the registration
official.
My current plan is to use a DAR, just because of that timeline
issue, and my proximity to the FSDO (100 miles or so). I won't
be getting a weight and balance done until about January, so if
that's required before I register, then I'll be waiting for that.
It's really getting exciting now.
Thanks Jack!
Tim
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Phillips, Jack wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Phillips, Jack"
<Jack.Phillips@cardinal.com>
>
> Beautiful job, Tim.
>
> As for registering your homebuilt, I followed the recommendations from
> the EAA's Homebuilders Headquarters when I finished my Pietenpol Air
> Camper last year. Registration and inspection went off without a hitch.
> You can find all the information you need on the EAA website, under
> "Members Only", then select Homebuilders Headquarters, then select
> "Registering" and "Articles".
>
> I had an inspector from the local FSDO come out and inspect mine. He
> spent several hours poking and prodding the airplane, before signing it
> off. The only paperwork he was interested in looking at was the
> registration (which you obviously already have since you've got your
> numbers painted on), and the weight and balance calculations. The
> inspection was free. It required about a 3 weeks notice to get the
> inspection lined up, where a DAR could have done it on a couple of days
> notice, but the DAR in our area wanted $500 to perform the inspection.
>
> Jack Phillips,
> Raleigh, NC
> Pietenpol Air Camper NX899JP
> RV-4 N18LR
> RV-10 on the wish list (hope to start building next winter)
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>
>
> ...If anyone has a link to a good guide to getting your airworthiness
> certificate, I'd love to start reading. I don't think I'm all that
> far from needing to start getting paperwork together. I don't know
> how early I can start the registration process, but now that my
> N-Number is painted on, I feel much closer. ;)
>
> Tim
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: Canopy Dorr Trimming |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
This is very hard to explain....and I can tell from your description
that it's hard to interpret too. You're right, there isn't much
guidance on that cut.
What you kind of want is this: When you close the door, picture the
cut face laying against the door itself. So in all cases almost, the
angle of the plane you cut in, will match the angle of the inner
surface of the door. On the bottom, I found myself cutting more
than that, which was unnecessary.
Now, here's the kicker.... Be careful about painting your interior
at this point, because you'll probably file and sand that edge later
again. Once you get the doors all in place, opening and closing,
you'll want them to close and come very close to those edges. In
fact, mine fit pretty good all the way around...I used a piece of paper
between the door and the frame to make sure I had enough gap to
slide the paper or thin steel ruler. But, then I added the fabric
covering to my doors, so I ended up filing and sanding even more of the
edge away so that the door would shut. You probably won't hurt
anything by overdoing it in the end, as the rubber seal would be
the sealing surface anyway, but it would help keep your outer
door surface flush (in addition to the beveled edge).
These are some older pics, but I don't have any recent ones
that I can find.
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/fuselage/20050702/RV200506230001.html
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/fuselage/20050702/RV200506240007.html
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/finishing/20050827/RV200508270062.html
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
Doerr, Ray R [NTK] wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr@sprint.com>
>
> I'm currently at the stage of trimming the lip on the canopy for
> the door opening. The plans don't state which direct the cut is suppose
> to be. Along the bottom of the door lip, I trimmed it with the cut edge
> facing the opposite door, but on the vertical lip of the door, you could
> cut it facing the other door or you could cut it where the cur edge
> faces the front of the plane. Can someone please explain which way this
> is supposed to be cut? I can see the lines just fine, just need to know
> which way the cut surface is suppose to be.
>
> Thank You
> Ray Doerr
> 40250
>
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 |
|
SPAM: If the email is for spam, please report to abuse@dnsExit.com
-By mail relay service at:
http://www.dnsExit.com/Direct.sv?cmd=mailRelay
Accounts will be suspended immediately if found spamming.
| Subject: | Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
Jesse,
The main issue here is for vapor lock instances during a start from a heat soaked
engine where the injector lines run on top of the engine and fuel is supplied
by a engine driven pump or the pump being in the cowl. This is a common
problem for that type of setup in warm or hot climates and is usually caused by
fuel pump cavitation due to the fuel temperature being raised above it's vapor
pressure threshold.
It's most commonly seen when you fly somewhere hot, get fuel, and then try a
restart shortly after. Usually requires a 30 minutes sit with the oil door open
to allow the fuel to condense again. Shouldn't be as much of a problem with
our fuel pumps being back in the fuselage but it could still happen. In our
case it would allow fuel to be circulated, cooling the lines back down and purging
the fuel vapor out for easier start in this condition.
If you aren't seeing a problem, no reason to worry about it, this is strictly
an engine start event. There is a good chance none of us would really see this
problem with the design of our fuel system having the fuel pump in the fuselage.
The most that would probably happen is a rough start until the lines clear.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Waiting on fuselage
-----Original Message-----
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@itecusa.org>
I am a little confused as well. We have a Bendix injection system. We haven't
put a return line in. We do have an overflow line that just runs out the back
of the cowling. The system can't be pumping much more fuel that it is using
or our fuel flows would be higher. When burning 6.5-7gph @ 17,500, I can't imagine
that we are actually burning less than that and wasting a significant amount.
Is the main issue here vapor lock? Would this system not work the same
way whether you have a return line or an overflow drain line? Running the boost
pump is going to do the same thing any, right. I am not much of an engine
guy, so please let me know where I am wrong. Also, if vapor lock mainly a startup
issue, or are we needing to worry about this while we are flying? We certainly
haven't had any issues with the system during our 150 hours in the air,
but if it is an accident waiting to happen, it doesn't matter how many hours
we have flown the wrong way, we want to fix it.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
F: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Kelly McMullen" <kellym@aviating.com>
It depends on the brand fuel injection used. TCM and Bendix do not use a common
rail, they send fuel to a distributor that sends it to individual injectors.
Bendix regulates the fuel flow at the fuel servo, and only fuel needed goes to
the distributor and injectors. Fuel pumps are self limiting, returning excess
pressure to their low pressure side. TCM
(Continental) is different, and does use a return loop. I don't know what aftermarket
systems use.
There isn't much in common between aircraft injection systems and auto systems.
Aircraft still use continuous injection, most cars use individual timed injection
for better emissions control. Aircraft distributors are pressure controled,
so when pressure drops below a preset minimum, no fuel goes to the injectors,
allowing idle cutoff.
Lloyd, Daniel R. said:
> It does, I did not realize there is a valve that is opened and closed.
> That makes more sense. I have not flown behind an IO engine, just
> standard. Now maybe you can explain to me, is it like in an auto,
> where there is allot more fuel going to the rail then is used, causing
> a return line to be necessary? or does it only pump what is required/
> used? I thought fuel injection meant a looped system, where only the
> portion of fuel that went to the injectors was used and the rest sent
> back to the tank?
>
> _____
>
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 |
|
SPAM: If the email is for spam, please report to abuse@dnsExit.com
-By mail relay service at:
http://www.dnsExit.com/Direct.sv?cmd=mailRelay
Accounts will be suspended immediately if found spamming.
| Subject: | Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
Really don't know if it would be needed or not but I currently live in Texas where
it routinly goes over 100 degrees for 6 months of the year (just dropped
out of the 90's about 2 weeks ago) so I would rather have the option if it is
a problem. It's one of those things that can't hurt but could help. When I get
to that point I'll solicit other people's opinion that live in hot climates
and make a decision then. Just going through the motions at this point.
Michael
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Kelly McMullen" <kellym@aviating.com>
I still don't understand the concern or need for a purge/return line. None of the
certified aircraft I'm familiar with that have Bendix RSA fuel injection have
any kind of purge or return line. If hot starting is the issue, proper start
procedure and light weight high-speed starters virtually eliminate that issue.
RV Builder (Michael Sausen) said:
> The internal pump check valve would probably be fine but I would still
> put one in the return line. Mainly a gut reaction, no sound science
> behind the thought. :-)
>
> Michael Sausen
> -10 #352 Waiting on Fuselage
> do not archive
>
> ________________________________
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: Finished Painting |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Well, initially I drew it on the PC. It was pretty easy to make and
adjust the muliple section curves that way. So, I had all 4 views
(Top, Side, Front, Isometric) on a printout in front of me for masking
it off. Then, I ran the tape as smooth as possible by hand, trying
to estimate at which points on the airframe the lines crossed. It
was then just a matter of trial and error to get something that looked
real nice, since the original scheme wasn't really in 3D. After
we thought we had it, we tried to duplicate it on the other sides.
For the wing outer ends, I did actually tape one off and make a
paper template to transfer it to the bottom and other wing.
Now, as for the durability, I think the basecoat/clearcoat will be
very durable. It's top quality auto paint. Even this a.m. after
spraying last night, it feels like it'll be nice and hard. I basically
used PPG because Randy had good luck with it, and it was available
at the most common local paint store. I think Imron would be a
fine choice too. The only negative I'd heard was that it doesn't/didn't
fill around the rivets as well.
Through a chain of friends, a DuPont rep ended up looking at my website.
They have a newer aviation paint that they would have loved to have me
try...at a discount...and it supposedly fixes the rivet filling problem.
But, since I had sprayed the PPG already, I thought it best to color
coat it with something from the same paint line.
I'll be helping another builder paint an RV-4 later this year and it
might be that we try the DuPont stuff on that project. As that
comes together, I'll make sure to let everyone know how that compares
if we spray it. I am very happy with the stuff that we sprayed though.
It seems to be very good paint. Hopefully though, the Concept will
be pretty chip resistant. I dinged a couple small nicks already, but
that was before it got a real good cure. The base/clear though seems
to be extremely tough for sure.
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Jesse Saint wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@itecusa.org>
>
> Tim,
>
> Did you just tape all of those lines by hand or did you have some sort of
> form? LOOKS AWESOME! What's the durability of the basecoat clearcoat PPG
> stuff compared to something like Imron, which doesn't seem to be a big
> choice in this group. PPG seems to be what everybody is using.
>
> Jesse Saint
> I-TEC, Inc.
> jesse@itecusa.org
> www.itecusa.org
> W: 352-465-4545
> C: 352-427-0285
> F: 815-377-3694
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 9:22 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Finished Painting
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>
> Thanks Jack, I'll check out the EAA site. I don't go there too often,
> but this is a perfect time. I don't actually have my registration
> done, but I have had the number reserved for the last nearly 2 years...
> right when I started the project. I'm just kind of wondering when
> I can actually send in some paperwork to make the registration
> official.
>
> My current plan is to use a DAR, just because of that timeline
> issue, and my proximity to the FSDO (100 miles or so). I won't
> be getting a weight and balance done until about January, so if
> that's required before I register, then I'll be waiting for that.
> It's really getting exciting now.
>
> Thanks Jack!
> Tim
>
> Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
> Phillips, Jack wrote:
>
>>--> RV10-List message posted by: "Phillips, Jack"
>
> <Jack.Phillips@cardinal.com>
>
>>Beautiful job, Tim.
>>
>>As for registering your homebuilt, I followed the recommendations from
>>the EAA's Homebuilders Headquarters when I finished my Pietenpol Air
>>Camper last year. Registration and inspection went off without a hitch.
>>You can find all the information you need on the EAA website, under
>>"Members Only", then select Homebuilders Headquarters, then select
>>"Registering" and "Articles".
>>
>>I had an inspector from the local FSDO come out and inspect mine. He
>>spent several hours poking and prodding the airplane, before signing it
>>off. The only paperwork he was interested in looking at was the
>>registration (which you obviously already have since you've got your
>>numbers painted on), and the weight and balance calculations. The
>>inspection was free. It required about a 3 weeks notice to get the
>>inspection lined up, where a DAR could have done it on a couple of days
>>notice, but the DAR in our area wanted $500 to perform the inspection.
>>
>>Jack Phillips,
>>Raleigh, NC
>>Pietenpol Air Camper NX899JP
>>RV-4 N18LR
>>RV-10 on the wish list (hope to start building next winter)
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>
>>--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>>
>>
>>...If anyone has a link to a good guide to getting your airworthiness
>>certificate, I'd love to start reading. I don't think I'm all that
>>far from needing to start getting paperwork together. I don't know
>>how early I can start the registration process, but now that my
>>N-Number is painted on, I feel much closer. ;)
>>
>>Tim
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Kelly McMullen" <kellym@aviating.com>
I own a 200hp IO360 in Mooney that I base at KCHD, AZ. I have a Skytec
starter, and hot starts are not a problem if you follow recommended hot
start procedures, and even if you botch that, flooded start procedures
will work. There is no return system, no purge, no nothing other than a
drain line from the bottom of the sump that drains excess fuel from the
manifold when the engine isn't running. The fuel pump is located the same
place all mechanical pumps are on the Lycoming, at the bottom rear. Vapor
lock isn't the problem. Excess fuel in the cylinder, aka flooding, is the
problem with hot starts.
RV Builder (Michael Sausen) said:
> Really don't know if it would be needed or not but I currently live in
> Texas where it routinly goes over 100 degrees for 6 months of the year
> (just dropped out of the 90's about 2 weeks ago) so I would rather have
> the option if it is a problem. It's one of those things that can't hurt
> but could help. When I get to that point I'll solicit other people's
> opinion that live in hot climates and make a decision then. Just going
> through the motions at this point.
>
> Michael
> 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: | Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
Well, if it helps any, I am in Florida, which is pretty hot during the
summer as well (all 8 months of it or so). We haven't had any problems with
hot starts.
Thanks for all the responses.
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org <http://www.itecusa.org/>
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
F: 815-377-3694
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder
(Michael Sausen)
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
Really don't know if it would be needed or not but I currently live in
Texas where it routinly goes over 100 degrees for 6 months of the year (just
dropped out of the 90's about 2 weeks ago) so I would rather have the option
if it is a problem. It's one of those things that can't hurt but could
help. When I get to that point I'll solicit other people's opinion that
live in hot climates and make a decision then. Just going through the
motions at this point.
Michael
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Kelly McMullen" <kellym@aviating.com>
I still don't understand the concern or need for a purge/return line. None
of the certified aircraft I'm familiar with that have Bendix RSA fuel
injection have any kind of purge or return line. If hot starting is the
issue, proper start procedure and light weight high-speed starters virtually
eliminate that issue.
RV Builder (Michael Sausen) said:
> The internal pump check valve would probably be fine but I would still
> put one in the return line. Mainly a gut reaction, no sound science
> behind the thought. :-)
>
> Michael Sausen
> -10 #352 Waiting on Fuselage
> do not archive
>
> ________________________________
====================================
RV10-List Email Forum -
more:
bsp;
====================================
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: | Finished Painting |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@itecusa.org>
Out of curiosity, why did you put DO NOT ARCHIVE on that one? I personally
think that would be a great reply to have in the archives for people down
the road, although maybe everybody already knows about the paints.
Thanks for the info.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
F: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Finished Painting
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Well, initially I drew it on the PC. It was pretty easy to make and
adjust the muliple section curves that way. So, I had all 4 views
(Top, Side, Front, Isometric) on a printout in front of me for masking
it off. Then, I ran the tape as smooth as possible by hand, trying
to estimate at which points on the airframe the lines crossed. It
was then just a matter of trial and error to get something that looked
real nice, since the original scheme wasn't really in 3D. After
we thought we had it, we tried to duplicate it on the other sides.
For the wing outer ends, I did actually tape one off and make a
paper template to transfer it to the bottom and other wing.
Now, as for the durability, I think the basecoat/clearcoat will be
very durable. It's top quality auto paint. Even this a.m. after
spraying last night, it feels like it'll be nice and hard. I basically
used PPG because Randy had good luck with it, and it was available
at the most common local paint store. I think Imron would be a
fine choice too. The only negative I'd heard was that it doesn't/didn't
fill around the rivets as well.
Through a chain of friends, a DuPont rep ended up looking at my website.
They have a newer aviation paint that they would have loved to have me
try...at a discount...and it supposedly fixes the rivet filling problem.
But, since I had sprayed the PPG already, I thought it best to color
coat it with something from the same paint line.
I'll be helping another builder paint an RV-4 later this year and it
might be that we try the DuPont stuff on that project. As that
comes together, I'll make sure to let everyone know how that compares
if we spray it. I am very happy with the stuff that we sprayed though.
It seems to be very good paint. Hopefully though, the Concept will
be pretty chip resistant. I dinged a couple small nicks already, but
that was before it got a real good cure. The base/clear though seems
to be extremely tough for sure.
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Jesse Saint wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@itecusa.org>
>
> Tim,
>
> Did you just tape all of those lines by hand or did you have some sort of
> form? LOOKS AWESOME! What's the durability of the basecoat clearcoat PPG
> stuff compared to something like Imron, which doesn't seem to be a big
> choice in this group. PPG seems to be what everybody is using.
>
> Jesse Saint
> I-TEC, Inc.
> jesse@itecusa.org
> www.itecusa.org
> W: 352-465-4545
> C: 352-427-0285
> F: 815-377-3694
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 9:22 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Finished Painting
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>
> Thanks Jack, I'll check out the EAA site. I don't go there too often,
> but this is a perfect time. I don't actually have my registration
> done, but I have had the number reserved for the last nearly 2 years...
> right when I started the project. I'm just kind of wondering when
> I can actually send in some paperwork to make the registration
> official.
>
> My current plan is to use a DAR, just because of that timeline
> issue, and my proximity to the FSDO (100 miles or so). I won't
> be getting a weight and balance done until about January, so if
> that's required before I register, then I'll be waiting for that.
> It's really getting exciting now.
>
> Thanks Jack!
> Tim
>
> Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
> Phillips, Jack wrote:
>
>>--> RV10-List message posted by: "Phillips, Jack"
>
> <Jack.Phillips@cardinal.com>
>
>>Beautiful job, Tim.
>>
>>As for registering your homebuilt, I followed the recommendations from
>>the EAA's Homebuilders Headquarters when I finished my Pietenpol Air
>>Camper last year. Registration and inspection went off without a hitch.
>>You can find all the information you need on the EAA website, under
>>"Members Only", then select Homebuilders Headquarters, then select
>>"Registering" and "Articles".
>>
>>I had an inspector from the local FSDO come out and inspect mine. He
>>spent several hours poking and prodding the airplane, before signing it
>>off. The only paperwork he was interested in looking at was the
>>registration (which you obviously already have since you've got your
>>numbers painted on), and the weight and balance calculations. The
>>inspection was free. It required about a 3 weeks notice to get the
>>inspection lined up, where a DAR could have done it on a couple of days
>>notice, but the DAR in our area wanted $500 to perform the inspection.
>>
>>Jack Phillips,
>>Raleigh, NC
>>Pietenpol Air Camper NX899JP
>>RV-4 N18LR
>>RV-10 on the wish list (hope to start building next winter)
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>
>>--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>>
>>
>>...If anyone has a link to a good guide to getting your airworthiness
>>certificate, I'd love to start reading. I don't think I'm all that
>>far from needing to start getting paperwork together. I don't know
>>how early I can start the registration process, but now that my
>>N-Number is painted on, I feel much closer. ;)
>>
>>Tim
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | New RV-10 Seat Page |
Well we finally have an info page up for our RV-10 seats. Please spread it
around to the other RV-10 related lists.
Make sure to scroll down and see the installed interior.
http://www.cleavelandtool.com/rvinteriors/2005/RV10.htm
Thanks,
Mike
Mike Lauritsen
Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
2225 First St.
Boone, Iowa 50036
515-432-6794
<mailto:mike@cleavelandtool.com> mike@cleavelandtool.com
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: | New RV-10 Seat Page |
Mike,
Looks great. Any idea when you will have more pictures and prices for
the interior panels?
Bobby Hughes
40116
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mike
Lauritsen - Work
Subject: RV10-List: New RV-10 Seat Page
Well we finally have an info page up for our RV-10 seats. Please spread
it around to the other RV-10 related lists.
Make sure to scroll down and see the installed interior.
http://www.cleavelandtool.com/rvinteriors/2005/RV10.htm
Thanks,
Mike
Mike Lauritsen
Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
2225 First St.
Boone, Iowa 50036
515-432-6794
mike@cleavelandtool.com <mailto:mike@cleavelandtool.com>
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Finished Painting |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
All "DNA's" removed .... going into the archives...
>
> Well, initially I drew it on the PC. It was pretty easy to make and
> adjust the muliple section curves that way. So, I had all 4 views
> (Top, Side, Front, Isometric) on a printout in front of me for masking
> it off. Then, I ran the tape as smooth as possible by hand, trying
> to estimate at which points on the airframe the lines crossed. It
> was then just a matter of trial and error to get something that looked
> real nice, since the original scheme wasn't really in 3D. After
> we thought we had it, we tried to duplicate it on the other sides.
> For the wing outer ends, I did actually tape one off and make a
> paper template to transfer it to the bottom and other wing.
>
> Now, as for the durability, I think the basecoat/clearcoat will be
> very durable. It's top quality auto paint. Even this a.m. after
> spraying last night, it feels like it'll be nice and hard. I basically
> used PPG because Randy had good luck with it, and it was available
> at the most common local paint store. I think Imron would be a
> fine choice too. The only negative I'd heard was that it doesn't/didn't
> fill around the rivets as well.
>
> Through a chain of friends, a DuPont rep ended up looking at my website.
> They have a newer aviation paint that they would have loved to have me
> try...at a discount...and it supposedly fixes the rivet filling problem.
> But, since I had sprayed the PPG already, I thought it best to color
> coat it with something from the same paint line.
>
> I'll be helping another builder paint an RV-4 later this year and it
> might be that we try the DuPont stuff on that project. As that
> comes together, I'll make sure to let everyone know how that compares
> if we spray it. I am very happy with the stuff that we sprayed though.
> It seems to be very good paint. Hopefully though, the Concept will
> be pretty chip resistant. I dinged a couple small nicks already, but
> that was before it got a real good cure. The base/clear though seems
> to be extremely tough for sure.
>
>
> Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
>
>
> Jesse Saint wrote:
>
>>--> RV10-List message posted by: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@itecusa.org>
>>
>>Tim,
>>
>>Did you just tape all of those lines by hand or did you have some sort of
>>form? LOOKS AWESOME! What's the durability of the basecoat clearcoat PPG
>>stuff compared to something like Imron, which doesn't seem to be a big
>>choice in this group. PPG seems to be what everybody is using.
>>
>>Jesse Saint
>>I-TEC, Inc.
>>jesse@itecusa.org
>>www.itecusa.org
>>W: 352-465-4545
>>C: 352-427-0285
>>F: 815-377-3694
>>
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 |
|
Sort of on the topic - has anyone heard anything new about a fadec for
the 540? Fadec.com hasn't changed in awhile, but I figured they'd want
to tap the 540 market.
ci
#40410
wings
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: | Tim's comments about painting |
Jesse wanted this saved for the archives, and I agree. You words are now
forever more, Tim.
Tim wrote:
Well, initially I drew it on the PC. It was pretty easy to make and adjust
the muliple section curves that way. So, I had all 4 views (Top, Side,
Front, Isometric) on a printout in front of me for masking it off. Then, I
ran the tape as smooth as possible by hand, trying to estimate at which
points on the airframe the lines crossed. It was then just a matter of
trial and error to get something that looked real nice, since the original
scheme wasn't really in 3D. After we thought we had it, we tried to
duplicate it on the other sides.
For the wing outer ends, I did actually tape one off and make a paper
template to transfer it to the bottom and other wing.
Now, as for the durability, I think the basecoat/clearcoat will be very
durable. It's top quality auto paint. Even this a.m. after spraying last
night, it feels like it'll be nice and hard. I basically used PPG because
Randy had good luck with it, and it was available at the most common local
paint store. I think Imron would be a fine choice too. The only negative
I'd heard was that it doesn't/didn't fill around the rivets as well.
Through a chain of friends, a DuPont rep ended up looking at my website.
They have a newer aviation paint that they would have loved to have me
try...at a discount...and it supposedly fixes the rivet filling problem.
But, since I had sprayed the PPG already, I thought it best to color coat it
with something from the same paint line.
I'll be helping another builder paint an RV-4 later this year and it might
be that we try the DuPont stuff on that project. As that comes together,
I'll make sure to let everyone know how that compares if we spray it. I am
very happy with the stuff that we sprayed though.
It seems to be very good paint. Hopefully though, the Concept will be
pretty chip resistant. I dinged a couple small nicks already, but that was
before it got a real good cure. The base/clear though seems to be extremely
tough for sure.
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
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: | Tim's comments about painting |
Now it's on there twice. I better add DO NOT ARCHIVE or it would be 3
times. This list really is great, though. I need to us DNA more, but am
getting used to it. I don't actually use the archives myself, but I know
that a lot of people do. I just keep everything filed away in an RV-10
folder. In fact, I currently have 5,032 e-mails in the folder, and that's
because I have deleted a bunch of them. That is all since the first of the
year. I wonder how many RV-10's we could have built with the cumulative
number of hours spent on the list.
GOD BLESS!
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org <http://www.itecusa.org/>
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
F: 815-377-3694
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Jessen
Subject: RV10-List: Tim's comments about painting
Jesse wanted this saved for the archives, and I agree. You words are now
forever more, Tim.
Tim wrote:
Well, initially I drew it on the PC. It was pretty easy to make and adjust
the muliple section curves that way. So, I had all 4 views (Top, Side,
Front, Isometric) on a printout in front of me for masking it off. Then, I
ran the tape as smooth as possible by hand, trying to estimate at which
points on the airframe the lines crossed. It was then just a matter of
trial and error to get something that looked real nice, since the original
scheme wasn't really in 3D. After we thought we had it, we tried to
duplicate it on the other sides.
For the wing outer ends, I did actually tape one off and make a paper
template to transfer it to the bottom and other wing.
Now, as for the durability, I think the basecoat/clearcoat will be very
durable. It's top quality auto paint. Even this a.m. after spraying last
night, it feels like it'll be nice and hard. I basically used PPG because
Randy had good luck with it, and it was available at the most common local
paint store. I think Imron would be a fine choice too. The only negative
I'd heard was that it doesn't/didn't fill around the rivets as well.
Through a chain of friends, a DuPont rep ended up looking at my website.
They have a newer aviation paint that they would have loved to have me
try...at a discount...and it supposedly fixes the rivet filling problem.
But, since I had sprayed the PPG already, I thought it best to color coat it
with something from the same paint line.
I'll be helping another builder paint an RV-4 later this year and it might
be that we try the DuPont stuff on that project. As that comes together,
I'll make sure to let everyone know how that compares if we spray it. I am
very happy with the stuff that we sprayed though.
It seems to be very good paint. Hopefully though, the Concept will be
pretty chip resistant. I dinged a couple small nicks already, but that was
before it got a real good cure. The base/clear though seems to be extremely
tough for sure.
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
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: Tim's comments about painting |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Or, on the flip side of that question....I wonder how much longer it
would have taken to build the RV-10 if people didn't have the
information and tips available on the list.... ;)
I for one, think I would have not nearly enjoyed this construction
as much if I had to suffer like the RV3,4,6 builders, with their plans,
and I can't imagine building one in a day and age where you had
to actually take Kodak photogaphs and mail the pictures to
someone if you had a question that needed visualization.
To me, the way it is today with our state of information is VERY much
the biggest factor in not only helping me to decide to build
the -10, but keeping it worth the effort as it is being built.
It's a huge project, but knowing all you folks are in it too,
and talking to you all really makes us feel like we're just
one big team, tackling a single mountain...the RV-10.
Tim
Jesse Saint wrote:
> Now its on there twice. I better add DO NOT ARCHIVE or it would be 3
> times. This list really is great, though. I need to us DNA more, but
> am getting used to it. I dont actually use the archives myself, but I
> know that a lot of people do. I just keep everything filed away in an
> RV-10 folder. In fact, I currently have 5,032 e-mails in the folder,
> and thats because I have deleted a bunch of them. That is all since
> the first of the year. I wonder how many RV-10s we could have built
> with the cumulative number of hours spent on the list.
>
>
>
> GOD BLESS!
>
>
>
> Jesse Saint
>
> I-TEC, Inc.
>
> jesse@itecusa.org <mailto:jesse@itecusa.org>
>
> www.itecusa.org <http://www.itecusa.org/>
>
> W: 352-465-4545
>
> C: 352-427-0285
>
> F: 815-377-3694
>
>
> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *John Jessen
> *Sent:* Monday, October 31, 2005 2:34 PM
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* RV10-List: Tim's comments about painting
>
>
>
> Jesse wanted this saved for the archives, and I agree. You words are
> now forever more, Tim.
>
> Tim wrote:
>
> Well, initially I drew it on the PC. It was pretty easy to make and
> adjust the muliple section curves that way. So, I had all 4 views (Top,
> Side, Front, Isometric) on a printout in front of me for masking it
> off. Then, I ran the tape as smooth as possible by hand, trying to
> estimate at which points on the airframe the lines crossed. It was then
> just a matter of trial and error to get something that looked real nice,
> since the original scheme wasn't really in 3D. After we thought we had
> it, we tried to duplicate it on the other sides.
>
> For the wing outer ends, I did actually tape one off and make a paper
> template to transfer it to the bottom and other wing.
>
> Now, as for the durability, I think the basecoat/clearcoat will be very
> durable. It's top quality auto paint. Even this a.m. after spraying
> last night, it feels like it'll be nice and hard. I basically used PPG
> because Randy had good luck with it, and it was available at the most
> common local paint store. I think Imron would be a fine choice too. The
> only negative I'd heard was that it doesn't/didn't fill around the
> rivets as well.
>
> Through a chain of friends, a DuPont rep ended up looking at my
> website. They have a newer aviation paint that they would have loved to
> have me try...at a discount...and it supposedly fixes the rivet filling
> problem. But, since I had sprayed the PPG already, I thought it best to
> color coat it with something from the same paint line.
>
> I'll be helping another builder paint an RV-4 later this year and it
> might be that we try the DuPont stuff on that project. As that comes
> together, I'll make sure to let everyone know how that compares if we
> spray it. I am very happy with the stuff that we sprayed though.
>
> It seems to be very good paint. Hopefully though, the Concept will be
> pretty chip resistant. I dinged a couple small nicks already, but that
> was before it got a real good cure. The base/clear though seems to be
> extremely tough for sure.
>
> Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
>
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: | Tim's comments about painting |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "John Jessen" <jjessen@rcn.com>
Not to mention keeping us all building safe... there are not enough members
using this web communication "portal" as it is. Only a handful populate it
with messages. Don't be hesitant guys and gals. Ask the questions.
do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Tim's comments about painting
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Or, on the flip side of that question....I wonder how much longer it would
have taken to build the RV-10 if people didn't have the information and tips
available on the list.... ;)
I for one, think I would have not nearly enjoyed this construction as much
if I had to suffer like the RV3,4,6 builders, with their plans, and I can't
imagine building one in a day and age where you had to actually take Kodak
photogaphs and mail the pictures to someone if you had a question that
needed visualization.
To me, the way it is today with our state of information is VERY much the
biggest factor in not only helping me to decide to build the -10, but
keeping it worth the effort as it is being built.
It's a huge project, but knowing all you folks are in it too, and talking to
you all really makes us feel like we're just one big team, tackling a single
mountain...the RV-10.
Tim
Jesse Saint wrote:
> Now it's on there twice. I better add DO NOT ARCHIVE or it would be 3
> times. This list really is great, though. I need to us DNA more, but
> am getting used to it. I don't actually use the archives myself, but
> I know that a lot of people do. I just keep everything filed away in
> an RV-10 folder. In fact, I currently have 5,032 e-mails in the
> folder, and that's because I have deleted a bunch of them. That is
> all since the first of the year. I wonder how many RV-10's we could
> have built with the cumulative number of hours spent on the list.
>
>
>
> GOD BLESS!
>
>
>
> Jesse Saint
>
> I-TEC, Inc.
>
> jesse@itecusa.org <mailto:jesse@itecusa.org>
>
> www.itecusa.org <http://www.itecusa.org/>
>
> W: 352-465-4545
>
> C: 352-427-0285
>
> F: 815-377-3694
>
> --
>
> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *John
> Jessen
> *Sent:* Monday, October 31, 2005 2:34 PM
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* RV10-List: Tim's comments about painting
>
>
>
> Jesse wanted this saved for the archives, and I agree. You words are
> now forever more, Tim.
>
> Tim wrote:
>
> Well, initially I drew it on the PC. It was pretty easy to make and
> adjust the muliple section curves that way. So, I had all 4 views
> (Top, Side, Front, Isometric) on a printout in front of me for masking it
> off. Then, I ran the tape as smooth as possible by hand, trying to
> estimate at which points on the airframe the lines crossed. It was
> then just a matter of trial and error to get something that looked
> real nice, since the original scheme wasn't really in 3D. After we
> thought we had it, we tried to duplicate it on the other sides.
>
> For the wing outer ends, I did actually tape one off and make a paper
> template to transfer it to the bottom and other wing.
>
> Now, as for the durability, I think the basecoat/clearcoat will be
> very durable. It's top quality auto paint. Even this a.m. after
> spraying last night, it feels like it'll be nice and hard. I
> basically used PPG because Randy had good luck with it, and it was
> available at the most common local paint store. I think Imron would
> be a fine choice too. The only negative I'd heard was that it
> doesn't/didn't fill around the rivets as well.
>
> Through a chain of friends, a DuPont rep ended up looking at my
> website. They have a newer aviation paint that they would have loved
> to have me try...at a discount...and it supposedly fixes the rivet
> filling problem. But, since I had sprayed the PPG already, I thought
> it best to color coat it with something from the same paint line.
>
> I'll be helping another builder paint an RV-4 later this year and it
> might be that we try the DuPont stuff on that project. As that comes
> together, I'll make sure to let everyone know how that compares if we
> spray it. I am very happy with the stuff that we sprayed though.
>
> It seems to be very good paint. Hopefully though, the Concept will be
> pretty chip resistant. I dinged a couple small nicks already, but
> that was before it got a real good cure. The base/clear though seems
> to be extremely tough for sure.
>
> Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
>
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 |
|
--> RV10-List message posted by: "John Hasbrouck" <jhasbrouck@woh.rr.com>
Is it possible to purchase the mounting bracket for the roll servo seperate
from the AP? I've asked TruTrak directly but thought I might get a faster
response here. I'm undecided as to which of their two servo APs to use but
as I understand it they all use the same bracket, depending on which side
you place the servo of course. Would like to close the wings up and move on
without committing to avionics just yet.
John Hasbrouck
#40264
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 |
|
SPAM: If the email is for spam, please report to abuse@dnsExit.com
-By mail relay service at:
http://www.dnsExit.com/Direct.sv?cmd=mailRelay
Accounts will be suspended immediately if found spamming.
John,
The roll servo bracket is easy to install at any point. I would just wait until
you decide as the difficult part is getting the servo in. However the wing
harness would be a good investment prior to closing the wing.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Waiting on Fuselage
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Hasbrouck
Subject: RV10-List: TruTrak AP
--> RV10-List message posted by: "John Hasbrouck"
--> <jhasbrouck@woh.rr.com>
Is it possible to purchase the mounting bracket for the roll servo seperate from
the AP? I've asked TruTrak directly but thought I might get a faster response
here. I'm undecided as to which of their two servo APs to use but as I understand
it they all use the same bracket, depending on which side you place the
servo of course. Would like to close the wings up and move on without committing
to avionics just yet.
John Hasbrouck
#40264
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: Tim's comments about painting |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Richard Sipp" <rsipp@earthlink.net>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Tim's comments about painting
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>
> Or, on the flip side of that question....I wonder how much longer it
> would have taken to build the RV-10 if people didn't have the
> information and tips available on the list.... ;)
>
> I for one, think I would have not nearly enjoyed this construction
> as much if I had to suffer like the RV3,4,6 builders, with their plans,
> and I can't imagine building one in a day and age where you had
> to actually take Kodak photogaphs and mail the pictures to
> someone if you had a question that needed visualization.
Well said Tim. I built and have been enjoying an RV4 for almost 10 years
now. I always tell people the best thing about the 10 is the plans and the
fact that all the sequence questions have been answered. A close second is
the precision of all the matched hole tooling. Doing a 10 "the old way"
would be close to impossible. It would be extremely difficult to bend up
parts that would then fit between other bent up parts. I am always amazed
when these parts fit together so well.
Your enthusiasm almost matches that of our departed Mr. McClow and I am sure
is a great motivator to many on the list as is all of the helpful advice.
Trust me, you will enjoy flying your airplane even more than building. Any
RV always draws interested airport bums.
For me, the only drawback will giving up aerobatics and the fun of flying
the A4 of the RVs. In trade, we are looking forward to a capable WAAS
equipped IFR traveler that will accommodate the family and dog.
Dick Sipp
RV4 N250DS
RV10 40065 N110DV
Do not archieve
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: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection |
RV Builder (Michael Sausen) wrote:
> Jesse,
>
> The main issue here is for vapor lock instances during a start from
> a heat soaked engine where the injector lines run on top of the engine
> and fuel is supplied by a engine driven pump or the pump being in the
> cowl. This is a common problem for that type of setup in warm or hot
> climates and is usually caused by fuel pump cavitation due to the fuel
> temperature being raised above it's vapor pressure threshold.
>
The pressure is a big consideration in addition to the temperature.
It's that first 'suck' at a high temp by the fuel pump that actually
creates the vapor pressure problem. Since the mechanical pump and
associated plumbing gets heat soaked during the turn-around, you need to
increase the pressure to make the vapor go back to liquid state. The
mechanical pumps don't process fuel vapor worth a flip.
> It's most commonly seen when you fly somewhere hot, get fuel, and
> then try a restart shortly after. Usually requires a 30 minutes sit
> with the oil door open to allow the fuel to condense again. Shouldn't
> be as much of a problem with our fuel pumps being back in the fuselage
> but it could still happen. In our case it would allow fuel to be
> circulated, cooling the lines back down and purging the fuel vapor out
> for easier start in this condition.
>
I'm guessing you're talking about an electric pump in the cockpit.
Depending on how hot the sun makes the cockpit, you 'could' experience
the problem with a fuselage mounted electric pump. Just depends on
where the pump is located. If you mount the pump at the lowest point
(on the floor or the fuselage skin itself) in the fuel system, then the
natural head pressure helps the vapor pressure problem.
> If you aren't seeing a problem, no reason to worry about it, this is
> strictly an engine start event.
>
Not true. You can get vapor lock after a long taxi .... if the system
is prone to vapor lock, that is.
> There is a good chance none of us would really see this problem with
> the design of our fuel system having the fuel pump in the fuselage.
> The most that would probably happen is a rough start until the lines
> clear.
>
I'm not too clear on which pump we're talking about here. The engine
driven pump WILL NOT process vapor. Period. You need to raise the
pressure in the lines prior to the engine driven pump (by an electric
pump in a cooler environment .... such as in the cockpit) to force the
vapor back to a liquid state. A motor driven pump is best, but an
impulse pump will also work. Not sure just how much pressure the cube
pumps can supply, so someone else will have to chime in on that one.
Linn .... run auto fuel in a low wing airplane for ages!!!
do not archive
>
>
> Michael Sausen
> -10 #352 Waiting on fuselage
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 11:05 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@itecusa.org>
>
> I am a little confused as well. We have a Bendix injection system.
> We haven't put a return line in. We do have an overflow line that
> just runs out the back of the cowling. The system can't be pumping
> much more fuel that it is using or our fuel flows would be higher.
> When burning 6.5-7gph @ 17,500, I can't imagine that we are actually
> burning less than that and wasting a significant amount. Is the main
> issue here vapor lock? Would this system not work the same way
> whether you have a return line or an overflow drain line? Running the
> boost pump is going to do the same thing any, right. I am not much of
> an engine guy, so please let me know where I am wrong. Also, if vapor
> lock mainly a startup issue, or are we needing to worry about this
> while we are flying? We certainly haven't had any issues with the
> system during our 150 hours in the air, but if it is an accident
> waiting to happen, it doesn't matter how many hours we have flown the
> wrong way, we want to fix it.
>
> Jesse Saint
> I-TEC, Inc.
> jesse@itecusa.org
> www.itecusa.org
> W: 352-465-4545
> C: 352-427-0285
> F: 815-377-3694
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen
> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 11:19 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vapor return for mechanical fuel injection
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Kelly McMullen" <kellym@aviating.com>
>
> It depends on the brand fuel injection used. TCM and Bendix do not use
> a common rail, they send fuel to a distributor that sends it to
> individual injectors. Bendix regulates the fuel flow at the fuel
> servo, and only fuel needed goes to the distributor and injectors.
> Fuel pumps are self limiting, returning excess pressure to their low
> pressure side. TCM
> (Continental) is different, and does use a return loop. I don't know
> what aftermarket systems use.
> There isn't much in common between aircraft injection systems and auto
> systems. Aircraft still use continuous injection, most cars use
> individual timed injection for better emissions control. Aircraft
> distributors are pressure controled, so when pressure drops below a
> preset minimum, no fuel goes to the injectors, allowing idle cutoff.
>
> Lloyd, Daniel R. said:
> > It does, I did not realize there is a valve that is opened and closed.
> > That makes more sense. I have not flown behind an IO engine, just
> > standard. Now maybe you can explain to me, is it like in an auto,
> > where there is allot more fuel going to the rail then is used, causing
> > a return line to be necessary? or does it only pump what is required/
> > used? I thought fuel injection meant a looped system, where only the
> > portion of fuel that went to the injectors was used and the rest sent
> > back to the tank?
> >
> > _____
> >
>
>
> ====================================
> RV10-List Email Forum -
> more:
> bsp;
> ====================================
>
>
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>
>
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
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 |
|
Ditto on the last comments re: the -10 list :
It is a university indeed , & the camaraderie that it entails is interesting also
, Tim and all the others that have the web sites (thanks much) .
i have contributed (a bit i think )
Brian Bollaert
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 |
|
The Ice water tubing I have seen will definitely get BRITTLE after 5 years and
break under small vibration. Would hate to rerun pitot tubing every 3 years to
keep it flexible.
The Ice water tubing I have seen will definitely get BRITTLE after 5 years and
break under small vibration. Would hate to rerun pitot tubing every 3 years to
keep it flexible.
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 |
|
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Lewis <Tim_Lewis@msm.umr.edu>
> Is it possible to purchase the mounting bracket for the roll servo
> seperate from the AP?
Yes. That's what I did. $50 for the mount, as I recall. Includes
connectors.
Tim
--
Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA)
RV-6A N47TD -- 790 hrs
RV-10 #40059 under construction
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 |
|
--> RV10-List message posted by: "David McNeill" <dlm46007@cox.net>
Forget the connectors as supplied by TT. get the standard dsubs and barrel
pins/sockets. soldering the cups is not the way to go especially if you have
to switch pins due to servo rotation
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Lewis" <Tim_Lewis@msm.umr.edu>
Subject: Re: RV10-List: TruTrak AP
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Lewis <Tim_Lewis@msm.umr.edu>
>
> > Is it possible to purchase the mounting bracket for the roll servo
> > seperate from the AP?
>
> Yes. That's what I did. $50 for the mount, as I recall. Includes
> connectors.
>
> Tim
> --
> Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA)
> RV-6A N47TD -- 790 hrs
> RV-10 #40059 under construction
>
>
>
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: | Placards/Nameplate |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
I was thinking that on my next order from ACS, I'd get whatever logbooks
and placards I'll need. I see on this page of ACS's catalog they have a
nameplate, and stainless steel ID tag on the top of the page.
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/pdf/catalog/Cat06348.pdf
I need both of these, right? I've seen the black on the side under
the HS on -10's. Where would the nameplate go?
Tim
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Tim's comments about painting |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Rick <ricksked@earthlink.net>
Wow....somebody remembered ol' Jimmy Mac...(James McClow) I miss him and his unbridled
enthusiasm as well....I would like to think he reads some of this sometime...for
old time sake....hE wuz a gOOD JoE.
Rick S.
40185
Fuselage
Do not archive
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! --
|