Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:10 AM - Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning (gary)
2. 07:34 AM - Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning (N777TY)
3. 07:44 AM - Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning (John Cox)
4. 08:01 AM - Re: Another Flying RV10 for the book (cloudvalley@comcast.net)
5. 08:24 AM - Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning (Deems Davis)
6. 09:46 AM - Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning (Bill DeRouchey)
7. 09:55 AM - Garmin G900X Users Group? (Robin Marks)
8. 10:16 AM - Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning (Tim Olson)
9. 11:54 AM - Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning (Marcus Cooper)
10. 02:21 PM - Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning (Roger Standley)
11. 02:40 PM - Glastar flyer/ RV10 builder (David McNeill)
12. 03:14 PM - Re: Garmin G900X Users Group? (gary)
13. 03:50 PM - Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning (Kelly McMullen)
14. 04:13 PM - Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning (Kelly McMullen)
15. 04:21 PM - Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning (Kelly McMullen)
16. 06:09 PM - Re: Garmin G900X Users Group? (Robin Marks)
17. 06:51 PM - Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning (richard sipp)
18. 06:55 PM - Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning (Tim Olson)
19. 07:19 PM - Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning (David McNeill)
20. 07:35 PM - Re: RV-10 trio pitch servo install (ddnebert)
21. 10:38 PM - Re: Glastar flyer/ RV10 builder (Werner Schneider)
22. 10:52 PM - Re: nose fork (Steven DiNieri)
23. 11:11 PM - Re: Glastar flyer/ RV10 builder (John Cox)
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: | LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning |
Is there a danger with running too much over square? Dick mentions 2" but I
have been running more than that (2200 and 26")LOP. I have not seen much
info on running over square.
Gary Specketer
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of richard sipp
Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 11:57 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
Tim:
Great post as usual on your injector balancing experience. I had very
nearly the same experience and results with two minor variations; a complete
Airflow Performance system vs. your Silver Hawk and we started by installing
.026's in all cylinders and then balancing. I ran most of the tests at
10-11 MSL and verified at the results at 7.5. Don R. felt that at the lower
power settings of around 50-60% the flow divider begins to be the
determining factor and by going to the smaller .026s the flow divider is
taken out of the equation.
There was an interesting series of pictures and notes regarding burned
pistons (don't remember where I saw them) where the author thought the cause
was "rapid" mixture leaning used by LOP operators. He felt the rapid rise
in EGT was the cause. I disagree. GAMI recommends the "big pull" from rich
to LOP and then a finer adujustment to prevent spending more time in the
danger zone of peak to 100 rich of peak. Also with a rapid initial mixture
leaning I doubt the cylinder or piston temp will increase before it cools
from steady LOP operation. Further at <65% I do not think you can do
anything to the mixture that would harm or overstress the engine.
Regarding long range cruise I was happy to find that my engine seems equally
smooth at 2250 as at higher RPM. I see about a 1GPH reduction in fuel flow
with each 100 RPM reduction at full throttle settings and there is very
little airspeed loss as the prop is taking bigger bits (sorta like
overdrive). Charles Lindberg showed the P-38 pilots in the South Pacific how
to double their range by running "over square and lean". Finally, to
prevent the prop driving the engine during higher speed descents I keep the
RPM at least "2" oversquare below manifold pressure. This is common
practice with the big radials and it would seem equally applicable to our
engines.
Dick Sipp
N110DV 175 hours
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: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning |
Dick,
I think you're referring to this document:
http://www.eci.aero/pdf/93-6-7.pdf
(though, no photos in it..)
--------
RV-7A
N777TY
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=259171#259171
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: | LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning |
The challenge is to avoid Detonation and the earlier than planned
destruction of the engine. That can be a factor of compression ratio of
the cylinder, quality and octane of the AVGAS, carbon and garbage
deposits inside the combustion chamber and the ignition event. The
lower the RPM, the higher the throttle the greater the risk.
Several pilots are running upward of 10.0:1 pistons, choose their avgas
supplier wisely, run a well timed ignition system and gently increase
the throttle. GAMI has made a business of educating pilots. Others try
marginal gas quality, ragged ignitions and throw caution to the wind.
Choose wisely. Fly Safe. Check your % of power tables for LOP
operations.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of gary
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 5:08 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
Is there a danger with running too much over square? Dick mentions 2"
but I
have been running more than that (2200 and 26")LOP. I have not seen much
info on running over square.
Gary Specketer
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of richard sipp
Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 11:57 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
Tim:
Great post as usual on your injector balancing experience. I had very
nearly the same experience and results with two minor variations; a
complete
Airflow Performance system vs. your Silver Hawk and we started by
installing
.026's in all cylinders and then balancing. I ran most of the tests at
10-11 MSL and verified at the results at 7.5. Don R. felt that at the
lower
power settings of around 50-60% the flow divider begins to be the
determining factor and by going to the smaller .026s the flow divider is
taken out of the equation.
There was an interesting series of pictures and notes regarding burned
pistons (don't remember where I saw them) where the author thought the
cause
was "rapid" mixture leaning used by LOP operators. He felt the rapid
rise
in EGT was the cause. I disagree. GAMI recommends the "big pull" from
rich
to LOP and then a finer adujustment to prevent spending more time in the
danger zone of peak to 100 rich of peak. Also with a rapid initial
mixture
leaning I doubt the cylinder or piston temp will increase before it
cools
from steady LOP operation. Further at <65% I do not think you can do
anything to the mixture that would harm or overstress the engine.
Regarding long range cruise I was happy to find that my engine seems
equally
smooth at 2250 as at higher RPM. I see about a 1GPH reduction in fuel
flow
with each 100 RPM reduction at full throttle settings and there is very
little airspeed loss as the prop is taking bigger bits (sorta like
overdrive). Charles Lindberg showed the P-38 pilots in the South Pacific
how
to double their range by running "over square and lean". Finally, to
prevent the prop driving the engine during higher speed descents I keep
the
RPM at least "2" oversquare below manifold pressure. This is common
practice with the big radials and it would seem equally applicable to
our
engines.
Dick Sipp
N110DV 175 hours
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: Another Flying RV10 for the book |
Hi Mike!
Doesn't time fly? It seems like yesterday that we were building our tail ki
t with you at Wally's in Eugene Oregon.=C2- We are so jealous! Congratula
tions. Wish things worked out for us to finish our kit, but we STILL have n
ot sold our farm. Making money though at the famres' market, and flying our
Grumman Tiger when we can- but so much slower than you will be flying! We
just hired a new Realtor who raised our price on the farm and told us he WI
LL sell it. He made no ambiguities about that. Then maybe we can get a high
performance plane...
Congratulations again Mike. We can send you a CD of a lot of pictures I jus
t found on a blank CD of our experience at Wally's with you! I thought I ha
d lost it.
Brian and Ruth
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robin Marks" <robin1@mrmoisture.com>
Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 8:00:20 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Another Flying RV10 for the book
Fantastic news Mike. Way to go on posting your first flight on Vans
site. I need to get something up there before the calendar clicks over
another year. I wonder how many Vans Aircraft are really flying?
Regardless you now have your own flying -10; enjoy and please fly safe!
I will see you are OSH in 2010.
Robin
Do Not Archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of AirMike
Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 10:48 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Another Flying RV10 for the book
RV-10 Q/B kit #40663 lifted off with Mike Seager at the controls on
Thursday August 13th 2009 at Minden, Nevada. AirMike now with 2 hrs. in
the beast.
http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/flights.htm
A sincere thanks to all the great folks on this list without whose help
the task would have been much more difficult. Special koddos to Tim
Olson, Dave M, Dave Saylor, Matt, Gary, Albert, Deems, William C.,Scott,
Kelly M, Jesse, Stein, Bob C., John C., Jae C., and anyone else whom I
may have forgotten.
For the newbees starting their projects this forum will yield to you a
better and safer aircraft and the opportunity to meet (even
electronically) a great group of fine folks. Read Matt's rules - be
positive, and do not be afraid to ask what you might think is a foolish
question. Respect and helpfulness keeps this a great forum. Fly safe -
have fun
--------
OSH '09 or Bust (busted) be there someday
Q/B Kit - end game
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=258937#258937
===========
===========
MS -
===========
e -
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2--Matt Dralle, List Admin.
===========
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning |
All of the LOP information is GREAT. Keep it coming !!!!!!! I have a
question:
When leaning the engine, the 'old traditional / prior to gages' way was
to lean it until it begins to 'stumble' and then richen it up a bit.
When I lean using the EGT gages I notice the 'stumble' when the 1st
cylinder goes lean. If you continue to lean until all of the remaining
cylinders peak (LOP), What happens to the 'stumble' ??? Does it even out
/ go way with the engine running smooth? Does it persist? Since any
changes in the engines smooth running are a concern in flight, I'd
appreciate learning what those of you that are routinely running LOP are
experiencing.
Deems Davis N519PJ
http://deemsrv10.com/index.html
gary wrote:
>
> Is there a danger with running too much over square? Dick mentions 2" but I
> have been running more than that (2200 and 26")LOP. I have not seen much
> info on running over square.
>
> Gary Specketer
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of richard sipp
> Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 11:57 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
>
>
> Tim:
>
> Great post as usual on your injector balancing experience. I had very
> nearly the same experience and results with two minor variations; a complete
>
> Airflow Performance system vs. your Silver Hawk and we started by installing
>
> .026's in all cylinders and then balancing. I ran most of the tests at
> 10-11 MSL and verified at the results at 7.5. Don R. felt that at the lower
>
> power settings of around 50-60% the flow divider begins to be the
> determining factor and by going to the smaller .026s the flow divider is
> taken out of the equation.
>
> There was an interesting series of pictures and notes regarding burned
> pistons (don't remember where I saw them) where the author thought the cause
>
> was "rapid" mixture leaning used by LOP operators. He felt the rapid rise
> in EGT was the cause. I disagree. GAMI recommends the "big pull" from rich
>
> to LOP and then a finer adujustment to prevent spending more time in the
> danger zone of peak to 100 rich of peak. Also with a rapid initial mixture
> leaning I doubt the cylinder or piston temp will increase before it cools
> from steady LOP operation. Further at <65% I do not think you can do
> anything to the mixture that would harm or overstress the engine.
>
> Regarding long range cruise I was happy to find that my engine seems equally
>
> smooth at 2250 as at higher RPM. I see about a 1GPH reduction in fuel flow
> with each 100 RPM reduction at full throttle settings and there is very
> little airspeed loss as the prop is taking bigger bits (sorta like
> overdrive). Charles Lindberg showed the P-38 pilots in the South Pacific how
>
> to double their range by running "over square and lean". Finally, to
> prevent the prop driving the engine during higher speed descents I keep the
> RPM at least "2" oversquare below manifold pressure. This is common
> practice with the big radials and it would seem equally applicable to our
> engines.
>
> Dick Sipp
> N110DV 175 hours
>
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning |
I believe tuning the injector nozzles will create a smoother running engine
and that in itself has value. However, I have been mystified during these
conversations as to the value of running LOP vs fuel economy. There was nev
er enough data in the emails to get the whole picture. The-question I alw
ays had was-how much speed are you willing to loose to gain how much-fu
el efficiency?
-
Thanks to Dave's pic of his panel and my own experience I was able to put a
picture together.
-
The following numbers are in statute miles and the Density Altitude is simi
lar. If we assume that the top speed of our RV-10's is 205mph then Dave is
flying 20% (164.5smph) under max and achieving 18.6smpg while leaned to app
rox 25deg LOP. An averaged flight in my plane is 6% under max speed (193smp
h) achieving 19.1smpg while leaned to peak. My definition of peak is when 3
cylinders drop.
-
Typical panel setup for me is: WOT, 10-13K feet, 2380-2420rpm, 10.1-10.3gph
, lean to peak.
-
These are only two-datapoints. What are others achieving? And please prov
ide the whole picture - what is-the percent under max speed you are willi
ng to fly and the miles per gallon you are achieving as a benefit. I assume
the whole LOP (other than a smooth engine) is to achieve fuel efficiency.
-
What am I missing?
-
Bill DeRouchey
N939SB
-
-
-
-
--- On Sun, 8/23/09, Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net> wrote:
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>
Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
All of the LOP information is GREAT. Keep it coming !!!!!!! I have a questi
on:
When leaning the engine, the 'old traditional / prior to gages' way was to
lean it until it begins to 'stumble' and then richen it up a bit. When I le
an using the EGT gages I notice the 'stumble' when the 1st cylinder goes le
an. If you continue to lean until all of the remaining cylinders peak (LOP)
, What happens to the 'stumble' ??? Does it even out / go way with the engi
ne running smooth? Does it persist? Since any changes in the engines smooth
running are a concern in flight, I'd appreciate learning what those of you
that are routinely running LOP are experiencing.
Deems Davis N519PJ
http://deemsrv10.com/index.html
gary wrote:
>
> Is there a danger with running too much over square?- Dick mentions 2"
but I
> have been running more than that (2200 and 26")LOP. I have not seen much
> info on running over square.
>
> Gary Specketer
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of richard sipp
> Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 11:57 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
>
>
> Tim:
>
> Great post as usual on your injector balancing experience.- I had very
nearly the same experience and results with two minor variations; a complet
e
>
> Airflow Performance system vs. your Silver Hawk and we started by install
ing
>
> .026's in all cylinders and then balancing.- I ran most of the tests at
10-11 MSL and verified at the results at 7.5.- Don R. felt that at the l
ower
>
> power settings of around 50-60% the flow divider begins to be the determi
ning factor and by going to the smaller .026s the flow divider is taken out
of the equation.
>
> There was an interesting series of pictures and notes regarding burned pi
stons (don't remember where I saw them) where the author thought the cause
>
> was "rapid" mixture leaning used by LOP operators.- He felt the rapid r
ise in EGT was the cause.- I disagree.- GAMI recommends the "big pull"
from rich
>
> to LOP and then a finer adujustment to prevent spending more time in the
danger zone of peak to 100 rich of peak.- Also with a rapid initial mixtu
re leaning I doubt the cylinder or piston temp will increase before it cool
s from steady LOP operation.- Further at <65% I do not think you can do a
nything to the mixture that would harm or overstress the engine.
>
> Regarding long range cruise I was happy to find that my engine seems equa
lly
>
> smooth at 2250 as at higher RPM.- I see about a 1GPH reduction in fuel
flow with each 100 RPM reduction at full throttle settings and there is ver
y little airspeed loss as the prop is taking bigger bits (sorta like overdr
ive). Charles Lindberg showed the P-38 pilots in the South Pacific how
>
> to double their range by running "over square and lean".- Finally, to p
revent the prop driving the engine during higher speed descents I keep the
RPM at least "2" oversquare below manifold pressure.- This is common prac
tice with the big radials and it would seem equally applicable to our engin
es.
>
> Dick Sipp
> N110DV 175 hours
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>---
le, List Admin.
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: | Garmin G900X Users Group? |
Does anyone know of a Garmin Users Group? Ideally a G900X or G1000 users
group? I have many (basic) questions about my avionics that don't seem
to be covered by the 500+ page manual.
Robin
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: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning |
This is just a guess, for me, to answer your question, but first
I'll pass on what my experience has been...
When I lean up to and past peak, there is never a period where
it stumbles. It keeps running smoothly and as you get further
and further LOP, you can hear the engine start to lose power...
it gets quieter. If you run that way for a couple minutes and
adapt to the sound, you will easily hear and feel the extra
power come back as you richen it up towards that -25 to -50F
LOP again...and feel even more power as you richen it back to
ROP operation. The old "lean to stumble" works well with the
carbureted planes I guess. (In my opinion though if it's
really that non-precise, carbureted engines in general are
kind of "sloppy", and not really going to be nearly as
good for LOP) Probably everyone should be using a 6 probe
monitor for their operations.
So my opinion on the answer to the question would be...since
you're running a fuel injected engine, if it's stumbling
when it gets to peak on one cylinder, I would guess (just
a guess) that it won't go away as you keep leaning further.
It would probably be the case that something is preventing
you from getting it smooth...be it timing, compression, or
something else. The hope is that you can determine what
exactly that is, and then make it work so it is smooth.
This is the big headache for me in the later part of that
writeup. My pal with the 10:1 pistons, we really have to
apply ourselves to figure that one out. He ordered the .026
injectors, so we'll see soon how that plays out. Maybe that
would be all it would take for you too. I'm hoping that we
can make it perfect and then provide more info to all others
who face the same hurdle.
I am just finally able to get to replying today, and I've
gotten a couple of great offline emails. One of them
brought up something that I should mention that is
important and I'll add this warning into the write-up soon.
I wrote there that you should use a timing light to time
both systems. This is something basically being said by
Klaus at Lightspeed. Of course, it's in his interest to
urge you to be very precise in determining timing. It would
be ideal if you knew it exactly. But, timing a system with
a timing light, being up by the prop when it's moving,
is a very dangerous thing. The writer, and A&P himself, said
that static timing of a mag can be very good. I agree.
I felt like a slacker that I've never used a timing light
on my plane, but I feel my mag was timed pretty well by
standard simple static timing. But, in this extreme case
of this 10:1 engine, I'm not sure what to do. Klaus
says use a timing light and get it exact...then tweak
the systems or maybe just the mag, and do some testing...try
advancing a little. I don't know what to say but...BE
CAREFUL if you're working near a moving prop....take it from
Stein. :)
Also, I assumed that with higher compression you would need
to slightly retard the timing. That may not be the case.
Klaus said LOP sometimes works better with advanced timing.
Anyway, he said not to use the adjustable timing knob addition
on the lightspeed..it's too dangerous to mess with. But,
the one big thing he did say that makes perfect sense is
to READ THE INSTALLATION MANUAL AND FOLLOW THE DIRECTIONS.
So, we're also going back into the Lightspeed install and
going to make sure the engine is set up properly per that
manual.
Wish it was simple answers for everyone, but there are going
to be some unique cases, with the various engine setups.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
Deems Davis wrote:
>
> All of the LOP information is GREAT. Keep it coming !!!!!!! I have a
> question:
>
> When leaning the engine, the 'old traditional / prior to gages' way was
> to lean it until it begins to 'stumble' and then richen it up a bit.
> When I lean using the EGT gages I notice the 'stumble' when the 1st
> cylinder goes lean. If you continue to lean until all of the remaining
> cylinders peak (LOP), What happens to the 'stumble' ??? Does it even out
> / go way with the engine running smooth? Does it persist? Since any
> changes in the engines smooth running are a concern in flight, I'd
> appreciate learning what those of you that are routinely running LOP are
> experiencing.
>
> Deems Davis N519PJ
> http://deemsrv10.com/index.html
>
> gary wrote:
>>
>> Is there a danger with running too much over square? Dick mentions 2"
>> but I
>> have been running more than that (2200 and 26")LOP. I have not seen much
>> info on running over square.
>>
>> Gary Specketer
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of richard sipp
>> Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 11:57 PM
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
>>
>>
>> Tim:
>>
>> Great post as usual on your injector balancing experience. I had very
>> nearly the same experience and results with two minor variations; a
>> complete
>>
>> Airflow Performance system vs. your Silver Hawk and we started by
>> installing
>>
>> .026's in all cylinders and then balancing. I ran most of the tests
>> at 10-11 MSL and verified at the results at 7.5. Don R. felt that at
>> the lower
>>
>> power settings of around 50-60% the flow divider begins to be the
>> determining factor and by going to the smaller .026s the flow divider
>> is taken out of the equation.
>>
>> There was an interesting series of pictures and notes regarding burned
>> pistons (don't remember where I saw them) where the author thought the
>> cause
>>
>> was "rapid" mixture leaning used by LOP operators. He felt the rapid
>> rise in EGT was the cause. I disagree. GAMI recommends the "big
>> pull" from rich
>>
>> to LOP and then a finer adujustment to prevent spending more time in
>> the danger zone of peak to 100 rich of peak. Also with a rapid
>> initial mixture leaning I doubt the cylinder or piston temp will
>> increase before it cools from steady LOP operation. Further at <65% I
>> do not think you can do anything to the mixture that would harm or
>> overstress the engine.
>>
>> Regarding long range cruise I was happy to find that my engine seems
>> equally
>>
>> smooth at 2250 as at higher RPM. I see about a 1GPH reduction in fuel
>> flow with each 100 RPM reduction at full throttle settings and there
>> is very little airspeed loss as the prop is taking bigger bits (sorta
>> like overdrive). Charles Lindberg showed the P-38 pilots in the South
>> Pacific how
>>
>> to double their range by running "over square and lean". Finally, to
>> prevent the prop driving the engine during higher speed descents I
>> keep the RPM at least "2" oversquare below manifold pressure. This is
>> common practice with the big radials and it would seem equally
>> applicable to our engines.
>>
>> Dick Sipp
>> N110DV 175 hours
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning |
Bill,
You address an interesting question. The primary debate has been on
whether to choose the old school Rich of Peak (ROP) or Lean of Peak (LOP)
which is why the big fuel savings over slight airspeed drop numbers. Seems
that most of us were taught to either richen slightly after the engine
stumbles in the absence of good gauges, or run around 50 to 100 ROP
depending on cruise or power requirements. Your choice to go at peak
certainly accomplishes most of the LOP intent of saving gas without the
speed drop.
I have read on the forum somewhere that some companies actually recommend
running at peak, whereas I've also read some concerns over that setting so
I'm hopefully there are some educated answers out there. My overall
understanding is the key is to keep the CHTs under control and otherwise
where you set the mixture shouldn't do any damage provided you are under 65%
power. Amazing how what should be a fairly straightforward topic has so
many perceptions.
I for one have been very please with LOP and really appreciate Tim's
write-up as I would like to make it even better. I have the same setup and
stayed clear of tweaking because I didn't know we had the same injector
options as the Airflow Performance setup, so THANKS.
Marcus
Do not archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill DeRouchey
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 12:38 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
I believe tuning the injector nozzles will create a smoother running engine
and that in itself has value. However, I have been mystified during these
conversations as to the value of running LOP vs fuel economy. There was
never enough data in the emails to get the whole picture. The question I
always had was how much speed are you willing to loose to gain how much fuel
efficiency?
Thanks to Dave's pic of his panel and my own experience I was able to put a
picture together.
The following numbers are in statute miles and the Density Altitude is
similar. If we assume that the top speed of our RV-10's is 205mph then Dave
is flying 20% (164.5smph) under max and achieving 18.6smpg while leaned to
approx 25deg LOP. An averaged flight in my plane is 6% under max speed
(193smph) achieving 19.1smpg while leaned to peak. My definition of peak is
when 3 cylinders drop.
Typical panel setup for me is: WOT, 10-13K feet, 2380-2420rpm, 10.1-10.3gph,
lean to peak.
These are only two datapoints. What are others achieving? And please provide
the whole picture - what is the percent under max speed you are willing to
fly and the miles per gallon you are achieving as a benefit. I assume the
whole LOP (other than a smooth engine) is to achieve fuel efficiency.
What am I missing?
Bill DeRouchey
N939SB
--- On Sun, 8/23/09, Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net> wrote:
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>
Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
<http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=deemsdavis@cox.net> >
All of the LOP information is GREAT. Keep it coming !!!!!!! I have a
question:
When leaning the engine, the 'old traditional / prior to gages' way was to
lean it until it begins to 'stumble' and then richen it up a bit. When I
lean using the EGT gages I notice the 'stumble' when the 1st cylinder goes
lean. If you continue to lean until all of the remaining cylinders peak
(LOP), What happens to the 'stumble' ??? Does it even out / go way with the
engine running smooth? Does it persist? Since any changes in the engines
smooth running are a concern in flight, I'd appreciate learning what those
of you that are routinely running LOP are experiencing.
Deems Davis N519PJ
http://deemsrv10.com/index.html
gary wrote:
<http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=speckter@comcast.net> >
>
> Is there a danger with running too much over square? Dick mentions 2" but
I
> have been running more than that (2200 and 26")LOP. I have not seen much
> info on running over square.
>
> Gary Specketer
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
<http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-rv10-list-server@matroni
cs.com>
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
<http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-rv10-list-server@matroni
cs.com> ] On Behalf Of richard sipp
> Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 11:57 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
<http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
>
<http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=rsipp@earthlink.net> >
>
> Tim:
>
> Great post as usual on your injector balancing experience. I had very
nearly the same experience and results with two minor variations; a complete
>
> Airflow Performance system vs. your Silver Hawk and we started by
installing
>
> .026's in all cylinders and then balancing. I ran most of the tests at
10-11 MSL and verified at the results at 7.5. Don R. felt that at the lower
>
> power settings of around 50-60% the flow divider begins to be the
determining factor and by going to the smaller .026s the flow divider is
taken out of the equation.
>
> There was an interesting series of pictures and notes regarding burned
pistons (don't remember where I saw them) where the author thought the cause
>
> was "rapid" mixture leaning used by LOP operators. He felt the rapid rise
in EGT was the cause. I disagree. GAMI recommends the "big pull" from rich
>
> to LOP and then a finer adujustment to prevent spending more time in the
danger zone of peak to 100 rich of peak. Also with a rapid initial mixture
leaning I doubt the cylinder or piston temp will increase before it cools
from steady LOP operation. Further at <65% I do not think you can do
anything to the mixture that would harm or overstress the engine.
>
> Regarding long range cruise I was happy to find that my engine seems
equally
>
> smooth at 2250 as at higher RPM. I see about a 1GPH reduction in fuel
flow with each 100 RPM reduction at full throttle settings and there is very
little airspeed loss as the prop is taking bigger bits (sorta like
overdrive). Charles Lindberg showed the P-38 pilots in the South Pacific how
>
> to double their range by running "over square and lean". Finally, to
prevent the prop driving the engine during higher speed descents I keep the
RPM at least "2" oversquare below manifold pressure. This is common
practice with the big radials and it would seem equally applicable to our
engines.
>
> Dick Sipp
> N110DV 175 hours
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ========================http://www.mat====================
<http://forums.matronics.com/>
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: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning |
Yes, I find this subject interesting, too.
I have a question: What are you seeing for peak EGT at various power
settings, say at 75%, 65% and 55% power settings?
Roger
----- Original Message -----
From: Marcus Cooper<mailto:coop85@verizon.net>
To: rv10-list@matronics.com<mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 11:53 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
Bill,
You address an interesting question. The primary debate has been
on whether to choose the old school Rich of Peak (ROP) or Lean of Peak
(LOP) which is why the big fuel savings over slight airspeed drop
numbers. Seems that most of us were taught to either richen slightly
after the engine stumbles in the absence of good gauges, or run around
50 to 100 ROP depending on cruise or power requirements. Your choice to
go at peak certainly accomplishes most of the LOP intent of saving gas
without the speed drop.
I have read on the forum somewhere that some companies actually
recommend running at peak, whereas I've also read some concerns over
that setting so I'm hopefully there are some educated answers out there.
My overall understanding is the key is to keep the CHTs under control
and otherwise where you set the mixture shouldn't do any damage provided
you are under 65% power. Amazing how what should be a fairly
straightforward topic has so many perceptions.
I for one have been very please with LOP and really appreciate Tim's
write-up as I would like to make it even better. I have the same setup
and stayed clear of tweaking because I didn't know we had the same
injector options as the Airflow Performance setup, so THANKS.
Marcus
Do not archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
DeRouchey
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 12:38 PM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
I believe tuning the injector nozzles will create a smoother
running engine and that in itself has value. However, I have been
mystified during these conversations as to the value of running LOP vs
fuel economy. There was never enough data in the emails to get the whole
picture. The question I always had was how much speed are you willing to
loose to gain how much fuel efficiency?
Thanks to Dave's pic of his panel and my own experience I was
able to put a picture together.
The following numbers are in statute miles and the Density
Altitude is similar. If we assume that the top speed of our RV-10's is
205mph then Dave is flying 20% (164.5smph) under max and achieving
18.6smpg while leaned to approx 25deg LOP. An averaged flight in my
plane is 6% under max speed (193smph) achieving 19.1smpg while leaned to
peak. My definition of peak is when 3 cylinders drop.
Typical panel setup for me is: WOT, 10-13K feet, 2380-2420rpm,
10.1-10.3gph, lean to peak.
These are only two datapoints. What are others achieving? And
please provide the whole picture - what is the percent under max speed
you are willing to fly and the miles per gallon you are achieving as a
benefit. I assume the whole LOP (other than a smooth engine) is to
achieve fuel efficiency.
What am I missing?
Bill DeRouchey
N939SB
--- On Sun, 8/23/09, Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net> wrote:
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>
Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Date: Sunday, August 23, 2009, 8:22 AM
<deemsdavis@cox.net<http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=deemsd
avis@cox.net>>
All of the LOP information is GREAT. Keep it coming !!!!!!! I
have a question:
When leaning the engine, the 'old traditional / prior to
gages' way was to lean it until it begins to 'stumble' and then richen
it up a bit. When I lean using the EGT gages I notice the 'stumble' when
the 1st cylinder goes lean. If you continue to lean until all of the
remaining cylinders peak (LOP), What happens to the 'stumble' ??? Does
it even out / go way with the engine running smooth? Does it persist?
Since any changes in the engines smooth running are a concern in flight,
I'd appreciate learning what those of you that are routinely running LOP
are experiencing.
Deems Davis N519PJ
http://deemsrv10.com/index.html<http://deemsrv10.com/index.html>
gary wrote:
<speckter@comcast.net<http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=spec
kter@comcast.net>>
>
> Is there a danger with running too much over square? Dick
mentions 2" but I
> have been running more than that (2200 and 26")LOP. I have
not seen much
> info on running over square.
>
> Gary Specketer
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com<http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/co
mpose?to=owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com>
>
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com<http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.c
om/mc/compose?to=owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com>] On Behalf Of
richard sipp
> Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 11:57 PM
> To:
rv10-list@matronics.com<http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=rv
10-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
>
<rsipp@earthlink.net<http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=rsipp
@earthlink.net>>
>
> Tim:
>
> Great post as usual on your injector balancing experience.
I had very nearly the same experience and results with two minor
variations; a complete
>
> Airflow Performance system vs. your Silver Hawk and we
started by installing
>
> .026's in all cylinders and then balancing. I ran most of
the tests at 10-11 MSL and verified at the results at 7.5. Don R. felt
that at the lower
>
> power settings of around 50-60% the flow divider begins to
be the determining factor and by going to the smaller .026s the flow
divider is taken out of the equation.
>
> There was an interesting series of pictures and notes
regarding burned pistons (don't remember where I saw them) where the
author thought the cause
>
> was "rapid" mixture leaning used by LOP operators. He felt
the rapid rise in EGT was the cause. I disagree. GAMI recommends the
"big pull" from rich
>
> to LOP and then a finer adujustment to prevent spending more
time in the danger zone of peak to 100 rich of peak. Also with a rapid
initial mixture leaning I doubt the cylinder or piston temp will
increase before it cools from steady LOP operation. Further at <65% I
do not think you can do anything to the mixture that would harm or
overstress the engine.
>
> Regarding long range cruise I was happy to find that my
engine seems equally
>
> smooth at 2250 as at higher RPM. I see about a 1GPH
reduction in fuel flow with each 100 RPM reduction at full throttle
settings and there is very little airspeed loss as the prop is taking
bigger bits (sorta like overdrive). Charles Lindberg showed the P-38
pilots in the South Pacific how
>
> to double their range by running "over square and lean".
Finally, to prevent the prop driving the engine during higher speed
descents I keep the RPM at least "2" oversquare below manifold pressure.
This is common practice with the big radials and it would seem equally
applicable to our engines.
>
> Dick Sipp
> N110DV 175 hours
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
========================h
ttp://www.mat====================
<http://forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Listhttp://forums.matronics.comht
tp://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List<http://www.matronics.com/Nav
igator?RV10-List>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on>
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: | Glastar flyer/ RV10 builder |
IIRC there was an RV10 builder who was flying a Glastar for fun while
building. If he will identify himself off list I will send pictures of the
use of an RV10 nose fork on the Glastar to improve rough/soft field
performance. Just completed the Glastar mod this morning to 15/600-5 main
wheels and a 500-5 nose wheel.
N46007 RV10 190TT
N48007 Glastar 515TT
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: | Garmin G900X Users Group? |
Robin, if you want to start one, count me in.
Gary Specketer
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 11:55 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Garmin G900X Users Group?
Does anyone know of a Garmin Users Group? Ideally a G900X or G1000 users
group? I have many (basic) questions about my avionics that don't seem to be
covered by the 500+ page manual.
Robin
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning |
Peak depends on a lot of factors besides power setting...OAT,
altitude, exact probe placement, type of instrument, etc. I've seen
anywhere from 1400 to 1500 peak on the IO-360 in my Mooney. I have
UBG16 with fast acting probes mounted 1.5" below exhaust port flange.
I try to climb at 1200-1250F EGT, but don't obsess on it.
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Roger Standley<taildragon@msn.com> wrote:
> Yes, I find this subject interesting, too.
>
> I have a question: What are you seeing for peak EGT at various power
> settings, say at 75%, 65% and 55% power settings?
>
> Roger
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Marcus Cooper
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 11:53 AM
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
>
> Bill,
>
> You address an interesting question. The primary debate has been on
> whether to choose the old school Rich of Peak (ROP) or Lean of Peak (LOP)
> which is why the big fuel savings over slight airspeed drop numbers. Seems
> that most of us were taught to either richen slightly after the engine
> stumbles in the absence of good gauges, or run around 50 to 100 ROP
> depending on cruise or power requirements. Your choice to go at peak
> certainly accomplishes most of the LOP intent of saving gas without the
> speed drop.
>
>
> I have read on the forum somewhere that some companies actually recommend
> running at peak, whereas I've also read some concerns over that setting so
> I'm hopefully there are some educated answers out there. My overall
> understanding is the key is to keep the CHTs under control and otherwise
> where you set the mixture shouldn't do any damage provided you are under 65%
> power. Amazing how what should be a fairly straightforward topic has so
> many perceptions.
>
>
> I for one have been very please with LOP and really appreciate Tim's
> write-up as I would like to make it even better. I have the same setup and
> stayed clear of tweaking because I didn't know we had the same injector
> options as the Airflow Performance setup, so THANKS.
>
>
> Marcus
>
> Do not archive
>
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill DeRouchey
> Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 12:38 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
>
>
> I believe tuning the injector nozzles will create a smoother running engine
> and that in itself has value. However, I have been mystified during these
> conversations as to the value of running LOP vs fuel economy. There was
> never enough data in the emails to get the whole picture. Thequestion I
> always had washow much speed are you willing to loose to gain how muchfuel
> efficiency?
>
>
> Thanks to Dave's pic of his panel and my own experience I was able to put a
> picture together.
>
>
> The following numbers are in statute miles and the Density Altitude is
> similar. If we assume that the top speed of our RV-10's is 205mph then Dave
> is flying 20% (164.5smph) under max and achieving 18.6smpg while leaned to
> approx 25deg LOP. An averaged flight in my plane is 6% under max speed
> (193smph) achieving 19.1smpg while leaned to peak. My definition of peak is
> when 3 cylinders drop.
>
>
> Typical panel setup for me is: WOT, 10-13K feet, 2380-2420rpm, 10.1-10.3gph,
> lean to peak.
>
>
> These are only twodatapoints. What are others achieving? And please provide
> the whole picture - what isthe percent under max speed you are willing to
> fly and the miles per gallon you are achieving as a benefit. I assume the
> whole LOP (other than a smooth engine) is to achieve fuel efficiency.
>
>
> What am I missing?
>
>
> Bill DeRouchey
>
> N939SB
>
>
> --- On Sun, 8/23/09, Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net> wrote:
>
> From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Date: Sunday, August 23, 2009, 8:22 AM
>
>
> All of the LOP information is GREAT. Keep it coming !!!!!!! I have a
> question:
>
> When leaning the engine, the 'old traditional / prior to gages' way was to
> lean it until it begins to 'stumble' and then richen it up a bit. When I
> lean using the EGT gages I notice the 'stumble' when the 1st cylinder goes
> lean. If you continue to lean until all of the remaining cylinders peak
> (LOP), What happens to the 'stumble' ??? Does it even out / go way with the
> engine running smooth? Does it persist? Since any changes in the engines
> smooth running are a concern in flight, I'd appreciate learning what those
> of you that are routinely running LOP are experiencing.
>
> Deems Davis N519PJ
> http://deemsrv10.com/index.html
>
> gary wrote:
>>
>> Is there a danger with running too much over square? Dick mentions 2" but
>> I
>> have been running more than that (2200 and 26")LOP. I have not seen much
>> info on running over square.
>>
>> Gary Specketer
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of richard sipp
>> Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 11:57 PM
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
>>
>>
>> Tim:
>>
>> Great post as usual on your injector balancing experience. I had very
>> nearly the same experience and results with two minor variations; a complete
>>
>> Airflow Performance system vs. your Silver Hawk and we started by
>> installing
>>
>> .026's in all cylinders and then balancing. I ran most of the tests at
>> 10-11 MSL and verified at the results at 7.5. Don R. felt that at the lower
>>
>> power settings of around 50-60% the flow divider begins to be the
>> determining factor and by going to the smaller .026s the flow divider is
>> taken out of the equation.
>>
>> There was an interesting series of pictures and notes regarding burned
>> pistons (don't remember where I saw them) where the author thought the cause
>>
>> was "rapid" mixture leaning used by LOP operators. He felt the rapid rise
>> in EGT was the cause. I disagree. GAMI recommends the "big pull" from rich
>>
>> to LOP and then a finer adujustment to prevent spending more time in the
>> danger zone of peak to 100 rich of peak. Also with a rapid initial mixture
>> leaning I doubt the cylinder or piston temp will increase before it cools
>> from steady LOP operation. Further at <65% I do not think you can do
>> anything to the mixture that would harm or overstress the engine.
>>
>> Regarding long range cruise I was happy to find that my engine seems
>> equally
>>
>> smooth at 2250 as at higher RPM. I see about a 1GPH reduction in fuel
>> flow with each 100 RPM reduction at full throttle settings and there is very
>> little airspeed loss as the prop is taking bigger bits (sorta like
>> overdrive). Charles Lindberg showed the P-38 pilots in the South Pacific how
>>
>> to double their range by running "over square and lean". Finally, to
>> prevent the prop driving the engine during higher speed descents I keep the
>> RPM at least "2" oversquare below manifold pressure. This is common
>> practice with the big radials and it would seem equally applicable to our
>> engines.
>>
>> Dick Sipp
>> N110DV 175 hours
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ========================http://www.mat====================
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>
> http://forums.matronics.com
>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning |
Deems, if you get a stumble when first cylinder reaches peak you may
need some injector matching. While I may sense a hint of roughness as I
get near the last cylinder to peak, there is no stumble and continue to
run fine until it wants to quit near 70 LOP.
Deems Davis wrote:
>
> All of the LOP information is GREAT. Keep it coming !!!!!!! I have a
> question:
>
> When leaning the engine, the 'old traditional / prior to gages' way was
> to lean it until it begins to 'stumble' and then richen it up a bit.
> When I lean using the EGT gages I notice the 'stumble' when the 1st
> cylinder goes lean. If you continue to lean until all of the remaining
> cylinders peak (LOP), What happens to the 'stumble' ??? Does it even out
> / go way with the engine running smooth? Does it persist? Since any
> changes in the engines smooth running are a concern in flight, I'd
> appreciate learning what those of you that are routinely running LOP are
> experiencing.
>
> Deems Davis N519PJ
> http://deemsrv10.com/index.html
>
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: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning |
Hi Bill,
LOP fuel economy is only one part of the picture, and is NOT the main
reason to do it. Your engine will run cleaner, use less oil and last
longer running LOP. It causes the flame to burn slower(like higher
octane) giving a flatter pressure pulse to the piston, so that the peak
pressure is less, but the average work is close to same. If you are
below 7500(approx) you can add throttle to make up for lost power. As
long as you are LOP, power =14.9 * gal/hr. So 10gph=149hp. (57%)
75% then = 13.1 gph, if, and only if, you are running LOP. So if you can
find an altitude where you can go LOP and then adjust throttle for 13.1
gph, you should see somewhere around 190mph. Of course once you are high
enough that you are at WOT and less than 13.1 your power is less and
speed will be less. I typically give up 5-7kts to fly LOP, which is
okay as long as I am not fighting a headwind.
Bill DeRouchey wrote:
> These are only two datapoints. What are others achieving? And please
> provide the whole picture - what is the percent under max speed you are
> willing to fly and the miles per gallon you are achieving as a benefit.
> I assume the whole LOP (other than a smooth engine) is to achieve fuel
> efficiency.
>
> What am I missing?
>
> Bill DeRouchey
> N939SB
>
>
>
>
>
> --- On *Sun, 8/23/09, Deems Davis /<deemsdavis@cox.net>/* wrote:
>
>
> From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Date: Sunday, August 23, 2009, 8:22 AM
>
> <http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=deemsdavis@cox.net>>
>
> All of the LOP information is GREAT. Keep it coming !!!!!!! I have a
> question:
>
> When leaning the engine, the 'old traditional / prior to gages' way
> was to lean it until it begins to 'stumble' and then richen it up a
> bit. When I lean using the EGT gages I notice the 'stumble' when the
> 1st cylinder goes lean. If you continue to lean until all of the
> remaining cylinders peak (LOP), What happens to the 'stumble' ???
> Does it even out / go way with the engine running smooth? Does it
> persist? Since any changes in the engines smooth running are a
> concern in flight, I'd appreciate learning what those of you that
> are routinely running LOP are experiencing.
>
> Deems Davis N519PJ
> http://deemsrv10.com/index.html
>
> gary wrote:
> <http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=speckter@comcast.net>>
> >
> > Is there a danger with running too much over square? Dick
> mentions 2" but I
> > have been running more than that (2200 and 26")LOP. I have not
> seen much
> > info on running over square.
> >
> > Gary Specketer
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com>
> > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com>]
> On Behalf Of richard sipp
> > Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 11:57 PM
> > To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=rv10-list@matronics.com>
> > Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
> >
> <rsipp@earthlink.net
> <http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=rsipp@earthlink.net>>
> >
> > Tim:
> >
> > Great post as usual on your injector balancing experience. I had
> very nearly the same experience and results with two minor
> variations; a complete
> >
> > Airflow Performance system vs. your Silver Hawk and we started by
> installing
> >
> > .026's in all cylinders and then balancing. I ran most of the
> tests at 10-11 MSL and verified at the results at 7.5. Don R. felt
> that at the lower
> >
> > power settings of around 50-60% the flow divider begins to be the
> determining factor and by going to the smaller .026s the flow
> divider is taken out of the equation.
> >
> > There was an interesting series of pictures and notes regarding
> burned pistons (don't remember where I saw them) where the author
> thought the cause
> >
> > was "rapid" mixture leaning used by LOP operators. He felt the
> rapid rise in EGT was the cause. I disagree. GAMI recommends the
> "big pull" from rich
> >
> > to LOP and then a finer adujustment to prevent spending more time
> in the danger zone of peak to 100 rich of peak. Also with a rapid
> initial mixture leaning I doubt the cylinder or piston temp will
> increase before it cools from steady LOP operation. Further at <65%
> I do not think you can do anything to the mixture that would harm or
> overstress the engine.
> >
> > Regarding long range cruise I was happy to find that my engine
> seems equally
> >
> > smooth at 2250 as at higher RPM. I see about a 1GPH reduction in
> fuel flow with each 100 RPM reduction at full throttle settings and
> there is very little airspeed loss as the prop is taking bigger bits
> (sorta like overdrive). Charles Lindberg showed the P-38 pilots in
> the South Pacific how
> >
> > to double their range by running "over square and lean".
> Finally, to prevent the prop driving the engine during higher speed
> descents I keep the RPM at least "2" oversquare below manifold
> pressure. This is common practice with the big radials and it would
> seem equally applicable to our engines.
> >
> > Dick Sipp
> > N110DV 175 hours
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =======================
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>http://www.mat====================
>
>
>
> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Garmin G900X Users Group? |
The blind leading the blind?
Gary are you flying behind a G900X now? If so maybe we could talk
offline to find out where each if us is confused (other than Garmin's
poor documentation). Note: I believe Garmin specifically limited it's
documentation to limit its liability.
Robin
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of gary
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 3:12 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Garmin G900X Users Group?
Robin, if you want to start one, count me in.
Gary Specketer
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 11:55 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Garmin G900X Users Group?
Does anyone know of a Garmin Users Group? Ideally a G900X or G1000 users
group? I have many (basic) questions about my avionics that don't seem
to be covered by the 500+ page manual.
Robin
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
08/23/09 06:18:00
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning |
There are limits to "oversquare" operation on the power charts in the
Lycoming operators manual. They vary with all the other engine parameters
but
the limits are higher than one would probably guess, several inches MP over
RPM in hundreds in most cases. These are the hard to read two page charts
and the limit is just a line and is easy to miss.
My normal cruise is 55-65% power, 10.5-11.5 GPH and 160-165 KTAS.
Dick Sipp
----- Original Message -----
From: "gary" <speckter@comcast.net>
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 8:07 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
>
> Is there a danger with running too much over square? Dick mentions 2" but
> I
> have been running more than that (2200 and 26")LOP. I have not seen much
> info on running over square.
>
> Gary Specketer
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of richard sipp
> Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 11:57 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
>
>
> Tim:
>
> Great post as usual on your injector balancing experience. I had very
> nearly the same experience and results with two minor variations; a
> complete
>
> Airflow Performance system vs. your Silver Hawk and we started by
> installing
>
> .026's in all cylinders and then balancing. I ran most of the tests at
> 10-11 MSL and verified at the results at 7.5. Don R. felt that at the
> lower
>
> power settings of around 50-60% the flow divider begins to be the
> determining factor and by going to the smaller .026s the flow divider is
> taken out of the equation.
>
> There was an interesting series of pictures and notes regarding burned
> pistons (don't remember where I saw them) where the author thought the
> cause
>
> was "rapid" mixture leaning used by LOP operators. He felt the rapid rise
> in EGT was the cause. I disagree. GAMI recommends the "big pull" from
> rich
>
> to LOP and then a finer adujustment to prevent spending more time in the
> danger zone of peak to 100 rich of peak. Also with a rapid initial
> mixture
> leaning I doubt the cylinder or piston temp will increase before it cools
> from steady LOP operation. Further at <65% I do not think you can do
> anything to the mixture that would harm or overstress the engine.
>
> Regarding long range cruise I was happy to find that my engine seems
> equally
>
> smooth at 2250 as at higher RPM. I see about a 1GPH reduction in fuel
> flow
> with each 100 RPM reduction at full throttle settings and there is very
> little airspeed loss as the prop is taking bigger bits (sorta like
> overdrive). Charles Lindberg showed the P-38 pilots in the South Pacific
> how
>
> to double their range by running "over square and lean". Finally, to
> prevent the prop driving the engine during higher speed descents I keep
> the
> RPM at least "2" oversquare below manifold pressure. This is common
> practice with the big radials and it would seem equally applicable to our
> engines.
>
> Dick Sipp
> N110DV 175 hours
>
>
>
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning |
Bill,
Regarding the speeds, I don't know why Dave was only getting 164.5
statute mph, but my LOP cruise is typically way better than that,
which is about 143kts, right? If I am way lean of peak, and/or
very heavy loaded, I MAY get slowed down to 155-156kts TAS, but
on plenty of trips I'm seeing speeds of 164-166kts at LOP cruise.
If I fly ROP, I'd say most commonly I'll see 173-175kts, sometimes
slower. I've found that between leaning variations, turbulence,
altitudes flown, and loadings, that the speed can be all over the
map, but I don't know that I've ever really seen constant enroute
cruise figures of less than 152kts on my trips. So if I am
getting, say 189-190 statue mph on many flights, and I'm generally
burning 9.5-10.5 gph at my most commonly flown altitudes,
I'm probably pushing right up near that same 19.1 statue mpg
on many flights. There are times I'm a bit less, but loadings
and the other factors don't always duplicate themselves. I'll
tell you what though, there's no way that I'm not getting
better efficiency than someone flying ROP. As Kelly pointed
out, it's the temps, the cleanness, and all sorts of other
things that are benefits too. I'd say that you will usually
lose 6-10kts depending on many factors, such as how far you
lean past peak. I usually just go for 25 LOP on the last
cyl. to peak.
Regarding flying ROP or at peak, like you are talking about,
I tend to agree that if you're way down in power like at
65%, you're probably not going to hurt anything too bad.
But, for those who are running 50-100 ROP, you probably
want to do a bit of studying up. I don't have the numbers
committed to memory, but there is a window at higher power
settings where you really don't want to stay, and I
think in order to stay out of it you really have to
either fly WAY ROP, or go LOP. Again, don't quote me,
but if you venture over 75% power, I'd avoid that range
from maybe 125 to 0 ROP. (Can someone verify that? I've got
docs but I'm not going to dig them up right this minute)
So I'm not saying you're doing anything wrong, at the
lower power levels you can get away with anything. But,
I think you picked a pretty lowball datapoint from David
if you're going to use his 164.5smph. Scott Schmidt
and I both just flew together for 3.75 hours running
LOP and we blew that speed away by at least 10kts
for the whole trip, on something like 9.5 gph. He was
lighter loaded than me and burned about 2 gallons less
over the entire leg.
So the point is, I don't think most people will give up enough
speed to worry about it a whole lot.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
Bill DeRouchey wrote:
> I believe tuning the injector nozzles will create a smoother running
> engine and that in itself has value. However, I have been mystified
> during these conversations as to the value of running LOP vs fuel
> economy. There was never enough data in the emails to get the whole
> picture. The question I always had was how much speed are you willing to
> loose to gain how much fuel efficiency?
>
> Thanks to Dave's pic of his panel and my own experience I was able to
> put a picture together.
>
> The following numbers are in statute miles and the Density Altitude is
> similar. If we assume that the top speed of our RV-10's is 205mph then
> Dave is flying 20% (164.5smph) under max and achieving 18.6smpg while
> leaned to approx 25deg LOP. An averaged flight in my plane is 6% under
> max speed (193smph) achieving 19.1smpg while leaned to peak. My
> definition of peak is when 3 cylinders drop.
>
> Typical panel setup for me is: WOT, 10-13K feet, 2380-2420rpm,
> 10.1-10.3gph, lean to peak.
>
> These are only two datapoints. What are others achieving? And please
> provide the whole picture - what is the percent under max speed you are
> willing to fly and the miles per gallon you are achieving as a benefit.
> I assume the whole LOP (other than a smooth engine) is to achieve fuel
> efficiency.
>
> What am I missing?
>
> Bill DeRouchey
> N939SB
>
>
>
>
>
> --- On *Sun, 8/23/09, Deems Davis /<deemsdavis@cox.net>/* wrote:
>
>
> From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Date: Sunday, August 23, 2009, 8:22 AM
>
> <http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=deemsdavis@cox.net>>
>
> All of the LOP information is GREAT. Keep it coming !!!!!!! I have a
> question:
>
> When leaning the engine, the 'old traditional / prior to gages' way
> was to lean it until it begins to 'stumble' and then richen it up a
> bit. When I lean using the EGT gages I notice the 'stumble' when the
> 1st cylinder goes lean. If you continue to lean until all of the
> remaining cylinders peak (LOP), What happens to the 'stumble' ???
> Does it even out / go way with the engine running smooth? Does it
> persist? Since any changes in the engines smooth running are a
> concern in flight, I'd appreciate learning what those of you that
> are routinely running LOP are experiencing.
>
> Deems Davis N519PJ
> http://deemsrv10.com/index.html
>
> gary wrote:
> <http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=speckter@comcast.net>>
> >
> > Is there a danger with running too much over square? Dick
> mentions 2" but I
> > have been running more than that (2200 and 26")LOP. I have not
> seen much
> > info on running over square.
> >
> > Gary Specketer
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com>
> > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com>]
> On Behalf Of richard sipp
> > Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 11:57 PM
> > To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=rv10-list@matronics.com>
> > Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
> >
> <rsipp@earthlink.net
> <http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=rsipp@earthlink.net>>
> >
> > Tim:
> >
> > Great post as usual on your injector balancing experience. I had
> very nearly the same experience and results with two minor
> variations; a complete
> >
> > Airflow Performance system vs. your Silver Hawk and we started by
> installing
> >
> > .026's in all cylinders and then balancing. I ran most of the
> tests at 10-11 MSL and verified at the results at 7.5. Don R. felt
> that at the lower
> >
> > power settings of around 50-60% the flow divider begins to be the
> determining factor and by going to the smaller .026s the flow
> divider is taken out of the equation.
> >
> > There was an interesting series of pictures and notes regarding
> burned pistons (don't remember where I saw them) where the author
> thought the cause
> >
> > was "rapid" mixture leaning used by LOP operators. He felt the
> rapid rise in EGT was the cause. I disagree. GAMI recommends the
> "big pull" from rich
> >
> > to LOP and then a finer adujustment to prevent spending more time
> in the danger zone of peak to 100 rich of peak. Also with a rapid
> initial mixture leaning I doubt the cylinder or piston temp will
> increase before it cools from steady LOP operation. Further at <65%
> I do not think you can do anything to the mixture that would harm or
> overstress the engine.
> >
> > Regarding long range cruise I was happy to find that my engine
> seems equally
> >
> > smooth at 2250 as at higher RPM. I see about a 1GPH reduction in
> fuel flow with each 100 RPM reduction at full throttle settings and
> there is very little airspeed loss as the prop is taking bigger bits
> (sorta like overdrive). Charles Lindberg showed the P-38 pilots in
> the South Pacific how
> >
> > to double their range by running "over square and lean".
> Finally, to prevent the prop driving the engine during higher speed
> descents I keep the RPM at least "2" oversquare below manifold
> pressure. This is common practice with the big radials and it would
> seem equally applicable to our engines.
> >
> > Dick Sipp
> > N110DV 175 hours
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =======================
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>http://www.mat====================
>
>
>
> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>
> *
>
>
> *
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: | LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning |
I was not using WOT at 10000 MSL. DA was 14000+. I don't know the weight but
we had OSH baggage and camping gear. I typically get about 150KTAS at about
8.5-9 gph. IIRC TAS is affected about 2 mph per 100 pounds gross weight
change. My numbers were from pictures just after departing OSH which would
mean higher gross weight rather than later in the flight. 36 gals burned in
the four hour flight to Tulsa after an OSH taxi and number 6 IFR departure
off of R09. After having flown for so many years at slower ground speeds
150KTAS GS or better seems enough. Of course if headwinds are involved I may
push the power lever forward but avoiding a fuel stop also figures into the
calculation.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 6:54 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
Bill,
Regarding the speeds, I don't know why Dave was only getting 164.5 statute
mph, but my LOP cruise is typically way better than that, which is about
143kts, right? If I am way lean of peak, and/or very heavy loaded, I MAY
get slowed down to 155-156kts TAS, but on plenty of trips I'm seeing speeds
of 164-166kts at LOP cruise.
If I fly ROP, I'd say most commonly I'll see 173-175kts, sometimes slower.
I've found that between leaning variations, turbulence, altitudes flown, and
loadings, that the speed can be all over the map, but I don't know that I've
ever really seen constant enroute cruise figures of less than 152kts on my
trips. So if I am getting, say 189-190 statue mph on many flights, and I'm
generally burning 9.5-10.5 gph at my most commonly flown altitudes, I'm
probably pushing right up near that same 19.1 statue mpg on many flights.
There are times I'm a bit less, but loadings and the other factors don't
always duplicate themselves. I'll tell you what though, there's no way that
I'm not getting better efficiency than someone flying ROP. As Kelly pointed
out, it's the temps, the cleanness, and all sorts of other things that are
benefits too. I'd say that you will usually lose 6-10kts depending on many
factors, such as how far you lean past peak. I usually just go for 25 LOP
on the last cyl. to peak.
Regarding flying ROP or at peak, like you are talking about, I tend to agree
that if you're way down in power like at 65%, you're probably not going to
hurt anything too bad.
But, for those who are running 50-100 ROP, you probably want to do a bit of
studying up. I don't have the numbers committed to memory, but there is a
window at higher power settings where you really don't want to stay, and I
think in order to stay out of it you really have to either fly WAY ROP, or
go LOP. Again, don't quote me, but if you venture over 75% power, I'd avoid
that range from maybe 125 to 0 ROP. (Can someone verify that? I've got docs
but I'm not going to dig them up right this minute)
So I'm not saying you're doing anything wrong, at the lower power levels you
can get away with anything. But, I think you picked a pretty lowball
datapoint from David if you're going to use his 164.5smph. Scott Schmidt
and I both just flew together for 3.75 hours running LOP and we blew that
speed away by at least 10kts for the whole trip, on something like 9.5 gph.
He was lighter loaded than me and burned about 2 gallons less over the
entire leg.
So the point is, I don't think most people will give up enough speed to
worry about it a whole lot.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
Bill DeRouchey wrote:
> I believe tuning the injector nozzles will create a smoother running
> engine and that in itself has value. However, I have been mystified
> during these conversations as to the value of running LOP vs fuel
> economy. There was never enough data in the emails to get the whole
> picture. The question I always had was how much speed are you willing
> to loose to gain how much fuel efficiency?
>
> Thanks to Dave's pic of his panel and my own experience I was able to
> put a picture together.
>
> The following numbers are in statute miles and the Density Altitude is
> similar. If we assume that the top speed of our RV-10's is 205mph then
> Dave is flying 20% (164.5smph) under max and achieving 18.6smpg while
> leaned to approx 25deg LOP. An averaged flight in my plane is 6% under
> max speed (193smph) achieving 19.1smpg while leaned to peak. My
> definition of peak is when 3 cylinders drop.
>
> Typical panel setup for me is: WOT, 10-13K feet, 2380-2420rpm,
> 10.1-10.3gph, lean to peak.
>
> These are only two datapoints. What are others achieving? And please
> provide the whole picture - what is the percent under max speed you
> are willing to fly and the miles per gallon you are achieving as a
benefit.
> I assume the whole LOP (other than a smooth engine) is to achieve fuel
> efficiency.
>
> What am I missing?
>
> Bill DeRouchey
> N939SB
>
>
>
>
>
> --- On *Sun, 8/23/09, Deems Davis /<deemsdavis@cox.net>/* wrote:
>
>
> From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Date: Sunday, August 23, 2009, 8:22 AM
>
> <http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=deemsdavis@cox.net>>
>
> All of the LOP information is GREAT. Keep it coming !!!!!!! I have a
> question:
>
> When leaning the engine, the 'old traditional / prior to gages' way
> was to lean it until it begins to 'stumble' and then richen it up a
> bit. When I lean using the EGT gages I notice the 'stumble' when the
> 1st cylinder goes lean. If you continue to lean until all of the
> remaining cylinders peak (LOP), What happens to the 'stumble' ???
> Does it even out / go way with the engine running smooth? Does it
> persist? Since any changes in the engines smooth running are a
> concern in flight, I'd appreciate learning what those of you that
> are routinely running LOP are experiencing.
>
> Deems Davis N519PJ
> http://deemsrv10.com/index.html
>
> gary wrote:
> <http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=speckter@comcast.net>>
> >
> > Is there a danger with running too much over square? Dick
> mentions 2" but I
> > have been running more than that (2200 and 26")LOP. I have not
> seen much
> > info on running over square.
> >
> > Gary Specketer
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>
<http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-rv10-list-server@matroni
cs.com>
> > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>
<http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-rv10-list-server@matroni
cs.com>]
> On Behalf Of richard sipp
> > Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 11:57 PM
> > To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=rv10-list@matronics.com>
> > Subject: Re: RV10-List: LOP (Lean of Peak) Injector Tuning
> >
> <rsipp@earthlink.net
> <http://us.mc344.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=rsipp@earthlink.net>>
> >
> > Tim:
> >
> > Great post as usual on your injector balancing experience. I had
> very nearly the same experience and results with two minor
> variations; a complete
> >
> > Airflow Performance system vs. your Silver Hawk and we started by
> installing
> >
> > .026's in all cylinders and then balancing. I ran most of the
> tests at 10-11 MSL and verified at the results at 7.5. Don R. felt
> that at the lower
> >
> > power settings of around 50-60% the flow divider begins to be the
> determining factor and by going to the smaller .026s the flow
> divider is taken out of the equation.
> >
> > There was an interesting series of pictures and notes regarding
> burned pistons (don't remember where I saw them) where the author
> thought the cause
> >
> > was "rapid" mixture leaning used by LOP operators. He felt the
> rapid rise in EGT was the cause. I disagree. GAMI recommends the
> "big pull" from rich
> >
> > to LOP and then a finer adujustment to prevent spending more time
> in the danger zone of peak to 100 rich of peak. Also with a rapid
> initial mixture leaning I doubt the cylinder or piston temp will
> increase before it cools from steady LOP operation. Further at <65%
> I do not think you can do anything to the mixture that would harm or
> overstress the engine.
> >
> > Regarding long range cruise I was happy to find that my engine
> seems equally
> >
> > smooth at 2250 as at higher RPM. I see about a 1GPH reduction in
> fuel flow with each 100 RPM reduction at full throttle settings and
> there is very little airspeed loss as the prop is taking bigger bits
> (sorta like overdrive). Charles Lindberg showed the P-38 pilots in
> the South Pacific how
> >
> > to double their range by running "over square and lean".
> Finally, to prevent the prop driving the engine during higher speed
> descents I keep the RPM at least "2" oversquare below manifold
> pressure. This is common practice with the big radials and it would
> seem equally applicable to our engines.
> >
> > Dick Sipp
> > N110DV 175 hours
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =======================
>
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>http://www.mat=========
> ==========
>
>
>
> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 trio pitch servo install |
Trio has a bracket, parts, and instructions for the wing leveler in the RV-10,
but no plans or parts yet for the pitch servo. After discussing with a number
of builders, the addition of a pitch servo (at such a reasonable price - $750
- controlled by the MGL Odyssey EFIS) was a good design idea. It was also something
I could do now. I'll order another servo for roll later.
I contacted Trio and an individual who had built and mounted a pitch servo in a
-10, and took pictures of it, and built a reinforced tray that is mounted on
the aft end of the battery and elevator bellcrank support platform. They suggested
I use whatever parts I could from the wing leveler kit and fashion a reinforced
tray.
So, I fashioned a 6x7 inch tray from the leftover cutout of the baggage door, cut
lengths of 3/4-in angle that I bought at the fly market, and mounted them facing
upward for clearance. Drilled, deburred and riveted the angle to the sheet.
Lined up the holes to connect the tray to the battery platform - three holes
for #8 screws. Marked and drilled six holes to suit the hardware supplied with
the servo bracket to mount the servo to the tray (bolt, washer, and lock nut).
I mounted the servo tray and it is very stiffly in-place. I attached the servo
arm to the wheel with screws to allow for motion at the top of the arc, detents
fore and aft, center straight up. Likewise, I positioned the elevator bellcrank
arm near-neutral (also vertical) then drilled a hole for a #3 bolt through
the arm to hold the servo control connection.
Looking around the shop, I found a hexagonal 6-1/2" threaded rod that accommodated
the rod ends and nuts supplied with the leveler kit (Vans VA 256) which was
the perfect length. Tightened up the rod end nuts, and used three washers between
the arms and the rod end for clearance, otherwise keeping the arm connection
design as pictured for the leveler servo. Bolted the battery platform back
to the ribs.
Log entry:
http://websites.expercraft.com/douglasn/index.php?q=log_entry&log_id=40960
and pictures:
http://websites.expercraft.com/douglasn/images/3368053714a91f7a4158b3.jpg
http://websites.expercraft.com/douglasn/images/21209592804a91f7a41c679.jpg
--------
RV-10 Builder #40546
Tail mostly done, wings complete, middle of SB fuse
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=259232#259232
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Glastar flyer/ RV10 builder |
David, as far as I can remember there are several, why not post it in
the Glastar Net Forum or do you have no account there?
Werner
do not archive
David McNeill wrote:
> IIRC there was an RV10 builder who was flying a Glastar for fun while
> building. If he will identify himself off list I will send pictures of
> the use of an RV10 nose fork on the Glastar to improve rough/soft
> field performance. Just completed the Glastar mod this morning to
> 15/600-5 main wheels and a 500-5 nose wheel.
>
> N46007 RV10 190TT
> N48007 Glastar 515TT
> *
>
>
> *
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 |
|
Dave,
I powdercoated mine and it came out nice. it didn't hurt the
bushings at all.
steve
From: David McNeill
Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 1:33 PM
Subject: RV10-List: nose fork
Has anyone painted/treated the fork as supplied by Vans?
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: | Glastar flyer/ RV10 builder |
John Jessen, it is time to step forward for flying the Glastar N531CE whil
e your RV-10 N212PJ kit #40328 needs the nose wheel improvement.
John Cox
From: Werner Schneider
Sent: Sun 8/23/2009 10:36 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Glastar flyer/ RV10 builder
David, as far as I can remember there are several, why not post it in
the Glastar Net Forum or do you have no account there?
Werner
do not archive
David McNeill wrote:
> IIRC there was an RV10 builder who was flying a Glastar for fun while
> building. If he will identify himself off list I will send pictures of
> the use of an RV10 nose fork on the Glastar to improve rough/soft
> field performance. Just completed the Glastar mod this morning to
> 15/600-5 main wheels and a 500-5 nose wheel.
>
> N46007 RV10 190TT
> N48007 Glastar 515TT
> *
>
>
> *
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! --
|