Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:29 AM - Re: ICAO Noise Test results RV-10 (gary@bendun.net)
2. 04:46 AM - Re: ICAO Noise Test results RV-10 (Mike Whisky)
3. 11:03 AM - Re: Re: ICAO Noise Test results RV-10 (Bruce Johnson)
4. 12:43 PM - 50% 100ll 50% Av Gas (rwwende)
5. 01:35 PM - Re: 50% 100ll 50% Av Gas (Kelly McMullen)
6. 01:52 PM - Re: 50% 100ll 50% Av Gas (Rob Kermanj)
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: ICAO Noise Test results RV-10 |
Bruce,
Not very helpful. Michael put some effort into sharing his findings. Why the
sour grapes from Uncle Sam?
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jul 29, 2014, at 5:40 PM, Bruce Johnson <bruce1hwjohnson@yahoo.com> wro
te:
>
> Another good reason to live in the USofA. Sorry for you Michael
>
> God Bless America
> (please) :)
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
> On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 2:33 PM, Mike Whisky <rv-10@wellenzohn.net> wrot
e:
>
>
>
> This might not be of great concern of most RV-10 owners especially in the U
S but I consider this still an important environmental information for all t
he RV-10 owners.
>
> My RV-10 has been built and accepted under Swiss regulations and one part o
f it is the noise measurement certificate. Landing tax are based mostly on M
TOW plus a charge for the noise class your aircraft is in. So it was of grea
t interest to achieve the lowest noise class.
>
> As there was no data available about noise emission of an RV-10 I want to s
hare my findings.
>
> The main noise sources are the propeller and the engine noise via the exha
ust system. As prop tip speed is one factor I decided to go with a smaller d
iameter 3-blade MT (MTV-12B/193-53) propeller. The next factor is of course R
PM which I reduced to max 2500. It is quite common for GA aircraft in German
y or Switzerland to have RPM reduced to 2500 in order to meet the maximal al
lowed noise requirements. The next thing is the exhaust system/muffler. Ther
e are special mufflers available like Liese which are quite common to muffle
the noise even further, however I needed my baseline first to make the call
to install them or not and to be able to define its required dB reduction.
> My RV-10 has the standard Vetterman 6-3 exhaust system and the above calle
d 3-blade prop running max 2500 RPM. The test were conducted at MTOW 2700lb /
1225kg.
>
> ICAO Noise Measurement Test Scenario
>
> ICAO Annex 16 Chapter 10
> - Application accepted from 1988 onwards
> One measurement point
> take-off flight path with max. take-off power
> Noise measured in dB(A)
>
>
> The measurement crew on the ground takes a picture of the overflying aircr
aft to compare the logged overflight altitude reported from the aircraft wit
h the measured results. At the same time it measures the noise. More factors
are taken into consideration including wind, surrounding surface etc. I had
to conduct 6 flights and the average noise values plus the correcting facto
rs result in the final noise level in dB, which puts me in one of the noise c
ategories mentioned above.
>
> To make a long story short my RV-10 achieved 77.8 dB which falls under cat
egory D, which is the lowest available.
> It is interesting to note that the only other RV-10, which went through th
e same test, is equipped with an two place Hartzell propeller (as well reduc
ed to 2500 RPM) and Liese mufflers attached to the Vetterman exhaust pipes, a
chieved noise class C. Therefore it looks as if the propeller diameter and p
robably the tip form is a major contributor to noise. There might be other c
ontributing factors such as sound insolation which might work as a reduction
of resonance.
>
> For all the builders who are building under a regulation where noise reduc
tion is a topic I hope that might help to consider propeller choice besides l
ooks, ground clearance and weight.
>
> Michael
>
> --------
> RV-10 builder (flying)
> #511
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=427526#427526
>
>
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/test_procedure_133.png
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/noise_category_166.png
>
>
>
> nbsp; --> http://forums.matronics.comhttp:/===========
============
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
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: ICAO Noise Test results RV-10 |
No worries, I guess that Bruce wanted to express is that he is happy to have artificially
reduce power to meet noise requirements.
I think however, as I might be the first one who has taken part in an official
noise test of this common engine propeller combination for the RV-10, it is a
benchmark for all in case it is required.
I recall from the transition training in Florida that there were billboards on
the highway complaining about aircraft noise. I guess for every RV-10 owner with
the same setup it might be good to know that they can meet the lowest Swiss
noise category, by just pulling RPM back a little if the neighborhood is noise
sensitive.
Cheers
Mike
--------
RV-10 builder (flying)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=427537#427537
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: ICAO Noise Test results RV-10 |
Wasn't trying to negative, just stating that I was glad we don't have to do
that in the US and sorry that Micheal did..-=0A-=0AGod Bless America
=0A(please) -:)=0A=0A=0ABruce=0A=0A=0AOn Wednesday, July 30, 2014 4:55 AM
, Mike Whisky <rv-10@wellenzohn.net> wrote:=0A =0A=0A=0A--> RV10-List messa
ge posted by: "Mike Whisky" <rv-10@wellenzohn.net>=0A=0ANo worries, I guess
that Bruce wanted to express is that he is happy to have artificially redu
ce power to meet noise requirements. =0A=0AI think however, as I might be t
he first one who has taken part in an official noise test of this common en
gine propeller combination for the RV-10, it is a benchmark for all in case
it is required. =0AI recall from the transition training in Florida that t
here were billboards on the highway complaining about aircraft noise. I gue
ss for every RV-10 owner with the same setup it might be good to know that
they can meet the lowest Swiss noise category, by just pulling RPM back a l
ittle if the neighborhood is noise sensitive. =0ACheers=0AMike=0A=0A-------
-=0ARV-10 builder (flying)=0A#511=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ARead this topic online here
:=0A=0Ahttp://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=427537#427537=0A=0A=0A
==================
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: | 50% 100ll 50% Av Gas |
Anybody running a 50/50 mix with the IO540?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=427574#427574
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: 50% 100ll 50% Av Gas |
I don't think you asked what you meant. 100LL=Avgas. Perhaps you meant
Mogas?
Certainly should be doable with 91 Octane mogas or better IF you have
stock 8.5:1 pistons. Any higher compression ratio pretty much demands
100 octane.
Then there is the issue of finding mogas without ethanol. In most of the
country today that is very difficult because of requirements for air
pollution and renewable fuels mandates. Ethanol creates its own problems
and you would have to plan ahead to have fuel system built to withstand
the ethanol and to deliver enough higher fuel flow to counter the leaner
mixture the ethanol will cause.
On 7/30/2014 12:42 PM, rwwende wrote:
>
> Anybody running a 50/50 mix with the IO540?
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=427574#427574
>
>
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: 50% 100ll 50% Av Gas |
I know someone in Florida (famous guy around here). Run 50/50 in his Rv6 for years
and finally sold the engine after 3000 hrs without any overhaul and bought
another new engine.
He flew the plane almost daily so that might be the reason for the longevity.
I think he took off on avgas and cruised on unleaded. If you need better details,
I will have to chase him down as he is a Snowbird living in Florida during
the winter month.
Can't promise quick turnaround.
Do not archive.
> On Jul 30, 2014, at 3:42 PM, "rwwende" <n7006w@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Anybody running a 50/50 mix with the IO540?
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=427574#427574
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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! --
|