Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:21 AM - Re: Wing Tank Transfer (Rich)
2. 05:16 AM - Re: pump placement (Ron DeWees)
3. 06:00 AM - Re: Wing Tank Transfer (Fred or Sandy Hulen)
4. 06:16 AM - Fw: Wing Tank Transfer (Fred or Sandy Hulen)
5. 06:26 AM - Re: Wing Tank Transfer (Fred or Sandy Hulen)
6. 06:55 AM - Re: pump placement (Dave Pepper)
7. 06:59 AM - Re: Wing Tank Transfer (Dave Pepper)
8. 08:09 AM - Re: Wing Tank Transfer (HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1))
9. 08:24 AM - Re: pump placement (HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1))
10. 08:28 AM - Re: Wing Tank Transfer (Schallgren@aol.com)
11. 09:21 AM - Facet pumps (Jeff Small)
12. 09:45 AM - Facet fuel pumps (George Swinford)
13. 09:59 AM - Re: pump placement (wizard-24@juno.com)
14. 10:06 AM - Re: Facet pumps (HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1))
15. 10:59 AM - Re: pump placement (Bryan Martin)
16. 11:47 AM - Re: pump placement (HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1))
17. 11:48 AM - Re: pump placement (HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1))
18. 12:09 PM - Re: pump placement (CLOJAN@aol.com)
19. 12:19 PM - Re: pump placement (wizard-24@juno.com)
20. 12:21 PM - Re: pump placement (wizard-24@juno.com)
21. 12:26 PM - Re: pump placement (Jeff Small)
22. 01:04 PM - Re: pump placement (HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1))
23. 01:07 PM - Re: pump placement (HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1))
24. 01:17 PM - Re: pump placement (Dave Pepper)
25. 01:28 PM - wing tanks (Edward T. Jeffko)
26. 01:31 PM - Re: Facet fuel pumps (Jeff Small)
27. 01:41 PM - Re: Facet fuel pumps (Dave Pepper)
28. 02:20 PM - Re: pump placement (Dave Kubassek)
29. 02:26 PM - Re: pump placement (HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1))
30. 02:29 PM - Re: pump placement (Gary Gower)
31. 02:41 PM - Re: Facet fuel pumps (George Swinford)
32. 02:51 PM - Re: wing tanks (Larry McFarland)
33. 03:41 PM - Fuel system design (Fred or Sandy Hulen)
34. 04:00 PM - Re: Wing Tank Transfer (ZodiacBuilder@aol.com)
35. 04:03 PM - Re: wing tanks (ZodiacBuilder@aol.com)
36. 04:04 PM - Re: wing tanks (ZodiacBuilder@aol.com)
37. 04:32 PM - Re: Fuel system design (HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1))
38. 06:42 PM - New plane moment (Philip Polstra)
39. 08:11 PM - Re: Rotax recommendation (Eric Parlow)
40. 08:17 PM - Elevator cut-out on XL (Bill Howerton)
41. 09:51 PM - Re: Facet fuel pumps (Winston Ellis)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing Tank Transfer |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Rich" <rbauer@intergate.com>
With all this talk of Facet fuel pumps, no one has yet mentioned which model
#. There are a few out there but can all of them have fuel drawn out of them
from another pump downstream?
Rich
----- Original Message -----
From: <Schallgren@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Wing Tank Transfer
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Schallgren@aol.com
>
> Dave:
>
> Yes, a facet pump is installed in series. So, header tank, gascolator,
fuel
> filter, Facet pump (low pressure one), fuel flow indicator pickup,
engine
> pump.
>
> Stan
>
>
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: pump placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Ron DeWees" <rdewees@mindspring.com>
Hi Dave and Stan.. I am in the process of plumbing my header tank to the
engine and had a slightly different approach to the ultimate goal of
uninterrupted, clean fuel to the carby. I am running the header tank output
into the facet pump, located on the cabin side of the firewall, into a
gascolator with internal fuel filter and from the gascolator to the
mechanical pump and carby. I have heard that it's better to push fuel thru
a filter than suck it thru. I know others have had no problem with the
pump on the output of a filter, but my tech counselor cautioned me about it.
The gascolator was purchased from Great Plans Aircraft and was quite
reasonable. It's internal ceramic filter is reported to be trouble-free.
Ron DeWees
----- Original Message -----
From: <Schallgren@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Wing Tank Transfer
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Schallgren@aol.com
>
> Dave:
>
> Yes, a facet pump is installed in series. So, header tank, gascolator,
fuel
> filter, Facet pump (low pressure one), fuel flow indicator pickup,
engine
> pump.
>
> Stan
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: Wing Tank Transfer |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Fred or Sandy Hulen" <hulens61@birch.net>
> Can you supply the name of the EAA Tech who made your tanks?
>Dave
++ His name and phone number have been sent to you directly.
Fred
do not archive
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: | Wing Tank Transfer |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Fred or Sandy Hulen" <hulens61@birch.net>
> > Can you supply the name of the EAA Tech who made your tanks?
> >Dave
++ Dave, I received a notice back from your e-mail host saying it won't
accept my message I sent to you directly. Advise of an e-mail that will
reach you and I'll try again.
Fred
do not archive
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: Wing Tank Transfer |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Fred or Sandy Hulen" <hulens61@birch.net>
> With all this talk of Facet fuel pumps, no one has yet mentioned which
model #.
++ In looking in my "fuel system" notes, it appears that the ones I am using
are Facet # 40105.
Incidentally, I wondered about this pump's ability to pump fuel vertically
(in case mechanical engine fuel pump were to fail and I had to rely on fuel
to be pumped from the wing tanks up to the engine carburetor). I attached a
hose to one of them and found that it was pumping out fuel quite abundantly
with the hose at 4 feet above the pump. Didn't have a longer hose to test
higher than this.
Fred
do not archive
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: pump placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dave Pepper" <rockinrimranch@earthlink.net>
Most pumps push fluid much better than they suck it. Therefore, the closer
the fuel pump to the source of the fuel, the better the flow of fuel in the
lines using that pump.
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing Tank Transfer |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dave Pepper" <rockinrimranch@earthlink.net>
Stan,
What is the optimal fuel filter used with a Rotax 912ULS? I have heard that
paper-type filters should not be used.
I was going to install the 4-6 PSI Facet pump in the wings, and possibly a
3rd as a backup to the engine pump after the gascolator. Is this the
appropriate pump as far as fuel pressure is concerned?
Thanks...Dave
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: | Wing Tank Transfer |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
That's what I do.
I only have two pumps, one at the root of each tank. I switch the pumps on
and off for tank selection.
Works great.
Watch your backup plans though,....My second battery is isolated from the
main batt system with a diode..If the main electrical system goes down I
still got a short term battery supply. Same supply serves the second
ignition.
Frank
601 HDS 302 hours
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Pepper [mailto:rockinrimranch@earthlink.net]
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Wing Tank Transfer
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dave Pepper"
--> <rockinrimranch@earthlink.net>
Fred's fuel system seems like the optimal one to me. That header tank is not
really a gravity system since the 912 carbs are higher than the tank mid
section. If an aircraft with wing locker tanks only had one Facet pump on
each wing tank, plus a third Facet pump to back up the engine pump, there
would be so much pumping redundancy that the failure of 1 pump would not
cause any problems. Could you operate such a system without a fuel selector
valve, and only a fuel shutoff valve in the line just before the gascolator?
Dave
advertising on the Matronics Forums.
Share: Share photos & files with other List members.
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Actually this is not quite a complete or true statement.
All pumps suck or push the same, but if you get any air or vapour in the
pump they will quit working. Fluids with high vapour pressures (auto fuel in
particular) will boil very easily if you suck on them. The warmer the fuel
the less suck it takes to boil it. When you boil the fuel all you get is
vapour which the pump can't pump.
The more flowrate you demand the more suck you need.
Now imagine being on a 110F tarmac runway with big trees at the end.
The moral is never suck fuel uphill or through a resistance such as a
filter, small hoses or uphill. Its OK at cruise 'cos your not near the
ground and not sucking very hard.
The one time you boil the fuel on takeoff could be your last.
Frank (put the pumps next the wing tanks) Hinde
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Pepper [mailto:rockinrimranch@earthlink.net]
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: pump placement
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dave Pepper"
--> <rockinrimranch@earthlink.net>
Most pumps push fluid much better than they suck it. Therefore, the closer
the fuel pump to the source of the fuel, the better the flow of fuel in the
lines using that pump.
advertising on the Matronics Forums.
Share: Share photos & files with other List members.
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: Wing Tank Transfer |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Schallgren@aol.com
Dave:
The 4-6 psi pump is correct for the wing transfer but you want the low
pressure one for the boost pump. I believe Fred had the right number for the
one
in series going to the engine. If not, the catalog at your auto parts store
will state what the output is of each facet pump.
Stan
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 |
|
Seal-Send-Time: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 12:22:11 -0400
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeff Small" <zodiacjeff@msn.com>
Tidbits from the archives:
http://www.facet-purolator.com/electri.htm
>the 40171, the 40105, and the 40106. The differences fall into
two distinct categories that relate to pump-off forward and reverse
leakage flows.
The Facet 40171 pump is the type sold by Stoddard-Hamilton Aircraft ,
Inc. (360-495-8533) to serve as a transfer pump for transferring fuel
from the auxiliary tanks to the main tanks. The 40171 costs about $54
each. The Facet 40105 and 40106 are sold by numerous suppliers,
including Aircraft Spruce and Specialties (800-824-1930 (west);
800-831-2949 (east)), Chief Aircraft (800-447-3408), Wicks
(800-221-9425) and others and typically used in the Zenith and other
aircraft for transferring fuel from an aux tank to a header tank. The
40105/6 pumps cost about $28 to $32 each.
Functionally, there is a world of difference between the
40171 and the 40105 / 40106.
All three model pumps have a "lift" capability and can draw fuel from
at least 3-feet. All three move the fuel at about 0.5 gal/min, or about
30 gal/h when they are operating.
In the "OFF" state, however, the differences between the pumps become
more obvious. At a 30-inch head pressure, the 40105 and 40106 pumps
have a forward "leak" rate or drain rate of about 15 gal/h. These pumps
thus flow freely in the forward direction at about one-hald the pumping
rate.... In the reverse direction, the 40105 and 40106 drain backwards
at between 0.05 ga/h to about 0.25 gal/hr, with a mean value over a
dozen tests with four different pumps of about 0.1 gal/h. (As a point
of reference, 0.1 gal/h is about one drop per second). Compare these
numbers to the 40171 pump, which showed no detectable leakage in the
"OFF" state in either the forward or reverse directions over several
hours.
The utilization implications are pretty clear: If your "from" tank is
higher that the "to" tank, you need the 40171 pump to prevent your
"from" fuel from draining into your "to" tank. If your "from" and "to"
tanks are at about the same level, you should still use the 40171 pump
to prevent an exchange of fuel. If your "from" tank is lower than your
"to" tank, you can use any of the pumps described, but if you use the
40105 or 40106, you should use a check valve on the outlet side of the
pump to present your "to" tank from draining back into your "from"
tank. Wicks lists a check valve at about $24, so cost-wise the 40171
may represent a better bargin because it has the checks built into
them....
You can identify the model by looking at the mounting tab on the pump.
One side of the mounting slot will be stamped "40" and the other side
will be stamped "105", 106" or "171".
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: | Facet fuel pumps |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "George Swinford" <grs-pms@comcast.net>
Jeff:
Thanks for that informative post.
One point about using the 105 or 106 fuel pumps to transfer fuel from the Zodiac
wing tanks to the fuselage tank: If the fuel is pumped to an inlet in the top
of the tank only the small amount in the line will be able to leak back thru
the pump to the wing tank. It seems to me that should be no problem.
George
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: pump placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: wizard-24@juno.com
> The moral is never suck fuel uphill or through a resistance such as
> a filter, small hoses or uphill. Its OK at cruise 'cos your not near
> the ground and not sucking very hard.
>
> The one time you boil the fuel on takeoff could be your last.
Given that info, it seems amazing to me that ZAC would show a different
arrangement on their XL plans -- which clearly shows the pumps way down
the line (after the selector valve in the cockpit and the gascolators).
This means the pump would be sucking fuel for quite some distance (and
I'm referring to models without a header tank), and uphill at that. And
of course, if your primary pump is an engine driven pump, you have no
choice but to suck fuel due to where the pump is located.
Very confusing to a newbie like myself. You want to trust ZAC (and quite
frankly, that's how I built my plane), but the points made here seem very
valid. What to do, what to do. Changing everything now would be
problematic, since getting at the tank outlets (and running wiring to the
pumps) would be difficult for the outboard (extended range) tanks.
Mike Fortunato
601XL
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Just one other titbit...
The 40106 pump generates more pressure than the 105. I mistakenly had a 105
in one of my wing tanks (wint tank direct to engine via the facet, no other
pumps) and the pressure would drop to zero psi on the guage at full throttle
running just this pump. I never see the 106's drop below 3 psi.
See my other message about the "lift capacity"...:)
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Small [mailto:zodiacjeff@msn.com]
Subject: Zenith-List: Facet pumps
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeff Small" <zodiacjeff@msn.com>
Tidbits from the archives:
http://www.facet-purolator.com/electri.htm
>the 40171, the 40105, and the 40106. The differences fall into
two distinct categories that relate to pump-off forward and reverse leakage
flows.
The Facet 40171 pump is the type sold by Stoddard-Hamilton Aircraft , Inc.
(360-495-8533) to serve as a transfer pump for transferring fuel from the
auxiliary tanks to the main tanks. The 40171 costs about $54 each. The
Facet 40105 and 40106 are sold by numerous suppliers, including Aircraft
Spruce and Specialties (800-824-1930 (west); 800-831-2949 (east)), Chief
Aircraft (800-447-3408), Wicks
(800-221-9425) and others and typically used in the Zenith and other
aircraft for transferring fuel from an aux tank to a header tank. The
40105/6 pumps cost about $28 to $32 each.
Functionally, there is a world of difference between the
40171 and the 40105 / 40106.
All three model pumps have a "lift" capability and can draw fuel from at
least 3-feet. All three move the fuel at about 0.5 gal/min, or about 30
gal/h when they are operating.
In the "OFF" state, however, the differences between the pumps become more
obvious. At a 30-inch head pressure, the 40105 and 40106 pumps have a
forward "leak" rate or drain rate of about 15 gal/h. These pumps thus flow
freely in the forward direction at about one-hald the pumping rate.... In
the reverse direction, the 40105 and 40106 drain backwards at between 0.05
ga/h to about 0.25 gal/hr, with a mean value over a dozen tests with four
different pumps of about 0.1 gal/h. (As a point
of reference, 0.1 gal/h is about one drop per second). Compare these
numbers to the 40171 pump, which showed no detectable leakage in the "OFF"
state in either the forward or reverse directions over several hours.
The utilization implications are pretty clear: If your "from" tank is higher
that the "to" tank, you need the 40171 pump to prevent your "from" fuel from
draining into your "to" tank. If your "from" and "to" tanks are at about
the same level, you should still use the 40171 pump to prevent an exchange
of fuel. If your "from" tank is lower than your "to" tank, you can use any
of the pumps described, but if you use the 40105 or 40106, you should use a
check valve on the outlet side of the pump to present your "to" tank from
draining back into your "from" tank. Wicks lists a check valve at about
$24, so cost-wise the 40171 may represent a better bargin because it has the
checks built into them....
You can identify the model by looking at the mounting tab on the pump. One
side of the mounting slot will be stamped "40" and the other side will be
stamped "105", 106" or "171".
advertising on the Matronics Forums.
Share: Share photos & files with other List members.
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: pump placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
on 7/23/03 1:08 PM, wizard-24@juno.com at wizard-24@juno.com wrote:
> Given that info, it seems amazing to me that ZAC would show a different
> arrangement on their XL plans -- which clearly shows the pumps way down
> the line (after the selector valve in the cockpit and the gascolators).
> This means the pump would be sucking fuel for quite some distance (and
> I'm referring to models without a header tank), and uphill at that.
The fuel lines are attached to the tanks at the lowest point on the tanks.
Because of the dihedral of the wings, the fuel lines run downhill to the
gascolater at the center of the fuselage. If you put your fuel pumps on the
cabin floor directly forward of the gascolater, they will not have to suck
at all, they will be gravity fed. I don't have a selector valve, I don't see
any need for one. I have a shutoff valve in the line from each tank.
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
Airframe construction complete.
Working on instrument panel, electrical and interior.
do not archive.
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
I would agree and if I had built an XL and saw that arrangement ZAC and I
would would be having some very pointed conversations.
I know folks who do suck up to the engine from the wing...but its not good
practice definatly.
I know of folks who have seen fuel boiling in their sight tubes on a hot
day....
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: wizard-24@juno.com [mailto:wizard-24@juno.com]
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: pump placement
--> Zenith-List message posted by: wizard-24@juno.com
> The moral is never suck fuel uphill or through a resistance such as
> a filter, small hoses or uphill. Its OK at cruise 'cos your not near
> the ground and not sucking very hard.
>
> The one time you boil the fuel on takeoff could be your last.
Given that info, it seems amazing to me that ZAC would show a different
arrangement on their XL plans -- which clearly shows the pumps way down the
line (after the selector valve in the cockpit and the gascolators). This
means the pump would be sucking fuel for quite some distance (and I'm
referring to models without a header tank), and uphill at that. And of
course, if your primary pump is an engine driven pump, you have no choice
but to suck fuel due to where the pump is located.
Very confusing to a newbie like myself. You want to trust ZAC (and quite
frankly, that's how I built my plane), but the points made here seem very
valid. What to do, what to do. Changing everything now would be problematic,
since getting at the tank outlets (and running wiring to the
pumps) would be difficult for the outboard (extended range) tanks.
Mike Fortunato
601XL
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the web
up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
advertising on the Matronics Forums.
Share: Share photos & files with other List members.
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Oh that's different!
I would still uase bigger lines to feed the sucktion side of the pumps
though...Just my preference
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Bryan Martin [mailto:bryanmmartin@comcast.net]
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: pump placement
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin
--> <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
on 7/23/03 1:08 PM, wizard-24@juno.com at wizard-24@juno.com wrote:
> Given that info, it seems amazing to me that ZAC would show a
> different arrangement on their XL plans -- which clearly shows the
> pumps way down the line (after the selector valve in the cockpit and
> the gascolators). This means the pump would be sucking fuel for quite
> some distance (and I'm referring to models without a header tank), and
> uphill at that.
The fuel lines are attached to the tanks at the lowest point on the tanks.
Because of the dihedral of the wings, the fuel lines run downhill to the
gascolater at the center of the fuselage. If you put your fuel pumps on the
cabin floor directly forward of the gascolater, they will not have to suck
at all, they will be gravity fed. I don't have a selector valve, I don't see
any need for one. I have a shutoff valve in the line from each tank.
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
Airframe construction complete.
Working on instrument panel, electrical and interior.
do not archive.
advertising on the Matronics Forums.
Share: Share photos & files with other List members.
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: pump placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: CLOJAN@aol.com
In a message dated 7/23/03 2:00:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
bryanmmartin@comcast.net writes:
> The fuel lines are attached to the tanks at the lowest point on the tanks.
> Because of the dihedral of the wings, the fuel lines run downhill to the
> gascolater at the center of the fuselage. If you put your fuel pumps on the
> cabin floor directly forward of the gascolater, they will not have to suck
> at all, they will be gravity fed
In this arangement do you need 2 fuel pumps. It seems that you could have the
tee then the one pump then the gascolater. How uneven is the flow of fuel
from left and right tanks and do we need 2 pumps to control this? I realize the
need for redundancy but the mechanical pump and the electric have been working
in production aircraft for years. Besides, Zac only puts one pump in their XL
kit.
Jack Russell
xl - jabiru
fuselage
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: pump placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: wizard-24@juno.com
> Because of the dihedral of the wings, the fuel lines run downhill to
> the gascolater at the center of the fuselage.
I suppose that's true NOW, but if you built from the original XL plans
and had to make the changes as indicated in the revised drawings, it
unfortunately doesn't work that way. I guess I'm probably in the minority
in that situation.
> don't have a selector valve, I don't see
> any need for one. I have a shutoff valve in the line from each tank.
A selector valve may not be needed for only two tanks, but with 4
independently plumbed tanks (per ZAC's plans), I think it's wise to have
one from a fuel management standpoint. And even still --- the plans do
show the console mounted selector valve, and the pump(s) after it. For
those of us that don't know any better -- that's the way we build 'em. I
really think ZAC should rethink this issue if it's as dangerous to suck
fuel as is being described on this list, or maybe I'm just being
over-cautious. It would be interesting to hear from anyone else on the
list that is sucking fuel and has been flying for a while.
Anyway, I guess if nothing else, it's all part of the archives for
builders to dig up IF they think to do so.
Mike Fortunato
601XL
pondering how to solve this fuel dilemma.....gets might hot here in
SoCal.
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
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: pump placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: wizard-24@juno.com
> In this arangement do you need 2 fuel pumps. How uneven is the flow of
> fuel from left and right tanks and do we need 2 pumps to control this?
My concern would be that if one tank got a little low on fuel, and if the
plane was banked in the opposite direction, you might risk sucking air
from the high tank if you only had the one pump?
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
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: pump placement |
Seal-Send-Time: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 15:27:04 -0400
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeff Small" <zodiacjeff@msn.com>
>In this arangement do you need 2 fuel pumps. It seems that you could have the
tee then the one pump then the gascolator.
This is the original Brent Battles design and the one I copied. HOWEVER, both
Brent and I pump to the top of a header. I think he has a 16 gallon, I use the
smaller 8.
Dihedral gravity. Those who have LE tanks will tell you just how fast the last
three inches of "empty" tank fills when gassing up. The effect is considerable.
Mike, you're fine.
Tailwinds jeff do not archive
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
There are plenty of folks sucking on fuel and getting away with it...Some of
them think I'm full of it...Thats OK, either way the laws of physics and 20
years as a professional engineer working on pumped systems tell me that your
asking for it if you suck on fuel.
Whether they weigh in with opposite views or not you have to ask the
question of who your gonna believe?
Frank
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: wizard-24@juno.com [mailto:wizard-24@juno.com]
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: pump placement
--> Zenith-List message posted by: wizard-24@juno.com
> Because of the dihedral of the wings, the fuel lines run downhill to
> the gascolater at the center of the fuselage.
I suppose that's true NOW, but if you built from the original XL plans and
had to make the changes as indicated in the revised drawings, it
unfortunately doesn't work that way. I guess I'm probably in the minority in
that situation.
> don't have a selector valve, I don't see
> any need for one. I have a shutoff valve in the line from each tank.
A selector valve may not be needed for only two tanks, but with 4
independently plumbed tanks (per ZAC's plans), I think it's wise to have one
from a fuel management standpoint. And even still --- the plans do show the
console mounted selector valve, and the pump(s) after it. For those of us
that don't know any better -- that's the way we build 'em. I really think
ZAC should rethink this issue if it's as dangerous to suck fuel as is being
described on this list, or maybe I'm just being over-cautious. It would be
interesting to hear from anyone else on the list that is sucking fuel and
has been flying for a while.
Anyway, I guess if nothing else, it's all part of the archives for builders
to dig up IF they think to do so.
Mike Fortunato
601XL
pondering how to solve this fuel dilemma.....gets might hot here in SoCal.
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the web
up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
advertising on the Matronics Forums.
Share: Share photos & files with other List members.
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Exactly!
Even if you have two pumps (one at the root of each tank) and you are coming
in at a 20kt crosswind on minimal fuel as I was two weekends ago you had
better not put the thing into a slip until your over the threashold.
Not a problem as long as you remember though.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: wizard-24@juno.com [mailto:wizard-24@juno.com]
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: pump placement
--> Zenith-List message posted by: wizard-24@juno.com
> In this arangement do you need 2 fuel pumps. How uneven is the flow
> of
> fuel from left and right tanks and do we need 2 pumps to control
> this?
My concern would be that if one tank got a little low on fuel, and if the
plane was banked in the opposite direction, you might risk sucking air from
the high tank if you only had the one pump?
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the web
up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
advertising on the Matronics Forums.
Share: Share photos & files with other List members.
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: pump placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dave Pepper" <rockinrimranch@earthlink.net>
Very good point, Frank. Although, in a slip, the high wing tank will be able
to supply fuel to the gascolator. Big question is.......will air from the
low wing tank be pumped to the gascolator, creating an air bubble which
could stop fuel supply to the engine?
Dave
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Edward T. Jeffko" <riovista@bossig.com>
With all the discussion on wing tanks, I wonder, would it be feasable to use
the wing innards as a mold for a composite tank? Maybe built in place
tanks?
Ed
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Facet fuel pumps |
Seal-Send-Time: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 16:32:07 -0400
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeff Small" <zodiacjeff@msn.com>
>One point about using the 105 or 106 fuel pumps to transfer fuel from the wing
tanks to the fuselage
>tank: If the fuel is pumped to an inlet in the top of the tank only a small amount
in the line will be able to leak >back thru the pump to the wing tank. It
seems to me that should be no problem.
Sure doesn't seem to be a problem for those with headers. However, at one time
I think ZAC supplied headers with the outlets all on the bottom. I think Bill
M. had one like this and had it modified. Mine had two on the top and one on
the lower right side. If your wings are pumped to the bottom of a header you
might be safer with a check valve in the system.
Everyone has opinions about headers and is welcome to them - you couldn't change
my mind about their positive utility. But I get a laugh about the "..gas in
my lap," comments. If you believe this then never accept a ride in a Cub - or
a lot of other vintage a/c. If you win a ride in the AOPA Waco you'd better
turn that down because the fuel is over your head! Ye gads!!!! If in your lap
is bad think of over your head. I'll never fly in a Cessna again.
If you'd like to explore the archives a bit more on this topic (which must surely
take up 50% of the bandwidth), type
40105 | 40106
into the search engine. There is a good post by Leo C. on drainback through the
Facet and a link from Fred H. for more info.
If you want to see some neat comments from listers like Bernie Gunn and Claude
Plathy about this and gain some additional info, type in
Facet | 40105 | 40106 but click on the "oldest first" button.
Bernie and Claude are no longer on the list but almost all of their posts were
entertaining. Claude's mountain flying/cheese tasting/ wine sipping stories were
a hoot.
You'll get over 700 hits; just go through a hundred to see how crowded the archives
are with posts cluttered up with original posts that are not needed. If
you ever do this you'll see why some of us harp about cutting down the entire
original post to which you respond.
Frank H. is correct - the 105 is the weaker of the two Facets
Bryan M. has given a great deal of common sense advice on fuel systems lately.
Stan C. - well, we just agree on header tanks ;
)
Tailwinds jeff do not archive
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Facet fuel pumps |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dave Pepper" <rockinrimranch@earthlink.net>
My header tank, bought from another builder when he built the fuselage, has
3 openings at the bottom, and 3 at the top! Seems like a hell of a lot of
openings to use....or plug!
Dave
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: pump placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dave Kubassek" <dkubassek@golden.net>
This is how i have mine installed as Bryan has noted below and it works fine
with or without the fuel pump turned on useing the engine mechanical pump
only.
Mind you i used all 3/8 fuel lines from tank to carb.(whether that improves
fuel flow or not???It just seemed like a good idea being a plumber and all.
dave k. C-FDSF XL. 0235 Lyc.
6.5 hrs
>
> The fuel lines are attached to the tanks at the lowest point on the tanks.
> Because of the dihedral of the wings, the fuel lines run downhill to the
> gascolater at the center of the fuselage. If you put your fuel pumps on
the
> cabin floor directly forward of the gascolater, they will not have to suck
> at all, they will be gravity fed. I don't have a selector valve, I don't
see
> any need for one. I have a shutoff valve in the line from each tank.
>
>
> --
> Bryan Martin
> N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
> Airframe construction complete.
> Working on instrument panel, electrical and interior.
> do not archive.
>
>
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
I thought of that but I "think" the starved pump would airlock and cease
pumping, even if you did get an air bubble it would simply come out in the
carb float bowls. As long as the "upwing" pump stayed wet it should pump.
My problem is can I be exactly sure where the fuel is?...If it is all in the
right tank and you do a slip to the right the engine will quit.....I make a
point on low fuel landings (and you can get it pretty darned low with a fuel
flow meter) to make crab approaches.
Frank
Do not archive
k.net>
Very good point, Frank. Although, in a slip, the high wing tank will be able
to supply fuel to the gascolator. Big question is.......will air from the
low wing tank be pumped to the gascolator, creating an air bubble which
could stop fuel supply to the engine?
Dave
advertising on the Matronics Forums.
Share: Share photos & files with other List members.
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: pump placement |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Gary Gower <ggower_99@yahoo.com>
--- CLOJAN@aol.com wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: CLOJAN@aol.com
>
> In a message dated 7/23/03 2:00:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> bryanmmartin@comcast.net writes:
>
>
> > The fuel lines are attached to the tanks at the lowest point on the
> tanks.
> > Because of the dihedral of the wings, the fuel lines run downhill
> to the
> > gascolater at the center of the fuselage. If you put your fuel
> pumps on the
> > cabin floor directly forward of the gascolater, they will not have
> to suck
> > at all, they will be gravity fed
>
> In this arangement do you need 2 fuel pumps. It seems that you could
> have the
> tee then the one pump then the gascolater. How uneven is the flow of
> fuel
> from left and right tanks and do we need 2 pumps to control this? I
> realize the
> need for redundancy but the mechanical pump and the electric have
> been working
> in production aircraft for years. Besides, Zac only puts one pump in
> their XL
> kit.
> Jack Russell
> xl - jabiru
> fuselage
>
In my opinion, here we are stepping in the line betwen redundancy and
KIS... Two pumps, one mechanic and one electric is safe enough,
remember the wise builder will only add lightness and simplicity to
their airplane to increase performance.
If we dont, then we will say that Zenith speed claims are very high :-)
:-) :-)
Saludos
Gary Gower
__________________________________
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Facet fuel pumps |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "George Swinford" <grs-pms@comcast.net>
Jeff:
My header tank had two tubes in the bottom, one in the top. I had one bottom
tube moved to the top, more or less in the center. My sight gage is also
more or less in the center.
George Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Small" <zodiacjeff@msn.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Facet fuel pumps
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeff Small" <zodiacjeff@msn.com>
>
> >One point about using the 105 or 106 fuel pumps to transfer fuel from the
wing tanks to the fuselage
> >tank: If the fuel is pumped to an inlet in the top of the tank only a
small amount in the line will be able to leak >back thru the pump to the
wing tank. It seems to me that should be no problem.
>
> Sure doesn't seem to be a problem for those with headers. However, at one
time I think ZAC supplied headers with the outlets all on the bottom. I
think Bill M. had one like this and had it modified. Mine had two on the
top and one on the lower right side. If your wings are pumped to the bottom
of a header you might be safer with a check valve in the system.
>
> Everyone has opinions about headers and is welcome to them - you couldn't
change my mind about their positive utility. But I get a laugh about the
"..gas in my lap," comments. If you believe this then never accept a ride
in a Cub - or a lot of other vintage a/c. If you win a ride in the AOPA
Waco you'd better turn that down because the fuel is over your head! Ye
gads!!!! If in your lap is bad think of over your head. I'll never fly in
a Cessna again.
>
> If you'd like to explore the archives a bit more on this topic (which must
surely take up 50% of the bandwidth), type
>
> 40105 | 40106
>
> into the search engine. There is a good post by Leo C. on drainback
through the Facet and a link from Fred H. for more info.
>
> If you want to see some neat comments from listers like Bernie Gunn and
Claude Plathy about this and gain some additional info, type in
>
> Facet | 40105 | 40106 but click on the "oldest first" button.
>
> Bernie and Claude are no longer on the list but almost all of their posts
were entertaining. Claude's mountain flying/cheese tasting/ wine sipping
stories were a hoot.
>
> You'll get over 700 hits; just go through a hundred to see how crowded the
archives are with posts cluttered up with original posts that are not
needed. If you ever do this you'll see why some of us harp about cutting
down the entire original post to which you respond.
>
> Frank H. is correct - the 105 is the weaker of the two Facets
>
> Bryan M. has given a great deal of common sense advice on fuel systems
lately.
>
> Stan C. - well, we just agree on header tanks ;
> )
>
> Tailwinds jeff do not archive
>
>
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry McFarland" <larrymc@qconline.com>
Subject: Zenith-List: wing tanks
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Edward T. Jeffko"
<riovista@bossig.com>
>
> With all the discussion on wing tanks, I wonder, would it be feasable to
use
> the wing innards as a mold for a composite tank? Maybe built in place
> tanks?
>
> Ed
>
Ed,
That's a really keen idea, that could be done by lining the inside surfaces
with a 1/8" skin
of cork, waxed inside and then layup epoxy segments that could be removable
for use as a mold. The rest is
relatively easy if you can work in the stuff.
Larry
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Fuel system design |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Fred or Sandy Hulen" <hulens61@birch.net>
Guys, When I see so many messages about fuel systems, I wonder (and worry
somewhat) about the fact that so many builders feel that they must wade
through all of the what-if's, and make tons of decisions (that can be right
or wrong) in order to personally design a fuel system for their airplane. If
you enjoy doing that, and are comfortable with it, then carry on. (:
)
But if you are a builder that "just wants to install a reliable fuel system"
and not be entangled with figuring it out and worrying about it, I suggest
that you first decide whether your fuel system will include or not include a
header tank. Then, remember, locate, or look up in the archives, those
postings from your fellow builders that now have high hours on there planes,
and attest to the reliability of their fuel system. Make sure that the
postings are about the same model of aircraft as yours. If your system will
include a header tank, then find a builder that has attested to the
reliability of his system using a header tank and USE HIS SYSTEM. Likewise
for the system with no header tank. In my humble opinion, you will have far
better probability of success and peace of mind to adapt a PREVIOUSLY PROVEN
system.
Fred
Jabiru 3300 / 601HDS N601LX
Now at 61 hours and heading out to fly my grandson to a Bar-B-Q restaurant
on the field at Paola Ks.
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing Tank Transfer |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: ZodiacBuilder@aol.com
In a message dated 7/22/2003 9:13:14 PM Eastern Standard Time,
rockinrimranch@earthlink.net writes:
> There's just something about 16 gallons of fuel above
> my lap, springing a leak and spraying the electrical system, and causing a
> fire, that concerns me.
>
> Thanks...Dave
>
Smart thinking.........
I guess I just opened a nasty can of worms.......Eh?
John W. Tarabocchia
http:\\hometown.aol.com\Zodiacbuilder
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: ZodiacBuilder@aol.com
In a message dated 7/23/2003 4:29:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
riovista@bossig.com writes:
> With all the discussion on wing tanks, I wonder, would it be feasable to use
> the wing innards as a mold for a composite tank? Maybe built in place
> tanks?
>
> Ed
>
Nothing wrong with turning the space into a wet wing.......Plenty of
airplanes out there that have successfully done so.
John W. Tarabocchia
http:\\hometown.aol.com\Zodiacbuilder
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: ZodiacBuilder@aol.com
In a message dated 7/23/2003 5:52:15 PM Eastern Standard Time,
larrymc@qconline.com writes:
> Ed,
> That's a really keen idea, that could be done by lining the inside surfaces
> with a 1/8" skin
> of cork, waxed inside and then layup epoxy segments that could be removable
> for use as a mold. The rest is
> relatively easy if you can work in the stuff.
> Larry
>
Why add the extra weight......Wet wing would serve the same purpose.
John W. Tarabocchia
http:\\hometown.aol.com\Zodiacbuilder
Message 37
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Fuel system design |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "HINDE,FRANK (HP-Corvallis,ex1)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Great idea!
601 HDS non-header tanks
LE wing tanks only
One facet pump at the out board edge of each wing
Independent power supplies to each pump
302 hours
No issues
No engine pump
Frank Soob (Ram engines valve guides that should stay in the heads)
-----Original Message-----
From: Fred or Sandy Hulen [mailto:hulens61@birch.net]
Subject: Zenith-List: Fuel system design
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Fred or Sandy Hulen"
--> <hulens61@birch.net>
Guys, When I see so many messages about fuel systems, I wonder (and worry
somewhat) about the fact that so many builders feel that they must wade
through all of the what-if's, and make tons of decisions (that can be right
or wrong) in order to personally design a fuel system for their airplane. If
you enjoy doing that, and are comfortable with it, then carry on. (:
)
But if you are a builder that "just wants to install a reliable fuel system"
and not be entangled with figuring it out and worrying about it, I suggest
that you first decide whether your fuel system will include or not include a
header tank. Then, remember, locate, or look up in the archives, those
postings from your fellow builders that now have high hours on there planes,
and attest to the reliability of their fuel system. Make sure that the
postings are about the same model of aircraft as yours. If your system will
include a header tank, then find a builder that has attested to the
reliability of his system using a header tank and USE HIS SYSTEM. Likewise
for the system with no header tank. In my humble opinion, you will have far
better probability of success and peace of mind to adapt a PREVIOUSLY PROVEN
system.
Fred
Jabiru 3300 / 601HDS N601LX
Now at 61 hours and heading out to fly my grandson to a Bar-B-Q restaurant
on the field at Paola Ks.
advertising on the Matronics Forums.
Share: Share photos & files with other List members.
Message 38
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | New plane moment |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra@mindspring.com>
I just picked up my brand new Alarus CH2000 at the factory today. Not quite
as awesome as flying the Zodiac for the first time, but pretty close!
Message 39
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rotax recommendation |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Eric Parlow" <ericparlow@hotmail.com>
What does Rotax say about Dexcool?
I also use Redline "WaterWetter" with good results.
Message 40
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Elevator cut-out on XL |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bill Howerton" <Bill@Howerton.com>
I just finished the elevator cut-out and I was surprised to see the note at
the bottom of 6-T-3B that says
"Note: Filler ribs or caps are not used on the sides of the elevator
cutout".
Maybe I'm just second guessing, but the whole thing seems like it would be
awfully flimsy with that area of .016 aluminum dangling out there without
any real support. Is this really Ok? Any comments from anyone?
Bill Howerton
Message 41
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Facet fuel pumps |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Winston Ellis <w1mdi@cox-internet.com>
Dave
Your header tank might have been intended for a fuel injected engine. Does it look
like this: http://www.sdsefi.com/techsurge.htm
Winston Ellis
Ketchum, Idaho
701/Suzuki
Dave Pepper wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dave Pepper" <rockinrimranch@earthlink.net>
>
> My header tank, bought from another builder when he built the fuselage, has
> 3 openings at the bottom, and 3 at the top! Seems like a hell of a lot of
> openings to use....or plug!
>
> Dave
>
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! --
|