Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:00 PM - Re: Angle for Useable Fuel and Flow Check (?) (ashontz)
2. 01:46 PM - Re: Angle for Useable Fuel and Flow Check (?) (Gig Giacona)
3. 01:52 PM - Re: Angle for Useable Fuel and Flow Check (?) (ashontz)
4. 03:53 PM - Re: Re: Angle for Useable Fuel and Flow Check (?) (Al Hays)
5. 07:09 PM - Re: 601 Flying Yesterday (Ron Lendon)
6. 07:58 PM - Re: Securing the Seats (BobTezyk)
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: Angle for Useable Fuel and Flow Check (?) |
Why not for a pump system too. Just because it's being pumped doesn't mean it'll
automatically work at a given angle, most likely if the pump has fuel it'll
pump it up that incline no problem, but how about if putting the plane at different
angles for some reason starves the pump of fuel?
[quote="ggower_99(at)yahoo.com"]Hello Dave,
Just my own point of view...
!st The XL is a low wing, pump operated fuel system. If we use the size of
pump(s) the correct diameter for the hoses as specidfied in the plan etc. the
flow should be correct.
With the Jabiru (and the Rotax 912, we even have The mechanic fuel pump from
the engine as an extra from the electric pump in the plans. Better if we use
an electric pump in the outlet of each wing tank.
2nd. I think that to test the flow with the highest flight angle is intended
for the gravity flow gasoline systems (high wings and/or header tank) where
a gasoline pump (electric or mechanic) is not used...
Probably I am wrong.
Saludos
Gary Gower.
do not archive.
DaveG601XL wrote:
I am to the point in my final assembly where I would like to demonstrate the useable
fuel quantity and fuel flow checks. Per the FAA guidelines, they suggest
"5 degrees above the highest anticipated climb angle." I e-mailed ZAC for their
suggested angle at which to perform this test. I got back a disappointing catch-22
like non-answer. They said the highest angle I am likely to see is the
power on stall angle. "Which you will have to find in your flight testing." That
was the entire answer, not even a suggestion considering that I cannot do
one before the other. Thanks for nothing.
Does anybody who is flying an XL with a Jabiru 3300 have any insight on an appropriate
angle to use for this
> [b]
--------
Andy Shontz
do not archive
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=185264#185264
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: Angle for Useable Fuel and Flow Check (?) |
I'll have to agree with Gary that that particular issue in the FAA circular is
talking about gravity feed systems.
I was looking at my wing and tank position after this thread was originally posted
and I don't see how you could test it on the ground to 5 degrees over the
max nose up angle you would experience in flight. Even at 90 unless the tank was
very low on fuel the fuel port would still be getting fuel.
Now, I'm not saying that there is no way that the fuel system could become unprimed
at some fuel level/angle but I just can't see a way to ground test for it.
I'll tie down the tail at some point pre-first flight and run the engine but
unless it just happens to dislodge something I'll be real surprised. I'm certainly
not going to jack the plane up into some extreme angle and run the engine.
That would just be asking for an accident.
The much safer way will be during the test flights and then it will be put in all
sorts of positions with all different levels of fuel to see what it does take
to un-prime the system if it can be done at all inside the flight envelope
of the aircraft. I'm leaning towards the idea that to do it you would be so close
to being out of gas that the tank was going to be try soon anyway.
This is one of the reasons we have 40 hours of phase 1 testing. You have to have
something to do during that time.
ashontz wrote:
> Why not for a pump system too. Just because it's being pumped doesn't mean it'll
automatically work at a given angle, most likely if the pump has fuel it'll
pump it up that incline no problem, but how about if putting the plane at different
angles for some reason starves the pump of fuel?
--------
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=185269#185269
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: Angle for Useable Fuel and Flow Check (?) |
Now, I'm not saying that there is no way that the fuel system could become unprimed
at some fuel level/angle but I just can't see a way to ground test for it.
Set the wheels on car ramps, then you can tilt it back further (ie. more ground
clearance).
Gig Giacona wrote:
> I'll have to agree with Gary that that particular issue in the FAA circular is
talking about gravity feed systems.
>
> I was looking at my wing and tank position after this thread was originally posted
and I don't see how you could test it on the ground to 5 degrees over the
max nose up angle you would experience in flight. Even at 90 unless the tank
was very low on fuel the fuel port would still be getting fuel.
>
> Now, I'm not saying that there is no way that the fuel system could become unprimed
at some fuel level/angle but I just can't see a way to ground test for
it. I'll tie down the tail at some point pre-first flight and run the engine but
unless it just happens to dislodge something I'll be real surprised. I'm certainly
not going to jack the plane up into some extreme angle and run the engine.
That would just be asking for an accident.
>
> The much safer way will be during the test flights and then it will be put in
all sorts of positions with all different levels of fuel to see what it does
take to un-prime the system if it can be done at all inside the flight envelope
of the aircraft. I'm leaning towards the idea that to do it you would be so
close to being out of gas that the tank was going to be try soon anyway.
>
> This is one of the reasons we have 40 hours of phase 1 testing. You have to have
something to do during that time.
>
>
>
> ashontz wrote:
> > Why not for a pump system too. Just because it's being pumped doesn't mean
it'll automatically work at a given angle, most likely if the pump has fuel it'll
pump it up that incline no problem, but how about if putting the plane at
different angles for some reason starves the pump of fuel?
>
--------
Andy Shontz
do not archive
CH601XL - Corvair
www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=185270#185270
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: Angle for Useable Fuel and Flow Check (?) |
Would it be necessary to actually run the engine in performing this
ground test for fuel flow? It would be much safer to divert the fuel
line into a suitable container and check for fuel flow at different
angles and fuel levels without the prop turning. One would have to
be sure to safeguard against accidentally energizing the starter when
testing electric pumps. An inexpensive manual pump could substitute
for an engine's mechanical pump for purposes of the ground test if
necessary.
Al Hays, 601XL , N5892H Reserved
Do not archive
On May 28, 2008, at 4:52 PM, ashontz wrote:
>
> Now, I'm not saying that there is no way that the fuel system could
> become unprimed at some fuel level/angle but I just can't see a way
> to ground test for it.
>
> Set the wheels on car ramps, then you can tilt it back further (ie.
> more ground clearance).
>
>
> Gig Giacona wrote:
>> I'll have to agree with Gary that that particular issue in the FAA
>> circular is talking about gravity feed systems.
>>
>> I was looking at my wing and tank position after this thread was
>> originally posted and I don't see how you could test it on the
>> ground to 5 degrees over the max nose up angle you would
>> experience in flight. Even at 90 unless the tank was very low on
>> fuel the fuel port would still be getting fuel.
>>
>> Now, I'm not saying that there is no way that the fuel system
>> could become unprimed at some fuel level/angle but I just can't
>> see a way to ground test for it. I'll tie down the tail at some
>> point pre-first flight and run the engine but unless it just
>> happens to dislodge something I'll be real surprised. I'm
>> certainly not going to jack the plane up into some extreme angle
>> and run the engine. That would just be asking for an accident.
>>
>> The much safer way will be during the test flights and then it
>> will be put in all sorts of positions with all different levels of
>> fuel to see what it does take to un-prime the system if it can be
>> done at all inside the flight envelope of the aircraft. I'm
>> leaning towards the idea that to do it you would be so close to
>> being out of gas that the tank was going to be try soon anyway.
>>
>> This is one of the reasons we have 40 hours of phase 1 testing.
>> You have to have something to do during that time.
>>
>>
>>
>> ashontz wrote:
>>> Why not for a pump system too. Just because it's being pumped
>>> doesn't mean it'll automatically work at a given angle, most
>>> likely if the pump has fuel it'll pump it up that incline no
>>> problem, but how about if putting the plane at different angles
>>> for some reason starves the pump of fuel?
>>
>
>
> --------
> Andy Shontz
>
> do not archive
>
> CH601XL - Corvair
> www.mykitlog.com/ashontz
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=185270#185270
>
>
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: 601 Flying Yesterday |
Scott,
That's a good looking design. And I have questions:
Did you make everything?
What kind of stainless did you use?
What's the wall thickness?
--------
Ron Lendon, Clinton Township, MI
Corvair Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-)
http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=185314#185314
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: Securing the Seats |
Pat,
When I worked at Learjet, (in the early 80's) they anchored both the seats and
carpet with Velcro. The Velcro had an adhesive backing but they determined that
it was not up to the task. They used an industrial strength contact cement
from a company called Kent. When it was applied to both sides of the bond and
allowed to dry, it was permanent - even on cloth or foam.
I have re-done several aircraft interiors with that system and I can say that it
is the only way to go. Just make sure you use a lot of Velcro to get a bond
that will stand up to several G's of butt pressure.
--------
do not archive
Regards,
Bob Tezyk
N78QT - 601XL QB/ Jab3300
Working on elevator
http://neo.datamatrix.com/eaglesnestestates/index.php?option=com_rsgallery2&Itemid=32&catid=23
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=185322#185322
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! --
|