What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Cooling air exit ramp lip

BruceMe

Well Known Member
I'm FWF on my RV-4 project. I was reading the (incredably long winded) LOP thread and found a few posts about exit lips. They come stock on the newer model RVs, should I fabricate one on my RV-4 now just to increase flow. More is almost always better.

-Bruce
RV-4 (N254MM reserved)
 
More airflow out could equal more drag. I wouldn't unless after you are operational you have cooling problems.
 
Don't think I agree. I installed a "C" shaped piece of 016 between the engine mount legs attached to the firewall to help smooth the exit flow out of my O-360 A1A powered RV-6. I didn't slow down at all and see slightly lower cyl head temps. I was attempting at the time to go faster. I installed the newer version of the pressure recovery wheel pants (my -6 was competed in 1998) and saw a 2-3 knot increase in speed. Was it the exit ramp or the wheel pants? Or a little of both? Speed tests were done as before WOT, 2700 rpm, and a constant density altitude on 3 (90 deg) legs recording the ground speed and plugging into an applet to determine TAS. Still no where near as fast as Dan ;) though.
 
BruceMe said:
They come stock on the newer model RVs
They do? Didn't on mine (2004 RV-7A). Anybody have pictures?

The RV-10 has louvers as an option. I have a pair but have yet to install
them.

The other option is to cut the exhaust pipes even with the cowl outlet.
This sounds interesting but I wonder if the exhaust pulse will make the
floor vibrations even worse.

Smoothing the outflow is what the RV-8 "C" plate does. It's next to
impossible to do that on a 7A model though I may try.

At the end of this month I will be moving my plane from CNO to CPM. Instead
of an hour away it will be 12 minutes. At that time I plan to do considerable
testing along these lines.
 
Cooling lip

Don't do it. We spent a considerable amount of time getting our baffling to fit really well on our 6A by cutting a little off at a time and paid particular attention to the baffle in the front of the engine (the one that goes across the top front) that keeps the air from backing out of the area around the spinner, causing a lot of drag. The net result is that we seldom see 400* F and usually cruise power yields 350 (75%) and 202+ TAS.

You can fabricate an "inner" lip similar to the RV 8s lower firewall lip and bring it up and around back to the firewall, smoothing the exit air flow. Someone else mentioned cutting off the exhaust pipes but Van says that you'll have a pulsing/vibrating floor with more heat too. Since we're already around 200 MPH cruise, it doesn't seem worth the tradeoff.
 
Leave the hacksaw in the toolbox

The other option is to cut the exhaust pipes even with the cowl outlet.
This sounds interesting but I wonder if the exhaust pulse will make the
floor vibrations even worse.

Several hundred hours ago I cut the turndowns off the pipes on my RV-6. Even though it was kinda cool to not see the pipes hanging out of the cowl, the mod definitely made the exhaust "sound interesting" and resulted in chronic gray exhaust stains on the bottom of the plane. Since I have insulation on the floor I didn't notice increased vibration but after a few hundred hours of cleaning the bottom of the plane I had had enough. Larry Vetterman sent me a couple of turndowns (he keeps them on hand for those of us who foolishly cut off the originals....) which I welded on the pipes. Now the engine sounds quieter and the belly of the plane stays clean.
 
I'm wondering about using a modified NACA vent in the center of lower cowl, just aft of the injection servo, as an alternative to the Kent Paser/Speed With Economy "exhaust pump" modification. But, I'm pretty amateurish (at both modifying the -6 and posting here!). Is this a crazy idea?

Monte
 
More scoops not needed?

rv620mr said:
I'm wondering about using a modified NACA vent in the center of lower cowl, just aft of the injection servo, as an alternative to the Kent Paser/Speed With Economy "exhaust pump" modification. But, I'm pretty amateurish (at both modifying the -6 and posting here!). Is this a crazy idea?

Monte
Not sure what you are talking about in Kent's book:
Exhaust Jet Thrust Nozzle
Exhaust anti-reversion cone
Cowl Air Outlet Venturi

If you are talking about an augmenter tube for exhaust, which is common on many Cessna and Piper Twins, this works, but I don't see how a NACA scoop works into it. You don't want to introduce any more air into the lower cowl just for the purpose of exiting right back out the cowl exit. You have plenty of air coming thru the cowl inlets to do the job. I just don't understand, but in general you don't want more scoops of any kind than you absolutly need.
 
Last edited:
gmcjetpilot said:
You don't want to introduce any more air into the lower cowl just for the purpose of exiting right back out the cowl exit. You have plenty of air coming thru the cowl inlets to do the job. I just don't understand, but in general you don't want more scoops of any kind than you absolutly need.
Absolutely! My phase 1 was conducted without wheelpants or gear leg fairings.
While troubleshooting the high CHT issue I had (before I found the problem)
I noticed that on the A models the cutout on the lower cowl for the nose gear
leg is about 3 inches long and a little bit over 1 inch wide. This is done so
you can get the lower cowl off. I realized that pressurized air might enter
into this area and entering the lower pressure area of the cowl just ahead of the
cowl exit. After taping it off I saw a 10-15 degree drop in CHT temps.
 
Walter,
Thanks for the heads up on the cowl slot
under the carb. I was wondering what I
should do about that.

I think I will mount the nose gear leg fairing
and the upper intersection fairing for phase-1
flight testing. This should give me a more true
picture of any cooling problems with the cowl.
It also will protect the nose gear leg stiffener.

Also, thanks for the info and pictures about
the air inlet ramps. I haven't flown yet and
don't know how well the baffle seals will work.

Tom
 
NACA vent: clarification

George & Walter,

Thanks for replying. I'm looking at pg. 65, figure 1-4 of Kent Paser's book (first printing 1994). It appears to me that the exhaust stacks were shortened such that the exhaust exited the pipes while yet in the cowl. Because of the tuned length, exhaust pulses, heat, etc., my understanding is that it's a bad idea to reduce the length of our Vetterman exhaust pipes. So, as an alternative, I was considering a NACA powered "exhaust pipe/cowl outlet venturi pump". Is it still a bad idea? Thank you.

Monte Neilan
RV6, Flying
Kimball, NE
 
I think I'm going to have to see a picture of sorts to directly understand
what you are trying to achieve.

Are you installing a NACA duct to allow outside air to enter the
lower cowl, just ahead of the cowl outlet to help speed up the exiting
air, since the external airflow is greater than that of the exhausting air?

That might have the reverse effect, I think. But I only slept in a Holiday
Inn once, and that was a long time ago.
 
BruceMe said:
I'm FWF on my RV-4 project. I was reading the (incredably long winded) LOP thread and found a few posts about exit lips. They come stock on the newer model RVs, should I fabricate one on my RV-4 now just to increase flow. More is almost always better.

-Bruce
RV-4 (N254MM reserved)

Bruce,

My RV-4 with 160hp in it runs very cool. I never see above 350 to 370 for cht's. I doubt you'll need it, and as other say, add it later only if you need it rather than add the drag now. I also never see oil temps above 180 either.
 
Wicked Stick said:
Bruce,

My RV-4 with 160hp in it runs very cool. I never see above 350 to 370 for cht's. I doubt you'll need it, and as other say, add it later only if you need it rather than add the drag now. I also never see oil temps above 180 either.

Thanks Dave,

Can't wait to form!
 
Page 65

rv620mr said:
George & Walter,

Thanks for replying. I'm looking at pg. 65, figure 1-4 of Kent Paser's book (first printing 1994). Monte Neilan, RV6, Flying, Kimball, NE
Monte, yes the idea's shown on pg 65 are very sound ones, which work absolutly well. Basically it's a cowl flap found on many factory planes. The idea is to play with exit area in flight. A good idea but adds complexity, weight, pilot work load and maintenance. Page 65 also incorporates a concept he called a "jet-pump" or "venturi-pump". It's most commonly called an exhaust augmentor.


The Fig 4-1, pg 65 shows a flush ramp (reverse flush scoop) w/ parallel sides and proper exit angle. Positioning the exhaust as shown provides an exhaust augmentor function. Exhaust augmentation is widely exploited in rocket and jet engines. Square (parallel sided, non diverging or converging) flush ramp is optimal for exits. (A NACA scoop is not ideal or used for exits, (The RV-4 has a slight ramp, but not of proper depth to exit the exhaust.)

An augmenter is a divergent (ie: bigger at the back than the front) cone into which the exhaust gases are expelled. In this case we have a square X-section. The efficency of this "augmenter" is less than ideal. I did a quick check, NASA has a 1957 reseach paper on "Internal performance of two-dimensional wedge exhaust nozzles". This is theory. The trick is to make the theory practical.

Mr Bernoulli figured out pressure exerted by gas is dependent on speed which it flows. The faster the flow, the lower the pressure. The "Bernoulli effect" creates a low-pressure area around the hot gas coming out the tailpipe; this low pressure draws cooler, denser air into the gas-flow. With out an augmenter tremendous amounts of turbulence and large swirling vortices's occure where hot and cold air mix. As they mix, the cold air is heated by the exhaust and expands but, since it's not confined in any way, this expansion doesn't add to the thrust -- it expands in all directions and reactive forces cancel out. This is what we have when we dump out pipes into the free air.

This idea is found on a megaphone or "Coanda" (solid cone inside a megaphone) at the end of an exhaust pipe. ("Coanda effect" http://www.thermofluids.co.uk/effect.php; http://www.rexresearch.com/coanda/1coanda.htm)

When we add an augmenter we have a degree of control over the expansion process. The heated air no longer expands evenly in all directions; instead the only direction it expands is towards the rear of the cone. Mr Newton then states "for every action there's an opposite and equal reaction". This means the heated air now is travelling only towards the rear of the cone; There is a reactive force exerted on the cone pushing it forward. This reactive force is "thrust."

The geometry does not exist on a RV to lend itself to a cowl flap or augmenter tubes. We just don't have the room unless an exhaust ramp was incorporated into the lower fuselage. Some homebuilts have "exhaust tunnel's". My 1958 Apache and friends C-310 (twins) have augmentor tubes. Nothing new. http://www.airspacemag.com/ASM/Mag/Supp/AS05/M202.html

Van has developed a very good basic non-cowl flap design of very low drag compared to most aircraft, so incorporating a cow flap or augmenter is not easy. Van has recognized the advantage of these ideas and published pictures and ideas in the news letter, "The RVator" over the years.

How do you make all this work in say a RV-7? Well, not easy (click)


To incorporate a flush exit ramp takes a major structural change to a RV. Van crunched the numbers of cost, weight, building complexity and simple efficient configuration, coming up with the current design. There are mods and gains but how much are you willing or able to do.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top