Show us a picture of your RV-10 progress.

[dhmoose]

Originally Posted by Greenley

I asked Ken at Vans if you were really supposed to remove that much, as the plans have you do your first cut leaving the whole wall thickness, the curve, and 1/16". By the time I was done I had sanded at least a third of the way through the side of the door frame on the fiberglass. Ken said no one ever asked about that. Given how different the actual is from what the plans describe I wonder about his answer. Now I am trying to figure out exactly how much flange to leave for the McMaster seals, can anyone point me to good guidance on this?

As Mark said, do your homework and make sure you completely understand the cuts to make and how to make them (on the curved flange). I made a mistake in how I held the cutting disc and ended up taking off too much. Cost me a bunch of hours to extend the entire perimeter! PITA! I think Ivan's site had good info so check here:

http://ivankristensen.phanfare.com/2292606_3334806

[Bluelabel]

Quite overdue on uploading some drool-worthy pics...
Most of this took place over the last 2 months, but I'm just now getting a chance to post 'em.

Since our plane is being built about 100 miles from Tulsa, we got the opportunity to pick our engine up directly from BPE in person. There was some testing done and extra break in done on my engine. We did get to run my engine on the EFII system in the dyno.... talk about smooth.....
Here's Allen, Dan H, Robert (EFII) And myself doing the switchover to the other fuel/ignition system....


That's almost 300hp of Barrett goodness right there... of course painted to match the plane...



On it's new home. (Thanks Al Smith for the Engine hoist!!)



Baffling for the Showplanes Cowl pretty much done....



Our very cool, custom Ignition Coil Mounting plate..... (Thanks for the idea Dave)



And of Course.... all the fun and mayhem that is going on on the other side of the firewall....



As of now, Hoses are all done, pretty much everything on the firewall is wrapped up... running wires waiting on our interior..... Hoping for a Winter 2015 first flight!!!

[Mike S]

Aaaha, twas your engine that Dan featured in the current Kit Planes article.

[Bluelabel]

Originally Posted by Mike S

Aaaha, twas your engine that Dan featured in the current Kit Planes article.

Ay.. it was indeed. Hadn't seen the article yet. Just read it. Couldn't spill any of the details.... Dan got all the facts right. Based on info from the identical test 2 days later at Titan, I feel strongly that we ,in a rush, made a big booboo in returning the hot fuel to the rail. In the titan test, the EFII system did as predicted and produced 10% more HP and 1 gallon less burn per hour.
We did our best on my engine to do an apples to apples, but with that one error in the EFII set up, there's no way of knowing if we skewed the results or not.... Either way, my engine ran smooth as silk, and for a hot humid tulsa day, had plenty of git up.

[DanH]

Originally Posted by Bluelabel

In the titan test, the EFII system did as predicted and produced 10% more HP and 1 gallon less burn per hour.

Sorry John. That may be what Robert told you, but it's bravo sierra.

[rvbuilder2002]

Originally Posted by DanH

Sorry John. That may be what Robert told you, but it's bravo sierra.

Thanks for the (vague) clarification...
My Bravo Sierra warning horns were blowing full blast in my head....

[Bluelabel]

Originally Posted by DanH

Sorry John. That may be what Robert told you, but it's bravo sierra.

Sorry Dan, Just like I can't argue with the results we got at Barrett on my engine (Skewed, not skewed, who knows, we introduced a questionable variable that we'll never know for sure), Also can't argue with the results that came directly From Titan's Dyno... (And since I don't work for any of these companies I can post 'em I mis-place the fuel burn chart...

We'll never know (until I go back to Barrett to help the next guy who's 540 comes through for build and we do it one last time that is....).

Either way, I've got what I feel to be the best engine, built by the best shop, running the best ignition and fuel system currently available on the market and I couldn't be happier. That's my opinion of my set up.... Anyone that wants to run mags.... I'll help you install them and we'll go punch holes in the sky together and both have fun....I'm leaving it at that....

[DanH]

Originally Posted by Bluelabel

Also can't argue with the results that came directly From Titan's Dyno...

194 HP vs 196 HP is one percent, not 10...

[ppilotmike]

John,

A couple of questions:
- Why do the charts say XIO-360, when your engine is an IO-540? Were the test runs not done on your engine?
- Can you post the chart showing the fuel flow savings?
- In your build, did you have to plumb return lines all the way back to the tanks? If not, where did you plumb the returns to?

[DanH]

Originally Posted by Bluelabel

Sorry Dan, Just like I can't argue with the results we got at Barrett on my engine (Skewed, not skewed, who knows, we introduced a questionable variable that we'll never know for sure), Also can't argue with the results that came directly From Titan's Dyno... (And since I don't work for any of these companies I can post 'em I mis-place the fuel burn chart...

Since you brought it up.....

Robert's "explanation" was included as a courtesy. He proposed it the morning after the tests, without the benefit of the complete dyno record.

Both you and I have a copy of that record. It is available to anyone, a matter of good journalism.



As stated in the article, the theory is, fundamentally, fuel supplied to the injectors with a high vapor content. However, there doesn't seem to be any evidence in the dyno record, notably exhaust gas temperatures.

As most are aware, EGT indicates what fuel-air ratio was actually delivered to the cylinder. From the record, here are the individual cylinder EGTs for the maximum power runs with the two delivery systems:



The power curve response to mixture variation is quite flat in the best power region; regular readers have seen it on a number of Lycoming charts presented in other threads. EGT deltas this small would not indicate a significant mixture variation, nor result in the 4% horsepower reduction (276 HP vs 265 HP, corrected) seen here.

Here's an example (Lycoming dyno, WOT/2700, angle valve 360). The EGT range for best power extends about 90F, and as much as 200 with small loss:



Keep in mind that the bubble argument is based on the engine being fed vapor rather than liquid fuel during the finite injector open time. If the system was regulating that open time based only on the base speed-density calculation, then the system would supply a lean mixture. The EGTs say that didn't happen. Even if it was happening, it wouldn't have mattered; both the Bendix and EFii runs were made with operator control of mixture. Mr. Barrett held RPM with with the water brake, advanced to WOT, then dialed the mixture to find max torque.

There are other good arguments, but let's get to the point. Any given day and any given engine might net slightly different results. The key word (and bottom line here) is slightly. So far, the range of published max HP deltas between conventional and EFii is (a) down 4%, (b) up 1% (the 360 posted above), and (c) up 2% (R409). Prior to your 540, Robert had never made a dyno run with the system installed on a Lycoming.