VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

-POSTING RULES
-Advertise in here!
- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

Keep VAF Going
Donate methods

Point your
camera app here
to donate fast.

  #11  
Old 04-17-2010, 04:31 PM
Dmadd Dmadd is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Camas, WA
Posts: 481
Default

I'll see what I can come up with as far as pictures.
When I measured it, I figured I would only need a one half inch spacer between the oil pan and the rotec, and everything would hook right up...
Thats the guess anyway... <BG>

DM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ratc View Post
Dennis, thanks for the input, it does sound promising!
You have answered one of the questions I've posted to Rotec regarding the use of the Vans FAB. No rush, but if there is any chance of a photo of the FAB modification/installation it would be a useful reference.
More importantly having seen one do you think there will be any major issues fitting it in/under the -4 standard 0-320 cowls?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-17-2010, 05:02 PM
Alan Carroll's Avatar
Alan Carroll Alan Carroll is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 778
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SvingenB View Post
Same principle, but different design (like a V6 vs a straight 6). Rotec TBI is a sliding carb with a totally separate fuel pressure regulator that when used together makes up a complete single point fuel injection or TBI. It is a simpler design than the Ellison.

Besides, at less than half the price, and can run on mogas and manufactured by an active team using modern manufacturing methods (unlike the stale Ellison), there really is no comparison.
I'd be curious to know how this is a simpler design - the Ellison is already very simple. The basic principle looks to be identical in both, down to the pattern of holes in metering tube. The Ellison is one piece, which seems simpler than having to mount the diaphram assembly separately. However, the Rotec clearly wins on price (perhaps reflecting lower development costs) and on being able to handle mogas.

Something that hasn't been mentioned yet is that the Ellison is known for being sensitive to inlet geometry. Presumably the Rotec will have similar issues, since it apparently works the same way?
__________________
Alan Carroll
RV-8 N12AC
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-17-2010, 06:07 PM
rocketbob's Avatar
rocketbob rocketbob is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 8I3
Posts: 3,669
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by petehowell View Post
I have been flying too much to take the time to install it. Probably next annual.

RocketBob has one for his -6 and is further along on the install. Maybe he will chime in.
Got the cable brackets and spacer made, but have hesitated to put it on since I could not get adequate test time this winter before making a few long trips in the RV. I just got back from SNF so I've got no more excuses... Its hard sometimes to start modifying a perfectly good flying RV that runs like a watch. The other side of it is I want to make a few more 'before' test flights to validate the data I've already captured in order to properly validate my testing with the Rotec. Stay tuned.
__________________

Please don't PM me! Email only!

Bob Japundza CFI A&PIA
N9187P PA-24-260B Comanche, flying
N678X F1 Rocket, under const.
N244BJ RV-6 "victim of SNF tornado" 1200+ hrs, rebuilding
N8155F C150 flying
N7925P PA-24-250 Comanche, restoring
Not a thing I own is stock.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-17-2010, 06:09 PM
petehowell's Avatar
petehowell petehowell is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: MN
Posts: 2,290
Default Install Pics

Install Pics can be found here....
__________________
Cheers,
Pete

Amateur Plane - RV-9A N789PH - 2400+ Hrs
Amateur Radio - KD0CVN
Doggies Delivered - 25+
St. Paul, MN
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-19-2010, 12:28 AM
Clouddancer Clouddancer is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 178
Default planning to use one in my RV-4

I'm planning to use the Rotec TBI on a O-360 in an RV-4. Will order engine and TBI later this year. I've been in short contact with Paul Chernikeeff from Rotec. He told me that they primarely developped the TBI on their on, because they needed them for their radial engines and that Ellison had to struggle for supply and was rather expensive.
For instance it seems that it will fullfill my needs: aerobatic, mogas, simple ...altough I've never seen one installed on an O-360.
__________________
Andreas Uebersax
RV-4 SN2416 in slow progress
Switzerland
VAF donation 2020/11/26
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-19-2010, 05:16 AM
carguy614's Avatar
carguy614 carguy614 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Shallotte NC
Posts: 594
Default Rotec "injector"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Carroll View Post
I'd be curious to know how this is a simpler design - the Ellison is already very simple. The basic principle looks to be identical in both, down to the pattern of holes in metering tube. The Ellison is one piece, which seems simpler than having to mount the diaphram assembly separately. However, the Rotec clearly wins on price (perhaps reflecting lower development costs) and on being able to handle mogas.

Something that hasn't been mentioned yet is that the Ellison is known for being sensitive to inlet geometry. Presumably the Rotec will have similar issues, since it apparently works the same way?
Looks to me to be the same technology that Ellison uses. Pressure diaphragm housing is integral to the casting on the Ellison, and separate on the Rotec. I hesitate to refer to it as "fuel injection" Rotating the metering tube into the venturi airstream meters the fuel. It's a slide carb. Looks like it could be a winner though, and I would love to see someone try to install one on a forward facing sump.
Regards,
Chris
__________________
Chris Schmitt
Shallotte, NC
RV9A 90970 N614RV
Sold to nice folks in Texas and badly missed.
RV9 in progress
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-19-2010, 07:28 AM
Alan Carroll's Avatar
Alan Carroll Alan Carroll is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 778
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouddancer View Post
IHe told me that they primarely developped the TBI on their on, because they needed them for their radial engines and that Ellison had to struggle for supply and was rather expensive.
Looking closer, the main functional difference seems to be that the the Rotec uses the pressure drop at spray bar to meter fuel:

http://www.rotecradialengines.com/TB...owTBIworks.pdf

In contrast the Ellison uses a separate pressure monitoring tube in the inlet throat. Not sure what difference this makes in how much fuel is metered. The geometry of the inlet, spray bar, and slide appear to be identical.
__________________
Alan Carroll
RV-8 N12AC
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-19-2010, 07:41 AM
SvingenB SvingenB is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Norway, Stj?rdal
Posts: 598
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by carguy614 View Post
Looks to me to be the same technology that Ellison uses. Pressure diaphragm housing is integral to the casting on the Ellison, and separate on the Rotec. I hesitate to refer to it as "fuel injection" Rotating the metering tube into the venturi airstream meters the fuel. It's a slide carb. Looks like it could be a winner though, and I would love to see someone try to install one on a forward facing sump.
Regards,
Chris
I have to agree, they are very similar. It is not a slide carb. The pressure regulator, or rather the modulated constant flowrate device makes all the difference. The same principle is used in ordinary fuel injections, but the mixture is very different. These TBIs use the metering bar to adjust the mixture as well as the main fuel flow by connecting it with the constant flowrate device, very elegant.
__________________
RV-4 #4520, Slow built
B Svingen
RV-4 Project Log
Onex Project Log

EAA Chapter 573 Norway
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-19-2010, 11:03 AM
SvingenB SvingenB is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Norway, Stj?rdal
Posts: 598
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Carroll View Post
Looking closer, the main functional difference seems to be that the the Rotec uses the pressure drop at spray bar to meter fuel:

http://www.rotecradialengines.com/TB...owTBIworks.pdf

In contrast the Ellison uses a separate pressure monitoring tube in the inlet throat. Not sure what difference this makes in how much fuel is metered. The geometry of the inlet, spray bar, and slide appear to be identical.
It is just different ways of obtaining the differential pressure between "static" and total. It is not really static since the main point is to vary this by adjusting mixture. The Ellison patent can be found here:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4524034.pdf

Look at fig. 14 and the following for different layouts.

The Rotec TBI sort of assumes that the total pressure is whatever pressure is inside the cowl (like fig 14 in Ellison patent). This is probably good enough in most cases, but I wonder what happens when flying without a cowl ?
__________________
RV-4 #4520, Slow built
B Svingen
RV-4 Project Log
Onex Project Log

EAA Chapter 573 Norway
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-19-2010, 06:07 PM
Alan Carroll's Avatar
Alan Carroll Alan Carroll is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 778
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SvingenB View Post
It is just different ways of obtaining the differential pressure between "static" and total. It is not really static since the main point is to vary this by adjusting mixture. The Ellison patent can be found here:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4524034.pdf

Look at fig. 14 and the following for different layouts.

The Rotec TBI sort of assumes that the total pressure is whatever pressure is inside the cowl (like fig 14 in Ellison patent). This is probably good enough in most cases, but I wonder what happens when flying without a cowl ?
Thanks, Figure 14 does help a lot. The Rotec design does appear to be slightly simpler than the Ellison in that it doesn't use a separate pressure sensing tube in the inlet throat (not sure if this is better or not). It also seems clear that both variants were fully described in the Ellison patent (now expired).

As noted by Rotec, the basic principle is a lot like a diaphram-type diving regulator? (except for mixture adjustment).
__________________
Alan Carroll
RV-8 N12AC
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:38 PM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.