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.

  #21  
Old 12-23-2020, 07:02 PM
rv6ejguy's Avatar
rv6ejguy rv6ejguy is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 5,904
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KatieB View Post
What I meant was, what happens when electrical power is killed to the aircraft. Say you have to shut off the master due to smoke in the cockpit, for example. Will it keep running as if it had mags/carb? Looks like it will if you use their special buffer capacitor, since the ECU is wired to the regulator/rectifier and alternator.

It's a single-alternator, single-battery system, according to the UL Power website. If you have an alternator failure, it will run until the battery dies, about an hour on the battery they tested. If the battery dies first, it runs "as long as necessary" on alternator power... or until the alternator burns out. That's fine for a VFR airplane, but if you're putting one of these in an RV intended for IFR, is that battery or alternator going to last until you're in a position to land? These engines were modeled after Jabiru engines. The alternators are basically motorcycle stators. The drawing on the UL site is identical to a Jabiru system with the stator and rectifier/regulator. I've seen them fail quite a bit. They burn out, regulators go bad. Maybe UL has improved them? People need to be prepared, is all I'm saying. I don't have a dog in the engine fight anymore, thank God. In fact, my old friend/colleague sells both Jabiru engines and UL Power. Those ULs do look sexy. But I cringe when people get all starry-eyed over the new technology and assume that it won't fail. I'd want a dual-alternator, dual-battery setup on one of these, personally. It would help offset the weight difference, too...
I agree, you are totally correct that these engines (and any other ED engine) should have a backup power source whether that be another battery, alternator or both.

Most often we wire the backup power so the engine can continue to run with the master contactor open though there are many ideas on how to accomplish backup power and not all follow this concept.
__________________

Ross Farnham, Calgary, Alberta
Turbo Subaru EJ22, SDS EFI, Marcotte M-300, IVO, Shorai- RV6A C-GVZX flying from CYBW since 2003- 445.9 hrs. on the Hobbs,
RV10 95% built- Sold 2016
http://www.sdsefi.com/aircraft.html
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiy...g2GvQfelECCGoQ


Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-24-2020, 01:59 PM
Canadian_JOY Canadian_JOY is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,388
Default

It's rare that I can do much other than read these threads and absorb information. Perhaps that's changing...

I'm peripherally involved in an aircraft equipped with a Rotax 912 iS engine. Rotax appears to have given much thought to the topic of redundancy in an electrically dependent aircraft.

The iS engine has two engine management systems called Lane A and Lane B. It has two alternators, A and B, either of which can power the EMSs. It's a well-designed system from what I can see. What I find interesting is there is also an opportunity to provide a third source of power to the EMSs from the ships battery, thus giving triple redundancy.

The only aspect of this implementation that causes me a little consternation is that some engine indications are not available to the pilot when operating on just one of the two EMSs. Seems a tolerable situation when one considers the EMS will keep the engine running.

In speaking with a certified Rotax iS engine tech I learned that Rotax has plumbed the engine with far more sensors than it currently uses to manage the engine, sensors like knock sensors. Clearly they have built the engine with future development in mind.

Interestingly, the design philosophy of the engine (and the basis of its certification) is that the pilot gets power when (s)he commands it. The EMS will not retard power to protect the engine. This is a fact a pilot is best to keep in mind, both in light of preserving the lifespan of the engine but also in preserving his or her own life when the trees are fast approaching.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-25-2020, 09:17 AM
rv6ejguy's Avatar
rv6ejguy rv6ejguy is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 5,904
Default

Not everybody has has good experiences with the iS EMS. They had a some issues initially with the system giving uncommanded power reductions in service. I don't hear much about that any more though.

We're working with an iS owner now to remove the factory EMS and replace its eyewatering complexity with SDS.

We've been approached by 2 UL engine owners also to replace their factory EMS' as they were not happy with several aspects of them.
__________________

Ross Farnham, Calgary, Alberta
Turbo Subaru EJ22, SDS EFI, Marcotte M-300, IVO, Shorai- RV6A C-GVZX flying from CYBW since 2003- 445.9 hrs. on the Hobbs,
RV10 95% built- Sold 2016
http://www.sdsefi.com/aircraft.html
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiy...g2GvQfelECCGoQ


Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-27-2020, 10:44 AM
agent4573 agent4573 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Mountain view
Posts: 265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rv6ejguy View Post
I don't think their FADEC runs in closed loop. No mention of an O2 sensor on their website.
There isn't a mention of an O2 sensor on the site, but the kitplanes article about the motors says if you lose a sensor they run a richer fuel map. I think your right theres no closed loop control, just different open loop fuel maps based on failed sensor flags.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Anunson View Post
Pilots can run a Lycoming LOP (lean of peak) for high efficiency and clean running. That isn't an option with the UL Power engines since the FADEC controls the mixture. So far, Lycoming engines run better fuel burns.
Do you have any source for this? The article I read about the smaller UL engines says they get better fuel efficiency than a similar powered rotax, which in turn are more fuel efficient than lycoming running similar power settings. It would be awesome to have some actual data from all the engines. Also, just because it's fadec controlled doesn't mean you can't tune it LOP off high power settings. Every ECU I've programmed goes way lean in the high RPM/low load area of the map.
__________________
www.rv7build.com
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-11-2021, 02:44 PM
JustPlaneChris JustPlaneChris is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 23
Default

There are fuel consumption charts on the ulpower website. Choose your engine and there are tabs for performance as well as consumption. Here's the page for the 350iS:

https://ulpower.com/en/engines/ul350/ul350is#4-fuel

Based on what I've seen from Zenith guys who are flying the UL engines, they do not seem to be as fuel efficient as the 912is, nor is there any reported way to run LOP.
__________________
Chris Boultinghouse
Temple, TX
EAA 575512
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-11-2021, 02:50 PM
rv6ejguy's Avatar
rv6ejguy rv6ejguy is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 5,904
Default

Works our to around .45 lbs./hp/hr. at 100 hp. Nothing impressive for a modern design. A Lycoming can do around .40-.42 with fuel injection running LOP.
__________________

Ross Farnham, Calgary, Alberta
Turbo Subaru EJ22, SDS EFI, Marcotte M-300, IVO, Shorai- RV6A C-GVZX flying from CYBW since 2003- 445.9 hrs. on the Hobbs,
RV10 95% built- Sold 2016
http://www.sdsefi.com/aircraft.html
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiy...g2GvQfelECCGoQ


Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-18-2021, 03:22 PM
Mike Houston Mike Houston is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Bushmills
Posts: 34
Default Fuel

Quote:
Originally Posted by rv6ejguy View Post
Works our to around .45 lbs./hp/hr. at 100 hp. Nothing impressive for a modern design. A Lycoming can do around .40-.42 with fuel injection running LOP.
The problem with the lycoming is it only burns LL100. The ULpower burns Mogas with up to 15% ethanol. In Europe that saves you about $3.50 a gallon.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-18-2021, 05:05 PM
rv6ejguy's Avatar
rv6ejguy rv6ejguy is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 5,904
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Houston View Post
The problem with the lycoming is it only burns LL100. The ULpower burns Mogas with up to 15% ethanol. In Europe that saves you about $3.50 a gallon.
Lycomings routinely burn 91 Mogas. Lots of folks doing it here on VAF...
__________________

Ross Farnham, Calgary, Alberta
Turbo Subaru EJ22, SDS EFI, Marcotte M-300, IVO, Shorai- RV6A C-GVZX flying from CYBW since 2003- 445.9 hrs. on the Hobbs,
RV10 95% built- Sold 2016
http://www.sdsefi.com/aircraft.html
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiy...g2GvQfelECCGoQ


Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-18-2021, 05:26 PM
airguy's Avatar
airguy airguy is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Garden City, Tx
Posts: 5,358
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Houston View Post
The problem with the lycoming is it only burns LL100. The ULpower burns Mogas with up to 15% ethanol. In Europe that saves you about $3.50 a gallon.
730 hours so far on a 360 burning Walmart-grade 91 premium with ethanol. Most people don't do it - but that doesn't mean it can't be done.
__________________
Greg Niehues - SEL, IFR, Repairman Cert.
Garden City, TX VAF 2021 dues paid
N16GN flying 750 hrs and counting; IO360, SDS, WWRV200, Dynon HDX, IFD440
Built an off-plan RV9A with too much fuel and too much HP. Should drop dead any minute now.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-31-2021, 03:59 PM
Mike Houston Mike Houston is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Bushmills
Posts: 34
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by airguy View Post
730 hours so far on a 360 burning Walmart-grade 91 premium with ethanol. Most people don't do it - but that doesn't mean it can't be done.
Yes, the 360s have a compression ratio of 8.5:1 which seems to be tolerant to burning mogas. Unfortunately the 390s are all higher though it appears if you are building an RV10 the 540s probably work with mogas as they are all 8.5 :1
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 05:16 AM.


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.