VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > RV Firewall Forward Section > Fuel Injection Systems
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41  
Old 02-07-2009, 12:06 PM
David-aviator David-aviator is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chesterfield, Missouri
Posts: 4,514
Default

When using internal lower cowl air as the source of filtered air, perhaps of greater concern than pressure is the temperature of that air, which is of course related. One would have to measure it to be sure but it would seem during summer months it could easily be 200F vrs 90-100F is using an external source. The cylinders are over 300 and the exhaust pipes over 1000 degrees, it is a warm environment. If anyone has measured forward lower cowl temperatures, it would be interesting information.
__________________
RV-12 Build Helper
RV-7A...Sold #70374
The RV-8...Sold #83261
I'm in, dues paid 2019 This place is worth it!
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 02-07-2009, 11:33 PM
rodbower rodbower is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 33
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David-aviator View Post
When using internal lower cowl air as the source of filtered air, perhaps of greater concern than pressure is the temperature of that air, which is of course related. One would have to measure it to be sure but it would seem during summer months it could easily be 200F vrs 90-100F is using an external source. The cylinders are over 300 and the exhaust pipes over 1000 degrees, it is a warm environment. If anyone has measured forward lower cowl temperatures, it would be interesting information.
Really Eazy DECISION.

When in doubt open the ram air valve and have at least 1.5" over warm inner cowl air. Nice to use in icing. Don't use it the ram air unless you need it. Problem solved. A little dust will not cause that much damage if only for a few minuets.

Maybe a few "Extra Minutes on un-filtered air" (max HP) in a serious situation is better that no options at all. Who wants to get familiar with "terra firma"?

Why do RVr's increase compression ratio's and spend $$$$$ on speed mods that reduce the life of the engine for that extra edge when needed ? SECOND SUCKS that's why.

"Ram Air" is free..Use it when you need it. Close the valve when the air is dirty.

It may be interesting to note that 1/8" flange thickness on my ram air valve reduced the volumetric efficiency 8CFM (beveled and fixed) on a high end "FLOW BENCH" this week end. God forbid what 90 deg. turns and scatt tubing and filter off of the rear baffle does to air flow and volumetric efficiency.

What about the relative air of 200 MPH in flight directly on the servo that's
6" from the prop blast. Not avialable in the inner plenum.

Something to ponder...Why does a NAS car engine (360cu) produce close to700 HP. on NON supercharged engines. LYCOMING 360 produces 180 HP @2700 rpm. Volumetric efficiency for one thing.

My ram air filter system Flowed 400CFM (bench flows at 400 CFM) and when it was swithed to K&N filerted air it Flowed 388 CFM (4%loss). This was not in a warm air environment but it is a consideration when comparing it to an inefficient system such as lots of turns and angles. Throw in a scatt tube and a poor filter then compare to the incremental loss (.5") of warm air in the cowl. These are hard numbers that can be verified at LY-CON engine rebuilders in Visalia.

I still have alot to learn, but I have built a Starduster II, an RV3, RV4, two RV8's A STEWART MUSTANG, and six restorations and have learned all kinds of things with each project.

30 Years of problem solving and having fun building Experimental Aircraft is just a start in this wonderful hobby.

I have been verifying results on LY-CON'S flow bench lately and it has allowed me to focus on just one part of the incremental approach to improving volumetric efficiency.
It's hard to beleive what a little head flow work/indexing the cam/roller llifters(Lycoming) electronic ignition/ and higher compression will do. Add all of the above incremental improvements and cold air induction/ram air and $$$. WOW -

Dave Ander's addressed the cooling and airframe drag issues and his improvements showed what his RV4 machine($65,000 NASA prize) is capable of. Eat's Harmond Rockets for lunch.

LY-CON (Visalia, Ca) has spent over 10 years developing their engine improvements and now have an STC on engine case "O" rings. They have thousands of hours of adding and removing material in Flow Bench Analysis. They finally digitized the results and consistently replicate the optimum head flowing. The Haws CNC is 5 axis and is really awesome.

I have been reading the reply's on the Ram Air and find alot of Pepper Tree Analysis with out flow bench analysis or real field comparisons. (apples to apples.)

There are so many variations in each experimantal induction system in the field that unless a standard system is addressed and compared to "say a Van's airbox" the observations are meaningless.

Early on, when I was flying my RV4 I remember a trip back from Prescot Az, with Dave Anders RV4. I was having trouble keeping up at 12,500 ft. My RV4 had a smooth bottom cowl and the filtered air was taken off the right rear baffle. He had electronic ignition and an angle valve and I didn"t. I figured that I would kick the RPM up a thousand. (and lie alot). Guess what, I slowed down. Volumetric efficiency!!! Solution...went to a Van"s lower cowl scoop. Problem solved. Figure that . Before I tried ram air.

How many stories and good times in 30 years.. I have already gone on to long.

Want to go fast---- talk to Dave Anders. He De Guru on Dat stuff.

Rod
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 02-08-2009, 08:59 AM
DanH's Avatar
DanH DanH is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 08A
Posts: 9,477
Default

Hello Rod,
Thanks for checking in. Don't get the idea you're being singled out. The discussion is about the pros and cons of various intake configurations; none are perfect. I've suggested your particular configuration has one major drawback, a large loss of manifold pressure when operating on filtered air for takeoff. It is in all other respects a nice piece.

<<When in doubt open the ram air valve and have at least 1.5" over warm inner cowl air.>>

Are you confirming the system has a valve open/closed difference of 1.5 inches at runway speeds?

<<My ram air filter system Flowed 400CFM (bench flows at 400 CFM) and when it was swithed to K&N filerted air it Flowed 388 CFM (4%loss).>>

Probably a good SuperFlow bench with FlowCom and a motor controller for automatic test pressure regulation, so both CFM numbers were taken at the same test pressure (probably 28") ?
__________________
Dan Horton
RV-8 SS
Barrett IO-390
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 02-08-2009, 12:22 PM
rodbower rodbower is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 33
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanH View Post
Hello Rod,
Thanks for checking in. Don't get the idea you're being singled out. The discussion is about the pros and cons of various intake configurations; none are perfect. I've suggested your particular configuration has one major drawback, a large loss of manifold pressure when operating on filtered air for takeoff. It is in all other respects a nice piece.

<<When in doubt open the ram air valve and have at least 1.5" over warm inner cowl air.>>

Are you confirming the system has a valve open/closed difference of 1.5 inches at runway speeds?

<<My ram air filter system Flowed 400CFM (bench flows at 400 CFM) and when it was swithed to K&N filerted air it Flowed 388 CFM (4%loss).>>

Probably a good SuperFlow bench with FlowCom and a motor controller for automatic test pressure regulation, so both CFM numbers were taken at the same test pressure (probably 28") ?
Dan, over the last 3 years my system has gone through several changes. John Huff supplied the ram air valve and it was mounted directly to the tapered K&N filter. This allowed for ram air when open and warm filtered air in the closed position.
My first experience with this system resulted in a loss of .5" on the ground using inner cowl air. The flight showed a gain of 1". After flying it and removing the cowl I noticed that the treatment oil had blown onto the inner cowl surface.
This was remedied by a fiberglass cannnister to contain the overboost and resulted in a 1.0" gain at crusing altitude. If you subtract the .5" loss with filtered air the net is close to what others on this site are experiencing.

My next change was to create a bridge between the filter cannister and the 3" tube that supplied the ram air. This solved the inner air problem as both the ram and filtered air came from the same source. Problem fixed. Well almost as the package , though compact, created install problems for builders and required alot of fiberglass rework.

This led to the current aluminum cannister system and most of the install problems were resolved. There is a trade off with the inner cowl temps but not a great loss in MP rather a small loss as experienced by my customers.

I flew my first leg to OSH from Visalia to Provo UT and climed to 13,500 ft with the filtered air activated and noticed no performance issues. I also activated the filter at 14,500 ft on the way to Arlington, WA due to smoke and still had no issues. When I open the ramair at that altitude and at 2500 rpm I got fuel burn down to 6.2 gph and showed a 160k tas. Close to 30 mpg.
At 6500 ft going to West Coast flyin and 25 sq my advanced flight system showed a 191 kt tas cruise at 9.5gph

I am still learning about my new plane and can only offer my experience with my plane and point to my web testimonial of Ron Keilin in Florida(RV8). Ron flew my fiberglass system with the outside filtered air for several years and then replaced it with the alum cannister that utilizes the inner cowl air. Ron has lots of experience with both systems now and would be happy to field any questions. Gets pretty hot in Florida and Ron has not seen as a problem.

The beauty of this induction approach is the simplicity and time it takes to install. My goal is to supply a quality product that minimizes the work needed to have a flying airplane. I have just finished a complete bolt on system for the RV-10 that can be installed in one morning and the fiberglass scoop takes less that 30 min to cut and glue in. Try installing Van's filter system and keep track of the time it takes.

I have quite a few systems flying now and will share the results as they come in.
By the way the flow work was at 28" and it was really an eye opener when we tested the RSA5 and the FM200 fuel meters. I am in the process of making a video of the flow work at LY-CON and will post on my web soon.

Rod
Reply With Quote
Reply



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 04:35 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.