VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

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

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

  #41  
Old 12-20-2012, 10:55 AM
smokyray's Avatar
smokyray smokyray is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: TX32
Posts: 1,891
Default Back to the future...

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonJay View Post
Interesting history. I keep a pan under the tail of my Bucker in the hangar to catch the gunk. The Bucker always has a clean belly, well, except for the "clean" oil that manages to blow back there from my a bit leaky 2300 hour 0320. I would hate to see what the inside of the tube looks like running that far back. Thus far, no blockage. (crossing fingers)
Jon,
My Dad took flying lessons from Frank Price when we lived in Waco. My earliest flying memories were riding with Frank in a Taylorcraft doing a slow roll while the fuel check cup in his palm never moved.
Frank practiced for his airshows in his Bucker (wings built by Jim Swick) and I had a ringside seat, at the age of three. It would permanently shape my life...
I would meet his best friend Jim Swick much later in life and Jim and I became friends and shared our fondness for the T-Craft design. It's 23012 airfoil is very similar to the RV's and shared by the Bonanza, Staggerwing, King Air and T-34.

Jim's final T-Craft was literally drawn up in front of me and scratch built using sawhorses, tape measure, tubing, a level and phenomenal welding. Truly a lost art. I heard he built his M-14P powered Bucker the same way which BTW was the most amazing Aerobatic airplane I have ever flown (F16 notwithstanding). For the "T-Coupe" Jim installed a Rotec Radial and his signature inverted oil system in a truly retro modern design aimed straight at the Sportsman category sport aerobatic pilot.
True pioneers, sorely missed...

V/R
Smokey


Last "Swick-T-Coupe"

Last edited by smokyray : 12-20-2012 at 11:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 12-20-2012, 12:07 PM
Mel's Avatar
Mel Mel is online now
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dallas area
Posts: 10,769
Default

I signed off Jim's last "Swick T" in October of 2009.
Unfortunately, due to extenuating circumstances, it has still not flown.
__________________
Mel Asberry, DAR since the last century.
EAA Flight Advisor/Tech Counselor, Friend of the RV-1
Recipient of Tony Bingelis Award and Wright Brothers Master Pilot Award
USAF Vet, High School E-LSA Project Mentor.
RV-6 Flying since 1993 (sold)
<rvmel(at)icloud.com>
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 12-20-2012, 12:34 PM
JonJay's Avatar
JonJay JonJay is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Battleground
Posts: 4,348
Default

It amazes me how a thread on oil separators can tie into connections to history, people, and thier airplanes. Aviation is a small world and this site is truly blessed with the many folks that have ties to amazing things.
__________________
Smart People do Stupid things all the time. I know, I've seen me do'em.

RV6 - Builder/Flying
Bucker Jungmann
Fiat G.46 -(restoration in progress, if I have enough life left in me)
RV1 - Proud Pilot.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 01-26-2013, 05:33 PM
vic syracuse vic syracuse is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Locust Grove, GA
Posts: 2,627
Default anti splat air/oil separator installed

I don't have any performance numbers yet, as I just installed this today and have made one flight. I replaced my Airwolf Air/oil separator and added the Antisplat aero separator. As a DAR I have seen many of Allan's products on RV's and I have been really impressed, so I decided to try this one myself. It certainly is a lot less complex of an installation than the Airwolf, except for the required welding of the stub onto the exhaust system. As you can see in the photo, I did add a brace to the stub just to prevent any cracking of the exhaust pipe. It probably isn't necessary, but I'd rather have done it and not need it than to have to repair it later (like on a trip to Alaska).
I know there have been some posts related to increased HP, and I hope I get those same results, although I am not sure I will actually feel the difference since the 10 has a constant speed propeller and is already quite exhiliarating at takeoff. I currently have the oil set at 9 qts after a fresh change, so I will update here in the near future.
By the way, the kit was first class. All parts were of very high quality, and all required parts for a complete installation were there. No need to call Spruce. I like it!

Vic





__________________
Vic Syracuse

Built RV-4, RV-6, 2-RV-10's, RV-7A, RV-8, Prescott Pusher, Kitfox Model II, Kitfox Speedster, Kitfox 7 Super Sport, Just Superstol, DAR, A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor/Flight Advisor, CFII-ASMEL/ASES
Kitplanes "Unairworthy" monthly feature
EAA Sport Aviation "Checkpoints" column
EAA Homebuilt Council Chair/member EAA BOD
Author "Pre-Buy Guide for Amateur-Built Aircraft"
www.Baselegaviation.com
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 02-02-2013, 04:26 PM
Marc Bourget Marc Bourget is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Stockton, California
Posts: 296
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by plehrke View Post
It would be interesting to send a sample of what was in the seperator and a sample from the crankcase in for oil analysis. See the difference in level of contaminates. Maybe after 2 or three times, you shed some facts on the debate of returning oil to the crankcase.
I would think with reasonably fresh oil you might not see much in the way of acids, etc., as the detergent additives in the oil would "mask" their presence.

Being that most are conservative with their oil change intervals, you might never get to a point where there would be a [u]detrimental[u] buildup of acids, etc.

No "science" was employed while composing this observation, just sounds reasonable to me!

mjb
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 02-10-2013, 04:42 PM
vic syracuse vic syracuse is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Locust Grove, GA
Posts: 2,627
Default Air oil separator update

I've got about 12 hours now on the Anti-Splat spearator that I mentioned in an earlier thread, including a couple of 3 1/2 hour legs. Not a lot of time, but some interesting things I thought I would share. I have over 600 hours on this RV-10 now, so I have a pretty good feel for it's performance and behavioral characteristics.
First, the ground idle has picked up about 50-70 rpms. So much so that I need to turn it down, but am not looking forward to pulling the cowling down again so soon, so that will wait for a while.
The belly is the cleanest I have ever seen it. Prior to this on a 7-8 hour trip there would be a little film of oil on the belly. Not so anymore. This might be due to the fact that we now have it draining into the exhaust, but it sure is nice!
Last, and certainly not scientific, so I am sure I will get eaten alive on this board, but I feel pretty confident I have picked up 1-2 knots in cruise. We make this particular trip to Ohio from Atlanta, up at 9K' and back at 8K' (not any higher this time of year due to temps and icing), and I normally see an indicated TAS of 168-169 knots. Once in a while it will touch 170, but not stay there. On the trip this week end it was always a solid 170-172 knots. Both ways. Two different days. Time will tell, but if the 7-8 HP claim of Allan's for the device is true, and the old "cube root of the HP increase yields the TAS difference in cruise" then the increase I am seeing seems right, as the cube root of 7-8 HP is somewhere between 1-2 knots.

As always, your mileage may very, but I am very happy.

Vic
__________________
Vic Syracuse

Built RV-4, RV-6, 2-RV-10's, RV-7A, RV-8, Prescott Pusher, Kitfox Model II, Kitfox Speedster, Kitfox 7 Super Sport, Just Superstol, DAR, A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor/Flight Advisor, CFII-ASMEL/ASES
Kitplanes "Unairworthy" monthly feature
EAA Sport Aviation "Checkpoints" column
EAA Homebuilt Council Chair/member EAA BOD
Author "Pre-Buy Guide for Amateur-Built Aircraft"
www.Baselegaviation.com
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 02-10-2013, 05:47 PM
N427EF N427EF is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,516
Default Interesting!

Interesting finding and much the same on my 10 but the vacuum reading on the crankcase is not as low as advertised unless the reed valve is located in an exhaust header, see Dan Horton's posts.
http://www.vansairforce.com/communit...oil+sep&page=7
Allan Neemo has you weld in the stub just where you have it and I am still hoping to hear from him on exactly how he achieved 5 or 6 inches of vacuum???
He is pretty quick on responses usually but has not responded so far.
Maybe someone can flush him out
__________________
Ernst Freitag
RV-8 finished (sold)
RV-10 Flyer 600 plus hours
Running on E10 mogas
Don't believe everything you know.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 02-15-2013, 10:47 AM
PerfTech's Avatar
PerfTech PerfTech is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Redlands, Ca.
Posts: 1,458
Talking Hope This Helps Clairify!!!!!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by N427EF View Post
Interesting finding and much the same on my 10 but the vacuum reading on the crankcase is not as low as advertised unless the reed valve is located in an exhaust header, see Dan Horton's posts.
http://www.vansairforce.com/communit...oil+sep&page=7
Allan Neemo has you weld in the stub just where you have it and I am still hoping to hear from him on exactly how he achieved 5 or 6 inches of vacuum???
He is pretty quick on responses usually but has not responded so far.
Maybe someone can flush him out
....Sorry to see you were awaiting a response and I was unaware of your question. I will try to answer a couple of questions in regards to the vacuum readings. First of all it is not possible to measure crankcase pressure or vacuum with a mechanical gauge as it can't begin to operate fast enough and only shows some sort of average less its own mechanical errors and limitations. We use a piezo crystal sensor to record the pressure waves on the dyno. The major portion of the pressure reduction is accomplished via the pumping action of the crankcase as it volume changes throughout the rotation of the engine. The valve allows air to exit but not enter, thus creating a pressure drop. The tube welded into the exhaust will supply only a minor part of the pressure reduction and mainly allows the vacuum to be created by the crankcase itself. The number of exhaust pressure pulses is not important and the valve can be installed in only one pipe on a four pipe exhaust system. When the engine is operating at 2500 RPM there are 1250 exhaust pulses per cyl and this is adequate to keep the valve open. It is important that the valve be installed in a vertical location (not leaning more than 45 deg.) as this will prevent puddling in the valve after shutdown of the engine. Second thing in discussion is the valve failing and what would happen. In the 33 years we have been using and marketing this valve we have never seen a failure with thousands sold and in use. But, hypothetically if one were to fail it would fail open only as it is a reed valve. This would create exactly the same condition as if you had no valve in line and would revert back to stock breathing. The only consequence would be a power loss in proportion the experienced gain. As for the valve sticking closed causing some damage, that is virtually an impossibility. This installation has a multitude of beneficial advantages with no negative effects and only serves to make the flying and maintenance of your engine less troublesome and add some efficiency and or performance to your flying. Thanks, Allan....
__________________
Allan Nimmo
AntiSplatAero.com
Innovative Aircraft Safety
Products, Tools & Services
Info@AntiSplatAero.com
Southern California (KREI)
RV-9A / Edge-540
(909) 824-1020
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 02-15-2013, 01:12 PM
DanH's Avatar
DanH DanH is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 08A
Posts: 9,500
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PerfTech View Post
The major portion of the pressure reduction is accomplished via the pumping action of the crankcase as it volume changes throughout the rotation of the engine. The valve allows air to exit but not enter, thus creating a pressure drop.
It's an opposed engine. There is no change in total crankcase volume through each complete revolution, only a change in the case volume under each opposed cylinder pair. As the case volumes are connected, one increases as the other decreases; they simply pump back and forth.
__________________
Dan Horton
RV-8 SS
Barrett IO-390
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 02-15-2013, 05:04 PM
PerfTech's Avatar
PerfTech PerfTech is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Redlands, Ca.
Posts: 1,458
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanH View Post
It's an opposed engine. There is no change in total crankcase volume through each complete revolution, only a change in the case volume under each opposed cylinder pair. As the case volumes are connected, one increases as the other decreases; they simply pump back and forth.
....In theory that is correct, but if you do as we do and install a temporary gauge on the crankcase you will see that this is not the case. The pressure fluctuates considerably when the engine is running. If you crank your engine over with the starter (mags off) and place your hand over the breather you will feel the engine suck and blow on your hand as described. Try it! regards, Allan....
__________________
Allan Nimmo
AntiSplatAero.com
Innovative Aircraft Safety
Products, Tools & Services
Info@AntiSplatAero.com
Southern California (KREI)
RV-9A / Edge-540
(909) 824-1020
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 08:02 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.