VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

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

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

  #21  
Old 07-06-2017, 03:45 PM
Sig600 Sig600 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: KRTS
Posts: 1,797
Default

Someone smashed your lower cowling

Like to see more pictures of the cowling work that was required.
__________________
Next?, TBD
IAR-823, SOLD
RV-8, SOLD
RV-7, SOLD
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-06-2017, 09:40 PM
Flandy10 Flandy10 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Peachtree City, GA
Posts: 85
Default Cowling Modification

So, how do you take a standard Van's cowl and transform it into something that will work with a turbo charged, intercooled diesel. Have you got 8 months- Lets start with the new requirements- 15 inch spinner, intercooler, oil cooler 2.5 times standard size, and others.

Start with the spinner change



Another reason for the spread, this high pressure fuel line (5,000psi+) made contact with the original cowling
Not anymore

Repeat with bottom cowl and throw in a large amount of expanding foam- fun stuff


Shape


Glass


Remove old lower section and graft on new


And that's just the beginning.....
__________________
Scott Flandermeyer
Rv-10 TDI #40816
85hrs and still having fun.
Fayettevile, GA

2017 VAF Donation complete

Last edited by Flandy10 : 07-07-2017 at 01:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-06-2017, 10:58 PM
kgood kgood is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Boulder City, NV
Posts: 149
Default

I'm jealous! Can't wait to hear more. It has been a lot of work, but someone's gotta do it!

Kurt
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-07-2017, 03:14 PM
Sig600 Sig600 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: KRTS
Posts: 1,797
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flandy10 View Post
Here are a few pictures of the installation.



I'm assuming one of these is the oil cooler, the other is the intercooler? Any problems on either with such a huge divergent opening of the plenums?

I'm a big fan of the potential for diesel... really cheering for you on this one (because I want to plagiarize it).
__________________
Next?, TBD
IAR-823, SOLD
RV-8, SOLD
RV-7, SOLD

Last edited by Sig600 : 07-07-2017 at 03:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-07-2017, 05:27 PM
Flandy10 Flandy10 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Peachtree City, GA
Posts: 85
Default

The intercooler is on the right and the oil cooler is on the left.

The ducting is working pretty well, but with anything, there is room for improvement during the hot summer days.
__________________
Scott Flandermeyer
Rv-10 TDI #40816
85hrs and still having fun.
Fayettevile, GA

2017 VAF Donation complete
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-08-2017, 02:15 PM
Flandy10 Flandy10 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Peachtree City, GA
Posts: 85
Default More Performance Numbers

G3x recorded 1:47 total time. I figured airborne 1:34 and total burn per the truck meter---12 gallons. Back on level ground in hangar, I sticked the tanks to verify fillup- needed another .5 gallon in one tank. So--12.5 total burn. Fuel burn at 12500 was between 7.5 and 8.0 GPH

Flight profile--climb to 5500 till clear of Class B then continue to 12500. 30 min max cruise. Decided on way down to stop every thousand to check speed numbers.

The following numbers were taken from the data file- let speed stabilize and eyeballed an average- Not the fastest and not the slowest--trying to be honest with the numbers.

Altitude ----IAS ---- TAS ---MAP
12500------127----157-----57
10500------128----154-----60
9500-------135-----158-----60
8500-------136-----158-----60
7500-------132-----151----61
6500-------135-----151----61
5500-------151-----167----76
4500-------155----168-----76


Why the big increase in MAP below 6500? The short version is ----The turbo on this pre-production engine didn't come with a speed sensor (and no way to retrofit one either). So to allow operations above 6000, CMI felt it was prudent to limit the MAP to the "B" model power numbers to prevent overspeeding the turbine.

There is one more test planned---side by side flight with a standard -10 to compare performance numbers.
__________________
Scott Flandermeyer
Rv-10 TDI #40816
85hrs and still having fun.
Fayettevile, GA

2017 VAF Donation complete
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-08-2017, 04:27 PM
rv6ejguy's Avatar
rv6ejguy rv6ejguy is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 4,025
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flandy10 View Post
G3x recorded 1:47 total time. I figured airborne 1:34 and total burn per the truck meter---12 gallons. Back on level ground in hangar, I sticked the tanks to verify fillup- needed another .5 gallon in one tank. So--12.5 total burn. Fuel burn at 12500 was between 7.5 and 8.0 GPH

Flight profile--climb to 5500 till clear of Class B then continue to 12500. 30 min max cruise. Decided on way down to stop every thousand to check speed numbers.

The following numbers were taken from the data file- let speed stabilize and eyeballed an average- Not the fastest and not the slowest--trying to be honest with the numbers.

Altitude ----IAS ---- TAS ---MAP
12500------127----157-----57
10500------128----154-----60
9500-------135-----158-----60
8500-------136-----158-----60
7500-------132-----151----61
6500-------135-----151----61
5500-------151-----167----76
4500-------155----168-----76


Why the big increase in MAP below 6500? The short version is ----The turbo on this pre-production engine didn't come with a speed sensor (and no way to retrofit one either). So to allow operations above 6000, CMI felt it was prudent to limit the MAP to the "B" model power numbers to prevent overspeeding the turbine.

There is one more test planned---side by side flight with a standard -10 to compare performance numbers.
Looks like pretty good total burn for that mission profile. Around 25-30% lower volume burn per hour in cruise against a well sorted injected 9 to 1 CR Lyc 540 running LOP with EIs. About 12-15% lower burn per unit fuel weight.

Most reports seem to show 9.5-12 gph LOP on injected 540s, depending on power settings but I'd invite any RV10 guys to weigh in with your numbers for comparison.

In cruise at least, a solid $15+/hr. cost savings using the average prices here: http://www.airnav.com/fuel/report.html Jet vs. 100LL.

The side by side will show the true fuel cost delta for for the complete mission. That will be very interesting. Hopefully you'll be comparing with an injected Lycoming with EIs running LOP, not a carbed one running ROP...

I'm curious as to what sort of fuel burn and MAP you're seeing in the descent?

I appreciate the amount of work that went into the installation. Kudos there. Cool project!
__________________

Ross Farnham, Calgary, Alberta
Turbo Subaru EJ22, Marcotte M-300, IVO, RV6A C-GVZX flying from CYBW- 416.6 hrs. on the Hobbs,
RV10 95% built- Sold 2016
http://www.sdsefi.com/aircraft.html
http://sdsefi.com/cpi.htm


Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-08-2017, 05:37 PM
Flandy10 Flandy10 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Peachtree City, GA
Posts: 85
Default Descent planning

Ross,

On this flight, I just maintained the cruise power and set up a 750fpm descent. From 12500 down to 6000, those MP settings equate to about 155-160Kias descent. I'm going to make a guess that with fuel flow for 57"MP at about 8gph, it is approaching 8.5 at 62"MP. Again, just a guess.

The ability to accurately measure FF over the entire RPM range has been an exercise in futility. The Red cube system cannot read the idle flow rates (I see 2.5 to 45gph regularly during taxi- it should be >.5gph) and its inflight variation can be +/- .5 to 1 gph at any given second. So I'm looking for a K-factor that comes close. I have looked at other systems that work accurately with diesel generators or boats, but nothing is compatible with aviation's analog inputs.
__________________
Scott Flandermeyer
Rv-10 TDI #40816
85hrs and still having fun.
Fayettevile, GA

2017 VAF Donation complete
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-08-2017, 06:25 PM
rv6ejguy's Avatar
rv6ejguy rv6ejguy is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 4,025
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flandy10 View Post
Ross,

On this flight, I just maintained the cruise power and set up a 750fpm descent. From 12500 down to 6000, those MP settings equate to about 155-160Kias descent. I'm going to make a guess that with fuel flow for 57"MP at about 8gph, it is approaching 8.5 at 62"MP. Again, just a guess.

The ability to accurately measure FF over the entire RPM range has been an exercise in futility. The Red cube system cannot read the idle flow rates (I see 2.5 to 45gph regularly during taxi- it should be >.5gph) and its inflight variation can be +/- .5 to 1 gph at any given second. So I'm looking for a K-factor that comes close. I have looked at other systems that work accurately with diesel generators or boats, but nothing is compatible with aviation's analog inputs.
Interesting. Surprised at such high MAP in the descent. Certainly different from a turbo SI engine. Is there a minimum MAP they recommend in flight to keep the fires lit?

They don't have any FF signal available out of the FADEC?
__________________

Ross Farnham, Calgary, Alberta
Turbo Subaru EJ22, Marcotte M-300, IVO, RV6A C-GVZX flying from CYBW- 416.6 hrs. on the Hobbs,
RV10 95% built- Sold 2016
http://www.sdsefi.com/aircraft.html
http://sdsefi.com/cpi.htm


Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-08-2017, 06:28 PM
rv7charlie rv7charlie is offline
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pocahontas MS
Posts: 2,333
Default

Hi Scott,

Have you looked at the older style FloScan sensors? They make them specifically for diesel engines (marine), and as far as I know, their K factor is similar to the gas version. Therefore, they should work with your gauge/EFIS, since (again, as far as I know), the FloScan & red cube sensors are supposed to interchange.

Just a thought,

Charlie
http://www.floscan.com/dnloads/floscanfinal.pdf
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 04:15 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.