Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Contact detail & Help

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Contact detail & Help
Goto page Previous 1, 2

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Europa-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

kheindl(at)msn.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 10:46 am Post subject: Contact detail & Help

Hi Frans,

I have been following your developments with great interest and I think that the end result is just plain amazing. Your Europa must be the slickest and fastest in this Universe.

Now, top speed is very useful for testing drag improvements, but you don't cruise at those speeds, do you ? When you are touring, what are your preferred settings regarding speed, MP, rpm etc., and exactly what is your fuel consumption then.

If the rest of us mortals wanted to implement some of your changes without too much expense, what would you recommend ? Speed isn't all that important to me, but improvements in cooling and under-cowl temperatures would be very beneficial. What is the part number for the heat exchanger and exactly where did you install it ?

I recently had a look at a CT with 912s. It has a very neat fwf package. I noticed that it also has larger rads back-to-back, tucked in under its belly ahead of the exhaust, but at an angle of 45 degrees. I also noticed an oil thermostat, and a pulsation damper on top of the engine for the fuel flow gauge (I could never get that to work on my engine). It had 800 hours on it but still looked brand new. It also had a very small (8AH?) battery.

Karl

 	  Quote: 	
		   Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 13:31:53 +0200

 From: frans(at)privatepilots.nl

 To: europa-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Re: Contact detail & Help

 --> Europa-List message posted by: Frans Veldman <frans(at)privatepilots.nl>

 On 06/23/2012 12:01 AM, Bud Yerly wrote:

 > Lovely design...

 Thanks!

 > However, my comments are based on an installation that is stock.  Takes

 > 40 hours from openning the box to engine fully installed and ready for

 > start and is reapeatable with only the parts in the box.

 My solution would be even faster to build, if they would change the

 contents of the box of course. It puzzles me why the contents of the box

 has not been changed long time ago, when people started to complain

 about inadequate cooling.

 > Many do not care to have any auto systems such as heat exchangers which

 > may malfunction.

 There is no auto system involved. The heat exchanger is just two fluid

 channels thermo coupled to each other. No moving parts, no electronic

 parts, just similar to a radiator, but now with two fluid channels

 instead of one fluid and one gas channel.

 > By all means, an extra hundred hours and cost will get you those extra 9

 > knots.    It just costs money and time.

 This argument is silly. Then why applying a finish on the airplane and

 not painting the raw fabric? It just costs money and time to apply a

 finish, for only 9 knots of speed or so.

 9 knots of speed:

 1) The difference between a mono and tri gear.

 2) equals to 10% fuel savings when flying with equal speeds.

 10% fuel saving means:

 1) About 10% lower operational costs.

 2) About 5 Kg's (10 lbs) of weight saving for the same flying distance

 because you need to carry less fuel.

 3) A 10% larger range on a full tank.

 > The airplane is 20,000 compromises flying in close formation....Choose

 > your changes wisely. 

 If I wanted a stock airplane and didn't care about speed, I would

 probably be flying a Cessna 152.

&gt Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,

&gt========================

frans(at)privatepilots.nl
Guest

Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 12:15 pm Post subject: Contact detail & Help

Hi Karl,



 	  Quote: 	
		   I have been following your developments with great interest and I think

 that the end result is just plain amazing.


	


Thanks!



 	  Quote: 	
		   Now, top speed is very useful for testing drag improvements, but you

 don't cruise at those speeds, do you ? When you are touring, what are

 your preferred settings regarding speed, MP, rpm etc., and exactly what

 is your fuel consumption then.


	


I found the sweet spot of the aircraft is with 27 inch MAP, where it

usually cruises with a speed somewhere between 120 and 130 KIAS,

depending on C of G and some other obscure factors. Fuel consumption

used to be 16 to 17 liters per hour, but I have observed this year that

the fuel consumption has increased to 18 liters per hour. Maybe the

carbs need an overhaul or so.

RPM is usually between 4800 and 5000 RPM, this feels best for the

engine. I have a two blade prop and at lower RPM's it feels less smooth.

Of course actual settings depend on various circumstances. With a strong

head wind we usually advance the throttle a bit, with a tail wind we

enjoy the lower fuel consumption of a lower power setting. We fly 90% of

our cruising with power between 26 and 28 inch.

With higher power settings the fuel consumption goes up faster than the

gain in speed. Other than in a car, a higher speed doesn't give any

other feeling than a lower speed, it just gives the same sensation. One

hour flying is still one hour flying. On a 3-hour trip I rather enjoy an

additional 10 minutes flying and have a free meal than just cranking up

the fuel consumption, paying more for less fun. AVGAS can be close to 3

Euro's per liter over here, so saving 10 liters on a trip can save

enough money to have a dinner for two!  I love telling friends that

flying there isn't more expensive than getting there by car.



 	  Quote: 	
		   If the rest of us mortals wanted to implement some of your changes

 without too much expense, what would you recommend ?


	


There isn't much money involved actually. The radiator costs about 300

Euro's, the heat exchanger a bit less. You can do without the heat

exchanger, I have been flying one summer with the stock oil radiator fed

by a 2" Scat tube via a wedge diffuser. Apart from the long warm up time

it was quite an improvement over the tandem setup. Best thing to do is

to scrap the stock coolant radiator, dog house, duct and associated

hardware and just install a thin radiator in a 45 degree angle in front

of the exhaust and turbo.



The main hurdle here is to shape a new underside of the cowling. You

have to be brave enough to cut the dog house away, and then insert a

block of blue foam and start cutting, rasping, sanding until you have

the shape you desire. Anyone who wants to make a mold out of my cowling

is welcome to do so, provided I'm allowed to use that mold to make a new

light weight carbon cowling for myself. 



BTW I'm not the only one who devised something like this. See the

attached picture. This is another configuration with a thin radiator in

a 45 degree angle, although it lacks a cowl flap and heat exchanger for

the oil. (Oil is cooled by a radiator, fed by a NASA duct on the port

side, you can see it on the picture). Also this owner claims very good

results with his setup on his 914 engine. The key really is to use a

thin radiator and mount it at the belly so the "used" air can take the

heat of the exhaust with it, and enjoy the benefits of a very sleek

cowling, excellent cooling, low pressure losses, and minimal cooling drag.



Anyway, my cooling design is not an exclusive invention of me but the

combination of ideas and experiments of multiple Europa owners who

believed that the cooling of the Europa could be improved other than by

using draggy brute force solutions.



 	  Quote: 	
		   What is the part number for the

 heat exchanger and exactly where did you install it ?


	


See picture, taken from under the engine. The heat exchanger is mounted

behind the engine. This was the first setup, with the stock coolant

radiator, hence the configuration of the coolant hoses pointing

downwards. In the current design the hose routing has been changed to

accomodate for the thin belly radiator.

If you really want to go this way, contact me privately for more info.

One caveat though: this heat exchanger has very thin canals and is not

compatible with Evans coolant due to its viscosity. I use it with 50/50

without problems.



 	  Quote: 	
		   It also had a very

 small (8AH?) battery.


	


I also have a small 8Ah battery, never needed anything more than that.

But I have a second alternator (mounted on the vaccuum pad) so I don't

need the battery as a backup during flight, I just need it for starting.



Frans

20110420_003.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

579.03 KB

Viewed:

3969 Time(s)

Cowling_Jens_5.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

64.35 KB

Viewed:

3969 Time(s)

max.cointe(at)eliops.fr
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 5:10 am Post subject: Contact detail & Help

Hi Frans,



I'm a bit puzzle by your first picture: are the blue pipes directly

connected to that flat radiator? I think these end at the bottom level of

the exhaust, so what is the shape of the radiator...

Other question: have you experienced (or do you think there is) differences

on that topic between 914 and 912?



Max  Cointe

F-PMLH TriGear Kit #560

912ULS Airmaster 420 hours

mcointe(at)free.fr



-----Message d'origine-----

De : owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com

[mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] De la part de Frans Veldman

Envoyé : lundi 25 juin 2012 23:10 À : europa-list(at)matronics.com Objet : Re:

Re: Contact detail & Help



Hi Karl,



 	  Quote: 	
		   I have been following your developments with great interest and I 

 think that the end result is just plain amazing.


	


Thanks!



 	  Quote: 	
		   Now, top speed is very useful for testing drag improvements, but you 

 don't cruise at those speeds, do you ? When you are touring, what are 

 your preferred settings regarding speed, MP, rpm etc., and exactly 

 what is your fuel consumption then.


	


I found the sweet spot of the aircraft is with 27 inch MAP, where it usually

cruises with a speed somewhere between 120 and 130 KIAS, depending on C of G

and some other obscure factors. Fuel consumption used to be 16 to 17 liters

per hour, but I have observed this year that the fuel consumption has

increased to 18 liters per hour. Maybe the carbs need an overhaul or so.

RPM is usually between 4800 and 5000 RPM, this feels best for the engine. I

have a two blade prop and at lower RPM's it feels less smooth.

Of course actual settings depend on various circumstances. With a strong

head wind we usually advance the throttle a bit, with a tail wind we enjoy

the lower fuel consumption of a lower power setting. We fly 90% of our

cruising with power between 26 and 28 inch.

With higher power settings the fuel consumption goes up faster than the gain

in speed. Other than in a car, a higher speed doesn't give any other feeling

than a lower speed, it just gives the same sensation. One hour flying is

still one hour flying. On a 3-hour trip I rather enjoy an additional 10

minutes flying and have a free meal than just cranking up the fuel

consumption, paying more for less fun. AVGAS can be close to 3 Euro's per

liter over here, so saving 10 liters on a trip can save enough money to have

a dinner for two!  I love telling friends that flying there isn't more

expensive than getting there by car.



 	  Quote: 	
		   If the rest of us mortals wanted to implement some of your changes 

 without too much expense, what would you recommend ?


	


There isn't much money involved actually. The radiator costs about 300

Euro's, the heat exchanger a bit less. You can do without the heat

exchanger, I have been flying one summer with the stock oil radiator fed by

a 2" Scat tube via a wedge diffuser. Apart from the long warm up time it was

quite an improvement over the tandem setup. Best thing to do is to scrap the

stock coolant radiator, dog house, duct and associated hardware and just

install a thin radiator in a 45 degree angle in front of the exhaust and

turbo.



The main hurdle here is to shape a new underside of the cowling. You have to

be brave enough to cut the dog house away, and then insert a block of blue

foam and start cutting, rasping, sanding until you have the shape you

desire. Anyone who wants to make a mold out of my cowling is welcome to do

so, provided I'm allowed to use that mold to make a new light weight carbon

cowling for myself. 



BTW I'm not the only one who devised something like this. See the attached

picture. This is another configuration with a thin radiator in a 45 degree

angle, although it lacks a cowl flap and heat exchanger for the oil. (Oil is

cooled by a radiator, fed by a NASA duct on the port side, you can see it on

the picture). Also this owner claims very good results with his setup on his

914 engine. The key really is to use a thin radiator and mount it at the

belly so the "used" air can take the heat of the exhaust with it, and enjoy

the benefits of a very sleek cowling, excellent cooling, low pressure

losses, and minimal cooling drag.



Anyway, my cooling design is not an exclusive invention of me but the

combination of ideas and experiments of multiple Europa owners who believed

that the cooling of the Europa could be improved other than by using draggy

brute force solutions.



 	  Quote: 	
		   What is the part number for the

 heat exchanger and exactly where did you install it ?


	


See picture, taken from under the engine. The heat exchanger is mounted

behind the engine. This was the first setup, with the stock coolant

radiator, hence the configuration of the coolant hoses pointing downwards.

In the current design the hose routing has been changed to accomodate for

the thin belly radiator.

If you really want to go this way, contact me privately for more info.

One caveat though: this heat exchanger has very thin canals and is not

compatible with Evans coolant due to its viscosity. I use it with 50/50

without problems.



 	  Quote: 	
		   It also had a very

 small (8AH?) battery.


	


I also have a small 8Ah battery, never needed anything more than that.

But I have a second alternator (mounted on the vaccuum pad) so I don't need

the battery as a backup during flight, I just need it for starting.



Frans

kheindl(at)msn.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 5:57 am Post subject: Contact detail & Help

Hi Frans,

Thank you for the additional information. I will follow your advice, but probably not until next year.If you are going to publish in the flyer, then some good pictures please of the radiator installations.Also, a source for the rads.

You mentioned that the prop is not as smooth at lower rpm's. I have the same prop and I discovered a long time ago that the carbs need to be in sync 100% for a two-bladed prop. With three blades the carbs would need to be out of sync quite a bit before you would notice. I know, because I tried it by putting my original Warp Drive back on.

Karl



[quote] Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 23:09:34 +0200

 From: frans(at)privatepilots.nl

 To: europa-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Re: Contact detail & Help

 

 Hi Karl,

 

 > I have been following your developments with great interest and I think

 > that the end result is just plain amazing.

 

 Thanks!

 

 > Now, top speed is very useful for testing drag improvements, but you

 > don't cruise at those speeds, do you ? When you are touring, what are

 > your preferred settings regarding speed, MP, rpm etc., and exactly what

 > is your fuel consumption then.

 

 I found the sweet spot of the aircraft is with 27 inch MAP, where it

 usually cruises with a speed somewhere between 120 and 130 KIAS,

 depending on C of G and some other obscure factors. Fuel consumption

 used to be 16 to 17 liters per hour, but I have observed this year that

 the fuel consumption has increased to 18 liters per hour. Maybe the

 carbs need an overhaul or so.

 RPM is usually between 4800 and 5000 RPM, this feels best for the

 engine. I have a two blade prop and at lower RPM's it feels less smooth.

 Of course actual settings depend on various circumstances. With a strong

 head wind we usually advance the throttle a bit, with a tail wind we

 enjoy the lower fuel consumption of a lower power setting. We fly 90% of

 our cruising with power between 26 and 28 inch.

 With higher power settings the fuel consumption goes up faster than the

 gain in speed. Other than in a car, a higher speed doesn't give any

 other feeling than a lower speed, it just gives the same sensation. One

 hour flying is still one hour flying. On a 3-hour trip I rather enjoy an

 additional 10 minutes flying and have a free meal than just cranking up

 the fuel consumption, paying more for less fun. AVGAS can be close to 3

 Euro's per liter over here, so saving 10 liters on a trip can save

 enough money to have a dinner for two!  I love telling friends that

 flying there isn't more expensive than getting there by car.

 

 > If the rest of us mortals wanted to implement some of your changes

 > without too much expense, what would you recommend ?

 

 There isn't much money involved actually. The radiator costs about 300

 Euro's, the heat exchanger a bit less. You can do without the heat

 exchanger, I have been flying one summer with the stock oil radiator fed

 by a 2" Scat tube via a wedge diffuser. Apart from the long warm up time

 it was quite an improvement over the tandem setup. Best thing to do is

 to scrap the stock coolant radiator, dog house, duct and associated

 hardware and just install a thin radiator in a 45 degree angle in front

 of the exhaust and turbo.

 

 The main hurdle here is to shape a new underside of the cowling. You

 have to be brave enough to cut the dog house away, and then insert a

 block of blue foam and start cutting, rasping, sanding until you have

 the shape you desire. Anyone who wants to make a mold out of my cowling

 is welcome to do so, provided I'm allowed to use that mold to make a new

 light weight carbon cowling for myself. 

 

 BTW I'm not the only one who devised something like this. See the

 attached picture. This is another configuration with a thin radiator in

 a 45 degree angle, although it lacks a cowl flap and heat exchanger for

 the oil. (Oil is cooled by a radiator, fed by a NASA duct on the port

 side, you can see it on the picture). Also this owner claims very good

 results with his setup on his 914 engine. The key really is to use a

 thin radiator and mount it at the belly so the "used" air can take the

 heat of the exhaust with it, and enjoy the benefits of a very sleek

 cowlng, excellent cooling, low pressure losses, and minimal cooling drag.

 

 Anyway, my cooling design is not an exclusive invention of me but the

 combination of ideas and experiments of multiple Europa owners who

 believed that the cooling of the Europa could be improved other than by

 using draggy brute force solutions.

 

 > What is the part number for the

 > heat exchanger and exactly where did you install it ?

 

 See picture, taken from under the engine. The heat exchanger is mounted

 behind the engine. This was the first setup, with the stock coolant

 radiator, hence the configuration of the coolant hoses pointing

 downwards. In the current design the hose routing has been changed to

 accomodate for the thin belly radiator.

 If you really want to go this way, contact me privately for more info.

 One caveat though: this heat exchanger has very thin canals and is not

 compatible with Evans coolant due to its viscosity. I use it with 50/50

 without problems.

 

 > It also had a very

 > small (8AH?) battery.

 

 I also have a small 8Ah battery, never needed anything more than that.

 But I have a second alternator (mounted on the vaccuum pad) so I don't

 need the battery as a backup during flight, I just need it for starting

grahamsingleton(at)btinte
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 7:37 am Post subject: Contact detail & Help

Karl

3 blades will always be smoother because when the 2 blades are horizontal each blade sees a 

different AoA, especially with high angles of attack. This causes different thrist on the blades resulting 

in yawing oscillation of the airplane.

Graham

        From: Karl Heindl <kheindl(at)msn.com>

 To: europa-list(at)matronics.com 

 Sent: Tuesday, 26 June 2012, 14:57

 Subject: RE: Re: Contact detail & Help

  

 

    Hi Frans,



Thank you for the additional information. I will follow your advice, but probably not until next year.

If you are going to publish in the flyer, then some good pictures please of the radiator installations.

Also, a source for the rads.

You mentioned that the prop is not as smooth at lower rpm's. I have the same prop and I discovered a long time ago that the carbs need to be in sync 100% for a two-bladed prop. With three blades the carbs would need to be out of sync quite a bit before you would notice. I know, because I tried it by putting my original Warp Drive back on.

Karl





 	  Quote: 	
		   Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 23:09:34 +0200

 From: frans(at)privatepilots.nl

 To: europa-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Re: Contact detail & Help

 

 Hi  Karl,

 

 > I have been following your developments with great interest and I think

 > that the end result is just plain amazing.

 

 Thanks!

 

 > Now, top speed is very useful for testing drag improvements, but you

 > don't cruise at those speeds, do you ? When you are touring, what are

 > your preferred settings regarding speed, MP, rpm etc., and exactly what

 > is your fuel consumption then.

 

 I found the sweet spot of the aircraft is with 27 inch MAP, where it

 usually cruises with a speed somewhere between 120 and 130 KIAS,

 depending on C of G and some other obscure factors. Fuel consumption

 used to be 16 to 17 liters per hour, but I have observed this year that

 the fuel consumption has increased to 18 liters per hour. Maybe the

 carbs need an overhaul or so.

 RPM is usually between 4800 and 5000 RPM,  this feels best for the

 engine. I have a two blade prop and at lower RPM's it feels less smooth.

 Of course actual settings depend on various circumstances. With a strong

 head wind we usually advance the throttle a bit, with a tail wind we

 enjoy the lower fuel consumption of a lower power setting. We fly 90% of

 our cruising with power between 26 and 28 inch.

 With higher power settings the fuel consumption goes up faster than the

 gain in speed. Other than in a car, a higher speed doesn't give any

 other feeling than a lower speed, it just gives the same sensation. One

 hour flying is still one hour flying. On a 3-hour trip I rather enjoy an

 additional 10 minutes flying and have a free meal than just cranking up

 the fuel consumption, paying more for less fun. AVGAS can be close to 3

 Euro's per liter over here, so saving 10 liters on a trip can save

 enough  money to have a dinner for two!  I love telling friends that

 flying there isn't more expensive than getting there by car.

 

 > If the rest of us mortals wanted to implement some of your changes

 > without too much expense, what would you recommend ?

 

 There isn't much money involved actually. The radiator costs about 300

 Euro's, the heat exchanger a bit less. You can do without the heat

 exchanger, I have been flying one summer with the stock oil radiator fed

 by a 2" Scat tube via a wedge diffuser. Apart from the long warm up time

 it was quite an improvement over the tandem setup. Best thing to do is

 to scrap the stock coolant radiator, dog house, duct and associated

 hardware and just install a thin radiator in a 45 degree angle in front

 of the exhaust and turbo.

 

 The main hurdle here is to shape a new underside of the cowling.  You

 have to be brave enough to cut the dog house away, and then insert a

 block of blue foam and start cutting, rasping, sanding until you have

 the shape you desire. Anyone who wants to make a mold out of my cowling

 is welcome to do so, provided I'm allowed to use that mold to make a new

 light weight carbon cowling for myself. 

 

 BTW I'm not the only one who devised something like this. See the

 attached picture. This is another configuration with a thin radiator in

 a 45 degree angle, although it lacks a cowl flap and heat exchanger for

 the oil. (Oil is cooled by a radiator, fed by a NASA duct on the port

 side, you can see it on the picture). Also this owner claims very good

 results with his setup on his 914 engine. The key really is to use a

 thin radiator and mount it at the belly so the "used" air can take the

 heat of the exhaust with it,  and enjoy the benefits of a very sleek

 cowlng, excellent cooling, low pressure losses, and minimal cooling drag.

 

 Anyway, my cooling design is not an exclusive invention of me but the

 combination of ideas and experiments of multiple Europa owners who

 believed that the cooling of the Europa could be improved other than by

 using draggy brute force solutions.

 

 > What is the part number for the

 > heat exchanger and exactly where did you install it ?

 

 See picture, taken from under the engine. The heat exchanger is mounted

 behind the engine. This was the first setup, with the stock coolant

 radiator, hence the configuration of the coolant hoses pointing

 downwards. In the current design the hose routing has been changed to

 accomodate for the thin belly radiator.

 If you really want to go this way, contact me privately for more  info.

 One caveat though: this heat exchanger has very thin canals and is not

 compatible with Evans coolant due to its viscosity. I use it with 50/50

 without problems.

 

 > It also had a very

 > small (8AH?) battery.

 

 I also have a small 8Ah battery, never needed anything more than that.

 But I have a second alternator (mounted on the vaccuum pad) so I don't

 need the battery as a backup during flight, I just need it for starting.

 

 Frans


	




 		 	   		  

  [quote]http://www.matronics.com/Naviet="_blank" href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics-> [b]

davidjoyce(at)doctors.org
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 9:36 am Post subject: Contact detail & Help

Graham, In my innocence I thought that the plane was 

designed so that in normal cruise attitude the engine axis 

was horizontal and the blades at equal AOA

Regards, David Joyce, G-XSDJ

On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:37:01 +0100 (BST)

  GRAHAM SINGLETON <grahamsingleton(at)btinternet.com> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   Karl

 3 blades will always be smoother because when the 2 

blades are horizontal each blade sees a 

 different AoA, especially with high angles of attack. 

This causes different thrist on the blades resulting 

 in yawing oscillation of the airplane.

 Graham

 

 

 ________________________________

 From: Karl Heindl <kheindl(at)msn.com>

 To: europa-list(at)matronics.com 

 Sent: Tuesday, 26 June 2012, 14:57

 Subject: RE: Re: Contact detail & Help

 

 

 

 Hi Frans,

 

 Thank you for the additional information. I will follow 

your advice, but probably not until next year.

 If you are going to publish in the flyer, then some good 

pictures please of the radiator installations.

 Also, a source for the rads.

 

 You mentioned that the prop is not as smooth at lower 

rpm's. I have the same prop and I discovered a long time 

ago that the carbs need to be in sync 100% for a 

two-bladed prop. With three blades the carbs would need 

to be out of sync quite a bit before you would notice. I 

know, because I tried it by putting my original Warp 

Drive back on.

 

 Karl

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

> Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 23:09:34 +0200

> From: frans(at)privatepilots.nl

> To: europa-list(at)matronics.com

> Subject: Re: Re: Contact detail & Help

> 

> Hi Karl,

> 

> > I have been following your developments with great 

>interest and I think

> > that the end result is just plain amazing.

> 

> Thanks!

> 

> > Now, top speed is very useful for testing drag 

>improvements, but you

> > don't cruise at those speeds, do you ? When you are 

>touring, what are

> > your preferred settings regarding speed, MP, rpm etc., 

>and exactly what

> > is your fuel consumption then.

> 

> I found the sweet spot of the aircraft is with 27 inch 

>MAP, where it

> usually cruises with a speed somewhere between 120 and 

>130 KIAS,

> depending on C of G and some other obscure factors. Fuel 

>consumption

> used to be 16 to 17 liters per hour, but I have observed 

>this year that

> the fuel consumption has increased to 18 liters per 

>hour. Maybe the

> carbs need an overhaul or so.

> RPM is usually between 4800 and 5000 RPM, this feels 

>best for the

> engine. I have a two blade prop and at lower RPM's it 

>feels less smooth.

> Of course actual settings depend on various 

>circumstances. With a strong

> head wind we usually advance the throttle a bit, with a 

>tail wind we

> enjoy the lower fuel consumption of a lower power 

>setting. We fly 90% of

> our cruising with power between 26 and 28 inch.

> With higher power settings the fuel consumption goes up 

>faster than the

> gain in speed. Other than in a car, a higher speed 

>doesn't give any

> other feeling than a lower speed, it just gives the same 

>sensation. One

> hour flying is still one hour flying. On a 3-hour trip I 

>rather enjoy an

> additional 10 minutes flying and have a free meal than 

>just cranking up

> the fuel consumption, paying more for less fun. AVGAS 

>can be close to 3

> Euro's per liter over here, so saving 10 liters on a 

>trip can save

> enough money to have a dinner for two!  I love 

>telling friends that

> flying there isn't more expensive than getting there by 

>car.

> 

> > If the rest of us mortals wanted to implement some of 

>your changes

> > without too much expense, what would you recommend ?

> 

> There isn't much money involved actually. The radiator 

>costs about 300

> Euro's, the heat exchanger a bit less. You can do 

>without the heat

> exchanger, I have been flying one summer with the stock 

>oil radiator fed

> by a 2" Scat tube via a wedge diffuser. Apart from the 

>long warm up time

> it was quite an improvement over the tandem setup. Best 

>thing to do is

> to scrap the stock coolant radiator, dog house, duct and 

>associated

> hardware and just install a thin radiator in a 45 degree 

>angle in front

> of the exhaust and turbo.

> 

> The main hurdle here is to shape a new underside of the 

>cowling. You

> have to be brave enough to cut the dog house away, and 

>then insert a

> block of blue foam and start cutting, rasping, sanding 

>until you have

> the shape you desire. Anyone who wants to make a mold 

>out of my cowling

> is welcome to do so, provided I'm allowed to use that 

>mold to make a new

> light weight carbon cowling for myself. 

> 

> BTW I'm not the only one who devised something like 

>this. See the

> attached picture. This is another configuration with a 

>thin radiator in

> a 45 degree angle, although it lacks a cowl flap and 

>heat exchanger for

> the oil. (Oil is cooled by a radiator, fed by a NASA 

>duct on the port

> side, you can see it on the picture). Also this owner 

>claims very good

> results with his setup on his 914 engine. The key really 

>is to use a

> thin radiator and mount it at the belly so the "used" 

>air can take the

> heat of the exhaust with it, and enjoy the benefits of a 

>very sleek

> cowlng, excellent cooling, low pressure losses, and 

>minimal cooling drag.

> 

> Anyway, my cooling design is not an exclusive invention 

>of me but the

> combination of ideas and experiments of multiple Europa 

>owners who

> believed that the cooling of the Europa could be 

>improved other than by

> using draggy brute force solutions.

> 

> > What is the part number for the

> > heat exchanger and exactly where did you install it ?

> 

> See picture, taken from under the engine. The heat 

>exchanger is mounted

> behind the engine. This was the first setup, with the 

>stock coolant

> radiator, hence the configuration of the coolant hoses 

>pointing

> downwards. In the current design the hose routing has 

>been changed to

> accomodate for the thin belly radiator.

> If you really want to go this way, contact me privately 

>for more info.

> One caveat though: this heat exchanger has very thin 

>canals and is not

> compatible with Evans coolant due to its viscosity. I 

>use it with 50/50

> without problems.

> 

> > It also had a very

> > small (8AH?) battery.

> 

> I also have a small 8Ah battery, never needed anything 

>more than that.

> But I have a second alternator (mounted on the vaccuum 

>pad) so I don't

> need the battery as a backup during flig=====

grahamsingleton(at)btinte
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 10:28 am Post subject: Contact detail & Help

Hi David

Yes it probably is, but it's at low speeds and high power on climb out that the vibration is worst. 

With multi blade props the problem isn't as bad. I'm not good enough at maths to explain why

but I am just reiterating what Bruno Guimbal said years ago. He designed a very attractive looking helicopter I once saw at 

the RSA Rally years ago. He seems to have moved on, haven't heard anything for years. Very experienced aerospace engineer

who built a Vari Eze around 1978 which he flew to Leicester when our  rally was there in 1979 I think.

Graham

        From: David Joyce <davidjoyce(at)doctors.org.uk>

 To: europa-list(at)matronics.com 

 Sent: Tuesday, 26 June 2012, 18:35

 Subject: Re: Re: Contact detail & Help

  

 

--> Europa-List message posted by: "David Joyce" <davidjoyce(at)doctors.org.uk (davidjoyce(at)doctors.org.uk)>



Graham, In my innocence I thought that the plane was designed so that in normal cruise attitude the engine axis was horizontal and the blades at equal AOA

Regards, David Joyce, G-XSDJ

On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:37:01 +0100 (BST)

 GRAHAM SINGLETON <grahamsingleton(at)btinternet.com (grahamsingleton(at)btinternet.com)> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   Karl

 3 blades will always be smoother because when the 2 blades are horizontal each blade sees a 

 different AoA, especially with high angles of attack. This causes different thrist on the blades resulting 

 in yawing oscillation of the airplane.

 Graham

 

 

 ________________________________

 From: Karl Heindl <kheindl(at)msn.com (kheindl(at)msn.com)>

 To: europa-list(at)matronics.com (europa-list(at)matronics.com) Sent: Tuesday, 26 June 2012, 14:57

 Subject: RE: Re: Contact detail & Help

 

 

 

 Hi Frans,

 

 Thank you for the additional information. I will follow your advice, but probably not until next year.

 If you are going to publish in the flyer, then some good pictures please of the radiator installations.

 Also, a source for the rads.

 

 You mentioned that the prop is not as smooth at lower rpm's. I have the same prop and I discovered a long time ago that the carbs need to be in sync 100% for a two-bladed prop. With three blades the carbs would need to be out of sync quite a bit before you would notice. I know, because I tried it by putting my original Warp Drive back on.

  

 Karl

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

> Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 23:09:34 +0200

> From: frans(at)privatepilots.nl (frans(at)privatepilots.nl)

> To: europa-list(at)matronics.com (europa-list(at)matronics.com)

> Subject: Re: Re: Contact detail & Help

> 

> Hi Karl,

> 

> > I have been following your developments with great interest and I think

> > that the end result is just plain amazing.

> 

> Thanks!

> 

> > Now, top speed is very useful for testing drag improvements, but you

> > don't cruise at those speeds, do you ? When you are touring, what are

> > your preferred settings regarding speed, MP, rpm etc., and exactly what

>  > is your fuel consumption then.

> 

> I found the sweet spot of the aircraft is with 27 inch MAP, where it

> usually cruises with a speed somewhere between 120 and 130 KIAS,

> depending on C of G and some other obscure factors. Fuel consumption

> used to be 16 to 17 liters per hour, but I have observed this year that

> the fuel consumption has increased to 18 liters per hour. Maybe the

> carbs need an overhaul or so.

> RPM is usually between 4800 and 5000 RPM, this feels best for the

> engine. I have a two blade prop and at lower RPM's it feels less smooth.

> Of course actual settings depend on various circumstances. With a strong

> head wind we usually advance the throttle a bit, with a tail wind we

> enjoy the lower fuel consumption of a lower power setting. We fly 90% of

> our cruising with power between 26 and 28  inch.

> With higher power settings the fuel consumption goes up faster than the

> gain in speed. Other than in a car, a higher speed doesn't give any

> other feeling than a lower speed, it just gives the same sensation. One

> hour flying is still one hour flying. On a 3-hour trip I rather enjoy an

> additional 10 minutes flying and have a free meal than just cranking up

> the fuel consumption, paying more for less fun. AVGAS can be close to 3

> Euro's per liter over here, so saving 10 liters on a trip can save

> enough money to have a dinner for two!  I love telling friends that

> flying there isn't more expensive than getting there by car.

> 

> > If the rest of us mortals wanted to implement some of your changes

> > without too much expense, what would you recommend ?

> 

> There isn't much money involved  actually. The radiator costs about 300

> Euro's, the heat exchanger a bit less. You can do without the heat

> exchanger, I have been flying one summer with the stock oil radiator fed

> by a 2" Scat tube via a wedge diffuser. Apart from the long warm up time

> it was quite an improvement over the tandem setup. Best thing to do is

> to scrap the stock coolant radiator, dog house, duct and associated

> hardware and just install a thin radiator in a 45 degree angle in front

> of the exhaust and turbo.

> 

> The main hurdle here is to shape a new underside of the cowling. You

> have to be brave enough to cut the dog house away, and then insert a

> block of blue foam and start cutting, rasping, sanding until you have

> the shape you desire. Anyone who wants to make a mold out of my cowling

> is welcome to do so, provided I'm allowed  to use that mold to make a new

> light weight carbon cowling for myself. 

> 

> BTW I'm not the only one who devised something like this. See the

> attached picture. This is another configuration with a thin radiator in

> a 45 degree angle, although it lacks a cowl flap and heat exchanger for

> the oil. (Oil is cooled by a radiator, fed by a NASA duct on the port

> side, you can see it on the picture). Also this owner claims very good

> results with his setup on his 914 engine. The key really is to use a

> thin radiator and mount it at the belly so the "used" air can take the

> heat of the exhaust with it, and enjoy the benefits of a very sleek

> cowlng, excellent cooling, low pressure losses, and minimal cooling drag.

> 

> Anyway, my cooling design is not an exclusive invention of me but the

> combination of  ideas and experiments of multiple Europa owners who

> believed that the cooling of the Europa could be improved other than by

> using draggy brute force solutions.

> 

> > What is the part number for the

> > heat exchanger and exactly where did you install it ?

> 

> See picture, taken from under the engine. The heat exchanger is mounted

> behind the engine. This was the first setup, with the stock coolant

> radiator, hence the configuration of the coolant hoses pointing

> downwards. In the current design the hose routing has been changed to

> accomodate for the thin belly radiator.

> If you really want to go this way, contact me privately for more info.

> One caveat though: this heat exchanger has very thin canals and is not

> compatible with Evans coolant due to its viscosity. I use it with 50/50

>  without problems.

> 

> > It also had a very

> > small (8AH?) battery.

> 

> I also have a small 8Ah battery, never needed anything more than that.

> But I have a second alternator (mounted on the vaccuum pad) so I don't

> ne//www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List" target="_blank">http://www.mat="http://forums.matronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics                    &nbsptronics.com/contribution" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contri================


	






 

 

  

 [quote][b]

frans(at)privatepilots.nl
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 12:58 pm Post subject: Contact detail & Help

On 06/26/2012 03:09 PM, Max Cointe (Eliops) wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   I'm a bit puzzle by your first picture: are the blue pipes directly

 connected to that flat radiator?


	


As I wrote, this picture was taken when I was still using the stock

radiator. The hose routing has been changed when I upgraded to the flat

radiator. Actually I now use aluminium pipes for the coolant for most of

the routing, because of the close proximity of the exhaust.



 	  Quote: 	
		   Other question: have you experienced (or do you think there is) differences

 on that topic between 914 and 912?


	


I have no 912, but as far as I know the 914 is the most difficult engine

to cool, so if it works on a 914 it should work well on a 912.



Frans

frans(at)privatepilots.nl
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 1:05 pm Post subject: Contact detail & Help

Hi Karl,



 	  Quote: 	
		   You mentioned that the prop is not as smooth at lower rpm's. I have the

 same prop and I discovered a long time ago that the carbs need to be in

 sync 100% for a two-bladed prop.


	


I agree with you. My carbs are 100% balanced, so the whole setup runs

very smooth. However, it just feels the engine runs best at 5000 RPM. I

called it "smooth" in my previous post, but it has nothing to do with

vibrations, it is just the general impression that the engine gives. At

RPMs below 4700 it just sounds a bit as if the engine is labouring, hard

to describe precisely what I mean as English is a foreign language for me.



On the ground the prop sounds very mean, especially if the wind is not

precisely at front. I guess the inner part with lots of twist just

stalls out if there is not enough airspeed. Once airborn the prop is

very silent.

Do you also have the large twist prop?



Frans

kheindl(at)msn.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 1:40 pm Post subject: Contact detail & Help

Frans,

My prop is the identical model to yours; I was the first to install one, which prompted Woodcomp to make the first 10 inch spinner.It (the prop) makes a very nice low frequency sound when you listen to it from outside the aircraft.

Karl

[quote] Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 00:00:11 +0200

 From: frans(at)privatepilots.nl

 To: europa-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Re: Contact detail & Help

 

 

 

 Hi Karl,

 

 > You mentioned that the prop is not as smooth at lower rpm's. I have the

 > same prop and I discovered a long time ago that the carbs need to be in

 > sync 100% for a two-bladed prop.

 

 I agree with you. My carbs are 100% balanced, so the whole setup runs

 very smooth. However, it just feels the engine runs best at 5000 RPM. I

 called it "smooth" in my previous post, but it has nothing to do with

 vibrations, it is just the general impression that the engine gives. At

 RPMs below 4700 it just sounds a bit as if the engine is labouring, hard

 to describe precisely what I mean as English is a foreign language for me

grahamsingleton(at)btinte
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 10:52 pm Post subject: Contact detail & Help

The Diamond Katana has a 2 blade Hoffman (doesn't it?) which makes the Rotax sound more like a quiet Lycoming!

Graham

        From: Karl Heindl <kheindl(at)msn.com>

 To: europa-list(at)matronics.com 

 Sent: Tuesday, 26 June 2012, 22:39

 Subject: RE: Re: Contact detail & Help

Frans,

My prop is the identical model to yours; I was the first to install one, which prompted Woodcomp to make the first 10 inch spinner.

It (the prop) makes a very nice low frequency sound when you listen to it from outside the aircraft.

Karl

 	  Quote: 	
		   Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 00:00:11 +0200

 From: frans(at)privatepilots.nl

 To: europa-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Re: Contact detail & Help

 --> Europa-List message posted by: Frans Veldman <frans(at)privatepilots.nl>

 Hi Karl,

 > You mentioned that the prop is not as smooth at lower rpm's. I have the

 > same prop and I discovered a long time ago that the carbs need to be in

 > sync 100% for a two-bladed prop.

 I agree with you. My carbs are 100% balanced, so the whole setup  runs

 very smooth. However, it just feels the engine runs best at 5000 RPM. I

 called it "smooth" in my previous post, but it has nothing to do with

 vibrations, it is just the general impression that the engine gives. At

 RPMs below 4700 it just sounds a bit as if the engine is labouring, hard

 to describe precisely what I mean as English is a foreign language for me.

 On the ground the prop sounds very mean, especially if the wind is not

 precisely at front. I guess the inner part with lots of twist just

 stalls out if there is not enough airspeed. Once airborn the prop is

 very silent.

 Do you also have the large twist=

  [quote]http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-Listhttp://=======================

[b]

frans(at)privatepilots.nl
Guest

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 12:06 am Post subject: Contact detail & Help

On 06/26/2012 11:39 PM, Karl Heindl wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   It (the prop) makes a very nice low frequency sound when you listen to

 it from outside the aircraft.


	


If I test run the engine the neighbours complain that they don't hear

the engine at all, but their windows start rattling in their frames. 

Indeed a very low frequency tone!



Frans

budyerly(at)msn.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:04 am Post subject: Contact detail & Help

<?xml:namespace prefix="v" /><?xml:namespace prefix="o" /><![endif]-->  To all,

 From testing with the Airmaster AP420 vs 332 a couple of notes on prop  vibration/noise.

 I do not intend to comment on the different brands, only the differences  between a three and two blade prop both designed for and tested on the  Europa..

  

 A two blade AP420 with Sensenich Blades vs. three blade AP332 with  Warp Drive Blades non tapered.  Engine 914, Aircraft Europa XS  Trigear.

  

 First, at cruise the Rotax only turns nominally 2050 RPM prop speed and the  prop length is limited to 64 inches, so the tip compression or mach whack  noises are minimized.  The limited cruise RPM really degrades the  performance of a propeller.  The gear box limit of 2.43 reduction imposes a  problem in cruise, but allows longer blades and the ability to deliver more  torque to a prop.  In essence, the slow prop shaft RPM and limited length  means the prop angle at cruise must be increased to absorb the torque of the  engine.  The higher angle of attack of the blade makes for some interesting  problems for the blade designer.  Takeoff,  vs. climb performance  vs. cruise performance will be significantly different conditions and  design criteria for the blades and the downwash off the blades as they pass the  cowl are different. 

  

 The next thing is that the area of the blades must be near equal for proper  comparisons.

  

 Finally, the Europa thrust line has a near zero angle at cruise, but nearly  8 degrees during initial climb at max climb speeds of 65 and 75 for angle and  rate.

  

 Comment:  Quality propeller blade manufacturers have very consistent  mass balance and airfoil sections blade to blade, so vibrations due to balance  are minimal.  Hand cut or custom props, or defective props (yes we had one  Sensenich go out of balance due to an internal balloon failure) must be sorted  out. The slightest profile difference makes a difference in both noise and  vibration.

  

 The two blade pulses, due to AOA during climb, does give a change in sound  outside the aircraft as well as inside.  The power pulses of each blade  passing through the windshield arc allows the two blade to make an audible  (somewhat irritating) pulse across the windshield and cowl face.

 The three blade prop increases the frequency of the power pulses and  smooths out the pulses affects and although the decibels aren't  terribly different, the noise (what is irritating to the ear) is less for  the three blade.  Tapered tips are less noisy than square tips.   Cutoff tips give a sharp tip sound when compared to a swept tip.  Swept  tips have lower initial inertia and lower tip drag at higher prop speeds.

  

 At or near cruise, this pulsing noise is diminished significantly at the  shorter blade lengths.  Long blade lengths tend to be noisier due to their  effect on more of the aircraft, most noticeably is the windscreen pulsing noise  transferred into the cockpit and to your ears.

  

 On tests with the 76 inch long blades, the two blade is very loud in  comparison, diminishing with a shortening of the blade length.  

 The 76 inch long two blade requires ANR headsets for comfort, and  the windscreen in the Rans and Kitfox actually moves like a drum as the blade  passes.  The two blade at the long lengths is faster on top end as I  approached the aircraft's VNE.  High altitude performance was a bit better  with the two blade also.  This is, in my opinion, not not due to the  differences in two vs three blade as much as the difference in blade areas,  thickness and taper plus the slight advantage in efficiency of any two blade  over a three blade (remembering the most efficient prop is a single  blade).  The Sensenich blades are thicker and wider of chord on the longer  blades.  The Warp Drive blades of that length were tapered tips because of  the very long length and the difference in rotational inertia.  We went to  the wide chord blade on the 332 at 76 inches (not good for the sprag clutch on  the Rotax with its higher inertia on start) but it still was a bit slower at top  end and had only a tiny decrease in static thrust than the 76 inch long  Sensenich blades on the 420.

  

 Tip design also has an effect.  A swept tip tends to be quieter  on the very long props, but is less effective on the shorter props.  A  number of designers have toyed with better blade designs but the problem is each  experimental is different.  What works on a Vari Eze is not going to work  for a Ran's or Europa even with the same engine...

 I talked with Steve and Mike at Sensenich about the 64 inch two blade, but  they had to admit, it isn't working as well as they would like.  The twist,  area profile, taper and airfoil section have got to be tweaked to get the most  out of the Europa/914 combo.  How many blades will we sell to pay for all  the tweaking and testing that comes into the blade manufacture equation.   Yes, mass produced blades must operate efficiently but also sell.  Right  now the Sensenich market is in the LSA market which doesn't need all that  tweaking because they only go 120 Knots.  We in the Europa  commuity are looking for 150 Knots at 10,000, which is a totally different  blade design.  Not that the casual observer would notice the difference,  but to those of us flying efficient glass aircraft, we notice the  difference.  Again, I am not getting into whose manufactured prop is  better, because tests have to be done on the same aircraft, same CG, same  conditions to be valid.  My Europa is significantly faster (15 knots) than  another XS in the shop.  Same airplane, landing gear, engine,  and prop, just different in oh so many little ways... CG, wheel pants,  cowl seals, door fit, trim of the aircraft, flap droop, wing gap seals, engine  isolation mount age, etc.

   

 Another area of vibration is the wind angle during taxi, compression  braking with the prop at high speed, resonance effects, Rotax gearbox (straight  cut verses taped cut). There are certain aircraft where the vibration of the  prop in one, or all of the above is quite irritating. The Warp Drive, does drive  me nuts during taxi with a quartering tail wind as my engine /prop combo sounds  terrible during taxi and if I dive into the pattern with the prop at cruise  (5000) at 130 Knots and lower the power setting further, I can feel the prop and  gearbox lash and rattling noise. Entering the pattern at "Takeoff" setting  diminishes that as does entering the pattern at lower speed.



  

 Pusher designs have noticeable differences from the tractor types due  to air flow disturbance across the blades, especially if a tail boom is  below the prop.  Even the addition of an augmenter exhaust to only one side  of the aircraft makes a difference in feel.

  

 In my summary to Airmaster, I saw no difference in performance between the  AP332 vs the AP420 in the Europa (64 inch prop length) but a noticeable  difference in the longer 76 inch blades on the Kitfox / Rans S6 aircraft.   The two blade was lighter, easier to get the cowl off and on, and a bit  noisier on the Europa.  Longevity of the blades depends on how much  grass you intend to mow.

  

  

 Have a great weekend,

 I'm off to the shop.

  

 Bud Yerly

  

  

  

  

  

  

 [quote]   ---

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Europa-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2
Page 2 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum