Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Bing54 / Max height btw Fuel tank and Mikuni fuel pump

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

Bing54 / Max height btw Fuel tank and Mikuni fuel pump

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

rickofudall

Joined: 19 Sep 2009
Posts: 1392
Location: Udall, KS, USA

Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 10:24 am Post subject: Bing54 / Max height btw Fuel tank and Mikuni fuel pump

From CPS for Part #53 (?) Instructions for Mikuni fuel pumps. The full text can be found here.

http://www.800-airwolf.com/pdffiles/ARTICLES/part%2053.PDF

"....you have to realize that the system does have limitations as far as expected fuel pressure and the distance up hill the fuel can be expected to rise. A vertical rise of no more than 39” can be accepted out of any pulse pump. Anything higher and count on deliver problems. Another thing to remember is that the pulse pump is always limited to the pressures or pumping value of the crankcase. With a pulse pump it is nearly impossible to create too much pressure for the Carb float level. Also keep in mind that the fuel pressure available will fall off as the crank seals and gaskets being to leak over time."

I also looked at Mikuni's website. They have no info that I could find anyway, but they do list a DF-62 fuel pump that delivers up to 62 liters per hour. The DF-35 pumps that most of use are rated at 35 liters per hour.

Rick Girard

On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:55 AM, LageB <lage.bystrom(at)glocalnet.net (lage.bystrom(at)glocalnet.net)> wrote:

 [quote]--> Kolb-List message posted by: "LageB" <lage.bystrom(at)glocalnet.net (lage.bystrom(at)glocalnet.net)>

 lucien wrote:

 > I don't know the specific answers to your (good) questions, but some thoughts I have. Yes, 40" probably is too high for the pneumatic pump to lift fuel reliably. The vacuum generated by the pump isn't a whole lot. So I'd say you're probably in the "considerably" zone at that point 

  >

 > An alternative to consider is a header tank located closer to the engine. LS

 Thanks Lucien   

 I am inclined to think same, i.e that 40" is probably in the risk zone for the Mikuni to suck & feed the Dual Bing 54 carbs

 I have no space for a tank closer to the engine (it would have been best  - I know).  So, for me the questions are:

  (1) Is it some way to confirm that 40" indeed is too much?

  (2) If too much. Then no choice.  An electric pump must be installed.  either as:

       -  Stand alone ?  -> If so, what pressure spec?

          or,

        - Series or parallel -> If so, what pressure specs (should be different depending whether parallel or series connection - right?)

 Since this is not an Aircraft, I am thinking to adopt Stand alone option (by-passing the impulse pump) for simplicity.

 Would a Automobile fuel pump 5.0 Psi, 130L/h work?

 Lage

 Read this topic online here:

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=282248#282248

 ===========

 arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List

 ===========

 http://forums.matronics.com

 ===========

 le, List Admin.

 ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution

 ===========

 [b]

- The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List

_________________
The smallest miracle right in front of you is enough to make you happy....

rickofudall

Joined: 19 Sep 2009
Posts: 1392
Location: Udall, KS, USA

Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2010 10:34 am Post subject: Bing54 / Max height btw Fuel tank and Mikuni fuel pump

I did some more poking around to look for more info on Mikuni fuel pumps. For what it's worth I found that JC Whitney has all models of Mikuni fuel pumps, even the three outlet version of the -35, at fairly reasonable prices. They even have the -62 pump for $45.99 (less than CPS charges for a -35), so if you need more fuel delivery there's a reasonable option. 

Rick Girard 

On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 12:19 PM, Richard Girard <aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com (aslsa.rng(at)gmail.com)> wrote:

[quote] From CPS for Part #53 (?) Instructions for Mikuni fuel pumps. The full text can be found here.

http://www.800-airwolf.com/pdffiles/ARTICLES/part%2053.PDF

"....you have to realize that the system does have limitations as far as expected fuel pressure and the distance up hill the fuel can be expected to rise. A vertical rise of no more than 39” can be accepted out of any pulse pump. Anything higher and count on deliver problems. Another thing to remember is that the pulse pump is always limited to the pressures or pumping value of the crankcase. With a pulse pump it is nearly impossible to create too much pressure for the Carb float level. Also keep in mind that the fuel pressure available will fall off as the crank seals and gaskets being to leak over time."

I also looked at Mikuni's website. They have no info that I could find anyway, but they do list a DF-62 fuel pump that delivers up to 62 liters per hour. The DF-35 pumps that most of use are rated at 35 liters per hour.

Rick Girard

On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:55 AM, LageB <lage.bystrom(at)glocalnet.net (lage.bystrom(at)glocalnet.net)> wrote:

   	  Quote: 	
		  --> Kolb-List message posted by: "LageB" <lage.bystrom(at)glocalnet.net (lage.bystrom(at)glocalnet.net)>

 lucien wrote:

 > I don't know the specific answers to your (good) questions, but some thoughts I have. Yes, 40" probably is too high for the pneumatic pump to lift fuel reliably. The vacuum generated by the pump isn't a whole lot. So I'd say you're probably in the "considerably" zone at that point 

   >

 > An alternative to consider is a header tank located closer to the engine. LS

 Thanks Lucien   

 I am inclined to think same, i.e that 40" is probably in the risk zone for the Mikuni to suck & feed the Dual Bing 54 carbs

 I have no space for a tank closer to the engine (it would have been best  - I know).  So, for me the questions are:

  (1) Is it some way to confirm that 40" indeed is too much?

  (2) If too much. Then no choice.  An electric pump must be installed.  either as:

       -  Stand alone ?  -> If so, what pressure spec?

          or,

        - Series or parallel -> If so, what pressure specs (should be different depending whether parallel or series connection - right?)

 Since this is not an Aircraft, I am thinking to adopt Stand alone option (by-passing the impulse pump) for simplicity.

 Would a Automobile fuel pump 5.0 Psi, 130L/h work?

 Lage

 Read this topic online here:

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=282248#282248

 ===========

 arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List

 ===========

 http://forums.matronics.com

 ===========

 le, List Admin.

 ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution

 ===========

[b]

- The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List

_________________
The smallest miracle right in front of you is enough to make you happy....

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

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