Original Posted By: shad bell
Pietenpol-List: Fuel flow question
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: Rick
John; since you're building a GN-1, I can't offer direct advice or assistance (myairplane is a Piet). However, my experience with the 16 gallon tank up aheadof the passenger in my airplane is that with a gravity feed system, the lastcouple of gallons in my tank are unusable except in an emergency, and then onlyin level flight. I can cruise on past the 12 gallon mark and dig into thatlast few gallons of reserve, but if I raise the nose to full-stall the airplaneor try to power out in a climbing go-around with minimum fuel, I may not havesufficient fuel flow to sustain engine operation. It does sound like yourtest is pretty extreme though I think I've heard of 12 degrees as the nominaldesign three-point attitude, which would also be the climb out angle at justabove minimum controllable airspeed.Although it is certainly simpler and easier to keep your system as-is, gravityfeed only, if you run a Corvair you'll also run a battery and electrical system,so you can include an electric fuel pump feeding fuel from your main tank toa small header tank that gravity-feeds the carb. Alternatively, your fuel pumpcan continuously feed the carb and the overflow can return to the tank.Just BS'ing here.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel flow question
John; since you're building a GN-1, I can't offer direct advice or assistance (myairplane is a Piet). However, my experience with the 16 gallon tank up aheadof the passenger in my airplane is that with a gravity feed system, the lastcouple of gallons in my tank are unusable except in an emergency, and then onlyin level flight. I can cruise on past the 12 gallon mark and dig into thatlast few gallons of reserve, but if I raise the nose to full-stall the airplaneor try to power out in a climbing go-around with minimum fuel, I may not havesufficient fuel flow to sustain engine operation. It does sound like yourtest is pretty extreme though I think I've heard of 12 degrees as the nominaldesign three-point attitude, which would also be the climb out angle at justabove minimum controllable airspeed.Although it is certainly simpler and easier to keep your system as-is, gravityfeed only, if you run a Corvair you'll also run a battery and electrical system,so you can include an electric fuel pump feeding fuel from your main tank toa small header tank that gravity-feeds the carb. Alternatively, your fuel pumpcan continuously feed the carb and the overflow can return to the tank.Just BS'ing here.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel flow question
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: Ken Bickers
John, I have a 19 gal in the nose on my Corvair powered Piet. With the fuselage at a20 deg. angle of attack, I got a fuel flow of 22.5 gph. This fuel flow was maintainedwith only 1/2 gallon of fuel in the tank. All of the fuel was useableexcept for 4oz. The FAR's require the fuel flow to be 150% of the max fuel burnat max angle of attack. I think you can easily climb at a 16 degree angle, especiallyafter a shallow dive. I would be very concerned about your fuel flowrates.If the max fuel burn is 9 gph on a Corvair, as Shad says you need a flow rate ofat least 13.5 gph.Regards,Rick Schreiber On Jan 25, 2014, at 6:55 PM, John Franklin wrote:> > I'm building a GN-1 with a Corvair engine, fed by a gravity-fed fuel system.The fuel tank is from Aircraft Spruce, built for a Swift airplane, and is listedas a 16-gallon tank. I placed it in the compartment where the passenger wouldnormally be, having decided to build a single-seat Aircamper. The 3/8" fueltubing is routed downhill from the main shutoff valve in the cockpit to thegascolator at the bottom of the firewall. > > Today I did a fuel-flow test as recommended by Tony Bingelis' books. With theplane level and about three gallons of fuel in the tank, I get a most generous29 gal/hour flow rate. However, when I lowered the tail until the fuselagewas at a 16 degree angle, the fuel flow dropped to a miserable 1.5 gal/hour.> > Since I've never flown an Aircamper, I don't know if 16 degrees is a reasonableangle to test, it looked pretty steep to me and I doubt if the plane couldsustain that kind of nose-up attitude for long, but really don't know. Sincethe fuel flow is so high at level height, I would think that would rule out anyrestrictions.> > I would appreciate any comments and/or suggestions. I could raise the tank maybeanother inch or two, but no more than that. I suppose I could add a fuelpump but of course that adds complexity, weight, etc.> > Thanks,> John Franklin> Prairie Aire 4TA0> Needville, TX> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 21:06:28 -0700Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
John, I have a 19 gal in the nose on my Corvair powered Piet. With the fuselage at a20 deg. angle of attack, I got a fuel flow of 22.5 gph. This fuel flow was maintainedwith only 1/2 gallon of fuel in the tank. All of the fuel was useableexcept for 4oz. The FAR's require the fuel flow to be 150% of the max fuel burnat max angle of attack. I think you can easily climb at a 16 degree angle, especiallyafter a shallow dive. I would be very concerned about your fuel flowrates.If the max fuel burn is 9 gph on a Corvair, as Shad says you need a flow rate ofat least 13.5 gph.Regards,Rick Schreiber On Jan 25, 2014, at 6:55 PM, John Franklin wrote:> > I'm building a GN-1 with a Corvair engine, fed by a gravity-fed fuel system.The fuel tank is from Aircraft Spruce, built for a Swift airplane, and is listedas a 16-gallon tank. I placed it in the compartment where the passenger wouldnormally be, having decided to build a single-seat Aircamper. The 3/8" fueltubing is routed downhill from the main shutoff valve in the cockpit to thegascolator at the bottom of the firewall. > > Today I did a fuel-flow test as recommended by Tony Bingelis' books. With theplane level and about three gallons of fuel in the tank, I get a most generous29 gal/hour flow rate. However, when I lowered the tail until the fuselagewas at a 16 degree angle, the fuel flow dropped to a miserable 1.5 gal/hour.> > Since I've never flown an Aircamper, I don't know if 16 degrees is a reasonableangle to test, it looked pretty steep to me and I doubt if the plane couldsustain that kind of nose-up attitude for long, but really don't know. Sincethe fuel flow is so high at level height, I would think that would rule out anyrestrictions.> > I would appreciate any comments and/or suggestions. I could raise the tank maybeanother inch or two, but no more than that. I suppose I could add a fuelpump but of course that adds complexity, weight, etc.> > Thanks,> John Franklin> Prairie Aire 4TA0> Needville, TX> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 21:06:28 -0700Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: Hans van der Voort
Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: John Franklin
John; if you're taking your airplane to the upcoming Corvair College, you willget excellent advice on how to tackle your fuel flow concerns. Great thinking!As a passing comment, and others have mentioned the same thing about their experiences,I have had my airplane in power-on stall configuration till it wouldmush indefinitely. In that configuration, it will hold altitude and hang on theprop, but the point is that the nose is at a ridiculously high attitude. It'stoo bad that I didn't have an angle finder on the top longeron so I couldget a reading... it feels like it's 45 degrees nose-high but I'm sure it's not.This is not a very normal flight configuration, but it's certainly a placewhere the only way the airplane is still flying is because power is available.You want reliable fuel flow with the nose high.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 14:38:45 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
John; if you're taking your airplane to the upcoming Corvair College, you willget excellent advice on how to tackle your fuel flow concerns. Great thinking!As a passing comment, and others have mentioned the same thing about their experiences,I have had my airplane in power-on stall configuration till it wouldmush indefinitely. In that configuration, it will hold altitude and hang on theprop, but the point is that the nose is at a ridiculously high attitude. It'stoo bad that I didn't have an angle finder on the top longeron so I couldget a reading... it feels like it's 45 degrees nose-high but I'm sure it's not.This is not a very normal flight configuration, but it's certainly a placewhere the only way the airplane is still flying is because power is available.You want reliable fuel flow with the nose high.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 14:38:45 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: "taildrags"
What is preventing you from using a center section wing tank like most others.It is a proven design, keeps the fuel over the CG and will allow for the frontcockpit to be used as a baggage area when flying to Brodhead. Then you wouldalso eliminate another failure point, the fuel pump.Fuel for thought.--------Scott LiefeldFlying N11MS since March 1972Steel TubeC-85-12Wire WheelsBrodhead in 1996Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
What is preventing you from using a center section wing tank like most others.It is a proven design, keeps the fuel over the CG and will allow for the frontcockpit to be used as a baggage area when flying to Brodhead. Then you wouldalso eliminate another failure point, the fuel pump.Fuel for thought.--------Scott LiefeldFlying N11MS since March 1972Steel TubeC-85-12Wire WheelsBrodhead in 1996Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: John Franklin
I'm not versed enough on Facet pumps to know the difference between "interrupter"and regular ones, but I know someone who does. I'll ask.I also don't know how much fuel pressure the Zenith carb likes or can tolerate,so I can't say whether your system might operate with a fuel pump but no headertank. The point of the header tank is to always have a quantity of fuel "uphigh" so that the carb always sees reliable gravity head, but then you can usea fuel pump to lift fuel from the main tank to the header tank and let theexcess return to the main tank... no need for a fuel pressure regulator at thecarb and no fear of overpressuring at the carb. You can almost always make about99% of the fuel usable with a fuel pump, too.Scott raises a good point about just using the wing centersection for fuel, butit's a personal preference thing. Some folks will not tolerate having fuel orfuel lines anywhere in the cockpit, so they want the tank(s) in the outer wings.Some folks don't want fuel overhead, so they put it in the nose. It doessimplify matters to have the fuel up in the wing centersection since there isalways plenty of gravity fuel pressure available and the CG doesn't shift withfuel burn. Getting up there to refuel is a little more work, but not much.Each approach has its pros and cons, but the plane won't fly without fuel soit's got to go somewhere.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 19:48:17 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
I'm not versed enough on Facet pumps to know the difference between "interrupter"and regular ones, but I know someone who does. I'll ask.I also don't know how much fuel pressure the Zenith carb likes or can tolerate,so I can't say whether your system might operate with a fuel pump but no headertank. The point of the header tank is to always have a quantity of fuel "uphigh" so that the carb always sees reliable gravity head, but then you can usea fuel pump to lift fuel from the main tank to the header tank and let theexcess return to the main tank... no need for a fuel pressure regulator at thecarb and no fear of overpressuring at the carb. You can almost always make about99% of the fuel usable with a fuel pump, too.Scott raises a good point about just using the wing centersection for fuel, butit's a personal preference thing. Some folks will not tolerate having fuel orfuel lines anywhere in the cockpit, so they want the tank(s) in the outer wings.Some folks don't want fuel overhead, so they put it in the nose. It doessimplify matters to have the fuel up in the wing centersection since there isalways plenty of gravity fuel pressure available and the CG doesn't shift withfuel burn. Getting up there to refuel is a little more work, but not much.Each approach has its pros and cons, but the plane won't fly without fuel soit's got to go somewhere.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 19:48:17 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By:>> AircamperN11MS
Hey JohnAll of your questions and concerns show a lot of intelligence. Most,if not all,are addressed in Uncle Tony's (Tony Bingelis) books . These are all availablethrough the EAA store for less than the 100 bucks worth of aggravation youhave experienced. Fly safe. GlenSent from my iPhone> On Jan 26, 2014, at 5:48 PM, John Franklin wrote:> > > Scott,> > It would actually be easier for me to put a tank in the center section than itwould be to move the existing tank behind the firewall. The reasons I didn'tput it in the center section are that 1) I would have had to fabricate thetank. 2) It would be a lot harder to access, and 3) I wanted to avoid gas linesin the cockpit, although having the tank right in front of the cockpit isn'treally much different. I agree with you about the fuel pump being another failurepoint, plus the fact it is a unit that contains both fuel and electricity...whichworries me! I wonder if a fuel pump lets fuel pass if it has failed?> > Regards,> John F.> > > -----Original Message-----
Hey JohnAll of your questions and concerns show a lot of intelligence. Most,if not all,are addressed in Uncle Tony's (Tony Bingelis) books . These are all availablethrough the EAA store for less than the 100 bucks worth of aggravation youhave experienced. Fly safe. GlenSent from my iPhone> On Jan 26, 2014, at 5:48 PM, John Franklin wrote:> > > Scott,> > It would actually be easier for me to put a tank in the center section than itwould be to move the existing tank behind the firewall. The reasons I didn'tput it in the center section are that 1) I would have had to fabricate thetank. 2) It would be a lot harder to access, and 3) I wanted to avoid gas linesin the cockpit, although having the tank right in front of the cockpit isn'treally much different. I agree with you about the fuel pump being another failurepoint, plus the fact it is a unit that contains both fuel and electricity...whichworries me! I wonder if a fuel pump lets fuel pass if it has failed?> > Regards,> John F.> > > -----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Spitfire XV
Original Posted By: "GNflyer"
one thing I might suggest if you are still in the wing/center section build stagemight be give some thought to a small tank I the center section. it does complicatethe idea of having a usable fuel gage, but there is no doubt that youget the most head pressure from it. and it would not have to be real big to givebackup fuel feed if your fuse tank doesn't cut it.I am just not real comfortablewith any combination of electric pumps,check valves-etc. still it wouldrequire a second fuel cut-off valve and the potential to be left on and draindown possibly flooding the bottom tank over if it was filled. pretty easy tothink of what if's for about any situation. as far as high deck angle once in-flightI don't think you would ever approach anything like 16 degrees. maybe sittingon the ground or taking off till you bring the tail up, but after thateven on a go-around I don't think so.- if I truly wanted to limit it to a singleplace and keep the tank in the front seat area I'd probably go for doing afairly deep forward sloping sump to get the few gallongs forward. and stay assimple as possible. anyway you got lots of feedback and maybe some of it willhelp someone. RaymondRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Spitfire XV
one thing I might suggest if you are still in the wing/center section build stagemight be give some thought to a small tank I the center section. it does complicatethe idea of having a usable fuel gage, but there is no doubt that youget the most head pressure from it. and it would not have to be real big to givebackup fuel feed if your fuse tank doesn't cut it.I am just not real comfortablewith any combination of electric pumps,check valves-etc. still it wouldrequire a second fuel cut-off valve and the potential to be left on and draindown possibly flooding the bottom tank over if it was filled. pretty easy tothink of what if's for about any situation. as far as high deck angle once in-flightI don't think you would ever approach anything like 16 degrees. maybe sittingon the ground or taking off till you bring the tail up, but after thateven on a go-around I don't think so.- if I truly wanted to limit it to a singleplace and keep the tank in the front seat area I'd probably go for doing afairly deep forward sloping sump to get the few gallongs forward. and stay assimple as possible. anyway you got lots of feedback and maybe some of it willhelp someone. RaymondRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Spitfire XV
Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: "AircamperN11MS"
an incredible amount of dedication. about 20-25 years ago I was able to make atrip to the northwest regional in Washington state and drove a rental car on upinto Canada a short ways. we took a ferry out onto Vancouver island and I wasalways asking about airports and projects. I ran across a fellow who was bestI remember building a Spitfire from scratch. I have not been able to find outif he ever got it done or what happened to it. but I'd sure like to know. RaymondRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
an incredible amount of dedication. about 20-25 years ago I was able to make atrip to the northwest regional in Washington state and drove a rental car on upinto Canada a short ways. we took a ferry out onto Vancouver island and I wasalways asking about airports and projects. I ran across a fellow who was bestI remember building a Spitfire from scratch. I have not been able to find outif he ever got it done or what happened to it. but I'd sure like to know. RaymondRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: John Franklin
John,Since you have asked I will tell you a very true short story.Here I go. I was asked to do a first flight on a Pietenpol with a Corvair engine.I agreed to do it. I arrived at the airport with the understanding that everythingI find during a complete inspection will be corrected before I fly it.pleasekeep in mind that I am an EAA Tech Counsoler for the past 18 years or so.After six hours of work on the plane it was time to fly it. The plane was builtvery well but just needed some fine tuning. It has a center section tankand a nose tank. The intent of the owner is to use the center section tank asthe primary and the nose as reserve, about 10 gal in the nose. An electric fuelpump is also on this plane without a bypass and Check valve. Yes electric aircraftfuel pumps can flow fuel if not turned on. Get the proper one. But theengine will also have a mechanical pump installed. Back to the flight. I electedto fly the plane off the nose tank only for CG reasons. I am heavier than theowner. We tied the plane down and did two or three full power runs for twominutes at a time with the fuel pump off. It all checked good and this was ata climb angle. On the runway now, full throttle and ready to rotate when the enginequit without warming. Now it won't run unless the fuel pump is on. I decidedto fly it with the pump on and all went well. While at pattern alt. I shutthe pump off to see if it would run. I quit again. When the nose tank was fullthe engine would run without a pump. After only two gallons were used therewasn't enough head pressure to push it through the pump and it would quit. Itdoes however run OK when burning from the center section tank. The owners alwaysfly it with the pump on. It is a big failure point with no success of anyrestart attempt if you run a little low on fuel. I would hate to run out of gaswith 8 gallons on board. So.please put the tank in the proper location so youdon't need to rely on an electric fuel pump. I mean this with all respect toyou and want you to have a very safe and enjoyable airplane.Respectfully,--------Scott LiefeldFlying N11MS since March 1972Steel TubeC-85-12Wire WheelsBrodhead in 1996Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:54:40 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
John,Since you have asked I will tell you a very true short story.Here I go. I was asked to do a first flight on a Pietenpol with a Corvair engine.I agreed to do it. I arrived at the airport with the understanding that everythingI find during a complete inspection will be corrected before I fly it.pleasekeep in mind that I am an EAA Tech Counsoler for the past 18 years or so.After six hours of work on the plane it was time to fly it. The plane was builtvery well but just needed some fine tuning. It has a center section tankand a nose tank. The intent of the owner is to use the center section tank asthe primary and the nose as reserve, about 10 gal in the nose. An electric fuelpump is also on this plane without a bypass and Check valve. Yes electric aircraftfuel pumps can flow fuel if not turned on. Get the proper one. But theengine will also have a mechanical pump installed. Back to the flight. I electedto fly the plane off the nose tank only for CG reasons. I am heavier than theowner. We tied the plane down and did two or three full power runs for twominutes at a time with the fuel pump off. It all checked good and this was ata climb angle. On the runway now, full throttle and ready to rotate when the enginequit without warming. Now it won't run unless the fuel pump is on. I decidedto fly it with the pump on and all went well. While at pattern alt. I shutthe pump off to see if it would run. I quit again. When the nose tank was fullthe engine would run without a pump. After only two gallons were used therewasn't enough head pressure to push it through the pump and it would quit. Itdoes however run OK when burning from the center section tank. The owners alwaysfly it with the pump on. It is a big failure point with no success of anyrestart attempt if you run a little low on fuel. I would hate to run out of gaswith 8 gallons on board. So.please put the tank in the proper location so youdon't need to rely on an electric fuel pump. I mean this with all respect toyou and want you to have a very safe and enjoyable airplane.Respectfully,--------Scott LiefeldFlying N11MS since March 1972Steel TubeC-85-12Wire WheelsBrodhead in 1996Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:54:40 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: Ken Bickers
You are right-many low wing types have fuel pumps- and we are building experimentalclass and have the discretion to change and try designs- if you choose thepump methods I know WW says to have nothing else on the circuit to cause aproblem with shorting it out. however I can see no reason there could not be twofuel pumps parallel -they usualy have internal checks anyway on the electrics.with an individual switch for each beside the ignition switch so if you wantedto change either ignition sides if you have dual coils like mine you couldalso switch pumps in case of failure. as long as all are clearly marked. justmy worthless opinion. RaymondRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:21:27 -0700Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
You are right-many low wing types have fuel pumps- and we are building experimentalclass and have the discretion to change and try designs- if you choose thepump methods I know WW says to have nothing else on the circuit to cause aproblem with shorting it out. however I can see no reason there could not be twofuel pumps parallel -they usualy have internal checks anyway on the electrics.with an individual switch for each beside the ignition switch so if you wantedto change either ignition sides if you have dual coils like mine you couldalso switch pumps in case of failure. as long as all are clearly marked. justmy worthless opinion. RaymondRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:21:27 -0700Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
John,Fuel pumps are attached directly to the tank they are drawing from. For reasons of simplicity, I too vote for the wing tank, if you can't do a nose tank. It is understandable that you may be intimidated by building your own tank, but it really isn=99t very hard...just a bit messy, if you go the Pro-seal method. Now's the time, before you do finish paint. Just cut the fabric leaving enough to fold and fasten into the opening...maybe install some reinforcing tapes at the edges; design and build your tank; cut the holes in the floor of the center section for the fuel lines...and drop her in! Working part time on it, you should be done in less than a week.There are many builders on this list who made their own tanks, so you should be able to gather all the help and support you want...including from me.Then you have all that front area for camping equipment!Gary BootheNX308MB-----Original Message-----
John,Fuel pumps are attached directly to the tank they are drawing from. For reasons of simplicity, I too vote for the wing tank, if you can't do a nose tank. It is understandable that you may be intimidated by building your own tank, but it really isn=99t very hard...just a bit messy, if you go the Pro-seal method. Now's the time, before you do finish paint. Just cut the fabric leaving enough to fold and fasten into the opening...maybe install some reinforcing tapes at the edges; design and build your tank; cut the holes in the floor of the center section for the fuel lines...and drop her in! Working part time on it, you should be done in less than a week.There are many builders on this list who made their own tanks, so you should be able to gather all the help and support you want...including from me.Then you have all that front area for camping equipment!Gary BootheNX308MB-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: Hans van der Voort
Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: "Gary Boothe"
Gary: that's a nice fuel tank, and sturdy looking. How much fuel does it hold?The riveted flange construction looks to be about as easy as it can be. Wewon't deduct points for the one or two rivets that are a teeny bit off the straightlines ;o)Also, back to Scott's comment about having a mechanical fuel pump on the Corvair(and John's reply), the reason why William advises against the use of the Corvairmechanical fuel pump is that it is a diaphragm pumper type of operationand the diaphragm can rupture. When it does, fuel then has a straight shot rightdown into the guts of the engine, and the engine will probably not run verylong before the oil is diluted and metal starts meeting metal in a catastrophicway.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Gary: that's a nice fuel tank, and sturdy looking. How much fuel does it hold?The riveted flange construction looks to be about as easy as it can be. Wewon't deduct points for the one or two rivets that are a teeny bit off the straightlines ;o)Also, back to Scott's comment about having a mechanical fuel pump on the Corvair(and John's reply), the reason why William advises against the use of the Corvairmechanical fuel pump is that it is a diaphragm pumper type of operationand the diaphragm can rupture. When it does, fuel then has a straight shot rightdown into the guts of the engine, and the engine will probably not run verylong before the oil is diluted and metal starts meeting metal in a catastrophicway.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Thanks, Oscar...I think...You have a keen eye. You will also note that, where those rivets areoff-set, they occur at a dimple or crimp. I had to off-set them so that theygrabbed the flange where the crimp ended. This tank holds 16 gallons.Smartest thing I did was incorporate the access panels on the top. They canbe easily removed and reinstalled with new sealer.Gary BootheNX308MB-----Original Message-----
Thanks, Oscar...I think...You have a keen eye. You will also note that, where those rivets areoff-set, they occur at a dimple or crimp. I had to off-set them so that theygrabbed the flange where the crimp ended. This tank holds 16 gallons.Smartest thing I did was incorporate the access panels on the top. They canbe easily removed and reinstalled with new sealer.Gary BootheNX308MB-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: Hans van der Voort
Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: "taildrags"
Was just wondering if anyone has got there Piet club newsletter? Have been lookingfor it everyday for a month. Don't we usually get them the end of December/ first of January? ThanksRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Was just wondering if anyone has got there Piet club newsletter? Have been lookingfor it everyday for a month. Don't we usually get them the end of December/ first of January? ThanksRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: shad bell
Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: "AircamperN11MS"
Ok thanks for the update. I take it that you are the one in charge of the newsletternow. Actually slipped my mind that it has changed hands. Understand gettingthings figured out at first, no problem, I was just curious. Looking forwardto getting it! ThanksRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Ok thanks for the update. I take it that you are the one in charge of the newsletternow. Actually slipped my mind that it has changed hands. Understand gettingthings figured out at first, no problem, I was just curious. Looking forwardto getting it! ThanksRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: Chuck Campbell
Hi john,I think your questions have been answered in some form here. I am a guy who likesmagnetos and steam gauges. Electrical powered stuff has its place and itis a lot more reliable than in the past. Lets look at one of the suggestions.Keep in mind they are all good ones. you just need to figure out what you want.One of the ideas was to install a second fuel pump. It is a great idea forredundancy but if your battery is dead, you have no fuel. My personal choiceis still gravity fed system. This is why. We know that you need 12 voltsfor your engine to run. It is a distributor and coil arrangement. Lets say thatyour alternator quits in flight. You have a fuel pump and distributor thatneed power to make you engine run. This is where it gets tricky. How manyamps is required and how many amper hours is your battery? You'll need to do themath here to see how long it is going to run. If you only needed to run theignition system you will have a lot more time to find a place to land. I knowwe can play the would if game all day here but the point here is to think carefullyabout what you want. and build it that way. Taking your plane to theCorvair collage is an excellent idea. There will plenty of folks there with awhole bunch more Corvair knowledge than I have. You are absolutely on the right websites and asking all the right people the rightquestions. Please do not get discouraged. We have all been down this roadand will offer the best advice we have. Oh, one more thing that hasn't been mentioned. You will need to be able to shutthe fuel off from the pilots seat. It is the best way to stop an inflight fire.Safety first. Respectfully to all reading this,--------Scott LiefeldFlying N11MS since March 1972Steel TubeC-85-12Wire WheelsBrodhead in 1996Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Hi john,I think your questions have been answered in some form here. I am a guy who likesmagnetos and steam gauges. Electrical powered stuff has its place and itis a lot more reliable than in the past. Lets look at one of the suggestions.Keep in mind they are all good ones. you just need to figure out what you want.One of the ideas was to install a second fuel pump. It is a great idea forredundancy but if your battery is dead, you have no fuel. My personal choiceis still gravity fed system. This is why. We know that you need 12 voltsfor your engine to run. It is a distributor and coil arrangement. Lets say thatyour alternator quits in flight. You have a fuel pump and distributor thatneed power to make you engine run. This is where it gets tricky. How manyamps is required and how many amper hours is your battery? You'll need to do themath here to see how long it is going to run. If you only needed to run theignition system you will have a lot more time to find a place to land. I knowwe can play the would if game all day here but the point here is to think carefullyabout what you want. and build it that way. Taking your plane to theCorvair collage is an excellent idea. There will plenty of folks there with awhole bunch more Corvair knowledge than I have. You are absolutely on the right websites and asking all the right people the rightquestions. Please do not get discouraged. We have all been down this roadand will offer the best advice we have. Oh, one more thing that hasn't been mentioned. You will need to be able to shutthe fuel off from the pilots seat. It is the best way to stop an inflight fire.Safety first. Respectfully to all reading this,--------Scott LiefeldFlying N11MS since March 1972Steel TubeC-85-12Wire WheelsBrodhead in 1996Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Larry Williams?! Pshaw! I have the Steve Eldridge fuel gauge!Gary BootheNX308MB-----Original Message-----
Larry Williams?! Pshaw! I have the Steve Eldridge fuel gauge!Gary BootheNX308MB-----Original Message-----
Original Posted By: "Gary Boothe"
Gary; that's a beautiful rendition of the Steve Eldredge sight gauge! I neverthought of leaving the copper tube in its natural state or highlighting it, buton your vintage-style airplane, polished metal goes very well. Do you havea quick-drain fitting in the bottom of the tube there?I created those drawings from hand sketches that Steve sent me, plus his narrativedescription, but when I scanned them a little of the text was cut off andI tried to fix it with MS Paint. Crude, but it gets the point across. I alsogot similar sketches from the Top Curmudgeon (Larry) for his float-type indicator,which is also quite simple and elegant.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Gary; that's a beautiful rendition of the Steve Eldredge sight gauge! I neverthought of leaving the copper tube in its natural state or highlighting it, buton your vintage-style airplane, polished metal goes very well. Do you havea quick-drain fitting in the bottom of the tube there?I created those drawings from hand sketches that Steve sent me, plus his narrativedescription, but when I scanned them a little of the text was cut off andI tried to fix it with MS Paint. Crude, but it gets the point across. I alsogot similar sketches from the Top Curmudgeon (Larry) for his float-type indicator,which is also quite simple and elegant.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
As with many things on my plane, the site gauge too has been modified fromthat picture. Yes, it has always had a quick-drain, but I have also takenoff some of the tubing on the other side to give it a see-thru, more visible'glass'. I had no idea that the drawings were yours! They must be good,because even I could follow them!Gary BootheNX308MB-----Original Message-----
As with many things on my plane, the site gauge too has been modified fromthat picture. Yes, it has always had a quick-drain, but I have also takenoff some of the tubing on the other side to give it a see-thru, more visible'glass'. I had no idea that the drawings were yours! They must be good,because even I could follow them!Gary BootheNX308MB-----Original Message-----
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
...and now that I look back on that article...Sure enough! There's yourname!!Gary BootheNX308MB-----Original Message-----
...and now that I look back on that article...Sure enough! There's yourname!!Gary BootheNX308MB-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: "Jack Phillips"
A welded aluminum gravity feed tank is really hard to beat. If you can make aposter board mock up tank, there are several shops that can fab up a tank foryou. If the tank was kept fairly simple, you only be into it for a few hundredbucks or so. The other option is to spend 8-10 hours to form one up yourselfout of aluminum and take it to a shop that welds aluminum. Most would welda simple one for $100-$150. Well worth the money for a rugged, simple, leakproof,gravity fed system. Very few things to go wrong.Don EmchNX899DERead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
A welded aluminum gravity feed tank is really hard to beat. If you can make aposter board mock up tank, there are several shops that can fab up a tank foryou. If the tank was kept fairly simple, you only be into it for a few hundredbucks or so. The other option is to spend 8-10 hours to form one up yourselfout of aluminum and take it to a shop that welds aluminum. Most would welda simple one for $100-$150. Well worth the money for a rugged, simple, leakproof,gravity fed system. Very few things to go wrong.Don EmchNX899DERead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: Steven Dortch
Subject: Pietenpol-List: CENTER SECTION FUEL TANKThat price included every thing. In fact he made it 1/4 inch too large and had to redo it to fit in the "c" section. I also am showing you my fuselage center 6 gal tank I got from ALUMINUN GAS TANKS .NET that you can buy at a good price.Ted________________________________________________________________________________Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 09:12:58 -0600Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Subject: Pietenpol-List: CENTER SECTION FUEL TANKThat price included every thing. In fact he made it 1/4 inch too large and had to redo it to fit in the "c" section. I also am showing you my fuselage center 6 gal tank I got from ALUMINUN GAS TANKS .NET that you can buy at a good price.Ted________________________________________________________________________________Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 09:12:58 -0600Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By:=0A=0A-----Original Message-----=0A owner-pietenpol-list-server@matron
ation: N80951=0AInjuries: 1 Fatal.=0A=0ANTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investigation or =0Aconducted a significant amount of investigative work without any travel, and =0Aused data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft accident =0Areport.=0A=0AThe pilot made a radio call indicating that he had an engine problem or =0Afailure and was going down. Witnesses observed the airplane maneuvering at a low =0Aaltitude with the propeller not turning. As the airplane made a turn, its nose =0Adropped, and the airplane descended and impacted the ground. Examination of the =0Aaccident site revealed that the airplane impacted the ground in a nose down =0Aattitude. An examination of the WSK 'PZL-Rzeszow' (PZL) Franklin 6A-350-C1R =0Aengine revealed that the engine driven fuel pump had failed. It was determined =0Athat the inlet and outlet valve stems fractured due to fatigue. According to a =0APZL representative, PZL did not know who manufactured the pump and did 'not know =0Acharacteristics' of the pump. Research revealed that this fuel pump was designed =0Afor use in the Chevrolet Corvair automobile. According to the pump manufacturer, =0Athe pump was intended strictly for automotive applications, and not intended for =0Aaviation use. The pump was designed to operate at 5.4 pounds per square inch =0Aminimum and 6.9 pounds per square inch maximum static pressure at the pump =0Aoutlet when the pump is operated at 1,800 revolutions per minute. According to =0Athe PZL representative, the operating limits for fuel pressure in model =0A6A-350-C1R engines are 0.5 pounds per square inch minimum to 8.5 pounds per =0Asquare inch maximum. The FAA issued 'Type Certification Data Sheet No. E9EA' for =0Athe PZL Franklin 6A-350-C1R engine on December 8, 1994. =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AOn Monday, January 27, 2014 1:21 PM, Gary Boothe =0A=0AThanks, Oscar...I think...=0A=0AYou have a keen eye. You will also note that, where those rivets are=0Aoff-set, they occur at a dimple or crimp. I had to off-set them so that they=0Agrabbed the flange where the crimp ended. This tank holds 16 gallons.=0ASmartest thing I did was incorporate the access panels on the top. They can=0Abe easily removed and reinstalled with new sealer.=0A=0AGary Boothe=0ANX308MB=0A
ation: N80951=0AInjuries: 1 Fatal.=0A=0ANTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investigation or =0Aconducted a significant amount of investigative work without any travel, and =0Aused data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft accident =0Areport.=0A=0AThe pilot made a radio call indicating that he had an engine problem or =0Afailure and was going down. Witnesses observed the airplane maneuvering at a low =0Aaltitude with the propeller not turning. As the airplane made a turn, its nose =0Adropped, and the airplane descended and impacted the ground. Examination of the =0Aaccident site revealed that the airplane impacted the ground in a nose down =0Aattitude. An examination of the WSK 'PZL-Rzeszow' (PZL) Franklin 6A-350-C1R =0Aengine revealed that the engine driven fuel pump had failed. It was determined =0Athat the inlet and outlet valve stems fractured due to fatigue. According to a =0APZL representative, PZL did not know who manufactured the pump and did 'not know =0Acharacteristics' of the pump. Research revealed that this fuel pump was designed =0Afor use in the Chevrolet Corvair automobile. According to the pump manufacturer, =0Athe pump was intended strictly for automotive applications, and not intended for =0Aaviation use. The pump was designed to operate at 5.4 pounds per square inch =0Aminimum and 6.9 pounds per square inch maximum static pressure at the pump =0Aoutlet when the pump is operated at 1,800 revolutions per minute. According to =0Athe PZL representative, the operating limits for fuel pressure in model =0A6A-350-C1R engines are 0.5 pounds per square inch minimum to 8.5 pounds per =0Asquare inch maximum. The FAA issued 'Type Certification Data Sheet No. E9EA' for =0Athe PZL Franklin 6A-350-C1R engine on December 8, 1994. =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AOn Monday, January 27, 2014 1:21 PM, Gary Boothe =0A=0AThanks, Oscar...I think...=0A=0AYou have a keen eye. You will also note that, where those rivets are=0Aoff-set, they occur at a dimple or crimp. I had to off-set them so that they=0Agrabbed the flange where the crimp ended. This tank holds 16 gallons.=0ASmartest thing I did was incorporate the access panels on the top. They can=0Abe easily removed and reinstalled with new sealer.=0A=0AGary Boothe=0ANX308MB=0A
Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
Original Posted By: "taildrags"
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com> > c.com>> > > > Newsletter is to the printers. I had an an article from Dom Emch on ski flying I needed to get in. Patience is asked for while I learn this system.> > > > Best,> > -john-> > > > John Hofmann> > Vice-President, IT and Production> > The Rees Group, Inc.> > 2424 American Lane> > Madison, WI 53704> > Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150> > Fax: 608.443.2474> > Email: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com> > > > On Jan 27, 2014, at 4:41 PM, Pietflyer1977 wrote:> > m>> > > > > > Was just wondering if anyone has got there Piet club newsletter? Have been looking for it everyday for a month. Don't we usually get them the end of December / first of January? Thanks> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read this topic online here:> > > > > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 709#417709> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > &g================> > > > > > > > ============================================================================================================================================> ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com> > c.com>> > > > Newsletter is to the printers. I had an an article from Dom Emch on ski flying I needed to get in. Patience is asked for while I learn this system.> > > > Best,> > -john-> > > > John Hofmann> > Vice-President, IT and Production> > The Rees Group, Inc.> > 2424 American Lane> > Madison, WI 53704> > Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150> > Fax: 608.443.2474> > Email: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com> > > > On Jan 27, 2014, at 4:41 PM, Pietflyer1977 wrote:> > m>> > > > > > Was just wondering if anyone has got there Piet club newsletter? Have been looking for it everyday for a month. Don't we usually get them the end of December / first of January? Thanks> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read this topic online here:> > > > > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 709#417709> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > &g================> > > > > > > > ============================================================================================================================================> ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel flow question