No4

Dr Hans was asked by Private Message to provide the following essay .Volkswagen V10 5.0 Litre 400 hp Turbo Diesel Thielert 4.0 V8 Mercedes Benz Turbo Diesel, fully certified with Constant Speed Propeller, 285 kg ready to start. euro 50,000 . http://www.centurion-engines.com/c40/c40_start.htm That is my benchmark. The performance in a four seat heavy gross weight Cozy would be incredible. However, it being most unlikely that I will afford it, I must do my best to emulate it. The new VW Toureg 4x4, and Phaeton luxury beasts have been launched with the 315 hp V10 Turbo Diesel. This is not an engine to compare to an IO-360, but with a TIO-540. This is a much better article than I could ever explain here about the standard engine. http://www.germancarfans.com/news.cfm/newsid/2030324.001/volkswagen/1.html With a chip upgrade, they promise 375 hp at 3750 rpm, and peak torque up to 820 nm at 2000 rpm, which is 171 Kilowatts, which is 230 horsepower. This engine could drive a semi trailer. click here http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://chiptuning.speed-buster.de/&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dvolkswagen%2Bv10%2Btuning%2Bdiesel%26start%3D60%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DN then click "Tuning Kit", then "VW Volkswagen", then "Toureg", then "5.0 V10 TDI". As the cost and maintenance of a constant speed prop are prohibitive for me, the V10's wide power band is essential, and I seem unlikely to utilise more than 300 hp. With a 2:1 reduction drive, and a five blade wooden prop, I would like 3500 rpm (@250 hp) to equate to 300 knots, and so 2000 rpm (230 hp) should equate to 170 knots. Hopefuly it will make a deep "whump whump" noise that scares away small children and farm animals. Modifications Removal of all unnneceesary items Re programming of ECU Change twin turbo for single 400 hp or smaller. Ceramic Face Head, Valves, Pistons Custom Exhaust Manifold, and Pipe Heat treat Exhaust and Turbo Coat Exhaust and Turbo Top Secret Radiator, Intercooler and Ram Air Duct. The Doctor is currently researching the merits of air to water intercoolers, dry sump oil systems, and "magic" lubrication coatings. For a very nice AMG turbo diesel http://www.mercedes-benz.com/omb/amg/en/cars/series/c30cdi/index.htm Some more references http://www.enginehistory.org/Diesels/Ch2.pdf http://www.team.net/sol/tech/engine.html http://vcc.volvocars.se/diesel/tech_specification.asp

Hallo Tyson How is the Defiant going? I heard they have a very long build time, 6000 hrs is that correct? Can I ask which engines are you using? I think my ultimate plane would be a Defiant with twin 300 hp Thielert V8's, and retracts. Maybe someday.. I agree the Cozy may run into terrible trouble at 390 knots at 48,000 feet. But I am rather hoping to remain at around 18,000 to 23,000 with 250 to 300 knots on the GPS, and 180 Indicated. It is commonly done by light pressurised twins, so I would be dissapointed with myself I can't get it out of a Cozy. It seems flutter is not only the strength of the aircraft, but should the rudder, ailerons, and elevator all clash in rythmn, then somehow the fuselage suffers. From what I can understand making the part as strong as possible is greatly beneficial, and would imagine that mass balancing becomes very important. Would it be worth my while to build a carbon fibre canard, or ailerons? I think you can get a nose piece and a nice bottle to fit in your handbag for $300, but if you want the U beauty kevlar bottles and electronic breathing management system, for four people is well over $2000. I think you are right though that it's peanuts to refill.

What do you need ear lobes for anyway? Waste of time, imho, much better off getting rid of them. I don't know why you sound surprised cncdoc, I've seen the NFL, thats what you lot wear isn't it? Nice cheerleaders though.

Adopting a very British Household Cavalry accent, twiddling my handlebar moustache in a heavy leather armchair with a large malt whiskey.... I remember, when I was in Africa, back in the last century, I actualy had a shower attached to my truck. About 45 minutes before arival I would switch on a small electric pump, which would pass water through a 1/4 inch copper pipe that was tightly wound around the exhaust pipe. Hey presto! 50 litres of hot water, and lots of happy campers. You don't want it to overpressurize though, I don't imagine hot steam all over the cockpit would be too pleasant.

The number 7 jersey is all yours John. Do you think we should tell them that we don't stand around in lycra hot pants chatting for hours, and that they'd have to actualy play a WHOLE game. For the seppos, no forward passes, no blocking, learn how to scrummage, and remember to place the ball on the ground over the try line. I'm looking forwards to pre season training. Before I get banished for talking rubbish outside the Coffee House, has anyone thought of teaming up with Jake C's http://www.homebuiltairplanes.com/forums/ website? There's a lot of cross over regarding general construction and engine discussion. I got nasty de ja vu there. Jon M. remember your gum shield and you better check to see if your life insurance is up to date

quoting Mountain High's site, A four place complete kit costs US$ 725 The largest kevlar tank holds 200 man hours of ox. My friend sucks ox when riding his turbo Cessna 182, and refils are I think $10. http://www.mhoxygen.com/index.phtml Aircraft Spruce, the Cozy's new master, have a wide range here.. http://www.aircraft-spruce.com/ntoc.php?sec=ps&cat=oxygensystems

"Originally posted by Jim Sower Did you know we English are World Champions? Hooligans, the lot of you! " No that was me, Jim's a good ole boy from the south. Hooligans are the Association Football fans, that's soccer to you. They say that soccer is a game for gentlemen played by hooligans, and that rugby is a game for hooligans played by gentlemen. After some thought on the matter, I personaly would like to see forum remain as it is. If I can't find what I want from a search, I'll just ask. Too easy.

Easy Tiger! Make yourself a nice cup of tea, sit down, and chill out. Top poster eh? I think you deserve a badge, or maybe a certificate. Airliners pressurise their cabins to 8,000 feet, My CPL Human Factors lecturer tells us we can only go above 10,000 feet for thirty minutes without oxygen, and not above 13,000. Well, I've walked up to 16,000 feet, and people have been up Everest without oxygen. I think Sir Edmund Hilary stopped for a smoke at about 27,000 feet. A guy from Nigeria made it to Heathrow on the undercarriage of an Airbus. I think if you keep the hound warm, you'd be safe to 15,000, and then supply oxygen above that. Keeping it low on ox will stop it bouncing around the cabin. I still like bowlersaid's "iron lung", I reckon that's a ripper.

Thanks for that Tyson, 1) We've gone way off thread, and are back into something discussed by us non builders almost ad infinitum; but we are in the coffee house, you're new here, and so we may still get away with it yet. 2) I agree exceeding Vne in the Cozy is un wise. 3) Plenty of Jet fighters, the Starship, the Tupolev "concordski" are all canards. The Berkut makes 300 mph indicated. We are building experimental aircraft, marble can do whatever suits his fancy. 4) climbing to 25,000 feet 200 CAS = 300 TAS. Miles per gallon will be the same, you will get to your destination faster for the same fuel burn, you will sit thousands of feet above the worst of the weather, you may even catch a 100 mph tailwind, and, God forbid, it might even be jolly good fun. eg If I was to decide to fly across the Tasman Sea from here in NZ, to Sydney, Australia; I could spend six hours dodging cumulus at 10,000 feet, or three hours watching it all slip past below me. Easy decision for me. I'll be eating Steak and Chips, drinking cold beer whilst you are looking at an inch of ice on your leading edge, hoping the liferaft doesn't leak, and the water isn't too cold (by the way it is very cold). If marble can pull off his 300 mph ducted fan beast, good luck to him, I'd love to see it, you never know he might sell plans for it one day and retire a millionaire. If you want to build your Defiant to the letter of the plans, best of luck to you too, you'll be building a winner. I think actualy if you do the math, you are much better off buying a ticket on an airliner. I'm sorry but Jim's profound statement isn't going up as grafiti anywhere round here. Cheers

"I am leaning towards removing the anonymous factor to the membership. You can see that some of the "fights" and noise here is directly related to anonymous members. In order to access all forum areas in the future, you may need to provide your real name." Hallo Jon, If I'm one of your damned offenders you can tell me, it's alright, I've got a hide like a rhino. Yes I have a name, it's Adam John Sparkes, or "Sparkesy" age 32 Born Edgeware, London, England previous resident of England, Kenya, Tanzania, South Africa, Australia, and the Cook Islands. Currently in New Zealand, hoping to move to Fiji. OK? I've tried to change my signature, but it doesn't seem to work yet, maybe this time. I can't realy see what name I or anyone uses matters, We will still make the same posts, and how do you know we are not just making up names???? By the way No4 is what is on the back of my Rugby jersey, but I wouldn't expect you Phillistines to understand much about that. Did you know we English are World Champions?

Trying to exceed Vne by 50 or 100 mph , imho, is NOT a good idea. The Cozy is not designed for that dynamic pressure. The aerofoil is completely the wrong shape for starters. Flutter however is my biggest fear, as it is a function of true airspeed as well as indicated airspeed. I'm led to believe it is to do with frequency, oscilation, and resonance. A critical vibration frequency causes massive structural damage. Here's an article on the Lancair 360 regarding flutter, looks like even the "experts" can't agree sometimes. http://www.lancair.net/flutter.html http://www.aircraftdesigns.com/flutter_analysis.html http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/spinoff1997/t8.html http://www.google.co.nz/search?q=cache:kacSyld5pDUJ:www.ae.utexas.edu/courses/ase463q/design_pages/spring03/polen/flutter.doc+aircraft++flutter&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 If anyone has anymore knowledge on flutter, I'd be glad to hear it.

She's way (weigh?) too heavy to make the Cozy a 4 seater, at least not without raising the gross weight by a several hundred pounds, and stretching the fuselage, which would certainly be possible, but beyond my capabilities this time around. I can't find any figures yet, but the Thielert V8 4.0 weighs 283.5 kg prepared for service, so I'm planning on 300 kg. ( I can hear the groans from here!) But my whole project is to build a plane around an engine, rather than find the right engine for a plane. I'm only making mine a two seater, with long range tanks, the cooling system, the ox bottles, and some luggage space to go where the rear seats were.

You are quite right Bob, A fixed pitch prop wouldn't cut the mustard at 100 mph and 300 mph on a Lycoming. For that matter a Turbo O-360 wouldn't be able maintain 200 hp either, not for long anyway. The solution is a constant speed prop, or an engine that produces sufficient power low down, and can then rev to allow 300 mph. The engine I plan to use, the VW V10 TDI, is rated at 230 hp at 2000 rpm, and 400 hp at 3750 rpm. With the reduction drive it will produce 200 hp at 150 mph, and then the same, or more all the way to 320 mph. I don't plan to utilise more than 250 hp.

I was doing some calculations on my "Deep Blue" pocket calculator, with a little bit of assistance from my Pooleys CRP-1 nav computer. I am interested in the 300 mph "barrier" for my Cozy. Taking the CAFE figures, and with a bit of rounding, I tried to work out the drag of a Cozy similar to Mark Beduhn's. The basic premise revolves around a 180 Lycoming, running at 75% power, achieves 200 knots. I know this is a bit high, but it is easier in the workings. SO Full power 180 hp = 135 kilowatts 75% power 135 hp = 100 kw minus prop efficiency 75% = 75 thrust kw 75,000 watts divided by 100 metres per second (200 knots) gives us a drag figure of 750 Newtons, or roughly 165 lbs. SO! To take a "standard" Cozy to 300 knots, at 25,000 (where 200 CAS = 300 TAS) it should require 750 * 150 = 112.5 Thrust Kw, which is 150 Brake kilowatts, which is 200 hp continous. I think we agreed that retractable gear was worth 20 knots. SO! 75,000 watts divided by 110 m/s (220 knots) gives us a new drag figure of 680 Newtons. To now travel at 300 knots only requires 100 thrust kw, which is 135 brake kilowatts, or 180 hp continous, or a saving of around 4.5 litres per hour. Or alternatively comparing it to a "standard" Cozy pumping 200 hp continous, 112.5 Thrust kilowatts now gives you a speed of 330 knots. So by climbing to 25,000 feet, retractable gear is now worth 30 knots. Any Good? phasers on stun, all hands to attack positions...

Hello Matt and all, Well hats of to you my friend! You certainly sound like you have done your homework. I had a good look at your site. I can't read the Mathcad document, and the html document came up with a lot of boxes with the dreaded red cross. Anyway, my simple brain would probably be unable to compute all that information! I undestand the idea of accelerating the air into the fan, and then allowing it to expand, but isn't that drag? If you say the fan is 10% less efficient than a prop, and a psru only taps 5% power, then isn't the psru ahead? Also the weights seem almost identical. How do you compare the drag of this fan to a propeller? Could I ask are you comparing a fan to a fixed pitch prop, or a variable pitch prop. Just off the top of my head I imagine the csu might match or better the static thrust of your fan. The fixed pitch prop will of course suffer inefficiency at any speed other than it's designed propulsion velocity. Not really to do with the actual fan or prop, but I'm lead to believe that the psru will remove the gyroscopic, asymetric torque, and vibration problems inherant to propulsion. Direct drive will load the rotary's main bearings in a way it was not designed. Modern turbo props reduce their shaft speeds somewhere in the region of 50:1, and use multiple long carbon fibre blades with scimitar tips. For example the ATR-72, with twin 2500hp engines uses seven scimitar blades with a disc diameter of 14 feet, which spin at 900 rpm in cruise. Which begs for me the question, why then are they not using a ducted/unducted fan? I understand of course that just because everyone isn't doing it doesn't mean it is not a good idea. Furthermore, I suggest that most props you are comparing to will be spinning at around 2500 rpm. I believe this magic number only comes from the Lycoming benchmark. To my knowledge no Rutan design has been fitted with a slower spinning prop. I propose a race, my 1000 rpm thumper versus your 7000 rpm screamer. How does September 2007 suit you? Best of luck with your design, I'm sure many people will be fascinated if it comes into reality. Cheers Adam

There is always the "un-ducted fan"

You are right Jim, atomisation is the key with the water spray. I still can't fault the windscreen washer linked to some irrigation nozzles. I think I'll try it. One for the radiator, and one for the intercooler. regarding the water methanol injection, I found this in my gas turbine notes. " Water Methanol Injection Water Methanol consists of approximately 45% methanol and 55% water by volume. Its specific gravity is 0.94. Water methanol is sprayed into the compressor inlet and the temperature of the inlet air is reduced. This action increases the air density allowing an increased thrust to be attained. The methanol burns in the combustion chamber and restores the turbine inlet temperature without the addition of fuel. Engine power is restored [augmented] without adjusting fuel flow. Note: This form of thrust augmentation is of very limited duration and usually only when take off power requirements are critical because of high OAT's or high Density Altitudes. " I heard of a Fokker Frienship turboprop in which the mechanics filled the water methanol container with the oil slops bucket. Both engines burnt right through their casings and they had to ditch onto a frozen river.

There is a Long EZ flying with a ducted fan, (or is it a shrouded propeller??) http://www.bridgingworlds.com/duckt.htm To quote our own Mr Slade from the www.homebuiltairplanes.com forum, "IMHO Perry's experiments are a wonderful example of the true experimental movement, but I think he has a long way to go. The duct concept isn't very efficient at low speeds (eg less than 300 kts or so), and he's not getting a lot of power from his 13B. The result is that his cruise speed is way below a lycoming powered EZ. A redrive weighs about 35lb. I bet that duct weighs a lot more, so he's not gaining anything net weight wise." I totaly agree, but if I may add.... from my basic gas turbine rating notes @ 250 mph; prop efficiency 80%; Turbo fan 60%, and Jet 40% @ 450 mph; prop efficiency 60%; Turbo fan 70%, and jet 55% @ 600 mph; prop efficiency 40%; Turbo fan 80%, and jet 70% of course jets are the only engines that can go faster than 600 mph. From A.C. Kermode "Principles of Flight" (my bible) .." the amount of thrust provided will be equal to the rate at which momentum is given to the air." Thus Thrust = mass times velocity, or T=mv SO! Accelerating 1 kg of air to 10 metres per second will give you the same thrust as accelerating 10 kg of air to 1 metre per second. Kinetic Energy is 1/2MV2 1kg@10m/s = 0.5 * 100 which equals 50 watts 10kg@1m/s = 5 * 1 which equals 5 watts So really you want to accelerate as much air as possible, rather than less air as fast as possible. I will be trying a big 5 blader which will spin between 1000 rpm and 1750 rpm, depending on airspeed.

Fair play to you Dust, Surely the search engine checks all entries, so something like "Turbo" is pretty much ruined. I understand your frustration with the rotary/auto/certified debate; it's your decision, your engine, so best of luck. I agree the archives are difficult to maintain, and was wondering if the sticky threads were to be used, then the moderator(s) could cut and paste any useful info into those threads. How fast will your Cozy go on OX? I've done some calculations and will be willing to share. Perhaps a new thread? I need some time to prepare my Kevlar underpants, missile jamming radar, and power up the front deflector shield. Best regards Adam

Fair points Dust, I was picked out for not sticking to the thread, after two posts previously saying we all should. I see you want this site to grow, and the archives to become worthwile, so I wonder why you post the word "Turbo" fifty times in reply to a question, "Just start building now" fifty times in response to another; when were having a technical discussion about your ignition system, you cracked a sad on because it wasn't what you wanted to hear, and posted what I thought was quite rude and childish; and even the Dog Ox thread almost turned into "How fast is my Cozy going to be?" No offense is implied, I really enjoy your input to the forum, but as Jesus said "take the plank out of your own eye before looking for the speck in anothers"

Hallo Jim, cncdoc, and all, Jim asks "Is the exhaust treatment on the inside or outside of the pipe? If it's outside, pipe has to absorb the heat that doesn't transfer, if it's inside, how does it hold up to the exhaust pulses and all the nasty stuff in exhaust?" Yes it is on the outside, and it traps the heat into the exhaust manifold. I've been wondering about the header pipe becoming hotter, and the jury is still out (ie my two brain cells are still waiting to collide). Can you cook a header pipe? Anyway it must work somehow or they wouldn't bother. ..."How many racing teams use this stuff and what do they have to say about it? In my experience, stuff that sounds too good to be true ...." Pasted from HPC website..."HPC has revolutionized the exhaust component industry with highly developed coating technology. Testimonial to this achievement is 16 Daytona 500 and 15 Indianapolis 500 wins during our 19-year history. With such a rich racing heritage and the many performance improvements that have become so well accepted, you will find HPC products on OEM applications worldwide"... The first time I heard about this, it was the truck modifiers saying they sent their pistons to the same shop that prepares Paul Newman's Indy car. If you look at HPC's website, it seems motorsport is their key business, bikes, drag, Indy, Nascar, Formula 1, Le Mans, etc, etc. I'm pretty much decided to 'go the whole hog', I really like the idea of turning the chamber into a clay oven, and trapping all that heat for the turbocharger to play with.

Thats a really good idea Bowlersaid! Might I go one step further and suggest pressurisation? I know some light twins get their pressurisation from a turbocharger. I think keeping the box at 8,000 feet altitude at 20,000 feet wouldn't require much "bleed air"; with a hose from the turbo. How often are you planning to take the dog? I'd suggest staying below 10,000 on those occasions. I can remember seeing a photo of a scuba diving dog from about 20 years ago. It had a big fish bowl helmet. Something like that or a mask would probably send the mutt off it's rocker.

I spoke to HPC in Auckland today. They can ceramic coat the piston faces, valve faces, and the cylinder head in the combustion chamber. I think the price works out at US$100. They can then use their special paint on the exhauslt manifold, turbine casing, and tailpipe for another US$30. Finally they can coat the remaining moving parts with their special coating which vastly improves lubrication for US$70. Not bad improvements to an engine for $200. They claim improved horsepower, reduced operating temperatures, and improved turbocharger efficiency.

HPC Coatings are a world wide company. looking at their site it seems you can ceramic face the pistons and valves, then treat the exhaust manifold and header. The figures look remarkable. http://www.hpcoatings.com/ I was right! It is cryogenic freezing. These guys here in NZ, are also claiming remarkable improvements. Even makes your shooter more accurate apparently. The first site explains the process quite well http://www.cryogenic.co.nz and this group seem to use other methods http://www.heat-treat.co.nz

Good work Mr Hicks! Thanks for that, very interesting indeed. Anybody else get deja vu?