![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Instead of using a left/right fuel selector, could I use two check valves
and connect the two tanks into a single feed? [LTANK]---|-----T-----|-----[RTANK] Where | and | are the check valves and 'T' is a T-connector towards the header tank. The check valves prevent fuel moving from one tank to the other. Any pro's, con's or thoughts? Rob |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Rob Turk" wrote in message news:SN6we.366$in3.124@amstwist00... Instead of using a left/right fuel selector, could I use two check valves and connect the two tanks into a single feed? [LTANK]---|-----T-----|-----[RTANK] Where | and | are the check valves and 'T' is a T-connector towards the header tank. The check valves prevent fuel moving from one tank to the other. Any pro's, con's or thoughts? I'd want more control over the actual fuel usage than a check valve will give me. The selector valve will allow you to use fuel from the 'heavy side' to properly level out- check valves will not allow this. Then you can leave the selector valve on 'both' for normal conditions. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Edgar" wrote in message
... "Rob Turk" wrote in message news:SN6we.366$in3.124@amstwist00... Instead of using a left/right fuel selector, could I use two check valves and connect the two tanks into a single feed? [LTANK]---|-----T-----|-----[RTANK] Where | and | are the check valves and 'T' is a T-connector towards the header tank. The check valves prevent fuel moving from one tank to the other. Any pro's, con's or thoughts? I'd want more control over the actual fuel usage than a check valve will give me. The selector valve will allow you to use fuel from the 'heavy side' to properly level out- check valves will not allow this. Then you can leave the selector valve on 'both' for normal conditions. Wouldn't gravity take care of leveling the two tanks? That way there wouldn't be a heavy side. My assumption is that the fullest one will create more pressure, causing it to level automatically. Wrong assumption?!? This is on a high-wing plane by the way.. Rob |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Wouldn't gravity take care of leveling the two tanks? That way there wouldn't be a heavy side. My assumption is that the fullest one will create more pressure, causing it to level automatically. Wrong assumption?!? This is on a high-wing plane by the way.. Rob I think that your tanks will not feed evenly because of little differences in the way the lines run and venting. You will also lose the ability to run one tank dry to extend your range. On my murphy rebel one tank feeds a lot faster than the other one when I'm running on both. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Drew Dalgleish wrote:
Wouldn't gravity take care of leveling the two tanks? That way there wouldn't be a heavy side. My assumption is that the fullest one will create more pressure, causing it to level automatically. Wrong assumption?!? This is on a high-wing plane by the way.. Rob I think that your tanks will not feed evenly because of little differences in the way the lines run and venting. You will also lose the ability to run one tank dry to extend your range. On my murphy rebel one tank feeds a lot faster than the other one when I'm running on both. Very dependent on how far below the tank outlet the two lines/valve connects the two feed lines,,,,,,,,,, a connection that is level with the tank outlets will very likely have trouble feeding both tanks evenly, a much lower connection won't care,,,,,,,,, -- Mark Smith Tri-State Kite Sales 1121 N Locust St Mt Vernon, IN 47620 1-812-838-6351 http://www.trikite.com |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 12:54:20 GMT, Mark Smith wrote:
Drew Dalgleish wrote: Wouldn't gravity take care of leveling the two tanks? That way there wouldn't be a heavy side. My assumption is that the fullest one will create more pressure, causing it to level automatically. Wrong assumption?!? This is on a high-wing plane by the way.. Rob I think that your tanks will not feed evenly because of little differences in the way the lines run and venting. You will also lose the ability to run one tank dry to extend your range. On my murphy rebel one tank feeds a lot faster than the other one when I'm running on both. Very dependent on how far below the tank outlet the two lines/valve connects the two feed lines,,,,,,,,,, a connection that is level with the tank outlets will very likely have trouble feeding both tanks evenly, a much lower connection won't care,,,,,,,,, that may usually be the case but on my plane the connection is at the firewall just ahead of the gascolator. thats almost 3' difference in height. When I did my fuel flow test the tanks flowed the same amount. Mark Smith Tri-State Kite Sales 1121 N Locust St Mt Vernon, IN 47620 1-812-838-6351 http://www.trikite.com |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Is the fuel above or below the engine (high wing or low wing?)
it IS possible in a low wing configuration for one tank to completely drain and then suck air. The answer to that is to use a sump or gravity fed header tank. The Velocity plans call for two strake mounted tanks, draining into a single sump, from there the fuel is fed to the engine. In practice the two strake tanks and sump function as a single fuel tank. The check valve isnt necessary. Dave Rob Turk wrote: Instead of using a left/right fuel selector, could I use two check valves and connect the two tanks into a single feed? [LTANK]---|-----T-----|-----[RTANK] Where | and | are the check valves and 'T' is a T-connector towards the header tank. The check valves prevent fuel moving from one tank to the other. Any pro's, con's or thoughts? Rob |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
How would you shut off the fuel? Let's say in the case of fire. Al
"Rob Turk" wrote in message news:SN6we.366$in3.124@amstwist00... Instead of using a left/right fuel selector, could I use two check valves and connect the two tanks into a single feed? [LTANK]---|-----T-----|-----[RTANK] Where | and | are the check valves and 'T' is a T-connector towards the header tank. The check valves prevent fuel moving from one tank to the other. Any pro's, con's or thoughts? Rob |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Al" wrote in message
news:1119973229.7b47c562c0536a3cc6ea1419507bddbe@t eranews... How would you shut off the fuel? Let's say in the case of fire. Al The full picture is a bit more complex (isn't it always...) This is a high-wing plane (Rans S6S). Both main tanks have breather pipes to pressurise the tanks during flight. The fuel lines from the tanks flow into separate entries of a fuel buffer tank (approx 1.5 Gallon) placed low, below the luggage compartment. From the buffer tank a single feed goes through a Facet pump (just in case), then through the fuel filter to a shut-off valve near the firewall, within easy reach of the pilot. Then through the firewall into a gascolator. Output of the gascolator goes to the mechanical pump on the Jabiru engine, then to the carburettor. The overflow of the gascolator goes through a check valve, then through a return line into the buffer tank. What I'm trying to determine is if I should use separate cut-off valves in the lines from the main tanks to the buffer, or that I can use check valves instead. Rob |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Use separate valves if the tanks aren't vented to the same
source. For certified aircraft, any gravity-feed system that uses one valve or a valve with a "Both" position must have the tanks vented to the same source to keep tank pressures equal. Many homebuilts have problems along this line and a few have quit and crashed because the builder made mods and/or didn't understand the reasons the designer made things the way he did. Even some designs had shortcomings to start with. The original Glastar design, for instance, had a vent tube under each wingtip to feed each tank separately, and small differences in ram air pressure would cause one tank to drain before the other. If the pressure differential is large enough, the tank with lower pressure will not flow at all and the engine will quit when the other runs dry. The Cessna 150 used a single valve to control the flow from both tanks, teed together at the valve inlet, and the tanks were both connected to the single vent under the left wing. You could still get uneven flow if you flew with one wing a bit low; remember that the tanks are well apart and a slight bank will raise one above the other to cause crossflow. Check valves could stop that, but they'd have to be installed as low as possible so that the small amount of head pressure will open them, and their springs would have to be very weak. My old Auster had such check valves but still used two shutoffs because the tanks were separately vented at the caps. If I was to build another airplane I'd have shutoffs right at the tank outlets; maintenance on the system is a pain if you have to drain the tanks every time you want to fix something, and it would be nice to have them there in case of a leak lower down in the system while in flight. Dan |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Time, running out of fuel and fuel gauges | Dylan Smith | Piloting | 29 | February 3rd 08 07:04 PM |
Weatherhead fuel valves? | Yosimite Sam | Home Built | 2 | February 14th 04 12:21 AM |
Airplane Parts on Ebay Vac Reg Valves, Fuel Floats, O-200 Spider, Fuel Injection Valve | Bill Berle | Home Built | 0 | January 26th 04 07:48 AM |
Pumping fuel backwards through an electric fuel pump | Greg Reid | Home Built | 15 | October 7th 03 07:09 PM |
Hot weather and autogas? | Rich S. | Home Built | 33 | July 30th 03 11:25 PM |