A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

A Simple Auto Engine Conversion



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 28th 08, 01:11 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
Peter Dohm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,754
Default A Simple Auto Engine Conversion

"flybynightkarmarepair" wrote in message
...

FBNKR: This whole thread smacks of TROLL, but you can read what more of
what
I think, along with the E-Racer guy (Shirl Dickey), and a little from
the Belted Air Power reduction guy (Jess Myers) he

Peter: I agree about the Troll, but sometimes one just can't resist...

FBNKR: http://users.lmi.net/~ryoung/Sonerai/BOP.htm

FBNKR: You can also search this newsgroup for anything by Corky Scott, and
watch his chronicle. He never flew his auto engine conversion, after
working on it for years.

Peter: I had wondered about what Corky finally did, but did recall that he
was giving up on the auto conversion idea--although IIRC his aircraft was a
four seater.




  #2  
Old August 28th 08, 03:56 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
Bill Daniels
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 687
Default A Simple Auto Engine Conversion

The problematic word in the subject of this thread is "simple".

An aluminum V8 auto-derived engine is not an aircraft engine - yet. It
needs a lot of engineering work to become one. If the engineering is well
done, the resulting aircraft engine will be successful. If it isn't.....
Many auto conversions weren't. It isn't easy.

Auto engines are high revving compared to direct drive aircraft engines so
to get a reasonable power to weight ratio, a PSRU is needed. But, isn't a
PSRU heavy? Yes, but so is the crankshaft of a direct drive engine - it has
to be to handle the torque. Auto engines have light cranks which are just
as strong on a HP to HP comparison since they rev higher. HP is just torque
(Ft Lbs) times RPM divided by 5252. Compare the weight of a direct drive
crank vs. the crank + PSRU weight of an auto conversion - not so much
difference as thought.

To minimize the re-engineering, keep the engine core working as nearly the
same as in a road vehicle but make sure it uses the best forged racing parts
like rods and pistons for durability. Use the lightest flywheel that allows
an even idle.

The PSRU is just a special PTO (Power Take Off) with gears. It mounts to
the flywheel housing and connects to the flywheel with a flex plate.
Millions of PTO's are in use as irrigation pumps so somebody knows how to do
it. It takes all the gyroscopic and thrust loads away from the crank which
'sees' no loads except torque. Make it from billet aluminum and use the
best bearing money can buy. I'd use a very close tolerance planetary
gearset for durability.

It will withstand high contineous power if you keep it cool. Design the
radiator for worst case cooling conditions and then control the airflow with
variable baffles. I'd feed a pair 12" diameter "barrel" radiators with jet
like wing root air intakes and rear fusalage exhaust . I'd augment the
radiator outflow with engine exhaust which keeps the radiator intakes from
ingesting hot engine exhaust while increasing airflow through the radiator.

I'd use 100PSI racing type fuel injection with in-tank pumps to prevent
vapor lock. I'd use closed loop mixture control with an O2 sensor. No
fussy carburator - no carb ice.

Would I put this thing in an airplane and fly it over the mountains at
night? Not at first - not by a long shot. I'd build it on a trailer so I
could run it in non-noise sensitive areas. I'd take it to air shows to
entertain but mainly I'd just run it on the trailer trying to break it. If
after a few years I still couldn't break it, then maybe in an airplane.
Ground testing is the expensive part. 2000 hours at 10GPH = 20,000 gallons
at $4 each = $80,000. Nobody said it was cheap.



  #3  
Old August 28th 08, 11:18 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
Morgans[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,924
Default A Simple Auto Engine Conversion


"Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote

Would I put this thing in an airplane and fly it over the mountains at
night? Not at first - not by a long shot. I'd build it on a trailer so I
could run it in non-noise sensitive areas. I'd take it to air shows to
entertain but mainly I'd just run it on the trailer trying to break it.


How about putting on an airboat, and have fun, while trying to break it.
The chopping at the waves would put some gyroscopic loads on it that would
imitate, of even exceed the types of conditions that it would see on an
airplane, that you could not duplicate on a trailer.

I saw someone did that while developing a system, just recently. I plan to
do just that.

If after a few years I still couldn't break it, then maybe in an airplane.
Ground testing is the expensive part. 2000 hours at 10GPH = 20,000
gallons at $4 each = $80,000. Nobody said it was cheap.


While I agree with the need to thouroughly test a unit, I do question the
need to do 2,000 hours, unless you are going for certification. Running it,
tearing it down occasionally and carefully inspecting (including
magnafluxing) will give you all the information you need for deciding
whether it is going to go the distance, IMHO.
--
Jim in NC


  #4  
Old September 5th 08, 11:49 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
Barnyard BOb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 169
Default A Simple Auto Engine Conversion

On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 18:18:08 -0400, "Morgans"
wrote:


"Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote

If after a few years I still couldn't break it, then maybe in an airplane.
Ground testing is the expensive part. 2000 hours at 10GPH = 20,000
gallons at $4 each = $80,000. Nobody said it was cheap.


While I agree with the need to thouroughly test a unit, I do question the
need to do 2,000 hours, unless you are going for certification. Running it,
tearing it down occasionally and carefully inspecting (including
magnafluxing) will give you all the information you need for deciding
whether it is going to go the distance, IMHO.


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Morgans.
You never fail to amaze! ;-)

You know so much....


- NOT -


- Barnyard BOb -

The more people I meet,
the more I like my dog
and George Carlin humor.

May he now rest in peace.
  #5  
Old September 5th 08, 02:24 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
stol
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 161
Default A Simple Auto Engine Conversion

On Sep 5, 4:49*am, Barnyard BOb wrote:
On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 18:18:08 -0400, "Morgans"

wrote:

"Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote


If after a few years I still couldn't break it, then maybe in an airplane.
Ground testing is the expensive part. *2000 hours at 10GPH = 20,000
gallons at $4 each = $80,000. *Nobody said it was cheap.


While I agree with the need to thouroughly test a unit, I do question the
need to do 2,000 hours, unless you are going for certification. *Running it,
tearing it down occasionally and carefully inspecting (including
magnafluxing) will give you all the information you need for deciding
whether it is going to go the distance, IMHO.


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Morgans.
You never fail to amaze! *;-)

You know so much....

* * * - NOT -

- Barnyard BOb -

The more people I meet,
the more I like my dog
and George Carlin humor.

May he now rest in peace.


This is the Rec. Aviation. HOMEBUILT group. Feel free to wander over
to the Rec. Aviation. CERTIFIED group to voice your concerns. You
really need to be addressing the correct group to get any respect..

Tailwinds.

Ben
www.haaspowerair.com
  #6  
Old September 14th 08, 09:09 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
Barnyard BOb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 169
Default A Simple Auto Engine Conversion

On Fri, 5 Sep 2008 06:24:52 -0700 (PDT), stol
wrote:

Morgans.
You never fail to amaze! *;-)

You know so much....

* * * - NOT -

- Barnyard BOb -

The more people I meet,
the more I like my dog
and George Carlin humor.

May he now rest in peace.


This is the Rec. Aviation. HOMEBUILT group. Feel free to wander over
to the Rec. Aviation. CERTIFIED group to voice your concerns. You
really need to be addressing the correct group to get any respect..

Tailwinds.

Ben


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Unless your name is Morgans...

** PHUCK OFF **

Get a life... and sense of humor!



- Barnyard BOb -


  #7  
Old September 14th 08, 09:31 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
Morgans[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,924
Default A Simple Auto Engine Conversion


"Barnyard BOb" wrote

Unless your name is Morgans...

** PHUCK OFF **

Get a life... and sense of humor!


Uhhh, Bob?

As you always seemed to like correcting my speeling errarhs, I need to point
out that you spelled "PHUCK" wrong.

You seem to think this word is like a phone, somehow? gg
--
Jim in NC


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Auto Engine Conversion Video stol Home Built 24 May 4th 08 05:13 AM
Auto-conversion adapter plate Ernest Christley Home Built 3 June 29th 05 06:19 AM
Auto-Engine Conversion Oil Cooler D.W. Taylor Home Built 0 April 29th 05 05:30 AM
Auto conversion cost post Richard Riley Home Built 13 December 28th 03 12:52 PM
C172 Penn Yan 180 HP Engine Conversion John Roncallo Owning 4 October 20th 03 06:42 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.