Auto Engine Conversion Video

"stol" wrote

Hi Jim. This is exactly the feedback I was looking for. My gut feeling
is that I should re edit the video and leave some more space in some
of the shots to answer those and more questions.

You could freeze a frame when you are looking at the appropriate area of the
plane or engine, and add some narration. I don't know how to do that, but I
know it can be done.

I would guess I could let the last scene run and do it then.

For some stuff, yes, but if you add too much, some people would turn it off.
Ya' gotta' entertain 'em! g You could make a chart with the specs and graphs,
like a power point, and import it to the video as it renders. Or you could make
a large legible chart and video it directly. The advantage is that you could
point to some stuff with a big pointer, if you wanted to call attention to
things on the charts.

I can tell you all that this video stuff is alot harder then it looks on TV..
;~)..

Yep, it must be. I've never tried it, but I sent my son to college for 4 years
to learn how to do that kind of stuff, and more. It is way over my head! ;-)
--
Jim in NC

Morgans wrote:

"stol" wrote

Hi Jim. This is exactly the feedback I was looking for. My gut feeling
is that I should re edit the video and leave some more space in some
of the shots to answer those and more questions.



You could freeze a frame when you are looking at the appropriate area of
the plane or engine, and add some narration. I don't know how to do
that, but I know it can be done.


That would be very noticible.
Video looks bad still frame.

If it's a steady shot, a short clip could be copied and stuck in place.

Or...
For some stuff, yes, but if you add too much, some people would turn it
off. Ya' gotta' entertain 'em! g You could make a chart with the
specs and graphs, like a power point, and import it to the video as it
renders. Or you could make a large legible chart and video it
directly. The advantage is that you could point to some stuff with a
big pointer, if you wanted to call attention to things on the charts.

This would be an excellent approach.

BUT...
I can tell you all that this video stuff is alot harder then it looks
on TV.. ;~)..


Too right.

The next step is a video editor.
But this is a big step.
It will take many hours of your time to learn the programs before
anything useful happens.
Then lots more hours actually making the movie.

Cutting up the source into separate scenes.
Adding "information scenes" - basically still pics of a text file,
spreadsheet, still photographs, other video clips, etc.

Rearranging to suit. a few times.

Then you get to completely re-do the voice over - a few times.

It's kinda like building an airplane, you don't really ever get
finished, you just reach the point where it's as finished as it's
going to get.


I use ULead's VideoStudio 7 - because it was the hot setup when I
started playing with this stuff a few years ago. There are probably
other/better? programs available now.

A Windows box will need 2 to 4 GIG of memory and 10 times that in
disk space to do anything useful to video.

Like I said, it's a big step.

But it you really want to edit video, it's the only way.


Richard

BTW, I'm still very impressed with what you have done so far!
IT really is a hell of a piece of work.

And, like Jim suggested upstream, it could easily (Well?...)
be turned into a major book on auto engine conversion.

In article ,
cavelamb himself wrote:

Morgans wrote:

"stol" wrote

Hi Jim. This is exactly the feedback I was looking for. My gut feeling
is that I should re edit the video and leave some more space in some
of the shots to answer those and more questions.



You could freeze a frame when you are looking at the appropriate area of
the plane or engine, and add some narration. I don't know how to do
that, but I know it can be done.


That would be very noticible.
Video looks bad still frame.

Depends on the camera and mode that was used.

If the camera records full frames, you're good, if it records successive
frames, it will look quite poor.

"Steve Hix" wrote in message
...
In article ,
cavelamb himself wrote:

Morgans wrote:

"stol" wrote

Hi Jim. This is exactly the feedback I was looking for. My gut feeling
is that I should re edit the video and leave some more space in some
of the shots to answer those and more questions.



You could freeze a frame when you are looking at the appropriate area
of
the plane or engine, and add some narration. I don't know how to do
that, but I know it can be done.


That would be very noticible.
Video looks bad still frame.

Depends on the camera and mode that was used.

If the camera records full frames, you're good, if it records successive
frames, it will look quite poor.

BTW, successive frames might also be referred to as fields.

In article ,
"Peter Dohm" wrote:

"Steve Hix" wrote in message
...
In article ,
cavelamb himself wrote:

Morgans wrote:

"stol" wrote

Hi Jim. This is exactly the feedback I was looking for. My gut feeling
is that I should re edit the video and leave some more space in some
of the shots to answer those and more questions.



You could freeze a frame when you are looking at the appropriate area
of
the plane or engine, and add some narration. I don't know how to do
that, but I know it can be done.


That would be very noticible.
Video looks bad still frame.

Depends on the camera and mode that was used.

If the camera records full frames, you're good, if it records successive
frames, it will look quite poor.

BTW, successive frames might also be referred to as fields.

Right.

I meant fields. Two per frame.

Really.

On Apr 30, 10:26*pm, "Morgans" wrote:
"stol" wrote in message

...

The first edition of my video is up on the net. There is one glitch
that I can't seem to figure out. At 14.40 into it the video locks up.
For some reason the progress arrow that moves under the pic outruns
the fed data. I have been able to view the second half of the video by
simply taking the cursor and sliding that arrow back in time about a
minute or so. Then when it resumes it runs past the 14.40 mark and
plays to the end. Don't ask whats wrong cause I am amazed I even got
it posted. Thanks again to Jim in NC and Darrel who both made this
upload possible. *Hopefully it plays ok for you...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...50730841&hl=en

I've thought of a few questions, that your video (otherwise very thorough and
well done, I thought) didn't answer.

I would like to have seen a bit of statistics, or specifications, such as engine
weight without the accessories, and the full up weight with the redrive,
accessories, and plumbing. *Also, some possible charts on climb vs. rpm and fuel
consumption, and cruise speeds vs. rpm and fuel consumption.

What did you have to do, if anything, to get the CG right, on what I would
assume is a heavier engine than is usually used on this aircraft.

Many auto engine conversions use a smaller than normal accessory drive pulley on
the crankshaft, as to not overspeed the alternator, and water pump, and such, or
else use oversized pulleys on the alternator, at a minimum. *Did you do anything
like that? *I would guess that you probably did not, since your stated cruise
RPM is not all that higher than an auto on the highway.

Do you have a split electrical system, to make electrical failure less of a
possible engine stopping event, and do other backups exist to keep the sparks
sparking, and fuel flowing?

Interesting observations on the need for a beefed up redrive front mounting
plate. *I would never have guessed that would be a problem. *Is the lower pulley
mounted on two bearings, or just the outer bearing and the crankshaft bearings?
What type of mating is made with the crankshaft? *Splines? *Any problems with
getting the alignment right, and any problems with any slop with the interface?
Any harmonics issues? *I did notice the use of your fluid harmonic balancer.
How does the belt tension function? *How often does it need to have the tension
checked and/or adjusted? *I have noted that some redrive manufacturers advertise
a single bolt tensioning feature.

On an annual inspection, (or more frequent inspections, if applicable) what
points in particular are you disassembling to inspect, and what things do you
make a point to inspect visually, or otherwise pay close attention to checking?

If you had to advise someone who was undertaking their own conversion, what top
5 (or 10) points would you tell them will be the most critical things to get
right, or will be the hardest to get right?

What things surprised you (I know you hit a few of these things in the video) as
things that you did not think would be difficult, but proved to be hard to get
right?

I know this is a pretty huge list of questions, and if you don't feel like
answering them all, or that some of them don't really apply, so be it; I would
understand. *You obviously have already spent a lot of time on doing a good
video, and these questions might well take more time than you want to invest. *I
will say that I appreciate the time you have already invested.

You know, by the time you got done with all of this, you could probably do just
a little more, and organize what you have done in the video and your other
documentations, into writing a book! *This could be the start of something big!
g

Again, a hearty "well done!"
--
Jim in NC


You know, by the time you got done with all of this, you could probably do just
a little more, and organize what you have done in the video and your other
documentations, into writing a book! This could be the start of something big!
g

Again, a hearty "well done!"
--
Jim in NC

Ok guys. make some popcorn, get a cold beverage, prop up your feet and
get ready to be bored. :)).

I will try to answer Jims questions as best that I can.

My main protocol during this whole process was and still is.. First. I
want safety and durability. second comes weight and a close third is
cost. Keeping it in those confines has served me well and kept me
alive,,, so far G

The Zenith 801 was designed for a 0-320, 0-360 with a wooden prop and
very basic instruments, this kept it real light, the usefull loads
high and costs down. My plane weighs 150+ lbs more then the factory
demo but alot is added by my desire to trick it out. My paint job
including complete corrosion protection on all the interior surfaces,
a heavy coat of epoxy primer, two coats of Dupont Imron and drop
shadow 12" N numbers added 38 lbs. The interior was more exotic then
most other 801's so I can't calcululate the added numbers but it is
probably 10-12 lbs over stock. The panel when I was finished weighed
37 lbs, probably twice the normal but I wanted all the additional
items, especially the engine documentation gauges. This is a one of a
kind powerplant and I want to know exactly what's happening and why.
With this big motor and the climate I live in I hate slow starting
motors, like when it's -35f and the 15-50 oil is as thick as molasses.
Two things help me here, one is the Powertrain technology starter, it
is a real brute and very light, and the Optima gell cell red top
battery, it is a great battery and very heavy. :(. I mounted it in
the area behind the rear seat. The main reason for such a large
battery was since I run electronic ignitions I wanted longevity if the
alternator failed. The DAR that inspected my plane asked that very
question and I had calculated with the electric demand for the
ignition alone, which is 4 amps, to keep the big fan turning I have
around 13 hours of reserve juice. The DAR ran the same numbers and
just smiled as I told him I would have to land 3.4 times to refuel
before the ign would not fire the plugs and if I was so dumb as to
take off the third time without fixing the alternator then I deserved
the Darwin award. He agreed !!!

On the Factroy Zenith 801 demo there is no weight added in the tail
for proper CG. When I figured my CG it showed I needed 39 lbs in the
tail. At first I was depressed till I found out that the 801's with
the Franklin 220 HP 6 cyl engines need to add 37 lbs. Zenith calls for
a max weight of 440 lbs firewall forward and I am at 437.. It has been
a few years since I fabricated the whole powerplant and the actual
numbers are stored in my main house, it is to be returned to me next
week when the judge finalizes the divorce... Long story short,,
married 30 years, wife hits menopause, her brain goes haywire, yada,
yada,yada. Last year she says either the plane goes or she goes, of
course I attended OSH as planned and papers where served while I was
there... I am not giving up on my plane that easily so she is gone,,,
her loss.

so I will estimate what I remember.

I weighed the motor and in its long block form it was 297 lbs, oil
pan, valve covers, intake manifold, water pump, harmonic balancer,
flywheel included,,, No fluids, no carb, no ignition, no headers or
redrive.

Redrive weighs 41 lbs.

Prop is around 20 lbs.

The remaining 80 lbs are eaten up by everything it takes to make it
fly, cowling, alternator, carb, starter, fluids, hoses, wires,
tailpipes, mufflers, mount,etc. Remember half the coolant is rearward
of the firewall so that's 1/2 of 7 quarts or about 8 lbs that is
needed but not firewall forward weight.

Motor will burn 18 GPH on takeoff @ 4400 rpms. at cruise I pull the
throttle back to 8-12 inches of manifold vacuum, this equates to
around 40% power, the fuel burn is 6.6-7.2 GPH at that setting. The
801 is a very dirty airframe aerodynamically. It will cruise at 95 mph
@ 7 GPH, at 103 mph it takes 11 gal an hour. Full power and 18 GPH
gets me 119 mph in level flight, so this basically means it hits the
brick wall of drag around 98 or so. The best way to explain this is it
is like pulling a drag chute at anything over 100. That's the trade
off of being able to take off and land in a couple of hundred feet.
Life is a compromise, :(.

The pulleys are 10% underdriven and the rpms for the water pump,
vacuum pump and the alternator seems to be perfect.

I did fabricate some coolant tricks to help the motor say cool. The
water pump impeller has a fin shroud attached to it to help make it
flow better at slow rpms and it also helps it pump coolant the
additional distance to the radiator. The following statement IMHO is
derived from years of racing, tinkering, etc and may or may not be
totally accurate. On cast iron motors using copper/ brass radiators
you need to slow down the coolant as it passes through the motor and
radiator so it has time to transfer heat, on an all aluminum motor
using a aluminum radiator you need to flow coolant almost as fast as
you can circulate it. The limiting factor is coolant flowing too fast
will cavitate and the tiny air bubbles act like insulators and prevent
heat transfer to a small degree. Also these bubbles are very errosive
so you need to make sure that doesn't happen. The best way to observe
this is to overcharge the coolant with too much antifreeze, this will
foam up when cavitation is present and you just take the cap off and
look into the expension tank to observe it. Once you seem confident ya
got it right just reduce the gycol concentrate to a normal level. I
will reveal that on my plane I recirculate my coolant in the entire
system about every 6 seconds. This is set by the size of my restrictor
disc where my thermostat goes. The 1/2" disc was too small and the
5/8" let the water flow too fast and foam just started to appear.
19/32" is what works perfect for me. Different airframes with
different radiator set ups and other variables will dictate the
restrictor disc be smaller or larger. That's one of the
"experimental" parts of alternative engines. G I do want to also add
that the Belted Air redrive is a great unit and works wonderful on V-6
Chevies. Jess had built a well engineered unit, so when I comment on
me having to modify it , that is because I am passing through it ALOT
more power then he designed it for. On a V-6 it should last for
decades it is so well built.


I wired the plane myself and it is a straight forward system.
Everything is on the main buss including ignition #1. #2 ignition is a
direct connection to the positive post of the battery using a
dedicated feed wire encased in a non conductive chase. There is one
fuse in that circuit and that can be quickly changed if need be.
Therefore I can lose the entire electrical system, the main contactor
and all other related devices on the main buss and by switching to ign
# 2 the motor will continue running for hours. The chances of that
circuit failing at the same time as the main one are as small as
hitting the lottery. I will take my chances with those odds.

Fuel delivery is straight forward. High wing tanks gravity feed a
Holley "red" racing fuel pump that is mounted under my seat and
downstream of the fuel cut off valves, the fuel then flows through the
JPI transducer, on to the engine driven diaphram fuel pump and then to
the carb, If by chance both fuel pumps fail, gravity will continue to
feed the carb with up to 12 GPH of fuel. I will just have land ASAP.
If the carb fails all I need to do is to repeatedly pump the throttle
and the accelarator pump in the Holley 2 barrel will shoot a stream of
gas into the engine, that should allow me to get it on the ground
safely... I hope. !!



Ok Intermission time... Please visit our snack bar and get a cold
drink and some delicious popcorn. !!! And if you are as old as me you
will remember Ju Ju Bees, Good and Plenty, Milk Duds and other teeth
rotting candies.ha ha.





The redrive has been a real education for me. Most people worry about
the belt as being the weak point, in fact the belt is about the only
thing that has not failed and it is the strongest item in the whole
unit, Believe it or not.. The lower pulley has just one outboard
bearing to support to crank, the inner support comes from the rear
main bearing in the motor itself. When the front plate hit the lower
sprocket Jess@ Belted Air concluded that the thrust bearing went out
and the crank traveled forward and thats what caused the scratches, in
reality if that would have happened the scratch pattern would have
been circular on the complete footprint of the sprocket. Since only
the tip of the plate contacted the sprocket the only way was for the
plate to curl and distort. I build my own motors and I an VERY picky
on clearances. The motor was built with.008" thrust end play. I check
that dimension and alot of others on every conditional inspection each
year and it is still .0085. Aluminum motors need different clearances
that iron motors and I set all of them to a safe number I felt
comfortable with. As a racer I don't give away all my tricks and those
clearances on my particular motor are propriatary and unless you get
me very drunk I ain't talking. G I figuered it was time for a
Bush's baked bean commercial.

Lower sprocket alignment is accompolished by a shaft pressed into it.
That indexes the sprocket to the crank and the other end of that same
shaft is what engages in the outboard bearing support. I set mine up
at .0005 TIR. Ya can't get closer then that. The sprocket is fastened
to the crank by way of 6 custom 7/16 SAE socket head high tensile
bolts. I Have not been able to feel any harmonics and the motor is so
smooth if you didn't see the prop turning and hear it purring you
would not know it was running. It is that smooth. !!! Belt tension,
adjustment and alignment are all addressed with the two jack screws
Jess has designed into front and rear upper bearing blocks. These
screws push the bearing blocks up and away from the bottom. Turn both
one way and the belt gets firmer, the other way and it gets looser, if
the belt tracks forward you loosen the rear jack screw. Vise a
versa.. Basically they are two independent bearing block that can be
set as needed to get the belt tensioned correctly and tracking right.
I cannot envision a single bolt tensioner that would cure a belt that
was manufactured slightly larger on one side then the other. Trust
me,, they can come that way straight from the factory.

As for someone undertaking their own conversion my advise is ,,, Keep
it simple, use common sense, buy the absolute best quality parts you
can buy, figure the size of your radiator and add at least 50%, Try
to do the best job possible and make it as functional as possible. The
whole reason the auto engine conversion has such a bad reputation is
because of some people who went out a junk yard, bought a old motor,
didn't think the process through and boasted about how cheap their
engine cost. The vast majority of the time the plane crashed and that
bad press in next to impossible to overcome. We all have an idea that
when perfected will revolutionize the experimental market, it just
takes ALOT of patience, backyard engineering and good ol Americam
spirit... Chin up guys and keep tinkering.

Oh yeah,,, Don't put your chewing gum on the bottom of your seat..
GGG

Ben Haas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com

"stol" wrote a lengthy answer, and ended with:

Oh yeah,,, Don't put your chewing gum on the bottom of your seat..
GGG

Thanks; that about answers it all!
--
Jim in NC

On Apr 26, 4:14*pm, "Peter Dohm" wrote:
"stol" wrote in message

...

The first edition of my video is up on the net. There is one glitch
that I can't seem to figure out. At 14.40 into it the video locks up.
For some reason the progress arrow that moves under the pic outruns
the fed data. I have been able to view the second half of the video by
simply taking the cursor and sliding that arrow back in time about a
minute or so. Then when it resumes it runs past the 14.40 mark and
plays to the end. Don't ask whats wrong cause I am amazed I even got
it posted. Thanks again to Jim in NC and Darrel who both made this
upload possible. *Hopefully it plays ok for you...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...50730841&hl=en

First, that was a great and informative presentation that included some new
information that should help keep me from having to accomplish some of the
same experiments.

I had no trouble with the playback. *After reading the previous comments, I
started the download, paused the playback, finished some other tasks, and
took an undeserved break untill the download completed--so the playback
worked without incident.

Peter

I am looking for some feedback on how many people were able to view it
without the pause half way through..

Ben.

On 2008-05-03, stol wrote:
I am looking for some feedback on how many people were able to view it
without the pause half way through..

I'm one, in case you didn't add me to the list Monday...
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

"stol" wrote

I am looking for some feedback on how many people were able to view it
without the pause half way through..


No problem.