Auto Engine to Air Craft

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

WonderousMountain

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
1,853
Location
Clatsop, Or
Will you be using stock exhaust or some aftermarket parts?

What is your warmup wait, and climb to altitude?

Curious about cooling and water pump.
 

blainepga

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
69
Location
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
An opinion...

Superchargers are what's known as positive air displacement devices, they turn at a given speed and each revolution displace 'X' amount of air. That's fine when at sea level but when you go up into thinner air then the volume that is displaced is reduced accordingly (because the air's thinner) so you might have say 8psi of boost at sea level but that might be reduced to 2 psi of boost at 5000 feet (whatever). Also note under load a supercharger can not produce more psi than the driven speed allows.

A Turbocharger relies on exhaust pressure that is usually in excess of what's needed to spin the turbines so if you have 8psi at sea level, the exhaust has enough excess energy to continue to speed up the turbo's turbine to continue to maintain that 8psi at 5000 feet (whatever).

Also under load and even at low rpm, the exhaust pressure is still increased by greater cylinder pressures to provide high levels of boost that a supercharger can not as it's limited by the driven rpm.

Just a suggestion but for these reasons you might consider changing to a turbocharged version that is far more suited for flying, possibly the supercharged's internals are the same.

If at all possible could you weigh and display?
I understand how a supercharger works. WWII fighters were equipped with various supercharger/turbo-superchargers. Some had some type of mechanical drive while some were exhaust driven. As I said, I am going to change the front pulley on the supercharger to get better performance at the lower end of the rpm range.

Blaine
 

blainepga

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
69
Location
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
As you can see I sometimes stutter with my replies. My next post will cover how to make an adapter template to attach the PSRU to the engine. This only will be used to build the 6061 interface and aid in the construction of the engine mount. The mount will be fabricated from .090 wall 1" chrome moly tubing.

Blaine
 

blainepga

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
69
Location
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
I've been reading some of the posts in the different blogs on this wonderful creation where we have the opportunity to express ourselves. I've read how some individuals are trying to pare down any amount of miniscule weight from an engine in order to get it to a weight consistent for the airframe they have chosen. Designers of a particular airframe had an engine in mind for that application that weighed a specific amount. Instead of falling in love with a specific engine, why not try to find one with the proper weight and potential. I also have been following the direct drive groups. I understand the reasoning of saving the weight and cost of a PSRU, but when you introduce the various complexities of inverting an engine not designed for that purpose, the monies one could have saved are evaporated. The BMW in the WWII ME-109 was designed from the ground up as an inverted packaged. My point is that the V8's, V6's, and four cylinder engines all work in their normal positions and if you factor in a PSRU from the begining you will know if a particular engine FWF weight is viable with your intended airframe.
 

cheapracer

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2013
Messages
6,052
Location
Australian
I understand how a supercharger works. WWII fighters were equipped with various supercharger/turbo-superchargers. Some had some type of mechanical drive while some were exhaust driven.
Most WW2 planes used centrifugal superchargers, more closely related to the Turbo - not positive displacement Rootes type superchargers as the LSJ does.

The centrifugal blower has the same issues though, it is related to engine speed, not engine needs.


Depending on the pulley I end up with, I expect about 260hp at WOT.

Blaine
... at sea level.

At 5000 feet it will be 220hp and at 10,000 feet it will be 180hp, a fact of physics that can not be changed unless you have the ability to de-couple the blower from the engine and increase it's speed to compensate for the altitude change ... A turbocharger does this automatically.


Any replies not directly related to the combination I am building serves no purpose on this thread.
... and the reason I suggest a turbo to overcome this issue is not because I am talking "one on one" with you, but because this is an open forum topic that thousands of forum visitors are reading of who some might choose to follow a different LSJ path to you and informing people that the choice of a turbo to maintain boost pressure at altitude is very relevant and very on topic to this thread.

If you do not wish for posts like mine to appear debating or questioning your choices then there is a closed section where you can control what is posted ... Member Project Logs

Interesting project none ever the less, good luck with it all.
 

rv6ejguy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Messages
3,749
Location
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
I've been reading some of the posts in the different blogs on this wonderful creation where we have the opportunity to express ourselves. I've read how some individuals are trying to pare down any amount of miniscule weight from an engine in order to get it to a weight consistent for the airframe they have chosen. Designers of a particular airframe had an engine in mind for that application that weighed a specific amount. Instead of falling in love with a specific engine, why not try to find one with the proper weight and potential. I also have been following the direct drive groups. I understand the reasoning of saving the weight and cost of a PSRU, but when you introduce the various complexities of inverting an engine not designed for that purpose, the monies one could have saved are evaporated. The BMW in the WWII ME-109 was designed from the ground up as an inverted packaged. My point is that the V8's, V6's, and four cylinder engines all work in their normal positions and if you factor in a PSRU from the begining you will know if a particular engine FWF weight is viable with your intended airframe.
A couple points on your posts; THe ME 109 used a Daimler Benz engine, not BMW. For an engine in the weight class of the LSJ, .090 X 1.00 4130 is complete overkill. .060 X .75 is way more than adequate, even for something stressed for aerobatics.

With regards to the Roots type blower vs. turbocharger, a bunch of Eggenfellner Subarus had the turbos removed and replaced with Eaton blowers. They didn't work out too well. The turbo versions we did later were vastly faster, lighter and more reliable with the easy ability to vary boost with altitude.
 

blainepga

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
69
Location
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
Most WW2 planes used centrifugal superchargers, more closely related to the Turbo - not positive displacement Rootes type superchargers as the LSJ does.

The centrifugal blower has the same issues though, it is related to engine speed, not engine needs.




... at sea level.

At 5000 feet it will be 220hp and at 10,000 feet it will be 180hp, a fact of physics that can not be changed unless you have the ability to de-couple the blower from the engine and increase it's speed to compensate for the altitude change ... A turbocharger does this automatically.




... and the reason I suggest a turbo to overcome this issue is not because I am talking "one on one" with you, but because this is an open forum topic that thousands of forum visitors are reading of who some might choose to follow a different LSJ path to you and informing people that the choice of a turbo to maintain boost pressure at altitude is very relevant and very on topic to this thread.

If you do not wish for posts like mine to appear debating or questioning your choices then there is a closed section where you can control what is posted ... Member Project Logs

Interesting project none ever the less, good luck with it all.
I wasn't being knowingly being critical of anyone on my post, just clarifying my direction. I welcome any and all input because as I stated, maybe we can come up with a combination that will be viable across many airframes with the Ecotec line of engines. The blower is already there and the engine will see the dyno before it gets in the air. If any of the combinations I am going to try don't work out, then I can move to the turbo systems. I am hoping to find a pulley that will be my best option at altitude. My prop choice will be a composite electric adjustable. 180 hp at 10,000 ft doesn't sound too bad. Nice math!! Sorry, I believe that the BMW was a radial. I'm old.
 

crytes

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 16, 2014
Messages
140
Location
Clarksville, TN / USA
To get a super charger to work low rpm and still make power at altitude you will have to over drive it and blow off the extra that will waste a lot of the energy used to drive the supercharger and the reason ww2 superchargers were 2 speeds. To test this on a dyno you will need a way lower the local air pressure around the intake.
 

blainepga

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
69
Location
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
To get a super charger to work low rpm and still make power at altitude you will have to over drive it and blow off the extra that will waste a lot of the energy used to drive the supercharger and the reason ww2 superchargers were 2 speeds. To test this on a dyno you will need a way lower the local air pressure around the intake.
Understood and I am working on that. The whole idea is how will this combination perform at altitude. I was also wondering if a certain amount of an inert gas (nitrogen) introduced into the airstream whould dilute the mixture just enough to simulate various altitudes.
 

blainepga

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
69
Location
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
I haven't forgotten about this post, I just got a little side tracked with another more pressing project. Namely my car. I have over 270K miles on it and I am in the process of refurbishing another motor. I weighed all of the alternatives and decided against a new car when I can end up with exactly what I want. The basis of my project will be built around a turbocharged engine. I am very close and I will provide details and pictures when complete. Suffice to say I have tailored everything to be able to adjust on the fly from 8psi to 32psi. Yes I do know something about turbocharging. One of my former projects was twin chevy 454s in a scarob offshore racing boat. We took it from the entrance of Newport Harbor in CA to Avalon Harbor On Catalina Island against 6 foot seas in twenty minutes. A distance of 36 miles. Going with the same seas back we made it in 18 minutes. What a ride!!!

Blaine
 

blainepga

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
69
Location
Queen Creek, AZ 85142
I have been away from this site for awhile. I have had four major operations on my neck and back during this past year. I should be able to get back to normal in the next six months. As I make any progress, I will add them to this post.

Blaine
 

blane.c

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jun 27, 2015
Messages
3,882
Location
capital district NY
Hope you recover soon, looking forward to updates on your endeavor. I like superchargers, P&W used multiple speed superchargers on there engines for altitude, The one's I flew behind were all wired shut to the low altitude position to reduce maintenance problems. I think it would be better to use an oversize supercharger and a waste-gate, than other complicated ideas. It will be nice to see some more pictures of this mod.
 

cheapracer

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2013
Messages
6,052
Location
Australian
Sorry to hear of your misfourtune, hope you get back on track so we can fight more over super Vs turbo! :gig:
 

AdrianS

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2014
Messages
516
Location
Australia
I have daydreamed about a variable speed centrifugal supercharger for a long time (for automotive use).
A scooter CVT could handle the power, but none that I have looked at can be easily adapted to act in 'reverse' as would be needed.

It would be a nifty device if it existed : vary the boost by altering the drive ratio, so you get boost at low revs without overdriving the SC at high revs. It would make altitude normalisation easy too.
 
2
Top