Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection LS1


Jason Muscat <fifty101fifty@...>
 

LMAO ... i gues i could just start putting math formulas up as i dont realy comunicate well with text, but thats no fun ... :)

Tri-Q1 <rryan@san.rr.com> wrote: Quarky, this is the first time you have made any cents.

Ryan
--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, Jason Muscat <fifty101fifty@...> wrote:

or just people are tired of hearing my 2 cents .. lol .. ONE POINT
TWENETY ONE GIGAWATS !!!! (slides the spectacles deeper in his
brow) .... im realy not that bad ... i have simply nothign better to
do with my time right now except read my e-mail and plan out building
my plane ... have to "veg" as long as i can wile i can ;) .. sorry
guys ill shut up ... lol





---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger’s low PC-to-Phone call rates.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Tri-Q1 <rryan@...>
 

Quarky, this is the first time you have made any cents.

Ryan
--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, Jason Muscat <fifty101fifty@...> wrote:

or just people are tired of hearing my 2 cents .. lol .. ONE POINT
TWENETY ONE GIGAWATS !!!! (slides the spectacles deeper in his
brow) .... im realy not that bad ... i have simply nothign better to
do with my time right now except read my e-mail and plan out building
my plane ... have to "veg" as long as i can wile i can ;) .. sorry
guys ill shut up ... lol


Jason Muscat <fifty101fifty@...>
 

or just people are tired of hearing my 2 cents .. lol .. ONE POINT TWENETY ONE GIGAWATS !!!! (slides the spectacles deeper in his brow) .... im realy not that bad ... i have simply nothign better to do with my time right now except read my e-mail and plan out building my plane ... have to "veg" as long as i can wile i can ;) .. sorry guys ill shut up ... lol

Peter Harris <peterjfharris@bigpond.com> wrote: We are all sounding a bit past our use by date except maybe Jason is right
(as yet untested). I sort of remember something like P1V1=P2V2 ie PV is
constant in a given system and if the volume increases the pressure must
decrease. The NACA vent allows the cross section ie volume to increase as
the air flows in and than sucks more air in until stability is reached.

Peter

_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Jason Muscat
Sent: Wednesday, 27 September 2006 2:39 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection LS1

im sure i have to brush up on my dynamics (statics is so much easier) but
isnt there a distinction between pressure, and what i think you are refuring
to "in the direction of flow" velocity?
after all as the speed of a moving fluid (liquid or gas) increases, the
pressure within that fluid decreases. The principle states that the total
energy in a steadily flowing fluid system is a constant along the flow path.
An increase in the fluids speed must be matched by a decrease in it's
pressure. There is no refrence to the "vector" of the pressure difference,
it is "with in" the fluid. ....sticky sticky ...

larry severson <larry2@socal. <mailto:larry2%40socal.rr.com> rr.com> wrote:

Peter,
Actually when the air slows and expands the pressure increases. It is
counter intuitive.
No, the increased pressure is perpendicular to the direction of flow.
It is reduced in the direction of flow.

Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@socal. <mailto:larry2%40socal.rr.com> rr.com

---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.










---------------------------------
Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com


Peter Harris <peterjfharris@...>
 

We are all sounding a bit past our use by date except maybe Jason is right
(as yet untested). I sort of remember something like P1V1=P2V2 ie PV is
constant in a given system and if the volume increases the pressure must
decrease. The NACA vent allows the cross section ie volume to increase as
the air flows in and than sucks more air in until stability is reached.

Peter



_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Jason Muscat
Sent: Wednesday, 27 September 2006 2:39 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection LS1



im sure i have to brush up on my dynamics (statics is so much easier) but
isnt there a distinction between pressure, and what i think you are refuring
to "in the direction of flow" velocity?
after all as the speed of a moving fluid (liquid or gas) increases, the
pressure within that fluid decreases. The principle states that the total
energy in a steadily flowing fluid system is a constant along the flow path.
An increase in the fluids speed must be matched by a decrease in it's
pressure. There is no refrence to the "vector" of the pressure difference,
it is "with in" the fluid. ....sticky sticky ...

larry severson <larry2@socal. <mailto:larry2%40socal.rr.com> rr.com> wrote:

Peter,
Actually when the air slows and expands the pressure increases. It is
counter intuitive.
No, the increased pressure is perpendicular to the direction of flow.
It is reduced in the direction of flow.

Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@socal. <mailto:larry2%40socal.rr.com> rr.com


---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.


Jason Muscat <fifty101fifty@...>
 

im sure i have to brush up on my dynamics (statics is so much easier) but isnt there a distinction between pressure, and what i think you are refuring to "in the direction of flow" velocity?
after all as the speed of a moving fluid (liquid or gas) increases, the pressure within that fluid decreases. The principle states that the total energy in a steadily flowing fluid system is a constant along the flow path. An increase in the fluids speed must be matched by a decrease in it's pressure. There is no refrence to the "vector" of the pressure difference, it is "with in" the fluid. ....sticky sticky ...

larry severson <larry2@socal.rr.com> wrote:

Peter,
Actually when the air slows and expands the pressure increases. It is
counter intuitive.
No, the increased pressure is perpendicular to the direction of flow.
It is reduced in the direction of flow.

Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@socal.rr.com






---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger’s low PC-to-Phone call rates.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Larry Severson
 

Peter,
Actually when the air slows and expands the pressure increases. It is
counter intuitive.
No, the increased pressure is perpendicular to the direction of flow. It is reduced in the direction of flow.


Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@socal.rr.com


Peter Harris <peterjfharris@...>
 

Earnest it is hard for me to grasp that the expanding airflow will increase
in pressure (but that's not your fault).

Peter



_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
MartinErni@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, 27 September 2006 11:03 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection LS1



Peter,
Actually when the air slows and expands the pressure increases. It is
counter intuitive.
Earnest


MartinErni@...
 

Peter,
Actually when the air slows and expands the pressure increases. It is
counter intuitive.
Earnest


Peter Harris <peterjfharris@...>
 

Sure Larry well the idea is that we want the airflow to expand, slow down
and therefore reduce pressure which will suck more air into (or from in this
case) the orifice.

Peter



_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
larry severson
Sent: Tuesday, 26 September 2006 7:57 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection LS1




When I look at the pic it seems to show that not only is the submerged
inlet
(which is an exit) reversed but also the entry ramp is reversed so it
tapers
outwards moving aft, not inward. Ie the exit flow is allowed to expand
which
would induce more flow out of the exit. Maybe we are both right.
Going from wide to narrow aft (not what you are proposing) has been
tried and demonstrated to NOT work.
http://home. <http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/nacaducts/index.html>
hiwaay.net/~langford/nacaducts/index.html Scroll down and
see the failed effort.

Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@socal. <mailto:larry2%40socal.rr.com> rr.com


Larry Severson
 

When I look at the pic it seems to show that not only is the submerged inlet
(which is an exit) reversed but also the entry ramp is reversed so it tapers
outwards moving aft, not inward. Ie the exit flow is allowed to expand which
would induce more flow out of the exit. Maybe we are both right.
Going from wide to narrow aft (not what you are proposing) has been tried and demonstrated to NOT work. http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/nacaducts/index.html Scroll down and see the failed effort.


Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@socal.rr.com


Peter Harris <peterjfharris@...>
 

One Sky Dog,

When I look at the pic it seems to show that not only is the submerged inlet
(which is an exit) reversed but also the entry ramp is reversed so it tapers
outwards moving aft, not inward. Ie the exit flow is allowed to expand which
would induce more flow out of the exit. Maybe we are both right.

Peter



_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
oneskydog@aol.com
Sent: Monday, 25 September 2006 9:06 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection LS1

In a message dated 9/20/2006 11:52:15 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
peterjfharris@ <mailto:peterjfharris%40bigpond.com> bigpond.com writes:

Dave thinking some more, if the cowl exit is shaped as a reversed naca inlet
I think that would do the job, as the airflow expands aft pressure is
reduced to suck more from inside the cowl.

Peter

NACA submerged inlets do not work in reverse.

Irv Culver said if you do not know how to end it just cut it off.

What you need is a converging chanel to collect the air direct it and
accelerate it up to free stream velocity into the low pressure area. A
truncated
square slit works as good as anything according to Horner.

Regards,

One Sky Dog


One Sky Dog
 

In a message dated 9/20/2006 11:52:15 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
peterjfharris@bigpond.com writes:




Dave thinking some more, if the cowl exit is shaped as a reversed naca inlet
I think that would do the job, as the airflow expands aft pressure is
reduced to suck more from inside the cowl.

Peter







NACA submerged inlets do not work in reverse.

Irv Culver said if you do not know how to end it just cut it off.

What you need is a converging chanel to collect the air direct it and
accelerate it up to free stream velocity into the low pressure area. A truncated
square slit works as good as anything according to Horner.

Regards,

One Sky Dog


Jim Patillo
 

Yeah your fillet is wider after your mod, Sam. Even more reason not
to mess with it. If you could flow it, you would probably get ever
better air adhesion than me. Can't you wax it up real good in the
areas your are concerned about and do a test. You will be surprised!

Jim P.



--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, "Sam Hoskins" <shoskins@...> wrote:

Hi Jim,

I did see your photos. I think I have a wider fillet radius than
you do. I
did change it a couple years ago when I redid the upper surface to
the
canard (after this linked photo was taken).

Here is my wing root before the repair:

http://home.mchsi.com/~shoskins/aircraftdetail/06sparrowstrainer.jpg

I want to change where the fillet joins the fuselage, aft of the
elevator,
so it attaches more like that Lancair. Might be good for a knot
or so.

Though I have not done the oil flow bit I suspect that there is
all sorts of
turbulence here. The underside looks pretty turbulent, also.

BTW, I am not too crazy about doing the oil flow test. There are
so many
cracks in that 21 year old lacquer paint I am afraid it would
permanently
give my buggy a spider web look. Then I'd have to change the name
to Brown
Recluse, or some such thing.

If I had it to do over, I might shorten the elevator by about two
inches,
inboard end, so there might be more real estate to accept a more
gentle
curve at the canard/fuselage joint.

Does that make any sense?

Sam



_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of
Jim Patillo
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 6:26 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection
LS1




Hello Sammy,

I believe you have the same style LS1 I have. Have you oil flowed
the
canard/fuselage area of you plane?

I did and just published some pictures in the photo section. What
am I
missing here? Did I not do the flow test properly? Isn't the goal
to
have a canard fuselage junction that has a smooth attached uniform
air
flow to the rear? I would presume if we have the same style
canards,
they should behave similarily. In which case there may be no need
to
revisit that area. Seriously what am I missing from my conclusion,
I
always look forward to more work.

Regards,
Tell your lovely bride I said hi!
Jim P

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com,
shoskins@ wrote:

Look how nicely the fuselage/wing junction fairs into the
canard.
That's where
I need the improvement.
Sam






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Doug Humble <hawkidoug@...>
 

I just thought of another thing to keep in mind about a side exiting cowl. Don't forget you have a cabin inlet in that general area as well. Oil down the side may enter here and, on the positive side, let you know you have a problem.

Doug "Hawkeye" Humble
A Sign Above www.asignabove.net
Omaha NE
N25974

----- Original Message -----
From: Peter Harris
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 11:27 PM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection LS1


Dave thinking some more, if the cowl exit is shaped as a reversed naca inlet
I think that would do the job, as the airflow expands aft pressure is
reduced to suck more from inside the cowl.

Peter

_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
darichardson75
Sent: Thursday, 21 September 2006 9:44 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection LS1

That Quickie picture is one interpretation of how to make that
gill. I'm hardly a Quickie expert but I belive I've seen some that
are more squared or slightly flaired like a dust pan. That just
caught my eye because it looked like the oil on my plane and what
Jim's photos showed as well. To answer your question, I'm not
sure. What I have seen is a sloped ramp. I'm sure those NACA folks
looked at that configuration, though.

Paul's point about the CO making its way in via the NACA inlet vent
may be an issue. What I noticed on the oil that was sucked out of
the cowling was that it went under the bottom of the plane between
the aft surface of the canard and the main gear leg on my Tri-Q2 on
both sides. I did't see the left or right swirl exactly that Pat
was talking about. It just seemed to follow the area above the
canard and then gently rolled underneath.

I don't know if I answered your question or not or just gave your
more questions.

Dave Richardson

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com, "Peter
Harris" <peterjfharris@...>
wrote:
>
> Thanks Dave. I see that the quickie gill installation is channeled
to exit
> above the canard . I did not think of that, it would be more
effective. But
> is that a naca inlet being used as an outlet??
>
> Peter
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
[mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com] On
Behalf Of
> Dave Richardson
> Sent: Wednesday, 20 September 2006 11:43 PM
> To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
> Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage
intersection LS1
>
>
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> Very nice Jab installation. Those are an excellent alternative.
Just
> wish the price were a little more affordable.
>
> You can just see what I was talking about in the upper right photo
shown
> on this web site
>
> _____
>
> From: Peter Harris [mailto:peterjfharris@
> <mailto:peterjfharris%40bigpond.com> bigpond.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 12:31 AM
> To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
> Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage
intersection LS1
>
> Dave, I made gills for cooling the Norton and have kept them for
the
> Jabiru
> 3300 installation. I was not aware of Burt's work. I cut "D" shaped
> panels
> from the rear side cowl one each side and glassed the "D" reversed
> inside
> the cowl to make inverted "gills". I think they produce no drag and
> located
> in this low pressure area they work well. But I have retained the
shroud
> and
> tunnel underneath. When the shroud is closed I get a cruise CHT of
> 239degF
> when ambient is about 77degF. These gills show up in the pics file
for
> VHONQ
> Oskar.
>
> Peter
>
> _____
>
> From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
> <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:
> Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
> <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of
> Dave Richardson
> Sent: Wednesday, 20 September 2006 1:19 AM
> To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
> <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage
intersection LS1
>
> Hi Jim,
>
> I had similar results in some "unscheduled" oil flow tests on my
Tri-Q2
> with an LS1. The specific point I saw was the arched clean area
about
> 4-5 inches above the canard / fuselage intersection. I always
wondered
> what the air was doing right in the contour between the canard and
> fuselage. Some had suggested that it was compressing the air there
> which would cause drag and less of a V shape and more of an L shape
> there would help. That is a compound low pressure area from the
canard
> shape as well as the fuselage shape. In fact, it is low enough to
suck
> loose oil from inside the cowling (hence my "tests"). You know I
think
> Burt and co. really had it right on the Quickie by putting the
major
> cowling exit air out over the canard through those gills. On the
Q2/xx
> we try to dump the cooling air out into a high pressure area under
the
> fuselage and we have these two nice low pressure areas. I'm sure
there
> are other considerations, though. The Eagle 150 uses this area for
> their cooling air exit.
>
> Anyway, thanks for sharing the photos.
>
> Dave Richardson
>
> Tri-Q2 825DR 69 hrs.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Peter Harris <peterjfharris@...>
 

Dave thinking some more, if the cowl exit is shaped as a reversed naca inlet
I think that would do the job, as the airflow expands aft pressure is
reduced to suck more from inside the cowl.

Peter



_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
darichardson75
Sent: Thursday, 21 September 2006 9:44 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection LS1



That Quickie picture is one interpretation of how to make that
gill. I'm hardly a Quickie expert but I belive I've seen some that
are more squared or slightly flaired like a dust pan. That just
caught my eye because it looked like the oil on my plane and what
Jim's photos showed as well. To answer your question, I'm not
sure. What I have seen is a sloped ramp. I'm sure those NACA folks
looked at that configuration, though.

Paul's point about the CO making its way in via the NACA inlet vent
may be an issue. What I noticed on the oil that was sucked out of
the cowling was that it went under the bottom of the plane between
the aft surface of the canard and the main gear leg on my Tri-Q2 on
both sides. I did't see the left or right swirl exactly that Pat
was talking about. It just seemed to follow the area above the
canard and then gently rolled underneath.

I don't know if I answered your question or not or just gave your
more questions.

Dave Richardson

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com, "Peter
Harris" <peterjfharris@...>
wrote:

Thanks Dave. I see that the quickie gill installation is channeled
to exit
above the canard . I did not think of that, it would be more
effective. But
is that a naca inlet being used as an outlet??

Peter



_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
[mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com] On
Behalf Of
Dave Richardson
Sent: Wednesday, 20 September 2006 11:43 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage
intersection LS1



Hi Peter,

Very nice Jab installation. Those are an excellent alternative.
Just
wish the price were a little more affordable.

You can just see what I was talking about in the upper right photo
shown
on this web site

_____

From: Peter Harris [mailto:peterjfharris@
<mailto:peterjfharris%40bigpond.com> bigpond.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 12:31 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage
intersection LS1

Dave, I made gills for cooling the Norton and have kept them for
the
Jabiru
3300 installation. I was not aware of Burt's work. I cut "D" shaped
panels
from the rear side cowl one each side and glassed the "D" reversed
inside
the cowl to make inverted "gills". I think they produce no drag and
located
in this low pressure area they work well. But I have retained the
shroud
and
tunnel underneath. When the shroud is closed I get a cruise CHT of
239degF
when ambient is about 77degF. These gills show up in the pics file
for
VHONQ
Oskar.

Peter

_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:
Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of
Dave Richardson
Sent: Wednesday, 20 September 2006 1:19 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage
intersection LS1

Hi Jim,

I had similar results in some "unscheduled" oil flow tests on my
Tri-Q2
with an LS1. The specific point I saw was the arched clean area
about
4-5 inches above the canard / fuselage intersection. I always
wondered
what the air was doing right in the contour between the canard and
fuselage. Some had suggested that it was compressing the air there
which would cause drag and less of a V shape and more of an L shape
there would help. That is a compound low pressure area from the
canard
shape as well as the fuselage shape. In fact, it is low enough to
suck
loose oil from inside the cowling (hence my "tests"). You know I
think
Burt and co. really had it right on the Quickie by putting the
major
cowling exit air out over the canard through those gills. On the
Q2/xx
we try to dump the cooling air out into a high pressure area under
the
fuselage and we have these two nice low pressure areas. I'm sure
there
are other considerations, though. The Eagle 150 uses this area for
their cooling air exit.

Anyway, thanks for sharing the photos.

Dave Richardson

Tri-Q2 825DR 69 hrs.









Sam Hoskins <shoskins@...>
 

Hi Jim,

I did see your photos. I think I have a wider fillet radius than you do. I
did change it a couple years ago when I redid the upper surface to the
canard (after this linked photo was taken).

Here is my wing root before the repair:

http://home.mchsi.com/~shoskins/aircraftdetail/06sparrowstrainer.jpg

I want to change where the fillet joins the fuselage, aft of the elevator,
so it attaches more like that Lancair. Might be good for a knot or so.

Though I have not done the oil flow bit I suspect that there is all sorts of
turbulence here. The underside looks pretty turbulent, also.

BTW, I am not too crazy about doing the oil flow test. There are so many
cracks in that 21 year old lacquer paint I am afraid it would permanently
give my buggy a spider web look. Then I'd have to change the name to Brown
Recluse, or some such thing.

If I had it to do over, I might shorten the elevator by about two inches,
inboard end, so there might be more real estate to accept a more gentle
curve at the canard/fuselage joint.

Does that make any sense?

Sam



_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Jim Patillo
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 6:26 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection LS1




Hello Sammy,

I believe you have the same style LS1 I have. Have you oil flowed the
canard/fuselage area of you plane?

I did and just published some pictures in the photo section. What am I
missing here? Did I not do the flow test properly? Isn't the goal to
have a canard fuselage junction that has a smooth attached uniform air
flow to the rear? I would presume if we have the same style canards,
they should behave similarily. In which case there may be no need to
revisit that area. Seriously what am I missing from my conclusion, I
always look forward to more work.

Regards,
Tell your lovely bride I said hi!
Jim P

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com,
shoskins@... wrote:

Look how nicely the fuselage/wing junction fairs into the canard.
That's where
I need the improvement.
Sam








David Richardson
 

That Quickie picture is one interpretation of how to make that
gill. I'm hardly a Quickie expert but I belive I've seen some that
are more squared or slightly flaired like a dust pan. That just
caught my eye because it looked like the oil on my plane and what
Jim's photos showed as well. To answer your question, I'm not
sure. What I have seen is a sloped ramp. I'm sure those NACA folks
looked at that configuration, though.

Paul's point about the CO making its way in via the NACA inlet vent
may be an issue. What I noticed on the oil that was sucked out of
the cowling was that it went under the bottom of the plane between
the aft surface of the canard and the main gear leg on my Tri-Q2 on
both sides. I did't see the left or right swirl exactly that Pat
was talking about. It just seemed to follow the area above the
canard and then gently rolled underneath.

I don't know if I answered your question or not or just gave your
more questions.

Dave Richardson



--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Harris" <peterjfharris@...>
wrote:

Thanks Dave. I see that the quickie gill installation is channeled
to exit
above the canard . I did not think of that, it would be more
effective. But
is that a naca inlet being used as an outlet??

Peter



_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of
Dave Richardson
Sent: Wednesday, 20 September 2006 11:43 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage
intersection LS1



Hi Peter,

Very nice Jab installation. Those are an excellent alternative.
Just
wish the price were a little more affordable.

You can just see what I was talking about in the upper right photo
shown
on this web site

_____

From: Peter Harris [mailto:peterjfharris@
<mailto:peterjfharris%40bigpond.com> bigpond.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 12:31 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage
intersection LS1

Dave, I made gills for cooling the Norton and have kept them for
the
Jabiru
3300 installation. I was not aware of Burt's work. I cut "D" shaped
panels
from the rear side cowl one each side and glassed the "D" reversed
inside
the cowl to make inverted "gills". I think they produce no drag and
located
in this low pressure area they work well. But I have retained the
shroud
and
tunnel underneath. When the shroud is closed I get a cruise CHT of
239degF
when ambient is about 77degF. These gills show up in the pics file
for
VHONQ
Oskar.

Peter

_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:
Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of
Dave Richardson
Sent: Wednesday, 20 September 2006 1:19 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage
intersection LS1

Hi Jim,

I had similar results in some "unscheduled" oil flow tests on my
Tri-Q2
with an LS1. The specific point I saw was the arched clean area
about
4-5 inches above the canard / fuselage intersection. I always
wondered
what the air was doing right in the contour between the canard and
fuselage. Some had suggested that it was compressing the air there
which would cause drag and less of a V shape and more of an L shape
there would help. That is a compound low pressure area from the
canard
shape as well as the fuselage shape. In fact, it is low enough to
suck
loose oil from inside the cowling (hence my "tests"). You know I
think
Burt and co. really had it right on the Quickie by putting the
major
cowling exit air out over the canard through those gills. On the
Q2/xx
we try to dump the cooling air out into a high pressure area under
the
fuselage and we have these two nice low pressure areas. I'm sure
there
are other considerations, though. The Eagle 150 uses this area for
their cooling air exit.

Anyway, thanks for sharing the photos.

Dave Richardson

Tri-Q2 825DR 69 hrs.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Jim Patillo
 

Hello Sammy,

I believe you have the same style LS1 I have. Have you oil flowed the
canard/fuselage area of you plane?

I did and just published some pictures in the photo section. What am I
missing here? Did I not do the flow test properly? Isn't the goal to
have a canard fuselage junction that has a smooth attached uniform air
flow to the rear? I would presume if we have the same style canards,
they should behave similarily. In which case there may be no need to
revisit that area. Seriously what am I missing from my conclusion, I
always look forward to more work.

Regards,
Tell your lovely bride I said hi!
Jim P

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, shoskins@... wrote:

Look how nicely the fuselage/wing junction fairs into the canard.
That's where
I need the improvement.
Sam






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Steve <sham@...>
 

TEST

----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Richardson
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 9:22 AM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection LS1


(Sorry keyboard misfire on the last post.)

Here is a link to a Quickie photo.

http://members.shaw.ca/ghillsden/page5.html

The shape shown is a ramped channel cut into the side of the fuselage
with the thin end aft that contours over the canard and the thick end
inside the cowling. That contour example looks just like how the oil
flowed out of my cowling and over and above the canard area. If you
also look in the photo section of the Q-List you will see some Q2 fluid
dynamic images. The side shot shows the nice low pressure area above
the canard and aft of the firewall. If I understand this correctly,
having the ramp extend into that low pressure area will help draw the
air out of the cowling because it will be the path of least resistance.
If you also look at the fluid dynamic shot of the bottom of the Q2/xx
you'll see the high pressure area aft of the firewall in line with the
forward edge of the canard that most Q2/xx's try to dump their cooling
air into (the path of most resistance).

If you look at the Files section of the Q-List and open up the Side
Cooling folder Larry Koutz placed there you'll see what they did on the
Eagle 150 to get the air into the area above the canard as well as
Larry's manometer investigations of that area on his Q200.

Some of practical issues associated with actually implementing something
like this might be:

1) How big do they need to be?

2) Is there going to be any rudder pedal interference?

3) Keeping sufficient structure to keep that area strong and supporting
the firewall and canard attachments.

4) Possible streaks down the side of the plane from oil out of the
engine compartment

5) Getting the guts up to cut the fuselage and firewall

Dave Richardson

Tri-Q2 825DR 67 Hrs.

_____

From: Peter Harris [mailto:peterjfharris@bigpond.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 12:31 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection LS1

Dave, I made gills for cooling the Norton and have kept them for the
Jabiru
3300 installation. I was not aware of Burt's work. I cut "D" shaped
panels
from the rear side cowl one each side and glassed the "D" reversed
inside
the cowl to make inverted "gills". I think they produce no drag and
located
in this low pressure area they work well. But I have retained the shroud
and
tunnel underneath. When the shroud is closed I get a cruise CHT of
239degF
when ambient is about 77degF. These gills show up in the pics file for
VHONQ
Oskar.

Peter

_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:
Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of
Dave Richardson
Sent: Wednesday, 20 September 2006 1:19 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection LS1

Hi Jim,

I had similar results in some "unscheduled" oil flow tests on my Tri-Q2
with an LS1. The specific point I saw was the arched clean area about
4-5 inches above the canard / fuselage intersection. I always wondered
what the air was doing right in the contour between the canard and
fuselage. Some had suggested that it was compressing the air there
which would cause drag and less of a V shape and more of an L shape
there would help. That is a compound low pressure area from the canard
shape as well as the fuselage shape. In fact, it is low enough to suck
loose oil from inside the cowling (hence my "tests"). You know I think
Burt and co. really had it right on the Quickie by putting the major
cowling exit air out over the canard through those gills. On the Q2/xx
we try to dump the cooling air out into a high pressure area under the
fuselage and we have these two nice low pressure areas. I'm sure there
are other considerations, though. The Eagle 150 uses this area for
their cooling air exit.

Anyway, thanks for sharing the photos.

Dave Richardson

Tri-Q2 825DR 69 hrs.


Peter Harris <peterjfharris@...>
 

Thanks Dave. I see that the quickie gill installation is channeled to exit
above the canard . I did not think of that, it would be more effective. But
is that a naca inlet being used as an outlet??

Peter



_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Dave Richardson
Sent: Wednesday, 20 September 2006 11:43 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection LS1



Hi Peter,

Very nice Jab installation. Those are an excellent alternative. Just
wish the price were a little more affordable.

You can just see what I was talking about in the upper right photo shown
on this web site

_____

From: Peter Harris [mailto:peterjfharris@
<mailto:peterjfharris%40bigpond.com> bigpond.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 12:31 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection LS1

Dave, I made gills for cooling the Norton and have kept them for the
Jabiru
3300 installation. I was not aware of Burt's work. I cut "D" shaped
panels
from the rear side cowl one each side and glassed the "D" reversed
inside
the cowl to make inverted "gills". I think they produce no drag and
located
in this low pressure area they work well. But I have retained the shroud
and
tunnel underneath. When the shroud is closed I get a cruise CHT of
239degF
when ambient is about 77degF. These gills show up in the pics file for
VHONQ
Oskar.

Peter

_____

From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:
Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of
Dave Richardson
Sent: Wednesday, 20 September 2006 1:19 AM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com
<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Air Flow at canard - fuselage intersection LS1

Hi Jim,

I had similar results in some "unscheduled" oil flow tests on my Tri-Q2
with an LS1. The specific point I saw was the arched clean area about
4-5 inches above the canard / fuselage intersection. I always wondered
what the air was doing right in the contour between the canard and
fuselage. Some had suggested that it was compressing the air there
which would cause drag and less of a V shape and more of an L shape
there would help. That is a compound low pressure area from the canard
shape as well as the fuselage shape. In fact, it is low enough to suck
loose oil from inside the cowling (hence my "tests"). You know I think
Burt and co. really had it right on the Quickie by putting the major
cowling exit air out over the canard through those gills. On the Q2/xx
we try to dump the cooling air out into a high pressure area under the
fuselage and we have these two nice low pressure areas. I'm sure there
are other considerations, though. The Eagle 150 uses this area for
their cooling air exit.

Anyway, thanks for sharing the photos.

Dave Richardson

Tri-Q2 825DR 69 hrs.