Fuel tank options.


smeshno1@...
 

 It (the internal tank foams).. would displace some capacity, yes. 

My particular solution, Bruce, is to purchase a blown seamless poly tank, and then plans build around it. I am looking at a tank right now that is holding 250 gallons of water in my cottage. Part of my rain catchment system. It is common material. 

 My engine compression is safe using 93 octane (boat gas).. NO ethanol!!  100LL is of course also no problem for detonation protection, but I must use lead extraction additive. Neither fuel will attack the poly tank(s)... both tanks can take pressurization, within reason of course. They are tuff!! I have purposely inflated and deflated sealed tanks just to see where they fail at. No dice..
they stayed fluid tight. 

Vern     


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...>
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 8:01 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io <main@q-list.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Forward Canopy geometry
 
The airframe needs to be as light as possible.  The foam filled fuel tanks would take away a bit of fuel volume wouldn’t it?
Bruce


On Mar 23, 2021, at 6:18 PM, Anthony P <solarant@...> wrote:



[Edited Message Follows]

With all the talk about fuel dumping, tank integrity, and motorsports, I'm very surprised I have not seen or heard of fuel cells or fuel bladders being used in homebuilt composite aircraft.
All of my race cars have used fuel cells with flexible and puncture resistant bladders.  Both of the companies I buy from started out in the aircraft industry and I think still serve that industry.

Here's a link to a common supplier of high end (expensive) onboard fire suppression systems used in amateur and professional car racing.
https://www.lifeline-fire.co.uk/



Bruce Crain
 

So would you attach it to the airframe with the same ridgidity of the original tanks?  Would it handle g loads that the originals handle?  Phil Langford survived a crash in California and the fuselage handled it well. Not sure if a knock off would do the same unless it is ops checked to limits.  If you do something different make sure it equals or betters the original.
But that is going to make your aircraft finish point a lot of years down the road.  And I would love to see the “Frankenbird” fly intor Field Of Dreams before my Certificate is taken.
Geepers!  Am I beginning to sound like Jimmeh the “Great Poobah”?!  I take it as a compliment!
Bruce


On Mar 24, 2021, at 12:04 PM, smeshno1@... wrote:


 It (the internal tank foams).. would displace some capacity, yes. 

My particular solution, Bruce, is to purchase a blown seamless poly tank, and then plans build around it. I am looking at a tank right now that is holding 250 gallons of water in my cottage. Part of my rain catchment system. It is common material. 

 My engine compression is safe using 93 octane (boat gas).. NO ethanol!!  100LL is of course also no problem for detonation protection, but I must use lead extraction additive. Neither fuel will attack the poly tank(s)... both tanks can take pressurization, within reason of course. They are tuff!! I have purposely inflated and deflated sealed tanks just to see where they fail at. No dice..
they stayed fluid tight. 

Vern     


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...>
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 8:01 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io <main@q-list.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Forward Canopy geometry
 
The airframe needs to be as light as possible.  The foam filled fuel tanks would take away a bit of fuel volume wouldn’t it?
Bruce


On Mar 23, 2021, at 6:18 PM, Anthony P <solarant@...> wrote:



[Edited Message Follows]

With all the talk about fuel dumping, tank integrity, and motorsports, I'm very surprised I have not seen or heard of fuel cells or fuel bladders being used in homebuilt composite aircraft.
All of my race cars have used fuel cells with flexible and puncture resistant bladders.  Both of the companies I buy from started out in the aircraft industry and I think still serve that industry.

Here's a link to a common supplier of high end (expensive) onboard fire suppression systems used in amateur and professional car racing.
https://www.lifeline-fire.co.uk/





smeshno1@...
 

Yes.. the G load capacity should be no different. The poly tanks are profiled to the IML of the plans main tank. The reserve similar, only smaller of course. This is not off the shelf at Tractor (mmmm) Aircraft Supply Company, but the material IS the same as the tanks at farm supply stores. The white poly. A better way to think of it is a "harder material bladder".
 
 One piece..no seams..radius corners in each location. As others have done, the header tank feeds the main tank.  

 I hear you about the time to build. Been working on building the house for 3 years getting on 4 now. Solo..not one assistant. Every part of the build. At least now I won't have to drive to and from Tulsa to a job. Now my progress is moving faster. I was being reasonable when I estimated 2024. I have a 30X40 hangar on my property and a two car garage. Both airplanes fit in the hangar.    


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 2:24 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io <main@q-list.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Fuel tank options.
 
So would you attach it to the airframe with the same ridgidity of the original tanks?  Would it handle g loads that the originals handle?  Phil Langford survived a crash in California and the fuselage handled it well. Not sure if a knock off would do the same unless it is ops checked to limits.  If you do something different make sure it equals or betters the original.
But that is going to make your aircraft finish point a lot of years down the road.  And I would love to see the “Frankenbird” fly intor Field Of Dreams before my Certificate is taken.
Geepers!  Am I beginning to sound like Jimmeh the “Great Poobah”?!  I take it as a compliment!
Bruce


On Mar 24, 2021, at 12:04 PM, smeshno1@... wrote:


 It (the internal tank foams).. would displace some capacity, yes. 

My particular solution, Bruce, is to purchase a blown seamless poly tank, and then plans build around it. I am looking at a tank right now that is holding 250 gallons of water in my cottage. Part of my rain catchment system. It is common material. 

 My engine compression is safe using 93 octane (boat gas).. NO ethanol!!  100LL is of course also no problem for detonation protection, but I must use lead extraction additive. Neither fuel will attack the poly tank(s)... both tanks can take pressurization, within reason of course. They are tuff!! I have purposely inflated and deflated sealed tanks just to see where they fail at. No dice..
they stayed fluid tight. 

Vern     


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...>
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 8:01 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io <main@q-list.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Forward Canopy geometry
 
The airframe needs to be as light as possible.  The foam filled fuel tanks would take away a bit of fuel volume wouldn’t it?
Bruce


On Mar 23, 2021, at 6:18 PM, Anthony P <solarant@...> wrote:



[Edited Message Follows]

With all the talk about fuel dumping, tank integrity, and motorsports, I'm very surprised I have not seen or heard of fuel cells or fuel bladders being used in homebuilt composite aircraft.
All of my race cars have used fuel cells with flexible and puncture resistant bladders.  Both of the companies I buy from started out in the aircraft industry and I think still serve that industry.

Here's a link to a common supplier of high end (expensive) onboard fire suppression systems used in amateur and professional car racing.
https://www.lifeline-fire.co.uk/





Bruce Crain
 

I will be excited to see you fly into FOD or earlier in 2024!  Gitter done!
Bruce


On Mar 24, 2021, at 3:23 PM, smeshno1@... wrote:


Yes.. the G load capacity should be no different. The poly tanks are profiled to the IML of the plans main tank. The reserve similar, only smaller of course. This is not off the shelf at Tractor (mmmm) Aircraft Supply Company, but the material IS the same as the tanks at farm supply stores. The white poly. A better way to think of it is a "harder material bladder".
 
 One piece..no seams..radius corners in each location. As others have done, the header tank feeds the main tank.  

 I hear you about the time to build. Been working on building the house for 3 years getting on 4 now. Solo..not one assistant. Every part of the build. At least now I won't have to drive to and from Tulsa to a job. Now my progress is moving faster. I was being reasonable when I estimated 2024. I have a 30X40 hangar on my property and a two car garage. Both airplanes fit in the hangar.    


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 2:24 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io <main@q-list.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Fuel tank options.
 
So would you attach it to the airframe with the same ridgidity of the original tanks?  Would it handle g loads that the originals handle?  Phil Langford survived a crash in California and the fuselage handled it well. Not sure if a knock off would do the same unless it is ops checked to limits.  If you do something different make sure it equals or betters the original.
But that is going to make your aircraft finish point a lot of years down the road.  And I would love to see the “Frankenbird” fly intor Field Of Dreams before my Certificate is taken.
Geepers!  Am I beginning to sound like Jimmeh the “Great Poobah”?!  I take it as a compliment!
Bruce


On Mar 24, 2021, at 12:04 PM, smeshno1@... wrote:


 It (the internal tank foams).. would displace some capacity, yes. 

My particular solution, Bruce, is to purchase a blown seamless poly tank, and then plans build around it. I am looking at a tank right now that is holding 250 gallons of water in my cottage. Part of my rain catchment system. It is common material. 

 My engine compression is safe using 93 octane (boat gas).. NO ethanol!!  100LL is of course also no problem for detonation protection, but I must use lead extraction additive. Neither fuel will attack the poly tank(s)... both tanks can take pressurization, within reason of course. They are tuff!! I have purposely inflated and deflated sealed tanks just to see where they fail at. No dice..
they stayed fluid tight. 

Vern     


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...>
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 8:01 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io <main@q-list.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Forward Canopy geometry
 
The airframe needs to be as light as possible.  The foam filled fuel tanks would take away a bit of fuel volume wouldn’t it?
Bruce


On Mar 23, 2021, at 6:18 PM, Anthony P <solarant@...> wrote:



[Edited Message Follows]

With all the talk about fuel dumping, tank integrity, and motorsports, I'm very surprised I have not seen or heard of fuel cells or fuel bladders being used in homebuilt composite aircraft.
All of my race cars have used fuel cells with flexible and puncture resistant bladders.  Both of the companies I buy from started out in the aircraft industry and I think still serve that industry.

Here's a link to a common supplier of high end (expensive) onboard fire suppression systems used in amateur and professional car racing.
https://www.lifeline-fire.co.uk/







Robert Cringely
 

Speaking purely as a cheapskate who lives in the state with America's highest fuel prices, I make my own ethanol-free avgas from red 87-octane agriculture fuel. It's easy with a translucent plastic storage tank (mine originally carried bulk varietal wine -- I live in Sonoma County) with a drain tap added near the bottom of the tank. I take the tank to the gas station that sells red (untaxed -- 36 cents cheaper per gallon here) ag fuel. Starting with half a tank, add a bunch of water. Yes, add water to your gasoline! Almost immediately the ethanol will be absorbed by the water and both will settle to the bottom of the tank. You can see the demarcation right through the translucent tank wall. Drain out the water/alcohol mixture through the lower tap. I say "lower tap" because there is an identical tap a couple inches higher in the tank through which you can draw the actual fuel for your plane. As long as the demarcation line is below the upper tap, all you can take out of the tank is gasoline, no water or alcohol. This also means that there is no gasoline in the fluid you withdraw from the lower tap, which you can just allow to evaporate. 

The fuel that results from this really easy effort is lower octane than you'd like because ethanol has higher octane than gasoline. I estimate it is around 85 octane. Now that's plenty good for most older aircraft engines, but not for a VW or a higher-compression O-200. You can start with higher octane gas, but that's not red and therefore not cheap. So what I do is add Aces IV gasoline fuel additive (http://bndautomotive.com/aces-formulas/aces-iv-gasoline-formula/), which not only raises the octane number by eight points (85 to 93) it adds a fuel preservative. The stuff is expensive but costs less than $0.10 per gallon of fuel. One gallon of Aces IV treats 770 gallons of gas, by the way, so I buy a gallon only about once per year.

You end up with 10 percent less fuel, of course, but my last purchase here worked out to about $2.10 per gallon (highest gas prices in America, remember), and you aren't running all over the state looking for ethanol-free gas for $5 per gallon. This is all perfectly legal, by the way, and I'm not the first guy to do it.



On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:04 AM <smeshno1@...> wrote:
 It (the internal tank foams).. would displace some capacity, yes. 

My particular solution, Bruce, is to purchase a blown seamless poly tank, and then plans build around it. I am looking at a tank right now that is holding 250 gallons of water in my cottage. Part of my rain catchment system. It is common material. 

 My engine compression is safe using 93 octane (boat gas).. NO ethanol!!  100LL is of course also no problem for detonation protection, but I must use lead extraction additive. Neither fuel will attack the poly tank(s)... both tanks can take pressurization, within reason of course. They are tuff!! I have purposely inflated and deflated sealed tanks just to see where they fail at. No dice..
they stayed fluid tight. 

Vern     


From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> on behalf of Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...>
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 8:01 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io <main@q-list.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Forward Canopy geometry
 
The airframe needs to be as light as possible.  The foam filled fuel tanks would take away a bit of fuel volume wouldn’t it?
Bruce


On Mar 23, 2021, at 6:18 PM, Anthony P <solarant@...> wrote:



[Edited Message Follows]

With all the talk about fuel dumping, tank integrity, and motorsports, I'm very surprised I have not seen or heard of fuel cells or fuel bladders being used in homebuilt composite aircraft.
All of my race cars have used fuel cells with flexible and puncture resistant bladders.  Both of the companies I buy from started out in the aircraft industry and I think still serve that industry.

Here's a link to a common supplier of high end (expensive) onboard fire suppression systems used in amateur and professional car racing.
https://www.lifeline-fire.co.uk/