PDA

View Full Version : Things wrong with CEM



XyZspineZyX
09-19-2003, 03:24 AM
Some basic checking, running a 109G-6 through various rad settings. All readings straight from the guages at same throttle settings. Max temps reached.

@ 1000M Closed rads 89C Full open 81C

@ 4000M " " 89C " " 81C

@ 9000M " " 89C " " 81C


Isn't it suppose to cool down a bit as one goes up, or are these coolant systems that well regulated.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif In any case figured I'd better check, if any factor was modeled in for time to reach peak temp, that's where things get a little odd. Time to reach peak temp @1000M took seven minutes, @ 9000M five minutes. Isn't something a bit wrong here, higher you are the faster you overheat?


One other anomoly, could someone explain why a G-6 sets off the overheat alarm at 103 degrees C while a Yak-9 doesn't trip till 114 indicated? Were luft aircraft running underpressurized straight water?

All power settings above @ 80%. Set to @ 100% all values change to 100C and 92C for all altitudes.

Regardless of power % setting you always get an 8C degree of temp control with rads for each one. A 1.4 degree C drop per setting. Pretty simple formulas here, no connection with reality.



Message Edited on 09/19/0305:13AM by RedManAce

XyZspineZyX
09-19-2003, 03:24 AM
Some basic checking, running a 109G-6 through various rad settings. All readings straight from the guages at same throttle settings. Max temps reached.

@ 1000M Closed rads 89C Full open 81C

@ 4000M " " 89C " " 81C

@ 9000M " " 89C " " 81C


Isn't it suppose to cool down a bit as one goes up, or are these coolant systems that well regulated.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif In any case figured I'd better check, if any factor was modeled in for time to reach peak temp, that's where things get a little odd. Time to reach peak temp @1000M took seven minutes, @ 9000M five minutes. Isn't something a bit wrong here, higher you are the faster you overheat?


One other anomoly, could someone explain why a G-6 sets off the overheat alarm at 103 degrees C while a Yak-9 doesn't trip till 114 indicated? Were luft aircraft running underpressurized straight water?

All power settings above @ 80%. Set to @ 100% all values change to 100C and 92C for all altitudes.

Regardless of power % setting you always get an 8C degree of temp control with rads for each one. A 1.4 degree C drop per setting. Pretty simple formulas here, no connection with reality.



Message Edited on 09/19/0305:13AM by RedManAce

XyZspineZyX
09-19-2003, 04:21 AM
I may be wrong here , but wouldn't you expect the thinner air to provide less cooling at higher altitudes with supercharged intakes? With normal aspirated planes the power goes down with altitude, even though there is less coolong air up high, the temp stays low. But with super or turbocharged planes the power output stays higher and the thinner air is less efficient at cooling. I know this is the case with turbo charged private planes.

XyZspineZyX
09-19-2003, 04:29 AM
Air may be thinner, but its also colder, no?

XyZspineZyX
09-19-2003, 07:16 AM
Lagg series 4 overheat coolant @125C

Lagg series 66 @113

Yak-9 @113

Mig SVAK @126

Can't find anything else liquid cooled that has working indicators that overheats low as 103. How can there be such a wide variance in coolant heat bearing capacity? Coolant is coolant, should all be boiling over at or near the same point, give or take one or two degrees.

XyZspineZyX
09-19-2003, 02:38 PM
RedManAce wrote:
- How can there be such a wide variance in coolant heat
- bearing capacity?

I think the non-worshipping among us all know. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Still, bump anyway.