Lady Anne Boleyn Rev07 Full Size Plan Drawings

[larry cottrill]

Hi Larry,

I was wondering if you still draw your Lady Anne in Nudis by having the intake infront of the CC, or have you found a better method?

My design work was with UFLOW1D - yes, I use the unfolded model as Graham suggested long ago. I start out with smoothly distributed low internal pressure and let her run forward from there. I also break up the engine into its main section (the "mortar") and its front end section (the "flask") as I've described in earlier topics, but that's mainly to check that I can really achieve tight resonance between the main pipe and the front end.

EDIT: I have now attached UFLOW1D graphics in my usual style - never before published for this Rev07 engine.

Of course I always have a concentric intake on my mind, so at some pointe could I have your permisson to try and build the lady Anne with a concentric intake?
I think it would be very interesting. I wouldn't be able to start building it for a month or two.

Go for it! Keep us posted when you get going through it.

I'm off to Japan this Sunday for a few weeks!

That's great! One of the few foreign places in the world I've ever wanted to see.

Take care Larry. You're always an inspiration to us all.

Thanks, Hagen - gee, that's nice to know. But, some might not fully agree ;-)

L Cottrill

[tufty]

I have now attached UFLOW1D graphics in my usual style - never before published for this Rev07 engine.

You're not fooling anyone there, Larry. No way were those done in MS Paint.

Take care Larry. You're always an inspiration to us all.

Thanks, Hagen - gee, that's nice to know. But, some might not fully agree ;-)

Some might not agree with your hypotheses, some might not agree with your approach, but that's all by the by; what everyone can attest to is that you are a prolific and enthusiatic designer, willing to accept where he has made mistakes and to learn from them, and to share his work (and, more often than not, the praise for it) with others - that in itself is an inspiration.

Carry on, that man. Carry on.

Simon

[larry cottrill]

I have now attached UFLOW1D graphics in my usual style - never before published for this Rev07 engine.

You're not fooling anyone there, Larry. No way were those done in MS Paint.

Actually, Paint was involved in all of those. UFLOW1D provided the basic images this noon. I used the Alt-PrintScrn function to capture them as .bmp files that paint can handle easily. I used paint to apply the temperatures and titles to the UFLOW "fat boy" view of the geometry. The other three were just re-saved as .gif files to compress them and end up with something I could upload to the forums.

This was all done in minutes - nothing like the fancied-up ones I did a couple of years ago where I combined the four graphs and (in one case) re-scaled for four different engine designs to compare. Now THAT was a Paint job!

Take care Larry. You're always an inspiration to us all.

Thanks, Hagen - gee, that's nice to know. But, some might not fully agree ;-)

Some might not agree with your hypotheses, some might not agree with your approach, but that's all by the by; what everyone can attest to is that you are a prolific and enthusiatic designer, willing to accept where he has made mistakes and to learn from them, and to share his work (and, more often than not, the praise for it) with others - that in itself is an inspiration.

Carry on, that man. Carry on.

Thank you for the kind words, Simon. I have one important task in life, and it's not thinking up great engines - it is trying to illustrate to the world what a follower of Jesus is expected to be like. I am always paying attention to knowing where I succeed and where I fail (which is plenty). One of the main things is, I try to encourage - I have no right to make the other guy's burden heavier, and a deep responsibility to lift what I can carry, if it appears helpful to do so. What I have found in following this principle is that it is an absolute blast to suggest something different, gently correct a misunderstanding, offer a hint of something to try - and then see the other guy succeed! There is nothing else quite like that in the world! And I end up learning a TON of stuff along the way - "iron sharpens iron", man.

I'll try to never forget that I showed up here with NOTHING in terms of concrete knowledge. This place is just one of many gifts God has given me along life's way. It's because of the people here, of course, and the wide variety of experiences we share.

Thank you, sir! All the best,
L Cottrill

[ed knesl]

Larry,

I tested the engine today and it wouln'd sustain a run without forced air.
I have got it pretty blue now from all that heat, however it quits as soon as air gets removed. Perhaps the flair is not big enough.
Fuel supply is OK - Rosco jector, runs great on other engines.
( I did not make the fuel and air supply pipes per your plan, I have it
the all fashion way, everything attached to a test stand ).
Tell me if you got your engine going.

Thank you,
Ed

[larry cottrill]

Ed -

Slog throuigh the first half of the testing thread:
http://www.pulse-jets.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=4410

You'll see that at first I had my share of problems, though for me it did sustain a little while - just until it really warmed up. The whole problem went away when I increased the fuel flow capability - once I got the fuel opened up with better pressure, she started and runs just fine! Should have some video of a couple demo runs on YouTube by Mon or Tue next week. You can see me going thru my initial troubles here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKKipJwl2Mk

Sounds like you're not getting quite that far, though. Where are you ending up with your fuel spouting point? Maybe you're not setting it up deep enough in the intake or some such. Or maybe this particular 'jector is just a little too restrictive and needs to be filed back a little or something to open it up a hair more. Just babbling here, of course ...

Try a wide-open ended small pipe (3/16 inch ID or something) spouting at the halfway point of the intake straight section or even a little farther in. My plain steel model has very little intake flare and runs out just like the stainless one.

L Cottrill

[ed knesl]

Larry,

Thank you, it might be it, I was only about an inch deep, tomorrow I will
play more with that feed tube.
It run great with just little of air from 12V air pump.
I will get her going !
The trouble was the noise, some off duty fireman already beat on my
garage door. He thaught I was welding something, having said that it
sounded like a welder. Well, I confirmed his expert thoughts.
Thats why I did not have enough time to fiddle more.
I am in the middle of the city.

Thanks again !
Ed

[larry cottrill]

Ed -

Note that Mike, and (I think) Rossco too, say that they never could start a Chinese engine with the Rosscojector. It is entirely possible that the same thing might be true here.

Has anyone successfully used the Roscojector to start and run ANY conventional FWE? (By "conventional", I mean with rear-facing intake, not the "linear" ones Steve and Eric were building for a while.) It's possible that this has been done, and I just don't remember seeing it mentioned, of course.

L Cottrill

[Rossco]

Yes... all engines now start with said method. Hahaaa

The chinese, and now it seems the chinese intake and cc specificaly is the issue. There is a big jump from intake running, to deep running that is very hard to get through.
It is possible to start and operate a chinese engine, however we have not yet successfully transitioned to permanent gas or liquid injector from the starting one.
The fwe combustor and intake start very easily this way, when tuned, and transition well to the power injector. This will be the only way to start the Sabre. (See the Sabre thread soon for update, desription and photos)

Now ill go back through this thread and look at what your actualy talking about... jumping the gun as usual!

Rossco

[larry cottrill]

Well, that's interesting. I presume there is probably a "best size" 'jector for each engine tested to get the surest starts. I say this because, obviously, the size and massflow of the gas stream from the stinger will determine the rate of air entrainment. Driving in too much air can be overwhelming for a small engine, even if the fuel rate is right, so I guess that could apply to the Rosscojector, too.

I think the air entrainment (eductor action with the Rosscojector in position) is the main reason the transitions you've mentioned turn out to be somewhat tricky.

Thanks!

L Cottrill