<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1458" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><SPAN class=418323315-13082004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Yes--
I have used a bladder tank (AKA bubbleless) from the get-go and had no troubles
with my Webra 1.45 (after getting the pipe length right and the mixture right).
Gordon Anderson, who has had real trouble with his Webra, is switching to the
bladder and planning to test today. I'm sure he will give us a
report.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=418323315-13082004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> discussion-request@nsrca.org
[mailto:discussion-request@nsrca.org]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Randy<BR><B>Sent:</B>
Friday, August 13, 2004 8:07 AM<BR><B>To:</B>
discussion@nsrca.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: hopper theory &
practice<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Any one using a bladder tank with their Webra 145
or 160? Some poeple at the local fuel has started using them in sports
plane for fuel related problems. Seems to sovle thier
problems.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Randy</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=wgalligan@goodsonacura.com
href="mailto:wgalligan@goodsonacura.com">Wayne Galligan</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, August 13, 2004 10:43
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: hopper theory &
practice</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>There has to be more
pressure(muffler tap) to the main tank then there is draw from the
carb in order for this system to work properly. Inertia can effect
this as I stated in one of my other posts. I proved this in my
Prophecy that had the tank higher then the needle valve and when I pressed a
hard negative "g" load it would go lean. At all other attitudes it ran
fine, i.e, uplines, downlines, snaps, positive maneuvers. </FONT><FONT
face=Arial size=2>All up it has its merits but the best is that it reduces
the possibility of picking up air in the main feed line and reducing the
possible lean run or lean burp, something you don't want happening on a
turbine or helo engine. The hopper will reduce the amount
of air that enters the hopper when the main pickup encounters
bubbles of foaming. The hopper pickup will still be in
bubbleless fuel (fairly fuel tank) if the tank is isolated well
enough. Jet and helo guys use then for this reason. The
other is if you are trying to move weight forward for a tail heavy airplane.
This makes good use of the fuel transfer and extra tank instead of adding
lead ballast. I think the bladder tank(like the Tettra) is the best
alternative to bubbleless feed and I am seriously considering using
it. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Wayne Galligan</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=Jim_Woodward@beaerospace.com
href="mailto:Jim_Woodward@beaerospace.com">Jim_Woodward@beaerospace.com</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, August 13, 2004 7:54
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: hopper theory &
practice</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>I'll take a stab as why
the hopper tanks work. Liquid may be incompressible, but it is
"movable". The hopper tank has a fuel entry and exit point.
Exit point being the clunk line that goes to the engine, entry point
being the vent line. The hopper tank becomes a reservoir of fuel.
Although I think you can argue that the entry and exit point fuel
velocity (or suction force) is the same, this cannot be said for the
middle of the tank were the suction force is diffused over a larger
volumetric cross section. The image in my mind is a wind tunnel's
stilling chamber. I think an interesting question would be this:
How small can a hopper tank be to still provide the ease of fuel
draw we are looking for? Can the hopper tank be reduced to a section
of fuel tubing that is "bubbled"? Would the "bubble" work is there
was a separate entry and exit point like the ven t and clunk lines of the
hopper tank? If the bubble was 5 times larger than the ID of fuel
tubing would it work?</FONT> <BR><FONT face=sans-serif
size=2>Thanks,</FONT> <BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>Jim
W.<BR></FONT><BR><BR><BR>
<TABLE width="100%">
<TBODY>
<TR vAlign=top>
<TD>
<TD><FONT face=sans-serif size=1><B>ronlock@comcast.net</B></FONT>
<BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=1>Sent by:
discussion-request@nsrca.org</FONT>
<P><FONT face=sans-serif size=1>08/13/2004 08:34 AM</FONT> <BR><FONT
face=sans-serif size=1>Please respond to discussion</FONT> <BR></P>
<TD><FONT face=Arial size=1>
</FONT><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=1>
To: discussion@nsrca.org,
discussion@nsrca.org</FONT> <BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=1>
cc: Jerry Budd
<jbudd@QNET.COM></FONT> <BR><FONT face=sans-serif
size=1> Subject:
Re: hopper theory &
practice</FONT></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><BR><BR><BR><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3>Ive been a hopper tank diss-believer for
years. I also wonder why many continue to report benefits.
What's responsible for the benefit?</FONT>
<P><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>I'm in agreement with Nat, and what
"I think" Jerry has said regarding the fuel system with a FULL hopper tank
being a column of fluid, and the hopper would have no benefit.</FONT>
<P><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>Maybe hopper serves to eliminate
foaming and bubbles? Do I understand heli pilots use hoppers for
that reason?</FONT>
<P><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>In practice do we usually have some
air in the hopper? Or do we usually have a hopper tank that is
flexible? Might we be drawing from the hopper without replenishing
from the main tank during a vertical? Then the hopper gets
replenished during level lines?</FONT>
<P><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>Still wondering, Ron
Lockhart</FONT>
<P><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>-------------- Original message
-------------- <BR><BR>> >Matt, <BR>> >With or without the
hopper tank we still have a solid column of <BR>> >incompressible
fluid for gravity and G's to play its tricks on. I <BR>> >contend if
it runs ok with the hopper it will run just as well <BR>> >without.
Nat <BR>> <BR>> Nat, <BR>> <BR>> While not exactly accurate as
stated, your point is well taken. Your <BR>> hypothesis has some merit
when the tank is full, but it falls short <BR>> anytime else (which is
most of the flight). Adding just a small <BR>> amount of air causes the
system to become compressible (just like the <BR>> brakes on your car).
<BR>> <BR>> Jerry <BR>> -- <BR>> ___________ <BR>> Jerry
Budd <BR>> mailto:jbudd@qnet.com <BR>>
===================================== <BR>> # To be removed from this
list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm <BR>> and follow the
instructions. <BR>> </FONT>
<P>
<P></P></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>