Date   

Re: FlyEFII System 32 Warning / Mitigation Strategy

Greg Gullikson
 

Marc,

Thanks so much for the timely response. I feel much better now. 

Thanks again,
Greg


On Oct 26, 2021, at 10:51 AM, Todd Carrico <tcarrico.cozy@...> wrote:


On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 12:15 PM David A Froble <davef@...> wrote:


As you might remember Marc, I have a strong desire to understand things.

So,my question is, if the SDS people have a good product, as you mentioned,
and the EFII system is so expensive (I'd think $6K is expensive) then why
are people going for the EFII stuff?

I'm not anywhere near to looking at engine stuff, just curious.

--
David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef@...
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA  15486


I'm not Marc, but that has never stopped me from chiming in :)

I was deciding between the two systems, and thought I was sold on the EFII stuff.  Web site was slicker, the focus seemed be all about aircraft, faster CPU can't be worse, etc..  And then go over the SDS site, and he is trashing the EFII guy and his product.  It didn't sit well with me; it seemed like a public pissing contest.  The SDS site was hard to get around in, more text than pictures (hehe, i'm a simpleton...)

But then Marc mentioned a preference for SDS.  Not a sales pitch, just that he would go that direction if he had to do it over again.  Got me to re-think the issue.  I dug harder into the SDS site, for all the information there, it is not fluff.  The information was useful.  And I sent the owner a couple of questions, and got short informative and non-judgmental answers.

IMO, I think the short answer is that the EFII looks more modern, and has better marketing..  Things that don't matter much at 10k feet over rough terrain...

tc

 


Re: FlyEFII System 32 Warning / Mitigation Strategy

Bill Allen
 

Todd Carrico wrote: “  EFII looks more modern, and has better marketing (than the SDS site)”
You hit the nail on the head. Sadly, that’s what draws people in, from Jim Bede, to Raptor - Slick marketing works, - it’s the American Way…. :^)

Bill Allen

On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 at 19:51, Todd Carrico <tcarrico.cozy@...> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 12:15 PM David A Froble <davef@...> wrote:


As you might remember Marc, I have a strong desire to understand things.

So,my question is, if the SDS people have a good product, as you mentioned,
and the EFII system is so expensive (I'd think $6K is expensive) then why
are people going for the EFII stuff?

I'm not anywhere near to looking at engine stuff, just curious.

--
David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef@...
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA  15486


I'm not Marc, but that has never stopped me from chiming in :)

I was deciding between the two systems, and thought I was sold on the EFII stuff.  Web site was slicker, the focus seemed be all about aircraft, faster CPU can't be worse, etc..  And then go over the SDS site, and he is trashing the EFII guy and his product.  It didn't sit well with me; it seemed like a public pissing contest.  The SDS site was hard to get around in, more text than pictures (hehe, i'm a simpleton...)

But then Marc mentioned a preference for SDS.  Not a sales pitch, just that he would go that direction if he had to do it over again.  Got me to re-think the issue.  I dug harder into the SDS site, for all the information there, it is not fluff.  The information was useful.  And I sent the owner a couple of questions, and got short informative and non-judgmental answers.

IMO, I think the short answer is that the EFII looks more modern, and has better marketing..  Things that don't matter much at 10k feet over rough terrain...

tc

 

--


Re: FlyEFII System 32 Warning / Mitigation Strategy

Todd Carrico
 

On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 12:15 PM David A Froble <davef@...> wrote:


As you might remember Marc, I have a strong desire to understand things.

So,my question is, if the SDS people have a good product, as you mentioned,
and the EFII system is so expensive (I'd think $6K is expensive) then why
are people going for the EFII stuff?

I'm not anywhere near to looking at engine stuff, just curious.

--
David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef@...
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA  15486


I'm not Marc, but that has never stopped me from chiming in :)

I was deciding between the two systems, and thought I was sold on the EFII stuff.  Web site was slicker, the focus seemed be all about aircraft, faster CPU can't be worse, etc..  And then go over the SDS site, and he is trashing the EFII guy and his product.  It didn't sit well with me; it seemed like a public pissing contest.  The SDS site was hard to get around in, more text than pictures (hehe, i'm a simpleton...)

But then Marc mentioned a preference for SDS.  Not a sales pitch, just that he would go that direction if he had to do it over again.  Got me to re-think the issue.  I dug harder into the SDS site, for all the information there, it is not fluff.  The information was useful.  And I sent the owner a couple of questions, and got short informative and non-judgmental answers.

IMO, I think the short answer is that the EFII looks more modern, and has better marketing..  Things that don't matter much at 10k feet over rough terrain...

tc

 


Re: FlyEFII System 32 Warning / Mitigation Strategy

David A Froble
 

As you might remember Marc, I have a strong desire to understand things.

So,my question is, if the SDS people have a good product, as you mentioned,
and the EFII system is so expensive (I'd think $6K is expensive) then why
are people going for the EFII stuff?

I'm not anywhere near to looking at engine stuff, just curious.

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@...
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486


Re: FlyEFII System 32 Warning / Mitigation Strategy

Marc J. Zeitlin
 

An EFII customer asked me:
 
I have a new engine with an EFII-4R system. Do you happen to know if this older EFII system has the same issues as you noted about the System 32?

The older EFII-4, -4R, -6 and -6R systems were OEM's from SDS, so they're ALMOST identical to the SDS system - just some minor differences. The crank sensor module and the ECU's are different from the System 32 crank trigger and ECU's, and according to Ross at SDS, the SDS versions have never had a failure of either, with a couple of thousand systems sold and well over 1 million flight hours.

As costly as the system was I am tempted to change out for something else. I’m glad that you posted the info about the EFII issues, but I’m sick that I might be eating $6000.

Anyone with the older systems from FlyEFII can rest easy, as they're just rebranded SDS units - no need for removal or replacement.

--
Marc J. Zeitlin                      marc_zeitlin@...
                                            http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright © 2021                     Burnside Aerospace


FlyEFII System 32 Warning / Mitigation Strategy

Marc J. Zeitlin
 

Folks:

Executive Summary:

This is a generic warning regarding FlyEFII System 32 EI/EFI systems with regard to the FI portion of the equipment. Anyone with FlyEFII System 32 equipment on their aircraft should be exceedingly vigilant about failures and inspections.

In good conscience, not only can I not recommend purchase and usage of FlyEFII System 32 EI/EFII systems, but I strongly discourage their purchase and usage. The company has not been responsive to failure reports and constructive feedback from me or a customer with extensive Air Force and canard flight test experience; has not accepted responsibility for known failures due to design, manufacturing or quality control; nor have they (to date) issued any Service Bulletins for known failures that have occurred.


Injector Mounts:

Recently Russ Meyerriecks discussed (on the COZY Mailing List) a failure of one of his injector port fuel injector mounts, involving a crack in the machined housing. In his case, it did not lead to in-flight safety issues, but it could have. According to a trustworthy source there has been at least one other failure of this type, which DID lead to a fire just after landing. The airplane was saved by fire trucks close by. These are safety critical failures.

To mitigate these failures, in the short term, I strongly recommend inspections of the machined injector mounts regularly - every 25 hours at the least and any time the top cowling is removed.


Crank Sensor Failures:

I support two aircraft (Long-EZ and COZY MKIV) with the FlyEFII System 32 EI/EFI installed - one system I installed and one was installed by the aircraft's owner. On both of these aircraft, we've had crank position sensor failures that have led to "hiccups" in flight. These power losses lasted anywhere from  0.5 seconds or less, to 10 seconds. When at altitude, a short hiccup that can be cured by switching to ECU #2 from ECU #1 (there are two ECU's and two crank sensors in each of these installations) is not a large safety issue. But the 10 second power loss occurred on a COZY MKIV during takeoff and an emergency landing was averted only because the crank sensor started working again, for no apparent reason. Debugging is difficult due to the poor logging capability of the System 32 equipment and on the Long-EZ, we swapped ECU's, checked wiring and connectors multiple times, with no change in the intermittent short power loss behavior. Once we swapped in a new crank sensor, the problem stopped.

The symptoms on the COZY during the 10 second power loss were identical and the owner has verified all wiring and connectivity is per specifications. All evidence points to another crank sensor failure. FlyEFII admits that they've had yet another failure of the crank sensors on a Lancair, so these are not isolated issues, nor specific to canards.

Given that either an ECU, crank sensor, or MAP sensor failure during takeoff may cause a power loss in a time/safety critical period, the fact that there are redundant components that per the installation instructions require manual pilot intervention to switch from ECU #1 to ECU #2 does not provide ACTUAL redundancy. There are numerous components (the above, plus Fuel Pumps, fuel tanks, and ignitions) that can cause power loss during takeoff and would require very quick pilot response to switch from primary to backup sources - having what is apparently a failure prone system with no effective backup other than manual intervention in the short term is no backup at all.

In the interest of decreasing risk, particularly in the takeoff regime, I have determined that there is a mitigation strategy that seems to provide (tested only on the one Long-EZ aircraft, but FlyEFII does confirm that it should work in all installations) automatic fallover from ECU #1 (failures of either the ECU itself or MAP/crank sensors) to ECU #2 and it's associated sensors. This involves an extremely simple switch replacement on the instrument panel.

Per FlyEFII's instruction manual, the last page shows an ECU fuel enable switch that sends a ground signal to either ECU #1 or ECU #2, disabling the grounded ECU (identical in theory and practice to how magnetos are disabled). If that switch is changed from an ON - ON switch to an ON - OFF - ON switch, so that when the switch is in the center position, NEITHER ECU is grounded, then BOTH ECU's will be active at the same time - if one keels over dead, the other is there to pick up the slack automatically - no manual intervention or debugging required. It is not yet clear how a sensor (rather than an ECU) failure will be annunciated, if at all, however.

I strongly recommend that anyone with a FlyEFII System 32 EI/EFI system replace the ECU enable switch as indicated above and always use the center "BOTH" position during takeoff and landing, in the same way that we switch our backup fuel pumps on for takeoff and landing. And I also recommend that during takeoff and landing, with the System 32 dual electric fuel pumps, you run BOTH pumps so that a single pump failure does not lead to engine power loss either.


Conclusions:

For anyone considering purchasing an EI/EFI unit for their plane, I strongly recommend the SDS system. A comparison of the SDS and FlyEFII systems can be seen here:


I (and my flight test expert compatriot customer) have had extensive communication experience with FlyEFII and I with SDS also, as well as having installed both systems in canard aircraft and I do not hesitate to recommend SDS for their technical expertise, support (they have even supported FlyEFII systems that have been abandoned by FlyEFII), knowledge, and extremely good performance and reliability.

Be safe.

--
Marc J. Zeitlin                      marc_zeitlin@...
                                            http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright © 2021                     Burnside Aerospace


Re: Bonding question

David A Froble
 

On 10/19/2021 11:03 AM, Dale Martin wrote:
You have a picture or some measurements and angles??
Trying.

If the pictures come thru, you can see the tube. I'll bond the tube in to the sidewalls
first, then bond in the front piece of foam, being able to bond all around the tube.

The back piece of foam, I'll either bond in, or, have it removable. Not sure yet.
Regardless, I won't be able to bond the bottom of the rear piece of foam.

Foam pieces will have 2 plys of bid.

Sidewalls are maybe 9 pieces of BID, inside the shell, which was several layers
of BID.

Enough?

My problem is, I don't have a clue how much strength a layer of BID provides.

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@...
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486


Re: Bonding question

David A Froble
 

On 10/19/2021 10:58 AM, Larry Pilkington wrote:
What loads will be applied to this tube?
Think "main spar". The cables going to the wing attach to each end of the tube.
It is mainly a tension load. Tube is installed in composite structure side walls,
with 9-10 layers of BID to reinforce side wall. There should not be any "turning"
loads. I can get a bit paranoid about things. Sometimes that is good.

My current thoughts:

Don't worry, it is not an issue.

Drill tube, install pins/bolts, then bond.

Drill tube, install without bolts, then re-drill fiberglass to install bolts.

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@...
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486


Re: Bonding question

Stan Susman
 

It would greatly help in answering your question if we knew what the job of the tube is going to be?


Re: Bonding question

Dale Martin
 

You have a picture or some measurements and angles??

Dale
http://www.long-ez.com
=====================>

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” – Edmund Burke.


On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 7:59 AM Larry Pilkington <lopilk@...> wrote:
What loads will be applied to this tube? 


Re: Bonding question

Larry Pilkington
 

What loads will be applied to this tube?


Re: Bonding question

Joe Person
 

Several types of anodizing processes exist, and their resultant material properties vary quite a bit. Bonding to anodized aluminum - integrity of the bond depends on the type of anodize process used on the aluminum. Example: an optimum bond is generally achieved when a phosphoric acid anodize is done. Not so if a “hard” anodize is done (think Circulon cookware and it’s non-stick properties).

FWIW,

-Joe Person

On Oct 19, 2021, at 7:27 AM, aviationeyes <skyeyecorp@...> wrote:

My plane has at least 2 aluminum tubes (air induction system) bonded in place by fiberglass. One since 1985 the other at least 10 years in service and neither with any sign of failure. (...And don't forget the many plans-mandated aluminum hardpoints throughout the canard, wings, fuselage.) Bonding to anodized aluminum is superior to bare aluminum. Do rough up the surface to give the epoxy something to key on. For maximum security, you could drill some divets or holes in the aluminum bonding areas to let the glass-epoxy settle in for a more kinematic bond.
--Jose


On Mon, Oct 18, 2021, at 11:43 PM, David A Froble wrote:
I'm back playing with my learning project. Got a question.

I have a piece of 1.125 dia anodized aluminum tubing, which will be bonded
into a composite structure. I'm worried about the bond breaking loose,
and the tubing turning in the structure.

I don't know if my concern is valid. Perhaps the bond will be strong enough.

I have considered some type of pins in the tubing, AN3 bolts for
example, to aid
the bonding. Should I worry about this? If using the bolts, is there
any better
way to position them. I also worry that the fiberglass will just fit
over the end
of the bolts, and not really get a good bond.

Any advice?

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@...
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486


--

skyeyecorp@...





Re: Bonding question

aviationeyes
 

My plane has at least 2 aluminum tubes (air induction system) bonded in place by fiberglass. One since 1985 the other at least 10 years in service and neither with any sign of failure. (...And don't forget the many plans-mandated aluminum hardpoints throughout the canard, wings, fuselage.) Bonding to anodized aluminum is superior to bare aluminum. Do rough up the surface to give the epoxy something to key on. For maximum security, you could drill some divets or holes in the aluminum bonding areas to let the glass-epoxy settle in for a more kinematic bond.
--Jose

On Mon, Oct 18, 2021, at 11:43 PM, David A Froble wrote:
I'm back playing with my learning project. Got a question.

I have a piece of 1.125 dia anodized aluminum tubing, which will be bonded
into a composite structure. I'm worried about the bond breaking loose,
and the tubing turning in the structure.

I don't know if my concern is valid. Perhaps the bond will be strong enough.

I have considered some type of pins in the tubing, AN3 bolts for
example, to aid
the bonding. Should I worry about this? If using the bolts, is there
any better
way to position them. I also worry that the fiberglass will just fit
over the end
of the bolts, and not really get a good bond.

Any advice?

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@...
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486


--

skyeyecorp@...


Bonding question

David A Froble
 

I'm back playing with my learning project. Got a question.

I have a piece of 1.125 dia anodized aluminum tubing, which will be bonded
into a composite structure. I'm worried about the bond breaking loose,
and the tubing turning in the structure.

I don't know if my concern is valid. Perhaps the bond will be strong enough.

I have considered some type of pins in the tubing, AN3 bolts for example, to aid
the bonding. Should I worry about this? If using the bolts, is there any better
way to position them. I also worry that the fiberglass will just fit over the end
of the bolts, and not really get a good bond.

Any advice?

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@...
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486


Re: Jack's Noselift site down

Izzy
 

Thanks Don, that's perfect.


Izzy
(603)410-7277


On Tuesday, October 12, 2021, 09:55:56 PM EDT, Don B via groups.io <donberlin475@...> wrote:


Izzy 
Does this help?




On Oct 12, 2021, at 6:29 PM, Izzy via groups.io <inbriggs@...> wrote:


I tried to get to http://www.eznoselift.com/ but the site seems to be down. I emailed Jack about it to see if he needs any help. 

In the meantime, if anyone can send me the schematic for his limit switches on the Noselift I'd be grateful.

Izzy
(603)410-7277


Re: Jack's Noselift site down

Don B
 

Izzy 
Does this help?




On Oct 12, 2021, at 6:29 PM, Izzy via groups.io <inbriggs@...> wrote:


I tried to get to http://www.eznoselift.com/ but the site seems to be down. I emailed Jack about it to see if he needs any help. 

In the meantime, if anyone can send me the schematic for his limit switches on the Noselift I'd be grateful.

Izzy
(603)410-7277


Jack's Noselift site down

Izzy
 

I tried to get to http://www.eznoselift.com/ but the site seems to be down. I emailed Jack about it to see if he needs any help. 

In the meantime, if anyone can send me the schematic for his limit switches on the Noselift I'd be grateful.

Izzy
(603)410-7277


Re: Exhaust flange nuts

johntoelaer
 

I used brass nuts rethreaded to coarse thread
n138ez


Re: Long-EZ O-320 air filter setup

Dale Martin
 

Jose,

The problem with the RV airbox is that it is not optimized or sealed very well.  When I redesign it, it included a short velocity stack in the mold.  The most difficult part of the airbox is the air diverter valve for carb heat.  We use no metal in the airbox itself with the exception of the alt. air tube which is aluminum.

If the goal is to get every bit of manifold pressure you can’t have any bumps or any sharp corners as they are defeating.  The door/valve needs to neatly cover the alternate air inlet and be smooth to not disturb the in coming air.  Air will spill out the inlet and requires a small curved surface so the rejection air can easily return to engine cooling air.

Needless to say there is a good deal to consider when making an airbox least of all robust enough to handle constant engine harmonics.

If you choose to use that type of airbox consider modifying the lower cowl into a boat tail type.  You will have all the room you need.  The mod can be accomplished in 3 days and it will enhance the planes appearance.


Dale




On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 2:42 PM aviationeyes <skyeyecorp@...> wrote:
Mike,
Thanks for the photo of your prototype. 3D prototyping to the rescue! It looks very interesting and helpful to see. I guess once a few feet off the ground flying, one could safely bypass the filter and open the ram air doors. Still, I wonder how the turbulence of the doors would affect the air into the carb mouth.

Dave Anders had an interesting article in the Oct 2018 Kitplanes about air box design where he discusses the great benefit of a very short elliptical bell entry (aka, velocity stack) into the carb mouth.

One thing I've been wondering is if the Van's FAB is really suitable for our rear engine planes. This airbox was originally designed for the low pressure, lower cowling part of a typical down draft RV with a ram air entry in front of the cowl...to preserve air pressure. In our updraft case, the airbox will already be in the high pressure lower cowl area. So I wonder if a box surrounding the air filter is required at all in our case.

--Jose


On Thu, Sep 30, 2021, at 3:13 PM, Mike Tooze via groups.io wrote:
Jose, All,

Here's something that I was playing with .


It needs to be transformed into an ally 90 deg. curved box (flat sided as shown) grafted onto a 2 1/2" dia tube (for SCAT hose) at the input end and a circular section to mate the carb. (Pictured upside down, - ignore the lead-through shown)

The concept is to retain the firewall mounted carb heat switch and air filter so to accommodate 'ram-air' within my narrow, sharp TE of the lower cowl.

The 3D full sized model works fine in that a Bowden cable or servo, pulls the two door leavers together onto their stops leaving the side doors equally open as ram air inputs. A disadvantage is that it would only be used airborne as ram air would not be filtered.


I've been meaning to follow this up but getting the Vari back to the field is my current priority.


Mike T




------ Original Message ------
From: "aviationeyes" <skyeyecorp@...>
Sent: Thursday, 30 Sep, 21 At 18:01
Subject: [c-a] Long-EZ O-320 air filter setup

The per-plans engine air filter/induction setup is said to be restrictive, robbing the engine of power producing air. (I'm referring to the firewall mounted air filter.) I've been playing with replacing my system with a Van's FAB (Filtered or Forced Air Box), but this has proven to be challenging due to space and interference issues. If I continue down this path, I will have to cut up the lower cowl and remold a bump into it to make room for the FAB. I'll also have to re-plumb (or re-design) the carb heat system. I think I'm getting lazy in my older age.

Has everyone upgraded to the Van's type (or Dale's improved) FAB? Is the Cozy system different from the Long-EZ plans? Please post pictures of you air induction setup so that I can get some inspiration ;-)

--Jose


Attachments:
  • Proof of conncept 3D prints.bmp

-- 
  


--
Dale
http://www.long-ez.com
=====================>

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” – Edmund Burke.


Re: October Canard Calendar

Izzy
 



try this 

https://canardowners.com/



Izzy
(603)410-7277

On Oct 2, 2021, at 13:49, Bob Holliston <bob.holliston@...> wrote:


I Googled COBA website. It came up with: Correction Officers Benevolent Association. Couldn't find any EZ pictures. 

On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 9:50 AM Thomas W. Carey <tcarey47@...> wrote:

The October Canard Calendar is now available on the COBA website



--

481 - 500 of 110532