Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Trace Engines LP
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Commander-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

tylorhall(at)mac.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 8:19 pm Post subject: Trace Engines LP

Team,

I had the honor to meet with David Czarnecki, CEO of Trace Engines at the aviation super show in Las Vegas the other week.



traceengines.com



They bought the Orenda (Thunder) engine and now have the production certificate.  There have been many changes to the new production engines.  The future things they are working on a confuter controlled ignition and mixture control.  

The 685 that has a pair of Orinda engines mounted on it and has flown has  been recovered from North Dakota and flew to Midland, TX.  It is still looking for an investor to finish the STC with the new Trace engines.



The Trace engine is also working on a higher HP version.  The have tested the engine up to 750+ Hp.



On of the big changes in putting this engine on an airframe is the change from trying to put every thing in-front of the fire wall to moving the radiator and cooling into the engine nacelle   This reduced the frontal area and made a sleeker look.



They are in contact with Dick Macoon about further developments.



I wonder if Midland, TX would be a good place for the annual fly-In??



Tylor Hall

kitepilot(at)kitepilot.co
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:50 am Post subject: Trace Engines LP

Hello World...

I am a lurker (and Twin-commander "drooler") in this list, and I've done 

some reading.  I have never flown on an Aero Commander 5XX (would love to 

and would trade it for glider and/or taildragger teaching...   , but I 

did a lot of "riding" (I wasn't a pilot yet) on a Turbo Commander 690A 

(impressive beast).

I owned a Bellanca Super Viking for several years and, although fairly 

active in aviation (glider tow, glider teaching, giving the occasional 

biannual and renting the occasional multi for currency), I am, at the, 

moment "plane-less". 



Question is (and please don't shoot the messenger) about the statement:

 	  Quote: 	
		  > The 685 that has a pair of Orinda engines mounted on it


	


And the WEB site (one single non-spaces line from "http" to "htm"):

http://www.epi-eng.com/aircraft_engine_conversions/additional_weight_conside 

rations.htm

Look for "An Extremely Bad Example." 



Can anyone elaborate on this?

Just plain and simple sick curiosity...

Enrique A. Troconis 



 



 



Tylor Hall writes: 



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Team,

 I had the honor to meet with David Czarnecki, CEO of Trace Engines at the aviation super show in Las Vegas the other week. 

 

 traceengines.com 

 

 They bought the Orenda (Thunder) engine and now have the production certificate.  There have been many changes to the new production engines.  The future things they are working on a confuter controlled ignition and mixture control.  

 The 685 that has a pair of Orinda engines mounted on it and has flown has  been recovered from North Dakota and flew to Midland, TX.  It is still looking for an investor to finish the STC with the new Trace engines. 

 

 The Trace engine is also working on a higher HP version.  The have tested the engine up to 750+ Hp. 

 

 On of the big changes in putting this engine on an airframe is the change from trying to put every thing in-front of the fire wall to moving the radiator and cooling into the engine nacelle   This reduced the frontal area and made a sleeker look. 

 

 They are in contact with Dick Macoon about further developments. 

 

 I wonder if Midland, TX would be a good place for the annual fly-In?? 

 

 Tylor Hall

Peter Bichier

Joined: 25 Aug 2008
Posts: 103
Location: Toledo, Ohio

Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2010 10:57 am Post subject: Trace Engines LP

For those of us who are not so cyber educated, just go to:



http://www.epi-eng.com/



then on the left side you'll find "Aircraft Engine Conversions"



then on #4 you have "Evaluating the Wisdom of an Engine Conversion"



and finally scroll down to the bottom: "An Extremely Bad Example"



... which seem to completely shoot themselves on the foot with all the 685 photos... although the Orenda exists, so somehow Mr Macoon made it work, just don't know what was the payload or any of the other specs.

_________________
560 Dreamer

John Vormbaum

Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Posts: 273
Location: SF Bay Area, CA

Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2010 11:14 am Post subject: Trace Engines LP

I have also heard from people that flew the Orenda-powered airplane that 

there were some profound vibration issues.



/J



On 3/31/2010 11:57 AM, Peter Bichier wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   



 For those of us who are not so cyber educated, just go to:



 http://www.epi-eng.com/



 then on the left side you'll find "Aircraft Engine Conversions"



 then on #4 you have "Evaluating the Wisdom of an Engine Conversion"



 and finally scroll down to the bottom: "An Extremely Bad Example"



 ... which seem to completely shoot themselves on the foot with all the 685 photos... although the Orenda exists, so somehow Mr Macoon made it work, just don't know what was the payload or any of the other specs.



 --------

 560 Dreamer





 Read this topic online here:



 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=292558#292558

nico(at)cybersuperstore.c
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2010 12:03 pm Post subject: Trace Engines LP

Very insightful article.



It immediately struck me that the moment of the additional weight on the

wing would be a killer, hanging an additional 660# 8 or 10 feet ahead of the

wing root. But the chart shows a comparable load and torsion for a 550 hp V8

even if one adds in a 100# extra for the turbos, no? 



Why would that be a bad combination? Is there anything in a study somewhere

about the vibration that folks experienced with the Orenda or other

conversions? Gut-feel tells me that the GM engine would be smoother. I don't

know why. Perhaps higher RPM?



Nico



--

tylorhall(at)mac.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2010 7:38 pm Post subject: Trace Engines LP

Weight of the engine total installation has always been a concern.

When talking to David from Trace, he talked about how this new engine is lighter that the older Orenda.

They have also change from a Hartzel to a lighter weight prop that saves over 40 lb.  Moving some items behind the fire wall also saved weight and center of gravity.

It is all beyond my understanding, but it sounds good.



The Trace engine has all new parts and new suppliers of these parts.  To be certified, every part has to have a traceable supply chain.  The Trace is an all new engine.  Or that is what they were saying.



Tylor Hall



 It has always been interesting to watch the development process.

On Mar 31, 2010, at 2:03 PM, nico css wrote:



[quote] 

 

 Very insightful article.

 

 It immediately struck me that the moment of the additional weight on the

 wing would be a killer, hanging an additional 660# 8 or 10 feet ahead of the

 wing root. But the chart shows a comparable load and torsion for a 550 hp V8

 even if one adds in a 100# extra for the turbos, no? 

 

 Why would that be a bad combination? Is there anything in a study somewhere

 about the vibration that folks experienced with the Orenda or other

 conversions? Gut-feel tells me that the GM engine would be smoother. I don't

 know why. Perhaps higher RPM?

 

 Nico

 

 

 

 --

nico(at)cybersuperstore.c
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2010 7:55 pm Post subject: Trace Engines LP

"It has always been interesting to watch the development process."



Fascinating.

--

wjrhamilton(at)optusnet.c
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2010 10:17 pm Post subject: Trace Engines LP

Folks,

A colleague of mine got involved in the tail end of the Orenda saga, there

were some fundamental problems, some common to any configuration based on

the 350 Chev. V-8 and firing order. Another was based on the problem of

cylinder liners moving.

Suffice to say, after mucho moolah was expended (invested??) none of the

problems were solved, before the global financial crisis caught up.

I did see a prototype of the "new" engine, that was going to solve all the

Orenda in-service problems, was a really pretty engine, with a really

impressive accessory drive case --- etc., etc, but it was never going to be

cheap, compared to a good old Lycoming or Continental, unless you were

building a replica Spitfire or similar.

Cheers,

Bill Hamilton



PS: Re. interesting projects, stand  by for the publicity release of a

Brittain-Norman Trilander, but with one big turbo-prop, up the fin,

replacing the three original engines.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------



--

nico(at)cybersuperstore.c
Guest

Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 12:34 am Post subject: Trace Engines LP

This always intrigued me. Why would the aviation environment be so harsh on

an engine. The 350 Chevy engine is a pretty robust engine, easily lasting

100,000 miles and at about 55 mph, it should be good for about 1,800 hours.

Granted, it doesn't run at 75% power all the time, but all sorts of things

seem to go wrong with an automobile engine as soon as they drop it into the

nose or onto the wing of a plane.



Any thoughts?



--

Peter Bichier

Joined: 25 Aug 2008
Posts: 103
Location: Toledo, Ohio

Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 4:48 pm Post subject: Re: Trace Engines LP

Hey Commanders,



For those of you who are EAA members there is a great article in this April issue (don't know if you would be able to see it):



http://www.sportaviationonline.org/sportaviation/201004?pg=2&pm=2&fs=1#pg42



A couple of guys geared a 427 Chevy onto a Velocity (4 seater canard) and claim that they match the weight of a IO-540 (including the weight of the 2 radiators and 2 alternators: 430 lbs including the prop) but are getting 450 HP. It's also a retractable gear, so they have a hydraulic system, and reach 200 kts on 15 gph. 



some pictures:



http://www.eaa.org/apps/galleries/gallery.aspx?ID=299



They even had to build their own reduction gear box (cause the factory one only lasted 8hrs...) Great article showing how some amateurs can come up with really ingenious tricks to make a great flying machine. They have at least 100 hrs flying with it, hope it's an inspiration for other folks who believe in a good old small block V8!



[quote="nico(at)cybersuperstore.c"]This always intrigued me. Why would the aviation environment be so harsh on

an engine. The 350 Chevy engine is a pretty robust engine, easily lasting

100,000 miles and at about 55 mph, it should be good for about 1,800 hours.

Granted, it doesn't run at 75% power all the time, but all sorts of things

seem to go wrong with an automobile engine as soon as they drop it into the

nose or onto the wing of a plane.



Any thoughts?

_________________
560 Dreamer

cschuerm(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 5:17 pm Post subject: Trace Engines LP

Peter Bichier wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		     hope it's an inspiration for other folks who believe in a good old small block V8!

    

well....sorta....
	


It's a Dart very high-end aluminum racing engine.  They are not what 

you'd find in the junkyard Chevy for sure unless you're buying salvage 

from nascar.



chris

BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 5:59 pm Post subject: Trace Engines LP

Good Evening Peter,

  

 Beautiful airplane. At what altitude are they getting the 230 MPH on 15  GPH?

  

 Happy Skies,

  

 Old Bob

  

 Do Not Archive

  

  In a message dated 4/7/2010 7:49:42 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  pbichie(at)UTNet.UToledo.Edu writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  -->    Commander-List message posted by: "Peter Bichier"    <pbichie(at)UTNet.UToledo.Edu>



Hey Commanders,



For those of    you who are EAA members there is a great article in this April issue (don't    know if you would be able to see    it):



http://www.sportaviationonline.org/sportaviation/201004?pg=2&pm=2&fs=1#pg42



A    couple of guys geared a 427 Chevy onto a Velocity (4 seater canard) and claim    that they match the weight of a IO-540 (including the weight of the 2    radiators and 2 alternators: 430 lbs including the prop) but are getting 450    HP. It's also a retractable gear, so they have a hydraulic system, and reach    200 kts on 15 gph. 



some    pictures:



http://www.eaa.org/apps/galleries/gallery.aspx?ID=299



They    even had to build their own reduction gear box (cause the factory one only    lasted 8hrs...) Great article showing how some amateurs can come up with    really ingenious tricks to make a great flying machine. They have at least 100    hrs flying with it, hope it's an inspiration for other folks who believe in a    good old small block V8!



[quote="nico(at)cybersuperstore.c"]This always    intrigued me. Why would the aviation environment be so harsh on

an engine.    The 350 Chevy engine is a pretty robust engine, easily lasting

100,000    miles and at about 55 mph, it should be good for about 1,800    hours.

Granted, it doesn't run at 75% power all the time, but all sorts of    things

seem to go wrong with an automobile engine as soon as they drop it    into the

nose or onto the wing of a plane.



Any    thoughts?



--------

560 Dreamer





Read this topic    online    here:



http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=293434#293434===============================================

_-=    Use the  ties  Day  ================================================               - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS  ================================================             - List Contribution Web Site  sp;                             ===================================================



	


  [quote][b]

yourtcfg(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 6:38 pm Post subject: Trace Engines LP

The reason is exactly what you said.  A 350 chevy only uses about 25-30% of its rated power to last 100,00 miles.  In marine applications, even with beefed up inererd, they only last the equivalent of 40,000 miles.  It boils down to horsepower over cubic inches.  The best airplane engines made had a ratio of about 1/2 HP for each CID (Lyc 0-032 = 150HP, Cont )-470 = 230 HP, P&W R-985 = 450 HP).  When aviation engines exceed these parameters, we in the industry call them troubled engines (TIGSO-520 = 435 HP, GTSO 540 = 380 HP, R3350 = 2500HP).  The TBO goes way down, from 2000 to 1200, in some cases even less, and many times they don't make that!!  The P-51 Mustang engine is a R.R. V1610 and makes 1500 HP, for about 250 hours.  That is the military TBO!!  If only there was some magic.  But alas, the numbers will almost always tell the outcome.  jb 



--

BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 7:41 pm Post subject: Trace Engines LP

Good Evening JB,

  

 I do not disagree with your premise, but I do think the R-3350 deserves a  bit better press.

  

 We pulled 3200 HP out of ours and a few versions developed 3500 HP. Our  3200 HP engines had earned a TBO of 3500 hours after only about ten years  in service. The DC-7 and Super Connies equipped with Turbo Compound R-3350s get  terrible press based on reports from folks who flew them when they were not  being operated as they were designed to be operated. That engine had to be run  in the regime that is now referred to as Lean Of Peak. Run it with a rich  mixture and you would burn it up. It was a great engine mounted to fine flying  machines.

  

 We ran our R-2800s for over 3600 between overhauls and they gave us a  takeoff power of 2500.

  

 Lots of pretty good piston powered airplanes out there.

  

 Happy Skies,

  

 Old Bob

  

  In a message dated 4/7/2010 9:38:53 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  yourtcfg(at)aol.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  The reason is exactly what you said.  A 350    chevy only uses about 25-30% of its rated power to last 100,00 miles.  In    marine applications, even with beefed up inererd, they only last the    equivalent of 40,000 miles.  It boils down to horsepower over cubic    inches.  The best airplane engines made had a ratio of about 1/2 HP for    each CID (Lyc 0-032 = 150HP, Cont )-470 = 230 HP, P&W R-985 = 450    HP).  When aviation engines exceed these parameters, we in the industry    call them troubled engines (TIGSO-520 = 435 HP, GTSO 540 = 380 HP, R3350 =    2500HP).  The TBO goes way down, from 2000 to 1200, in some cases    even less, and many times they don't make that!!  The P-51 Mustang engine    is a R.R. V1610 and makes 1500 HP, for about 250 hours.  That is the    military TBO!!  If only there was some magic.  But alas, the    numbers will almost always tell the outcome.  jb 



   

   -----Original    Message-----

From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com

To:    commander-list(at)matronics.com

Sent: Wed, Apr 7, 2010 6:58 pm

Subject: Re:    Re: Trace Engines LP



      Good Evening Peter,

    

   Beautiful airplane. At what altitude are they getting the 230 MPH on 15    GPH?

    

   Happy Skies,

    

   Old Bob

    

	


  [quote][b]

TRACE

Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 2
Location: Midland, TX

Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 9:48 am Post subject: Re: Trace Engines LP

I have enjoyed reading you forum.  I have some input to add to clear up some inaccuracies I have read.  This is not only from TRACEâ€™s point of view but as an engine guy as well.  



1.)TRACE builds an FAA fully certified 600HP, water cooled engine.  We have a 750HP engine that that is in validation testing with electronic fuel injection and ignition.  We are not really competing with X-Cat products, though we can build custom engines to the right application.



2.)Specs on the 685 Commander that was converted to Orenda engines can be found at www.mrrpm.com   There is rate of climb and true air speed information that shows excellent performance. I know Dick very well and these are actual numbers.



3.) â€œProfound vibration issuesâ€ are unfounded.  The engine has been designed with a unique firing order to reduce torsional vibration as much as possible.  The firing order is not similar to any automotive firing order.  The balance spec for the entire rotating system (crank, con rods and pistons) is far more precise than an automotive application to again minimize any vibration.



4.)Higher engine RPM is not ideal as it effect propeller selection.  The TRACE engine runs 4400rpm at the crank at full power, which translates into 2057rpm at the prop flange on the reduction gearbox.  This allows large range of propeller usage.  The largest prop we use a 106â€ three bladed McCauley. 



5.)Weight on any system is of concern.  TRACE has several programs in development and weight is always a consideration along with proper balance.  One is the use of MT composite pros which weigh in at 45lbs compared to a standard prop at 120lbs.  Positioning of the accessories is also crucial. 



6.)Cylinder liners are not an issue.  The key is the installation and making sure the steel cylinder liners are set in the aluminum block all the way.  TRACE has a robust process that verifies that is done prior to final deck height machining.  The steel sleeves are cooled in liquid nitrogen and installed into the aluminum block which is heated in a furnace.  The sleeves are then retained in position while they cool to prevent any movement.  The end result is an interference fit that does not allow movement.  These liners can be bored to 0.010â€, 0.020â€ or 0.030â€ at overhauls if required. 



7.) â€œâ€¦it was never going to be cheap, compared to a good old Lycoming or Continentalâ€¦â€  New technology is never cheaper especially when it is a vast improvement over air cooled engines.  The performance isnâ€™t even comparable with TRACE building 600hp engines and developing a same cubic inch engine that produces 750hp.  There are great advantages in new technology such as the accessory gear box and reduction gear box which are serious advancements in engineering specifically for aviation.  Essentially you get piston powered operating costs with turbine performance.  You donâ€™t get that with either Lycoming or Continental. 



8.) A 350 Chevy is a robust engine for a hot rod but not for an aircraft.  The reasoning for this is simple.   The duty or load cycle of the engine is what drives how robust the engine design has to be.  A 350 Chevy operates typically at about 30% of max horsepower its capable of producing when driving around town or the highway.  In aviation, an engine typically runs 75% to 100%, which creates more horsepower and corresponds directly to lead generation for example.  The cooling capability (volumetric flowrate) of a typical 350 is tripled with the TRACE engine.  The cooling scheme is  also much different with the coolant coming into each cylinder head and flowing evenly through the block, ultimately being pumped out at the center of the engine on both sides.  This cooling scheme on a TRACE engine is unique to our engine and the high output nature of aviation use.  It is a far superior thermally balanced system that automotive use.  As I stated before, TRACE has an intensely tighter balance specification on all rotating components and unique firing order, so torsional vibration wonâ€™t be an issue.  The high loading on the engine also results in higher stress on engine components.  TRACE has six bolt main caps, where the best automotive engines typically has four bolt main caps.  Overall the precision of machined components for aviation use is also more tightly tolerance and controlled which produces a better overall system as a whole.   Considering all of these factors itâ€™s not really a surprise that all of this innovation and detail to quality results in a higher price than automotive engines when there is so much more that goes into a TRACE engine.  We wonâ€™t even mention the liability insurance related to aviation component and aviation production.

I think I covered most the issues brought up in these postings.  If you have any questions, feel free to contact me with any specific issues or interest you.  TRACE is interested in closing an STC for Commanders.  I can be reached at david(at)traceengines.com



Thanks, 

David Czarnecki

Chief Operating Officer

TRACE Engines, L.P.

dongirod

Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 140

Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 10:21 am Post subject: Trace Engines LP

Thanks for the article David, I enjoyed the learning experience.



Don



--------------------------------------------------

From: "TRACE" <david(at)traceengines.com>

Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 1:49 PM

To: <commander-list(at)matronics.com>

Subject: Re: Trace Engines LP



 	  Quote: 	
		   



 I have enjoyed reading you forum.  I have some input to add to clear up 

 some inaccuracies I have read.  This is not only from TRACEâ?Ts point of 

 view but as an engine guy as well.



 1.)TRACE builds an FAA fully certified 600HP, water cooled engine.  We 

 have a 750HP engine that that is in validation testing with electronic 

 fuel injection and ignition.  We are not really competing with X-Cat 

 products, though we can build custom engines to the right application.



 2.)Specs on the 685 Commander that was converted to Orenda engines can be 

 found at www.mrrpm.com   There is rate of climb and true air speed 

 information that shows excellent performance. I know Dick very well and 

 these are actual numbers.



 3.) â?oProfound vibration issuesâ? are unfounded.  The engine has been 

 designed with a unique firing order to reduce torsional vibration as much 

 as possible.  The firing order is not similar to any automotive firing 

 order.  The balance spec for the entire rotating system (crank, con rods 

 and pistons) is far more precise than an automotive application to again 

 minimize any vibration.



 4.)Higher engine RPM is not ideal as it effect propeller selection.  The 

 TRACE engine runs 4400rpm at the crank at full power, which translates 

 into 2057rpm at the prop flange on the reduction gearbox.  This allows 

 large range of propeller usage.  The largest prop we use a 106â? three 

 bladed McCauley.



 5.)Weight on any system is of concern.  TRACE has several programs in 

 development and weight is always a consideration along with proper 

 balance.  One is the use of MT composite pros which weigh in at 45lbs 

 compared to a standard prop at 120lbs.  Positioning of the accessories is 

 also crucial.



 6.)Cylinder liners are not an issue.  The key is the installation and 

 making sure the steel cylinder liners are set in the aluminum block all 

 the way.  TRACE has a robust process that verifies that is done prior to 

 final deck height machining.  The steel sleeves are cooled in liquid 

 nitrogen and installed into the aluminum block which is heated in a 

 furnace.  The sleeves are then retained in position while they cool to 

 prevent any movement.  The end result is an interference fit that does not 

 allow movement.  These liners can be bored to 0.010â?, 0.020â? or 

 0.030â? at overhauls if required.



 7.) â?oâ?¦it was never going to be cheap, compared to a good old Lycoming 

 or Continentalâ?¦â?  New technology is never cheaper especially when it 

 is a vast improvement over air cooled engines.  The performance isnâ?Tt 

 even comparable with TRACE building 600hp engines and developing a same 

 cubic inch engine that produces 750hp.  There are great advantages in new 

 technology such as the accessory gear box and reduction gear box which are 

 serious advancements in engineering specifically for aviation. 

 Essentially you get piston powered operating costs with turbine 

 performance.  You donâ?Tt get that with either Lycoming or Continental.



 8.) A 350 Chevy is a robust engine for a hot rod but not for an aircraft. 

 The reasoning for this is simple.   The duty or load cycle of the engine 

 is what drives how robust the engine design has to be.  A 350 Chevy 

 operates typically at about 30% of max horsepower its capable of producing 

 when driving around town or the highway.  In aviation, an engine typically 

 runs 75% to 100%, which creates more horsepower and corresponds directly 

 to lead generation for example.  The cooling capability (volumetric 

 flowrate) of a typical 350 is tripled with the TRACE engine.  The cooling 

 scheme is  also much different with the coolant coming into each cylinder 

 head and flowing evenly through the block, ultimately being pumped out at 

 the center of the engine on both sides.  This cooling scheme on a TRACE 

 engine is unique to our engine and the high output nature of aviation use. 

 It is a far superior thermally balanced system that automotive use.  As I 

 stated before, TRACE has an intensely !

 tighter balance specification on all rotating components and unique firing 

 order, so torsional vibration wonâ?Tt be an issue.  The high loading on 

 the engine also results in higher stress on engine components.  TRACE has 

 six bolt main caps, where the best automotive engines typically has four 

 bolt main caps.  Overall the precision of machined components for aviation 

 use is also more tightly tolerance and controlled which produces a better 

 overall system as a whole.   Considering all of these factors itâ?Ts not 

 really a surprise that all of this innovation and detail to quality 

 results in a higher price than automotive engines when there is so much 

 more that goes into a TRACE engine.  We wonâ?Tt even mention the liability 

 insurance related to aviation component and aviation production.

 I think I covered most the issues brought up in these postings.  If you 

 have any questions, feel free to contact me with any specific issues or 

 interest you.  TRACE is interested in closing an STC for Commanders.  I 

 can be reached at david(at)traceengines.com



 Thanks,

 David Czarnecki

 Chief Operating Officer

 TRACE Engines, L.P.





 Read this topic online here:



 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=293524#293524






	


 	  Quote: 	
		  

 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

 14:32:00

nico(at)cybersuperstore.c
Guest

Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 12:12 pm Post subject: Trace Engines LP

Hi David:



Thank you for that informative piece. 



It's not often that we get the man on the spot to give us the information from the source. However, now that we have you on the line, we are going to tap your brain a little bit, which is a privilege.  



There is something that still doesn't click well, which is the firing order thing. The older V8's had a firing order of 1 5 4 8 6 3 7 2, which, if you look closely, fires on alternate banks except 8 and 6. If, and that's the gray area which you may be able to fill in, firing 6 and 8 successively on the same bank is the culprit causing torsional vibration, how did Trace solve the problem without creating a new crank with different crank (throw) angles, which would involve new counterweight technology, and perhaps cause a whole host of other problems? 



Wouldn't a dynamic coupler, like Diamond is using with the new Mercedes diesels, fitted between the crank and the reduction box have been a more effective solution? Or is the new firing order also causing a longer TBO?



Nico





--

BillLeff1(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:39 pm Post subject: Trace Engines LP

Hey guys, I flew the first test flights of the Orenda 685, yea that is me  in the video. I thought is was extremely smooth. There was a problem at idle but  I understand that was fixed. It was a problem in fuel metering.  The  biggest problem on the first flight was it had too much cooling!

  

 Best of luck to Trace Engines. Anything can stand improvement but, I thing  they had a great engine to start with. By the way, my 600HP Pratt & Whiteny  weighs 885 lbs. Think what a light weight Trace "Orenda" would do on my  T-6!

  

 Bill Leff

  

  In a message dated 4/8/2010 1:50:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  david(at)traceengines.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  -->    Commander-List message posted by: "TRACE"    <david(at)traceengines.com>



I have enjoyed reading you forum.     I have some input to add to clear up some inaccuracies I have read.  This    is not only from TRACEÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s point of view but as an engine guy as well.     



1.)TRACE builds an FAA fully certified 600HP, water cooled    engine.  We have a 750HP engine that that is in validation testing with    electronic fuel injection and ignition.  We are not really competing with    X-Cat products, though we can build custom engines to the right    application.



2.)Specs on the 685 Commander that was converted to Orenda    engines can be found at www.mrrpm.com   There is rate of climb and    true air speed information that shows excellent performance. I know Dick very    well and these are actual numbers.



3.) Ã¢â‚¬Å“Profound vibration issuesÃ¢â‚¬Â    are unfounded.  The engine has been designed with a unique firing order    to reduce torsional vibration as much as possible.  The firing order is    not similar to any automotive firing order.  The balance spec for the    entire rotating system (crank, con rods and pistons) is far more precise than    an automotive application to again minimize any vibration.



4.)Higher    engine RPM is not ideal as it effect propeller selection.  The TRACE    engine runs 4400rpm at the crank at full power, which translates into 2057rpm    at the prop flange on the reduction gearbox.  This allows large range of    propeller usage.  The largest prop we use a 106Ã¢â‚¬Â three bladed McCauley.    



5.)Weight on any system is of concern.  TRACE has several    programs in development and weight is always a consideration along with proper    balance.  One is the use of MT composite pros which weigh in at 45lbs    compared to a standard prop at 120lbs.  Positioning of the accessories is    also crucial. 



6.)Cylinder liners are not an issue.  The key is    the installation and making sure the steel cylinder liners are set in the    aluminum block all the way.  TRACE has a robust process that verifies    that is done prior to final deck height machining.  The steel sleeves are    cooled in liquid nitrogen and installed into the aluminum block which is    heated in a furnace.  The sleeves are then retained in position while    they cool to prevent any movement.  The end result is an interference fit    that does not allow movement.  These liners can be bored to 0.010Ã¢â‚¬Â,    0.020Ã¢â‚¬Â or 0.030Ã¢â‚¬Â at overhauls if required. 



7.) Ã¢â‚¬Å“Ã¢â‚¬Â¦it was never    going to be cheap, compared to a good old Lycoming or ContinentalÃ¢â‚¬Â¦Ã¢â‚¬Â     New technology is never cheaper especially when it is a vast improvement over    air cooled engines.  The performance isnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t even comparable with TRACE    building 600hp engines and developing a same cubic inch engine that produces    750hp.  There are great advantages in new technology such as the    accessory gear box and reduction gear box which are serious advancements in    engineering specifically for aviation.  Essentially you get piston    powered operating costs with turbine performance.  You donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t get that    with either Lycoming or Continental. 



8.) A 350 Chevy is a robust    engine for a hot rod but not for an aircraft.  The reasoning for this is    simple.   The duty or load cycle of the engine is what drives how    robust the engine design has to be.  A 350 Chevy operates typically at    about 30% of max horsepower its capable of producing when driving around town    or the highway.  In aviation, an engine typically runs 75% to 100%, which    creates more horsepower and corresponds directly to lead generation for    example.  The cooling capability (volumetric flowrate) of a typical 350    is tripled with the TRACE engine.  The cooling scheme is  also much    different with the coolant coming into each cylinder head and flowing evenly    through the block, ultimately being pumped out at the center of the engine on    both sides.  This cooling scheme on a TRACE engine is unique to our    engine and the high output nature of aviation use.  It is a far superior    thermally balanced system that automotive use.  As I stated before, TRACE    has an intensely tighter balance specification on all rotating components and    unique firing order, so torsional vibration wonÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t be an issue.  The    high loading on the engine also results in higher stress on engine    components.  TRACE has six bolt main caps, where the best automotive    engines typically has four bolt main caps.  Overall the precision of    machined components for aviation use is also more tightly tolerance and    controlled which produces a better overall system as a whole.      Considering all of these factors itÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s not really a surprise that all of this    innovation and detail to quality results in a higher price than automotive    engines when there is so much more that goes into a TRACE engine.  We    wonÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t even mention the liability insurance related to aviation component and    aviation production.

I think I covered most the issues brought up in these    postings.  If you have any questions, feel free to contact me with any    specific issues or interest you.  TRACE is interested in closing an STC    for Commanders.  I can be reached at    david(at)traceengines.com



Thanks, 

David Czarnecki

Chief Operating    Officer

TRACE Engines, L.P.





Read this topic online    here:



http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=293524#293524===============================================

_-=    Use the  ties  Day  ================================================               - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS  ================================================             - List Contribution Web Site  sp;                             ===================================================



	


  [quote][b]

tylorhall(at)mac.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 7:48 pm Post subject: Trace Engines LP

Bill,I would hope it would keep running?



Did I see a video of you landing on a road in Wi?

David,

Thank you for joining our merry group.  You have a lot more detailed information than I could relate.

I have always enjoyed listening to Dick talk about the engine development.  I know total weight was a big thing with make it all work.

The Thunder engine was just a start.  The Orinda took it to the next step that was Certified .   It appears that the Trace is a whole another higher level.  I do not know or totally understand all the changes, but it sounds like real progress.

We love hearing about any new developments.

Bill, what would 750HP Trace do to your T-6?  Would it become a T-7.5?



 Tylor Hall



On Apr 8, 2010, at 8:29 PM, BillLeff1(at)aol.com (BillLeff1(at)aol.com) wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		    Hey guys, I flew the first test flights of the Orenda 685, yea that is me  in the video. I thought is was extremely smooth. There was a problem at idle but  I understand that was fixed. It was a problem in fuel metering.  The  biggest problem on the first flight was it had too much cooling!

  

 Best of luck to Trace Engines. Anything can stand improvement but, I thing  they had a great engine to start with. By the way, my 600HP Pratt & Whiteny  weighs 885 lbs. Think what a light weight Trace "Orenda" would do on my  T-6!

  

 Bill Leff

  

  In a message dated 4/8/2010 1:50:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  david(at)traceengines.com (david(at)traceengines.com) writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  -->    Commander-List message posted by: "TRACE"    <david(at)traceengines.com (david(at)traceengines.com)>



I have enjoyed reading you forum.     I have some input to add to clear up some inaccuracies I have read.  This    is not only from TRACEÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s point of view but as an engine guy as well.     



1.)TRACE builds an FAA fully certified 600HP, water cooled    engine.  We have a 750HP engine that that is in validation testing with    electronic fuel injection and ignition.  We are not really competing with    X-Cat products, though we can build custom engines to the right    application.



2.)Specs on the 685 Commander that was converted to Orenda    engines can be found at www.mrrpm.com   There is rate of climb and    true air speed information that shows excellent performance. I know Dick very    well and these are actual numbers.



3.) Ã¢â‚¬Å“Profound vibration issuesÃ¢â‚¬Â    are unfounded.  The engine has been designed with a unique firing order    to reduce torsional vibration as much as possible.  The firing order is    not similar to any automotive firing order.  The balance spec for the    entire rotating system (crank, con rods and pistons) is far more precise than    an automotive application to again minimize any vibration.



4.)Higher    engine RPM is not ideal as it effect propeller selection.  The TRACE    engine runs 4400rpm at the crank at full power, which translates into 2057rpm    at the prop flange on the reduction gearbox.  This allows large range of    propeller usage.  The largest prop we use a 106Ã¢â‚¬Â three bladed McCauley.    



5.)Weight on any system is of concern.  TRACE has several    programs in development and weight is always a consideration along with proper    balance.  One is the use of MT composite pros which weigh in at 45lbs    compared to a standard prop at 120lbs.  Positioning of the accessories is    also crucial. 



6.)Cylinder liners are not an issue.  The key is    the installation and making sure the steel cylinder liners are set in the    aluminum block all the way.  TRACE has a robust process that verifies    that is done prior to final deck height machining.  The steel sleeves are    cooled in liquid nitrogen and installed into the aluminum block which is    heated in a furnace.  The sleeves are then retained in position while    they cool to prevent any movement.  The end result is an interference fit    that does not allow movement.  These liners can be bored to 0.010Ã¢â‚¬Â,    0.020Ã¢â‚¬Â or 0.030Ã¢â‚¬Â at overhauls if required. 



7.) Ã¢â‚¬Å“Ã¢â‚¬Â¦it was never    going to be cheap, compared to a good old Lycoming or ContinentalÃ¢â‚¬Â¦Ã¢â‚¬Â     New technology is never cheaper especially when it is a vast improvement over    air cooled engines.  The performance isnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t even comparable with TRACE    building 600hp engines and developing a same cubic inch engine that produces    750hp.  There are great advantages in new technology such as the    accessory gear box and reduction gear box which are serious advancements in    engineering specifically for aviation.  Essentially you get piston    powered operating costs with turbine performance.  You donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t get that    with either Lycoming or Continental. 



8.) A 350 Chevy is a robust    engine for a hot rod but not for an aircraft.  The reasoning for this is    simple.   The duty or load cycle of the engine is what drives how    robust the engine design has to be.  A 350 Chevy operates typically at    about 30% of max horsepower its capable of producing when driving around town    or the highway.  In aviation, an engine typically runs 75% to 100%, which    creates more horsepower and corresponds directly to lead generation for    example.  The cooling capability (volumetric flowrate) of a typical 350    is tripled with the TRACE engine.  The cooling scheme is  also much    different with the coolant coming into each cylinder head and flowing evenly    through the block, ultimately being pumped out at the center of the engine on    both sides.  This cooling scheme on a TRACE engine is unique to our    engine and the high output nature of aviation use.  It is a far superior    thermally balanced system that automotive use.  As I stated before, TRACE    has an intensely tighter balance specification on all rotating components and    unique firing order, so torsional vibration wonÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t be an issue.  The    high loading on the engine also results in higher stress on engine    components.  TRACE has six bolt main caps, where the best automotive    engines typically has four bolt main caps.  Overall the precision of    machined components for aviation use is also more tightly tolerance and    controlled which produces a better overall system as a whole.      Considering all of these factors itÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s not really a surprise that all of this    innovation and detail to quality results in a higher price than automotive    engines when there is so much more that goes into a TRACE engine.  We    wonÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t even mention the liability insurance related to aviation component and    aviation production.

I think I covered most the issues brought up in these    postings.  If you have any questions, feel free to contact me with any    specific issues or interest you.  TRACE is interested in closing an STC    for Commanders.  I can be reached at    david(at)traceengines.com (david(at)traceengines.com)



Thanks, 

David Czarnecki

Chief Operating    Officer

TRACE Engines, L.P.





Read this topic online    here:



http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=293524#293524========== Use the  ties  Day  =======================               - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS  =======================             - List Contribution Web Site  sp;                             =



	


   	  Quote: 	
		  



href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List

href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com

href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution

BillLeff1(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:49 pm Post subject: Trace Engines LP

Yes that was me!

  

 Bill leff

  

  In a message dated 4/8/2010 11:48:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  tylorhall(at)mac.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  Bill,    I would hope it would keep running?

   

   Did I see a video of you landing on a road in Wi?

   



   David,

   Thank you for joining our merry group.  You have a lot more detailed    information than I could relate.

   I have always enjoyed listening to Dick talk about the engine    development.  I know total weight was a big thing with make it all    work.

   The Thunder engine was just a start.  The Orinda took it to the next    step that was Certified .   It appears that the Trace is a whole another    higher level.  I do not know or totally understand all the changes, but    it sounds like real progress.

   We love hearing about any new developments.

   



   Bill, what would 750HP Trace do to your T-6?  Would it become a    T-7.5?

   



   

         Tylor Hall

   





      On Apr 8, 2010, at 8:29 PM, BillLeff1(at)aol.com (BillLeff1(at)aol.com) wrote:

    	  Quote: 	
		            Hey guys, I flew the first test flights of the Orenda 685, yea that is      me in the video. I thought is was extremely smooth. There was a problem at      idle but I understand that was fixed. It was a problem in fuel      metering.  The biggest problem on the first flight was it had too much      cooling!

      

     Best of luck to Trace Engines. Anything can stand improvement but, I      thing they had a great engine to start with. By the way, my 600HP Pratt      & Whiteny weighs 885 lbs. Think what a light weight Trace "Orenda" would      do on my T-6!

      

     Bill Leff

      

          In a message dated 4/8/2010 1:50:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, david(at)traceengines.com (david(at)traceengines.com)  writes:

      	  Quote: 	
		  --> Commander-List message posted by: "TRACE" <david(at)traceengines.com (david(at)traceengines.com)>



I        have enjoyed reading you forum.  I have some input to add to clear up        some inaccuracies I have read.  This is not only from TRACEÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s point        of view but as an engine guy as well.  



1.)TRACE builds an FAA        fully certified 600HP, water cooled engine.  We have a 750HP engine        that that is in validation testing with electronic fuel injection and        ignition.  We are not really competing with X-Cat products, though we        can build custom engines to the right application.



2.)Specs on the        685 Commander that was converted to Orenda engines can be found at www.mrrpm.com   There is rate        of climb and true air speed information that shows excellent performance.        I know Dick very well and these are actual numbers.



3.) Ã¢â‚¬Å“Profound        vibration issuesÃ¢â‚¬Â are unfounded.  The engine has been designed with        a unique firing order to reduce torsional vibration as much as        possible.  The firing order is not similar to any automotive firing        order.  The balance spec for the entire rotating system (crank, con        rods and pistons) is far more precise than an automotive application to        again minimize any vibration.



4.)Higher engine RPM is not ideal as        it effect propeller selection.  The TRACE engine runs 4400rpm at the        crank at full power, which translates into 2057rpm at the prop flange on        the reduction gearbox.  This allows large range of propeller        usage.  The largest prop we use a 106Ã¢â‚¬Â three bladed McCauley.        



5.)Weight on any system is of concern.  TRACE has several        programs in development and weight is always a consideration along with        proper balance.  One is the use of MT composite pros which weigh in        at 45lbs compared to a standard prop at 120lbs.  Positioning of the        accessories is also crucial. 



6.)Cylinder liners are not an        issue.  The key is the installation and making sure the steel        cylinder liners are set in the aluminum block all the way.  TRACE has        a robust process that verifies that is done prior to final deck height        machining.  The steel sleeves are cooled in liquid nitrogen and        installed into the aluminum block which is heated in a furnace.  The        sleeves are then retained in position while they cool to prevent any        movement.  The end result is an interference fit that does not allow        movement.  These liners can be bored to 0.010Ã¢â‚¬Â, 0.020Ã¢â‚¬Â or        0.030Ã¢â‚¬Â at overhauls if required. 



7.) Ã¢â‚¬Å“Ã¢â‚¬Â¦it was never going to        be cheap, compared to a good old Lycoming or ContinentalÃ¢â‚¬Â¦Ã¢â‚¬Â  New        technology is never cheaper especially when it is a vast improvement over        air cooled engines.  The performance isnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t even comparable with        TRACE building 600hp engines and developing a same cubic inch engine that        produces 750hp.  There are great advantages in new technology such as        the accessory gear box and reduction gear box which are serious        advancements in engineering specifically for aviation.  Essentially        you get piston powered operating costs with turbine performance.  You        donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t get that with either Lycoming or Continental. 



8.) A 350        Chevy is a robust engine for a hot rod but not for an aircraft.  The        reasoning for this is simple.   The duty or load cycle of the        engine is what drives how robust the engine design has to be.  A 350        Chevy operates typically at about 30% of max horsepower its capable of        producing when driving around town or the highway.  In aviation, an        engine typically runs 75% to 100%, which creates more horsepower and        corresponds directly to lead generation for example.  The cooling        capability (volumetric flowrate) of a typical 350 is tripled with the        TRACE engine.  The cooling scheme is  also much different with        the coolant coming into each cylinder head and flowing evenly through the        block, ultimately being pumped out at the center of the engine on both        sides.  This cooling scheme on a TRACE engine is unique to our engine        and the high output nature of aviation use.  It is a far superior        thermally balanced system that automotive use.  As I stated before,        TRACE has an intensely tighter balance specification on all rotating        components and unique firing order, so torsional vibration wonÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t be an        issue.  The high loading on the engine also results in higher stress        on engine components.  TRACE has six bolt main caps, where the best        automotive engines typically has four bolt main caps.  Overall the        precision of machined components for aviation use is also more tightly        tolerance and controlled which produces a better overall system as a        whole.   Considering all of these factors itÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s not really a        surprise that all of this innovation and detail to quality results in a        higher price than automotive engines when there is so much more that goes        into a TRACE engine.  We wonÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t even mention the liability insurance        related to aviation component and aviation production.

I think I        covered most the issues brought up in these postings.  If you have        any questions, feel free to contact me with any specific issues or        interest you.  TRACE is interested in closing an STC for        Commanders.  I can be reached at david(at)traceengines.com (david(at)traceengines.com)



Thanks,        

David Czarnecki

Chief Operating Officer

TRACE Engines,        L.P.





Read this topic online here:



http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=293524#293524==========        Use the ties Day =======================                     - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS =======================                   - List Contribution Web Site sp;                                       =



	


 	  Quote: 	
		  



href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List

href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com

href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution



	


	


= 	


  [quote][b]

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Commander-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum