<4.1.20021208130103.01621bd8@pop.ozemail.com.au>
<5.1.1.6.0.20021208174146.028d34e0@post.aviators.net>
<5.1.1.6.0.20021209100354.029cdc60@post.aviators.net>
<3DF53F4C.83F04486@ameritech.net>
<005801c29ff4$a4381290$12052c44@FAMILY>
John & Amy Eckel wrote:
>
> Fred,
> I am sure you know this, but 1 percent gradient is .57 degrees
> and 1 degree is 1.7 percent gradient. Would the smaller movement
> on only 1 percent gradient help your situation. I haven't gotten to this
> point in building yet so I am interested in finding the problems now
> instead of after assembly.
> Regards,
> John E, still on phase I kit
The problem is the geometry of the tank bottom in trigear ground
attitude, where a few oz. of fluid spread across a large area is alone
too shallow to fully siphon. Then tilt it a bit, and it spreads
elsewhere, causing the am't of undrainable fluid to rise
dramatically. Ground slope gradient is as one actually finds it on
airport ramps and aprons, and a small am't can affect the reliability
of a "clean" fuel drain sample. The only fixes I can think of are a
separate sump tank fw'd of the fuel selector for best insurance (need
be only 8 oz. per the rules), or at least a gascolator of reassuring
capacity.
Regards,
Fred F.
|