Thank you so much for your very kind proposal Ali.
That is just so kind of you to offer help and support for an engine that you have not sold!

I am going to call my dealer in the morning of the 7th of Jan and give him the day in getting some straight answers and a confirmed shipping from Germany before i give the direct route a chance. Remeber that I checked if it was in stock before I ordered the 160sx since i was allready waiting on other stuff.
My dealer is an honest and nice guy, but a fairly small JetCat dealer by international standards. But I suspect he may be a little too "nice guy" in his dealings with JetCat Germany.

I'll give it a try to sort things out, but if nothing happens again, I will axcept your very nice offer Ali.
Again. Thank you so much!! I really appreciate it! [sm=teeth_smile.gif]

Staale

Ali is that type of guy, he has sorted problems out for me in the past that had nothing to do with his point of sale, one of the good all around guys.

Happy New Year to all.

Mike

Hi Staale,
No problem at all. Glad to be of help. Please dont get me wrong, I love to sell Jet Cat turbines, but on this one I would really not like to take the sale from your dealer. My offer was to help you and your dealer get the turbines and parts that you want.
Either way I can help just let me know.
Regards Al
Good luck with your 200 SX !

Hi Staale,

We in India are using around 15 to 18 Pst UATs in different models, so far we have had great success with these UATs except for two of them which had the same problem which you described. When we auto calibrated the turbine it would not go to full rpm in both cases, one was with a 8 Kg turbine and the other with a 13 Kg turbine. In both cases we replaced the UAT with another one and the turbines ran perfect. Please check the UAT first before opening up the fuel system. If there is a problem with the UAT PST will happily send you a replacement.

Chaitanya.

Staale,
Chaitanya could be right. Although I have not had any problem with the 6 PST air traps I have used so far, I have heard that some had a problem with the brass porous pickup clunk.
Have a look here on how I check/modify the PST air trap for the P-200:
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9297018

I still recommend you to do the flow test...

Thank you guys for your inputs.

I will first test it again after the mods i did in [link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9373056]post 73[/link].

If still not OK, I'll do the flow test as you described, Oliver and have a closer look at the inside of the PST trap.
I have a few of those brass porous pickup clunks in diferent sizes lying around, so I could replace it my self if there looks to be something wrong with it.

Will report back after I've run it again.

Happy new year guys!

Well you could do the flow test before mounting the engine again. It is only a matter of 2 minutes and could save you the hassle of an additional setup + removal of the engine...

Too late[8D].
I finished everything yesterday and everything is back in place. Just did not have the time to test run it.

Contrary to Darryl Tarr's (post #13) about the limits of the BVM UAT, this device is used on many P-200 powered Ultra Bandits without problems.

There is an addendum posted on www.bvmjets.com, under "jet kits/Ultra Bandit/addendums, that clarifies the proper fuel system plumbing.

The BVM UAT has an advantage over other devices because it is translucent. You can actually see how well it is performing on a high power throttle up.

The BVM UAT has also been tested successfully with engines of higher fuel flow demand than the P-200.

Well Harley, I do completely agree with Darryl's staement in post 14 at this stage.
I have had problems as well with the UAT under high fuel flow, and I am not the only one.

Have a look here:
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_92..._1/key_/tm.htm

Your experience in the matter is welcome, please feel free to post it in the thread above. I am always happy to get some different feedback and discuss technical matters with an expert.

Why don't you run a poll to see how many people have/have not had a problem?

Rob.

Oli,
I have read this thread before, and am well aware of the issues that you and others have had in the past. I am also well aware of your expertise in this field, and respect your abilities.

Please see the Ultra Bandit fuel system addendum on the BVM website.

We abstain from using "push type" fittings on the suction side of the fuel systems, and safety wire the connections to minimize the chances of an air leak upstream of the pump. We also recommend using 6MM (minimum) fuel lines on the suction side as well.

We have had encountered no fuel supply problems since adding the second header tank inlet fitting.

Harley,

I answered to you here:
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9379553

Since I believe that the discussion is more appropriate in this place.

Did some more testing today.

First fired it up after the mods I did to the tanks in [link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9373056]Post 73[/link]
Got 110K rpm at 6,2pw just as the last time[&o]

Then we tried to blow as hard as we could in the vent line while engine was running. Same 110k rpm.

Then we connected the fueling station and ran it at full power while the engine was at full throttle, eliminating any vacum on the suction side since the filling goes directly to the header tank and is pumping more than the engine consumes. Same result, 110K. Maybe 200 rpm's more.
This makes me pretty sure that the problem is not on the suction side of the pump.

Then I did the bottle test as Oliver suggested. I marked of 750cc and 1000cc on a soda bottle. Unplugged the fuel line from the front of the engine, leaving the fuel filter and valves still in the system and meassured how long it took to pump 750cc in to the soda bottle. All fuel tanks in the plane was full as in the live test.
It took 52 sec to reach the 750cc mark @ 5,5pw. 1 liter was reached in 1,11 sec. Making the fuel flow about 850 to 900 cc's a minute.

Without the engine connected I assume it's pumping more because there is no restriction in form of the engine injectors building up the fuel pressure...?
Did not Carsten in Denmark get over a litre a minute doing the same @ pw5,0 without the valves??

I have not seen any signs of cavitation or air passing through the system at any time during any of theese tests.
Fuel system is as follows: Two side tanks feeds a centre tank via seperate lines of XXL tygon and 5mm brass tubes in to the tank. The centre tank feeds the PST trap via a 5mm ID clunk and 5mm brass tubes through tank and xxl tygon.
Then it's the PST trap > Pump > Filter (2,5 mm ID) > Festo 4mm barbed Y > fuel and start valves > engine.

Then I switched to another pump, the same Husel pump NIB, but with a bigger suction nipple., Same result, 52 sec to reach 750cc.

Then I fed the pump directly from a BVM overflow tank eliminating the whole tank system in the plane and the PST trap. Same 52 sec. to reach 750cc.

Then decided to by-pass the fuel valve since I knew it's the smallest passage in the whole system with only a 1,5mm ID nipples.
Connected the hose right after the fuel filter (which is 100% clean and drilled up to 2,5mm (was 1,8) ) The time to 750cc now was 40 sec instead of the 52 sec on all the other attempts.

Took the valves off and blew through them with my mouth. Could not tell any difference in flow between them. Tried to drill the nipples out to 2mm on the fuel valve, but one of them broke when screwing them back on to the valve because there was not a lot of material left under the threads[:@]

So now I have decided to rip the whole system out of the plane and run it in a bench. I have replaced the fuel valve with one from a Merlin engine. That valve is the same type that a friend of mine has on an older P-200 ans is much bigger than the small ones now used by JetCat.
Running it in the bench, I can easely by-pass the valve while the engine is running with two Festo Y-pieces, a piece of tubing and a clamp.

I feel I am really running out of options now, and that I have eliminated just about every part of the fuel system one at a time. The only change in results I got was when we ran the fuel pump without the fuel going through the fuel valve.
I really, really hope that the bench run will show if it was the valve or not. It could be OK now with the new valve, but if it's not, then I'll by-pass the valve while the engine is running.

One thing is for sure. This is not fun at all. Taking the whole fuel system appart and putting it back in the tight F-16 several times now has made a lot of fuel spills and mess all over the nice and clean install I had[&:]. Probably have to rip out everything and do it all over again[:@]

The one thing I really don't hope, is that it is something wrong with the ECU or the engine itself. If things have to go back to JetCat , with the speedy customer service I have seen so far, I will probably be without an engine for a year or so[:@][:'(][:'(]

Sorry about the mood, but I am just so fu*** fed up with this P200SX now that I could just about flush it!

Any educated suggestions are very wellcome, though
What do you say Oliver? Please talk to me

SAP

May be a silly sugestion, but have you tried a gravity feed to see what sort of fuel flow you get out of the tank, perhaps even run the turbine with just a gravity tank to see what happens.

Mike

Better than gravity feed, ran it with the fueling station giving 1,5 - 2 liters a minute into the header tank did not do any difference at all.

Send it to jetcat...!!

Staale,

You have got the flow at the nominal pump voltage: 750ml/min @ 5,5V.
The problem comes from the engine or the ECU. Could be a RPM sensor problem, or some kind of software bug.
You have to send the engine + pump + ECU to Jetcat. The valves are fine with the small nipple and have proven reliable operation.

Good luck

What I was trying to suggest was eliminating the header tank, valves etc and just use gravity to supply the turbine, that would perhaps eliminate the variables.

Mike

Staale, is the engine hitting a temp limit?

Rob.

Yes Staale, I found that without the valves and filter, I would need a lot less voltage to arrive at the 750 ml/min.

I just checked my GSU data from the last flight (12 min runtime):

Max RPM: 112600
Max Pump voltage: 6.00V

I still have the plastic UAT in my Viperjet with the P200SX in (but have just received a PST "baby bottle"), so far no problems with the running, although I can see some "micro bubbles" in the tube to the pump, but they are very short bursts, and they only occur once or twice a minute, so I don't think it will/is a problem in practice (I can NOT hold the throttle in on position for 1 minute anyway on that plane )

Regarding service from JetCat, I have had zero problems with that, I always contact Max Reinhardt, he is a very helpfull guy !

I have had a couple of my turbines to service, and it has never taken more than 2 weeks complete turnaround, (a P160SE took 4 days, a P60SE took 1 week, upgrading software in my 9 ECU's took 5 days), so always very satisfied !

Same question I posed on the UAT thread... if we are concerned about flow rates through UATs and valves and filters on the larger motors, why not just parallel the last bit of the system (after the last "main" tank .. you could even set up two clunks in the last main tank just like the Laser engine guys suggest for their two cylinder/two cab V-twins) and "Y" it into the engine at the last moment .. two UAT's two filters, two valves, etc.

If it's just viscous flow limits in the pipes, fittings, and tubes, this should show it right away. If not it must be either the flow impedance inside the motor (e.g. the vaporizer needles) or the pump can't produce enough throughput ... or there is something else wrong in the engine control system (hence all the comments about "return to jetcat" which is the only way to handle this list of issues).

Seems inevitable that if you feed the beast enough fuel, it ought to produce the RPMs it should .. or shoot flames .. the kero has to go somewhere :-)

Maybe naive, but worth a try, I think...

Dave McQueeney

Hi Staale,

Just to confirm: I get 5,5V at full thrust and 112000 RPM on the test bench with a single tank.
I get 5,7V at full thrust and 112000 RPM in the F-18F with a 3 tank configuration and PST air trap.

Hi Oliver.

I did some more testing today, and now I am very glad I did not just wrap it up and sent it to JetCat.

Since, trying a different pump, force feeding the header tank with a fueling station or feeding the pump directly from a BVM overflow tank with 6mm lines did not help jack sh**, I had a very good gut feeling that my problems was on the pressure side of the pump.

Started the the day by running it in the bench. Same setup as before, only now with the Merlin fuel valve I had lying around.
The result was that it now hit 112k at pv 6,0 for the first time, just as Carsten in DK says his p200sx does. The only difference from the previous attemts is the different type of fuel valve.
With the stock small JetCat valve we only got 109-110k @ pv 6,2 remember...?

The the curiousity hit me, and I wanted to find out if the new valve still was restricting a bit.... I made a by-pass of the fuel valve with two Y's, a piece of 4mm tubing and a ball valve, so when the ball valve is opened, the fuel flow also can go around the electronic fuel valve.
Fired it up again in the bench and went to full throttle. The result with the ball valve shut is 112k @ 6,0 pv. Lowered the throttle a bit and opened the ball valve, then went back to full throttle again. Now the pump voltage droped to pv 5,8. We did this back and forward many times to confirm the results and the same thing hapened every time. In other words, when the fuel also was let around the electronic solenoid, the pump voltage dropped by 0,2 volts.

Then next step was to mount the whole thing back in the plane. I wanted to ensure that the engine performed the same installed in the plane with the whole fuel system connected.
I also made a by-pass system with a ball valve placed just beside the engine to do the test in the same way as we did in the bench.

Fired it up and anxiously pushed the throttle stick forward. I got 112K @ pv 6,0 with the by-pass closed. With the by-pass opened, we got 112k @ pv 5,8 wich is excatly the same values as in the bench. This makes me really satisfied about the planes fuel system.
Again we did this many times to confirm the results, again they vere the same every time. pv 6,0 with only the electronic valve and the by-pass closed, and pv 5,8 with the by-pass opened.

So. The restriction was fuel solenoid all along. The sad part is that it was the single last piece in the entire fuel system that we checked and eliminated as a cause, and that I have spent many, many hours on this issue. Partly bacause so many was so certan that the problem was on the suction side.
I have had a bad feeling about theese small valves and the small pump on such a large engine from the moment I opened the box.

I still don't think it's right of JetCat delivering theese engines with fuel valves and fuel fumps that are so close to the limit on what they can perform.
The pump is running at almost 100% of it's capacity and the nipples on the fuel valves are only 1,5 mm ID. Don't know the ID of the fuel valve it self, but probably even smaller.
When things are running so close to it's limits in a pefrect world, it does not take much of a problem (restriction) before the engine does not get the fuel it needs to reach max rpm.

In my case it was the fuel valve that was the tiny restriction. If it was only my valve, I don't know for sure, but my faulty valve would work great in a P-60 to a P180 and the owners of theese engines would never know they had a bad valve. But in a P200SX the restriction was just a little too much...

One thing is for sure: JetCat has not run my engine with my ECU or with my fuel valves! I also seriously doubt they have run the pump either.
The ECU showed zero runs and running time. The valves vas very dry a new in their bag with no traces of kero.

My guess is that they have a bench set up with valves and pump and ECU so they just drop the engine in and making sure that it runs OK.
Probably saves them a few minutes not having to rig up each set up with ECU, wireing and plumbing of valves, pump etc. and then taking it all appart and unplumb it and dry everything before packing.
Much easier to just drop a engine down in the bench and go.
Well. Had they bothered to do so, I would not have waisted all this time, and that kind of pis*** me off that they leave the testing of the external equipment to the end user.
I have paid a lot of money for this biggest engine in the JetCat range and they did not even bother to test it properly before shipping it out.

Judging from the PM's I have gotten, I am not alone thinking that the supplied valves and pump is (barely) up to the job, or not the only having fuel supply related problems with the p200 (sx).
Maybe something is changed inside the 200sx compared to the old 200 making the fuel pressure higher and the job tougher pr the pump??? Different injectors and or combustion chamber maybe??

What will I do next?
1: I will ask for a new valve by JetCat. With my luck I'll probably have in a year or so.
2: Since getting a fuel valve from JetCat that IMO is up to the job (with a margin) is probably out of the question, I will find one my self.
3: I will talk to Peter Hausl and find a pump that delivers a little more, say 20% more so the max pump voltage is in the 4,5 to 5,0 volt range, giving a better margin.
4: Next time I will give more faith to my gut feeling. Had I done so this time, it would have saved me a lot of hours in the work shop, headache and a lot of words I can't even spell
5: Don't listen to arguments like "JetCat would not deliver it if it was not OK" and "Don't think so much and just go out and fly" and " It's best because uncle Bob says so"

Some pic to prove I'm not just lying


The by-pass and the fuel valve from the Merlin engine


Running in the plane with by-pass closed @ 112k @ pv 6,0


Running in the plane with by-pass open @ 112k @ pv 5,8


The by-pass valve is placed beside the engine. I will remove the by-pass system when I get a pump and valves that is up to the job.


Too cold outside so we ran it from the inside of the workshop with the door open and just the tailcone sticking out.
-18c outside and +20c inside[8D]

Hey Staale,

I noticed after looking at your photos that the Fuel Solenoid Valve appears to be the “old style”.

My P-200SX came with the NEW valves (see photo).

Although the NEW valves are smaller I am NOT sure if there is any difference in the mechanical part of the valves that may restrict your fuel flow.

Good luck,

Darryl