Brodhead Pietenpol Association

Original Posted By: kbickers
Those using engines other than the "A" have an option of relocating the tank from the wing to the nose. I am at the point of deciding and would like others points of view as to the pros and cons of each. I like the idea of moving the tank to the fuse from an ease of access point of view, but changing cg during a long flight has me worried due to gas being burned off.Comments?STeve E.________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: bellissimod(at)cs.lsl.litton.com
>>>On Thu, 5 Dec 1996, Pietenpol Discussion wrote:>>> Those using engines other than the "A" have an option of relocating >> the tank from the wing to the nose. I am at the point of deciding >> and would like others points of view as to the pros and cons of each. >> I like the idea of moving the tank to the fuse from an ease of access >> point of view, but changing cg during a long flight has me worried >> due to gas being burned off.>> >> Comments?>> >> STeve E.>>>Steve, I have struggled with this same question. Ultimately, I have decided>on the wing tank for three or four basic reasons. One, the CG issue. If the>tank is in the wing center section, there is virtually no effect on CG as>fuel is burned. Two, having the fuel that much higher than the engine should>ensure plenty of fuel pressure at the carburetor. I'm not sure a fuselage >tank would be as certain in this regard. Maybe it would be. I just don't >know. Third, I don't like fuel in the fuselage. In the event of a crash, >I'd like a little more separation between me (and my passenger) and any >leaking fuel. Fourth (and finally), I'm planning to use the area where >a fuselage tank would go for a storage locker. I can easily imagine >wanting quick and frequent access to such a storage area, whereas when >fueling, there is usually a ladder handy, so getting up to the tank is not>such a big deal. >>Your mileage may differ, of course. Regards, Ken>>If you decide for a wing tank, Aircraft Spruce sells a Stearman type fuelgauge that can be positioned in one side of the tank, is 8" tall.Saludos Gary Gower________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: Michael D Cuy
On Thu, 5 Dec 1996, Pietenpol Discussion wrote:> Those using engines other than the "A" have an option of relocating > the tank from the wing to the nose. I am at the point of deciding > and would like others points of view as to the pros and cons of each. > I like the idea of moving the tank to the fuse from an ease of access > point of view, but changing cg during a long flight has me worried > due to gas being burned off.> > Comments?> > STeve E.Steve, I have struggled with this same question. Ultimately, I have decidedon the wing tank for three or four basic reasons. One, the CG issue. If thetank is in the wing center section, there is virtually no effect on CG asfuel is burned. Two, having the fuel that much higher than the engine shouldensure plenty of fuel pressure at the carburetor. I'm not sure a fuselage tank would be as certain in this regard. Maybe it would be. I just don't know. Third, I don't like fuel in the fuselage. In the event of a crash, I'd like a little more separation between me (and my passenger) and any leaking fuel. Fourth (and finally), I'm planning to use the area where a fuselage tank would go for a storage locker. I can easily imagine wanting quick and frequent access to such a storage area, whereas when fueling, there is usually a ladder handy, so getting up to the tank is notsuch a big deal. Your mileage may differ, of course. Regards, Ken________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: "Sayre, William G"
>>On Thu, 5 Dec 1996, Pietenpol Discussion wrote:>>> Those using engines other than the "A" have an option of relocating >> the tank from the wing to the nose. I am at the point of deciding >> and would like others points of view as to the pros and cons of each. >> I like the idea of moving the tank to the fuse from an ease of access >> point of view, but changing cg during a long flight has me worried >> due to gas being burned off.>>> Comments?>> Steve, CG is a valid concern. (especially when trying to manipulatea chart if the cg is off some) Frank P. runs a nose tank 65 Cont. andwouldn't mind some kind of elev. trim, but says it's not too bad.I guess the cabanes with this kind of tank/eng need to slope back about 3.5". Brian K's cabanes w/a 65 Cont. look perfectly upright-thanks to a longer motor mount. I have an 18 gal. nose tank and 65Cont. and was concerned about having enough head pressure as K.Bickers mentioned. To find my unuseable fuel I followed TonyBingelis' method: Placed plane on a grass barn ramp (about 16 deg.incline), put 5 gals. in tank and measured flow rate at carb inlet witha graduated Rubbermaid container. Tony says somewhere in theFAR's that a gravity feed system must provide 150 % of max. powerfuel consumption for your engine in a climb. My unuseable fuelturned out to be just over 1 gallon. I rigged up a little trim lever justunder my seat which actuates two spring loaded cables that attach toto small arms of 4130 welded to the elev. walking beam cross tube.A friction lock knob keeps the lever where I put it. Least on the ground you can feel the stick forces change nicely. Someone toldme that Bernie used this type of trim on one of his Piets as I recall.Tell you more when she flies. Mike C. ________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: Gary Gower
I concur with Ken whole heartedly and can add that I had a Fraklinpowered Piet with the nose tank. With no trim system you willexperience a shift in stick pressure to maintain level flight but Inever found it annoying or dangerous....you just adjust as time passes.Besides, I was enjoying myself so much I hardly noticed!!!Bill>---------->From: kbickers[SMTP:kbickers(at)indiana.edu]>Sent: Thursday, December 05, 1996 8:30 AM>To: Pietenpol Discussion>Subject: Re: Fuel Tanks>>>On Thu, 5 Dec 1996, Pietenpol Discussion wrote:>>> Those using engines other than the "A" have an option of relocating >> the tank from the wing to the nose. >> >> Comments?>> >> STeve E.>>>Steve, I have struggled with this same question. Ultimately, I have decided>on the wing tank for three or four basic reasons. One, the CG issue. If the>tank is in the wing center section, there is virtually no effect on CG as>fuel is burned. Two, having the fuel that much higher than the engine should>ensure plenty of fuel pressure at the carburetor. I'm not sure a fuselage >tank would be as certain in this regard. Maybe it would be. I just don't >know. Third, I don't like fuel in the fuselage. In the event of a crash, >I'd like a little more separation between me (and my passenger) and any >leaking fuel. Fourth (and finally), I'm planning to use the area where >a fuselage tank would go for a storage locker. I can easily imagine >wanting quick and frequent access to such a storage area, whereas when >fueling, there is usually a ladder handy, so getting up to the tank is not>such a big deal. >>Your mileage may differ, of course. Regards, Ken>>________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: Steve Eldredge
I have a 16 gal center section fuel tank, With a 0-200 that gives me atwo and a half hour range with reserve, I built the center section from ChadWillie's prints. I made a good size door giving into the space behind the firewall.You canput a lot of stuff in there. Also it allows one to inspect the inside motormount fittings. Mike ________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: Richard Carden
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuel TanksIn a message dated 11/28/03 10:23:42 PM Central Standard Time, Gnwac(at)cs.com writes:>Greg,There's lots of Pietenpol's around with a nose, or 'cowling' fuel tanks. I made mine from fiberglass, and have flanges molded in on the sides, to sit on the top of the forward longerons. The bottom of the tank slopes forward, toward the outlet, with the plane sitting static laden (tail down). After fittingthe tank, I then made wedges under the forward portion of the tank to help support the weight of the 10.7 gallons. These wedges were then glued to the plywood deck, on top of the crossmember above the firewall, and everything is behind the stainless steel firewall. I used thick heavy fiberglass deck cloth,on the aft side of the firewall. The outlet is a blister, that sticks forwardthrough the firewall, where a 'weldable' fitting is molded in the fiberglass, and then an elbow, and then a cable operated on / off valve. The inlet for the wing tank is also a blister molded in the fiberglass tank, that sticks through the cowling, and is located on the aft, top left side, at about 10 O'clock. I did it this way so as to keep all fittings OUTSIDE the cowling, soany leaks would not collect fuel in the cockpit or forward deck area. I'm not surewhich is scarier, and inflight fire, aft C.G. condition, or my gal when she says "Chuck, we need to talk..."Chuck G.________________________________________________________________________________Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 11:24:31 -0500

Original Posted By: "Cy Galley"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel TanksThanks Chuck,Sounds like you did a wonderful job. Some of you that have been doing this building stuff for a while are very resourceful.Greg________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: Michael D Cuy
Hi Guys,Do I need a seperate fuel vent pipe built into the fuel tank if I use avented fuel cap?Just about ready to make the front tank.CheersPeterWonthaggi, Vic. Australiahttp://www.cpc-world.com________________________________________________________________________________Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 09:23:20 -0500

Original Posted By: Peter W Johnson
Messagenope.... as long as the tank is vented in some form you're fine. justuse the vented cap. Some folks will put a tube in the cap and put an angle cuton it facing forward. This provides a small amount of positive pressure inthe tank because of the forced air into it..DJ----- Original Message -----

Original Posted By: "DJ Vegh"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel TanksIn a message dated 1/29/04 3:18:06 AM Central Standard Time, vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au writes:>Peter,You only need one vent, bent and pointed into the slipstream, similar to the way Tony Bengalis shows it. I made the vents into the fuel caps, on both the wing tank, and the cowl tank. I bent a 1/4" copper tube, JB Weld to attach it to the cap. The cowl tank fuel cap also has a wire / cork for fuel quantityindicator. Are you building a wing tank, or cowl tank ? What material ?Chuck Gantzer________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Thanks for the replys, I'm building both cowl tank and center section out of 0.050" 5052 - H32Aluminium.Looks like 1/4" tube in each of the caps will do the job.CheersPeter.-----Original Message-----

Original Posted By: Clif Dawson

Original Posted By: "Peter W Johnson"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel TanksIn a message dated 1/30/04 1:28:34 AM Central Standard Time, vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au writes:>Peter,Here is a few things to keep in mind, when you're designing your tanks: Make the fuel sumps at the lowest part of the tank, with the tail down. For the wing tank, put one in the back of the tank. For the cowl tank, slope the bottom of the tank forward, to the outlet - when the tail is on the ground. Make the outlet of the cowl tank so that all the water will find it'sway out. You must assume that every time you add fuel, you add water, and you mustsump it out before each flight. Make the wing tank slope to the center of the bottom, while in level flight, to the outlet. This will allow all the fuel to be transferred to the cowltank, via an on / off valve on the bottom of the wing tank (above the passenger's head). Make the valve accessible from the pilot seat. I used a ballvalve, and a simple torque tube in line with the rotation of the valve, along thebottom of the wing, with a 90 bend in it for the handle, just above the pilot's windshield. Isolate the cowl tank, and all the fittings, from the passenger compartment. Should a leak occur, the fuel can't find it's way to the passengercompartment. Insulate the cowl tank from the engine compartment, behind a sealedfirewall. You can use Fiberfax, or Heavy weave fiberglass. Another fuel On /Off valve should be located at the outlet of the Cowl Tank, and operated via heavy duty cable, or very secure torque tube. I used a push-on, pull-off cable. Tony Bengelis shows all this. An engine fire Can Not have a flame path to the fuel tank, so all fittings through the firewall must be Fireproof. The gascolator should go on the bottom edge of the firewall (lowest point in the fuel system), and easily accessible thru the bottom of the cowl. Do Not put any portion of the gascolator below the bottom edge of the firewall. If you knock the landing gear off on landing, it can't cause a fuel leak. No need for any kind of fuel quantity indicator in the Wing Tank, because the engine will be drinking from the Cowl tank. Use a cork & wire in the cowl tank fuel cap. Do a thorough leak test to both tanks, before installation. These are just a few things to consider, when designing your fuel system.Chuck GantzerNX770CG________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Thanks Chuck,I presume the cowl tank would have to have a level indicating the capacityof the wing tank. This would allow the cowl tank to use enough fuel toenable the wing tank valve to be turned on and re-fill the cowl tank withoutoverflowing the cowl tank. Unless there was a float valve on the cowl tankinlet from the wing tank.I think may be a better idea would be to have the fuel valves on each tankseperatley feeding the gascolator. You would also need some sort of wingtank quantity guage.What do you think?CheersPeter-----Original Message-----

Original Posted By: "Graham Hansen"
Don't really know why but in addition to old airplanes I also have other strangeinterests. One of them is VW Beetles. I'm an all stock guy. The custom guysdo all kinds of things with their Bugs, including custom fuel tanks. I thoughtmaybe their might be some interest in this website. They custom make aluminumfuel tanks. http://www.aluminumgastanks.net/For those around the Ohio area I know of a fantastic racecar fab shop that cando a great job on the welding if you take one to them that is already fabbed up.Don EmchNX899DERead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________