Technical Talk

Re: Technical Talk

Postby sheppane » Sun Jul 15, 2012 11:23 pm

Bill,

The fuel breather pipe was pointing backwards with it's intake away from the airflow, as illustrated on the attached monochrome image taken by Norman Hurst on the morning of the 4th as Bluebird is winched down the slipway, and the earlier colour images taken around the 20 - 21 November 66

PIC 376.jpg
Detail.jpg
Detail 2.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
'When you go down into the arena, you know that sometimes, you're likely to get your nose punched. You do it with your eyes open. You take the risks'

Donald Campbell, Bluebird and The Final Record Attempt. http://www.bluebirdk7.com
User avatar
sheppane
 
Posts: 441
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 10:03 am
Location: Chiswick, West London and Penrith, Cumbria.

Re: Technical Talk

Postby Renegadenemo » Sun Jul 15, 2012 11:34 pm

Hi Neil - we knew you'd know. Just testing. :D

On slightly more serious note, it does seem to have been tried facing both ways but because it's set into a rubber grommet then attached to a rubber pipe beneath with a hose clip it maybe would've been displaced at speed by the airflow were it facing the other way. Pure speculation on my part, of course. I reckon we got that redundant antenna mount spot-on too. Pleased with that.
I'm only a plumber from Cannock...

This is not put on as a public entertainment... it's put on to reach a certain goal.
User avatar
Renegadenemo
 
Posts: 2819
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 12:29 pm
Location: N E England

Re: Technical Talk

Postby sheppane » Sun Jul 15, 2012 11:43 pm

Renegadenemo wrote:Hi Neil - we knew you'd know. Just testing. :D

On slightly more serious note, it does seem to have been tried facing both ways but because it's set into a rubber grommet then attached to a rubber pipe beneath with a hose clip it maybe would've been displaced at speed by the airflow were it facing the other way. Pure speculation on my part, of course. I reckon we got that redundant antenna mount spot-on too. Pleased with that.


Bill, You're correct. On the 5th November, it was facing forwards. This image was taken the day of the Static test. The first of the colour pics on my earlier post was taken the day K7 went back in the water after the intake repair, two weeks later.

Detail 3.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
'When you go down into the arena, you know that sometimes, you're likely to get your nose punched. You do it with your eyes open. You take the risks'

Donald Campbell, Bluebird and The Final Record Attempt. http://www.bluebirdk7.com
User avatar
sheppane
 
Posts: 441
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 10:03 am
Location: Chiswick, West London and Penrith, Cumbria.

Re: Technical Talk

Postby Mike Bull » Mon Jul 16, 2012 2:13 am

I wondered how literally people would take Bill's caption, as personally I was months ahead of you all, which is why I built the thing the way round that I did! ('Built' perhaps being too grand a term there; made an 'ole and shoved a pipe through would be more precise) It's certainly another of those fascinating tiny details though. Thanks for the extra pics Neil, and it was your book's chronological order that nailed it for me in the first place. 8-)
"You never had the things you thought you should have had,
and you'll not get them now..."

is mos redintegro
User avatar
Mike Bull
 
Posts: 2895
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 1:57 pm

Re: Technical Talk

Postby Renegadenemo » Mon Jul 16, 2012 8:27 am

I'm not so good at the chronological order thing so was that pipe there pre-Orpheus? The reason I ask is that tank pressurisation was discussed for the Orph' and I wondered if facing that pipe forwards was a small attempt at achieving this.
I'm only a plumber from Cannock...

This is not put on as a public entertainment... it's put on to reach a certain goal.
User avatar
Renegadenemo
 
Posts: 2819
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 12:29 pm
Location: N E England

Re: Technical Talk

Postby sheppane » Mon Jul 16, 2012 1:29 pm

Renegadenemo wrote:I'm not so good at the chronological order thing so was that pipe there pre-Orpheus? The reason I ask is that tank pressurisation was discussed for the Orph' and I wondered if facing that pipe forwards was a small attempt at achieving this.


It was a feature since 1955, but not when K7 was first unveilled. I would suggest that trials quickly proved that it was required. Forward facing throughout the Beryl equipped period.
'When you go down into the arena, you know that sometimes, you're likely to get your nose punched. You do it with your eyes open. You take the risks'

Donald Campbell, Bluebird and The Final Record Attempt. http://www.bluebirdk7.com
User avatar
sheppane
 
Posts: 441
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 10:03 am
Location: Chiswick, West London and Penrith, Cumbria.

Re: Technical Talk

Postby Mike Bull » Mon Jul 16, 2012 2:33 pm

I've told him that as well. Never listens to me. :lol:

I'm not so good at the theory side though- with the pipe facing rearwards in the airflow, would the passing air have a kind of 'suck' effect on the pipe..? Which would vary with speed? You'd think the thing would work very differently depending on whether it was facing into the airflow or not.

While of course I'm sure that everything was properly looked into during the Orph conversion, I can't help but think that there was an element of 'well, this bit always worked with the Beryl so we don't need to worry about that/it can't be that bit that's not right now' going on, particularly once they got to Coniston.
"You never had the things you thought you should have had,
and you'll not get them now..."

is mos redintegro
User avatar
Mike Bull
 
Posts: 2895
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 1:57 pm

Re: Technical Talk

Postby Renegadenemo » Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:06 pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-la ... e-17481466

I hope they don't build these half an inch different side for side!
I'm only a plumber from Cannock...

This is not put on as a public entertainment... it's put on to reach a certain goal.
User avatar
Renegadenemo
 
Posts: 2819
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 12:29 pm
Location: N E England

Re: Technical Talk

Postby Mike Bull » Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:32 pm

Renegadenemo wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-17481466

I hope they don't build these half an inch different side for side!


:lol: :lol: :lol:

Shims...non-symmetrical...variable centre lines...rivets within rivets...large gaps filled with loy filler...
"You never had the things you thought you should have had,
and you'll not get them now..."

is mos redintegro
User avatar
Mike Bull
 
Posts: 2895
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 1:57 pm

Re: Technical Talk

Postby Renegadenemo » Sat May 11, 2013 7:36 pm

We're more or less stopped on the sponson work now until the shoes and float wedges come back from MKW so we've moved back onto systems.
Our test engine is now the right way up again and the fuel system is in a box ready to go to Barry's to have all the widgets made up so we can put the plumbing on - Stuart, you will no doubt be delighted at this long-overdue news!
Checkie made a splendid job of fitting the instrument panel and fitting and testing the igniters and Mike has installed the LP, HP and throttle control rods.
Sponsons aren't that exciting anyway...
I'm only a plumber from Cannock...

This is not put on as a public entertainment... it's put on to reach a certain goal.
User avatar
Renegadenemo
 
Posts: 2819
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 12:29 pm
Location: N E England

PreviousNext

Return to Bluebird Rebuild

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests

cron