If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Wright Flyer Ignition
There's a debate going on over in rec.crafts.metalworking about what
type of igniton was used on the original Flyer, and on the replica, if it's different from the original. Does it use a mag and sparkplugs, or the old make-break contacts inside the combustion chamber to produce the spark? Dan |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Dan
Thomas wrote: There's a debate going on over in rec.crafts.metalworking about what type of igniton was used on the original Flyer, and on the replica, if it's different from the original. Does it use a mag and sparkplugs, or the old make-break contacts inside the combustion chamber to produce the spark? Dan FWIW, the detailed cut-away drawing in Flight a few months ago, it used make-break contacts in the combustion chamber. "Wilbur and Orville, a Biography of the Wright Brothers", Fred Howard, says the same thing on page 106. But I have no idea where the info came from that either of the above used. -- Kevin Horton - RV-8 Ottawa, Canada http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
There's a debate going on over in rec.crafts.metalworking about what type of igniton was used on the original Flyer... ---------------------------------------- Dear Dan, Yeah, that crops up every now & then :-) According to Leonard Hobbs, author of a book about the Wright brothers and their engines (*), the original used make-and-break... AND a magneto. But the 'magneto' had been gutted and was in fact running as a permanent-magnet dynamo, providing about 10 volts. The magneto is clearly evident in several photos of the original engine, the typical horsehoe magnets sticking up above the level of the flywheel. The presence of what is obiously a magneto has been a source of confusion for many who are not familiar with make & break. The lack of spark plugs should be the deciding clue but the fact spark plugs and magneto were fitted to later models of what is basically the same engine simply adds to the confusion. The key point, in my opinion, is that on the original engine the magneto was not keyed to either the crank or the cam but was powered by a simple friction drive off the edge of the flywheel. Based on the photos I've seen the make & break levers appear to be driven off the cam, a guess that is supported by the fact the cam timing can be altered once the engine is running. This was common among make & break marine engines, as was the lack of any form of throttle other than a kill switch, another Wright design element. To start such engines you moved the timing lever to a position that gave you a spark just after TDC. Once it was running and the 'vaporizor' was heated up, you moved the timing to the 'run' position (ie, slightly advanced from TDC) and opened the fuel valve to full on. No carb, not throttle and basically, no worries... until you ran out of fuel or oil. (Some make & break engines from the 1880's were still chugging around Nova Scotia in the 1950's.) But after those first flights in December of '03 details get pretty hazy. Later Wright engines used spark plugs but the original did not. If you don't have a sparking plug your ignition options are pretty slim. Most spark plugs were made in France back then but make & break engines were common throughout America. It was used on early 'motor cycles,' washing machines, water pumps and so forth. Since those 'motor cycles' were often nothing more than a one-speed make&break one-lunger belted to the rear wheel of a bicycle, and since the Wrights had built bicycles for a time, the odds are in favor of their having a good knowledge of the make & break ignition system. Which is more than you can say of most folks today :-) -R.S.Hoover (Hobbs, Leonard S. "The Wright Brothers' Engines and Their design" Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1971, pp 9-28. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
I concur. The "spark points" used on the '03 motor were irridium if I'm not
mistaken. And the "magneto" was friction drive off of the flywheel. You may find more info. by doing a Google search on Charlie Taylor, who was the Wrights' engine specialist and a master machinist. You might also try contacting Nick Engler at Wright Brothers Airplane Company. He'll build you a replica engine if you've got tons of cash to burn. If that doesn't do it, you might try contacting The Wright Experience, which is the official EAA / Ford Motor Company sponsored team. Fortunately, my Wright ship is motor free! Harry |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
I have Charles Taylors biography written by H.R. DuFour which shows the engine
in minute detail. The sparking wires were Platinum. Ignition timing was controlled by a sliding gear on the timing shaft which was in turn, controlled by a small lever mounted on the rear left leg of the engine. Diagonally across from the flywheel corner. Charlie Taylor gets far too little recognition for his part in that epic flight. He designed and built the engine in something like 3 months. Also had a big role in making the propellor. Many people, including DuFour, seem to think Charlie was ill treated by the Wrights but Charlie seemed to have a wild streak in him and often went off on adventures such as volunteering to be the Mechanic for the Vinn Fizz and others. Warren I concur. The "spark points" used on the '03 motor were irridium if I'm not mistaken. And the "magneto" was friction drive off of the flywheel. You may find more info. by doing a Google search on Charlie Taylor, who was the Wrights' engine specialist and a master machinist. You might also try contacting Nick Engler at Wright Brothers Airplane Company. He'll build you a replica engine if you've got tons of cash to burn. If that doesn't do it, you might try contacting The Wright Experience, which is the official EAA / Ford Motor Company sponsored team. Fortunately, my Wright ship is motor free! Harry |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Unfortunately, Charlie's reported fondness for doing the kind of things
machinists like to do (drinkin' smokin', 'n swearin') didn't sit too well with Katharine... or so I've read. The friction may have been the original source of the lack or recognition. Now here's a better subject: Where in HELL do you suppose the Wrights came across platinum wire and irridium spark points? Most of the materials used in the airframe were fairly easy to source in 1900 - 1903, but these must have been pretty tough. Also, how do you suppose Charlie got the crankshaft to ballance so well considering the methods he used to fabricate it? My respect for these men continues to grow. They were infinately more skilled than I am. Harry Wright 1902 glider #8 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|