How about an injector mounted just above the upper plug, or between

the plugs. This could be a diesel injector with a very high pop pressure.
Two single cylinder pumps would follow a single eccentric on the nose of the
crank, 180 degrees apart. High rotor face temps would improve power. There
would be no fuel trapped in the squish areas. You could run as much boost as
you want. There would be no fuel to preignite or detonate because injection
would be at TDC or just a few degrees before. Atomization would be near
perfect and between the plugs. In fact once up to temps it might not need
plugs at all. You could start it on gasoline and once at temp, run it on
almost anything, just like WWII.

Something to think about anyway.
Lynn E. Hanover

Atomization is the big issue. That is what Vance is saying. It takes

super

high pressure to atomize well. 2000 psi and up Ford claims.

Paul Lamar

Lynn is suggesting something that is very close to the "SCORE"

technology (Curtiss-Wright/Deere/RPI direct injected stratified charge
engines). The Wankel GMBH was also similar. Paul, you must have some
references on this you can scan in....

The concept is very sensitive to injector location, iginter location,

shape of rotor combustion recess, and injection characteristics (pressure,
rate shape, spray pattern duration, etc.) Don't know if a Mazda engine would
work acceptably well with reasonable modifications. Efficiency is very much
improved with turbocharging, but combustion pressures get high (1200psi,
about double what the Mazda engine would normally see). The pressure is
considerably lower than true diesel at 3000psi plus.

Properly done, it WILL run on many fuels, hot or cold. Runs better on

diesel than gasoline (gasoline burns too slowly). You can shut the ignition
off at power, but its not because of combustion chamber temp or pressure,
rather the spark plug stays so damn hot it works like a glow plug (at least
in the true SCORE engine which has the spark plug in a little pre-chamber
area).

Jon

I don't think they ever quite got the BSFC this good.
This is from AIAA 86-1553

Here too is a picture of the Wankel Gmbh version.
Note the spark plug and the off the shelf Bosch "Unit" injector
just go straight in. I don't think this one ever got below .40 BSFC.
The turbo helps heat the charge so it is easier for the spark to
fire the heavy fuel I suspect.

Paul Lamar

Paul
Two questions on this JET A issue:
Q1: What are these RC2-32 and NASA ring engines which are cited in the
attached pictures ? Are they just prototype or lab engines, or are they in
production ?

Not in production. Lab engines.

Q2: Do you know more on the wankel engine running with jet A: power, price
weight etc...
Rgds Philippe CHENEVIER

Wankel Gmbh. about $10,000 U.S. 
Out of business as I understand it but the web site is still up.
http://www.wankel-rotary.com/

The Turbocharged/Intercooled engine weight is 161 Ibs (73 kg) only with 
excellent altitude performance and  95 hp (70kW) at 6,000 rpm. 

According to WANKEL the specific Jet-A-fuel consumption is BSFC: 0.487
Ibs./bhph (296 gr./kWh) and this engines power to weight ratio could not
be matched by any comparable  multifuel piston engine on a worldwide basis. 

Paul Lamar
 
The AirCraft Rotary Engine NewsLetter.              Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org