Tom Kendall wrote:

Close, but a bit off.  I'm just surprised that with all the

anal-ytical

types on this mailing list, Marc hasn't already received a ration of

grief


>from everybody ;-)

The 20B has 50% more air flow, fuel flow, hp, etc. than the 13B, all

other

things being equal.  3 rotors / 2 rotors = 1.50 = 150%, or 50% more

than

the

2 rotor version.

My 25 cents worth.

Tom Kendall

Marc Wiese wrote:

Ah so right Tom!
2 rotor = 80 cu. 3 rotor= 120 cu in (as spec by Mazda...). Mass flow

>from calcs 20B=41.3 lbs min; mass flow from 13 b =27.3 lbs min. So

actually 41.3/27.3=1.5128205
You add more of course than just a rotor, or displacement!
Marc Wiese

Is this 80 cu per rotor, or per rotor face.?
Royce

Now you are getting into a real can of worms :-)
Considered as a two cycle it is 1.3 liter but it is not a two cycle.
It is equivalent, as far as the volume of air it pumps, to a 2.6 liter
4 cycle 4 cylinder engine. However the volumetric efficiency is at
least 20% higher than any piston engine. No poppet valves to get in the
way of the intake ports. Therefore in terms of turbo charger
selection I would use about a 3 liter equivalency.


Paul Lamar
 
The AirCraft Rotary Engine NewsLetter.              Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site. Copyright 1998-2002 All world wide rights reserved.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org