Lehanover@aol.com wrote:
http://www.newcovenant.com/speedcrafter/calculators/intake.htm
Here is an interesting Spreadsheet for calculating Torque peak.
Lynn E. Hanover.
Thats pretty amazing Lynn. Thanks for finding that.
Paul Lamar
I went in to that site and put in 160 cubic inches which is
about what the 13B is equivalent to in a four cylinder four cycle engine
and 6000 RPM for max torque. For whatever this is worth comparing
such widely different types of engines.
Here is their formula.
"Intake Runner Area = (Cylinder Volume X Peak Torque RPM)/88200"
As you can see and as I have been maintaining runner area is directly
proportional to RPM for peak torque/HP.
It came back with a runner area of 2.72 square inches.
A = pi R^2
A/pi = R^2
R = square root of A/pi = .93
That would be four runners of course for a four cylinder engine.
2.72 square inches is equivalent to a .930 radius round
pipe or 1.86 inches ID. The large runner size ID for the ACRE NL injector
holders and intake manifold is 1.625". According to this calculation
TOO SMALL for max power at 6000 RPM. So you will need to polish them
out to 1.86 if you are looking for max HP at 6000 RPM. At least to the
tubing
bend ID size of 1.75 inches.
The small runners are WAY TOO SMALL at 1.375 inches. Not
a heck of a lot you can do about that as the center housing ports
are rather restricted on the current engine. You can polish them out to
1.5
inches the same as the small tubing bends.
By this calculation the ACRE NL manifold should have pretty good
BSFC at about 5000 RPM as the 17" runners are too long anyway for 6000
RPM.
A good compromise between peak power and good cruise fuel burn.
All bets are off if you use a dynamic chamber on the ends of the
runners.
We will have to do another manifold for the RX8 engine with yet larger
runners for peak torque/HP at 7800 RPM assuming the use of a 2.85:1 psru.
Paul Lamar
I respectfully disagree. To restate the principle: Its All About
Velocity! Because the volume of intake air is divided between the two
runners, you ADD the area of the two runners rather than consider them
individually in order to use the formula on the web site.
BTW, Did you notice that valve diameter and valve lift (port size) is
ignored in the formula?
Tracy Crook
The formula on the web site is derived on the basis of a four cycle piston
engine. The two wankel rotor on that basis is equivalent to a four cylinder
four cycle engine of 160 cubic inches. The web site clearly asks for the
number of cylinders along with the RPM and the displacement.
If you think it is all about velocity why don't you reduce
the size of the runners and the port area to increase the velocity?
That is unless of course you believe that runner area has nothing to do with
velocity.
Paul Lamar
The AirCraft Rotary Engine NewsLetter. Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site. http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/
Copyright 1998-2003 All world wide rights reserved.