<<snip>>
I recommend Mazdatrix Signal Hill CA to build your engine for you.
They will run it on the bench for free and on the dyno for more money
if you wish. They know what they are doing. BTW it is not possible to
build an RX8 style side exhaust port 3 rotor right at the moment. Well
anyway
not using a stock 3 rotor e-shaft.  The one you see racing on the speed
channel is really an old  3 rotor p-port engine. Also not possible to build
an RX8 style effective turbo engine unless you use third gen low compression
rotors.

Paul Lamar
<<snip>>


Paul,

Maybe I'm missing the intent of your reply above but from what I
have read here I wouldn't even consider a side port engine, 20b or 13b!
P-port engines seem to be by far the better choice for performance rotary
engines in virtually all respects.  So if one accepts the costs involved in
p-porting a Renesis engine are low compression rotors available to build up
a 20b for what I expect would be a relatively low boost engine application?


If I were to accept a turbo 13b rotary as a suitable engine is a
reliable long lived 300hp configuration viable.  I know of one which is
rated at 280 hp but not yet flying, a 7-8% increase over that would not seem
to be very much but......

Finally please address what would be the preferred control parameter
to ensure that the turbo does not overspeed at altitude due to reduced
compressor load in the thin air. Turbo speed would be the most direct
monitoring parameter but air pressure would be easier to measure; or is
there another parameter I haven't considered.

Thanks and Cheers
Good Building and Flying

Carl

Carl P. Lindon  B.Eng., CD.
Lieutenant (Navy)
DGIIP/DIRAP
Work
e-mail:  lindon.cp@forces.gc.ca
Home
e-mail:  carllindon at rogers dot com

Well a really large waste gate. So far the stock waste gates seem
to be too small. Also a large turbine section (or A/R) will run slower.
So far we don't have any real data beyond that. We just can't say
what part numbers work well at all altitudes. Nobody to my knowledge has
installed a turbo turbine tach yet. That is something that really needs
to be done. The three or four people trying turbos are doing it by the trial
and
error method. Since the failure mode is turbine blade failure due to heat
(TIT) AND/OR RPM (centrifugal force) you might want to monitor both.

I think a 3rd gen turbo engine with two piece stock iron or 2 piece ceramic
apex seals would work well for takeoff at 300 HP. I suspect if you tried
to cruise it at 300 HP you might have rotor and rotor housing cooling
problems. I don't know for sure. You would be on the bleeding edge.

Paul Lamar

Hi Carl,

I am in a similar situation as you are and have looked at running the rotary
engine on ethanol as a way to obtain or exceed the magic 300HP takeoff
power.  95% pure ethanol gives a 10 to 15% increase in power and burns
cooler because if vaporizes faster than gasoline (is that the proper way to
say it Paul?)  The stoiometric rate of alcohol is a little over  9:1  and
which means you can run at higher boost levels or to achieve better fuel
mileage you should run at higher boost levels.

The people at Baylor University in Waco TX. have about 6 planes flying now
on ethanol and the Pitts I believe uses a Lynosauras with 11:1 compression
ratio.

There are drawbacks of course.   10% or worse fuel mileage, and heavier fuel
weight are the bigger ones.  Still I am opting for it. But then again I've
been accused of hugging trees and dolphins:)

I am going with a turbo normalized RENESIS engine and perhaps P port as
well.

Doug in Japan
SeaWind