Vladimir,
If I understand your inquiry correctly, You are intending
to make
complete engine packages for sale.If so - then it
depends on
what market you wish to target.Many on this forum
are after
high performance 2 or 3 rotor packages.Others want
less hp and
weight, so the single rotor information. For the LSA market
100 - 150 hp and wet weight under 160 lbs would be perfect.
The 555 fuel injection being developed here and a no external
source ignition (also being discussed here) are good.

To the mechanical side of a revised (Mazda) design I
would investigate
hydroformed e-shaft to reduce weight (if can be done
without oiling
problems), lighter rotors that have less combustion heat
transferethan cast iron, aluminum end and center
housings, and Pauls favorite
- turbocompounding to get bsfc to .35 or less.

If you have a clean sheet for rotor development please
investigatewhere the pocket should be for best torque. An
inventor I correspond
with believes that a trailing edge pocket would make more
power due
to the position of the rotor and e-shaft. He also
believes that gearing
the rotor to the e-shaft would harness more torque by
using the inertia
of the rotor(s) as well as the "push" from combustion. He
also has an
idea to eliminate unburned fuel at the leading edge.
Dan F


Got any drawings on this "gearing the rotor to the e-
shaft" Dan?
Paul Lamar


As always, thank you for your input, Mr. Lamar. I must
admit that with
infinite number of configurations and possibilities, determining
what type of set-up
to run for the aviation RE is becoming the hardest task I
have ever
undertaken.
I understand that for the LSA market, a single rotor
would be ideal,
however,
the lack of redundancy in the design makes me question
whether or not it
would be appropriate for aviation use. This is the reason my
partner and I were
leaning toward developing smaller two and three rotor
engines. Still, if
the demand for a single rotor is high enough, I suppose I
will have to go
against my better judgment and offer it anyway. As far as fuel
injection for
aviation, my belief goes back to simplicity and redundancy. The 555
fuel injection
you mentioned sounds very interesting and will most
definitely do some research
on the matter. In the beginning, we were thinking about
designing a rotary
that can run on heavy fuel. Do you
believe that many aviators would see the change
from avgas/mogas to Jet A
as beneficial? I am happy to see you bring up aluminum side
plates and such as
those elements will definitely be Incorporated into the
final design. As
far as the turbo compound, my partner loves the idea, it's as
though he has
become a turbo compound junky. Also, very interesting to see you
mention the
location of the rotor recess a as Toyo Kogyo already did testing
on the matter and
concluded that a recess toward the leading side favored
performance while
one closer to the trailing end was beneficial to
emission. Also, from
Mazda's earlier technical paper, it seems that most of the
unburnt hydrocarbons are
in the vicinity of the trailing end due to the flame
propagation being
faster on the leading edge because of squish flow. As with all
things, I
understand that Mazda's findings and research must be taken with a
grain of salt, but
it is very interesting and satisfying to see
the ideas and opinions of others go against the
grain, so to speak.
Thank you for your insight,
Vladimir


Wankels are harder to build than they look. Half a dozen
companies have
gone belly up trying. If I were you I would stick to
Mazda parts.
If what you are purposing is not a Wankel you have a
snowballs chance
in hell of pulling it off. Billions have been spent so
far on the Wankel.
Running on heavy fuel is not economically viable. Heavy fuel
is more expensive than gasoline. Three companies have
given up so far.
Paul Lamar


A....men if I, were you I focus on a one rotor engine based on
16x parts for
LSA UAV markets.compact water cooled neat and tidy( see mistral
)let mazda
do all the hard and expensive R&D. Get the product out the door
as quick as
possible. Kit engines first then engine packages.Once you have
that going
look for government contracts, after that you can do complicated and
expensive. Then you can sell your core business to Tracy Cook
for pennies on
the dollar when you go broke :)we will all thank you for
a really neat one
rotor.
Clifton

Hi Vladimir,

I will need to buy a 160HP rotary engine in a few years from now.I
would like a 2 rotor turbo compound engine over a one rotor. To me it
means more security IF a rotor goes bad.

A smaller rotor means higher RPM.

Marc Joseph