Got an email from Poul Woelfle on their new ultra lite
rotary engine. PL


"We have in the meantime finished our single-rotor aircraft engine, and
we
are just speaking to the first customers. Since Rotax has apparently
stopped
production of the 447, it seems that its a good time to enter the
aviation
market. Attached you find a data sheet of the engine.

The main objective for now was to make it run well, and it does that. It
starts with a 3Ah battery and has clean idle (slight torsional vibration
with a propeller due to the belt drive). The throttle responsiveness is
also
good since we replaced the vacuum actuator for the direct intake(P-port)
with a mechanical device that only opens on the last ¼ of carburettor
opening. Also (as suggested by a Para motor customer in France) we made
the
V-belt pulley auto-ventilated, and this has eliminated any heatissues we
have had with some belt types. A customer in England has flown theengine
in
this final design and is really excited about it.

Also fuel consumption is not the best
in the world, but compared to 2-stroke data I could find, we seem to be
doing quite well. I can also send you a CAD file of the engine if you
want
to see the outside dimensions.

We would be curious to hear your opinion and of course any criticism or
suggestions for improvement.

Best Regardsalso from my father,

Poul

Poul Henrik Woelfle

Woelfle Engineering GmbH

Randstraße 109

D - 47804 Krefeld
Tel. +49 2151 151020
Fax +49 2151 151019
www.woelfle-engineering.com
HRB 7369, Amtsgericht Krefeld
Geschäftsführer: Paul A. Woelfle


Thanks Poul,

Sounds great and please send the CAD dwg.
The fuel consumption is not an issue for ultralights
in this country and Canada as they are only used maybe once a
month for a couple of hours of low and slow recreational flying.
It is about 20% lower than a 2 cycle however.

All rotaries have a certain amount of torsional vibration.
Your upcoming two rotor will be even smoother.

I suggest you use the ceramic bearings and up the take off
RPM and HP for five minutes. Typical of all aircraft engines. I think
customers will be more impressed with higher HP and you will sell
more engines.

When I get this multi-strike CD ignition system finished I'll ship
you one and you can test it on the dyno to see if it improves
the BSFC.

Paul Lamar



Paul,

Thank you for your efforts to keep this email group on the cutting edge.

Exciting stuff to read about this XF40. AVL is also working on a range
extender utilizing this core unless I am mistaken. I have seen pictures
that
may hint to Direct Injection (whether it is a mock up or actualproduction
intent I can't say.) version on the range extender. The point beingshould
a
project like that come to fruition, quantities of scale can't hurt the
potential of the project making it long term (other than karting) andthe
potential of DI even making on "the wing". Never mind solar panels,a
Co-Gen
unit of the XF40 (or 2 rotor) such at this running of natural gas using
the
engine heat as a pre-heater or total heater for your Hot H2O is probably
more due-able than Van Jones and the Emerald City Project and pie in the
sky
photo voltaics that still haven't had the magical breakthroughinthe 170
yrs they have been around (unless I am mistaken). The electricityfrom the
Co-gen for household use and or to a Heat Pump could take care of a
majority
of your HVAC needs depending upon the climate. Interesting stuffindeed...

My best,
Anthony

Do you have any AVL tech papers published on range extender project?

One thing to always keep in mind about modern cars.
The high excess HP is there when needed to accelerate during high cruise
speeds and to climb hills. Electric cars with range extenders
do not provide that need. There is barely enough excess power to
sustain cruise speeds once the batteries need recharging.
Therefore electric carswill never sell unless
they are forced on the population at the point of a gun like
the Traubant was.

Green has become an euphemism for a dictatorial government.
That should raise a red flag (pardon the pun) every time
one hears that kind of BS :)

Paul Lamar

Paul,

Found a couple of PDF's they may not be technical papers you arelooking for
however.

http://www.autoinfo.gov.cn/fdj1zw/fdj/2009/Hubert_cqyz12.pdf

http://www.rolandberger.at/media/pdf/Roland_Berger_SumSy09_List_20090622.pdfYes I never understood the extra power requirement while climbinghills and
or accelerating for EV's. Until I spoke with one of my auto gnomes on a
"high profile" project that will rename nameless :-). It came to lightwhen
I asked why the engine was not running constant for the lowest BSFCand why
they were not using the battery as the main power source and theyanswer I
got was somewhat along your lines. They couldn't make the battery bigenough
and from my research we don't have an ultra-capacitor or other device to
fill in for those worse case senarios. On the Greenies they arewatermelons,
Green on the outside and red on the inside....

Anthony

I like the water melon analogy :)
It is all based on a phony requirement to reduce man made CO2.
The jury is still out on the optimum level of CO2 as higher
CO2 levels makes plants grow faster. Levels are far from toxic
to humans and linear extrapolations are invalid due to negative
feedback. Ancient history has shown CO2 going up and down over
the long term with no dire consequence. Unless of course somebody
comes up with a theory on CO2 causing the demise of the poor
dinosaurs :)

Paul Lamar

Paul,

Your last comment sure is amusing.
It might be risky though to say this as some weird "scientist" may pick
up on it and [try to] prove just that. :)

As far as the other connection to the dinosaurs goes, the oil, one might
argue: good thing they died or we would have no oil.
However that is just as stupid an idea as the one that CO2 is the reason
for climate change. Oil is abiotic, formed under high pressure and
temperature deep down. How else would it get down there?

I have a suspicion that CO2 is being made bad to have a reason for more
nuclear power plants, which sure are worse than anything else in the
long run.

Rolf Pfeiffer


Rolf has a bone to pick with the French I guess, and
perhaps the Brits as well.
 Modern reactors are about 100 times more efficient than
the Three Mile Island versions built 50 years ago or so.
And, free European and American reactors were, at that
time, and are, vastly superior to those built by the old
communist block countries.
 When the Three Mile Island reactor melted down, there was
no radiation leakage. The containment facility worked as
designed.

 When the Soviet Chernobyl reactor melted down, there was
no containment features of any kind to prevent the damage
that ensued.
 How many died at Chernobyl? Millions? That is what all
the leftist professors ranted about at the time here in the
states.
 So how many actually died?

 I believe the last count was.... GASP!....59.

Too many?  Blame it on the piss poor worthless soviet
bureaucracy that installed a worthless bureaucrat to run
the facility. The damned idiot didn't fill the radiator
that kept the rods cool.....MELT DOWWWN!


So,,, a handful of poor Russian folks are still undergoing
treatment for the diseases caused from radiation exposure.
  About 1/2 of the 59 victims of the worthless soviet
bureaucracy run incident, were sadly, children. These poor
kids died because of the worthless soviet run health care
system. (coming to your neighborhood soon) The soviet
physicians did not know to treat the kids first, nor did
they have the tools to do it. About 30 children died
shortly after the melt down.

  OK, point made?
Don't trust a bureaucracy to build anything right.
Especially a communist one.

  Marching ahead...
 The French have been building highly efficient reactors
for some time now. Last I heard from Brittan's House of
Commons, the Brits are happily going to build a few too.
And alas, King "O" has been kicking the idea around, if for
no other reason, than to tease his opponents on the right.

 Just what are these rabidly socialist regimes doin makin
nukes again?
They're out of juice friends! I mean,,, itz like claiming
we are out of water.... how embarrassing...
  Any savvy socialist simply pulled out the calculator and
added up all of the additional revenue he could collect
from state owned  nuclear energy production, and there you
go, the nukes are on order!

 Now what will we do with all that waste fuel???
    Put it on a missile to the Sun???

Our ignoble relatives across the pond have figured out a
way to deflect the fiery wrath of the red/green coalitions
of Europe. The modern French reactors produce a truly tiny
amount waste. So little that is makes every other source of
energy appear impossibly foolish to pursue.
 At the end of you and your family of four's life, you all
will have consumed  the approximate amount of nuclear fuel
to have produced a quantity of waste that would fit into
one of their tea cups.

 About two ounces... over your whole life span....

Compare that to tons of waste if you consume coal.

Now just what could we do with all of that extra nuclear energy?

Ed Carver