Paul It seems to me this engine set up is more or less what Tracy
did with his RV The throttle body is a cut down of the standard RX 7
, and the primary throttle plate and barrel removed ,if i am not
mistaken.
In such a set up A What type of rpm can you develop if you use the
3.1 redrive planet and prop say for the falconair f12 in the photo B
The dynamic plenum volume i believe , must be 2,7 more than the
volume of the intake runners ,is this correct? C Would it be better
if the primary intakes (smaller diameter intakes) would be on its own
throttle plate and chamber in the intake plenum and not been removed
in the throttle body If you can help me on this thanks
Le Roux Breytenbach
Depends on the pitch and the diameter. Mainly the diameter is limited
by the tips going transonic.
That plenum is a joke. It enhances the torque at 3000 RPM absolutely
where you don't need it :-) I explained that to people many many
times and they still did it anyway :-) I don't think Tracy ever
understood it. Certainly not when he used it for the first time.
Mazda did it because cars need low RPM torque for good acceleration
in first gear. Mazda called it a dynamic chamber.
Airplanes fly on HP and HP is RPM times torque. The more RPM and the
more HIGH RPM torque the more HP.
You want max torque to happen at 6000 RPM or above. A simple runner
18 to 20 inches long will give that with a p-port. You will get more
HP with out the dynamic chamber.
If Mazda uses the 16B in the new car it is a partial answer to the
car low RPM torque problem. Torque is mostly related to engine
displacement. The 13B is a small engine for cars or airplane engines.
It 160 cubic inches while the typical light aircraft engine is 320
cubic inches. The 16B will be about 200 cubic inches if they make
it.
The torque peak in my New Dodge (Fiat) stealth motor home MB engine
is at 2000 RPM. While I am at it I will mention the transmission is a
computer controlled six speed conventional manual transmission. The
computer throws the clutch out and shifts it with small hydraulic
cylinders. Just like a Formula 1 engine :-)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 18 years of the newsletter there have been several situations like this.
Some one comes up with something that appears at first glance to be
an improvement. Someone else analyzes it and discovers draw backs or
it is simply undesirable for the new application. It might work in
other applications.
The first person lets his ego take over and refuses to under stand
or learn what the second person is saying.
In one case a new newsletter was formed by the angry first party :-)
To learn you must have an open mind and keep your ego in check :-)
Try to understand why the second party is saying that or just ask
him why do you think that?
Paul Lamar
Hi Paul,
I appreciate and have learned much within this group for sure. !!!
I think we are all in debt to yourself and others who have pioneered
a path in aviation with the rotary. When I was building back in the
late 80's and 90's, the Tracy's and David Atkins types...Lou
Ross..etc. were who were out there and available. Though it could be
said that there is no loss out here as to egos :) , they were a
contribution to where things are today.
Despite the Tracy and David's not getting it right ( plenum's being a
joke) they both continue to fly all over the continent on those so
called... jokes. Yes, a few us followed them in, but.. your
enlightenment to a better alternative doesn't diminish their success.
So until we are all flying on your yet to be produced ignition and
other components.. Thank you for continuing to help evolve where the
rotary movement can be in the future of our personal flying
machines.
Thanks,
bruce buksyk
Speaking of the ignition the patent I applied for was a real up hill battle.
The first patent attorney I hired, despite having a degree in electronic
engineering, was not competent in that field. I had to fire him and find
another. The second called himself the patent king. He did a good patent
but then he dropped the ball. The patent office rejected it due to minor
drawing issues and name discrepancy by leaving out my middle name on
some of the forms but not others.
The patent office has a policy of only notifying the attorney that has
power of attorney and not the inventor. This happened in April 2015.
The patent king did nothing and did not notify me. Simple problems to fix.
I was under the mistaken impression that every thing was OK and the patent
office was doing their thing. Finally I got worried and called the
patent office.
They confirmed that the patent was filled but since I did not have
power of attorney they could not tell me anything about it despite being
the inventor of record. I had to file a form to make myself the attorney.
I fixed the minor problems and the patent office revived the patent
application. A year and a half lost. Still the original date of the patent
application applies.
I have a patent on programing computers that was manufactured
by Hewlett Packard without my consent. I won the case but again the
patent attorney
defending me did not do a very good job on net monetary compensation to
me. It
is essential that one obtains an injunction on manufacturing immediately.
One is very vulnerable to incompetent or scam artist patent attorneys.
My advice is get some how too books and learn how to do it your
self.
Paul Lamar
I think the single person that did more to promote the rotary and continues
to promote the rotary than anyone else is Dave Leonard. He now has over 600
hours. One of the things he does is fly in formation with at least 50
other RV's
for major sporting events. He also participated at Reno. Unfortunately
the race was
canceled due to the P51 fatal.
Thank you Dave!
Paul Lamar
The Rotary Engine free News Letter. Powered by Linux. If you want
off the list PLEASE let me know and I will remove you. ACRE NL web
site.
http://www.rotaryeng.net You Tube
http://tinyurl.com/beqqxas
Copyright 1998-2016 All world wide rights reserved.
