BTW can anybody tell me why my
 air passages in this rotor housing
   are a bad idea? This is a quiz.

   Paul Lamar


   They allow high pressure
 combustion gases to pass back to the intake
    side. This would cause
 preignition. BIG no no!

   Dale Davies

   Possibly but there is one other
 problem.

   Paul Lamar

   Compression pressure bleedoff
 and out the exhaust. Low cylinder
   pressure and high exhaust
 emissions. Dale Davies

   Not exactly.

   What do you mean "out the
 exhaust." ?

   Paul Lamar


   It will blow the combustion
 cycle back into the previous chamber as
   apex passes inlet to bypass. And
 the timing would be static. The
   rotor design stays with the
 combustion

   Kurt Emerson

   Well yes but that is not what I
 had in mind. There is another factor
   in play here. Can anybody think
 what that is?

   Paul Lamar



 That the passage would cause that area
 to be even hotter than it already
 is, and its already a problem area.

 Dan Gorsline


 Not yet :-) That is not it.

 It is a well known problem you should
 know about.


 Paul Lamar


Paul and all,
We would be bleeding pressure from the 45deg ATDC big push on the rotor.

But my problem is with the original premise... that we should divert the hurricane flow.
And secondly that we should add surface area... both of which are a detriment to the Rotary.

The spark kernel needs turbulence to develop quickly.  It is also helped by compression and temperature.
Attached is a quote from Sir Harry Ricardo.

On the GM patent I think if we could change the stainless by-pass inserts to non-bypass vacuum SS inserts (think thermos bottle) to minimize heat loss it would be a great help.

Barry Bordes

Why do you think surface area is a problem? There will be no combustion under
a metal plate on top of the rotor. I am sure General Motors checked that before they
applied for their patent. The area  is too thin at .1 inch to support combustion.

A very important part of this idea is to relive the high pressure in
the area where the aft part of the rotor is in close contact with the
wall of the rotor housing. That will reduce the velocity of the wind storm.

There is also not a reduction in pressure due to squish flow under the top
plate on top of the rotor. There is a slight reduction in compression ratio
but that could be made up  with a shallower bath tub.

Turbulence is fine but a wind storm on top of the rotor blowing the mixture down stream
is something else. That blows the combustion away from the optimum e-shaft angle.

Yes I agree about a vacuum's ability to insulate but ceramic rotors have been built
with no significant improvement in BSFC. I suspect  GM found that out when the
tested the 2 piece rotor.

It is called the adiabatic Wankel but it was a big disappointment.

The flow in the combustion chamber is the only really significant difference
between the Wankel and a piston engine.

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 1998-2017 All world wide rights reserved.