Paul, Any cool area that cannot enter into the combustion process
 will lead to wasted energy. An example would be the area above the
 side seals.

 I went the opposite way. I increased the turbulence and flow at the
 sparkplug and found a measurable difference. The burn rate
 increased as shown with combustion testing. It then required
 removing 2 degrees of timing. (see attached)

 The best solution IMHO would be a way to seed the chamber with a
 catalyst-like substance that would simultaneously ignite over all
 of the rotor face captured area. Barry Bordes

 Yes but it is not enough to affect the BSFC by 10%. Something else
 is going on. I think it is the wind in the combustion chamber.

 Your catalyst might work.

 You also need a way to test the BSFC.  If you have a prop on the
 engine and you run it at a constant RPM long enough to burn a
 gallon of gas you can test the BSFC by how long it takes to burn a
 gallon.

 The longer it runs the better the BSFC of course.

 It will be hard to measure the effect ( if any ) on that NACA
 duct.

 Paul Lamar



 Hi Paul, Further to my thoughts on CC turbulence. It is well known
 (as you know) that recip engines rely heavily on this effect. In
 two valve per cylinder  it relies on "swirl" as the mix comes in
 through one valve and out the other. This spin effect is increased
 as the piston comes up, rather like an ice skater as they move
 their arms in to greatly increase their spin. In an engine with two
 valves per cylinder it "tumbles" instead rather like an acrobat or
 diver doing a forward roll. Possibly the turbulence could also be
 improved by injecting hot air in through the trailing plug hole
 (NOS would be better !) this will give a small (or even big)
 supercharging effect also. Of course this will affect the mixture
 and must be allowed for. Chris. p.s. no need to put this in if you
 think it's all bullshit.


 There is a very Fundamental difference in the moving combustion
 chamber of a Wankel and the fixed combustion chamber of a piston
 engine. Apples and oranges.

 Paul Lamar


 The trailing plug would be too late in the intake for the cooling
 effect of the NOS injection to provide a "supercharging" effect.
 Injecting about 45°after the intake opening in combination with
 direct fuel injection as illustrated in photos from Mazda of the
 16X rotor housing. Also incorporation of the Far Trailing plug as
 used in the Le Mans winning engine would help with BSFC and
 emissions. NOS is only good for short power bursts.

 My feeling regarding hydrogen as a fuel is that it is a future
 possibility. In the interim, a focus on the use of natural gas
 would be more beneficial. It burns clean and can be used in
 modified diesel engines. In a rotary engine, fairly high boost
 pressure could be used on engines like the 10A and 13A with 3 spark
 plugs. Using Paul's ignition system for very complete combustion
 would provide high power and low emissions. Natural gas is
 inexpensive and fueling can be done at home overnight or at quick
 fill stations. Fuel costs for a year of driving should be less than
 gasoline providing driving conditions and miles driven remain the
 same.

 Dale Davies


 What does all that have to do with the squish flow?

 Paul Lamar



 Hi Paul, When I re-read my missive on turbulence I noticed my
 second instance involving " tumble " was meant to read four valves
 per cylinder not two.

 Cheers Chris Hoskins


 On recip engines in the early emissions days lower compression
 ratios were desired thus the Big Three made use of open chamber
 heads. These had larger combustion chamber volumes and tapered to
 the cylinder walls. Newer research has found the quench heads
 better. Ford and the others developed heart shaped combustion
 chambers that enhance combustion efficiency.

 As Barry explained swirl from a two valve head speeds the spread of
 the flame front.I believe the air/fuel squished out between the
 quench part of the head and the rising piston also promotes tumble.
 Too much can be detrimental. In four valve heads tumble is more
 prevalent. The Detroit Diesel two strokes had the inlet ports at an
 angle to initiate swirl. Even though the rotary combustion chamber
 works differently, I believe combustion theory applies as Laws of
 Physics. It is just a matter of determining what works best. I
 believe Barry's findings corroborate what the other auto
 manufacturers are finding.


 Somender Singh got a patent for "groove" technology that helps with
 swirl and possivly tumble. If grooves were machined into the
 trailing side of the rotor face to direct a blast of air/fuel
 forward past the spark plugs to carry the flame to the front edge
 and then back down the sides may help fuel burn. Using the far
 trailing plug would also help if possible to incorporate. The third
 plug would tend to send a jet of rapidly expanding flame along the
 groove.

 Dale Davies

 None of the first two paragraphs  is applicable to the rotary.
 Apples and oranges.

 Do you have any drawings or the patent itself? Or just the patent
 number?

 Paul Lamar


 How about putting tapered reversing swirl ports in the depression to
 swirl and reverse flow. They could also act as a catch to for the
 flame front to thrust against the rotor. It would have to be a
 catalyst surface to be self cleaning. I'm just thinking, there maybe
 be a 1000 reasons why this wouldn't work but I can't think of any.

 Kurt Emerson

No amount of swirl, turbulence, tumbling etc. etc. is going
to help if the fire is not in the right e-shaft angle region.
It is all just blown away.  The air speed in the combustion
chamber at this point is 90 meters per SECOND! That
is 270 feet per second or 184 MPH!!! Here is a chart for
two different combustion chamber shapes. The wind
direction changes. This is from Rotary Engine.

Wind in the world is created by an atmospheric difference in pressure.
The larger the pressure difference the stronger the wind. That is how they
predict weather changes  in general.

The same thing happens in the Wankel combustion chamber. A large difference
in pressure is created IN THE COMBUSTION CHAMBER when
the back side of the rotor rapidly approaches the rotor housing.
The front side is rapidly moving away lowering the relative pressure.
That will force the fire away from the optimum e-shaft angle.
This is entirely different from what happens in a piston engine.
There is no reason for the fire to move relative to the spark plugs.

I suspect several surface gap plugs would help north of the upper plug
as would redirecting the wind flow.

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.