X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from ispmxmta09-srv.alltel.net ([166.102.165.170] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0c5) with ESMTP id 770162 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 16:06:54 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=166.102.165.170; envelope-from=montyr2157@alltel.net Received: from Thorstwin ([4.226.225.101]) by ispmxmta09-srv.alltel.net with SMTP id <20051016200608.CLTX6445.ispmxmta09-srv.alltel.net@Thorstwin> for ; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 15:06:08 -0500 Message-ID: <000501c5d28d$122c1df0$65e1e204@Thorstwin> From: "Monty Roberts" To: Subject: flyrotary "Banishment" Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 15:06:17 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0002_01C5D263.28902DE0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C5D263.28902DE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Oh well, I don't really care why it happened. I figured it was only a = matter of time anyway. It really doesn't matter in practice what the equivalent displacement = is. Power to weight, bsfc, and TBO are the only really important = numbers. If you choose the magic displacement hypothesis you can still = develop a fuel curve for the engine. The key is a 2 cycle and a 4 cycle = engine are both Otto cycles thermodynamically. Using immaculate = ingestion, the 2 cycle should have a volumetric efficiency near 200%. We = all know this is not the case. The Wankel is also an Otto cycle engine = thermodynamically. Each rotor is capable of simultaneously processing 3 = separate charges in various states of induction, compression, expansion, = or ignition. Concentrating on the single chamber in isolation ignores = this fact. To calculate VE you have to look at the "packets" of charge = being processed, regardless of what the E shaft is doing. What it could = theoretically do vs what it does in actuality is the true VE. =20 Relative displacement is only important if you are trying to quantify = the relative merits of the engine VS other forms of engine hardware. = Obviously the Wankel has many mechanical merits, it just doesn't change = the laws of thermodynamics. Mazda has numerous reasons to portray this = in the most favorable light, both for marketing and taxation reasons. = Apparently some of the true believer rotary extremists don't want this = Mazda 1.3L wink and nod displacement questioned because it removes some = of the specialness from their chosen brand of internal combustion = religion. All of this is thankfully lost on pointy headed taxation = bureaucrats and marketing weenies.=20 I viewed the "argument" as a discussion and was merely striving for = clarity and correctnes of thought here. It does no good to perpetuate a = false understanding of something. Monty Imaculate ingestion! I like that. I don't know though. I keep telling him it's a 3.9L engine and haven't been banished yet. I will say that I think the discussions (or arguments) have clarified my understanding of how the Wankle works. I haven't though about the 120% VE at all. If measured properly, it shouldn't make any difference what you think the displacement is. Bob W. ------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C5D263.28902DE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Oh = well, I don't=20 really care why it happened. I figured it was only a matter of time=20 anyway.

It really doesn't matter in practice = what the=20 equivalent displacement is. Power to weight, bsfc, and TBO are the only = really=20 important numbers. If you choose the magic displacement hypothesis = you can=20 still develop a fuel curve for the engine. The key is a 2 cycle and a 4 = cycle=20 engine are both Otto cycles thermodynamically. Using immaculate = ingestion, the 2=20 cycle should have a volumetric efficiency near 200%. We all know this is = not the=20 case. The Wankel is also an Otto cycle engine thermodynamically. Each = rotor is=20 capable of simultaneously processing 3 separate charges in various = states=20 of induction, compression, expansion, or ignition. Concentrating on = the=20 single chamber in isolation ignores this fact. To calculate VE = you=20 have to look at the "packets" of charge being processed, regardless = of what the E shaft is doing. What it could theoretically do = vs what=20 it does in actuality is the true VE.

Relative displacement is only = important=20 if you are trying to quantify the relative merits of the engine VS other = forms=20 of engine hardware. Obviously the Wankel has many = mechanical=20 merits, it just doesn't change the laws of thermodynamics. Mazda has = numerous=20 reasons to portray this in the most favorable light, both for marketing = and=20 taxation reasons. Apparently some of the true believer rotary extremists = don't=20 want this Mazda 1.3L wink and nod displacement questioned because it = removes=20 some of the specialness from their chosen brand of internal=20 combustion religion. All of this is thankfully lost on pointy = headed=20 taxation bureaucrats and marketing weenies.

I viewed the "argument" as a discussion = and was=20 merely striving for clarity and correctnes of thought here. It does no = good to=20 perpetuate a false understanding of something.

Monty

Imaculate=20 ingestion! I like that. I don't know though. I keep
telling him it's = a 3.9L=20 engine and haven't been banished yet. I will
say that I think the = discussions=20 (or arguments) have clarified my
understanding of how the Wankle = works. I=20 haven't though about the 120%
VE at all. If measured properly, it = shouldn't=20 make any difference what
you think the displacement is.

Bob=20 W.

------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C5D263.28902DE0--