Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.233.170.185; envelope-from=msteitle@gmail.com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=OB41wYw2Hr1sftWngmHfWmPMdAgvQ0UtKr/8pwyjwiYQl+/fNvr9Wwq2IFvcztxcsBn/2TvZ7f876I4SeDryuWf8rpJk5MLh+ffrvd0XzjpZ8nCbX5lM1lTcW6FKHwqy2zd+B+MLzoNCqSMM3HEW8IGGguLrlLwEJkLjusA5KnQ=
Message-ID: <5cf132c0711220653h396838f4lbbff4065f2641424@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2007 07:53:32 -0700
From: "Mark Steitle" <msteitle@gmail.com>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Fw: [Bulk] 16x
In-Reply-To: <list-2500722@logan.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <list-2500722@logan.com>

Wow Ed, you really need to get out more!  Of course, with current fuel
prices I can't say that I blame you for sitting home playing on the
computer.  I was just trying to get a feel for what to expect for
engine life on my 20B.

Mark


On Nov 22, 2007 7:29 AM, Ed Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com> wrote:
> Lets see, Mark,  that rebuilt was in 05 down in Louisiana.  I fly around 50
> hours a year so, I've probably put around 100 hours on the rebuilt engine.
>
> Ed
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Steitle" <msteitle@gmail.com>
> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
> Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 9:04 AM
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fw: [Bulk] 16x
>
>
> > Ed,
> > How many flight hours does your engine have on it since last rebuild?
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > On Nov 22, 2007 5:45 AM, Ed Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com> wrote:
> >> Thanks, George, that in indeed interesting information.  Long throw
> >> should
> >> mean more torque.  Be interesting to see how they have improved the
> >> sealing.
> >> Two years more development then all the production (assuming they go
> >> forward
> >> with it), so I should expect to see it for at least 5 years.  Well,
> >> hopefully the old 13B will hold out for that long.
> >>
> >> Ed
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "George Lendich" <lendich@optusnet.com.au>
> >> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
> >> Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 1:51 AM
> >> Subject: [FlyRotary] Fw: [Bulk] 16x
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Ed, Lynn and Bill +
> >> >>
> >> >> This was posted to me privately and may help to clarify the
> >> >> specifications of the 16x. Some of the info are estimations by Rolf
> >> >> Pfeiffer ex - NSU engineer.
> >> >>
> >> >>> Hello George
> >> >>> Nice to hear from you. Here is my assessment:
> >> >>
> >> >> Also info supplied by Don Sherman as follows:-
> >> >>
> >> >> I interviewed Seiji Tashima, the engineering expert for Mazda's new
> >> >> rotary, at Tokyo on your behalf. Here are a few details he revealed:
> >> >> Rotor width reduced by 5mm saves weight, improves apex seal
> >> >> performance
> >> >> trochoid is 25mm wider, 35mm taller for more displacement and torque
> >> >> would not reveal increase in eccentricity. New displacement is
> >> >> 800cc/rotor.
> >> >>
> >> >> Aluminum end plates have plasma-sprayed wear surface direct and
> >> >> indirect
> >> >> fuel injection.
> >> >>
> >> >> Torque gains come from longer e-dimension, more displacement, and
> >> >> direct
> >> >> injection.
> >> >>
> >> >> He would not confirm 300 hp power goal.
> >> >> All the gas seals are improved,  with smaller flame holes adjacent to
> >> >> spark plugs.
> >> >> The 16x engine ran for the first time this year, full development will
> >> >> be
> >> >> at least 2 more years.
> >> >>
> >> >> Engine weight is reduced from 125kg [275 pounds] to 100 kg [220
> >> >> pounds].
> >> >>
> >> >> Assessment by Rolf Pfeiffer as follows:-
> >> >>
> >> >>> /Now, using above dimensions we get the following:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 25 mm wider means the short axis goes from 180 to 205 mm.
> >> >>> 35 mm taller means the long axis goes from 240 to 275 mm.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> This results in E = 17.5 mm, and R = 120 mm.
> >> >>> The old dimensions were E = 15 mm and R = 105 (including the radius
> >> >>> of 3
> >> >>> mm for the apex seals).
> >> >>> The ratio R/E is 6.857, down from 7.0.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The ratio of stroke to piston area becomes higher which is what they
> >> >>> want, I suppose.
> >> >>> The RX7/8's were 0.33 S/D, above numbers would be 0.3764, a
> >> >>> substantial
> >> >>> 14% improvement in ratio of stroke to equivalent piston diameter. A
> >> >>> long
> >> >>> stroke engine, so to speak.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I also had stated that:
> >> >>> NSU also went that direction with their latest developments before
> >> >>> folding.
> >> >>> We are lucky that Mazda has the financial means and does carry on.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The last big NSU unit EA 871 was approximately like this:
> >> >>> (Calculating
> >> >>> back from its displacement and width. I had already left by then, so
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> info is calculated.)
> >> >>> E = 17.28, R = 120.5, width = 69 (given), displacement = 746.6 cc
> >> >>> (given).
> >> >>> This is very close to what Mazda seems to be doing now, if above
> >> >>> numbers
> >> >>> are right.
> >> >>> NSU had great hopes in that engine. It was used in a German
> >> >>> fan-liner.
> >> >>> It was the high point of the Wankel development at NSU.
> >> >>> Then the money did run out. NSU was merged with AUDI, and VW the
> >> >>> parent,
> >> >>> killed it all. All further development was stopped.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Fan Trainer:
> >> >>> http://www.der-wankelmotor.de/Flugzeuge/RFB/rfb.html#Fanliner
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Regards
> >> >>> Rolf
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> George Lendich wrote:
> >> >>>> Rolf,
> >> >>>> Could you give me your assessment of the new 16X eccentric. If I
> >> >>>> remember correctly you gave you assessment on Paul's site. There is
> >> >>>> discussion on another site and I would like to pass it on to
> >> >>>> interested
> >> >>>> parties.
> >> >>>> Also if my memory serves me right, you mentioned a manufacturer was
> >> >>>> working on a similar size ( change in eccentric) and what company
> >> >>>> that
> >> >>>> was.
> >> >>>> Am I wrong to believe it was the company you were working with at
> >> >>>> the
> >> >>>> time?
> >> >>>> George Lendich
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> >> > Archive and UnSub:
> >> > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> >> Archive and UnSub:
> >> http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> > Archive and UnSub:
> > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
> >
>
>
> --
> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
>