X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from kmb-rly01.kumbaresources.com ([196.25.79.169] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.8) with ESMTP id 1043610 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 06:58:58 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=196.25.79.169; envelope-from=Hennie.vanRooyen@kumbaresources.com Received: from kmb-msg01.kumbaresources.com ([10.4.0.4]) by kmb-rly01.kumbaresources.com with InterScan Messaging Security Suite; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:54:42 +0200 Received: from kmbxkpc1.kumbaresources.com ([10.4.0.8]) by kmb-msg01.kumbaresources.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:56:18 +0200 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C64E70.CB73B41F" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6603.0 Subject: RE: Rotary - FWD from Lancair ES List Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:56:18 +0200 Message-ID: <9E0DEB6303D10843B3160726ECBB167D162BFC@kmbxkpc1.kumbaresources.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Rotary - FWD from Lancair ES List Thread-Index: AcZOcMtWcQtslB+dR/u56ptWmK65Uw== From: "Hennie van Rooyen [HQP]" To: Return-Path: Hennie.vanRooyen@kumbaresources.com X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Mar 2006 11:56:18.0420 (UTC) FILETIME=[CB817340:01C64E70] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C64E70.CB73B41F Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Mark and anyone, =0D "Mazdatrix recently dyno'd a N/A peripheral-ported 13B for Paul Lamar at= 250hp @ 6000rpm, running a carburetor. That is an easy 125hp/rotor, and= 250 hp from a 195# engine." =0D What would be a reasonable firewall forward weight of such a N/A complete= installation? What I really want to know is what is the lightest= installation to be expected based on average experience? =0D Regards, =0D Hennie =0D =0D -----Original Message----- From: Mark R Steitle [mailto:mark.steitle@austin.utexas.edu] Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:59 PM Subject: Rotary - FWD from Lancair ES List Hey Guys,=0D I thought I would forward a post from the Lancair ES list concerning= rotaries (oldest post on the bottom). There are very few rotary powered= Lancairs, so I'm kinda the front man on this one by default. I may come= to some of the Fly Rotary "experts" for help if I get in a corner, but so= far, everyone's been polite and its been a fun exchange. =0D =0D I'm sure there is more to come. =0D =0D Mark Steitle Lancair ES - N/A 20B =0D =0D _____ =0D From: Lancair_ES@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Lancair_ES@yahoogroups.com] On= Behalf Of Mark R Steitle Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 8:41 AM To: Lancair_ES@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Lancair_ES] Rotary =0D Gary, First, it is not my intent to flame you or anyone else. I only strive to= educate. I don't know just where your calculations are off, but obviously= something is amiss. Mazda rated the N/A 13B 2-rotor engines anywhere from= 160 to 180 hp. The 2.0L 3-rotor was only produced in a turbo model= (20B-REW) and was rated at a very conservative 299hp. The new RX-8= Renesis engine (a 1.3L n/a 2-rotor) is rated at 238 hp. =0D =0D Attached is a hp/torque chart from the Mazda 26B 4-rotor engine that was= used in the Mazda LeMans race car, and won the LeMans in 1990. It shows= that it produced 675hp at 9000rpm. That is over 150 hp/rotor. While this= engine was a peripheral-ported engine, it also was normally-aspirated. = Mazdatrix recently dyno'd a N/A peripheral-ported 13B for Paul Lamar at= 250hp @ 6000rpm, running a carburetor. That is an easy 125hp/rotor, and= 250 hp from a 195# engine. (While 6000rpm might sound high, keep in mind= that the crank turns 3X the rotor speed. So, when the crank is turning= 6000rpm, the rotors are only going 2000rpm.) =0D Also attached is a dyno chart by Atkins Rotary showing a turbo 3-rotor= producing 375hp at 6200. This is in the rpm ballpark of where you would= normally operate a rotary airplane engine running a 2.85:1 gearbox, such= as the RWS model RD2-C. It should be noted that the rotary's lowest= bearing loads occur at 5900 rpm. So, 6200 is very close to the "sweet= spot" as far as bearing loads are concerned.=0D =0D Turbo'd rotaries can produce an incredible amount of power for their size. = 500hp from a turbo-charged 13B in not all that unusual. That would= correlate to 750hp from a 3-rotor at the same boost. So, 580hp at 7000 is= well within reach of the common man. A Velocity builder in California (Al= Glitzen) recently dyno'd his N/A 20B at 275 hp @ 6000. =0D =0D In the early days of the rotary, they were beating the pants off of all the= competition, so the SCCA came up with an equalizer formula to make racing= fair for all participants. It effectively doubles the 1.3L displacement= and treats it is a 2.6L. If you compare the airflow of the 1.3L rotary= engine it pumps as much air as a 2.6L 4-stroke piston engine would. So,= the SCCA considers the displacement to be 2.6L for the 13B and 3.9L for= the 20B. Maybe this helps explain why they produce more hp than your= calculations would indicate. =0D As you pointed out, one of the most attractive features of the rotary is= its soft failure modes. If they're running when the failure occurs, they= will usually keep running until they are shut down, then they will refuse= to re-start. The 13B has only 3 moving parts, two pistons and a crank. = Pistons are cast iron and the crank is bullet-proof. =0D =0D For more information, check out the ACRE (AirCraft Rotary Engine) web site= at www.rotaryeng.net . =0D =0D Mark Steitle =0D =0D =0D =0D =0D _____ =0D From: Lancair_ES@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Lancair_ES@yahoogroups.com] On= Behalf Of Gary Casey Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 10:06 PM To: Lancair_ES@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Lancair_ES] Rotary =0D I should probably take this to the rotary engine list as they seem to =0D have napalm ready to flame us "disbelievers", but here goes: A =0D naturally aspirated 2-liter Mazda engine, according to my =0D predictions, would produce about 160 hp at 7,000 rpm. Under boost, =0D and I don't know whether this one is running 39 inches (Hg?) manifold =0D pressure or more likely 10 psi boost, which would be about 50 inches =0D Hg, I would predict a power output of 275, maybe a little less. This =0D roughly correlates to 275 hp for the last twin-turbo RX7, which ran =0D to about 8500 rpm. The claim below is 580 hp, or twice my prediction =0D and about twice the best specific output from Mazda. And then the =0D 580 hp at 7,000 would be equivalent to a torque of 435 ft-lb, which =0D is higher than the peak torque stated (386 ft-lb). All that is not to say it wouldn't make a good engine for the ES. It =0D would tolerate 50 inches of manifold pressure and 7,000 rpm quite =0D well and that would produce 275 hp. With some effort the turbo setup =0D could be matched to give a critical altitude of 10,000 ft. Power =0D would probably fall off to maybe 200 hp at 20,000 ft, still =0D respectable. The thing that always bothered my about the rotary =0D option is the relatively high fuel consumption, maybe 10% higher than =0D a piston engine. The thing that is attractive is that there are =0D very few catastrophic failure modes. They will keep running with a =0D broken apex seal and even with no coolant. Gary Casey On Mar 21, 2006, at 9:30 AM, wrote: > ed > the rotary is a 20b. a 2 liter or 120 cu. in. > engine. > we have an IVO prop on it to get us through the 40hr > test. we are going to look at the MT prop at sun-n-fun > and we have a prop that chuck diaz has designed for > the rotary community. we are going to ground test it > before another guy flight test it. > paul brannon N117ES > > --- erosiak@comcast.net wrote: > >> Paul, >> >> What is the cubic inch engine size of the rotary, >> and what prop will you use?? >> >> Ed Rosiak >> >> >> -------------- Original message >> ---------------------- >> From: >> >> >> >>> From: >> To: Lancair_ES@yahoogroups.com >> Subject: RE: [Lancair_ES] Someone talk some sense >> into me! >> Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:22:13 +0000 >> > > --------------------------------- > bryan > no! no! we hope to be a little better than piston > speeds. > we did dyno the engine. 39" mp (10 lbs boost) it > made 580 hp @7000rpm and 386ft/lb torgue @ 5400 rpm. > we will turbo normalize with 3 lbs boost or 33" mp > and make about 330-350 hp. > paul brannon N117ES > > --- bjburr@mwheli.com wrote: To Post a message to the group, send it to: Lancair_ES@YahooGroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: Lancair_ES-unsubscribe@YahooGroups.com If you have questions for the group administrator, send it to: Lancair_ES-owner@YahooGroups.com=0D _____ =0D YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS=0D =0D * Visit your group " Lancair_ES = " on the web. =0D * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: Lancair_ES-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com= =0D =0D * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! = Terms of Service.=0D =0D _____ =0D ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= -------------- This e-mail is confidential and is for the addressee only.=0D Please refer to http://www.kumbaresources.com/email-disclaimer for= important disclaimers. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= -------------- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C64E70.CB73B41F Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi=0D Mark and anyone,
 
"Mazdatrix recently dyno’d a N/A peripheral-ported 13B= for Paul=0D Lamar at 250hp @ 6000rpm, running a carburetor.  That is an easy=0D 125hp/rotor, and 250 hp from a 195# engine."
 
What=0D would be a reasonable firewall forward weight of such a N/A complete=0D installation? What I really want to know is what is the lightest= installation to=0D be expected based on average experience?
 
Regards,
 
Hennie
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark R Steitle=0D [mailto:mark.steitle@austin.utexas.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, March= 22,=0D 2006 6:59 PM
Subject: Rotary - FWD from Lancair ES=0D List

Hey Guys,=0D

I thought I= would=0D forward a post from the Lancair ES list concerning rotaries (oldest post= on=0D the bottom).  There are very few rotary powered Lancairs, so= I’m kinda=0D the front man on this one by default.  I may come to some of the Fly= =0D Rotary “experts” for help if I get in a corner, but so far,= everyone’s been=0D polite and its been a fun exchange. 

 

I’m sure= there is=0D more to come. 

 

Mark=0D Steitle

Lancair ES= – N/A=0D 20B

 

 

From:=0D Lancair_ES@yahoogroups.com=0D [mailto:Lancair_ES@yahoogroups.com]=0D On Behalf Of= Mark R Steitle
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006= 8:41=0D AM
To: Lancair_ES@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Lancair_ES]=0D Rotary

 

Gary,

First, it is= not my=0D intent to flame you or anyone else.  I only strive to educate. = I=0D don’t know just where your calculations are off, but obviously= something is=0D amiss.  Mazda rated the N/A 13B 2-rotor engines anywhere from 160 to= 180=0D hp.  The 2.0L 3-rotor was only produced in a turbo model (20B-REW)= and=0D was rated at a very conservative 299hp.  The new RX-8 Renesis engine= (a=0D 1.3L n/a 2-rotor) is rated at 238 hp. 

 

Attached is a= =0D hp/torque chart from the Mazda 26B 4-rotor engine that was used in the= Mazda=0D LeMans race car, and won the LeMans in 1990.  It shows that it= produced=0D 675hp at 9000rpm.  That is over 150 hp/rotor.  While this= engine was=0D a peripheral-ported engine, it also was normally-aspirated. = Mazdatrix=0D recently dyno’d a N/A peripheral-ported 13B for Paul Lamar at 250hp= @ 6000rpm,=0D running a carburetor.  That is an easy 125hp/rotor, and 250 hp from= a=0D 195# engine.  (While 6000rpm might sound high, keep in mind that the= =0D crank turns 3X the rotor speed.  So, when the crank is turning= 6000rpm,=0D the rotors are only going 2000rpm.)

 

Also attached= is a=0D dyno chart by Atkins Rotary showing a turbo 3-rotor producing 375hp at=0D 6200.  This is in the rpm ballpark of where you would normally= operate a=0D rotary airplane engine running a 2.85:1 gearbox, such as the RWS model=0D RD2-C.  It should be noted that the rotary’s lowest bearing= loads occur=0D at 5900 rpm.  So, 6200 is very close to the “sweet spot”= as far as=0D bearing loads are concerned.

 

Turbo’d= rotaries can=0D produce an incredible amount of power for their size.  500hp from a= =0D turbo-charged 13B in not all that unusual.  That would correlate to= 750hp=0D from a 3-rotor at the same boost.  So, 580hp at 7000 is well within= reach=0D of the common man.  A Velocity builder in California (Al Glitzen) recently= dyno’d his=0D N/A 20B at 275 hp @ 6000.   

 

In the early= days of=0D the rotary, they were beating the pants off of all the competition, so= the=0D SCCA came up with an equalizer formula to make racing fair for all=0D participants.  It effectively doubles the 1.3L displacement and= treats it=0D is a 2.6L.  If you compare the airflow of the 1.3L rotary engine it= pumps=0D as much air as a 2.6L 4-stroke piston engine would.  So, the SCCA=0D considers the displacement to be 2.6L for the 13B and 3.9L for the= 20B. =0D Maybe this helps explain why they produce more hp than your calculations= would=0D indicate.

 

As you pointed= out,=0D one of the most attractive features of the rotary is its soft failure=0D modes.  If they’re running when the failure occurs, they will= usually=0D keep running until they are shut down, then they will refuse to=0D re-start.  The 13B has only 3 moving parts, two pistons and a=0D crank.  Pistons are cast iron and the crank is bullet-proof. =0D

 

For more= information,=0D check out the ACRE (AirCraft Rotary Engine)= web site=0D at www.rotaryeng.net.=0D  

 

Mark= Steitle =0D

 

 

 

 

From:=0D Lancair_ES@yahoogroups.com=0D [mailto:Lancair_ES@yahoogroups.com]=0D On Behalf Of Gary=0D Casey
Sent: Tuesday,= March=0D 21, 2006 10:06 PM
To:= =0D Lancair_ES@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Lancair_ES]=0D Rotary

 

I should probably take this to= the rotary=0D engine list as they seem to 
have napalm ready to flame us "disbelievers", but= here=0D goes:  A 
naturally=0D aspirated 2-liter Mazda engine, according to my =0D
predictions, would produce= about=0D 160 hp at 7,000 rpm.  Under boost, 
and I don't know whether this one is running 39= inches=0D (Hg?) manifold 
pressure or=0D more likely 10 psi boost, which would be about 50 inches =0D
Hg, I would predict a= power=0D output of 275, maybe a little less.  This =
roughly correlates to 275 hp for the last twin-turbo= RX7,=0D which ran 
to about= 8500=0D rpm.  The claim below is 580 hp, or twice my prediction =0D
and about twice the best= specific=0D output from Mazda.  And then the 
580 hp at 7,000 would be equivalent to a torque of= 435=0D ft-lb, which 
is= higher than=0D the peak torque stated (386 ft-lb).

All that is not to say it wouldn't make a good= engine for=0D the ES.  It 
would=0D tolerate 50 inches of manifold pressure and 7,000 rpm quite =0D
well and that would= produce 275=0D hp.  With some effort the turbo setup =
could be matched to give a critical altitude of= 10,000=0D ft.  Power 
would=0D probably fall off to maybe 200 hp at 20,000 ft, still =0D
respectable.  The= thing that=0D always bothered my about the rotary 
option is the relatively high fuel consumption,= maybe 10%=0D higher than 
a piston= =0D engine.   The thing that is attractive is that there are = =0D
very few catastrophic= failure=0D modes.  They will keep running with a =
broken apex seal and even with no=0D coolant.

Gary=0D Casey
On Mar 21, 2006, at= 9:30 AM,=0D <fpbjr2001@yahoo.com> wrote:

> ed
>   the rotary is a 20b. a 2 liter or= 120 cu.=0D in.
>=0D engine.
> we have an IVO= prop=0D on it to get us through the 40hr
> test. we are going to look at the MT prop at=0D sun-n-fun
> and we have= a prop=0D that chuck diaz has designed for
> the rotary community. we are going to ground= test=0D it
> before another guy= flight=0D test it.
>       paul= brannon =0D N117ES
>
> ---=0D erosiak@comcast.net wrote:
>
>>=0D Paul,
>>
>> What is the cubic inch engine size of the=0D rotary,
>> and what= prop=0D will you use??
>>
>> Ed Rosiak
>>
>>
>>  -------------- Original=0D message
>>=0D ----------------------
>>=0D From: <fpbjr2001@yahoo.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>> From:   =0D <fpbjr2001@yahoo.com>
>> To:    Lancair_ES@yahoogroups.com
>> Subject:    RE: [Lancair_ES]= =0D Someone talk some sense
>>=0D into me!
>>=0D Date:    Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:22:13=0D +0000
>>
>
>=0D ---------------------------------
> bryan
>   no! no! we hope to be a little= better than=0D piston
>=0D speeds.
>   we= did=0D dyno the engine. 39" mp (10 lbs boost) it
> made 580 hp @7000rpm and 386ft/lb torgue @ 5400= =0D rpm.
>  we will= turbo=0D normalize with 3 lbs boost or 33" mp
> and make about 330-350= hp.
>           = ;=0D paul brannon   N117ES
>
> ---=0D bjburr@mwheli.com wrote:




To Post a= message to=0D the group, send it to:

Lancair_ES@YahooGroups.com

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message=0D to:

Lancair_ES-unsubscribe@YahooGroups.com

If you have questions for the group administrator,= send it=0D to:

Lancair_ES-owner@YahooGroups.com=0D


YAHOO! GROUPS=0D LINKS=0D

 

  •  Visit your= group=0D "Lancair_ES"= on the=0D web.
     
  •  To= unsubscribe=0D from this group, send an email to:
     Lancair_ES-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
     = =0D
  •  Your use of= Yahoo!=0D Groups is subject to the Yahoo!=0D Terms of Service.

 


----------------------------------------------------------------= -------------------------
This e-mail is confidential and is for the= addressee only.
Please refer to= http://www.kumbaresources.com/email-disclaimer for important= disclaimers.
----------------------------------------------------------= -------------------------------
------_=_NextPart_001_01C64E70.CB73B41F--