X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 2 [X] Return-Path: Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.250] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.7) with ESMTP id 1921228 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 14 Mar 2007 16:01:29 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.132.250; envelope-from=rotary.thjakits@gmail.com Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c34so291202anc for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2007 13:00:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=sB1z+7hTFQmAsyafYYGem2NLaINa9KbNwAnkJxoLK6BWb6URXc2zC3opyNvyLBZJr74xBT2eH621TZr0jAj1HshV7nyZWcPgz3NSmd7BH7SMp4FECsA02/70oYmgzEN0dEqdza8I6kLTOFFXK6kHZwJt6cSjiNTT4/HQGQ5lyag= 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:references; b=mxYQXIFPPxlyaEjpKjinthJ3Qz1PHN4PFfi/onNOvhh2jyYrvr17HDDcbUeIR9/9PPEI6boWWO6VAw5zeZIqeEzpTWXUPQCtyHIfJFQx9gKyMlKFZJV+PZUQoNYJP1VT0pTl2vETwPRqMixvSu0fgwGWzYtgz2b9CG5ZM7QLQQs= Received: by 10.100.198.11 with SMTP id v11mr2440294anf.1173902441813; Wed, 14 Mar 2007 13:00:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.195.12 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Mar 2007 12:59:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <63163d560703141259s403d367bme1767848d7970e28@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 14:59:57 -0500 From: "Thomas Jakits" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Jet-A In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_63374_10110664.1173902397357" References: ------=_Part_63374_10110664.1173902397357 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Supposedly Diesel (and Jet-A) have a higher engergy content than Gasoline... So for the same amount of air/fuel mix you should get more power. Whether it is a real Diesel or not should not matter. Question is always based on a common base, here I would say it is "cumbustion air available"... I know that Mistral expects a litte less power, but I doubt it has to do with engery content in the fuel - there must be something else.... Francoise?? Thomas On 3/14/07, wrjjrs@aol.com wrote: > > Thomas, > > Think Diesel. The mileage would improve, but power would be slightly > down. The rotary can't produce high enough compression to do diesel. Jet-a > and diesel are nearly identical. > > Bill Jepson > > -----Original Message----- > From: rotary.thjakits@gmail.com > To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net > Sent: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 8:33 AM > Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Jet-A > > Bill, > > why would you expect " ....a minor loss of Power" with Jet-A? > > Thomas > > > On 3/14/07, wrjjrs@aol.com wrote: > > > > There are many reasons, the ability to control lean-of-peak operations > > better is one reason. That is with gasoline operation. The ability to run > > Jet A with minor loss of power is another. The high pressure DI charge > > can be directed to take advantage of the rotaries ability to run lean, > > (stratified charge) reducing GPH. The last possible item is the ability > > to eventually run without a throttle valve to improve efficiency due to > > lower pumping losses. The Audi guys are saying that they expect as much > > as 18% improvement in mileage. They achieve that using some techniques > > we wouldn't such as turning OFF the fuel completely during deceleration > > cycles. Since we don't really "coast" anytime that isn't possible. Running > > LOP, operation with all kinds of fuels and minor power improvement with > > better atomization and less charge dilution are the biggest reasons. OH, > > yea, you can put fuel input on the side opposite the exhaust which > > simplifies the plumbing a minor amount. > > Bill Jepson > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Lehanover@aol.com > > To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net > > Sent: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 5:06 AM > > Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Jet-A > > > > In a message dated 3/14/2007 12:09:11 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > > WRJJRS@aol.com writes: > > > > Lynn, > > I believe the best place for direct injection would be in about the > > same place that Mazda ran the "far trailing" plug in the Le Mans engine. > > It is a possible place, some of the original NSU tests used the trailing > > plug hole and single ignition. I would prefer to stay with 2 plugs. > > Bill Jepson > > > > > > So this idea is to avoid detonation in the low octane fuel? > > > > Lynn E. Hanover > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free > > from AOL at *AOL.com* . > > ------------------------------ > > AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free > > from AOL at *AOL.com* > > . > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free > from AOL at *AOL.com* > . > > ------=_Part_63374_10110664.1173902397357 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
Supposedly Diesel (and Jet-A) have a higher engergy content than Gasoline...
So for the same amount of air/fuel mix you should get more power.
Whether it is a real Diesel or not should not matter.
Question is always based on a common base, here I would say it is "cumbustion air available"...
I know that Mistral expects a litte less power, but I doubt it has to do with engery content in the fuel - there must be something else....
 
Francoise??
 
Thomas

 
On 3/14/07, wrjjrs@aol.com <wrjjrs@aol.com> wrote:
Thomas,
 
 Think Diesel. The mileage would improve, but power would be slightly down. The rotary can't produce high enough compression to do diesel. Jet-a and diesel are nearly identical .
 
Bill Jepson
 
-----Original Message-----
From: rotary.thjakits@gmail.com
To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net
Sent: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 8:33 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Jet-A

Bill,
 
why would you expect " ....a minor loss of Power" with Jet-A?
 
Thomas

 
On 3/14/07, wrjjrs@aol.com < wrjjrs@aol.com> wrote:
There are many reasons, the ability to control lean-of-peak operations better is one reason. That is with gasoline operation. The ability to run Jet A with minor loss of power is another. The high pressure DI charge can be directed to take advantage of the rotaries ability to run lean, (stratified charge) reducing GPH. The last possible item is the ability to eventually run without a throttle valve  to improve efficiency due to lower pumping losses. The Audi guys are saying that they expect as much as 18% improvement in mileage. They achieve that using some techniques we wouldn't such as turning OFF the fuel completely during deceleration cycles.  Since we don't really "coast" anytime that isn't possible. Running LOP, operation with all kinds of fuels and minor power improvement with better atomization and less charge dilution are the biggest reasons. OH, yea, you can put fuel input on the side opposite the exhaust which simplifies the plumbing a minor amount.
Bill Jepson 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Lehanover@aol.com
To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net
Sent: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 5:06 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Jet-A
In a message dated 3/14/2007 12:09:11 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, WRJJRS@aol.com writes:
Lynn,
 I believe the best place for direct injection  would be in about the same place that Mazda ran the "far trailing" plug in the Le Mans engine. It is a possible place, some of the original NSU tests used the trailing plug hole and single ignition. I would prefer to stay with 2 plugs.
Bill Jepson

 
So this idea is to avoid detonation in the low octane fuel?
 
Lynn E. Hanover 



AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.
 

 
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.
 

------=_Part_63374_10110664.1173902397357--