X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from ms-smtp-02.southeast.rr.com ([24.25.9.101] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.9) with ESMTP id 2110277 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 20:20:32 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.101; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from edward2 (cpe-024-074-103-061.carolina.res.rr.com [24.74.103.61]) by ms-smtp-02.southeast.rr.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id l5J0JMUc020354 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 20:19:23 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <002101c7b207$7ce731b0$2402a8c0@edward2> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Fw: Different Rotary Port configurations Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 20:19:22 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine Thanks, Jerry. 230 HP at 7500 would sound just about idea for most of us. That would indicate around 180-190HP at around 6000 rpm. Appreciate you sharing your data and thoughts Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry Hey" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 8:03 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fw: Different Rotary Port configurations >I have never been interested in max power but the considerable power that >a conservatively timed and sized p port can produce at our RPM plus the >simple and light weight weight intake is clearly the ideal set up. Nothing >else can compare at all. Here is my 230 hp @ 7500 rpm system. It is >based on the 13B. It would have 1.5" i.d. intakes, 22 inches in length. >The throttle body i.d. would be larger (1.625 i.d.) to make up for the >losses due to the butterfly obstructing the passage. If you are using a >slide throttle, then the i.d. can remain at 1.5". Timing would be >retarded enough to limit overlap, but the port would close at the same >time as the LeMan's p port. In other words, the port would open and close >late. If we ever get one of these on a dyno, then we can dial in the >intake length. Big p ports that develop max power at 9000 rpm have >nothing to do with us. This is just my uneducated opinion, but I have had >a lot of good advisors along the way. Jerry > > > > On Jun 18, 2007, at 7:58 PM, Ed Anderson wrote: > >> Sounds like we have PP nailed down, so now just need to find a source at >> a reasonable price. >> >> On the other hand, I have to keep reminding myself that when I fly, I >> normally do not come anywhere close to using the power I can produce >> with my old street ported 13B. I keep the fuel burn down to 7.5-8 GPH. >> Now, take off is one place where I do use all the old engine can produce >> even if only for 2-3 minutes. Of course, it always takes fuel to >> produce power and the thought that crosses my mind is that the for the >> same power produced the Renesis will undoubtedly get a better specific >> fuel consumption than a PP. >> >> So for those that want the utmost in power, it sounds like the PP is >> the way to go. For other cheap old chaps the Renesis would appear to >> offer a cost effective power increase. >> >> Ed >> ----- Original Message ----- From: >> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" >> Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 5:34 PM >> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fw: Different Rotary Port configurations >> >> >> Ed, Jerry and others, >> Sizing of the port and the length of the intake tubes are the details >> that will control powerband. P-ports have been shown to produce more >> power at anything above 2000 RPM. We are talking about details here. >> Jerry you are correct that you can use smaller ports, no problem, but >> not a LOT smaller. For performance with control I believe I'll chose to >> run a smaller throttle body. You can limit the system on either end. >> Bill Jepson >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ed Anderson >> To: Rotary motors in aircraft >> Sent: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:25 am >> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fw: Different Rotary Port configurations >> >> >> Hi Jerry, >> >> I know you did a lot research on the right sizing of a PP for our >> application. Any of that material, rationale, etc, you would care to >> share at this time? >> >> The reason I am interested is that with the Mazda folks claiming that >> the six port Renesis produced 40% more HP than an older 13B. If I >> assume a modest 160 Hp for the old 13B, 40% more would provide 1.4*160 >> = 224 HP which I believe is in the ball park of what they are now >> claiming for HP. Now that sounds goo, however, that is probably at 9000 >> rpm which is probably a bit high for our needs. So if the PP could >> produce 224 HP at a lesser rpm say no more than 7500 rpm, then the PP >> would suit our needs better (just my opinion of course). >> >> Ed >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry Hey" >> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" >> Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 1:33 PM >> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fw: Different Rotary Port configurations >> >>> I usually keep my mouth shut when it comes to P port discussions. I >> agree >with everything Bill has written with one exception. I doubt the >> big p >ports are advantageous at our RPM. A 1.5" i.d. port will flow >> 7500 rpm, >no problem. The smaller ports are easier to time (less >> overlap) and the >smaller dia. intake tubes are much easier to fit. >>> jerry >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jun 18, 2007, at 1:01 PM, Richard Sohn wrote: >>>> Bill, AMEN to all. Richard Sohn N2071U ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" >>>> Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 11:12 AM >>>> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fw: Different Rotary Port configurations >>>> Guys, Lets cut to the chase. The P-port rotary will idle fine. The >> original >>>> 12As were p-port. Lots of the NSU wankels were p-port. John Deere >> and >>>> MB C111 engines were p-port. There was no comment that these engines >>>> didn't idle. Perhaps not as smoothly as the side port engines, but >> idle >>>> none the less. The P-port makes the most power, period. Mazda >> wouldn't >>>> have used the P-port only on their LeMans engine if combination >> ports >>>> would have worked better. Don't think for a second they didn't try >>>> other configurations either. They used the far trailing plug to >> improve >>>> efficiency less than 2%. Richard's work showed no improvement to >> power >>>> with the side port/p-port combo. Anywhere but idle my guess would be >>>> that the inrush from the p-port probably causes minimal flow in the >>>> side ports. The p-port is open much sooner and flow is underway by >> the >>>> time the side port opens. If we had a source for finished p-port >>>> housings that cost the same as the standard housings we would all be >>>> using them and the discussion would cease and we would move on to >> other >>>> subjects. For aircraft use the big p-port is for most cases the best >>>> possible solution. We can improve on minor details, but not much. >> The >>>> simpler manifolding and more compact package when using fewer tubes >> for >>>> the intake are all pluses for the p-port. We don't have car low RPM >>>> issues to worry about. If a good source of the Mazda racing p- port >>>> housings was available for the same price as standard housings I'd >> have >>>> 3 on order right now. (20B remember) Bill Jepson Well, Mark - perhaps >>>> in the future Only so much time and so many things that would be fun >>>> to try. IF I interpret the charts correctly the P + S type intake >>>> configuration appears to provide much more intake port area than >>>> either the P or S type along. Makes sense - if you have twice as many >>>> intakes it has more area. Supposedly the P+S overcomes the low rpm >>>> idle problem of the PP alone. But, for aircraft usage, I think Richard >>>> is on the money, you don't really spend much time at idle in aircraft >>>> usage and I idle above >> 1600 >>>> rpm in any case, so who cares {:>) - just go with the P port. However, >>>> I am intrigued by the large intake area that the P + S configuration >>>> has over even the PP alone and what that might potent for POWER! More >>>> Power, Scotty!!!!! Saw some information on the Renesis in an SAE paper >>>> that indicates >> the >>>> six port (They call it the HIGH POWER Renesis) produces 40% more >> power >>>> than the standard 13B. They did not make a comparison to the 4 port >>>> Renesis but presumably it produces less than the six port Renesis >> but >>>> more than the older 13B. They also didn't specify the rpm point that >>>> occurred, but I assume it must be near its maximum. Also, its not >>>> clear if this figure was based on the earlier 250 HP claim for the >>>> Renesis by Mazda or the later adjusted 237 HP claim (actually I'd >> take >>>> either one) . The intake configuration and operation on the six port >>>> is quite involved, but they do make use of the Dynamic Effect. They >>>> call it >> the >>>> Sequential Dynamic Air Intake System (S-DAIS). Since there is no >>>> intake/exhaust port overlap in the Renesis, they appear to make use >> of >>>> the "A" pulse which is the pressure wave created when the high >> velocity >>>> air in the intake slams into the closing port and bounced back down >> the >>>> manifold. They then have several valves that activate at different >>>> rpm/air flow situations that control the sequential activation of >>>> elements of the S-DAIS. As well as the "A" pulse, the older NA 13B DEI >>>> also used the >> stronger >>>> "B" pulse created when the intake opened releasing a burst of the >>>> trapped exhaust gas residue to create a power shock wave which >> raised >>>> the manifold pressure at the second rotor's intake. But, since there >>>> is no intake/exhaust overlap with the Renesis side ports, it would >>>> appear that only the "A" pulse is used to enhance power. Ed ----- >>>> Original Message ----- >>>> From: Mark Steitle To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Monday, June >>>> 18, 2007 9:12 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fw: Different Rotary Port >>>> configurations Thanks Richard for the clarification. Mark S. (Looks >>>> like I should have typed a little faster.) On 6/18/07, Mark Steitle >>>> wrote: Well Ed, It looks like you've got yourself >>>> a new intake project. Didn't >> Richard >>>> Sohn try running side and peripheral intake porting on his one >> rotor? >>>> I vaguely remember him mentioning it and that he abandoned the idea. >> I >>>> think it had something to do with the complexity of the dual runners >>>> and that he was satisfied with the idle characteristics of the >> p-port? >>>> Maybe Richard can comment? Mark S. On 6/17/07, Ed Anderson >>>> wrote: Ok, here's the answer to my >>>> question. The second image shows a three barrel carb with the primary >>>> going to two side intake ports and the secondary going to the >>>> Peripheral ports. Interesting concept. Ed ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: Ed Anderson To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Sunday, June 17, >>>> 2007 10:15 PM Subject: Different Rotary Port configurations Ok, >>>> getting a bit quite again. Here is something that some of you >> may >>>> find interesting. Its a graph comparing the possible different port >>>> configurations for the Rotary engine. The top graph shows the intake >>>> and exhaust port opening for a engine with a peripheral intake and >>>> peripheral exhaust - such as a 13B >> which >>>> has been converted to a PP intake. The trapezoidal shapes show the >>>> port area. For example on the first graph the first rectangular area >>>> entitled PORT shows the Peripheral exhaust port open at 63Deg ATDC. >>>> There are two trapezoid areas shown for the Peripheral intake. A "P" >>>> which I presume stands for Primary and a much larger P+S which I >>>> presumes stands for a combined primary and Secondary port. Although, I >>>> do not ever recall a PP with two >> tubes >>>> one for primary and one for secondary. So there may be another >>>> explanation. The second graph is our traditional 13B with sideport >>>> intake and peripheral port exhaust. Here the intake timing for the >>>> intake is >> that >>>> of the NA 13B although it shows the intake opening a bit later than >> the >>>> stock 13B but closing at the stock 40 deg ABDC. If you look at the >>>> area under the first graphs "P" trapezoid it >> appears >>>> to be open much longer than the P for the side port intake (2nd >> graph), >>>> but the trapezoid is not as high. Wonder what that signifies? Open >>>> longer but not as large a port area? Anyhow, thought some of you might >>>> find it interesting. Ed Anderson Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered Matthews, >>>> NC eanderson@carolina.rr.com http:// >>>> members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW http:// >>>> www.dmack.net/mazda/index.html -- Homepage: http:// www.flyrotary.com/ >>>> Archive and UnSub: http:// >>>> mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html >> ______________________________________________________________________ >> __ >>>> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's >> free >>>> from AOL at AOL.com. =0 -- Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ Archive >>>> and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/ flyrotary/ >>>> List.html -- >> No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by >>>> AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.9.0/852 - >>>> Release Date: >> 6/17/2007 >> 8:23 AM >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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 >> >> >> ______________________________________________________________________ __ >> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free >> from AOL at AOL.com. >> =0 >> >> -- >> 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