Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #37931
From: <WRJJRS@aol.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Fw: Different Rotary Port configurations
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 00:53:26 EDT
To: <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
George and Jerry,
 I believe that a properly contoured 1-3/4" port will work fine, but I believe that the tube length is far more important. My logic is that smaller ports do incur more pumping losses. Another thing to remember is that if your engine makes more power than you expect at a predetermined RPM that is OK too. I completely understand why you want to go with 1-3/4" (44.5 mm George) to keep the gas flow speeds up. The thing to remember is a badly contoured or poorly timed small port will insure nither power or tractability. What really needs to happen is we need to build some of these things and test them.
 George,
 I have e-mailed Larry through the other list. I can't help him unless he contacts me. So far no joy. I have some ideas for products which I would contribute just for the parts if he is willing to cooperate I'm in.
Bill Jepson
 
Jerry,
I am totally in agreement with your on this subject Jerry and I would dearly
love to get Larry (on the other list) who is an engineer with his own CNC
engineering  business, on this list as well. Now Larry gave a really good
evaluation/assessment on the port sizing which was in line with all that I'd
see before and he concluded a smaller Diameter PP which someone didn't agree
with - Jerry and I have both asked for his e-mail address and it never found
the group ( funny that).

I was hoping Bill J. would be able to arrange this ( hint, hint).

BTW Larry is intending to manufacture Mazda components, to service the
Aviation Industry. Just reading his suggestions, convinces me he knows what
he's about in relation to the rotary and is in a position to be a great
contributor. However I did suggest he make single cranks but I got no
response from that one.

Now the suggestion of welding a SS tube to the steel liner ( on the inside)
and my suggestion to Bill J. of an O ring on the outside, would seem to me
to be the ideal PP configuration, now the only other thing to decide is the
Diameter.  I believe 1.5" ( 38mm) is adequate, but with any restriction
maybe 1.6 ( 40 to 41mm) to 1.7 ( 43mm) would be necessary. I think the
suggested Al 2" ( 51mm) has an ID of 1.8 ( 45-46mm) - we really are
splitting hairs at this stage.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 




See what's free at AOL.com.
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster