it wouldnt lesson the power at all, if it only kicks in at cruise speed...... you dont use all 200HP when your crusing down the road do you....... nope........ you would not lose any power but it could add the the complications of things to go wrong but hey its not too advanced

 

moveing two rotors takes power laws of physics. Im afraid i dont understand how this will work out. its a cool idea but i see no reason to do this.

 

the rotors will be like a supercharger for the other 2 rotors that are being used at cruising speed... while the unused rotors spinnin a pipe would take the compression the make and force it into the chambers of the rotors being used, providing a better combustion, improving economy ect ect

 

cool....i dotn know how that would work but cool

 

But when the other rotors enter the exhaust cycle, they would effectively create a vacuum - sucking the air back into them, and out of the other rotors - that is what I meant

 

not if the was a SOV where the combustion takes places


(Suck Off Valve )

 

but it would still create a vacuum at some point of rotation though, it would need a valve to shut it off at certain points, and it wouldn't be much help towards VE, because there would be a point where fuel can exit during normal running (when it's not being used as a compressor)

 

could you clearify that a little more.....?

 

Where the pipe would be for the compressed air to exit, it would create a point of low-pressure in the combusion chamber. The fuel would "flood" this area, and it would bog-down.

Unless you had some kind of v.v.expensive flush-sitting valve against the housing internals to re-create the air-tight surface again.

Also, what happens AFTER the point of combustion? The space expands, and if this space isnt being filled with expanding gasses, then it will create a vacuum.

You get around this problem by having the take off point earlier in the rotor housing, but this would see virtually no extra pressure whatsoever, and it could only supply around 1/4 of what it takes in (due to the area it has to move, and the extra heat involved from the rotor)

sorry man, it would be good if it worked, but rotaries and economy are two words that will never be heard in the same sentence (unless you include "lack-of"!!)

 

it could be done but . . . .. $

 

The only rotaries i can think of that dont use a couple of gallons for every mile, are the ones that are so small, you can fit them in your palm (or dead rotaries - they CAN'T use any fuel!!)