ultimatejay

iTrader: (1)

[QUOTE=pmr eng;8751174]Interesting you say that, I was in the gym earlier today and I was curling 45kg (100lbs) dumbells and they seemed kinda light because I managed to do 10 reps in each arm. Maybe that's the reason why I perceive 3lbs to not be a vast amount


That just means you have a very very small dick.

If you don't think 3lbs or even 1lb per rotor is alot of weight savings on the engine internals then you are in the wrong forum. Why do you think all the piston racers are using alluminum pistons for years and years and years now? Must be because they look nicer ehh? Go take another steroid.

pmr eng

Hi,
You are not correct!
If the 10lbs rotor is spinning at 10000rpm and is counterbalanced and the 7lbs aluminum rotor is spinning at 10000rpm and is counterbalanced wouldn't forces be the same, they are both counterbalanced?
The force should be theoretically zero!!!
The only force acting on the bearing is the combustion force/pressure

I didn't appreciate your comment earlier
Next time show some respect!

Gorilla RE

iTrader: (1)

Actually weight savings is NOT the main reason for using forged pistons in "most" application.

-J

G.KAKKOS

The ability to rev faster does NOT only depend on the engine...
I would agree with you if we were talking about an engine on an engine dyno.

Gorilla RE

iTrader: (1)

Still missing it bud...... I'm done contributing in ruining this extremelly amazing thread by arguing with ignorant fools.

Alex, E&J etc. I am very very proud of your amazing achievement, not only for ya'll personally but for the rotary community!! Congatulations guys, we need more folks like ya'll! Looking forward to seeing the great things the future holds if these are the kind of R&D/products we can expect from ya'll!

-J

B6T

iTrader: (2)

They are machined from a solid billet of aluminum, and they aren't internally cooled like the OEM design. This can only be achieve through casting, which is incredibly expensive for small production runs. I also wonder about the longevity of these parts in street applications.

I'm not trying to bash the product, so don't accuse me of that.

felix_is_alive

HUH?

G.KAKKOS

If everybody that have a diferent opinion than yours is ''ignorant fool'' then i better stop this here.
Basicaly YOU are the one that missing the point on what I said but anyway.

Gorilla RE

iTrader: (1)

DelSlow

iTrader: (2)

Very interesting project, I love seeing new technology being developed.

Has there been a stress analysis done to determine how much more material can be safely removed? Why did you choose to use 6061 instead of a stronger alloy in the 7000 series? Have you determined what sort of temperatures the rotor reaches and if a thermal barrier coating can be applied without cracking?

With the much higher thermal conductivity of aluminum, I'm sure that a simple machineable cooling passage could be designed to effectively cool the rotor enough for continuous use.

pmr eng

HUH?


Rephrased
If a counterweight is used, what is the inertia force (the force of the spinning rotor) on the bearing going to be if the rotor's mass of 7lbs is rotating at 10000rpm?

JBurer

A question to toss out there for Crispeed - in theory, wouldn't a lighter rotating assembly allow for a slightly leaner air/fuel ratio?

Gorilla RE

iTrader: (1)

Why?

dgeesaman

iTrader: (7)

Regarding the bearings, isn't it true that because they are hydrodynamic, higher RPM = higher surface speed = better centering and better bearing performance?

In any case, 3lbs out of each rotor PLUS a matching amount of weight out of the counterbalance results in a huge drop in rotational inertia. This type of advancement is just nuts.

What would be really wild is if this material could be developed to a durability suitable for use on road courses and street driven vehicles.

Dave

proz07

iTrader: (6)

SCIENCE CLASS IS IN YO>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
NEWTON's 3 laws of motion

I. Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.

II. The relationship between an object's mass m, its acceleration a, and the applied force F is F = ma. Acceleration and force are vectors (as indicated by their symbols being displayed in slant bold font); in this law the direction of the force vector is the same as the direction of the acceleration vector.

III. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

now here we go for those slow learners. Yes what you said can be used but only on something that ONLY ROTATES like a flywheel. unfortunatly for you a rotary engine is still going off of real world physics. first off the rotary engine still has a STROKE even though the rotor rotates around it it still moves up and down just like a piston. that being true it must stop and then begining moving again in the oposite direction.

so rotor goes up then stops then down then stops yada yada through out the cycles.

now im going to through out some nice rounded numbers for ya to comprehend. lets say a stock rotor weighs 10 pounds and the lightened rotor weighs 7 pounds it does not take the same amount of energy to stop these two different weights. in fact id say it takes 30% less energy to reverse the acceleration of the lightened rotor. now take that 30% and put it into RPM's and you can now rev that engine 30% higher, before it has the same force on it that it would have had with the stock rotor. so there is 30% less force acting on the bearing, of course then in addition to the "combustion".

hope i got that close enough for ya if you still dont understand i can not help you anylonger and you need to seek help elsewhere. thank you come again

z

oh and sorry to the lopez crew for cluttering your thread. you guys do nice work i always wanna see more.

crispeed

Best 'off' post!

No hope for the 'e-mercenary' warriors.

B6T

iTrader: (2)

This is going to get interesting...

Trots*88TII-AE*

iTrader: (11)

Worst rotary engine descriptive post/physics calculations EVER.

DelSlow

iTrader: (2)

+1

I think people need to start busting out some FBDs, because that isn't going to convince anyone.

B6T

iTrader: (2)

Fish Bone Diagrams???

pmr eng

Close, you require less energy (fuel) to produce the same effects (acceleration of the rotor) when the part is lighter

A/R completely different scenerio

pmr eng

True, that is if there weren't any counterweights
It would start with low vibration, as the speed increases the vibration amplitude would be enormous (the hi=uge vibration is the components resonance - whatever frequency that maybe), then reduces once again and plateau's
Eventually it will destroy itself
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonance

Yep,
Force = mass*e(distance from the centre of rotation to centre of mass)* angular velocity^2 (rotational speed omega squared (rad/s))

ultimatejay

iTrader: (1)

Ok guys enough with the physics and mechanical engineering mumbo jumbo that you guys are cluttering this thread up with. The only thing you need to know at the moment is that these rotors are going to take the rotary to the next level.

pmr eng

A flywheel is perfectly symmetrical (equal size and mass all over), it's machined on a lathe, doesn't need balancing
A rotor spins, it has no reciprocating mass only rotating mass

There is a reduction in force to the bearing only from the burnt gas pressure and it's rotation, but not from the rotation of the rotors mass. The force from rotating mass is "0" because it is balanced!

jacobcartmill

iTrader: (6)

why hasn't mazda done this?

one would think that they would have checked into this a long time ago --if not for their street cars, definitely for their race cars-- several years ago with the hundreds of millions of dollars they have invested in rotaries over the last 30 years.

anyone have any input on this?