rotary engine

Have you looked at the Mazda automobile sites. Try http://www.rotaryengineillustrated.com. There are quite a few others as well.

The new design was most likely too expensive to manufacture with ceramics, didn't have any significant advantages in the market place and or it got lost in the attic for storage of items that no one was interested in any longer.

If Goggle can't find it, it is no longer there of you haven't used sufficiently inventive inquiry terms.

Hello! My name is Clifton Layne Ross. I am known as tohr, which is Celtic for cliff. I am curious as to the reason of your inquiry for I have designed just such an engine which is extremely efficient with zero wasted inertia and an extremely high output that also couples to an innovative transmission and drive train for 4wheel drive w/breaking incorporated into this system for a grand total of 23 major moving parts. The whole system is unified (works with itself). I used to fancy myself as a "MOPAR" fan and was intrigued with their efforts to incorporate a turbine engine into a car back in 1963/4 which was abandoned for lack of a transmission design that could efficiently and economically convey such power at such a high rpm without the excessive heat build up along with (I am assuming) problems that quite possibly arose from the inertia of rotation of the turbine to such a degree as to resist reorientation of its inertial direction in motion as in a turn. So back in "86" I set my self to the task of solving the transmission problem with success. I came up with a transmission that would do the job and with only 5 moving parts. Well as time went on I found myself trying to improve my design and in so doing came up with a new drive train concept and a new engine concept to boot, 1991. I have since worked the whole thing down to 23 major moving parts and at present am redefining "unitized" in it's design to where there are only 13 major moving parts in total for the engine, transmission and drive train for 4wheel drive w/breaking incorporated into the system. are you an investor? This concept would give "the big three" (and company) a new concept vehicle to compete with. I do not wish to corner the market, it would not be fair to the long standing auto industries that have brought us this far along in the realm of transportation. I have also addressed the inertial aspects as well. Fuel can be liquid or gaseous, although atomized is optimal. I have only discussed the transmission with two other engineer friends, and have not discussed the rest of the concept with any one.

I remember the article you are talking about. I think it was called something like a "Quad" engine, since it had a 4-sided rotating vane, rather than the Wankel's 3. Try to add that to your search. My internet access is limited here at work, or I'd try to search too. (Maybe I can find a copy on my computer at home tonight)

I found the article I was referring to. My memory was off. It was not "quad", but "Quasiturbine". The heading reads:

White Paper on Quantum Parallel: The Saint-Hilaire "Quasiturbine" As The Basis For a Simultaneous Paradigm Shift In Vehicle Propulsion Systems An entry into the "Post Piston Engine Era" for Optimum Efficiency and Environmental Benefits December 15, 2003 by Myron D. Stokes Publisher, eMOTION! REPORTS.com www.emotionreports.com

You can go to the website and scroll down to Special Reports for the white paper (pdf file). Enjoy!

Sounds very much like the Vd Burgh engine (hope I spelled his name right after all these years).

He was a Dutch engineer who made a concept ic with a rotor that had many little pivotting lobes attached to it which followed a combustion chamber that had compression and expansion points along its circumference. Back then, must be close to 20 years ago, the manufacturing was a serious problem but even now they are deemed not efficient enough to warrant the cost of manufacture which is alwasy higher than standard ic engines.

The current wankels are only toys for boys so to speak as they also are not all that efficient.

I currently own a Mazda RX-8 which utilizes just such an engine. This one consists of two rotors (3 vertex each) which rotate in oval housings with slight indent in the side of the oval. The housing is ported which means there are only 3 moving parts; the two rotors and the drive shaft! The engine is very low torque, but capable of high revolutions to make up for it. With a 1.3L displacement the engine is rated at 248hp at 8000rpm (red lines at 9000).

Issues with the rotary engine in the past have been that they are not fuel efficient, and tend to burn oil since each of the vertices on the rotors need lubrication. Also, the inherent design is prone to flooding if the engine is shut down during idle. The engine must be revved up to at least 2500 rpm prior to shut down to avoid flooding. In this way, the fuel injectors are shut off with the key, and the momentum of the rotors while revved up have the ability to "flush" the system of residual unburned fuel.

In reply to #3 and#4 ;

Sadly no, i'm not an investor!

The concept was quite similar to the EM2 project listed on this site http://www.deadbeatdad.org/eliptoid/

Strangely enaugh, even much older concepts which are a screaming nightmare to manufacture, ( like the Quasiturbine) still have their place on the net for discussion, while the Hruschka idea is cleaned off the records in true Orwell style.?

A similar concept can be found at www.starrotor.com.

Commercial versions of the compressor section and of the expander section of the engine are in serial production for special applications.

The web site is complete with animations and thermodynamic analysis.

HAVE FUN

Another type of engine that might be of interest to you is the QuasiTurbine. I could throw some words up here about it but a wikipedia link should do just fine...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasiturbine

The new web site is at <http://quasiturbine.promci.qc.ca/>

It has been redesigned as the original prototype has been sold and presumably the patent rights.