autogyro wrote:I wish you the greatest of luck rotaryvalveman.
I just thought I should again mention that 'sleeve valve' engines were fully proven in the 1940's and were in reliable service on military operations through out WW2 in both fighters and bombers.
They were proven, but as fuels technology increased so that any advantsge of a sleeve valve dissapeared. Even Sir harry Ricardo had to concede this point (probably the biggest sleeve valve advocate ever)
However, now we've reached the point where the reciprocating poppet valves are reaching their limit it certainly is time to look at sleeve valves again. If rotaryvalveman really has come up with a novel solution to the sealing problem then it's really interesting. (I really wan't to know what it is!)
autogyro wrote:
If you equate efficiency with power output per liter. These sleeve valve engines produced nearly three times the power of even four valve per cylinder poppet valved engines and later non operational developments with supercharged stratified charged two stroke sleeve valce engines, resulted in documented results close to five thousand horsepower from 26 liters.
I'm very sorry, but you just can't compare engines like this. It's better to use BMEP to find out how they compare. The power gain is more than likely becuse it wa a two stroke.
1938 Spec (the 1200hp version) Merlin (single stage supercharged)
BMEP: Power W * Revolutions per cycle / Displaced Volume m^3 * Rev/s
876000 * 2 / 0.027 * 47.5 = 1 366 081 Pa
Rolls Royce Crecy (using wikipedia values) Supercharged to 2 bar and turbocharged..
2035000 * 1 / 0.026 * 41.66 = 1 878 762 Pa
Cercy was was 37% better it terms of output potential. This is more than likely due to the 2 stroke arrangement with the valves having a minimal effect. As 2 strokes don't use poppet valves anyway.
Modern F1 Engine Naturally Aspirated:
566000 * 2 / 0.0024 * 283 = 1 666 666 Pa.
Turbo F1 Era. Race spec engine. Boosted to 2.4 bar. Apprx 600 hp output.
447000 * 2 / 0.0015 * 166 = 3 590 361 Pa
1.8 20v T In the Audi TT. output 220Hp at about 5500 rpm.
164000 * 2 / 0.0018 * 91 = 2 002 442 Pa
So as a comparison: A modern naturally aspirated F1 engine puts out 16.6 Bar BMEP.
A 2 stroke twincharged Crecy puts out 18.8 Bar BMEP. The turbo era F1 engines were putting out approx 36 Bar BMEP. Even a modern turbocharged road engine gets a higher BMEP figure to the Crecy.
This is very little ultimate performace difference, considering it's a 2 stoke AND boosted. To give typical road figures: Na road engines get about 8-12 BAr and boosted engines get 11-17.
autogyro wrote:
This technology works, is reliable and was prevented from on going development in road and race vehicles because of cost and the politics that you find so detrimental to your rotary work.
Current ic engines in road and race vehicles IMO are many decades obsolete even by 1940's standards. It is one of the worst cases of deluding the public for profit in this and the last century.
You site lots of old engines, but they are so different from each other that it makes a comparison meaningless (unless you use a non dimensional method like the BMEP). Becuase the Crecy made more power, you cannot simply attribute that to the valve arrangement. For a direct comparison to see what difference the vavles make, you need to compare and identical engine. 1 running poppets the other running sleeves.