Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Yes, at least in principle- because the "piston" doesn't have to keep stopping and starting again.

Don't think it's quite as simple as that. Ignoring the compressive and power stroke forces, the energy to accelerate a piston is returned by the piston when it pulls on the crankshaft when being decelerated.

 

There'll be losses through friction and the like, but it's not like (say) you or I trying to oscillate a piston up and down in our hand.

 

  • 1 month later...
Posted

From first principles, the Wankel should be more efficient because of two factors:

1. Lower mass than reciprocating engines

2. Less loss of kinetic energy from frequent changes in piston direction.

This is a gross simplification, and a lot of other factors including leakage make it less efficient, but I still hope engineers will get past these limitations.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.