On Sep 19, 12:55*am, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
* *Doctor *Drivel wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
* Doctor *Drivel wrote:
Audi are looking into using a very small Wankel engine as a range
extender genny slapped under the boot. For the rare times it will be
used it is fine. Wankels are efficient running at their constant high
speed "sweet spot", so come into their own as a genny. The very small
size and no vibration is also a great major advantage.
That'll be why all generators already use them.

This man is senile.

The rotary engine has been around for many many years. Petrol engine
powered generators too. The need for a quiet smooth running economical
generator also in great demand - many pay a great deal more for this, over
a basic type.

But all of a sudden the Wankle engine is ideal for this job?

You really are the most gullible of idiots, dribble.

The one thing you need on generators is the ability to run long periods
without breaking. Wankel engines wore the seals out in a few hundred
hours if that.

You wont find them in aircraft either. Nor will you find an aircraft
engine revving much over 2500 rpm. That way the bloody things are
reliable for extended periods of high throttle running.


There ARE Wankel aircraft engines, I have seen them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraf...#Wankel_engine

The reason traditional aircraft engines rev slowly is to do with
propellor requirements. The alternative being heavy gearboxes back
than.

There are some more modern ones that drive the propellor with a
toothed belt for speed reduction.

But the tendency is toward small gas turbines.