Congratulations! Your video, Liquid Piston Rotary Engine - In Slow Motoin, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 19 Badge!

Your video, Liquid Piston Rotary Engine - In Slow Motoin, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Liquid Piston Rotary Engine - In Slow Motoin has been added as a related post - related requested by newtboy on that post.

I thought by comparing itself to existing technologies, it was being up front that it’s just moving from purely theoretical to prototype. Maybe that’s not as clear to others?

I’m fairly certain every single point there was made about the Wankel when it was prototyped…look at it now! Edit: in fact, wankel side seals are the likely solution…it has the same rotary “side bleed” issue and they do ok.
Same for reciprocating piston engines and more.

Sure, it’s not ready for prime time, and no, it is no where near it’s theoretical potentials. What engine has been at this point? They got it to run, I’m pretty impressed with that as it’s much farther than most theoretical motor designs ever get.

This response seems to have a few gaps in it, but here's what a company rep said:

"And then there's our apex seals, they're like our piston rings," he continues. "In the Wankel engine, they're inside the rotor, again. They move at a high speed, and bounce around, they're very hard to lubricate. In our case, they're stationary, they don't bounce around, and you can lubricate them directly from the housing.

"So we basically solved the key challenges the old rotaries had with combustion and with oiling. Those oiling challenges caused both durability issues and emissions problems. By making those components stationary, we solve the challenges of the old rotary. And we also upgraded its cycle to give it much higher efficiency."

https://newatlas.com/military/liquidpiston-rotary-x-engine-army-generator/

The Fecal Matter is about to hit the Rotary Impeller.

*related=https://videosift.com/video/Climatologist-Emotional-Over-Arctic-Methane-Hydrate-Release

Amazing model, but I'm having a really hard time getting my head around how altitude can be controlled. I think the lift produced by the rotary wing would vary with airspeed, but that seems an awfully crude control mechanism.

Your video, Rotary Jails and Accidental Amputations, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I followed the YouTube link to see if there were other songs...and found a rotary phone bluetooth experiment...



Dude should productize that...idiots would eat that shit up.

Im not surprised for kids of this age not to know.

For more of this i give you, Kids react to old technology. I always get a kick out of these. Kids are hillarious and awesome.
VCR https://youtu.be/kesMOzzNBiQ
ROTARY PHONE https://youtu.be/XkuirEweZvM
WALKMAN https://youtu.be/Uk_vV-JRZ6E
TYPEWRITERS https://youtu.be/vfxRfkZdiAQ
OLD CAMERAS https://youtu.be/DDtWxURLlPk
OLD COMPUTER https://youtu.be/PF7EpEnglgk

Two different types of engine are both called "rotary" and both have been used on airplanes to confuse people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_engine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pistonless_rotary_engine

Also a rotary engine (most WWI warplanes) can look fairly similar to a radial (some WWII warplanes) unless its running.

The principle of the wankel engine is not dead. At this time other principles have been developed better but it can come back with better materials and design.

It would be awesome if there was a way to bring back real old style rotary engines, I love visible moving parts, very steampunk.

Whoops -- I screwed up.

P-47 had a *radial* engine (with pistons), but not a *rotary* engine.

So I guess I was reading too much into the advantages of rotary engine coinciding with the advantages of the P-47.

I'll leave my post above unedited and own my brain-fart, but I hereby own up to being all wet and wrong about it!

***update -- I was wrong about P-47 having a rotary engine, confused *radial* with rotary. Other than noting that mistake here, I'll leave my original comment unedited below (in which I draw erroneous conclusions based on that brain fart):

@eric3579 and @newtboy -

I was also quite interested in the "advantages" question. My grandfather was an armorer on P-47 "Thunderbolt" aircraft in WW2, and I knew that rotary engines were used in those.

Both of your answers tie in to the strengths of P-47s during the war. They were considered very reliable and resistant to damage (sorta like a WW2-era A-10; they could take a beating and make it back home). And of course, in internal combustion powered aircraft, power to weight ratio is even more important than in automobiles.

So, I'm sure that some of those strengths were at least partially due to the use of a radial engine. Not entirely, because other things in the design played a big role also -- like the fact that the P-47 engine was air cooled, so it didn't need a radiator system. As I understand it, comparatively light damage to a liquid-cooled aircraft like a P-51 that happened to damage the cooling system could disable or force them down for repairs... Not to knock the amazing piece of engineering that the Mustang was, but for sheer ability to take a beating and stay in the air, the Thunderbolt may have been the best US fighter in the war.

Your video, The Rotary Engine is Dead - Here's Why., has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.