Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by moogleii 3655 days ago
Just doing a brief visual comparison from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0e785YnDmq0, the most immediate difference is the inversion of the housing and rotor shapes. Instead of a dorito shaped rotor like the wankel, it has a jelly bean shaped rotor. And instead of a jelly bean shaped housing, it has a dorito shaped housing.

Also, my memory of the workings of the wankel is a bit rusty, but I believe it is inherently balanced, so no counterbalance is necessary, but this one requires a counterbalance. On the other hand, unlike the wankel's one combustion chamber, this one has 3, so it doesn't need to deal with asymmetric heating issues. The combustion chambers themselves are very interesting. Due to the dorito shaped nature of the wankel rotor, there seems to be an inherent limit to the compression ratio because of the planar sides of the rotor can't get any closer to the wall of the housing. But on this one, the rotor can get completely flush with the housing, allowing more direct control over the compression ratio. Definitely an intriguing design.

1 comments

I believe the counterbalance is due to the asymmetric jelly bean shape to create a larger expansion vs intake volume.