@@mattrittman hi I saw all these videos and these are really cool. Could you maybe continue doing vids just like this? I’d love to see how tanks work or an m4.
No,en absoluto,no tengo nada en contra de los pistones.De hecho mi motor (proyecto)los lleva.Estos son alargados,curvos y basculantes en un extremo.Valga como ejemplo una catapulta o una puerta al abrir o cerrar, menos fricción, mucha velocidad de compresión.Las carreras son asimétricas, dotado al final del tiempo de compresión con un avance (Brave step) permitiendo que el 80% del esfuerzo recaiga sobre el rotor de forma tangencial y solo un 20% sobre el pistón (llamado cizalla). Mi objetivo es un motor rotativo con rotor CIRCULAR y giro concéntrico de par motor igual o superior al 2T y por tanto no necesitará las r.p.m. ni el vaivén del rotativo wankel.Saludos.
@Blaik Lewis No, that's incorrect. Wankel engines are surprisingly low maintenance, the fatal flaw in its design is very poor reliability and durability.
You realize that Mazda didn't invent this, right? The basic design was done by Felix Wankel in the 1920's, developed into a running engine by Wankel, and further developed into a practical engine by Hanns Dieter Paschke, both working at NSU in the 1950's. Mazda licensed the design in 1961, one of many companies to do so, but the only one to sell an engine of this design in large quantities.
@Cyberkwak 2137 so what, there was just *billions* of barrels worth of dead dinosaurs piled up? There’s no way we’ve been burning dinosaurs this whole time lmao
+Asif Ifas it was invented in 1924, there was already engines based on pistons, so the idea couldn compete with the standrads that were already established.
Thirteen and a half years, and I'm only seeing this NOW? This is the simplest, most complete explanation of a Wankel that I have ever seen. Thank you, Matt Rittman!
racefan105 Unfortunately I haven't done any research so it was harder for me to understand. But i'm sure i could figure it out if I just did a bit of research :)
Piston engines have a clear boundary between engine oil and combustion room, but rotaries do not, engine oil will be consumed during the rotation. Meanwhile, the apex seals are problematic due to their limited size and shape; the sealed area is also way larger than a piston engine. Note, the entire rotary needs to move smoothly but also be highly sealed with the two housings sandwiched.
Not only that, but within that combustion room you have all 4 of the steps of the Otto cycle happening simultaneously, so if you don't have near perfect sealing of the different regions of the chamber, the bleedover will hurt engine efficiency as well.
@@mattrittman I just stumbled upon your videos an hour ago, and I can already tell you that your best is More Than Enough. This is only your first video on youtube and it's already better than most of my recommended
It amazes me that people even came up with this sort of thing. The mechanics of an engine seem incredibly complicated to me and I really still don't understand the rotary engine but the fact that people got this idea then made it work is genius.
I think this is a common problem actually. Rotary engines consume a lot more oil to prevent the scraping as much as possible but also the apex seals(tips) need to be replaced quite frequently if I'm not mistaken.
Bassotronics The apex seals are actually quite robust except in the area of detonation. Even stock seals will last over 100k on a turbo motor. Its the coating on the inside of the housings that can chip and peel over time.
Exactly why its a pos. And inherently flawed design. "Look at me dorito motor durrr.!" A motor that needs new apex seals every 80-90k miles is not what I would call revolutionary. ....PS. The rx8 looks like and is shit. No wonder they gave one for free on fear factor that one year lolz
I have been trying to figure out how the rotor could move in the oblong case since junior high school. That's about 45 years. No I finally can see it,sort of, I think.
Matt Rittman A 9 year old video still getting views also has the owner taking his time away from his day to reply to comments, you are a wonderful person my dude. Plus this video blew my mind! I always thought the combustion happened inside the triangular thingy
+Mostafa Mamdouh I second that, really well made and easy to understand even for someone with close to zero car knowledge. I was a bit sceptic at first because of no commentary, but as they say: A picture is worth a thousand words, and this was a damn fine picture! :)
I did a report in the 70's (4th grade) on the Wankel engine . I was so intrigued with this design I eventually purchased a mazda with the rotary engine. I never put a tachometer on that little motor, but I did take to some ridiculous RPMs. No floating valves! It wouldn't keep up with my big block chevy, but it would definitely scare the shit out of the driver, lol.
Awesome video. From being a child I always loved V8’s but after I raced the Mazda RX-3 rotary in the 90’s I realised what a wonderful design and powerplant it is. Smooth, rev forever and last long time providing you keep up good maintenance just like any engine. I can live with economy not being the best and a little more emissions. Long live the rotary engine!!! Give back to us this beautiful engine 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
If you’re reading this Matt Rittman I wonder if you have a Full HD version of this video on your computer I’d love to see you Reupload this video in Full HD because I and many others want this great video in better quality! Thank you if you read this 😊
in all honesty i love the rotary engine and mazda. thank you mazda for keeping this masterpiece going for so long. you have my full support with any new engines. i will be one of the first to buy. i just hope people will forgive me for my trolling. sorry.
@@doktorbimmer3870 Some Other Dude he's not my friend, I live 3000 miles away on the east coast. Although he's a mechanic and not a scholarly engineer, I see no evidence he's a drinker. And the world needs guys like him. Sometimes thats where the breakthroughs come from.
You gained another sub because I've come back to this video loads and it must be exhausting liking comments on this vid for over a decade, have a good night
Looks like a Wankel to me. Named after its inventor, like the Diesel engine for instance. They are called Wankel engines in the data sheets of the few cars that are powered by them. NSU (German car) sold a Wankel engined car before Mazda.
***** Yes, I am aware of that. It's clear you misunderstood my intention. My snarky comment was meant to inform the ignorant as to what a "Rotary engine" actually is while not describing it in detail. Instead I informed them of what they are looking at, which is a Wankel engine. If you do a Wikipedia search of a "Rotary engine" the aptly called aircraft engine from the early 20'th century will appear. It's easy to see how it earned that name as the whole engine DOES in fact rotate. The cylinders, crankcase and every single part of it rotates around its crankshaft which is the only thing stationary and is bolted to the frame of aircraft (although rotary engined cars and motorcycles did exist). The bottom line is that these early aircraft engines, which were popular during WWI, were refered to as rotary engines from the day they were invented and have kept this denomination in dictionaries. If anything they got first dibs on the name and let's also not overlook that they predate the Wankel engine by half a century. These Mazda diehards here don't even know that the German car manufacturer NSU was the first to produce a working Wankel, and that their NSU80 model even won the "Car of the Year Award" in 1968. When NSU sold their cars they called them Wankel-engined in their data sheets. When Mazda later sold theirs they likewise described them as Wankels. So where does this "rotary"-nonsense come from? As is often the case with erroneous designations it's from word-of-mouth and kids in general. Describing a Wankel to a kid is easiest if you tell them that there's no piston but instead a rotor that rotates. This is true, but does the engine itself rotate? No. Kids (and overgrown kids) often call zeppelins "blimps", when the two are different in design. Millions of ignorant people calling a zeppelin a blimp won't make it a blimp. Period. Do a Wikipedia search of the "Mazda Wankel engine" and the entire family of them will appear. Note how they are not refered to as "rotary engines". When I wrote:" Looks like a Wankel to me. Named after its inventor..." , I should have added (sarcasm for those who take everything literally and never once assume it might be a condescending or sarcastic comment). I think you could learn from that as it is clear you jumped to conclusions before even reading all of it. This doesn't just apply to car engines you know.
McLarenMercedes Wow. You are so smart. I wish I was as clever and detail oriented as you. Oh wait, I'm just being snarky... And if you were as clever as you think you are, you might have caught that the real name of your so called "rotary engine" is the Gnome Engine. By the way its technical classification is "radial engine", not rotary engine. And don't trust Wikipedia. Now, please do us all a favor, stop trying to pretend you're smart and/or clever. And stop being so uptight!
You are right. It is the Wankel-Engine :) If i translate the german Name "Drehkolbenmotor" of this Engine into english, the result is "Rotary Piston Engine". Some People call it "Rotary Piston Engine", and other People call it with the Name of the german Inventor (Felix Wankel) "Wankel-Engine" :) It's the same instance like the "Gasoline Engine", some People call it "Gasoline Engine" and other People call it with the Name of the german Inventor (Nicolaus August Otto) "Otto-Engine"
Pros - It can make good power for its size because it has 3 phases of combustion going on simultaneously for each rotor, a piston can only do one thing at a time. It can also rev at very high speeds. Cons: They burn oil, and they aren't very fuel efficient.
This was very useful because I’m 13 and my dad loves rotary’s and he told me to research and watch videos about them and I can’t believe this video was made before I was born
Video is great, but I personally would change the music to some sort of jazz or soul, that DnB just makes me wanna kick somebody and be way too focused and concentrated.
Luke Molnar Short for "gasoline." Just a different word for the same thing. Like, Americans have "acetaminophen" and Europeans have "paracetamol." Same shit, different word.
Luke Molnar Why do you call it "petrol" which is short for petroleum? I've never seen a car run on crude oil. I have seen cars run on "gas" which is short for gasoline...
Thanks for the animation. I have never managed to get my head around how rotaries work--especially how the rotor manages to retain a seal all the way around--Your video hit it right on the head.
@AYE OK SURE you are false: all Wankel as excentric shaft because cannot run without (the pistons doest turn round in the trochoïde...) and a WW1 rotary engine (Gnome design) as a rotary engine block (prop is drive from block), the crankshaft is fixed...
@@CThyran An aircraft radial and an aircraft rotary look the same, but in a radial the cylinders are stationary and the crankshaft (with the prop attached) rotates, while in a rotary the cylinders (and the prop with them) rotate around a fixed crankshaft. This should be called a "rotary piston engine" (because the pistons rotate), and often is.
Thanks for making this animation. It’s a little hard to grasp how a rotary makes a combustion cycle with out seeing it in motion. Well done. I never full understood these engines until now.
Done well sir!!!! I just heard about his engine at work today. Was intrigued on how it worked. Your video explained exactly what my curiosity was looking for!!!! 2 👍👍
The real doktorbimmer Oh, well yeah I'm very noob in this subject! I just keep hearing one my friend saying that his car it's a 2.0 car and it consumes a lot of fuel. (Ford Taurus) And he says that 1.6 ones burn a lot less, (he is a noob too, btw) So I saw this Mazda rx-7 FC3S and 1.3 seems pretty less, but yeah, it can burn low quantity but faster and in teh end it's the same... :/
How did U calculate this ? When it has 650 cc volume in one chamber and there is a ignition every 60 degrees like on a 12 cylinder recipro it must have 12 X 650 = 7800 = 7,8 L or not ? Actually the german government gave up this to calculate a displacement. In my papers of my RX 7 FC turbo from 1988 is stated: Hubraum - keiner - Wankelmotor ( displacement- none - Wankel- Engine )
I believe what he meant that they fire once every ONE rotation of the e shaft. yes, they are 4 stroke but are geared as 2 stroke. even if we use the 1.3L config for displacement, idk rather call it 2.6L for fair as they do double the combustions in one e shaft turn. hey, that's just my opinion. hope to get a rx7 (fc/fd) when I graduate.
ayyyyyyyyy man thanks for the good reply. but i was wondering if you could elaborate more on the degrees thing as i really did not understand. further more, I'm not the power type of guy and more of the experience type of guy. I've been researching the rotary engine and all its flaws (which i believe are due to yet to be discovered materials). it has something going for it in terms of maintenance. it needs at least 2 times to care and asks you to have fun with it in order to extend its life span (taking it to the crazy high redline). also for street purposes, illl probably buy one who blown engine for dirt cheap and rebuild it myself instead of spending the same money on a running one that i have no idea how it has been treated. i can tell you have experience on it from your huge amount of relatively "negative" comments on the engine. but your language seems to tell a different story to that "negativity".
@AYE OK SURE you don't as well, that's true that both Wankel and mazda are the ones who come up with the idea but they couldn't manage to make it work, and the mean problem for them was that the design blocked within the first movement, it couldn't turn. Just until the Moroccan Abdullah Shakroun came up with the solution. So I think that he's the inventor, since there is no innovation without making the invention possible.
I'm always fascinated at the "rotary" engine technology since my childhood days… …far less complicated and with a much better output with lesser headaches to maintain in peek performance than a regular "piston" engine.
I remember I asked my father how rotary engine works when I was in the middle school (and that was in the late 80’s). I believe my father would love this video, he would have explained it to me much easier.
I hate it when people refer this type of engine as rotary. It should be "Wankel rotary" as rotary engines are those with cylinders that actually turn. I came here to see how a *rotary piston engine*'s motor mounts work.
doktorbimmer "orbiting piston engine" Except it doesn't have any pistons. A piston is a disk or cylinder-shaped piece that slides back and forth inside a tube or cylinder-shaped housing. And the word "orbiting" is virtually synonymous with "rotary" (motion) or to rotate about. To say it's "not rotary at all" is to say then engine does not rotate about an axis, which it clearly does (Wankel engines have two axis which parts rotate about, one at the center of the rotor(s) that is not fixed it "orbits" (or rotates) about the eccentric shaft rotor journal in an epitrochoid pattern, and one on the main journals on the eccentric shaft, which is fixed.) I think something was lost in translation here from German to English. "Rotary Engine" is a very broad term that means any engine that rotates (they all do) and/or has a rotor (as opposed to a piston) as it's primary identifying feature. Calling a Wankel engine a "rotary engine" lacks precision, but it's not outright inaccurate.
doktorbimmer So despite the fact the engine rotates and has rotor(s) (and not pistons) it's somehow not a "rotary engine". "A "piston" is simply the moveable section of a sealed chamber that also transmits the mechanical energy of a pressuized fluid or gas... this accurately describes the pistons in both the Wankel DKM and KKM.... in any language." What about a roots supercharger or turbochargers? They also have a "moveable section of a sealed chamber that also transmits the mechanical energy of a pressuized fluid or gas..." (air/fuel mix). What about the heart? It also meets your "definition". In fact, so does literary anything that pumps air and/or fluid. You could even call a simple house fan blades "pistons" under that definition if they were in a sealed housing. The problem here is your "definition" (citation needed) of a piston is so broad as to be unusable. Under that "definition" almost anything can be a "piston". And that's what you're trying to do, you're trying to broaden the definition of a specific word so much that you can shoehorn a Wankel engine's rotor in. Again, a piston is a disk or cylinder-shaped object that slides back and forth inside a tube or cylinder (source: virtually every definition of the word). "Absolutely not... pistons and cylinders can be any shape imaginable, Honda designed an engine with oval shaped pistons, they can also be square or hexagonal... or any other shape." Did you hear that? "...cylinders can be any shape..."? um...no it can't. If a cylinder is any other shape besides a cylinder then it stops being a cylinder. duh. You're obfuscating the issue beyond all reason to try to bend what a Wankel engine is into something it's not while ignoring what it is. "...the Wankel KKM does not spin on a fixed axis..." The rotor(s)/rotor journals and the eccentric shaft main journals don't, but the housing itself does. So you're wrong there. "...it is Planetary movement..." Which is a form of rotary motion. The fact that things rotate about other things that rotate does not change this fact. "...thus the term "ORBITING PISTON" motor." Well, again, since the word "orbiting" is all but synonymous with the word "rotary" and the Wankel engine doesn't have pistons, it has rotors, the term (at least in English) is only about half correct. Again, using the term "rotary engine" to describe the Wankel engine, while imprecise, is not incorrect.
doktorbimmer "...are you familar with the Millet engine at all?" Yes. I have the internet. Reversing what spins with what's stationary doesn't change anything. "In engineering terms; a Cylinder (engine), the confined space within which a piston travels in an engine" Another vague, almost useless definition. Nevertheless, you have it backwards, the form of the thing ( inside the engine) is named for the shape, not the other way around. Calling, for example, a cube-shaped engine "cylinder", a cylinder is even more inaccurate then what you are claiming people are doing by calling Wankel engines "rotary engines".
doktorbimmer You didn't answer the point, which was about your vague, and what is seeming to be increasing arbitrary, "definition" for what a "piston" is. Supercharger rotors, turbocharger impellers/compressors, and turbines all fit your "definition" of a "piston". As does the heart or anything that moves a gas and/or fluid.
doktorbimmer A Wankel engine uses both. The rotor spins about an axis (the rotor journal). That axis *itself* spins about in a concentric pattern that causes the rotor itself to spin about in an epitrochoid pattern while the eccentric shaft spins about a concentric axis just like a conventional piston engine's crankshaft on it's main journals. There are two main ways one could consider the Wankel engine a "rotary engine". 1. The fact that it has rotor(s) instead of pistons. 2. That it's main characterizing trait is that fact that the engine is predicated exclusively on *rotation* as opposed to a combination of reciprocation and rotation as with a piston engine.
Brilliant! (Both the engine design and your animation.....music is an added bonus!) It's so radically different than a conventional piston engine I wonder how in the heck the designer came up with the idea. When I think of the tight tolerances needed to create the combustion required, while doing it with a rotary part spinning at thousands of RPMs, it boggles my mind. Very, very cool!
The real doktorbimmer If that's your opinion that's cool- but you should research gyrotor pumps. Same operating principle. I spent considerable time studying these principles throughout engineering school.
Twister051 There is a book called "The Wankel Rotary Engine" by John B Hege. It goes though the very early days with the housing spinning around the rotor to function as a pump. Intake cam through the center of the engine if I remember correctly. Follows as it started to be developed as an engine, much of the work actually done by another person working for NSU. Talks about all the various licensed prototype engines various companies made. The Corvette even came in a one off mid engine rotary concept. The book wraps up with the Mazda history with the engine. They where really the only company to see any success with the design. Very good read. It is on the Google Play store.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of this type of engine? Just looking it seems like it would work a lot better than a conventional reciprocating piston, but clearly it doesn't or everyone would be using this time of engine.
When it was used in cars, it had some design and fundamental problems. It wouldn't perform very well at low temperature, would have to be rebuilt very often and reach the end of its lifetime by 250k miles. Google the history of Rotary Engines for more info.
Eric Taylor They are gas guzzlers, people with heavy feet are lucky to break 20mpg.. The emissions are terrible.. There are apex seals which last 150k at best and cost about 2500$ for the dealer to replace..The Rx-8 renesis also had some bad side seal issues which could fail as early as 80k or earlier..+ the 4cyl cars of today make more power.. The last wankel rotary was built in 2012 and there is no expectation of it coming back due to its inefficient design and lack of popularity.We went from building the 1st airplane to sending a man into space.., in less time then we spent trying to perfect the wankle. It was time for it to go.
Eric Taylor The disadvantage of this engine is that it doesn't last as long really. If you pay attention to the Rotary Engine, you can notice that there is a lot more stress in going through it's phases just to get to the Exhaustion. By stress, I mean Stress on one Rotor. The APEX Seals itself are something that needs to be replaced regularly because of this issue. That being said, anyone who tells you that they don't make any power or lack performance are not too well educated on this motor. The Rotary engine produces A LOT of power and it sacrifices longevity for performance. Think about it. This 2 Rotor Engine (13B) is classified as a 1.3L. Let that sink in for a little bit. The 1.3L in the well known world is actually equivalent to a 2.6L due to the amount of revolutions a Rotor outputs via Phases. It puts out 2-3times more than 1 Piston does. Which is why the Rotary also lacks longevity. The reason why it's only a 1.3L is purely because of it's displacement but in terms of power, it actually displaces what a 2.6L engine would displace. So when we speak of Rotaries... The number in front refers to their displacement SIZE. There's the 10A 1.0L, 12A 1.2L, 13B 1.3L, 20B 2.0L (3 Rotors) and 28B 2.8L (4 Rotors). Now multiply their displacement size by 2 and you get their power of displacement. Just think about it, a 26B, the size of a 2.6L engine but displacement is more like a 4.8L, it's obvious why they don't last that long. GREAT for Performance however. The engine itself does well with HP/Torque Ratios once it reaches the 20B phase. In general, Rotaries are a different animal and a different beast. You're comparing Apples and Oranges when compared to a Piston engine. They do indeed have issues of their own but that can be said about any car to be honest. May have more issues than a Piston car though HAHA. P.S. For anyone who thinks Rotaries are 100% poop. Better check yourself before you look like a fool, have you heard of the Le Mans 24 hour race? In 1991, Mazda entered the race with the 787B 2.6L (26B) Rotary engine and dominated the race. Beating Mercedes and Jaguar by a huge gap. HUGE. Want to know what happened? They later banned the Rotary Engine from Le Mans. So there you have it, performance and 24 hours of harsh abuse.
+Scid34 And now electric engines are making IC obsolete, especially as battery and hydrogen fuel cell technologies improve. I'm excited especially given how electric vehicles are making a place in autosports, like the Pikes Peak Hillclimb.
The real doktorbimmer Yeah, the Chemical and Energetic industries used to produce generators and electricity, respectively, are both very dirty. Out of the 3 MAJOR power sources (Of course, there's always the wind and the sun, but still), all are harmful: Coal powerplants are self-explainatory, hydro plants can swamp nearby lands easily (See Russia's Volga Region: the many dams built on the Volga river destroyed most of the region's agricultural resources), while atomic powerplants harm the environment with their radioactive waste that has to be buried.
At the same time your burning oil cause the walls have to be lubricated in order to keep it from seizing. So its more money out of your pocket for every quart of oil you put in it. Just saying
Nice CGI, well done! Is there a prototype of that engine? Also, it would be cool to see R&D involving something else than fossil fuel combustion, but that's another topic. EDIT - From Wikipedia : "Sarich worked on the concept for a number of years without ever producing a production engine. A prototype was demonstrated, running on the bench with no load. The engine, which produces very high revs, has only one moving part. It can _supposedly be powered by compressed air or steam and can be run as a pump_. Only one "bench prototype" has been built, which worked, but without any load though.
doktorbimmer im sure thoses rx models still HAVE their wankel engine. unless morons like you were looking after them and destroyed them, then went out on a rampage on YT to prove a point and state the flaws in wankel engine without much understanding of how they work..
The real doktorbimmer damn dude, HAVE, present tense. Stop trolling all these comments. Just because they aren't manufactured anymore doesn't mean all of the RX7s magically disappeared
A friend of mine bought an RX 8, and he claimed that the engine could achieve very high rpms because, unlike a piston engine, the rotors could spin in one direction without having to overcome negative momentum of going backward with every stroke. That made sense to me. But he also said that while the engine could therefore deliver more torque, it was less fuel efficient than an engine with roughly equal combustion volume. That didn't make sense to me. Is that right? If so, why, and if not, why not?
+kev3d Yep, thats right. It uses more fuel simply because its running at higher revs. also it gets through lots of oil as its needed for the seals on the rotor.
+The real doktorbimmer I have a good question for you: Why are you on almost every technical video involved with rotaries? And why are you telling lies and starting arguments with people? Just cut you crap and and do some proper research, not what ever 1950's garbage you look at, and do yourself a favor and be the educated one here.
+NipNip The displacement of a rotary is skewed. When the first Wankels were built by the Getman company NSU, their displacement was measured by including all the chambers. In the late 50s, Max Bentele visited them and persuaded them to only count 1 chamber per rotor to circumvent European taxes on displacement. Later on in racing equate them to 4 stroke piston engines, 2 chambers per rotor were used, basing volume of an engine on chambers that completed a full combustion cycle in 2 crank rotations. To use a 13b as an example.... It has 650cc combustion chambers and 2 rotors. Using the Bentele "tax evasion" method, it gets labeled as a 1.3L (only 2 combustion chambers counted). Using the original method, it's a 3.9L (all 6 combustion chambers counted). Using the method inspired from racing sanctioning bodies, it's a 2.6L (4 combustion chambers completed cycles in 2 crankshaft rotations). The rotary is ingenious for how much displacement it has in a tiny package.
Watch my latest video on how a revolver works! th-cam.com/video/1s4plUZGj4w/w-d-xo.html
It’s been 15 yrs!
Yoo bro still here
😮😮😮
@@YoucanballerThat’s Why He’s One Of My Favourite♥️TH-camrs
@mattrittman so is there 3 combustion events per rotor, would this be the equivalent of a V6 piston engine?
What a legend. This guy is hearting comments after 12 years
I still try to read as many comments as I can :)
@@mattrittman hey...I love ur graphics and the way u used to explain...I used to tell these to my friend and they would like wow....
@@mattrittman dude your skill has only gotten better over the years - I hope that you landed some solid gigs
@@roscoesteele Thanks man!! I’ve had a few pretty great gigs yes!
@@mattrittman hi I saw all these videos and these are really cool. Could you maybe continue doing vids just like this? I’d love to see how tanks work or an m4.
Clear and consice. Excellent animations, too. Thanks for the post. Great vid.
MopHeDD Thank you very much!
que motor engenhoso,onde consigo uma réplica deste motor
My father had a snowmobile with a rotary engine. Worked well.
Actually it's really valuable information in a very simple an short videos, keep it up 👌
Till now people watch this insane video thanks man ❤
I AM WATCHING IT AFTER 12 YEARS
Same boi😂
Over 50 and how am I now just learning about this now? Jiminy Crickets!
I keep seeing the Coolant Jacket section like 3 times already
15 years later. Watched this on mute and still know what's going on.
amazing from Indonesia
спасибо, я удивляюсь насколько умными могут быть люди
Great work! How come the inner shaft spins faster than the outer rotor?
Still hearting comments legend ?
No shot this guy still likes comments
Ah yes, we have finally figured out the Mazda Dorito
Yeah that is right the mazda dorito is explained
برام باز کون
Ok simp
Fuck u for being so funny ur topped and I still have no clue about how combustion works on this shit. Good job tho
I’m trying to figure out how my bfs Mazda works so I can understand him lol
Whoever made this type of engine had it personal with pistons. Impressive.
No,en absoluto,no tengo nada en contra de los pistones.De hecho mi motor (proyecto)los lleva.Estos son alargados,curvos y basculantes en un extremo.Valga como ejemplo una catapulta o una puerta al abrir o cerrar,
menos fricción, mucha velocidad de compresión.Las carreras son asimétricas, dotado al final del tiempo de compresión con un avance (Brave step)
permitiendo que el 80% del esfuerzo
recaiga sobre el rotor de forma tangencial y solo un 20% sobre el pistón (llamado cizalla).
Mi objetivo es un motor rotativo con rotor CIRCULAR y giro concéntrico de par
motor igual o superior al 2T y por tanto no necesitará las r.p.m. ni el vaivén
del rotativo wankel.Saludos.
Felix Wankle made this and He had support from Mr. hail H :p
Legendary! Love this animation as much as i love the sound the engine makes!
Oh nice, thank you :)
Oh nice he still comments too
@@mattrittman damn truly cares about his viewers, still replies and hearts his viewers after 13 whole years
What I'd tell ya
I remember watching this 2 year ago omg
Other car manufacturers: What?! You cant have a spinning triangle engine!
Mazda: Haha Dorito go brrr
Mazda dropped the unreliable Wankel engine like a bad habit.
@Blaik Lewis No, that's incorrect.
Wankel engines are surprisingly low maintenance, the fatal flaw in its design is very poor reliability and durability.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 yes
Lol
You realize that Mazda didn't invent this, right? The basic design was done by Felix Wankel in the 1920's, developed into a running engine by Wankel, and further developed into a practical engine by Hanns Dieter Paschke, both working at NSU in the 1950's. Mazda licensed the design in 1961, one of many companies to do so, but the only one to sell an engine of this design in large quantities.
I am actually mind blown by how the triangle rotates in there.
Yeah haha when I’m trying to imagine it, it just doesn’t work
Dorito spin
Precision gears I suppose
Spinning doritosssssss
@@Twowheeleddevil then explain rx-7
Beautiful ❤️
Oh hey! Aren’t you the guy who did the liquid rotary engine thing?
@@Bolly650 Ok
What about 15 years
What about it
@@armanthakur2033 bruh was talking about if he would like my comment
Or heart it
@@Kartiksingh-he7tq goku solos
@@armanthakur2033what
it's amazing, how complex it is just to make a simple motion.
..using carbon from dinosaurs, isn't it?
@@PanPeno It really is not, that's an urban myth. The carbon in fossil fuels dates back much longer than the dinosaurs. It's mostly plant-based.
Piston engines are much more complex
@Cyberkwak 2137 so what, there was just *billions* of barrels worth of dead dinosaurs piled up? There’s no way we’ve been burning dinosaurs this whole time lmao
@@jorge8596 piston engines are more efficient, perform better and are more reliable.
How... In the world of fuck did they come up wit this
It's honestly not that hard lol if you follow the laws of mechanical engineering, any design can be made
+RzVids I know, but i always find it incredibly amazing how simple some of the designs are
Žiga Strmšek Well, you don't start with complexity :)
+Žiga Strmšek Time, passion and someone on your back asking you to come up with something new
+Asif Ifas it was invented in 1924, there was already engines based on pistons, so the idea couldn compete with the standrads that were already established.
Thirteen and a half years, and I'm only seeing this NOW? This is the simplest, most complete explanation of a Wankel that I have ever seen. Thank you, Matt Rittman!
Thank you so much Tersha :)
This is wankel rotary combustion engine
Even after reading various books and other explanations, I've never really understood this engine until now.
Wow thank you so much for your nice comment :) I really appreciate that man!
Matt Rittman I haven't done as much research as him, but this works better for me than any other way I've seen engines explained. Thanks!
racefan105 Unfortunately I haven't done any research so it was harder for me to understand.
But i'm sure i could figure it out if I just did a bit of research :)
CIAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Me too
i would have preferred some eurobeat for this
Goggles Tigerkhan ayyyy yiiii yiii yoooo Speed speed lover. Running in the 90s
(inhales)
*DON'T STOP THE MUUUSIC*
fuck off furry 🙄🤣
@@robertedwardlee8227 Do you ahuel?
@@robertedwardlee8227 Juu mee vittuu vaa
Piston engines have a clear boundary between engine oil and combustion room, but rotaries do not, engine oil will be consumed during the rotation.
Meanwhile, the apex seals are problematic due to their limited size and shape; the sealed area is also way larger than a piston engine. Note, the entire rotary needs to move smoothly but also be highly sealed with the two housings sandwiched.
Not only that, but within that combustion room you have all 4 of the steps of the Otto cycle happening simultaneously, so if you don't have near perfect sealing of the different regions of the chamber, the bleedover will hurt engine efficiency as well.
Piston engines also burn oil just not the 4stroke ones. And it's a wankel not Rotary.
A man who cares about the viewers after 13 years while also making these satisfying animations. You're amazing Matt!
Thank you so much man :) 🙌🏼
You still reply to comments after 13 years, wow
@@britsnoike4203 Haha I try my best :D
@@mattrittman I just stumbled upon your videos an hour ago, and I can already tell you that your best is More Than Enough. This is only your first video on youtube and it's already better than most of my recommended
@@GolenCheeseIt thanks so much man, I really appreciate your kind comment :)
It amazes me that people even came up with this sort of thing. The mechanics of an engine seem incredibly complicated to me and I really still don't understand the rotary engine but the fact that people got this idea then made it work is genius.
I wonder how the rotor's tips lasts more than a month with all that rotational force scraping the walls.
I think this is a common problem actually. Rotary engines consume a lot more oil to prevent the scraping as much as possible but also the apex seals(tips) need to be replaced quite frequently if I'm not mistaken.
Bassotronics The apex seals are actually quite robust except in the area of detonation. Even stock seals will last over 100k on a turbo motor. Its the coating on the inside of the housings that can chip and peel over time.
Exactly why its a pos. And inherently flawed design. "Look at me dorito motor durrr.!" A motor that needs new apex seals every 80-90k miles is not what I would call revolutionary. ....PS. The rx8 looks like and is shit. No wonder they gave one for free on fear factor that one year lolz
A rotary engine uses oil injection which lubricates the walls of the rotor housing.
Cairo Murphy Where is the oil kept? Sorry if it is a stupid question, but I don´t see some kind of oil sump where it is kept.
Some guy literally put 2 doritos on a stick and called it an engine
The music is exactly what you'd expect to go with the video.
Just curious to know , How much time require to create the whole animation from scratch? Btw amazing videos
Depends. If you count creating computers and the software, probably a very long time.
*Me: Hmm yes RX-7 go drift*
Rx7 🧡🖤
THE FC OR FD?!
Y E S!
I have been trying to figure out how the rotor could move in the oblong case since junior high school.
That's about 45 years. No I finally can see it,sort of, I think.
Thanks dude, that was an awesome explanation :)
Thank you, I really appreciate that :)
Matt Rittman
A 9 year old video still getting views also has the owner taking his time away from his day to reply to comments, you are a wonderful person my dude. Plus this video blew my mind! I always thought the combustion happened inside the triangular thingy
AydanlovesGTAgaming Heck yeah man! It makes such a difference when people tell me they understand how Wankel engines work after watching :)
Thank you so much for that comment man, it means a lot! Glad I can help shed some light as to how these engines work :)
James ബംഗാളിൽ നിന്നുള്ള
That is... by far... one of the most amazing videos on youtube
Haha thank you :)
+Mostafa Mamdouh I second that, really well made and easy to understand even for someone with close to zero car knowledge. I was a bit sceptic at first because of no commentary, but as they say: A picture is worth a thousand words, and this was a damn fine picture! :)
+Christoffer Rasmussen Haha thank you! This is very much appreciated :)
Hi!whose music in the video?
I did a report in the 70's (4th grade) on the Wankel engine . I was so intrigued with this design I eventually purchased a mazda with the rotary engine. I never put a tachometer on that little motor, but I did take to some ridiculous RPMs. No floating valves! It wouldn't keep up with my big block chevy, but it would definitely scare the shit out of the driver, lol.
ロリータのしくみ
に見えたオレは疲れてるんだと思う
I legit look up dorito engine and this is what shows up, perfection
Nice video. Needs to show the animated combustion (colors) a few times at the end.
Who came here from doug..
yep
RX-8 review haha
yea
Yeeeahhh hahaha
Thought it was me alone
Cheers for this vid man, helped alot more than alot of other explanations of rotaries, and it wasn't 45 minutes, so that was mad too!
Cheers again.
Thank you so much man! That means a lot!!
Excellent video Matt! I've often wondered how the rotary engine works. Great animation and illustration! Thanks.
TH-cam: suggests something made 12 years ago
Everyone: well well well lets find out then
I had a video from 2009 from random shts I never seen or have since 2014 like bruh.
Kyoko - I bet he must be thinking of other women
Keisuke -
Who tf is Kyoko/Keisuke ?
@@richardslav9282 Just watch initial D
Jesus christ this is some deep degeneracy
@@hoyes127 That's Keisuke for you
This how you learn more from You Tube than college
Dear TH-cam - This is exactly what I'm looking for whenever I begin my search with "how to" or "how does." We need more of these.. For everything..
Awesome video. From being a child I always loved V8’s but after I raced the Mazda RX-3 rotary in the 90’s I realised what a wonderful design and powerplant it is. Smooth, rev forever and last long time providing you keep up good maintenance just like any engine. I can live with economy not being the best and a little more emissions. Long live the rotary engine!!!
Give back to us this beautiful engine 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
If you’re reading this Matt Rittman I wonder if you have a Full HD version of this video on your computer I’d love to see you Reupload this video in Full HD because I and many others want this great video in better quality! Thank you if you read this 😊
Hey Jimmy, no I don’t have a full HD version, but it probably wouldn’t be too difficult to do 🙂. Might be something I’ll consider in the near future!
this animation is great, and helped me to understand how a rotary engine works. Thanks!
Same
same
WANKEL engine... not Rotary
same man, love the rotary engine
in all honesty i love the rotary engine and mazda. thank you mazda for keeping this masterpiece going for so long. you have my full support with any new engines. i will be one of the first to buy. i just hope people will forgive me for my trolling. sorry.
4 likes! wow guess i should be honnest more often!
Cheers!
so happy to see you came to your senses man!
@@doktorbimmer3870 Some Other Dude he's not my friend, I live 3000 miles away on the east coast. Although he's a mechanic and not a scholarly engineer, I see no evidence he's a drinker. And the world needs guys like him. Sometimes thats where the breakthroughs come from.
You gained another sub because I've come back to this video loads and it must be exhausting liking comments on this vid for over a decade, have a good night
Looks like a Wankel to me. Named after its inventor, like the Diesel engine for instance.
They are called Wankel engines in the data sheets of the few cars that are powered by them. NSU (German car) sold a Wankel engined car before Mazda.
You are aware that he's taking credit for the animation work not the engine, right?
*****
Yes, I am aware of that. It's clear you misunderstood my intention.
My snarky comment was meant to inform the ignorant as to what a "Rotary engine" actually is while not describing it in detail. Instead I informed them of what they are looking at, which is a Wankel engine.
If you do a Wikipedia search of a "Rotary engine" the aptly called aircraft engine from the early 20'th century will appear. It's easy to see how it earned that name as the whole engine DOES in fact rotate. The cylinders, crankcase and every single part of it rotates around its crankshaft which is the only thing stationary and is bolted to the frame of aircraft (although rotary engined cars and motorcycles did exist).
The bottom line is that these early aircraft engines, which were popular during WWI, were refered to as rotary engines from the day they were invented and have kept this denomination in dictionaries. If anything they got first dibs on the name and let's also not overlook that they predate the Wankel engine by half a century. These Mazda diehards here don't even know that the German car manufacturer NSU was the first to produce a working Wankel, and that their NSU80 model even won the "Car of the Year Award" in 1968.
When NSU sold their cars they called them Wankel-engined in their data sheets. When Mazda later sold theirs they likewise described them as Wankels.
So where does this "rotary"-nonsense come from? As is often the case with erroneous designations it's from word-of-mouth and kids in general. Describing a Wankel to a kid is easiest if you tell them that there's no piston but instead a rotor that rotates. This is true, but does the engine itself rotate? No.
Kids (and overgrown kids) often call zeppelins "blimps", when the two are different in design. Millions of ignorant people calling a zeppelin a blimp won't make it a blimp. Period.
Do a Wikipedia search of the "Mazda Wankel engine" and the entire family of them will appear. Note how they are not refered to as "rotary engines".
When I wrote:" Looks like a Wankel to me. Named after its inventor..." , I should have added (sarcasm for those who take everything literally and never once assume it might be a condescending or sarcastic comment).
I think you could learn from that as it is clear you jumped to conclusions before even reading all of it. This doesn't just apply to car engines you know.
McLarenMercedes
Wow. You are so smart. I wish I was as clever and detail oriented as you.
Oh wait, I'm just being snarky...
And if you were as clever as you think you are, you might have caught that the real name of your so called "rotary engine" is the Gnome Engine.
By the way its technical classification is "radial engine", not rotary engine. And don't trust Wikipedia.
Now, please do us all a favor, stop trying to pretend you're smart and/or clever. And stop being so uptight!
You are right. It is the Wankel-Engine :)
If i translate the german Name "Drehkolbenmotor" of this Engine into english, the result is "Rotary Piston Engine".
Some People call it "Rotary Piston Engine", and other People call it with the Name of the german Inventor (Felix Wankel) "Wankel-Engine" :)
It's the same instance like the "Gasoline Engine", some People call it "Gasoline Engine" and other People call it with the Name of the german Inventor (Nicolaus August Otto) "Otto-Engine"
NEXIS981 Shut up and go play Eve!
Pros - It can make good power for its size because it has 3 phases of combustion going on simultaneously for each rotor, a piston can only do one thing at a time. It can also rev at very high speeds. Cons: They burn oil, and they aren't very fuel efficient.
So it looks like one pop per rotor per revolution . Correct?
This was very useful because I’m 13 and my dad loves rotary’s and he told me to research and watch videos about them and I can’t believe this video was made before I was born
Man you got a new sub! Also legend for liking comments after 14 years
Thanks Jay!
Dude awesome. Great animation and great sound track. A little DnB ties it all together.
+Derek Martin Thanks man :)
+Matt Rittman Music name?
+LennonScript123 Pro in Minecraft darude sandstorm
Video is great, but I personally would change the music to some sort of jazz or soul, that DnB just makes me wanna kick somebody and be way too focused and concentrated.
@@LayJD_ looking for it as well
The down side is their not efficient, Had a RX8 used gas like a V8 Camero
Why do Americans say 'gas' when most the time they actually mean petrol or petroleum? Or even 'fuel' makes more sense. Just sayin.
Luke Molnar
Short for "gasoline." Just a different word for the same thing. Like, Americans have "acetaminophen" and Europeans have "paracetamol." Same shit, different word.
Oh ok so 'Gas' doesn't mean gas. Got it!
Luke Molnar
It means what it means: gasoline.
Luke Molnar Why do you call it "petrol" which is short for petroleum? I've never seen a car run on crude oil. I have seen cars run on "gas" which is short for gasoline...
レシプロエンジンに比べ、明らかに容積率が小さいロータリーエンジンは、ひたすら『回転』する事で『パワー』と『トルク』を生み出すしかない。
I can only imagine the nightmare associated with seals between all these different segments and components.
Thanks for the animation. I have never managed to get my head around how rotaries work--especially how the rotor manages to retain a seal all the way around--Your video hit it right on the head.
Thank you very much! I really appreciate that!
Matt Rittman i liked the bit when the triangle spun around in the circle.
you should call this Wankel engine instead of rotary engine because that would be way more specific. rotary engines can also be built with cylinders
@AYE OK SURE you are false: all Wankel as excentric shaft because cannot run without (the pistons doest turn round in the trochoïde...) and a WW1 rotary engine (Gnome design) as a rotary engine block (prop is drive from block), the crankshaft is fixed...
@@leneanderthalien An airplane engine with the pistons in a circle around the propeller is called a radial not a rotary.
@@CThyran Wow! You don't have a clue what a ROTARY engine is.
@@sandervanderkammen9230 Look at was analyste was talking about before opening your trap.
@@CThyran An aircraft radial and an aircraft rotary look the same, but in a radial the cylinders are stationary and the crankshaft (with the prop attached) rotates, while in a rotary the cylinders (and the prop with them) rotate around a fixed crankshaft.
This should be called a "rotary piston engine" (because the pistons rotate), and often is.
Creator is Real Boss
i love that rotary engine
It called a Wankel engine... a rotary is something very different.
Thats why you call it a wankel rotary
@@jimmy-fd9dy They never made the Wankel Rotary..
Only one still exists in the Deutsche Museum
It's very simple, yet so complex. I'm sure the dimensions have to be more precise than a piston engine
Thanks for making this animation. It’s a little hard to grasp how a rotary makes a combustion cycle with out seeing it in motion. Well done. I never full understood these engines until now.
Done well sir!!!! I just heard about his engine at work today. Was intrigued on how it worked. Your video explained exactly what my curiosity was looking for!!!! 2 👍👍
best explanation in 3D!!! Awsum work man... :)
Thank you so much man, that means a lot! :)
Bought a used RX8 and got eccentric shafted with bad compression :(
Everyone that bought an RX8 did...
Fascinating function. And if I understand it right, all Mazda cars use this?
no not all
just the entire RX lineup and some other mazdas
@@JQNAH ah, thanks for clarifying!
Wankel engines have been obsolete for more than a decade, production of Wankel engines at Mazda ceased on June 22nd 2012.
Very well put together video and quite informative. Thank you for the time and effort you put in to making a quality presentation!
Thank you!
Your animation skills are AMAZING! Your content is so insightful. Thanks for the great content man!
Thank you so much, seriously! 🙌🏼
They do burn a lot of oil
:(
the motor is 1.3 , so I guess we compensate with less fuel use. I hope
I want a Rx7 so bad...
The real doktorbimmer Oh, well yeah I'm very noob in this subject! I just keep hearing one my friend saying that his car it's a 2.0 car and it consumes a lot of fuel. (Ford Taurus) And he says that 1.6 ones burn a lot less, (he is a noob too, btw)
So I saw this Mazda rx-7 FC3S and 1.3 seems pretty less, but yeah, it can burn low quantity but faster and in teh end it's the same... :/
How did U calculate this ? When it has 650 cc volume in one chamber and there is a ignition every 60 degrees like on a 12 cylinder recipro it must have 12 X 650 = 7800 = 7,8 L or not ? Actually the german government gave up this to calculate a displacement. In my papers of my RX 7 FC turbo from 1988 is stated: Hubraum - keiner - Wankelmotor ( displacement- none - Wankel- Engine )
I believe what he meant that they fire once every ONE rotation of the e shaft. yes, they are 4 stroke but are geared as 2 stroke. even if we use the 1.3L config for displacement, idk rather call it 2.6L for fair as they do double the combustions in one e shaft turn. hey, that's just my opinion. hope to get a rx7 (fc/fd) when I graduate.
ayyyyyyyyy man thanks for the good reply. but i was wondering if you could elaborate more on the degrees thing as i really did not understand. further more, I'm not the power type of guy and more of the experience type of guy. I've been researching the rotary engine and all its flaws (which i believe are due to yet to be discovered materials). it has something going for it in terms of maintenance. it needs at least 2 times to care and asks you to have fun with it in order to extend its life span (taking it to the crazy high redline). also for street purposes, illl probably buy one who blown engine for dirt cheap and rebuild it myself instead of spending the same money on a running one that i have no idea how it has been treated. i can tell you have experience on it from your huge amount of relatively "negative" comments on the engine. but your language seems to tell a different story to that "negativity".
13 year old hearts is crazy
The idea of this engine is for the Moroccan inventor Abdullah Shakroun
@AYE OK SURE you don't as well, that's true that both Wankel and mazda are the ones who come up with the idea but they couldn't manage to make it work, and the mean problem for them was that the design blocked within the first movement, it couldn't turn. Just until the Moroccan Abdullah Shakroun came up with the solution. So I think that he's the inventor, since there is no innovation without making the invention possible.
I'm always fascinated at the "rotary" engine technology since my childhood days… …far less complicated and with a much better output with lesser headaches to maintain in peek performance than a regular "piston" engine.
Wankel engines are obsolete because they cannot match the efficiency, performance or reliability of reciprocating engines.
I remember I asked my father how rotary engine works when I was in the middle school (and that was in the late 80’s). I believe my father would love this video, he would have explained it to me much easier.
you didnt have to cut me off
I hate it when people refer this type of engine as rotary. It should be "Wankel rotary" as rotary engines are those with cylinders that actually turn.
I came here to see how a *rotary piston engine*'s motor mounts work.
doktorbimmer "orbiting piston engine" Except it doesn't have any pistons. A piston is a disk or cylinder-shaped piece that slides back and forth inside a tube or cylinder-shaped housing. And the word "orbiting" is virtually synonymous with "rotary" (motion) or to rotate about. To say it's "not rotary at all" is to say then engine does not rotate about an axis, which it clearly does (Wankel engines have two axis which parts rotate about, one at the center of the rotor(s) that is not fixed it "orbits" (or rotates) about the eccentric shaft rotor journal in an epitrochoid pattern, and one on the main journals on the eccentric shaft, which is fixed.)
I think something was lost in translation here from German to English. "Rotary Engine" is a very broad term that means any engine that rotates (they all do) and/or has a rotor (as opposed to a piston) as it's primary identifying feature.
Calling a Wankel engine a "rotary engine" lacks precision, but it's not outright inaccurate.
doktorbimmer So despite the fact the engine rotates and has rotor(s) (and not pistons) it's somehow not a "rotary engine".
"A "piston" is simply the moveable section of a sealed chamber that also transmits the mechanical energy of a pressuized fluid or gas... this accurately describes the pistons in both the Wankel DKM and KKM.... in any language."
What about a roots supercharger or turbochargers? They also have a "moveable section of a sealed chamber that also transmits the mechanical energy of a pressuized fluid or gas..." (air/fuel mix).
What about the heart? It also meets your "definition". In fact, so does literary anything that pumps air and/or fluid. You could even call a simple house fan blades "pistons" under that definition if they were in a sealed housing.
The problem here is your "definition" (citation needed) of a piston is so broad as to be unusable. Under that "definition" almost anything can be a "piston". And that's what you're trying to do, you're trying to broaden the definition of a specific word so much that you can shoehorn a Wankel engine's rotor in.
Again, a piston is a disk or cylinder-shaped object that slides back and forth inside a tube or cylinder (source: virtually every definition of the word).
"Absolutely not... pistons and cylinders can be any shape imaginable, Honda designed an engine with oval shaped pistons, they can also be square or hexagonal... or any other shape."
Did you hear that? "...cylinders can be any shape..."?
um...no it can't. If a cylinder is any other shape besides a cylinder then it stops being a cylinder. duh.
You're obfuscating the issue beyond all reason to try to bend what a Wankel engine is into something it's not while ignoring what it is.
"...the Wankel KKM does not spin on a fixed axis..."
The rotor(s)/rotor journals and the eccentric shaft main journals don't, but the housing itself does. So you're wrong there.
"...it is Planetary movement..."
Which is a form of rotary motion. The fact that things rotate about other things that rotate does not change this fact.
"...thus the term "ORBITING PISTON" motor."
Well, again, since the word "orbiting" is all but synonymous with the word "rotary" and the Wankel engine doesn't have pistons, it has rotors, the term (at least in English) is only about half correct.
Again, using the term "rotary engine" to describe the Wankel engine, while imprecise, is not incorrect.
doktorbimmer "...are you familar with the Millet engine at all?"
Yes. I have the internet. Reversing what spins with what's stationary doesn't change anything.
"In engineering terms; a Cylinder (engine), the confined space within which a piston travels in an engine"
Another vague, almost useless definition. Nevertheless, you have it backwards, the form of the thing ( inside the engine) is named for the shape, not the other way around.
Calling, for example, a cube-shaped engine "cylinder", a cylinder is even more inaccurate then what you are claiming people are doing by calling Wankel engines "rotary engines".
doktorbimmer You didn't answer the point, which was about your vague, and what is seeming to be increasing arbitrary, "definition" for what a "piston" is.
Supercharger rotors, turbocharger impellers/compressors, and turbines all fit your "definition" of a "piston". As does the heart or anything that moves a gas and/or fluid.
doktorbimmer A Wankel engine uses both. The rotor spins about an axis (the rotor journal). That axis *itself* spins about in a concentric pattern that causes the rotor itself to spin about in an epitrochoid pattern while the eccentric shaft spins about a concentric axis just like a conventional piston engine's crankshaft on it's main journals.
There are two main ways one could consider the Wankel engine a "rotary engine".
1. The fact that it has rotor(s) instead of pistons.
2. That it's main characterizing trait is that fact that the engine is predicated exclusively on *rotation* as opposed to a combination of reciprocation and rotation as with a piston engine.
very clear and informative.. kudos!
Thanks :)
Haha you're quite welcome! :)
Brilliant! (Both the engine design and your animation.....music is an added bonus!) It's so radically different than a conventional piston engine I wonder how in the heck the designer came up with the idea. When I think of the tight tolerances needed to create the combustion required, while doing it with a rotary part spinning at thousands of RPMs, it boggles my mind. Very, very cool!
Thank you very much! I spent a long time on the animation! Wish it was HD :/
Twister051
It was originally a water pump, similar to a gyrotor pump.
The real doktorbimmer
If that's your opinion that's cool- but you should research gyrotor pumps. Same operating principle. I spent considerable time studying these principles throughout engineering school.
Joko Engineeringhelp Gyrotor pumps... Maybe where Elvis got the idea!
Twister051 There is a book called "The Wankel Rotary Engine" by John B Hege. It goes though the very early days with the housing spinning around the rotor to function as a pump. Intake cam through the center of the engine if I remember correctly. Follows as it started to be developed as an engine, much of the work actually done by another person working for NSU. Talks about all the various licensed prototype engines various companies made. The Corvette even came in a one off mid engine rotary concept. The book wraps up with the Mazda history with the engine. They where really the only company to see any success with the design. Very good read. It is on the Google Play store.
Ach, Zie German Wankel rotary engine invention, aren't those Germans clever?
What are the advantages and disadvantages of this type of engine? Just looking it seems like it would work a lot better than a conventional reciprocating piston, but clearly it doesn't or everyone would be using this time of engine.
When it was used in cars, it had some design and fundamental problems. It wouldn't perform very well at low temperature, would have to be rebuilt very often and reach the end of its lifetime by 250k miles. Google the history of Rotary Engines for more info.
That Guy With the Pointlessly Long Username That You Are Wasting Your Time Reading Right Now
Thanks, love the username by the way.
Eric Taylor They are gas guzzlers, people with heavy feet are lucky to break 20mpg.. The emissions are terrible.. There are apex seals which last 150k at best and cost about 2500$ for the dealer to replace..The Rx-8 renesis also had some bad side seal issues which could fail as early as 80k or earlier..+ the 4cyl cars of today make more power..
The last wankel rotary was built in 2012 and there is no expectation of it coming back due to its inefficient design and lack of popularity.We went from building the 1st airplane to sending a man into space.., in less time then we spent trying to perfect the wankle. It was time for it to go.
Eric Taylor The disadvantage of this engine is that it doesn't last as long really. If you pay attention to the Rotary Engine, you can notice that there is a lot more stress in going through it's phases just to get to the Exhaustion. By stress, I mean Stress on one Rotor. The APEX Seals itself are something that needs to be replaced regularly because of this issue.
That being said, anyone who tells you that they don't make any power or lack performance are not too well educated on this motor. The Rotary engine produces A LOT of power and it sacrifices longevity for performance. Think about it. This 2 Rotor Engine (13B) is classified as a 1.3L. Let that sink in for a little bit. The 1.3L in the well known world is actually equivalent to a 2.6L due to the amount of revolutions a Rotor outputs via Phases. It puts out 2-3times more than 1 Piston does. Which is why the Rotary also lacks longevity. The reason why it's only a 1.3L is purely because of it's displacement but in terms of power, it actually displaces what a 2.6L engine would displace.
So when we speak of Rotaries... The number in front refers to their displacement SIZE. There's the 10A 1.0L, 12A 1.2L, 13B 1.3L, 20B 2.0L (3 Rotors) and 28B 2.8L (4 Rotors). Now multiply their displacement size by 2 and you get their power of displacement. Just think about it, a 26B, the size of a 2.6L engine but displacement is more like a 4.8L, it's obvious why they don't last that long. GREAT for Performance however. The engine itself does well with HP/Torque Ratios once it reaches the 20B phase.
In general, Rotaries are a different animal and a different beast. You're comparing Apples and Oranges when compared to a Piston engine. They do indeed have issues of their own but that can be said about any car to be honest. May have more issues than a Piston car though HAHA.
P.S. For anyone who thinks Rotaries are 100% poop. Better check yourself before you look like a fool, have you heard of the Le Mans 24 hour race? In 1991, Mazda entered the race with the 787B 2.6L (26B) Rotary engine and dominated the race. Beating Mercedes and Jaguar by a huge gap. HUGE. Want to know what happened? They later banned the Rotary Engine from Le Mans. So there you have it, performance and 24 hours of harsh abuse.
Advantage: compact size and power density.
Disadvantage: reliability and emissions.
Glad I didn't buy that RX-7 I was looking at! I wouldn't have had a clue how to fix that engine.
+Scid34 And now electric engines are making IC obsolete, especially as battery and hydrogen fuel cell technologies improve. I'm excited especially given how electric vehicles are making a place in autosports, like the Pikes Peak Hillclimb.
Scid34 Sit in a P85d in launch mode and say that again. That quiet power is... eerie.
+KodRaiN Eerie, but not awesome. Moreover, it'll take quite a while for electric engines to become as light and efficient as ICEs.
+The real doktorbimmer imagine a magnetic motor/generator charging the batteries...??
The real doktorbimmer Yeah, the Chemical and Energetic industries used to produce generators and electricity, respectively, are both very dirty. Out of the 3 MAJOR power sources (Of course, there's always the wind and the sun, but still), all are harmful: Coal powerplants are self-explainatory, hydro plants can swamp nearby lands easily (See Russia's Volga Region: the many dams built on the Volga river destroyed most of the region's agricultural resources), while atomic powerplants harm the environment with their radioactive waste that has to be buried.
At the same time your burning oil cause the walls have to be lubricated in order to keep it from seizing. So its more money out of your pocket for every quart of oil you put in it. Just saying
People who buy and drive performance vehicles, really don't give a shit lol.
Whatever you think. You must not get out to any GT or drift events.
The real doktorbimmer Because smart people buy new cars? That's right, they don't. My point still stands.
I've always wondered how the Dorito Gang worked. That's crazy
amazing work, i got what rotary engine is in 4 minutes thanks
That thing remind me of rx7.
Nice CGI, well done! Is there a prototype of that engine? Also, it would be cool to see R&D involving something else than fossil fuel combustion, but that's another topic.
EDIT - From Wikipedia : "Sarich worked on the concept for a number of years without ever producing a production engine. A prototype was demonstrated, running on the bench with no load. The engine, which produces very high revs, has only one moving part. It can _supposedly be powered by compressed air or steam and can be run as a pump_.
Only one "bench prototype" has been built, which worked, but without any load though.
Industrie du Design
France - Belgique - Amérique
search for Mazda's RX models they have Wankel engines
doktorbimmer
im sure thoses rx models still HAVE their wankel engine. unless morons like you were looking after them and destroyed them, then went out on a rampage on YT to prove a point and state the flaws in wankel engine without much understanding of how they work..
michael prostrup oh wait they still HAVE their engines..... silly me its HAVE... huh im dumb.
The real doktorbimmer damn dude, HAVE, present tense. Stop trolling all these comments. Just because they aren't manufactured anymore doesn't mean all of the RX7s magically disappeared
14 YEARS AGO?!? God i feel old now
Pretty ingenious
And impractical
A friend of mine bought an RX 8, and he claimed that the engine could achieve very high rpms because, unlike a piston engine, the rotors could spin in one direction without having to overcome negative momentum of going backward with every stroke. That made sense to me. But he also said that while the engine could therefore deliver more torque, it was less fuel efficient than an engine with roughly equal combustion volume. That didn't make sense to me.
Is that right? If so, why, and if not, why not?
+kev3d Yep, thats right. It uses more fuel simply because its running at higher revs. also it gets through lots of oil as its needed for the seals on the rotor.
+NipNip Interesting. Thank you.
The real doktorbimmer
how can that be true when a small wankel engine produces almost double the power of a piston engine the same size?
+The real doktorbimmer I have a good question for you: Why are you on almost every technical video involved with rotaries? And why are you telling lies and starting arguments with people? Just cut you crap and and do some proper research, not what ever 1950's garbage you look at, and do yourself a favor and be the educated one here.
+NipNip The displacement of a rotary is skewed. When the first Wankels were built by the Getman company NSU, their displacement was measured by including all the chambers. In the late 50s, Max Bentele visited them and persuaded them to only count 1 chamber per rotor to circumvent European taxes on displacement. Later on in racing equate them to 4 stroke piston engines, 2 chambers per rotor were used, basing volume of an engine on chambers that completed a full combustion cycle in 2 crank rotations.
To use a 13b as an example....
It has 650cc combustion chambers and 2 rotors.
Using the Bentele "tax evasion" method, it gets labeled as a 1.3L (only 2 combustion chambers counted).
Using the original method, it's a 3.9L (all 6 combustion chambers counted).
Using the method inspired from racing sanctioning bodies, it's a 2.6L (4 combustion chambers completed cycles in 2 crankshaft rotations).
The rotary is ingenious for how much displacement it has in a tiny package.
Nice informative video, straight to the point!
"Babe I'm pregnant"
me with rx7:
Just insane this engine even works.
Who loves Japanese cars ? And who is watching this in 2019
lol
Toyotas!!!
I kind of want to make one of these. Need to get my hands on the blue prints
I had a 1982 Mazda RX-7 that had rotary Wanted with a 4 barrel carburetor a 5 speed manual transmission. Needless to say THAT WAS A FUN CAR TO DRIVE.
Yeah that looks highly reliable🤥