Performance of a Low-Blowby Sealing System for a High Efficiency Rotary Engine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The X engine is a non-Wankel rotary engine that allies high power density and high efficiency by running a high-pressure Atkinson cycle at high speeds. The X engine overcomes the gas leakage issue of the Wankel engine by using two axially-loaded face seals that directly interface with three stationary radially-loaded apex seals per rotor. The direct-interfacing of the apex and face seals eliminates the need for corner seals of the typical Wankel engine, significantly reducing rotary engine blowby. This paper demonstrates the sealing performance that can be achieved by this new type of seal configuration for a rotary engine based on dynamics models and experiments. The dynamics models calculate the displacement and deformation of the face and apex seals for every crank angle using a time implicit solver. The gas leakage is then calculated from the position of the seals and pressure in the chambers and integrated over a rotor revolution. An “effective leakage orifice” area can be determined, to compare blowby between different engine types. Model results show that the X engine equivalent leakage area could be around 35% that of the leakage area of a similarly sized Wankel engine obtained from the same modeling method, which brings the X engine leakage closer to the piston engine’s leakage range. Initial experimental results support the findings from the model, as the X engine shows an equivalent leakage area of about 65% that of a scaled Wankel engine. This result demonstrates the potential of the X engine to achieve gas sealing improvements through additional seal development.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".