• sunbeam60@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    The argument is, though I’m not qualified to assess it, that Wankel engines are simpler, smaller, more power dense and, if allowed time to develop, would be an improvement on the traditional ICE. It’s very difficult to assess where we would have ended up and a little by the by, given we need to move away from burning fossil fuel.

    That said, do check out LiquidPiston’s evolution of the Wankel engine. It does sort of look like they’ve solved a number of issues a traditional Wankel engine has.

    • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      if allowed time to develop

      The basic problem with Wankels is that the geometry of the combustion chamber (such as it is) is constantly changing, which inevitably results in incomplete combustion compared to traditional ICEs. This leads to lowered fuel efficiency and greater emissions; the emissions problem is solved with an additional combustion chamber for the exhaust gases, but this consumes more fuel and lowers efficiency even more. It’s just a fundamental problem with the technology that no amount of development could ever fix.

    • Haywire@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It still has corners that need to have a moving seal. This is a huge issue.