6 Cylinder radial?

Cap'n Jack

Cap'n Jack

Final Approach
Joined
Jun 25, 2006
Messages
8,783
Location
Nebraska
Display Name
Display name:
Cap'n Jack

Bleriot by JackSilver, on Flickr

I only noticed this going through my shots when i got back. Is that a 6 cylinder radial engine, or are there 2 sets of 3 cylinders? I know Bleriots flew with 3 cylinder Anzani engines. If it is a 6 cylinder, how did the cylinder firing work?

I'll be posting more of these pictures soon.
 
Anzani 6

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anzani_6

made by merging two 3-cylinder units together, one slightly behind the other and at an angle of 60 degrees

800px-Anzani_45hp-001.jpg


http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1913/1913 - 0722.html

The new 6-cyl.40-45 h.p., with a bore and stroke of 90 by 120 mm., which develops its full power at 1,300 r.p.m., and weighs 154 lbs. The 6-cyl. 50-60 h.p. engine, with a bore and stroke of 105 by 120 mm., which develops its full power at 1,300 r.p.m., and weighs 200 lbs.This engine is a composite group of two of the 3-cyl. 30 h.p. models, but designed, of course, as one engine.​

 
Last edited:
looks to be 5 from here
 
I was refering to the first picture, the second is pretty self explanatory, look at the times of the posts
 
This engine is a composite group of two of the 3-cyl.

The only way possible to get an even numbered radial is to have 2,4,6, rows.
 
Tom-D said:
This engine is a composite group of two of the 3-cyl.

The only way possible to get an even numbered radial is to have 2,4,6, rows.
Click to expand...
There's one other way besides an even number of rows.
 
Steve said:
Anzani 6

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anzani_6

made by merging two 3-cylinder units together, one slightly behind the other and at an angle of 60 degrees



http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1913/1913 - 0722.html

The new 6-cyl.40-45 h.p., with a bore and stroke of 90 by 120 mm., which develops its full power at 1,300 r.p.m., and weighs 154 lbs. The 6-cyl. 50-60 h.p. engine, with a bore and stroke of 105 by 120 mm., which develops its full power at 1,300 r.p.m., and weighs 200 lbs.This engine is a composite group of two of the 3-cyl. 30 h.p. models, but designed, of course, as one engine.​
Click to expand...
Thanks- lots of interesting stuff in that museum but I only had a few hours/
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Would an even number of cylinders work if I were running 2 cycle?
Click to expand...

theory is good but I believe the rotating mass is too heavy to run the RPM required to get the flow you need.
 
There's one like it in the airport lobby at Grinnell, IA. 2 3's together.
 
jnmeade said:
There's one like it in the airport lobby at Grinnell, IA. 2 3's together.
Click to expand...

2 cylinder engines are not a radial, they are a flat engine , thus a 4 cylinder engine would be 2, 2 cylinder engines turn 90 degrees to each other. (Remington's Drone engine)

The Harley V twin is not a radial either, it has 2 rods to the same crank pin.
 
Henning said:
Supercharge it, lot's of diesels get around that issue that way....
Click to expand...
That theory has been used on radials P&W converted there 985 to diesel and set a world endurance records in 1928, simply by adding direct injection and a third cam ring to run the injectors.

but it was a 4 stroke engine, as all diesels are.
 
A two-stroke five-cylinder radial was built in the 1960s. It was featured in Popular Science. Another "revolutionary" design that never reached production.
3-27-04a000000000129.JPG


There are smaller two-stroke six-cylinder radials, too, flying in models and ultralights.

Dan
 
When I was growing up in the 50s and 60s, all city buses and many big trucks were powered by two stroke Detroil Diesel engines.
Don't see 'em much anymore because of the pollution problems.
 
Tom-D said:
That theory has been used on radials P&W converted there 985 to diesel and set a world endurance records in 1928, simply by adding direct injection and a third cam ring to run the injectors.

but it was a 4 stroke engine, as all diesels are.
Click to expand...

Seriously, can you find me more info on the 985 Diesel conversion? I always thought it was possible in 9 cylinder and higher radials that I have dealt with. I think a 985 and an 1820 would have enough sales to be viable. 1340 is a maybe as well. If P&W already has it developed, with modern machine shop ability to do small production economically, I could at least keep a pair and a spare running on a BE-18 for me.

As for all diesels being fourstroke, that is just plain and simple incorrect. They most mass produced diesel engine series (probably any engine series for that matter) in history were 2 strokes. All the "Jimmies" up until the 60 series were 2 stroke. I'm not talking about the Olds/GMC engines, I'm talking Detroit Diesel. All the way from when the design was awarded to GM as war spoils from WWI up to the current EMD engines are 2 strokers. All those 53 and 71 series engines that powered 3/4 of WWII? All 2 strokes. In aircraft as well, the Jumo? 2 stroke. The most powerful recip engines, sole source powering containerships that are larger than aircraft carriers, all 2 strokes.
 
Tom-D said:
That theory has been used on radials P&W converted there 985 to diesel and set a world endurance records in 1928, simply by adding direct injection and a third cam ring to run the injectors.
Click to expand...

They would have had to raise the compression, too, with tall pistons if they wanted compression ignition.

Dan
 
Tom-D said:
2 cylinder engines are not a radial, they are a flat engine , thus a 4 cylinder engine would be 2, 2 cylinder engines turn 90 degrees to each other. (Remington's Drone engine)

The Harley V twin is not a radial either, it has 2 rods to the same crank pin.
Click to expand...

OK, let me say it a little clearer. Two three-cyinder radial engine banks connected together.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Sure about that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-stroke_diesel_engine
Click to expand...

Wanna talk aircraft engines? show me a 2 stroke aircraft engine that you can fly behind. (no toys)

Yes I know there ar 2 stroke diesels, my Dad had an old tractor that was a 2 stroke diesel run on LNG. way back in the 50s and it wasn't new when he got it. He called it his Moline lawn ornament, because it simply wouldn't start if the temps were below 40 degrees.

The Detroit diesel is in many trucks today, but show me one used in any aircraft.
 
Last edited:
Cap'n Jack said:
Sure about that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-stroke_diesel_engine
Click to expand...

Here is what I'm talking about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radial_engine

Sorry about having thought that it was P&W that did the diesel engine and set the record, It was Packard.

Quote
Packard designed and built a diesel radial aircraft engine, the DR-980, in 1928. It was a 9 cylinder radial engine displacing 980 cubic inches and rated to produce 225 horsepower (168 kW). On 28 May 1931, a Bellanca CH-300 fitted with a DR-980, piloted by Walter Edwin Lees and Frederick Brossy, set a record for staying aloft for 84 hours and 32 minutes without being refueled. This record was not broken until 55 years later by the Rutan Voyager.
 
Tom-D said:
Wanna talk aircraft engines? show me a 2 stroke aircraft engine that you can fly behind. (no toys)

Yes I know there ar 2 stroke diesels, my Dad had an old tractor that was a 2 stroke diesel run on LNG. way back in the 50s and it wasn't new when he got it. He called it his Moline lawn ornament, because it simply wouldn't start if the temps were below 40 degrees.

The Detroit diesel is in many trucks today, but show me one used in any aircraft.
Click to expand...
Read the other response where you cite the wiki article. I was also responding to your comment where you said all diesels were 4 stroke. You didn't make any exceptions for land, sea, or air.

While most radial engines have been produced for gasoline fuels, there have been instances of diesel fueled engines. The Bristol Phoenix of 1928-1932 was successfully tested in aircraft and the Nordberg Manufacturing Company of the US developed and produced a series of large radial diesel engines from the 1940s.
To reduce the danger of engine fires, in 1932 the French company Clerget developed the 14D, a 14-cylinder two-stroke diesel radial engine. After a series of improvements, in 1938 the 14F2 model produced 520 hp (390 kW) at 1910 rpm cruise power, with a power-to-weight ratio near that of contemporary gasoline engines and a specific fuel consumption of 166 g/hp/hour. During WWII the research continued, but no engines were mass-produced because of the Nazi occupation, and by 1943 the engine had grown to produce over 1,000 hp (750 kW) with a turbocharger. After the war, the Clerget company was integrated in the SNECMA company and had plans for a 32-cylinder diesel engine of 4,000 hp (3,000 kW), but in 1947 the company abandoned piston engine development in favor of work on the emerging turbine engines.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Cap'n Jack said:
Read the other response where you cite the wiki article. I was also responding to your comment where you said all diesels were 4 stroke. You didn't make any exceptions for land, sea, or air.
Click to expand...

Sorry I made the assumption this was an aviation web page.

Cap'n Jack said:
Quote:
While most radial engines have been produced for gasoline fuels, there have been instances of diesel fueled engines. The Bristol Phoenix of 1928-1932 was successfully tested in aircraft and the Nordberg Manufacturing Company of the US developed and produced a series of large radial diesel engines from the 1940s.
To reduce the danger of engine fires, in 1932 the French company Clerget developed the 14D, a 14-cylinder two-stroke diesel radial engine. After a series of improvements, in 1938 the 14F2 model produced 520 hp (390 kW) at 1910 rpm cruise power, with a power-to-weight ratio near that of contemporary gasoline engines and a specific fuel consumption of 166 g/hp/hour. During WWII the research continued, but no engines were mass-produced because of the Nazi occupation, and by 1943 the engine had grown to produce over 1,000 hp (750 kW) with a turbocharger. After the war, the Clerget company was integrated in the SNECMA company and had plans for a 32-cylinder diesel engine of 4,000 hp (3,000 kW), but in 1947 the company abandoned piston engine development in favor of work on the emerging turbine engines.
Click to expand...

Try again, tell us the last time you saw one flying..?
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
Try again, tell us the last time you saw one flying..?
Click to expand...
Just because it wasn't mass-produced doesn't mean it wasn't flown.

Diesel radial engines
In the 1920s Pierre Clerget designed static diesel radial engines, the earliest were based on his rotary designs.
Clerget 9A(1929) 100 hp (75 kW) Nine-cylinder, single row radial engine,
Clerget 14F-01(1937) 14-cylinder, two-row radial engine, flown in a Potez 25 biplane.
Click to expand...

ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clerget_aircraft_engines

Henning also provided a reference. I knew they were diesel, I didn't know they were 2 stroke.
 
Tom-D said:
Funnest radial I ever saw.

Do you know why the Gremans were partial to diesels? Beside one of their own invented them? or what lead him to invent the diesel?
Click to expand...
You didn't specify radial or otherwise. Henning responded to your query. In any case, Clerget did fly a 2-stroke diesel radial engine on a plane.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
You didn't specify radial or otherwise. Henning responded to your query. In any case, Clerget did fly a 2-stroke diesel radial engine on a plane.
Click to expand...

Wasn't that the subject ? diesel radials? or did we loose you?
 
Tom-D said:
Wasn't that the subject ? diesel radials? or did we loose you?
Click to expand...
Nope. I think you are lost though.

Let's look through your comments:
but it was a 4 stroke engine, as all diesels are.
Click to expand...
Didn't specify any type. Remember- this isn't the red board. We can do non-aviation here.
Wanna talk aircraft engines? show me a 2 stroke aircraft engine that you can fly behind. (no toys)
Click to expand...
Didn't specify radial or any type.

In any case, it was finally shown that a 2 stroke radial diesel engine was flown on a plane.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
Funnest radial I ever saw.

Do you know why the Gremans were partial to diesels? Beside one of their own invented them? or what lead him to invent the diesel?
Click to expand...

??? You didn't limit your comment to radials, or aircraft or anything, you said that all diesels were 4 strokes...

That theory has been used on radials P&W converted there 985 to diesel and set a world endurance records in 1928, simply by adding direct injection and a third cam ring to run the injectors.

but it was a 4 stroke engine, as all diesels are.
Click to expand...

They were partial to diesels because they run more efficiently and can use a higher variety of lower cost, lower volatility fuels. Greater BTU density and a lower vapor temp/pressure makes it a more suitable fuel for aircraft. I mean seriously, it doesn't matter if it was gasoline or diesel burning as far as a 4 stroke recip engine went, a German invented it. Otto in the mid 1870s and Diesel in the early 1890s and between them a Scotsman named Clerk came up with the 2 stroke engine.

The problem with diesels until a few years ago is the power to weight ratio required to tolerate the high pressure spikes. With modern Common Rail electronic injection systems though, we can control the nozzles so finitely we can smooth out the power pulse. I think a modern common rail system could be adapted to a 985.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
After a series of improvements, in 1938 the 14F2 model produced 520 hp (390 kW) at 1910 rpm cruise power, with a power-to-weight ratio near that of contemporary gasoline engines and a specific fuel consumption of 166 g/hp/hour.
Click to expand...

Now, that must be 166 grams per hp per hour, not 166 gallons per hp per hour. Right? I hope? About .36 lb/hp/hr? 166 gph per horse would be an awesomely greedy engine.

Dan
 
Henning said:
lower volatility fuels. .
Click to expand...

That's it, they had plenty coal oil, and the diesel engine would run it very well.

need is the mother of invention.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top